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 .
Claims 1-20 are pending.
Specification
The disclosure is objected to because it contains an embedded hyperlink and/or other form of browser-executable code. Applicant is required to delete the embedded hyperlink and/or other form of browser-executable code; references to websites should be limited to the top-level domain name without any prefix such as http:// or other browser-executable code. See MPEP § 608.01.
The lengthy specification has not been checked to the extent necessary to determine the presence of all possible minor errors. Applicant's cooperation is requested in correcting any errors of which applicant may become aware in the specification.
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 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 non-obviousness.
Claim(s) 1-7, 11-13, 15-20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Figueroa et al, "A Robust Method for Estimating Landfill Methane Emissions", 2009, J. Air & Waste Manage. Assoc., PP 59:925–935 (hereinafter Figueroa) in view of Brookshire et al, US Patent Pub US 20010005812 A1 (hereinafter Brookshire) in view of Lenz et al, US Patent Pub US 20120191349 A1 (hereinafter Lenz)
Claim 1
Figueroa teaches a control system for determining an estimate of gas emissions in a region of a landfill (Figueroa, pg 926 – A system for estimating gas emissions in an area of a landfill.) the control system comprising: at least one controller configured to: obtain a plurality of measures (Figueroa, pg 926 – A computer obtaining measurement data.) comprising: a second set of one or more measures of concentration of methane in air, each measure of concentration of methane in the second set obtained at one of a plurality of locations in the region of the landfill among the plurality of gas collection points (Figueroa, pg 929, Fig. 2 - A plurality/”second set” of measurements methane concentration spread out over a landfill among gas sources/”collection points”.); and one or more measures of at least one environmental characteristic obtained at one or more locations within the region of the landfill (Figueroa, pg 927-928 – Measuring wind/”environmental characteristic” speed and direction.); determine, by using a gas emissions model to process the plurality of measures, an estimate of methane emissions in the region of the landfill (Figueroa, pg 927-928 - Methane production rates estimated by production models using the measured values.); and output the estimate of methane emissions. (Figueroa, pg 934, Fig. 7 – Output the modeled estimates of gas concentrations in a scatterplot.)
But Figueroa fails to specify the region comprising a plurality of gas collection points, each of the plurality of gas collection points comprising a gas extraction well.
However Brookshire teaches the region comprising a plurality of gas collection points, each of the plurality of gas collection points comprising a gas extraction well. (Brookshire, para 32 – A region/cell with multiple gas collection wells/points.)
Figueroa and Brookshire are analogous art because they are from the same field of endeavor. They relate to gas detection systems.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify the above gas detection system, as taught by Figueroa, and incorporating the above limitations, as taught by Brookshire.
One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to do this modification in order to provide a landfill monitoring and control system that can remotely control gas flow through wells in a landfill by incorporating the above limitations, as suggested by Brookshire (para 8).
But the combination of Figueroa and Brookshire fails to specify a first set of one or more measures of concentration of methane in air, each measure of concentration of methane in the first set obtained at a respective location within a threshold distance of one of the plurality of gas collection points.
However Lenz teaches a first set of one or more measures of concentration of methane in air, each measure of concentration of methane in the first set obtained at a respective location within a threshold distance of one of the plurality of gas collection points. (Lenz, para 46 - The location information may include a distance from a specific location/”gas collection point” or region.)
Figueroa, Brookshire, and Lenz are analogous art because they are from the same field of endeavor. They relate to gas detection systems.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify the above gas detection system, as taught by Figueroa and Brookshire, and incorporating the above limitations, as taught by Lenz.
One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to do this modification in order to monitor gas emissions within a geographic area such as a landfill by incorporating the above limitations, as suggested by Lenz (para 5).
This rejection also applies to claims 19-20.
Claim 2
The combination of Figueroa, Brookshire, and Lenz teaches all the limitations of the base claims as outlined above.
The combination of Figueroa, Brookshire, and Lenz further teaches displaying the estimate of methane emissions. (Figueroa, pg 934, Fig. 7 – Output the modeled estimates of gas concentrations in a scatterplot.)
Claim 3
The combination of Figueroa, Brookshire, and Lenz teaches all the limitations of the base claims as outlined above.
The combination of Figueroa, Brookshire, and Lenz further teaches outputting a graphical display of the region of the landfill having the estimate of methane emissions superimposed thereon. (Figueroa, pg 931, Fig. 6 – Methane emission isopleths.)
