DETAILED ACTION
Status of Claims
The following is a Final Office Action in response to the response received on 05/05/2026.
In response to applicant's elections to claims received on 11/17/2025, Group I (claim 1-19) are elected.
Claims 1, 13-15, and 19 are amended. Claims 11-12 and 20-21 are cancelled. Claims 22-25 are newly added. Claims 1-10, 13-19, and 22-25 are being considered in this Office Action. Claims 1-10, 13-19, and 22-25 are currently pending.
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statements (IDS) submitted on 05/01/2026, 06/18/2026, and 07/02/2026 are in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statements are being considered by the examiner.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's amendment necessitated the new grounds of rejection presented in this Office action.
Response to Claim Objections Arguments- Applicant’s arguments with respect to claims 13-15, applicant’s amendments to the claims overcome the claim objections. The claim objections are withdrawn.
Response to 101 Arguments- Applicant’s refers to the §101 rejection of claims 1-10, 13-19, and 22-25 of the remarks, the amended claims and arguments have been considered and are found persuasive. The claims are patent eligible under 35 USC 101 as amended claims recite limitations which are not abstract. In particular, the amended independent claims recite a particular sensors formed from a three-dimensional (3D) monolithic carbonaceous growth, and wherein a resonant frequency of the 3D monolithic carbonaceous growth is based at least in part on either or both of a permittivity and a permeability of a material associated with the sensors, and physically attached to or embedded within the respective particular units of the particular product to directly measure greenhouse gas emissions generated during use of the particular units. Thus, the claims meet the Alice test for eligibility under
35 USC §101 and MPEP 2106 as the claimed invention does not merely apply abstract idea using generic computer components; rather, it uses a specific sensor configuration and signal detection which amount to significantly more than an abstract idea under Step 2B.
Response to § 103 Arguments- Applicant's arguments with respect to the 35 U.S.C. §103rejection to claims have been considered, but are not persuasive.
The applicant argues that sensors formed from "carbonaceous microstructures" which are used specifically for detecting "tire strain" and "wear" in vehicle tires, as in the STOWELL excerpts relied upon, does not teach or suggest "receive greenhouse gas emissions data from sensors associated with respective particular units of a particular product, wherein the sensors are: formed from a three-dimensional (3D) monolithic carbonaceous growth, and wherein a resonant frequency of the 3D monolithic carbonaceous growth is based at least in part on either or both of a permittivity and a permeability of a material associated with the sensors, and physically attached to or embedded within the respective particular units of the particular product to directly measure greenhouse gas emissions generated during use of the particular units" (see this or similar, but not necessarily identical language in the independent claims). The applicant asserts of a reversible deformation, stress, or strain." See Stowell at Abstract. There is simply no teaching or suggestion in STOWELL of using such sensors to "directly measure greenhouse gas emissions generated during use of the particular units," within the context claimed as indicated above. McConnell's sensors are associated with "emission sources" (such as at enterprise locations)-not physically attached to or embedded within particular units of a particular product, as required by the claims, within the context of the full claim.
The examiner respectfully disagrees. The examiner notes that Stowell is not relied on to teach “receive greenhouse gas emissions data from sensors associated with respective particular units of a particular product.” Stowell is relied on to teach the claimed sensor structure as claimed as disclosed in the rejection set forth below and supported in Stowell paragraphs [0029], [0030], [0040], [0062-65], and [0190]. The examiner further notes Stowell is not limited to monitoring and detecting "tire strain" and "wear" in vehicle tires. Stowell expressly states, in paragraph [0122], that the use of the split ring resonator techniques is not limited to only tires. The use of the split ring resonator techniques is not limited to only vehicles. The technique may be applied to other elastomeric components and industrial systems. Next the examiner notes McConnell in paragraph [0031] teaches interfaces 66 are attached to direct emission sources with communications capabilities in order to monitor the emissions production of the direct emission source. Paragraph [0032] teaches the interface 66 is configured to accept input from emissions sensors. Paragraph [0033] teaches an interface 66 associated with a particular piece of equipment such as, for example, a direct emissions source, allows for collection of information, including real-time information, directly from the piece of equipment. The information collected by the appropriate interface 66 can be used to calculate emissions of the piece of equipment, the site, or the enterprise. Paragraph [0035] teaches the information can be stored or retrieved on a per-asset basis, or any other basis. Next Zhu teaches, in paragraph [0045], an item-shipping-scoring module 358 may be configured to determine or generate an item shipping green score for an item. the carbon emissions associated with the shipping of the item may be used as a basis for determining the item shipping green score. Paragraph [0046] teaches carbon emissions associated with the production, use, or disposal of the product may be considered in the item properties green score calculation. In conclusion, McConnell is relied upon for teaching the collections and management of greenhouse gas emissions data associated with products and assets, while Zhu teaches associating such information with products throughout the product lifecycle. The rejection therefore relies on the combination teaching of McConnell, Zhu, and Stowell to teach the claim.
Lastly, it would have obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to have modified the teaching of McConnell and Zhu incorporate the teachings of Stowell to the sensors are: formed from a three-dimensional (3D) monolithic carbonaceous growth, and wherein a resonant frequency of the 3D monolithic carbonaceous growth is based at least in part on either or both of a permittivity and a permeability of a material associated with the sensors, and physically attached to or embedded within the respective particular units of the particular product to directly measure greenhouse gas emissions generated during use of the particular units as part of the sensors taught in McConnell. Doing so would provide a durable sensor which will aid in capturing emission data. [0029].
Accordingly, Applicant's arguments with respect to the 35 U.S.C. §103 rejection to claims are not persuasive, and updated 35 U.S.C. § 103 rejection will address applicant's amendments.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
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 35 U.S.C. 103 which forms the basis for all obviousness rejections set forth in this Office action:
A patent for a claimed invention may not be obtained, notwithstanding that the claimed invention is not identically disclosed as set forth in section 102, if the differences between the claimed invention and the prior art are such that the claimed invention as a whole would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which the claimed invention pertains. Patentability shall not be negated by the manner in which the invention was made.
The text of those sections of Title 35, U.S. Code not included in this action can be found in a prior Office action.
The factual inquiries for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows:
1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art.
