DETAILED ACTION
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 .
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 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.
Priority
Acknowledgment is made that this application is a division of application 17/229,087.
Information Disclosure Statement
While it is not necessary for the Applicant to submit an information disclosure statement that lists the prior art reference(s) previously cited by the examiner in the parent application(s) for the latter filed continuing application claiming the benefit under 35 U.S.C. 120 to said parent application(s) (other than an international application that designated the U.S.), the information will not be printed on the patent issuing from the continuing application unless cited by the Applicant on an IDS or by the Examiner on a PTO-892 for the present application. See MPEP § 609.02. While the Examiner has reviewed the reference(s) of the parent application(s), the Examiner has not verified that all of the reference(s) listed in the parent application(s) appear on the present IDS and/or PTO-892.
Specification
Applicant is reminded of the proper content, language, and/or format for an abstract of the disclosure:
The language should be clear and concise and should not repeat information given in the title. It should avoid using phrases which can be implied, such as, “The disclosure concerns,” “The disclosure defined by this invention,” “The disclosure describes,” etc. In addition, the form and legal phraseology often used in patent claims, such as “means” and “said,” should be avoided.
The abstract of the disclosure is objected to because:
of use of phrases which can be implied (“is disclosed”).
Appropriate correction is required. See MPEP § 608.01(b) for guidelines for the preparation of patent abstracts.
Claim Interpretation
The Examiner acknowledges in particular [0017] pertaining to ordinality.
MPEP § 2111 states that “the specification must provide a clear and intentional use of a special definition for the claim term to be treated as having a special definition”. Where Applicant’s definitions are optional or non-limiting the definitions are not considered special definitions and claim terms referencing such definitions will instead be considered under the broadest reasonable interpretation in view of the specification. If Applicant wishes to provide further explanation or dispute the Examiner’s interpretation of the definitions or to identify missed definitions, Applicant should clearly identify the special definitions and corresponding structure with reference to the specification by page and line number, and to the drawing, if any, by reference characters in response to this Office action. Examples should be clearly delineated from required features.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
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.
Claim(s) 8 and 13-14 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over newly cited Chen (US 20220205890 A1; hereafter “Chen”) in view of newly cited Sathyanarayana et al (US 20170115388 A1; hereafter “Sathyanarayana”) and in further view of newly cited Cottrell et al (WO 8808516 A1; hereafter “Cottrell”).
Regarding independent claim 8,
Chen teaches a method for determining multi-phase flow properties of a fluid (multiphase fluid) within a pipeline (fig. 1, pipe 121) (Title “DEVICE AND METHOD FOR FLUID AND EQUIPMENT MONITORING”; Abstract “characteristics of multiphase fluid flows” and “capable of measuring, processing, and calculating simultaneous independent pressure, temperature, flow rate”) comprising:
measuring radial measurement data (generic radial through-transmission measurement) for the first ultrasonic signal (ultrasonic signal from transducing portion of a sensing compartment 105 used for radial measurement) to be emitted from a transducer (transducing portion of sensing compartment 105, comprising transducer portions 101 & 104) into the fluid (multiphase fluid) and received at a second transducer (transducing portion of sensing compartment 105’, comprising transducer portions 101’ & 104’; see fig. 8, 261);
measuring a second time (downstream time of flight) for a first ultrasonic signal (ultrasonic signal from transducing portion of sensing compartment 105) to be emitted from the first transducer (transducing portion of sensing compartment 105, comprising transducer portions 101 & 104) into the fluid (multiphase fluid), reflected off of a surface of the pipeline (fig. 1, pipe 121) (silent to cooperating first & second reflective barrier), and received back at the first transducer (transducing portion of sensing compartment 105, comprising transducer portions 101 & 104);
measuring a third time (upstream time of flight) for the first ultrasonic signal (ultrasonic signal from transducing portion of sensing compartment 105) to be emitted from the first transducer (transducing portion of sensing compartment 105, comprising transducer portions 101 & 104) into the fluid (multiphase fluid), reflected off of a surface of the pipeline (fig. 1, pipe 121) (silent to cooperating first & second reflective barrier), and received back at the first transducer (transducing portion of sensing compartment 105, comprising transducer portions 101 & 104); and
calculating, using the first radial measurement data (generic), second time (downstream time of flight), and the third time (upstream time of flight), at least one of: a liquid to gas ratio, a fluid density, a gas holdup, a liquid holdup, and a fluid velocity of the fluid (multiphase fluid) flowing through the pipeline (fig. 1, pipe 121) ([0091] “obtain flow velocity. Volumetric flow rate is calculated by using the flow velocity times cross sectional area of the pipe”; [0109] “fluid density monitoring”).
Chen does not teach items: 1) first and second reflective barriers, wherein the first ultrasonic signal is reflected off of a first surface of a first barrier, reflected off of a second surface of a second barrier, and received back at the first transducer, and wherein the first ultrasonic signal is reflected off the second surface of the second barrier, reflected off the first surface of the first barrier, and received back at the first transducer; and 2) a pulse-echo time of flight radial measurement comprising measuring a first time for a first ultrasonic signal to be emitted from a first transducer into the fluid, reflected off an inner surface of the pipeline, and received back at the first transducer.