Claim 4
The combination of Figueroa, Brookshire, and Lenz teaches all the limitations of the base claims as outlined above.
The combination of Figueroa, Brookshire, and Lenz further teaches the estimate of methane emissions comprises an estimate of methane emissions over time. (Figueroa, pg 928 – The ISC model allows one to easily specify the particular hour or hours of meteorological data to model the situation during the VOC measurement period of time.)
Claim 5
The combination of Figueroa, Brookshire, and Lenz teaches all the limitations of the base claims as outlined above.
Lenz further teaches generating a report including the estimate of methane emissions. (Lenz, para 37-38 – Generating a report of the estimated emissions.)
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify the above gas detection system, as taught by Figueroa, Brookshire, and Lenz, and incorporating the above limitations, as taught by Lenz.
One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to do this modification in order to report compliance to a regulatory agency by incorporating the above limitations, as suggested by Lenz (para 38).
Claim 6
. The control system of claim 1, wherein the at least one controller is further configured to
The combination of Figueroa, Brookshire, and Lenz teaches all the limitations of the base claims as outlined above.
Lenz further teaches cause a corrective action to be performed based on the determined estimate of methane emissions in the region of the landfill. (Lenz, para 37 – Causing a corrective action to be performed based on the methane emission estimate in the landfill.)
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify the above gas detection system, as taught by Figueroa, Brookshire, and Lenz, and incorporating the above limitations, as taught by Lenz.
One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to do this modification in order to reduce gas emissions within a geographic area such as a landfill by incorporating the above limitations, as suggested by Lenz (para 37).
Claim 7
. The control system of claim 6, wherein the at least one controller is further configured to
The combination of Figueroa, Brookshire, and Lenz teaches all the limitations of the base claims as outlined above.
Lenz further teaches determine whether the estimate of methane emissions is greater than a threshold, wherein the at least one controller is configured to cause the corrective action to be performed when it is determined that the estimate of methane emissions is greater than the threshold. (Lenz, para 37-38 – Causing a corrective action to be performed based on the methane emission estimate in the landfill based on the detected methane concentration exceeding a threshold.)
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify the above gas detection system, as taught by Figueroa, Brookshire, and Lenz, and incorporating the above limitations, as taught by Lenz.
One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to do this modification in order to reduce gas emissions within a geographic area such as a landfill by incorporating the above limitations, as suggested by Lenz (para 37).
Claim 11
The combination of Figueroa, Brookshire, and Lenz teaches all the limitations of the base claims as outlined above.
Lenz further teaches the corrective action comprises adjusting a flow rate of landfill gas being extracted from the landfill at one or more of the plurality of gas collection points. (Lenz, para 37 – Causing a corrective action to be performed based on the methane emission estimate in the landfill by increasing the well flow rate to decrease pressure elsewhere.)
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify the above gas detection system, as taught by Figueroa, Brookshire, and Lenz, and incorporating the above limitations, as taught by Lenz.
One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to do this modification in order to reduce gas emissions within a geographic area such as a landfill by incorporating the above limitations, as suggested by Lenz (para 37).
Claim 12
The combination of Figueroa, Brookshire, and Lenz teaches all the limitations of the base claims as outlined above.
Brookshire further teaches the corrective action comprises removing liquid from one or more of the gas extraction wells located at respective ones of the plurality of gas collection points. (Brookshire, para 38 – Bypass valves for selectively establishing fluid flow through the bypass pipe.)
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify the above gas detection system, as taught by Figueroa, Brookshire, and Lenz, and incorporating the above limitations, as taught by Brookshire.
One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to do this modification in order to provide a landfill monitoring and control system that can remotely control gas flow through wells in a landfill by incorporating the above limitations, as suggested by Brookshire (para 8).
Claim 13
The combination of Figueroa, Brookshire, and Lenz teaches all the limitations of the base claims as outlined above.
Brookshire further teaches the corrective action comprises adjusting an amount of vacuum applied to two or more of the plurality of gas collection points. (Brookshire, para 61 – Adjusting the amount of vacuum .)
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify the above gas detection system, as taught by Figueroa, Brookshire, and Lenz, and incorporating the above limitations, as taught by Brookshire.
One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to do this modification in order to provide a landfill monitoring and control system that can remotely control gas flow through wells in a landfill by incorporating the above limitations, as suggested by Brookshire (para 8).