2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue.
3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art.
4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness.
This application currently names joint inventors. In considering patentability of the claims the examiner presumes that the subject matter of the various claims was commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the claimed invention(s) absent any evidence to the contrary. Applicant is advised of the obligation under 37 CFR 1.56 to point out the inventor and effective filing dates of each claim that was not commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the later invention in order for the examiner to consider the applicability of 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(C) for any potential 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) prior art against the later invention.
Claims 1, 4, 6, 7, and 13 rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Robert S. McConnell (US 2010/0070423 A1, hereinafter “McConnell”) in view of Michael Stowell (US 2021/0348909 A1, hereinafter “Stowell”) in view of Geng Zhu (US 2016/0034909 A1, hereinafter “Zhu”).
Claim 1
McConnell teaches:
A computer program product comprising computer executable instructions stored on a non-transitory computer readable medium that when executed by a processor instruct the processor([0007] tracking with software emissions of the direct emission sources and indirect emission sources based on the plurality of characteristics. [0037] In one implementation, the central processor 52 includes software programs or instructions that run on the server-side to process requests and responses from an enterprise processor 54. These software programs or instructions send information to the enterprise processor 54, perform compilation and storage functions, and generate reports.) to: receive greenhouse gas emissions data from sensors associated with respective particular units of a particular product([0032] accept input from emissions sensors. [0059] The equipment interface allows the system to automatically track information related to the amount of emissions produced by a certain emission source without any manual input or effort by a user. [0060] all of the information gathered such that the system accumulates all of the information relating to the amount of emissions produced by each emission source);
process the greenhouse gas emissions data over all of the respective particular units([0061]tracking emissions include calculating the amount of emissions produced by an emission source or sources (block 14). That is, the amount of emissions produced, particularly the amount of greenhouse gas emissions, and more particularly the amount of CO2 and CO2 equivalents, produced by a particular source or group of sources can be calculated for any desired time period );
aggregate the at least a portion of the greenhouse gas emissions data to previously measured greenhouse gas emissions data of the particular units of the product([0055] the timing of the emissions information collection (block 72) and the number of such collections can vary significantly. That is, the collection can be performed daily, weekly, monthly, yearly, or at any other known interval. [0061] tracking emissions include calculating the amount of emissions produced by an emission source or sources (block 14). That is, the amount of emissions produced, particularly the amount of greenhouse gas emissions, and more particularly the amount of CO2 and CO2 equivalents, produced by a particular source or group of sources can be calculated for any desired time period).
While McConnell teaches [0007] tracking with software emissions of the direct emission sources and indirect emission sources based on the plurality of characteristics. paragraph [0031] teaches interfaces 66 are attached to direct emission sources with communications capabilities in order to monitor the emissions production of the direct emission source. Paragraph [0032] teaches the interface 66 is configured to accept input from emissions sensors. [0032] accept input from emissions sensors. [0059] The equipment interface allows the system to automatically track information related to the number of emissions produced by a certain emission source without any manual input or effort by a user. [0060] all of the information gathered such that the system accumulates all of the information relating to the number of emissions produced by each emission source, McConnell does not explicitly teach the following, however analogous reference in the field of gathering and analyzing sensor data, Stowell teaches:
wherein the sensors are: formed from a three-dimensional (3D) monolithic carbonaceous growth, ([0029] deploying durable sensors (e.g., split-ring resonators, SRRs), made from carbonaceous microstructures. [0030] the carbonaceous materials may be innately grown (e.g., self-nucleated) in a reactor from a carbon-containing gaseous species without requiring a seed particle to generate ornate 3D structures), and wherein a resonant frequency of the 3D monolithic carbonaceous growth is based at least in part on either or both of a permittivity and a permeability of a material associated with the sensors([0029] deploying durable sensors (e.g., split-ring resonators, SRRs), made from carbonaceous microstructures. [0030] the carbonaceous materials may be innately grown (e.g., self-nucleated) in a reactor from a carbon-containing gaseous species without requiring a seed particle to generate ornate 3D structures [0065] The material properties of permeability, permittivity and conductivity can also be considered when formulating a compound to be tuned to a particular electrical impedance), and physically attached to or embedded within the respective particular units of the particular product to directly measure greenhouse gas emissions generated during use of the particular units([0029]The sensors may be incorporated within vehicle components. The sensors may be embedded within portions of tire plies and/or tire tread. [0049] embedded sensors 270 (which can be embedded within materials such as tire plies) can employ and/or be powered by self-powered telemetry including tribological energy generators (not shown in FIG. 2) also incorporated within the material enclosed the respective sensors. Examiner notes the cited paragraphs illustrates that the sensors are physically attached or embedded within a respective monitored unit).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the teaching of McConnell incorporate the teachings of Stowell to include the sensors are formed from a three-dimensional (3D) monolithic carbonaceous growth and wherein a resonant frequency of the 3D monolithic carbonaceous growth is based at least in part on either or both of a permittivity and a permeability of a material associated with the sensors as part of the sensors taught in McConnell. Doing so would provide a durable sensor which will aid in capturing emission data. [0029].
