DETAILED ACTION
for
FLUID TRANSPORT DIAGNOSTICS
Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status
The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on 02/16/2024, 06/19/2025 and 01/13/2026 are in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statement is being considered by the examiner.
Oath/Declaration
The Oath/Declaration submitted on 01/11/2024 is noted by the Examiner.
Claim Interpretation
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(f):
(f) Element in Claim for a Combination. – An element in a claim for a combination may be expressed as a means or step for performing a specified function without the recital of structure, material, or acts in support thereof, and such claim shall be construed to cover the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification and equivalents thereof.
The following is a quotation of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph:
An element in a claim for a combination may be expressed as a means or step for performing a specified function without the recital of structure, material, or acts in support thereof, and such claim shall be construed to cover the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification and equivalents thereof.
The claims in this application are given their broadest reasonable interpretation using the plain meaning of the claim language in light of the specification as it would be understood by one of ordinary skill in the art. The broadest reasonable interpretation of a claim element (also commonly referred to as a claim limitation) is limited by the description in the specification when 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is invoked.
As explained in MPEP § 2181, subsection I, claim limitations that meet the following three-prong test will be interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph:
(A) the claim limitation uses the term “means” or “step” or a term used as a substitute for “means” that is a generic placeholder (also called a nonce term or a non-structural term having no specific structural meaning) for performing the claimed function;
(B) the term “means” or “step” or the generic placeholder is modified by functional language, typically, but not always linked by the transition word “for” (e.g., “means for”) or another linking word or phrase, such as “configured to” or “so that”; and
(C) the term “means” or “step” or the generic placeholder is not modified by sufficient structure, material, or acts for performing the claimed function.
Use of the word “means” (or “step”) in a claim with functional language creates a rebuttable presumption that the claim limitation is to be treated in accordance with 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph. The presumption that the claim limitation is interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is rebutted when the claim limitation recites sufficient structure, material, or acts to entirely perform the recited function.
Absence of the word “means” (or “step”) in a claim creates a rebuttable presumption that the claim limitation is not to be treated in accordance with 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph. The presumption that the claim limitation is not interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is rebutted when the claim limitation recites function without reciting sufficient structure, material or acts to entirely perform the recited function.
Claim limitations in this application that use the word “means” (or “step”) are being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, except as otherwise indicated in an Office action. Conversely, claim limitations in this application that do not use the word “means” (or “step”) are not being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, except as otherwise indicated in an Office action.
This application includes one or more claim limitations that use the word “means” or “step” but are nonetheless not being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph because the claim limitation(s) recite(s) sufficient structure, materials, or acts to entirely perform the recited function. Such claim limitation(s) is/are: “acoustic data signal processing module in claim 1 and correlation module in claim 1”.
Because this/these claim limitation(s) are not being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, it/they are not being interpreted to cover only the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification as performing the claimed function, and equivalents thereof.
If applicant intends to have this/these limitation(s) interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, applicant may: (1) amend the claim limitation(s) to remove the structure, materials, or acts that performs the claimed function; or (2) present a sufficient showing that the claim limitation(s) does/do not recite sufficient structure, materials, or acts to perform the claimed function.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status.
The following is a quotation of the appropriate paragraphs of 35 U.S.C. 102 that form the basis for the rejections under this section made in this Office action:
A person shall be entitled to a patent unless –
(a)(1) the claimed invention was patented, described in a printed publication, or in public use, on sale, or otherwise available to the public before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claims 1-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Blair et al. [herein after Blair] (US 2014/0200837) “Admitted by Applicant on IDS”.
PNG
media_image1.png
443
729
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Regarding claim 1, Blair discloses a system comprising: at least one acoustic sensor (computing device 110 includes “the I/O subsystem 222 may also be communicatively coupled to sensing devices (e.g., motion sensors, pressure sensors, kinetic sensors, temperature sensors, biometric sensors, and/or others”; Fig. 2) configured to generate at least one time-dependent acoustic data signal (126) indicative of an acoustic signal (126) generated by a system performing a fluid transport (118) process possessing a plurality of process attributes (¶0005, lines 10-18), the fluid transport process (118) comprising a flow of a fluid along at least one path (¶0029, lines 10-18); and a computing device (110; Fig. 1) having an acoustic data signal processing module (140) configured to: receive the at least one time-dependent acoustic data signal (¶0029, lines 42-50); and transform the at least one time-dependent acoustic data signal (126) to a frequency-domain spectrum (Fig. 2), wherein each process attribute of the plurality of process attributes is associated with at least one respective frequency band (¶0044, lines 9-10); and a correlation module (244) configured to determine a process attribute of the plurality of process attributes by identifying at least one characteristic of the frequency-domain spectrum (¶0044, lines 9-14; Fig. 2).
Regarding claims 2 and 13, Blair further discloses the acoustic data signal processing module being configured to transform the at least one time-dependent acoustic data signal (126) to the frequency-domain spectrum using a discrete Fourier transform (¶0043, lines 1-10).