Regarding item 1), Sathyanarayana teaches a method for determining flow properties of a fluid within a pipeline (fig. 1, pipe 12) (Title “Ultrasonic Transducer System And Method Using Broadband System Responses”; Abstract “A transducer system with a transducer and circuitry”; [0019] “System 10 includes a pipe 12 through which a material, such as water or gas, may flow”; [0069] “may be applied to a single transducer, wherein it is excited with a frequency and transmits a pulse train, after which it then responds to the reflection of that pulse train”), comprising:
measuring a second time (downstream time of flight) for the first ultrasonic signal to be emitted from the first transducer (transducer system comprising TR1 & TR2) ([0069] “single transducer”) into the fluid, reflected off of a first surface (surface of reflector R1) of a first barrier (fig. 1, reflector R1), reflected off of a second surface (surface of reflector R2) of a second barrier (fig. 1, reflector R2), and received back at the first transducer (transducer system comprising TR1 & TR2) ([0069] “single transducer”);
measuring a third time (upstream time of flight) for the first ultrasonic signal to be emitted from the first transducer (transducer system comprising TR1 & TR2) ([0069] “single transducer”) into the fluid, reflected off the second surface (surface of reflector R2) of the second barrier (fig. 1, reflector R2), reflected off the first surface (surface of reflector R1) of the first barrier (fig. 1, reflector R1), and received back at the first transducer (transducer system comprising TR1 & TR2) ([0069] “single transducer”); and
calculating, using the second time (downstream time of flight), and the third time (upstream time of flight), a fluid velocity of the fluid flowing through the pipeline (fig. 1, pipe 12) ([0005] “The first and second TOF, and the differential TOF, determine speed of flow of the propagation medium”; [0024] “determine the UPS TOF, the DNS TOF, and the relative difference of the UPS and DNS TOF” and “From these measures, the flow rate through pipe 12 may be calculated”; [0028] “accuracy of the TOF measures directly influences the accuracy of the velocity determination”; [0006] “Accurately measuring TOF relies on numerous factors, including a sufficiently energized and detected waveform in each of the two directions during the TOF measures”; [0069] “the preferred embodiments have been empirically shown to provide accurate TOF measures even in noisy environments (i.e., relatively low signal-to-nose ratio (SNR)), with a strong improvement in reducing cycle slips as compared to a single frequency excitation system. Likewise, the preferred embodiments have been empirically shown to provide accurate TOF measures in attenuating media (e.g., methane)”).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine Sathyanarayana’s first & second reflective barriers and associated TOF upstream/downstream velocity measurement method with Chen’s TOF upstream/downstream velocity measurement method, thereby providing the expected advantages of conventional reflectors including increasing signal-to-noise ratio and standardization of reflections as opposed to pipe surface reflections which aren’t necessarily specifically designed for reflections (e.g., surface reflectivity can vary across different pipes). Complimentarily, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine Chen’s multiphase fluid flow characterization measurements with Sathyanarayana’s single transducer system & associated method thereby providing increased versatility and marketability of measuring fluid flow of multiphase fluids and further including additional characterizations of multiphase fluids inclusive of fluid density monitoring. The Examiner additionally notes that the Courts have ruled an obviousness analysis based on the collective teachings of the references does not depend on the order in which the references are listed in the statement of the rejection. See In re Bush, 296 F.2d 491, 496 (CCPA 1961): “In a case of this type where a rejection is predicated on two references each containing pertinent disclosure which has been pointed out to the applicant, we deem it to be of no significance, but merely a matter of exposition, that the rejection is stated to be on A in view of B instead of on B in view of A, or to term one reference primary and the other secondary.”
Regarding item 2), Cottrell teaches A method for determining flow properties of a fluid within a pipeline (pipe) (Title “ULTRASONIC FLUID FLOWMETER”; Abstract “Output signals from the transducers are processed to compute the time of flight of the pulse from first to third transducers and hence the flowrate and the computed flowrate is corrected for variation in the propagation rate of the ultrasound by derivation of a correction factor from the output signal from the second transducer (T4) angled to direct an ultrasonic pulse in a direction perpendicular to the axis of flow”) comprising: measuring a first time (time of flight) for a first ultrasonic signal to be emitted from a first transducer (fig. 1, block 1 comprising transducers T4 & T1) into the fluid, reflected off an inner surface of the pipeline (pipe), and received back at the first transducer (fig. 1, block 1 comprising transducers T4 & T1); measuring a second time (time of flight) for the first ultrasonic signal to be emitted from the first transducer (fig. 1, block 1 comprising transducers T4 & T1) into the fluid, reflected off of a surface of the pipeline (pipe), and received at a second transducer (fig. 1, block 2 comprising T2); measuring a third time (time of flight) for another ultrasonic signal to be emitted from another transducer (T2) into the fluid, reflected off of a surface of the pipeline (pipe) and received at the first transducer (fig. 1, block 1 comprising transducers T4 & T1); and calculating, using (time of flights) the first time, the second time, and the third time, at least one of: a liquid to gas ratio, a fluid density, a gas holdup, a liquid holdup, and a fluid velocity of the fluid flowing through the pipeline (pipe) (! “the density of the fluid, which may vary with changes in composition and with temperature, affect the measurement and require correction of the observed time-of-flight and delta-T”; ! “(iv) Fluid Propagation Rate (F) This parameter is dependent on characteristics of the fluid such as density and temperature. It is required for the calculation of the the beam angle/path”; ! “an output signal from the second transducer is processed to modify the conversion in response to any changes in propagation rate represented by changes in the output signal from the second transducer. Preferably the flowmeter also includes means within a mounting block responding to changes in temperature and means for modifying the measured flowrate in response thereto”; (Title; page 8, last paragraph “relationship between flow velocity (V) and time”; page 9, ll. 13-17 “flowmeter reading”).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to substitute Cottrell’s radial pulse-echo measurement for Chen’s radial through transmission measurement, thereby providing the expected commercial advantage of reduced hardware costs (as opposed to Chen’s use of a second transducer system). The Examiner additionally notes that in Dystar Textilfarben GmbH & Co. Deutschland KG v. C.H. Patrick, 464 F.3d 1356, 1368, 80 USPQ2d 1641, 1651 (Fed. Cir. 2006): “Indeed, we have repeatedly held that an implicit motivation to combine exists not only when a suggestion may be gleaned from the prior art as a whole, but when the ‘improvement’ is technology-independent and the combination of references results in a product or process that is more desirable, for example because it is stronger, cheaper, cleaner, faster, lighter, smaller, more durable, or more efficient. Because the desire to enhance commercial opportunities by improving a product or process is universal—and even common-sensical—we have held that there exists in these situations a motivation to combine prior art references even absent any hint of suggestion in the references themselves.” In the present case, utilizing a single transducer system as opposed requiring utilizing in addition thereto a second transducer system is a common-sense enhancement that is desirable for making the system and associated method cheaper, as well as being smaller. See MPEP § 2144(II).
With further respect to the transducer being singular, the Examiner respectfully notes that it has been held that forming in one piece an article which has formerly been formed in two pieces and put together involves only routine skill in the art, Howard v. Detroit Stove Works, 150 U.S. 164 (1893); see also In re Larson, 340 F.2d 965, 968, 144 USPQ 347, 349 (CCPA 1965), and MPEP 2144.04 (V)(B). In the present case, only ordinary skill in the art is required to make the transducer housing an integral unit comprising the downstream, upstream, and radial transducing portions. Therefore, either the combination of prior art—namely Chen’s first (101) & second (104) transducing portions integrally housed in a sensing compartment (105), Sathyanarayana’s single transducer ([0069] “single transducer”), and Cottrell’s integral housing (10 of a radial transducing portion (T4) and an upstream transducing portion (T1)—reasonably suggests integrally housing the aforementioned combined transducing portions, or nevertheless, It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to so make integral thereby making the combined apparatus more compact, better enabling the sharing of electrical/electronic resources between components, and/or more easily mountable/replaceable together.