While McConnell teaches in [0061] the system calculates the emissions produced by an entire site and/or the entire enterprise. In other embodiments, the system automatically performs calculations and or reports emission totals at recurring predetermined intervals, such as every month or every year. McConnell does not the explicitly teach the following limitation, however analogous reference in the field of emission tracking and calculation, Zhu teaches:
allocate at least a portion of the greenhouse gas emissions data to the particular product ([0102] teaches non-transitory computer readable medium[0046] An item-properties-scoring module 360 may be configured to determine or generate an item properties green score for the item. The item properties green score may take into account various aspects of the item based on its environmental-friendliness, including environmental-friendliness of its production, packaging, operation, and disposal. Information related to the environmental-friendliness of a product (e.g., carbon emissions associated with a product, packaging associated with a product, the organic nature of a product, etc.) may be retrieved from an external system and analyzed to generate the item properties green score for the item);
and calculate a lifetime measurement of greenhouse gas emissions data for the particular units of the particular product based on the aggregation ([0046] The item properties green score may take into account various aspects of the item based on its environmental-friendliness, including environmental-friendliness of its production, packaging, operation, and disposal. Information related to the environmental-friendliness of a product (e.g., carbon emissions associated with a product, packaging associated with a product, the organic nature of a product, etc.) may be retrieved from an external system and analyzed to generate the item properties green score for the item), wherein the lifetime measurement aggregates emissions data collected from the sensors during each of a plurality of lifecycle stages of the particular units, the plurality of lifecycle stages comprising at least two of: raw materials extraction, manufacturing, distribution, use, and end-of-life processing([0046] An item-properties-scoring module 360 may be configured to determine or generate an item properties green score for the item. The item properties green score may take into account various aspects of the item based on its environmental-friendliness, including environmental-friendliness of its production, packaging, operation, and disposal. , carbon emissions associated with the production, use, or disposal of the product may be considered in the item properties green score calculation. [0045] An item-shipping-scoring module 358 may be configured to determine or generate an item shipping green score for an item. [0057] The transaction green score may represent a combination or aggregation of one or more item green scores, including an item condition green score, an item shipping green score, or an item properties green score associated with the transaction. The various item green scores may be weighted according to an assessment of their contribution to the overall impact on the environment of a transaction involving the item. The various item green scores may then be combined (e.g., as a sum, weighted sum, average, and so on) to determine the transaction green score).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the teaching of McConnell and Stowell incorporate the teachings of Zhu to include allocate at least a portion of the greenhouse gas emissions data to the particular product and calculate a lifetime measurement of greenhouse gas emissions data for the particular units of the particular product based on the aggregation, wherein the lifetime measurement aggregates emissions data collected from the sensors during each of a plurality of lifecycle stages of the particular units, the plurality of lifecycle stages comprising at least two of: raw materials extraction, manufacturing, distribution, use, and end-of-life processing. Doing so would help to incorporating green scores based on carbon emissions associated with a product into a network-based publication system to encourage users of the system to choose actions with respect to the system that will result in a more positive (or a less negative) impact on the environment than other actions. [0002].
Claim 4
While McConnell teaches in [0061] the system calculates the emissions produced by an entire site and/or the entire enterprise. In other embodiments, the system automatically performs calculations and or reports emission totals at recurring predetermined intervals, such as every month or every year. McConnell does not the explicitly teach the following limitation, however analogous reference in the field of emission tracking and calculation, Zhu teaches:
The computer program product of claim 1, wherein the greenhouse gas emissions data is based on emissions from using the particular product ([0046] The item properties green score may take into account various aspects of the item based on its environmental-friendliness, including environmental-friendliness of its production, packaging, operation, and disposal. carbon emissions associated with the production, use, or disposal of the product may be considered in the item properties green score calculation. information related to the environmental-friendliness of a product (e.g., carbon emissions associated with a product, packaging associated with a product, the organic nature of a product, etc.) may be retrieved from an external system and analyzed to generate the item properties green score for the item).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the teaching of McConnell and Stowell incorporate the teachings of Zhu to include the greenhouse gas emissions data is based on emissions from using the particular product. Doing so would help to incorporating green scores based on carbon emissions associated with a product into a network-based publication system to encourage users of the system to choose actions with respect to the system that will result in a more positive (or a less negative) impact on the environment than other actions. [0002].
Claim 6
While McConnell teaches in [0061] the system calculates the emissions produced by an entire site and/or the entire enterprise. In other embodiments, the system automatically performs calculations and or reports emission totals at recurring predetermined intervals, such as every month or every year. McConnell does not the explicitly teach the following limitation, however analogous reference in the field of emission tracking and calculation, Zhu teaches:
The computer program product of claim 1, wherein the greenhouse gas emissions data is based on direct emissions associated with the particular product([0046] The item properties green score may take into account various aspects of the item based on its environmental-friendliness, including environmental-friendliness of its production, packaging, operation, and disposal. carbon emissions associated with the production, use, or disposal of the product may be considered in the item properties green score calculation. information related to the environmental-friendliness of a product (e.g., carbon emissions associated with a product, packaging associated with a product, the organic nature of a product, etc.) may be retrieved from an external system and analyzed to generate the item properties green score for the item).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the teaching of McConnell and Stowell incorporate the teachings of Zhu to include the greenhouse gas emissions data is based on direct emissions associated with the particular product. Doing so would help to incorporating green scores based on carbon emissions associated with a product into a network-based publication system to encourage users of the system to choose actions with respect to the system that will result in a more positive (or a less negative) impact on the environment than other actions. [0002].
Claim 7
McConnell further teaches:
The computer program product of claim 1, wherein the greenhouse gas emissions data is based on indirect emissions associated with the particular product([0019] emissions can include emissions that originate from both direct and indirect emission sources. e system 10 tracks emissions from both direct and indirect sources. Alternatively, the system 10 can track solely the emissions from direct emission sources or solely the emissions from indirect emission sources).
Claim 13
While McConnell teaches [0007] tracking with software emissions of the direct emission sources and indirect emission sources based on the plurality of characteristics and [0032] accept input from emissions sensors. [0059] The equipment interface allows the system to automatically track information related to the amount of emissions produced by a certain emission source without any manual input or effort by a user. [0060] all of the information gathered such that the system accumulates all of the information relating to the amount of emissions produced by each emission source, McConnell does not explicitly teach the following, however analogous reference in the field of gathering and analyzing sensor data, Stowell teaches:
The computer program product of claim 1, wherein the sensors are split-ring resonator (SRR) on or embedded in a material, wherein each SRR includes a resonance portion, wherein the resonance portion is configured to resonate at a first frequency in response to an electromagnetic ping when a state of the material exceeds a threshold, and is configured to resonate at a second frequency in response to the electromagnetic ping when the state of the material is beneath the threshold ([0006]the SRRs may include a first split-ring resonator (SRR) with first carbon particles., the first carbon particles may uniquely resonate in response to an electromagnetic ping. The unique resonation may be based at least in part on a concentration level of the first carbon particles within the first SRR. the SRRs may include a second SRR adjacent to the first SRR, where the second SRR includes second carbon particles that may uniquely resonate in response to the electromagnetic ping. The unique resonation may be based at least in part on a concentration level of the second carbon particles within the second SRR. [0007] The first SRR may resonate at a first frequency in response to the electromagnetic ping, and the second SRR may resonate at a second frequency in response to the electromagnetic ping, where the first frequency may be different than the second frequency. [0008] each of the first SRR and the second SRR may have an attenuation point, which may be associated with a frequency response to the electromagnetic ping.).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the teaching of McConnell incorporate the teachings of Stowell to include the sensors is a split-ring resonator (SRR) on or embedded in a material, wherein the SRR includes a resonance portion, wherein the resonance portion is configured to resonate at a first frequency in response to an electromagnetic ping when a state of the material exceeds a threshold, and is configured to resonate at a second frequency in response to the electromagnetic ping when the state of the material is beneath the threshold as part of the sensors taught in McConnell. Doing so would provide a durable sensor and detect internal defects, delamination, or damage of sensors. [0029].
