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 continuation of parent application 17396314 (USPN 11885655).
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 (in this case previous) Examiner in the parent application for the latter filed continuing application claiming the benefit under 35 U.S.C. 120 to said parent application (other than an international application that designated the U.S.), the information will not be printed on any 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.
The information disclosure statement(s) (IDS) submitted on 06/14/2024, 07/16/2024, 09/19/2024, 12/02/2024, and 08/07/2025 (x2) is/are in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statement(s) is/are being considered by the Examiner.
Specification
Applicant is reminded of the proper content, language, and/or format for an abstract of the disclosure:
A patent abstract is a concise statement of the technical disclosure of the patent and should include that which is new in the art to which the invention pertains. The abstract should not refer to purported merits or speculative applications of the invention and should not compare the invention with the prior art.
If the patent is of a basic nature, the entire technical disclosure may be new in the art, and the abstract should be directed to the entire disclosure. If the patent is in the nature of an improvement in an old apparatus, process, product, or composition, the abstract should include the technical disclosure of the improvement. The abstract should also mention by way of example any preferred modifications or alternatives.
Where applicable, the abstract should include the following: (1) if a machine or apparatus, its organization and operation; (2) if an article, its method of making; (3) if a chemical compound, its identity and use; (4) if a mixture, its ingredients; (5) if a process, the steps.
Extensive mechanical and design details of an apparatus should not be included in the abstract. The abstract should be in narrative form and generally limited to a single paragraph on a separate sheet within the range of 50 to 150 words in length. The abstract should describe the disclosure sufficiently to assist readers in deciding whether there is a need for consulting the full patent text for details.
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:
use of phrases which can be implied (“The subject matter of this specification can be embodied in, among other things”).
Appropriate correction is required. See MPEP § 608.01(b) for guidelines for the preparation of patent abstracts.
Double Patenting
The nonstatutory double patenting rejection is based on a judicially created doctrine grounded in public policy (a policy reflected in the statute) so as to prevent the unjustified or improper timewise extension of the “right to exclude” granted by a patent and to prevent possible harassment by multiple assignees. A nonstatutory double patenting rejection is appropriate where the conflicting claims are not identical, but at least one examined application claim is not patentably distinct from the reference claim(s) because the examined application claim is either anticipated by, or would have been obvious over, the reference claim(s). See, e.g., In re Berg, 140 F.3d 1428, 46 USPQ2d 1226 (Fed. Cir. 1998); In re Goodman, 11 F.3d 1046, 29 USPQ2d 2010 (Fed. Cir. 1993); In re Longi, 759 F.2d 887, 225 USPQ 645 (Fed. Cir. 1985); In re Van Ornum, 686 F.2d 937, 214 USPQ 761 (CCPA 1982); In re Vogel, 422 F.2d 438, 164 USPQ 619 (CCPA 1970); In re Thorington, 418 F.2d 528, 163 USPQ 644 (CCPA 1969).
A timely filed terminal disclaimer in compliance with 37 CFR 1.321(c) or 1.321(d) may be used to overcome an actual or provisional rejection based on nonstatutory double patenting provided the reference application or patent either is shown to be commonly owned with the examined application, or claims an invention made as a result of activities undertaken within the scope of a joint research agreement. See MPEP § 717.02 for applications subject to examination under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA as explained in MPEP § 2159. See MPEP § 2146 et seq. for applications not subject to examination under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA . A terminal disclaimer must be signed in compliance with 37 CFR 1.321(b).
The filing of a terminal disclaimer by itself is not a complete reply to a nonstatutory double patenting (NSDP) rejection. A complete reply requires that the terminal disclaimer be accompanied by a reply requesting reconsideration of the prior Office action. Even where the NSDP rejection is provisional the reply must be complete. See MPEP § 804, subsection I.B.1. For a reply to a non-final Office action, see 37 CFR 1.111(a). For a reply to final Office action, see 37 CFR 1.113(c). A request for reconsideration while not provided for in 37 CFR 1.113(c) may be filed after final for consideration. See MPEP §§ 706.07(e) and 714.13.