Regarding claim 13, which depends on claim 8,
Chen teaches wherein a temperature sensor (fig. 1, temperature detector 103) and a pressure sensor (fig. 1, pressure sensor 102) are mounted on the pipeline (fig. 1, pipe 121).
Regarding claim 14, which depends on claim 8,
Chen as modified (see analysis of independent claim) suggests wherein a control unit with a computer processor (computer & control portions; see fig. 4, especially microcontroller 164, 113 comprising CPU 172, as well as clocks 155 & 171; see also fig. 1 electronic enclosure 117) is connected to the first transducer (transducing portion of sensing compartment 105, comprising transducer portions 101 & 104) to emit the first ultrasonic signal (ultrasonic signal from transducing portion of sensing compartment 105), measure the first time (radial direction time of flight), the second time (downstream time of flight), and the third time (upstream time of flight), and calculate the multi-phase flow properties of the fluid (multiphase fluid) ([0018] “FIG. 4 represents an electronic architecture block diagram of the device for fluid and equipment monitoring”; [0101]-[0102]).
The Examiner notes with respect to the above teachings being shown in different figures, that while the reference does not expressly show all of the above claimed features clearly in a single depicted embodiment as a single figure, either one of ordinary skill in the art would at once envisaged the
combination from the generic teachings thereof and/or specific possible choices of the structural components
thereof, or, in the alternative, it at least would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before
the effective filing date of the claimed invention to nevertheless so combine the above features for the
purpose and combinations as proposed by said reference and as analyzed by the Examiner
including the citations and/or Examiner comments provided above in reference to the claimed features.
Pertinently, the Examiner further notes that "Combining two embodiments disclosed adjacent to each other in a prior art patent does not require a leap of inventiveness", see Boston Scientific Scimed, Inc. v. Cordis Corp., 554 F.3d 982, 991 (Fed. Cir. 2009). The Examiner additionally notes that it has been held that broadly providing a mechanical or automatic means to replace manual activity which has accomplished the same result involves only routine skill in the art, In re Venner, 262 F.2d 91, 95, 120 USPQ 193, 194 (CCPA 1958). See MPEP 2144.04(III). In the present case it is the Examiner’s position that an ordinary artisan would at once envisaged that the aforementioned transducers are controlled by Chen’s computerized control unit. More particularly, it is Examiner’s position that it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before
the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine Chen’s electronic architecture including computer & controller with Chen’s sensor hardware components for automated computerized control thereof and providing the expected benefit of proper timing for emitting and/or receiving for the transducers including for aligning the data logging/analysis with said controls.
Claim(s) 15 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over newly cited Chen in view of newly cited Cottrell, and in further view of newly cited Hurmuzlu et al (US 20170160117 A1; hereafter “Hurmuzlu”) with newly cited Johansen et al (US 20070295101 A1; hereafter “Johansen”).
Regarding independent claim 15,
Chen teaches an apparatus (see fig. 1; see also details of computer/control portion in fig. 4) for determining multi-phase flow properties of a fluid (multiphase fluid) (Title “DEVICE AND METHOD FOR FLUID AND EQUIPMENT MONITORING”; Abstract “characteristics of multiphase fluid flows” and “capable of measuring, processing, and calculating simultaneous independent pressure, temperature, flow rate”) comprising:
a pipeline (fig. 1, pipe 121) configured to be a conduit for the fluid (multiphase fluid);
a pressure sensor (fig. 1, pressure sensing element 102) mounted to the pipeline (fig. 1, pipe 121);
a temperature sensor (temperature detector 103) mounted to the pipeline (fig. 1, pipe 121); and
a first transducer (transducing portion of sensing compartment 105, comprising transducer portions 101 & 104), mounted to the pipeline (fig. 1, pipe 121), configured to emit and receive a first ultrasonic signal (ultrasonic signal from transducing portion of sensing compartment 105), including to measure radial measurement data (generic radial through-transmission measurement) for the first ultrasonic signal (ultrasonic signal from transducing portion of a sensing compartment 105 used for radial measurement) to be emitted from a transducer (transducing portion of sensing compartment 105, comprising transducer portions 101 & 104) into the fluid (multiphase fluid) and received at a second transducer (transducing portion of sensing compartment 105’, comprising transducer portions 101’ & 104’; see fig. 8, 261).
Chen does not teach items: 1) a pulse-echo time of flight radial measurement, wherein the first ultrasonic signal reflects off an inner surface of the pipeline to be received back at the first transducer; 2a) wherein a liquid to gas ratio is calculated; and 2b) wherein said liquid to gas ratio is used to monitor well productivity.
Regarding item 1), Cottrell teaches an apparatus (fig. 1) for determining flow properties of a fluid (Title “ULTRASONIC FLUID FLOWMETER”; Abstract “Output signals from the transducers are processed to compute the time of flight of the pulse from first to third transducers and hence the flowrate and the computed flowrate is corrected for variation in the propagation rate of the ultrasound by derivation of a correction factor from the output signal from the second transducer (T4) angled to direct an ultrasonic pulse in a direction perpendicular to the axis of flow”) comprising: a pipeline (pipe) configured to be a conduit for the fluid; a temperature sensor (fig. 1, temperature sensor 4) mounted to the pipeline (pipe); and a first transducer (fig. 1, block 1 comprising transducers T4 & T1) (page 4, ll. 21-25 “Mounting block 1 houses an ultrasonic transducer, referenced as T”), mounted to the pipeline (pipe), configured to emit and receive a first ultrasonic signal wherein the first ultrasonic signal reflects off an inner surface of the pipeline (pipe) to be received back at the first transducer (fig. 1, block 1 comprising transducers T4 & T1) wherein the inner surface of the pipeline (pipe) that the first ultrasonic signal (signal from T4) reflects off of is located directly across from the first transducer (fig. 1, mounting block 1 with Transducer T) (page 1, last paragraph “non-intrusive monitoring of flow by time-of-flight measurement”; page 2, ll. 11-27 “observed time-of-flight and delta-T”).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to substitute Cottrell’s radial pulse-echo measurement for Chen’s radial through transmission measurement, thereby providing the expected commercial advantage of reduced hardware costs (as opposed to Chen’s use of a second transducer system). The Examiner additionally notes that in Dystar Textilfarben GmbH & Co. Deutschland KG v. C.H. Patrick, 464 F.3d 1356, 1368, 80 USPQ2d 1641, 1651 (Fed. Cir. 2006): “Indeed, we have repeatedly held that an implicit motivation to combine exists not only when a suggestion may be gleaned from the prior art as a whole, but when the ‘improvement’ is technology-independent and the combination of references results in a product or process that is more desirable, for example because it is stronger, cheaper, cleaner, faster, lighter, smaller, more durable, or more efficient. Because the desire to enhance commercial opportunities by improving a product or process is universal—and even common-sensical—we have held that there exists in these situations a motivation to combine prior art references even absent any hint of suggestion in the references themselves.” In the present case, utilizing a single transducer system as opposed requiring utilizing in addition thereto a second transducer system is a common-sense enhancement that is desirable for making the system and associated method cheaper, as well as being smaller. See MPEP § 2144(II).
