DETAILED ACTION
1. Claims 1-20 are pending in this application.
Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status
2. The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
Response to amendment
3. Applicant’s response to the last Office Action filed on 09/05/2025 has been entered and made of record.
4. Claims1 and 11 have been amended.
.
Response to Argument
5. The Applicant’s argument filed 10/03/2026 is fully consider.
6. Based on the Applicant’s amendment and argument the rejection of claim1-20 under 35 U.S.C 102 based on based on to Pere et al., is expressly withdrawn.
Double Patenting
7. The nonstatutory double patenting rejection is based on a judicially created doctrine grounded in public policy (a policy reflected in the statute) so as to prevent the unjustified or improper timewise extension of the “right to exclude” granted by a patent and to prevent possible harassment by multiple assignees. A nonstatutory obviousness-type double patenting rejection is appropriate where the conflicting claims are not identical, but at least one examined application claim is not patentably distinct from the reference claim(s) because the examined application claim is either anticipated by, or would have been obvious over, the reference claim(s). See, e.g., In re Berg, 140 F.3d 1428, 46 USPQ2d 1226 (Fed. Cir. 1998); In re Goodman, 11 F.3d 1046, 29 USPQ2d 2010 (Fed. Cir. 1993); In re Longi, 759 F.2d 887, 225 USPQ 645 (Fed. Cir. 1985); In re Van Ornum, 686 F.2d 937, 214 USPQ 761 (CCPA 1982); In re Vogel, 422 F.2d 438, 164 USPQ 619 (CCPA 1970); and In re Thorington, 418 F.2d 528, 163 USPQ 644 (CCPA 1969).
A timely filed terminal disclaimer in compliance with 37 CFR 1.321(c) or 1.321(d) may be used to overcome an actual or provisional rejection based on a nonstatutory double patenting ground provided the conflicting application or patent either is shown to be commonly owned with this application, or claims an invention made as a result of activities undertaken within the scope of a joint research agreement.
Effective January 1, 1994, a registered attorney or agent of record may sign a terminal disclaimer. A terminal disclaimer signed by the assignee must fully comply with 37 CFR 3.73(b).
8. Claims 1, 5-11 and14-20 are rejected on the ground of nonstatutory obviousness-type double patenting as being unpatentable over claims of 1-3, 5,7, 13-16 and 18 of US 9746093 B2, to Pere et al., (hereafter Pere)
9 . Regarding claims 1, 5-11 and14-20 of the current application claims 1-3, 5,7, 13-16 and 18 of US 9746093 B2, to Pere teaches :
Current Application no. 18/382145
US 9746093 B2,
1. A system for regulating fluid flow to a patient, comprising: a processor configured to perform an image processing sequence to detect drop formation or a free-flow condition in a drip chamber; and an image sensor to capture an image of the drip chamber, the processor being configured to apply a blurring function to the image of the drip chamber such that the processor determines whether the captured image includes a match to a template representing a drop forming within the drip chamber.
1. A system for regulating fluid flow, comprising: a fluid reservoir for infusing fluid contained therein into a patient; a drip chamber in fluid communication with the fluid reservoir, wherein the drip chamber is configured to allow a drop of the fluid to exit the fluid reservoir and travel through the drip chamber; a backlight disposed near the drip chamber such that the backlight provides at least partial illumination to the drip chamber; a valve configured to regulate the fluid flowing from the drip chamber to the patient; and a flow meter for monitoring the flow rate of the fluid passing through the drip chamber, the flow meter including: an image sensor configured to capture an image of the drip chamber, and a processor configured to: determine whether the captured image of the drip chamber contains a match to a template, and apply a blurring function to the image captured by the image sensor of the drip chamber such that the processor can determine if the captured image contains a match to the template.
5. The system according to claim 1, wherein the blurring function is a low pass filter.
2. The system of claim 1, wherein the blurring function is a low pass filter, the set of processor-executable instructions configured to apply the low pass filter to the image captured by the image sensor in either a vertical or a horizontal direction.
6. The system according to claim 1, wherein the blurring function causes blurring in a vertical direction.
2. The system of claim 1, wherein the blurring function is a low pass filter, the set of processor-executable instructions configured to apply the low pass filter to the image captured by the image sensor in either a vertical or a horizontal direction
7. The system according to claim 1, wherein the blurring function causes blurring in a horizontal direction.
2. The system of claim 1, wherein the blurring function is a low pass filter, the set of processor-executable instructions configured to apply the low pass filter to the image captured by the image sensor in either a vertical or a horizontal direction
8. The system according to claim 1, wherein the template includes at least a partial image of a drop of fluid forming within the drip chamber.
7. The system of claim 1, wherein the captured image includes an image of the drip chamber that is at least partially illuminated by the backlight.