The USPTO Internet website contains terminal disclaimer forms which may be used. Please visit www.uspto.gov/patent/patents-forms. The actual filing date of the application in which the form is filed determines what form (e.g., PTO/SB/25, PTO/SB/26, PTO/AIA /25, or PTO/AIA /26) should be used. A web-based eTerminal Disclaimer may be filled out completely online using web-screens. An eTerminal Disclaimer that meets all requirements is auto-processed and approved immediately upon submission. For more information about eTerminal Disclaimers, refer to www.uspto.gov/patents/apply/applying-online/eterminal-disclaimer.
Instant claim(s) 1, 13, and 18 is/are rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over reference patented claim(s) 6 and 17 of U.S. Patent No. 11,885,655.
Although the claims at issue are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other because of the reasons put forth in the table below:
One-Way Double Patenting Analysis Table
18/539,943
(instant)
USPN 11,885,655
(reference)
Obviousness Analysis of instant claim over reference claim
1
6
A fluid flow conditioning apparatus (1. A fluid flow conditioning apparatus, comprising), comprising: a linear fluid conduit having a first tubular body defining a major axis and extending from a conduit inlet to a conduit outlet arranged opposite the conduit inlet, and configured with a predetermined flow geometry to define a linear fluid flow path along the major axis (1. a linear fluid conduit having a first tubular body defining a major axis and extending from a conduit inlet to a conduit outlet arranged opposite the conduit inlet, and configured with a predetermined flow geometry to define a linear fluid flow path along the major axis); a fluid inlet defining an inlet fluid flow path that is non-parallel to the linear fluid flow path (1. a fluid inlet defining an inlet fluid flow path that is non-parallel to the linear fluid flow path); a first fluid flow conditioner (1. a first fluid flow conditioner) having a first conditioner inlet (1. a first conditioner inlet) in fluidic communication with the fluid inlet (1. the first conditioner inlet in fluidic communication with the fluid inlet), and a first conditioner outlet (1. a first conditioner outlet) in fluidic communication with the conduit inlet, and configured to (1. the first conditioner outlet in fluidic communication with the conduit inlet, and configured to): receive fluid flow through the first conditioner inlet along the inlet fluid flow path (1. receive fluid flow through the first conditioner inlet along the inlet fluid flow path); condition, by the first conditioner inlet, fluid flow (1. condition, by the first conditioner inlet, fluid flow); and
redirect conditioned fluid flow away from the inlet fluid flow path and through the first conditioner outlet along the linear fluid flow path along the major axis (1. redirect conditioned fluid flow away from the inlet fluid flow path and through the first conditioner outlet along the linear fluid flow path along the major axis); a second fluid flow conditioner (1. a second fluid flow conditioner) comprising a second tubular body (5. a second tubular body),
wherein a second conditioner outlet comprises a plurality of ports defined radially through the second tubular body (6. wherein the second conditioner outlet comprises a plurality of ports defined radially through the second tubular body) and defines a second conditioner inlet in fluidic communication with the conduit outlet, and configured to (1. a second conditioner inlet in fluidic communication with the conduit outlet, and a second conditioner outlet, and configured to): receive fluid flow from the linear fluid flow path along the major axis (1. receive fluid flow from the linear fluid flow path along the major axis); redirect fluid flow away from the linear fluid flow path and through the second conditioner outlet along an outlet fluid flow path that is non-parallel to the linear fluid flow path (1. redirect fluid flow away from the linear fluid flow path and through the second conditioner outlet along an outlet fluid flow path that is non-parallel to the linear fluid flow path); and condition, by the second conditioner outlet, fluid flow (1. condition, by the second conditioner outlet, fluid flow); and
a fluid outlet configured to receive fluid flow from the second conditioner outlet (1. a fluid outlet configured to receive fluid flow from the second conditioner outlet).
Indistinctly recites most limitations, differences being merely nominal nomenclatural differences or grammatical variations not amounting to patentable distinction.