With further respect to the transducer being singular, the Examiner respectfully notes that it has been held that forming in one piece an article which has formerly been formed in two pieces and put together involves only routine skill in the art, Howard v. Detroit Stove Works, 150 U.S. 164 (1893); see also In re Larson, 340 F.2d 965, 968, 144 USPQ 347, 349 (CCPA 1965), and MPEP 2144.04 (V)(B). In the present case, only ordinary skill in the art is required to make the transducer housing an integral unit. Therefore, either the combination of prior art—namely Chen’s first (101) & second (104) transducing portions integrally housed in a sensing compartment (105), and Cottrell’s integral housing (10 of a radial transducing portion (T4) and an upstream transducing portion (T1)—reasonably suggests integrally housing the aforementioned combined transducing portions, or nevertheless, It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to so make integral thereby making the combined apparatus more compact, better enabling the sharing of electrical/electronic resources between components, and/or more easily mountable/replaceable together.
Regarding item 2), Hurmuzlu teaches (best but not fully shown in figs. 2-3; however, see [0028] and reliance upon embodiment thereof, including each of an odd number of transducers and longitudinally separated transducer pairs) an apparatus for determining multi-phase flow properties of a fluid (multiphase fluid) (Title “REVOLVING ULTRASOUND FIELD MULTIPHASE FLOWMETER”; best shown in fig. 2; see figures FIGS. 3 to 4D for exemplary signal paths through multiphase mixture with cross-sectional views; [0007] “the present invention includes a device for determining the flow of one or more phases of a multiphase fluid mixture” and “determines the one or more phases of a multiphase fluid mixture” and “determine a gas fraction, a water fraction, and a non-water fluid fraction of the multiphase fluid mixture”; [0008] “GVF and a water cut”; [0005] “may be used in reservoir management and production allocation”; [0006] “oil pipeline”; [0028] “the present invention there can be an even (or an odd number other than 1) of radially symmetric transducers” and “the transducers pairs can have a radial angled placement along the longitudinal direction of the flow”) comprising: a pipeline (fig. 2, pipe 20) configured to be a conduit for the fluid (multiphase fluid); a pressure sensor (fig. 2, pressure transducer 32) mounted to the pipeline (fig. 2, pipe 20); a temperature sensor (fig. 2, temperature transducer 34) mounted to the pipeline (fig. 2, pipe 20); and a first transducer (fig. 2, transducer 12, denoting a first thereof), mounted to the pipeline (fig. 2, pipe 20), configured to emit and receive a first ultrasonic signal (ultrasonic wave) wherein the first ultrasonic signal (ultrasonic wave) reflects, to be received back at the first transducer (fig. 2, transducer 12, denoting a first thereof) ([0028] “the present invention there can be an even (or an odd number other than 1) of radially symmetric transducers” and “the transducers pairs can have a radial angled placement along the longitudinal direction of the flow”; Examiner notes that this limitation requires reliance upon the aforementioned disclosed aspect which is not fully shown in the drawings) ([0007] “ultrasonic wave”; [0022] “The transducers 12 can also be described as an ultrasound transmitter-received pair or transversal paired dual frequency ultrasound transmitter/receivers; however, the skilled artisan will recognize that which of the halves of the transmitter-received pair can be a transmitter or receiver, i.e., a transceiver or transducer”; [0009] “ultrasound transmitter/receivers are capable of at least one of: scanning at the same time, scanning in series, scanning in parallel, scanning in pulses, or scanning with one pair acting as a transmitter and the second pair acting as a receiver”; [0024] “A scan configuration can be defined by assigning one or more transducers as emitter(s), while any number of them, which may include the emitters themselves, will act as receivers. A wide range of scan sequences can be generated by using any desired set of successive scan configuration at specific time intervals”; [0025] “The emitter itself switches in receiving mode after the initial ultrasound pulse”; [0008], [0025]-[0026] “arrival time”. The Examiner emphasizes that one transducer assigned as an emitter can also act as a receiver for a scan, and that the arrival time thereof utilized suggests the time difference from emitting at time zero to receiving at the arrival time), wherein a liquid to gas ratio is calculated (at once envisaged that simple arithmetic provides said fraction from the gas fraction and the two liquid water/non-water fractions, and especially true in the limit case wherein there is only one or one dominant liquid; additional obviousness analysis provided) to monitor well productivity ([0005] “may be used in reservoir management and production allocation”; [0006] “oil pipeline”; acknowledged as in background, see obviousness statement combinations).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine Hurmuzlu’s additional multiphase characterizations of the cuts & fractions of the phases from acoustic measurements through the fluid with Chen’s acoustic measurements within a multiphase fluid thereby providing increased versatility and marketability of measuring additional commercially useful characterizations of said cuts and fractions of the multiphase fluids (e.g., production optimization, reservoir management, flow assurance, and/or safety). It further would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the conventional activity of determining fractions and utilizing said fractions in reservoir production allocation and management (Hurmuzlu, Background [0005]-[0006]) with Chen’s multiphase flowmeter and associated method for the clearly advantageous reason of said well productivity management thereby properly allocating resources and/or maximizing profits.
Chen as modified by Hurmuzlu still does not explicitly state determining the liquid to gas ratio.
However:
The Examiner takes Official Notice that the arithmetic of determining the liquid to gas ratio knowing all of the fractions is well-within ordinary skill in the art and a conventional activity thereof. Additionally, the Examiner takes Official Notice that utilizing curves for computations of the relationships between sound speed and fractions is likewise conventional in the art.