Claim 14
The combination of Figueroa, Brookshire, and Lenz teaches all the limitations of the base claims as outlined above.
But the combination of Figueroa, Brookshire, and Lenz fails to specify the corrective action comprises alerting a user to perform supplemental corrective action and wherein alerting the user to perform the supplemental corrective action comprises providing the user with a message with instructions to perform the supplemental corrective action.
However Quigley teaches the corrective action comprises alerting a user to perform supplemental corrective action and wherein alerting the user to perform the supplemental corrective action comprises providing the user with a message with instructions to perform the supplemental corrective action. (Quigley, Para 288-289 – Alerting an operator to take a specified corrective action.)
Figueroa, Brookshire, Lenz, and Quigley are analogous art because they are from the same field of endeavor. They relate to gas detection systems.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify the above gas detection system, as taught by Figueroa, Brookshire, and Lenz, and incorporating the above limitations, as taught by Quigley.
One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to do this modification in order to prevent landfill gas being released from the gas extraction system into the atmosphere by incorporating the above limitations, as suggested by Quigley (para 289).
Claim 15
The combination of Figueroa, Brookshire, and Lenz teaches all the limitations of the base claims as outlined above.
The combination of Figueroa, Brookshire, and Lenz further teaches wherein the gas emissions model comprises a Gaussian Dispersion model; and
wherein using the gas emissions model comprises using the Gaussian Dispersion model to determine the estimate of methane emissions in the region of the landfill at least in part by:
providing the plurality of measures to the Gaussian Dispersion model as input and processing the plurality of measures using the Gaussian Dispersion model to obtain the estimate of methane emissions as output from the Gaussian Dispersion model. (Figueroa, pg 926-929 – Using a Gaussian dispersion model to determine the estimate of methane emissions in the landfill area using the measured values.)
Claim 16
The combination of Figueroa, Brookshire, and Lenz teaches all the limitations of the base claims as outlined above.
Lenz further teaches prior to processing the plurality of measures with the gas emissions model, determine whether the one or more measures of the at least one environmental characteristic is within a range; and when it is determined that the one or more measures of the at least one environmental characteristic are within the range, process the plurality of measures with the gas emissions model to determine the estimate of gas emissions. (Lenz, para 55 – Comparing measured values to a tolerance range, and if the values are in range, processing the measurement, and if outside the range, refraining from collecting the data.)
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify the above gas detection system, as taught by Figueroa, Brookshire, and Lenz, and incorporating the above limitations, as taught by Lenz.
One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to do this modification in order to reduce gas emissions within a geographic area such as a landfill by incorporating the above limitations, as suggested by Lenz (para 37).
Claim 17
The combination of Figueroa, Brookshire, and Lenz teaches all the limitations of the base claims as outlined above.
The combination of Figueroa, Brookshire, and Lenz further teaches the at least one environmental characteristic comprises one or more of wind speed, wind direction, turbulence, a thickness of a planetary boundary layer, a surface stability class, a Turner stability class, a Richardson number, and/or a sensible heat transfer fluid layer. (Figueroa, pg 928, 928 – measuring wind speed and direction, crosswinds/turbulence.)
Claim 18
The combination of Figueroa, Brookshire, and Lenz teaches all the limitations of the base claims as outlined above.
Brookshire further teaches at least one sensor for obtaining at least one of the plurality of measures. (Brookshire, para 43 – Sensors used for gas concentration detection.)
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify the above gas detection system, as taught by Figueroa, Brookshire, and Lenz, and incorporating the above limitations, as taught by Brookshire.
One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to do this modification in order to provide a landfill monitoring and control system that can remotely control gas flow through wells in a landfill by incorporating the above limitations, as suggested by Brookshire (para 8).
Claim(s) 8-9 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Figueroa et al, "A Robust Method for Estimating Landfill Methane Emissions", 2009, J. Air & Waste Manage. Assoc., PP 59:925–935 (hereinafter Figueroa) in view of Brookshire et al, US Patent Pub US 20010005812 A1 (hereinafter Brookshire) in view of Lenz et al, US Patent Pub US 20120191349 A1 (hereinafter Lenz) as applied to claims 1-7, 11-13, 15-20 above, in view of Wang et al, US Patent Pub US 20230176023 A1 (hereinafter Wang)
Claim 8
The combination of Figueroa, Brookshire, and Lenz teaches all the limitations of the base claims as outlined above.