Claim 23
While McConnell teaches [0007] tracking with software emissions of the direct emission sources and indirect emission sources based on the plurality of characteristics and [0032] accept input from emissions sensors. [0059] The equipment interface allows the system to automatically track information related to the amount of emissions produced by a certain emission source without any manual input or effort by a user. [0060] all of the information gathered such that the system accumulates all of the information relating to the amount of emissions produced by each emission source, McConnell does not explicitly teach the following, however analogous reference in the field of gathering and analyzing sensor data, Stowell teaches:
The computer program product of claim 1, wherein the 3D monolithic carbonaceous growth is self-nucleated in a reactor from a carbon-containing gaseous species ([0030] the carbonaceous materials may be innately grown (e.g., self-nucleated) in a reactor from a carbon-containing gaseous species without requiring a seed particle to generate ornate 3D structure ).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the teaching of McConnell incorporate the teachings of Stowell to include the 3D monolithic carbonaceous growth is self-nucleated in a reactor from a carbon-containing gaseous species as part of the sensors taught in McConnell. Doing so would provide a durable sensor and detect internal defects, delamination, or damage of sensors. [0029].
Claims 2, 3, and 5 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over McConnell in view of Stowell in view of Zhu, as applied in claim 1, and further in view of David Probst (US 2010/0036693 A1, hereinafter “Probst”).
Claim 2
While McConnell teaches [0019] emissions can include emissions that originate from both direct and indirect emission sources. e system 10 tracks emissions from both direct and indirect sources. Alternatively, the system 10 can track solely the emissions from direct emission sources or solely the emissions from indirect emission sources. McConnell does not the explicitly teach the following limitation, however analogous reference in the field of emission tracking and calculation, Probst teaches:
The computer program product of claim 1, wherein the greenhouse gas emissions data include scope 3 emissions ([0015] The tracking of indirect processes allows an organization to track its overall impact on the environment. The environmental tracking system allows each process to be modeled by its input substances and its resulting output substances. [0017] Once the model of the processes of an organization and surrounding processes of the environment, vendors, customers, and so on is established, the environmental tracking system can track the flow of substances through an organization based on the model. By tracking the flow of substances according to the established model, the environmental impact system can provide an organization with an overall impact that the organization has on the environment).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the teaching of McConnell, Stowell, and Zhu incorporate the teachings of Probst to include the greenhouse gas emissions data include scope 3 emissions. Doing so would help tracking the flow of substances according to the established model, the environmental impact system can provide an organization with the overall impact that the organization has on the environment to encourage users of the system to choose actions with respect to the system that will result in a more positive (or a less negative) impact on the environment than other actions. [0006].
Claim 3
While McConnell teaches [0019] emissions can include emissions that originate from both direct and indirect emission sources. e system 10 tracks emissions from both direct and indirect sources. Alternatively, the system 10 can track solely the emissions from direct emission sources or solely the emissions from indirect emission sources. McConnell does not the explicitly teach the following limitation, however analogous reference in the field of emission tracking and calculation, Probst teaches:
The computer program product of claim 1, wherein the greenhouse gas emissions data are based on two or more of: raw materials emissions, manufacturing emissions, distributing emissions, using emissions disposing, or recycling emissions ([0003] In addition to tracking the release of substances into the ecosphere, organizations may want to track the resources they have consumed or extracted from the ecosphere. The resources may include energy, raw materials, transportation resources, and so on. [0018] For example, process 104 inputs a substance from process 103 and outputs substances to processes 105, 106, 109, and 110. The model includes an initial input flow from an ecosphere general process 101, which may represent the extraction of a raw material (e.g., coal or iron) from the environment. The ecosphere general process outputs the raw material, which is input into a vendor process 102. The vendor process may convert the raw material into a manufactured substance that is output from the vendor process 102 and input into a company receipt process 103. The vendor process 102 may also output a substance (e.g., CO.sub.2) that is input into an ecosphere air process 108. The company receipt process 103 may represent the receipt and inventorying of the manufactured substance and eventual output of the manufactured substance as input into a production floor processes 104. The production floor process 104 may represent the conversion of the manufactured substance into a finished product, which is then input into a customer base process 106 when it is sold. The production floor process 104 may also output greenhouse gases that are input into a scrubber process 105 with its output greenhouse gases being released in to the ecosphere air process 108).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the teaching of McConnell, Stowell, and Zhu incorporate the teachings of Probst to include the greenhouse gas emissions data are based on two or more of: raw materials emissions, manufacturing emissions, distributing emissions, using emissions disposing, or recycling emissions. Doing so would help tracking the flow of substances according to the established model, the environmental impact system can provide an organization with the overall impact that the organization has on the environment to encourage users of the system to choose actions with respect to the system that will result in a more positive (or a less negative) impact on the environment than other actions. [0006].