PNG
media_image1.png
493
540
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Furthermore, and as supporting factual evidence of the aforementioned assertion of utilizing said sound speed curves, Johansen teaches determining a liquid to gas ratio using a sound speed curve (Title “SONAR BASED MULTIPHASE FLOWMETER”; [0013], [0026]-[0027], see fig. 3).
In view of the above, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to further combine conventional sound curves—such as Johansen’s—for the aforementioned suggested computations thereby making said computations more efficient by enabling looking-up data on said curve rather than utilizing new statistical derivations and/or analytical solutions for so determining and thus being able to provide more real-time analysis of liquid to gas ratio faster and with less expensive computer components.
With yet further regards to the limitation “wherein a liquid to gas ratio is calculated to monitor well productivity”, the Examiner additionally notes that it has been held that a recitation with respect to the manner in which a claimed apparatus is intended to be employed does not differentiate the claimed apparatus from a prior art apparatus satisfying the claimed structural limitations, Ex parte Masham, 2 USPQ2d - 164 7 (1987). See MPEP § 2144(II). In the present case, calculating the liquid to gas ratio as well as monitoring well productivity are intended uses.
Claim(s) 9 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over newly cited Chen in view of newly cited Sathyanarayana, newly cited Cottrell, and in further view of newly cited Hurmuzlu with newly cited Johansen et al.
Regarding claim 9, which depends on claim 8,
Chen does not teach items) wherein the liquid to gas ratio is determined; and 1b) wherein said liquid to gas ratio is determined using a sound speed curve, the first time, the second time, and the third time.
Regarding item 1a) and pertinent to item 1b), Hurmuzlu teaches (best but not fully shown in figs. 2-3; however, see [0028]) a method for determining multi-phase flow properties of a fluid (multiphase fluid) within a pipeline (fig. 2, pipe 20) comprising (Title “REVOLVING ULTRASOUND FIELD MULTIPHASE FLOWMETER”; best shown in fig. 2; see figures FIGS. 3 to 4D for exemplary signal paths through multiphase mixture with cross-sectional views; [0007] “the present invention includes a device for determining the flow of one or more phases of a multiphase fluid mixture” and “determines the one or more phases of a multiphase fluid mixture” and “determine a gas fraction, a water fraction, and a non-water fluid fraction of the multiphase fluid mixture”; [0008] “GVF and a water cut”; [0005] “may be used in reservoir management and production allocation”; [0006] “oil pipeline”; [0028] “the present invention there can be an even (or an odd number other than 1) of radially symmetric transducers” and “the transducers pairs can have a radial angled placement along the longitudinal direction of the flow”): measuring a first time for a first ultrasonic signal (ultrasonic wave) to be emitted from a first transducer (fig. 2, transducer 12, denoting a first thereof) into the fluid (multiphase fluid), reflected off an inner surface (inner surface of pipe 20) of the pipeline (fig. 2, pipe 20), and received back at the first transducer (fig. 2, transducer 12, denoting a first thereof) ([0007] “ultrasonic wave”; [0022] “The transducers 12 can also be described as an ultrasound transmitter-received pair or transversal paired dual frequency ultrasound transmitter/receivers; however, the skilled artisan will recognize that which of the halves of the transmitter-received pair can be a transmitter or receiver, i.e., a transceiver or transducer”; [0009] “ultrasound transmitter/receivers are capable of at least one of: scanning at the same time, scanning in series, scanning in parallel, scanning in pulses, or scanning with one pair acting as a transmitter and the second pair acting as a receiver”; [0024] “A scan configuration can be defined by assigning one or more transducers as emitter(s), while any number of them, which may include the emitters themselves, will act as receivers. A wide range of scan sequences can be generated by using any desired set of successive scan configuration at specific time intervals”; [0025] “The emitter itself switches in receiving mode after the initial ultrasound pulse”; [0008], [0025]-[0026] “arrival time”. The Examiner emphasizes that one transducer assigned as an emitter can also act as a receiver for a scan, and that the arrival time thereof utilized suggests the time difference from emitting at time zero to receiving at the arrival time), wherein the inner surface (inner surface of pipe 20) of the pipeline (fig. 2, pipe 20) that the first ultrasonic signal (ultrasonic wave) reflects off of is located directly across from the first transducer (fig. 2, transducer 12) ([0028] “the present invention there can be an even (or an odd number other than 1) of radially symmetric transducers” and “the transducers pairs can have a radial angled placement along the longitudinal direction of the flow”; Examiner notes that this limitation requires reliance upon the aforementioned disclosed aspect which is not fully shown in the drawings, see additional obviousness analysis); measuring a second time for the first ultrasonic signal (ultrasonic wave) to be emitted from the first transducer (fig. 2, transducer 12, denoting a first thereof) into the fluid (multiphase fluid) and received at a second transducer (fig. 2, transducer 12, denoting a second thereof) ([0008], [0025]-[0026] “arrival time”; see additional exemplary paths and time domain signal in figs. 3-4; [0024] “assigning one or more transducers as emitter(s), while any number of them, which may include the emitters themselves, will act as receivers”; [0025]); measuring a third time for the first ultrasonic signal (ultrasonic wave) to be emitted from the second transducer (fig. 2, transducer 12, denoting a second thereof) into the fluid (multiphase fluid) and received at the first transducer (fig. 2, transducer 12, denoting a first thereof) ([0008], [0025]-[0026] “arrival time”; see additional exemplary paths and time domain signal in figs. 3-4; [0024] “assigning one or more transducers as emitter(s), while any number of them, which may include the emitters themselves, will act as receivers”; [0025]); and calculating, using the first time and the second time, at least one of: a liquid to gas ratio, a fluid density, a gas holdup, a liquid holdup, and a fluid velocity of the fluid (multiphase fluid) flowing through the pipeline (fig. 2, pipe 20) ([0007] “a gas fraction, a water fraction, and a non-water fluid fraction of the multiphase fluid mixture”; [0008] “Gas-Volumetric-Fraction (GVF)” and “total flow rate” and “determine the percentages of the two liquid phases in the mixture” and “water cut” and “measure the total mass flow”; [0023] “liquid fraction”; [0028] “determine flow velocity”), wherein the liquid to gas ratio (at once envisaged that simple arithmetic provides said fraction from the gas fraction and the two liquid water/non-water fractions, and especially true in the limit case wherein there is only one or one dominant liquid; additional obviousness analysis provided) is determined using a sound speed relationship (silent to computer using a curve for the relationship), a first time, a second time, and a third time ([0007], [0009] “computer to determine a gas fraction, a water fraction, and a non-water fluid fraction of the multiphase fluid mixture, based on the sensed fluid pressure, the sensed fluid temperature, and at least one characteristic of the detected ultrasonic wave in the multiphase fluid”).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine Hurmuzlu’s additional multiphase characterizations of the cuts & fractions of the phases from acoustic measurements through the fluid with Chen’s acoustic measurements within a multiphase fluid thereby providing increased versatility and marketability of measuring additional commercially useful characterizations of said cuts and fractions of the multiphase fluids (e.g., production optimization, reservoir management, flow assurance, and/or safety).