9. The system according to claim 1, wherein the blurring function is a one- dimensional Gaussian Blur function.
3. The system of claim 2, wherein the low pass filter includes a one- dimensional Gaussian Blur function.
10. The system according to claim 1, wherein the blurring function is a two- dimensional Gaussian Blur function.
5. The system of claim 4, wherein the low pass filter includes a two- dimensional Gaussian Blur function.
11. A method regulating fluid flow through a drip chamber, comprising: capturing an image of a drip chamber; and applying a blurring function to the image of the drip chamber; and determining whether the captured image includes a match to a template representing a drop forming within the drip chamber.
13. A method of filtering a captured image of a drip chamber configured to allow a drop of fluid to fall within the drip chamber, the method comprising: capturing an image of the drip chamber with an image sensor; determining if the captured image contains a visual obstruction; applying a blurring function to the captured image, the blurring function configured to eliminate an amount of detail in the captured image; and determining if the captured image contains a match to a template.
14. The method according to claim 11, further comprising matching a template to the image.
See claim 13
15. The method according to claim 11, wherein the template includes at least a partial image of a drop of fluid forming within the drip chamber.
14. The method according to claim 13, wherein the desired pattern includes at least a partial image of a drop of fluid within the drip chamber.
16. The method according to claim 11, wherein the blurring function is a low pass filter.
15. The method according to claim 13, wherein the blurring function is a low pass filter, the low pass filter being applied in either a vertical direction or a horizontal direction.
17. The method according to claim 11, wherein the applying of the blurring function comprises blurring in a vertical direction.
15. The method according to claim 13, wherein the blurring function is a low pass filter, the low pass filter being applied in either a vertical direction or a horizontal direction
18. The method according to claim 11, wherein the applying of the blurring function comprises blurring in a horizontal direction
15. The method according to claim 13, wherein the blurring function is a low pass filter, the low pass filter being applied in either a vertical direction or a horizontal direction
19. The method according to claim 11, wherein the blurring function is a one- dimensional Gaussian Blur function.
16. The method according to claim 15, wherein the low pass filter includes a one-dimensional Gaussian Blur function.
20. The method according to claim 11, wherein the blurring function is a two- dimensional Gaussian Blur function.
18. The method according to claim 17, wherein the low pass filter includes a two-dimensional Gaussian Blur function
10. Claims 2-4 and 12-13 are rejected on the ground of nonstatutory obviousness-type double patenting as being unpatentable over claims of 1 and 13 of US 9746093 B2,
to Pere in view of LEE et al., (hereafter LEE), KR 20030032355, pub. 04/26/2003
Regirding claim 2, while Pere et al., teaches claim 1, but fails to teach claim 2.
On the other hand in the same field of endeavor edge detection of LEE teaches an edge detection on the image to generate a first processed image(Abstract, claims )
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to incorporate a well- known edge detection method using
Canny edge algorithm taught by LEE into Pere et al.,
The suggestion/motivation for doing so would have been Canny edge detection allow user of LEE to obtain maximizes the signal-to-noise ratio to produce thin, highly accurate, and continuous boundaries.
As to claim 3, Lee teaches wherein the processor is further configured to perform a Boolean-operation on a pixel on a first side of an axis of the first processed image, and further comprising generating a second processed image(Fig.11A, page 5 par., 6. FIG. 11A is a motion edge image, FIG. 11B is an image filled with horizontal edge pixels, and FIG. 11C is an image showing a result of applying a mathematical summation and melting operation. 12A is an image showing vertical edge pixels, and FIG. 12B is an image showing a result of performing a bitwise logical product after mathematical shape melting and Boolean operations on horizontal and vertical edges. 13 shows the extracted VOP image (step 206).)
.
As to claim 4, Lee teaches the edge detection is performed using a canny edge detection (Abstract).
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to incorporate a well- known edge detection method using
Canny edge algorithm taught by LEE into Pere et al.,
The suggestion/motivation for doing so would have been Canny edge detection allow user of LEE to obtain maximizes the signal-to-noise ratio to produce thin, highly accurate, and continuous boundaries.
Claim 12 is rejected the same as claim 3 except claim 12 is directed to a method claim.
Claim 13 is rejected the same as claim 2 except claim 13 is directed to a method claim.
Conclusion.
Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a). Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a).
A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of the advisory action. In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the mailing date of this final action.
Contact Information
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communication from the examiner should be directed to Mekonen Bekele whose telephone number is (469) 295-9077.The examiner can normally be reached on Monday -Friday from 9:00AM to 6:50 PM Eastern Time.
If attempt to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor Eng, George can be reached on (571) 272-7495.The fax phone number for the organization where the application or proceeding is assigned is 571-237-8300. Information regarding the status of an application may be obtained from the patent Application Information Retrieval (PAIR) system. Status information for published application may be obtained from either Private PAIR or Public PAIR.
Status information for unpublished application is available through Privet PAIR only.
For more information about the PAIR system, see http://pair-direct.uspto.gov. Should you have question on access to the Private PAIR system, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866.217-919 (tool-free).
/MEKONEN T BEKELE/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2699
Prosecution Insights