Claim 5
While McConnell teaches [0019] emissions can include emissions that originate from both direct and indirect emission sources. e system 10 tracks emissions from both direct and indirect sources. Alternatively, the system 10 can track solely the emissions from direct emission sources or solely the emissions from indirect emission sources. McConnell does not the explicitly teach the following limitation, however analogous reference in the field of emission tracking and calculation, Probst teaches:
The computer program product of claim 1, wherein the greenhouse gas emissions data is based on chain supply emissions relating to the particular product ([0006] the environmental tracking system can track the flow of substances through an organization. The environmental tracking system allows a user to specify initial input flows of incoming substances and from where the incoming substances are purchased, acquired, extracted, returned from customers, and/or measured or metered to be used in the model. The environmental tracking system uses the incoming substance information as an initial input flow for a process of the organization that is defined by the model).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the teaching of McConnell, Stowell, and Zhu incorporate the teachings of Probst to include wherein the greenhouse gas emissions data is based on chain supply emissions relating to the particular product. Doing so would help tracking the flow of substances according to the established model, the environmental impact system can provide an organization with the overall impact that the organization has on the environment to encourage users of the system to choose actions with respect to the system that will result in a more positive (or a less negative) impact on the environment than other actions. [0006].
Claims 8-10 rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over McConnell in view of Stowell in view of Zhu, as applied in claim 1, and further in view of Ilya William Slutsker (US 2014/0316964 A1, hereinafter “Slutsker”).
Claim 8
While McConnell teaches in [0061] the system calculates the emissions produced by an entire site and/or the entire enterprise. In other embodiments, the system automatically performs calculations and or reports emission totals at recurring predetermined intervals, such as every month or every year. McConnell does not the explicitly teach the following limitation, however analogous reference in the field of emission tracking and calculation, Slutsker teaches:
The computer program product of claim 1, further comprising computer executable instructions that instruct the processor to calculate a net greenhouse gas emission output by comparing the lifetime measurement of greenhouse gas emissions data to a predetermined allowance([0044] The carbon emission module may also have a record of how much GHG for which a user is allowed to account. Carbon Allowances 110 may be allotted by a regional body that tracks compliance with the carbon emissions standards (said body herein after referred to as the Regional Body 114), while [0018] With this information, carbon reduction programs determine the allowable amount of greenhouse gases the participant have generated and compare the value to the participant carbon allowances (Carbon Allowance). ).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the teaching of McConnell, Stowell, and Zhu incorporate the teachings of Slutsker to include calculate a net greenhouse gas emission output by comparing the lifetime measurement of greenhouse gas emissions data to a predetermined allowance. Doing so would help providing a comprehensive solution for the trading, position analysis, and reporting of emissions transactions that can be used to minimize harmful emissions while allowing participants to avoid unnecessary penalties and identify underutilized assets. [0016].
Claim 9
McConnell further teaches:
The computer program product of claim 8, further comprising computer executable instructions that instruct the processor to, when the net greenhouse gas emission output results in a positive net, initiate a sell transaction to sell carbon credits to a carbon credit sensing network based on the positive net([0075] and figure 6 the system provides for comparing the emissions totals to the predetermined quota for the site or enterprise (or other measure, as discussed above) and calculating whether the emissions for that site or enterprise exceed the quota (block 94). Based on this calculation, the system or method provides for calculating the carbon credit debt or surplus (block 96). That is, if the site or enterprise has exceeded its emissions quota, then it has a carbon credit debt. In contrast, if the site or enterprise has emitted less than its quota, then it has a carbon credit surplus. [0076] the system 90 then allows for the purchase, sale, or reallocation of credits (block 98) depending on whether there is a surplus or debt).
Claim 10
McConnell further teaches:
The computer program product of claim 8, further comprising computer executable instructions that instruct the processor to, when the net greenhouse gas emission output results in a negative net, initiate a buy transaction to purchase carbon credits from a carbon credit sensing network to offset the negative net([0075] and figure 6 the system provides for comparing the emissions totals to the predetermined quota for the site or enterprise (or other measure, as discussed above) and calculating whether the emissions for that site or enterprise exceed the quota (block 94). Based on this calculation, the system or method provides for calculating the carbon credit debt or surplus (block 96). That is, if the site or enterprise has exceeded its emissions quota, then it has a carbon credit debt. In contrast, if the site or enterprise has emitted less than its quota, then it has a carbon credit surplus. [0076] the system 90 then allows for the purchase, sale, or reallocation of credits (block 98) depending on whether there is a surplus or debt).
Claims 14-15, 22, and 24 rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over McConnell in view of Stowell in view of Zhu, as applied in claim 1, and further in view of Bruce Lanning (US 2021/0181145 A1, hereinafter “Lanning”).
Claim 14
While McConnell teaches [0007] tracking with software emissions of the direct emission sources and indirect emission sources based on the plurality of characteristics and [0032] accept input from emissions sensors. [0059] The equipment interface allows the system to automatically track information related to the amount of emissions produced by a certain emission source without any manual input or effort by a user. [0060] all of the information gathered such that the system accumulates all of the information relating to the amount of emissions produced by each emission source, McConnell does not explicitly teach the following, however analogous reference in the field of gathering and analyzing sensor data, Lanning teaches:
The computer program product of claim 1, wherein the sensors are integrated within a label configured to be removably printed onto a surface of a package or container, and the label comprises one or more carbon-based inks([0008] the substrate and the sensor array may be integrated within a label configured to be removably printed onto a surface of a package or container. In some aspects, each of the carbon-based sensors may be printed on the substrate using a different carbon-based ink, and the pairs of electrodes may be printed on the substrate using an ohmic-based ink).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the teaching of McConnell, Stowell, and Zhu incorporate the teachings of Lanning to include the sensors is integrated within a label configured to be removably printed onto a surface of a package or container, and the label comprises one or more carbon-based inks as part of the sensors taught in McConnell. Doing so would provide a durable sensor and reduce a susceptibility of a respective carbon-based sensor to humidity. [0009].
Claim 15
While McConnell teaches [0007] tracking with software emissions of the direct emission sources and indirect emission sources based on the plurality of characteristics and [0032] accept input from emissions sensors. [0059] The equipment interface allows the system to automatically track information related to the amount of emissions produced by a certain emission source without any manual input or effort by a user. [0060] all of the information gathered such that the system accumulates all of the information relating to the amount of emissions produced by each emission source, McConnell does not explicitly teach the following, however analogous reference in the field of gathering and analyzing sensor data, Lanning teaches:
The computer program product of claim 1, wherein the sensors are carbon-based and are functionalized with a material configured to react with each analyte of a first group of analytes([0010] the carbon-based sensors may be configured to react with unique groups of analytes in response to an electromagnetic signal received from an external device).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the teaching of McConnell, Stowell, and Zhu incorporate the teachings of Lanning to include the sensors is carbon-based and is functionalized with a material configured to react with each analyte of a first group of analytes as part of the sensors taught in McConnell. Doing so would provide a durable sensor and reduce a susceptibility of a respective carbon-based sensor to humidity. [0009].