13
17
A method of fluid flow conditioning, comprising (11. A method of fluid flow conditioning, comprising): receiving a fluid flow, flowing along a first fluid flow path (11. receiving a fluid flow, flowing along a first fluid flow path);
conditioning the fluid flow by flowing the fluid flow through a first conditioner inlet of a first fluid flow conditioner (11. conditioning the fluid flow by flowing the fluid flow through a first conditioner inlet of a first fluid flow conditioner arranged proximal a conduit inlet); redirecting, by the first fluid flow conditioner, the fluid flow away from the first fluid flow path and toward a linear fluid flow path (11. redirecting, by the first fluid flow conditioner, the fluid flow away from the first fluid flow path and toward a linear fluid flow path); flowing the fluid flow along the linear fluid flow path through a first conditioner outlet (11. flowing the fluid flow along the linear fluid flow path through the first conditioner outlet);
flowing the fluid flow along the linear fluid flow path through a fluid conduit having a first tubular body extending from a conduit inlet to a conduit outlet arranged opposite the conduit inlet, and configured with a predetermined flow geometry (11. flowing the fluid flow along the linear fluid flow path through a fluid conduit having a first tubular body extending from a conduit inlet to a conduit outlet arranged opposite the conduit inlet, and configured with a predetermined flow geometry); flowing the fluid flow through a second conditioner inlet of a second fluid flow conditioner along the linear fluid flow path (11. flowing the fluid flow through a second conditioner inlet of a second fluid flow conditioner arranged proximal the conduit outlet along the linear fluid flow path), wherein the second fluid flow conditioner comprises a second tubular body (16. wherein the second fluid flow conditioner comprises a second tubular body extending between a first longitudinal end of the second tubular body and a second longitudinal end of the second tubular body opposite the first longitudinal end), and a second conditioner outlet of the second fluid flow conditioner (11. a second conditioner outlet of the second fluid flow conditioner) comprises a plurality of ports defined radially through the second tubular body (17. flowing the fluid flow through a plurality of ports defined radially through the second tubular body);
redirecting, by the second fluid flow conditioner, the fluid flow away from the linear fluid flow path and toward a second fluid flow path (11. redirecting, by the second fluid flow conditioner, the fluid flow away from the linear fluid flow path and toward a second fluid flow path); and conditioning the fluid flow by flowing the fluid flow through a second conditioner outlet of the second fluid flow conditioner (11. conditioning the fluid flow by flowing the fluid flow through a second conditioner outlet of the second fluid flow conditioner) through the plurality of ports (17. flowing the fluid flow through a plurality of ports defined radially through the second tubular body).
Indistinctly recites most limitations, differences being merely nominal nomenclatural differences or grammatical variations not amounting to patentable distinction.
18
17
The method of claim 13, wherein the second tubular body extends between a first longitudinal end and a second longitudinal end opposite the first longitudinal end, wherein the second conditioner outlet is arranged along the second tubular body, and the second conditioner inlet is arranged proximal to the conduit outlet (16. second tubular body extending between a first longitudinal end of the second tubular body and a second longitudinal end of the second tubular body opposite the first longitudinal end, wherein the second conditioner outlet is arranged along the second tubular body, and the second conditioner inlet is arranged proximal to the conduit outlet).
Indistinctly recites most limitations, differences being merely nominal nomenclatural differences or grammatical variations not amounting to patentable distinction.
The Double Patenting Rejections will not be held in abeyance. See MPEP § 804 & 714.02.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claim(s) 2-6, 9-12, 14-17, 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 following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter:
The Examiner notes that, aside from the double patenting rejections, the independent claims comprise subject matter that are non-obvious over the prior art—including the closest prior art US 20150013472 A1 “Gill”—for similar subject reasons to those put forth in the parent application 17/396,314 (USPN 11,885,655); see especially pages 11-12 of Applicant remarks dated 10/03/2023 in said parent application, the Examiner further noting that the arguments pertaining to the upstream conditioner similarly apply to the downstream conditioner as in the instant claims. 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 11FEB2026