Chen as modified by Hurmuzlu still does not explicitly state determining the liquid to gas ratio, nor in using a sound speed curve to so determine.
However:
The Examiner takes Official Notice that the arithmetic of determining the liquid to gas ratio knowing all of the fractions is well-within ordinary skill in the art and a conventional activity thereof. Additionally, the Examiner takes Official Notice that utilizing curves for computations of the relationships between sound speed and fractions is likewise conventional in the art.
Furthermore, and as supporting factual evidence of the aforementioned assertion of utilizing said sound speed curves, Johansen teaches determining a liquid to gas ratio using a sound speed curve (Title “SONAR BASED MULTIPHASE FLOWMETER”; [0013], [0026]-[0027], see fig. 3).
In view of the above, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to further combine conventional sound curves—such as Johansen’s—for the aforementioned suggested computations thereby making said computations more efficient by enabling looking-up data on said curve rather than utilizing new statistical derivations and/or analytical solutions for so determining and thus being able to provide more real-time analysis faster and with less expensive computer components.
The Examiner further notes that claim scope is not limited by claim language that suggests or makes optional but does not require steps to be performed, and that the broadest reasonable interpretation of a method (or process) claim having contingent limitations requires only those steps that must be performed and does not include steps that are not required to be performed because the condition(s) precedent are not met. In the present case, the determination of the liquid to gas ratio is an alternative in the independent claim, and the present claim does not make measurement of the liquid to gas ratio a required step (i.e., it is still a choice of the at least one, just more specific for that choice).
Claim(s) 10 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over newly cited Chen in view of newly cited Sathyanarayana, newly cited Cottrell, and in further view of newly cited Kupnik et al (US 20050066744 A1; hereafter “Kupnik”).
Regarding claim 10, which depends on claim 8,
Chen as modified (see analysis of independent claim) suggests wherein the first transducer (transducing portion of sensing compartment 105, comprising transducer portions; previously modified to be integral for additionally combined transducing portions) is mounted on an outer surface of the pipeline (fig. 1, pipe 121), and the first transducer (transducing portion of sensing compartment 105, comprising transducer portions 101 & 104) breaches the pipeline (fig. 1, pipe 121) to be adjacent (silent to being actually flush) with the inner surface of the pipeline (fig. 1, pipe 121) such that the first transducer (transducing portion of sensing compartment 105, comprising transducer portions) is in direct contact with the fluid (multiphase fluid) ([0090] “single mechanical connection point mounts to a section of pipe or equipment invasively in contact with the measurement medium”).Chen does not explicitly state that the transducer is flush.
However:
The Examiner respectfully notes that it had been held that discovering an optimum value of a result effective variable involves only routine skill in the art, In re Boesch, 617 F.2d 272, 205 USPQ 215 (CCPA 1980). See MPEP § 2144.05(II)(B). In the present case, it is the Examiner’s position that only ordinary skill in the art is required to place a substantially flush positioning as flush for the expected purpose of retaining contact while minimizing flow impairment therefrom.
Furthermore, Kupnik teaches wherein a transducer is flush-mounted with the inner surface of a pipeline (Title “Ultrasonic Gas Flowmeter As Well As Device To Measure Exhaust Flows Of Internal Combustion Engines And Method To Determine Flow Of Gases”; [0040] “Flush-mounted installation of the ultrasonic transducer in the measuring pipe”).
In view of the above, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to reposition Chen’s first transducer transducing portion to be flush-mounted—as supported by Kupnik—for the aforementioned advantage of retaining contact while minimizing flow impairment.
Claim(s) 12 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over newly cited Chen in view of newly cited Sathyanarayana, newly cited Cottrell, and in further view of newly cited Letton et al (US 6386018 B1; hereafter “Letton”).
Regarding claim 12, which depends on claim 8,
Chen teaches (generic) wherein the fluid (multiphase fluid) is comprised of a gas and a liquid phase.
Chen is silent to the specific case wherein the liquid phase is dispersed in the gas phase as droplets with a minimal amount of stratified flow occurring.
Letton teaches wherein the fluid is comprised of a gas and a liquid phase and the liquid phase is dispersed in the gas phase as droplets (mist) with a minimal amount of stratified flow (mist flow) occurring (Title “Ultrasonic 2-phase Flow Apparatus And Stratified Level Detector”; col. 6, ll. 7- 21 “flow meter used with a wet gas”; col. 11, ll. 41- 53 “gas flow contains liquid in primarily a mist flow”; col. 3, ll. 46-60 “a ‘mist flow’ of liquid in the pipeline consists of small droplets spread out in the gas flow. These small droplets of liquid are buoyed by and carried along with the turbulence of the moving gas. Thus, liquid traveling in mist form through the pipeline is carried along at approximately the same speed as the gas. A "stratified flow" of liquid consists of a stream or river traveling along one area of the pipeline, such as the bottom. This stream of liquid typically travels at a different rate than that of the gas moving above it. Because the determination of a liquid flow by a pipeline depends not only upon the percent volume the liquid occupies but also upon its velocity, it is helpful to know the form in which the liquid is travelling”; col. 7, line 64 through col. 8, line 9 “above gas flows of about five meters per second, it is expected that a stratified flow of fluid will begin to acquire mist flow characteristics. More particularly, the two-phase fluid may move through a series of forms, from stratified flow to annular flow to annular mist to mist. These changes will be due to the turbulent gas flow above the stratified flow entraining (i.e. siphoning off) and carrying with it droplets from the surface of the stratified flow”).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to utilize Chen’s multiphase flowmeter with the aforementioned claim limitation pertaining to “mist flow”—as supported by Letton’s wet gas multiphase flowmeter for said mist flow—thereby providing the expected advantages of increased utility and marketability within said flow regime, the Examiner additionally emphasizing that the combination with Letton’s said flowmeter provides evidence of the level of ordinary skill in so utilizing in said flow regime, and the Examiner further noting that this type of (high gas) multiphase flow commonly occurs in the oil and gas industry.