Claim 22
While McConnell teaches [0007] tracking with software emissions of the direct emission sources and indirect emission sources based on the plurality of characteristics and [0032] accept input from emissions sensors. [0059] The equipment interface allows the system to automatically track information related to the number of emissions produced by a certain emission source without any manual input or effort by a user. [0060] all of the information gathered such that the system accumulates all of the information relating to the number of emissions produced by each emission source, McConnell does not explicitly teach the following, however analogous reference in the field of gathering and analyzing sensor data, Lanning teaches:
The computer program product of claim 1, wherein the sensors are configured to detect at least one of CO2, CO, CH4, NOx, or SOx([0010] the carbon-based sensors may be configured to resonate at different frequencies in response to the electromagnetic signal. Each of the one or more electrodes may be configured to provide an output signal indicating whether a corresponding carbon-based sensor detected one or more analytes in a respective group of the unique groups of analytes. [0020] the analytes of the first and second groups of analytes may include one or more volatile organic compounds (VOCs). The one or more volatile organic compounds (VOCs) include any one or more of carbon dioxide (CO.sub.2), carbon monoxide (CO), nitrogen dioxide (NO.sub.2),).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the teaching of McConnell, Stowell, and Zhu incorporate the teachings of Lanning to include the sensors are configured to detect at least one of CO2, CO, CH4, NOx, or SOx as part of the sensors taught in McConnell. Doing so would provide a durable sensor and reduce a susceptibility of a respective carbon-based sensor to humidity. [0009].
Claim 24
While McConnell teaches [0007] tracking with software emissions of the direct emission sources and indirect emission sources based on the plurality of characteristics and [0032] accept input from emissions sensors. [0059] The equipment interface allows the system to automatically track information related to the amount of emissions produced by a certain emission source without any manual input or effort by a user. [0060] all of the information gathered such that the system accumulates all of the information relating to the amount of emissions produced by each emission source, McConnell does not explicitly teach the following, however analogous reference in the field of gathering and analyzing sensor data, Lanning teaches:
The computer program product of claim 1, wherein the sensors are integrated within a label configured to be removably printed onto a surface of a package or container associated with the particular units([0014] the substrate and the sensor array may be integrated within a label that can be removably printed on a surface of the package or container).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the teaching of McConnell, Stowell, and Zhu incorporate the teachings of Lanning to include the sensors are integrated within a label configured to be removably printed onto a surface of a package or container associated with the particular units as part of the sensors taught in McConnell. Doing so would provide a durable sensor and reduce a susceptibility of a respective carbon-based sensor to humidity. [0009].
Claims 16-17 rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over McConnell in view of Stowell in view of Zhu, as applied in claim 1, and further in view of Sung H. Lim (US 2021/0396709 A1, hereinafter “Lim”).
Claim 16
While McConnell teaches [0007] tracking with software emissions of the direct emission sources and indirect emission sources based on the plurality of characteristics and [0032] accept input from emissions sensors. [0059] The equipment interface allows the system to automatically track information related to the amount of emissions produced by a certain emission source without any manual input or effort by a user. [0060] all of the information gathered such that the system accumulates all of the information relating to the amount of emissions produced by each emission source, McConnell does not explicitly teach the following, however analogous reference in the field of gathering and analyzing sensor data, Lim teaches:
The computer program product of claim 1, wherein the sensors include a three-dimensional (3D) graphene layer, wherein the 3D graphene layer is biofunctionalized with a molecular recognition element configured to alter one or more electrical properties of the 3D graphene layer in response to exposure of the molecular recognition element to an analyte([0033] biological field-effect transistors (BioFETs) are a type of biosensor that includes a transistor for electrically sensing biomolecules or bio-entities. [0040] The 3D graphene layer may be deposited on an insulating layer (such as silicon dioxide) of the BioFET. The 3D graphene layer may be positioned within a well region containing an electrolyte solution that may receive an analyte (e.g., 2,4,6-Trinitrotoluene, “TNT”), and thereby potentially contact the analyte. Further, the 3D graphene layer may provide exposed surfaces that can be biofunctionalized with one or more molecular recognition elements that selectively bind with the analyte. [0111] The operation 1700A continues in block 1712A with biofunctionalizing the carbonaceous dispersion with a molecular recognition element configured to alter one or more electrical properties of the BioFET in response to exposure of the molecular recognition element to the analyte).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the teaching of McConnell, Stowell, and Zhu incorporate the teachings of Lim to include the sensors include a three-dimensional (3D) graphene layer, wherein the 3D graphene layer is biofunctionalized with a molecular recognition element configured to alter one or more electrical properties of the 3D graphene layer in response to exposure of the molecular recognition element to an analyte as part of the sensors taught in McConnell. Doing so would provide a durable sensor and provide an improved exposed surface area per unit volume, which results in improved binding of the molecular recognition elements with the analyte thereby improving sensitivity when compared to other, less structurally organized sensing materials. [0039-0040].
Claim 17
While McConnell teaches [0007] tracking with software emissions of the direct emission sources and indirect emission sources based on the plurality of characteristics and [0032] accept input from emissions sensors. [0059] The equipment interface allows the system to automatically track information related to the amount of emissions produced by a certain emission source without any manual input or effort by a user. [0060] all of the information gathered such that the system accumulates all of the information relating to the amount of emissions produced by each emission source, McConnell does not explicitly teach the following, however analogous reference in the field of gathering and analyzing sensor data, Lim teaches:
The computer program product of claim 16, wherein the molecular recognition element is a biological material configured to selectively bind with the analyte ([0033] biological field-effect transistors (BioFETs) are a type of biosensor that includes a transistor for electrically sensing biomolecules or bio-entities. [0040] the 3D graphene layer may provide exposed surfaces that can be biofunctionalized with one or more molecular recognition elements that selectively bind with the analyte).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the teaching of McConnell, Stowell, and Zhu incorporate the teachings of Lim to include the molecular recognition element is a biological material configured to selectively bind with the analyte as part of the sensors taught in McConnell. Doing so would provide a durable sensor and provide an improved exposed surface area per unit volume, which results in improved binding of the molecular recognition elements with the analyte thereby improving sensitivity when compared to other, less structurally organized sensing materials. [0039-0040].