But the combination of Figueroa, Brookshire, and Lenz fails to specify the threshold concentration is 100 ppm.
However Wang teaches the threshold concentration is 100 ppm. (, para 72 – A minimum detectable concentration threshold set for a sensor that can be set at 100 ppm.)
Figueroa, Brookshire, Lenz, and Quigley are analogous art because they are from the same field of endeavor. They relate to gas detection systems.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify the above gas detection system, as taught by Figueroa, Brookshire, and Lenz, and incorporating the above limitations, as taught by Quigley.
One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to do this modification in order to detect a methane leak by incorporating the above limitations, as suggested by Quigley (para 72).
Claim 9
The combination of Figueroa, Brookshire, and Lenz teaches all the limitations of the base claims as outlined above.
But the combination of Figueroa, Brookshire, and Lenz fails to specify the threshold concentration is 500 ppm.
However Wang teaches the threshold concentration is 500 ppm. (Wang, para 72 – A minimum detectable concentration threshold set for a sensor that can be set at 500 ppm.)
Figueroa, Brookshire, Lenz, and Wang are analogous art because they are from the same field of endeavor. They relate to gas detection systems.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify the above gas detection system, as taught by Figueroa, Brookshire, and Lenz, and incorporating the above limitations, as taught by Wang.
One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to do this modification in order to detect a methane leak by incorporating the above limitations, as suggested by Wang (para 72).
Claim(s) 14 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Figueroa et al, "A Robust Method for Estimating Landfill Methane Emissions", 2009, J. Air & Waste Manage. Assoc., PP 59:925–935 (hereinafter Figueroa) in view of Brookshire et al, US Patent Pub US 20010005812 A1 (hereinafter Brookshire) in view of Lenz et al, US Patent Pub US 20120191349 A1 (hereinafter Lenz) as applied to claims 1-7, 11-13, 15-20 above, in view of Quigley et al, US Patent Pub US 20200306806 A1 (hereinafter Quigley).
Claim 14
The combination of Figueroa, Brookshire, and Lenz teaches all the limitations of the base claims as outlined above.
But the combination of Figueroa, Brookshire, and Lenz fails to specify the corrective action comprises alerting a user to perform supplemental corrective action and wherein alerting the user to perform the supplemental corrective action comprises providing the user with a message with instructions to perform the supplemental corrective action.
However Quigley teaches the corrective action comprises alerting a user to perform supplemental corrective action and wherein alerting the user to perform the supplemental corrective action comprises providing the user with a message with instructions to perform the supplemental corrective action. (Quigley, Para 288-289 – Alerting an operator to take a specified corrective action.)
Figueroa, Brookshire, Lenz, and Quigley are analogous art because they are from the same field of endeavor. They relate to gas detection systems.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify the above gas detection system, as taught by Figueroa, Brookshire, and Lenz, and incorporating the above limitations, as taught by Quigley.
One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to do this modification in order to prevent landfill gas being released from the gas extraction system into the atmosphere by incorporating the above limitations, as suggested by Quigley (para 289).
Allowable Subject Matter
Claim 10 is objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but would be allowable if rewritten to include all of the limitations of the base claim, any intervening claims, and all the limitations of the claim itself.
The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter: Applicant’s claim defines over the prior art of record because the prior art of record, taken either alone or in combination, does not teach a threshold of 0.1 lb. methane per hour per square foot for initiating a control action.
Citation of Pertinent Prior Art
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Campanella et al, WIPO Patent Num WO2018194650A1 relates to claims regarding controlling extraction of landfill gas, measured concentration of a gas, and sensors configured to measure one or more characteristics of landfill gas extracted from the landfill.
Quigley et al, US Patent Pub US 20210229142 A1 relates to claims regarding a landfill gas extraction process with sensors obtaining a measure of concentration of methane in the landfill gas.
Mabunga et al, "Greenhouse Gas Emissions and Groundwater Leachate Leakage Monitoring of Sanitary Landfill", 2019, IEEE, pp 1-5 relates to claims regarding a system that monitors different environmental parameters of a sanitary landfill including methane concentrations.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to DAVID E OGG whose telephone number is (469) 295-9163. The examiner can normally be reached on Mon - Thurs 7:30 am - 5:00 pm CT.
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, Mohammad Ali can be reached on 571-272-4105. 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 EARL OGG/
Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2119