Claim(s) 16 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over newly cited Chen in view of newly cited Cottrell, newly cited Hurmuzlu with newly cited Johansen, and in further view of newly cited Letton.
Regarding claim 16, which depends on claim 15,
Chen teaches (generic) wherein the fluid (multiphase fluid) is comprised of a gas and a liquid phase.
Chen is silent to the specific case wherein the liquid phase is dispersed in the gas phase as droplets with a minimal amount of stratified flow occurring.
Letton teaches wherein the fluid is comprised of a gas and a liquid phase and the liquid phase is dispersed in the gas phase as droplets (mist) with a minimal amount of stratified flow (mist flow) occurring (Title “Ultrasonic 2-phase Flow Apparatus And Stratified Level Detector”; col. 6, ll. 7- 21 “flow meter used with a wet gas”; col. 11, ll. 41- 53 “gas flow contains liquid in primarily a mist flow”; col. 3, ll. 46-60 “a ‘mist flow’ of liquid in the pipeline consists of small droplets spread out in the gas flow. These small droplets of liquid are buoyed by and carried along with the turbulence of the moving gas. Thus, liquid traveling in mist form through the pipeline is carried along at approximately the same speed as the gas. A "stratified flow" of liquid consists of a stream or river traveling along one area of the pipeline, such as the bottom. This stream of liquid typically travels at a different rate than that of the gas moving above it. Because the determination of a liquid flow by a pipeline depends not only upon the percent volume the liquid occupies but also upon its velocity, it is helpful to know the form in which the liquid is travelling”; col. 7, line 64 through col. 8, line 9 “above gas flows of about five meters per second, it is expected that a stratified flow of fluid will begin to acquire mist flow characteristics. More particularly, the two-phase fluid may move through a series of forms, from stratified flow to annular flow to annular mist to mist. These changes will be due to the turbulent gas flow above the stratified flow entraining (i.e. siphoning off) and carrying with it droplets from the surface of the stratified flow”).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to utilize Chen’s multiphase flowmeter with the aforementioned claim limitation pertaining to “mist flow”—as supported by Letton’s wet gas multiphase flowmeter for said mist flow—thereby providing the expected advantages of increased utility and marketability within said flow regime, the Examiner additionally emphasizing that the combination with Letton’s said flowmeter provides evidence of the level of ordinary skill in so utilizing in said flow regime, and the Examiner further noting that this type of (high gas) multiphase flow commonly occurs in the oil and gas industry.
The Examiner additionally notes that it has been held that a recitation with respect to the manner in which a claimed apparatus is intended to be employed does not differentiate the claimed apparatus from a prior art apparatus satisfying the claimed structural limitations, Ex parte Masham, 2 USPQ2d - 164 7 (1987). See MPEP 2144(II). In the present case, using the apparatus for determining multi-phase flow properties of a fluid wherein the fluid is comprised of a gas and a liquid phase and the liquid phase is dispersed in the gas phase as droplets with a minimal amount of stratified flow occurring is an intended use.
Claim(s) 19 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over newly cited Chen in view of newly cited Cottrell, newly cited Hurmuzlu with newly cited Johansen, newly cited Letton, and in further view of newly cited Sathyanarayana.
Regarding claim 19, which depends on claim 16,
Chen teaches a control unit with a computer processor (computer & control portions; see fig. 4, especially microcontroller 164, 113 comprising CPU 172, as well as clocks 155 & 171; see also fig. 1 electronic enclosure 117) connected to the first transducer (transducing portion of sensing compartment 105, comprising transducer portions 101 & 104) to emit the first ultrasonic signal (ultrasonic signal from transducing portion of sensing compartment 105) and calculate the multi-phase flow properties of the fluid (multiphase fluid) ([0091] “obtain flow velocity. Volumetric flow rate is calculated by using the flow velocity times cross sectional area of the pipe”; [0109] “fluid density monitoring”) ([0018] “FIG. 4 represents an electronic architecture block diagram of the device for fluid and equipment monitoring”; [0101]-[0102]),
wherein the first ultrasonic signal (ultrasonic signal from transducing portion of sensing compartment 105) is emitted into the fluid (multiphase fluid), reflected off of a surface of the pipeline (fig. 1, pipe 121) (silent to cooperating first & second reflective barrier), and received back at the first transducer (transducing portion of sensing compartment 105, comprising transducer portions 101 & 104), and
wherein the first ultrasonic signal (ultrasonic signal from transducing portion of sensing compartment 105) is emitted into the fluid (multiphase fluid), reflected off of a surface of the pipeline (fig. 1, pipe 121) (silent to cooperating first & second reflective barrier), and received back at the first transducer (transducing portion of sensing compartment 105, comprising transducer portions 101 & 104).
The Examiner notes with respect to the above teachings being shown in different figures, that while the reference does not expressly show all of the above claimed features clearly in a single depicted embodiment as a single figure, either one of ordinary skill in the art would at once envisaged the
combination from the generic teachings thereof and/or specific possible choices of the structural components
thereof, or, in the alternative, it at least would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before
the effective filing date of the claimed invention to nevertheless so combine the above features for the
purpose and combinations as proposed by said reference and as analyzed by the Examiner
including the citations and/or Examiner comments provided above in reference to the claimed features.
Pertinently, the Examiner further notes that "Combining two embodiments disclosed adjacent to each other in a prior art patent does not require a leap of inventiveness", see Boston Scientific Scimed, Inc. v. Cordis Corp., 554 F.3d 982, 991 (Fed. Cir. 2009). The Examiner additionally notes that it has been held that broadly providing a mechanical or automatic means to replace manual activity which has accomplished the same result involves only routine skill in the art, In re Venner, 262 F.2d 91, 95, 120 USPQ 193, 194 (CCPA 1958). See MPEP 2144.04(III). In the present case it is the Examiner’s position that an ordinary artisan would at once envisaged that the aforementioned transducers are controlled by Chen’s computerized control unit. More particularly, it is Examiner’s position that it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before
the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine Chen’s electronic architecture including computer & controller with Chen’s sensor hardware components for automated computerized control thereof and providing the expected benefit of proper timing for emitting and/or receiving for the transducers including for aligning the data logging/analysis with said controls.