Claim 18 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over McConnell in view of Stowell in view of Zhu, as applied in claim 1, and further in view of Sung H. Lim (US 2020/0292488 A1, hereinafter “H. Lim”).
Claim 18
While McConnell teaches [0007] tracking with software emissions of the direct emission sources and indirect emission sources based on the plurality of characteristics and [0032] accept input from emissions sensors. [0059] The equipment interface allows the system to automatically track information related to the amount of emissions produced by a certain emission source without any manual input or effort by a user. [0060] all of the information gathered such that the system accumulates all of the information relating to the amount of emissions produced by each emission source, McConnell does not explicitly teach the following, however analogous reference in the field of gathering and analyzing sensor data, H. Lim teaches:
The computer program product of claim 1, wherein the sensors are a three-dimensional (3D) carbon-based structure configured to guide a migration of electrically charged electrophoretic ink particles dispersed throughout the 3D carbon-based structure, the electrically charged electrophoretic ink particles responsive to application of a voltage to the 3D carbon-based structure([0005] as a three-dimensional (3D) carbon-based structure configured to guide a migration of electrically charged electrophoretic ink particles dispersed therein that are configured to be responsive to application of a voltage to the first electrode).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the teaching of McConnell, Stowell, and Zhu incorporate the teachings of H. Lim to include the sensors are a three-dimensional (3D) carbon-based structure configured to guide a migration of electrically charged electrophoretic ink particles dispersed throughout the 3D carbon-based structure, the electrically charged electrophoretic ink particles responsive to application of a voltage to the 3D carbon-based structure as part of the sensors taught in McConnell. Doing so would provide a durable sensor and reduce a susceptibility of a respective carbon-based sensor to humidity.
Claim 19 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over McConnell in view of Stowell in view of Zhu in view of Slutsker.
Claim 19
McConnell teaches:
A method, comprising: receiving greenhouse gas emissions data from sensors([0032] accept input from emissions sensors. [0059] The equipment interface allows the system to automatically track information related to the amount of emissions produced by a certain emission source without any manual input or effort by a user. [0060] all of the information gathered such that the system accumulates all of the information relating to the amount of emissions produced by each emission source); process the greenhouse gas emissions data to determine a total greenhouse gas emissions output([0061] the system calculates the emissions produced by an entire site and/or the entire enterprise. In other embodiments, the system automatically performs calculations and or reports emission totals at recurring predetermined intervals, such as every month or every year. [0061]tracking emissions include calculating the amount of emissions produced by an emission source or sources (block 14). That is, the amount of emissions produced, particularly the amount of greenhouse gas emissions, and more particularly the amount of CO2 and CO2 equivalents, produced by a particular source or group of sources can be calculated for any desired time period);
when the net greenhouse gas emissions output results in a positive net, initiate a sell transaction to sell carbon credits to a carbon credit sensing network based on the positive net; and when the net greenhouse gas emissions output results in a negative net, initiate a buy transaction to purchase carbon credits from the carbon credit sensing network to offset the negative net([0075] and figure 6 the system provides for comparing the emissions totals to the predetermined quota for the site or enterprise (or other measure, as discussed above) and calculating whether the emissions for that site or enterprise exceed the quota (block 94). Based on this calculation, the system or method provides for calculating the carbon credit debt or surplus (block 96). That is, if the site or enterprise has exceeded its emissions quota, then it has a carbon credit debt. In contrast, if the site or enterprise has emitted less than its quota, then it has a carbon credit surplus. [0076] the system 90 then allows for the purchase, sale, or reallocation of credits (block 98) depending on whether there is a surplus or debt).
While McConnell teaches [0007] tracking with software emissions of the direct emission sources and indirect emission sources based on the plurality of characteristics. paragraph [0031] teaches interfaces 66 are attached to direct emission sources with communications capabilities in order to monitor the emissions production of the direct emission source. Paragraph [0032] teaches the interface 66 is configured to accept input from emissions sensors. [0032] accept input from emissions sensors. [0059] The equipment interface allows the system to automatically track information related to the number of emissions produced by a certain emission source without any manual input or effort by a user. [0060] all of the information gathered such that the system accumulates all of the information relating to the number of emissions produced by each emission source, McConnell does not explicitly teach the following, however analogous reference in the field of gathering and analyzing sensor data, Stowell teaches:
wherein the sensors are: formed from a three-dimensional (3D) monolithic carbonaceous growth, ([0029] deploying durable sensors (e.g., split-ring resonators, SRRs), made from carbonaceous microstructures. [0030] the carbonaceous materials may be innately grown (e.g., self-nucleated) in a reactor from a carbon-containing gaseous species without requiring a seed particle to generate ornate 3D structures), and wherein a resonant frequency of the 3D monolithic carbonaceous growth is based at least in part on either or both of a permittivity and a permeability of a material associated with the sensors([0029] deploying durable sensors (e.g., split-ring resonators, SRRs), made from carbonaceous microstructures. [0030] the carbonaceous materials may be innately grown (e.g., self-nucleated) in a reactor from a carbon-containing gaseous species without requiring a seed particle to generate ornate 3D structures [0065] The material properties of permeability, permittivity and conductivity can also be considered when formulating a compound to be tuned to a particular electrical impedance), and physically attached to or embedded within the respective particular units of the particular product to directly measure greenhouse gas emissions generated during use of the particular units([0029]The sensors may be incorporated within vehicle components. The sensors may be embedded within portions of tire plies and/or tire tread. [0049] embedded sensors 270 (which can be embedded within materials such as tire plies) can employ and/or be powered by self-powered telemetry including tribological energy generators (not shown in FIG. 2) also incorporated within the material enclosed the respective sensors. Examiner notes the cited paragraphs illustrates that the sensors are physically attached or embedded within a respective monitored unit).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the teaching of McConnell incorporate the teachings of Stowell to include the sensors are formed from a three-dimensional (3D) monolithic carbonaceous growth and wherein a resonant frequency of the 3D monolithic carbonaceous growth is based at least in part on either or both of a permittivity and a permeability of a material associated with the sensors as part of the sensors taught in McConnell. Doing so would provide a durable sensor which will aid in capturing emission data. [0029].