Regarding claims 3 and 14, Blair further discloses the correlation module (244) being configured to determine the process attribute by extracting a plurality of intensities from a selected frequency band of the frequency-domain spectrum (¶0043, lines 5-10).
Regarding claims 4 and 15, Blair further discloses one characteristic having a peak frequency (¶0006, lines 1-4).
Regarding claims 5 and 16, Blair further discloses the correlation module (244) being further configured to determine the process attribute by comparing a first interval of time with a second interval of time (¶0005, lines 7-10 to ¶0006, lines 1-4 & ¶0044 to ¶0045 lines 18-22).
Regarding claims 6 and 17, Blair further discloses the correlation module (244) being further configured to determine the process attribute by comparing a third interval of time with a predetermined characteristic value range (¶0034, lines 12-16).
Regarding claims 7 and 18, Blair further discloses the correlation module being further configured to determine the process attribute by comparing a fourth interval of time with a respective known characteristic of a known frequency-domain spectrum (¶0052, lines 1-8).
Regarding claims 8 and 19, Blair further discloses the process attribute of the plurality of process attributes comprises a process parameter being a temperature of a flow stream (¶0050, lines 16 -25); and a process deviation status being a fluid fluctuation (0043, lines 1-5 & ¶0043, lines 4-14).
Regarding claim 9, Blair further discloses system component having a nozzle (¶0028, lines 1-4).
Regarding claim 10, Blair further discloses the computing device further comprises an output device configured to output a representation of time-dependent acoustic data signal (126; ¶0008, lines 7-17).
Regarding claim 11, Blair further discloses the fluid transport process (118) having at least one fluid flow (112).
PNG
media_image2.png
429
565
media_image2.png
Greyscale
Regarding claim 12, Blair further discloses a method comprising: receiving, by a computing device, from at least one acoustic sensor (computing device 110 includes “the I/O subsystem 222 may also be communicatively coupled to sensing devices (e.g., motion sensors, pressure sensors, kinetic sensors, temperature sensors, biometric sensors, and/or others”; Fig. 2), at least one time-dependent acoustic data signal (126) indicative of an acoustic signal (126) generated by a system performing a fluid transport process possessing a plurality of process attributes (¶0005, lines 10-18), the fluid transport process (¶0029, lines 10-18) comprising a flow of a fluid along at least one path (118); transforming, by the computing device (140), the at least one time-dependent acoustic data signal (126) to a frequency-domain spectrum (Fig. 2), each process attribute of the plurality of process attributes is associated with at least one respective frequency band (¶0044, lines 9-10); and determining, by the computing device (244), a process attribute (¶0005, lines 10-18) of the plurality of process attributes by identifying at least one characteristic of the frequency-domain spectrum (¶0044, lines 9-14; Fig. 2).
Regarding claim 20, Blair discloses a computer readable storage medium comprising instructions that, when executed, cause at least one processor to (see claim 17): receive, from at least one acoustic sensor (computing device 110 includes “the I/O subsystem 222 may also be communicatively coupled to sensing devices (e.g., motion sensors, pressure sensors, kinetic sensors, temperature sensors, biometric sensors, and/or others”; Fig. 2) at least one time-dependent acoustic data signal (126) indicative of an acoustic signal generated by a system performing a fluid transport process possessing a plurality of process attributes (¶0005, lines 10-18), the fluid transport process (118) having a flow of a fluid along at least one path (¶0005, lines 10-18); transform the at least one time-dependent acoustic data signal (126) to a frequency-domain spectrum, (¶0043, lines 1-10) wherein each process attribute of the plurality of process attributes is associated with at least one respective frequency band (¶0044, lines 9-10); and determine a process attribute (¶0005, lines 10-18) of the plurality of process attributes by identifying at least one characteristic of the frequency-domain spectrum (¶0044, lines 9-14; Fig. 2).
Conclusion
THIRUVENKATANATHAN disclose a monitoring system, comprising a flow line comprising at least one bend, an optical fiber coupled to an exterior of the flow line, wherein the optical fiber is wrapped around at least a portion of the flow line, and a receiver coupled to an end of the optical fiber, wherein the receiver is configured to detect at least one acoustic signal from the optical fiber.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to BRANDI N HOPKINS whose telephone number is (571)270-7042. The examiner can normally be reached M & F 9-5 and T-TH, 6-4.
Examiner interviews are available via telephone, in-person, and video conferencing using a USPTO supplied web-based collaboration tool. To schedule an interview, applicant is encouraged to use the USPTO Automated Interview Request (AIR) at http://www.uspto.gov/interviewpractice.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Kristina Deherrera can be reached at (303) 297-4237. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300.
Information regarding the status of published or unpublished applications may be obtained from Patent Center. Unpublished application information in Patent Center is available to registered users. To file and manage patent submissions in Patent Center, visit: https://patentcenter.uspto.gov. Visit https://www.uspto.gov/patents/apply/patent-center for more information about Patent Center and https://www.uspto.gov/patents/docx for information about filing in DOCX format. For additional questions, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
/BRANDI N HOPKINS/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2855