Chen does not teach first and second reflective barriers, wherein the first ultrasonic signal is reflected off of a first surface of a first barrier, reflected off of a second surface of a second barrier, and received back at the first transducer, and wherein the first ultrasonic signal is reflected off the second surface of the second barrier, reflected off the first surface of the first barrier, and received back at the first transducer
Sathyanarayana teaches an apparatus (fig. 1, system 10) for determining flow properties of a fluid (Title “Ultrasonic Transducer System And Method Using Broadband System Responses”; Abstract “A transducer system with a transducer and circuitry”; [0019] “System 10 includes a pipe 12 through which a material, such as water or gas, may flow”; [0069] “may be applied to a single transducer, wherein it is excited with a frequency and transmits a pulse train, after which it then responds to the reflection of that pulse train”) comprising: a pipeline (fig. 1, pipe 12) configured to be a conduit for the fluid; a first transducer (transducer system comprising TR1 & TR2) ([0069] “single transducer”), mounted to the pipeline (fig. 1, pipe 12), configured to emit and receive a first ultrasonic signal wherein the first ultrasonic signal reflects off an inner surface of the pipeline (fig. 1, pipe 12) to be received back at the first transducer (transducer system comprising TR1 & TR2) ([0069] “single transducer”), wherein a liquid to gas ratio is calculated to monitor well productivity; a first barrier (fig. 1, reflector R1) comprising a first surface (surface of reflector R1); a second barrier (fig. 1, reflector R2) comprising a second surface (surface of reflector R2); and a control unit (fig. 1, processor 14 with clock 16), with a computer processor, connected to the first transducer (transducer system comprising TR1 & TR2) ([0069] “single transducer”) to emit the first ultrasonic signal and calculate the flow properties of the fluid ([0019] “a processor 14, such as a digital signal processor, microprocessor, microcontroller, or some other electronic circuitry, receives a clock signal from a clock 16, and processor 14 is coupled to both transducer TR.sub.1 and transducer TR.sub.2 for exciting either transducer TR.sub.x to transmit a signal and to process a correspondingly received signal by the other transducer, as further explored below”; [0005] “The first and second TOF, and the differential TOF, determine speed of flow of the propagation medium”; [0024] “determine the UPS TOF, the DNS TOF, and the relative difference of the UPS and DNS TOF” and “From these measures, the flow rate through pipe 12 may be calculated”; [0028] “accuracy of the TOF measures directly influences the accuracy of the velocity determination”; [0006] “Accurately measuring TOF relies on numerous factors, including a sufficiently energized and detected waveform in each of the two directions during the TOF measures”; [0069] “the preferred embodiments have been empirically shown to provide accurate TOF measures even in noisy environments (i.e., relatively low signal-to-nose ratio (SNR)), with a strong improvement in reducing cycle slips as compared to a single frequency excitation system. Likewise, the preferred embodiments have been empirically shown to provide accurate TOF measures in attenuating media (e.g., methane)”), wherein the first ultrasonic signal is emitted into the fluid, reflected off of the first surface (surface of reflector R1) of the first barrier (fig. 1, reflector R1), reflected off of the second surface (surface of reflector R2) of the second barrier (fig. 1, reflector R2), and received back at the first transducer (transducer system comprising TR1 & TR2) ([0069] “single transducer”), and wherein the first ultrasonic signal is emitted into the fluid, reflected off the second surface (surface of reflector R2) of the second barrier (fig. 1, reflector R2), reflected off the first surface (surface of reflector R1) of the first barrier (fig. 1, reflector R1), and received back at the first transducer (transducer system comprising TR1 & TR2) ([0069] “single transducer”).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine Sathyanarayana’s first & second reflective barriers and associated TOF upstream/downstream velocity measurement method with Chen’s TOF upstream/downstream velocity measurement method, thereby providing the expected advantages of conventional reflectors including increasing signal-to-noise ratio and standardization of reflections as opposed to pipe surface reflections which aren’t necessarily specifically designed for reflections (e.g., surface reflectivity can vary across different pipes). Complimentarily, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine Chen’s multiphase fluid flow characterization measurements with Sathyanarayana’s single transducer system & associated method thereby providing increased versatility and marketability of measuring fluid flow of multiphase fluids and further including additional characterizations of multiphase fluids inclusive of fluid density monitoring.
With further respect to the transducer being singular, the Examiner respectfully notes that it has been held that forming in one piece an article which has formerly been formed in two pieces and put together involves only routine skill in the art, Howard v. Detroit Stove Works, 150 U.S. 164 (1893); see also In re Larson, 340 F.2d 965, 968, 144 USPQ 347, 349 (CCPA 1965), and MPEP 2144.04 (V)(B). In the present case, only ordinary skill in the art is required to make the transducer housing an integral unit comprising the downstream, upstream, and radial transducing portions. Therefore, either the combination of prior art—namely Chen’s first (101) & second (104) transducing portions integrally housed in a sensing compartment (105), Sathyanarayana’s single transducer ([0069] “single transducer”), and Cottrell’s integral housing (10 of a radial transducing portion (T4) and an upstream transducing portion (T1)—reasonably suggests integrally housing the aforementioned combined transducing portions, or nevertheless, It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to so make integral thereby making the combined apparatus more compact, better enabling the sharing of electrical/electronic resources between components, and/or more easily mountable/replaceable together.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claim(s) 11 and 20 is/are objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims*.
*The Examiner helpfully notes for Applicant that for claim 20, the intervening subject matter of claim 16 may be omitted and still considered by the Examiner as allowable.
When this application is finally acted upon and allowed (i.e., the Notice of Allowance), the Examiner will determine, at the same time, whether the reasons why the application is being allowed are sufficiently evident from the record; see MPEP § 1302.14(I).
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to Applicant's disclosure. Applicant is invited to review PTO form 892 accompanying this Office Action listing Prior Art relevant to the instant invention cited by the Examiner.
Examiner interviews are available via telephone 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.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the Examiner should be directed to DAVID L SINGER whose telephone number is 303-297-4317. The Examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday 8:00 am - 6:00pm CT, EXCEPT alternating Friday.
If attempts to reach the Examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the Examiner’s supervisor, John Breene can be reached on 571-272-4107. 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.
/DAVID L SINGER/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2855 04DEC2025