While McConnell teaches in [0061] the system calculates the emissions produced by an entire site and/or the entire enterprise. In other embodiments, the system automatically performs calculations and or reports emission totals at recurring predetermined intervals, such as every month or every year. McConnell does not the explicitly teach the following limitation, however analogous reference in the field of emission tracking and calculation, Zhu teaches:
wherein the total greenhouse gas emissions output aggregates emissions data collected from the sensors during each of a plurality of lifecycle stages of the particular units, the plurality of lifecycle stages comprising at least two of: raw materials extraction, manufacturing, distribution, use, and end-of-life processing ([0046] An item-properties-scoring module 360 may be configured to determine or generate an item properties green score for the item. The item properties green score may take into account various aspects of the item based on its environmental-friendliness, including environmental-friendliness of its production, packaging, operation, and disposal. carbon emissions associated with the production, use, or disposal of the product may be considered in the item properties green score calculation. [0045] An item-shipping-scoring module 358 may be configured to determine or generate an item shipping green score for an item. [0057] The transaction green score may represent a combination or aggregation of one or more item green scores, including an item condition green score, an item shipping green score, or an item properties green score associated with the transaction. The various item green scores may be weighted according to an assessment of their contribution to the overall impact on the environment of a transaction involving the item. The various item green scores may then be combined (e.g., as a sum, weighted sum, average, and so on) to determine the transaction green score).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the teaching of McConnell and Stowell incorporate the teachings of Zhu to include wherein the total greenhouse gas emissions output aggregates emissions data collected from the sensors during each of a plurality of lifecycle stages of the particular units, the plurality of lifecycle stages comprising at least two of: raw materials extraction, manufacturing, distribution, use, and end-of-life processing. Doing so would help to incorporating green scores based on carbon emissions associated with a product into a network-based publication system to encourage users of the system to choose actions with respect to the system that will result in a more positive (or a less negative) impact on the environment than other actions. [0002].
While McConnell teaches in [0061] the system calculates the emissions produced by an entire site and/or the entire enterprise. In other embodiments, the system automatically performs calculations and or reports emission totals at recurring predetermined intervals, such as every month or every year. McConnell does not the explicitly teach the following limitation, however analogous reference in the field of emission tracking and calculation, Slutsker teaches:
calculate a net greenhouse gas emissions output by comparing the total greenhouse gas emissions output to a predetermined allowance([0044] The carbon emission module may also have a record of how much GHG for which a user is allowed to account. Carbon Allowances 110 may be allotted by a regional body that tracks compliance with the carbon emissions standards (said body herein after referred to as the Regional Body 114), while [0018] With this information, carbon reduction programs determine the allowable amount of greenhouse gases the participant have generated and compare the value to the participant carbon allowances (Carbon Allowance). ).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the teaching of McConnell, Stowell, and Zhu incorporate the teachings of Slutsker to include calculate a net greenhouse gas emissions output by comparing the total greenhouse gas emissions output to a predetermined allowance. Doing so would help providing a comprehensive solution for the trading, position analysis, and reporting of emissions transactions that can be used to minimize harmful emissions while allowing participants to avoid unnecessary penalties and identify underutilized assets. [0016].
Claim 25 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over McConnell in view of Stowell in view of Zhu in view of Slutsker, as applied in claim 19, and further in view of Lanning.
While McConnell teaches [0007] tracking with software emissions of the direct emission sources and indirect emission sources based on the plurality of characteristics and [0032] accept input from emissions sensors. [0059] The equipment interface allows the system to automatically track information related to the number of emissions produced by a certain emission source without any manual input or effort by a user. [0060] all of the information gathered such that the system accumulates all of the information relating to the number of emissions produced by each emission source, McConnell does not explicitly teach the following, however analogous reference in the field of gathering and analyzing sensor data, Lanning teaches:
The method of claim 19, wherein the sensors are configured to detect at least one of CO2, CO, CH4, NOx, or SOx([0010] the carbon-based sensors may be configured to resonate at different frequencies in response to the electromagnetic signal. Each of the one or more electrodes may be configured to provide an output signal indicating whether a corresponding carbon-based sensor detected one or more analytes in a respective group of the unique groups of analytes. [0020] the analytes of the first and second groups of analytes may include one or more volatile organic compounds (VOCs). The one or more volatile organic compounds (VOCs) include any one or more of carbon dioxide (CO.sub.2), carbon monoxide (CO), nitrogen dioxide (NO.sub.2),).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the teaching of McConnell, Stowell, Zhu, and Slutsker incorporate the teachings of Lanning to include the sensors are configured to detect at least one of CO2, CO, CH4, NOx, or SOx as part of the sensors taught in McConnell. Doing so would provide a durable sensor and reduce a susceptibility of a respective carbon-based sensor to humidity. [0009].
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure:
Setfan Metzger (US 20220276625 A1)- A method and system for controlling emissions by combining environmental response information, first environmental driver information and/or second environmental driver information to produce a space and time aligned data set that in turn can be used to produce a driver-response relationship model. Then using the driver-response relationship model to generate enhanced environmental response output information, which can be used to control emissions.
Jan Schoeneboom(US 20220108327 A1)- methods for determining the carbon footprint of a product in a production process in a production plant, in particular of a product in interconnected production processes. Certain embodiments of the present invention relate to a computer-implemented method for determining the carbon footprint of a product produced in production process of a production plant.
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.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to REHAM K ABOUZAHRA whose telephone number is (571)272-0419. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 7:00 AM to 5:00 PM.
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, Brian Epstein can be reached at (571)-270-5389. 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.
/REHAM K ABOUZAHRA/Examiner, Art Unit 3625
/BRIAN M EPSTEIN/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3625
Prosecution Insights