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 .
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 02/19/2026 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
Regarding claim 1, the Applicant states that the prior arts of White and Trieste, alone or in combination, do not teach the claim limitations of claim 1 directed to the housing having an opening for providing communication with an external environment. MPEP 2111 states that claims must be "given their broadest reasonable interpretation consistent with the specification." The Examiner has taken the position that White already teaches the gas sensor placed in the rear portion of housing of an electric meter. The Examiner has also taken that position that Trieste teaches having a housing (the combination of elements 20 and 56) to have an opening in order to provide communication with an external environment; such that dangerous and harmful gases (i.e. methane, propane, combustible gases, etc.) can be identified in the vicinity of the electric meter. Therefore, the 103 rejection of claim 1 below is deemed proper.
Applicant’s arguments with respect to claims 4, 6, 10,14, and 20 have been considered but are moot because the new ground of rejection does not rely on any reference applied in the prior rejection of record for any teaching or matter specifically challenged in the argument.
Drawings
The drawings are objected to under 37 CFR 1.83(a). The drawings must show every feature of the invention specified in the claims. Therefore, the map providing graphical representation of the data to the user device must be shown or the feature(s) canceled from the claim(s). No new matter should be entered.
Corrected drawing sheets in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(d) are required in reply to the Office action to avoid abandonment of the application. Any amended replacement drawing sheet should include all of the figures appearing on the immediate prior version of the sheet, even if only one figure is being amended. The figure or figure number of an amended drawing should not be labeled as “amended.” If a drawing figure is to be canceled, the appropriate figure must be removed from the replacement sheet, and where necessary, the remaining figures must be renumbered and appropriate changes made to the brief description of the several views of the drawings for consistency. Additional replacement sheets may be necessary to show the renumbering of the remaining figures. Each drawing sheet submitted after the filing date of an application must be labeled in the top margin as either “Replacement Sheet” or “New Sheet” pursuant to 37 CFR 1.121(d). If the changes are not accepted by the examiner, the applicant will be notified and informed of any required corrective action in the next Office action. The objection to the drawings will not be held in abeyance.
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.
Claims 1-3 and 7 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over White (US 20220283245; cited in the IDS filed on 06/17/2024; previously relied upon by the Examiner) in view of Trieste, Jr. (US 20200182918; previously relied upon by the Examiner; hereinafter “Trieste”).
Regarding claim 1, White teaches an electrical metering device (Figure 2A) comprising:
a housing (202; Figure 2A) positioned in communication with an electrical distribution system (utility company; [0020, 0029-0032]);
an electrical sensor unit (204; Figure 2A; [0027, 0031-0033]) configured to measure at least one parameter of the electrical distribution system ([0027, 0031-0033]) to obtain electrical system data ([0027, 0031-0033]);
a gas sensor unit (218a; Figure 2A) configured to obtain gas data ([0009, 0015-0017, 0021, 0026-0027]);
one or more processors (205; Figure 2A; [0027]) in communication with the electrical sensor unit (204; [0032]) and the gas sensor unit (218a; [0016]);
a memory unit (212; Figure 2A) in communication with the one or more processors (205; Figure 2A); and a communication unit (207 and 208; Figure 2A; [0028, 0036]) configured to send and receive data ([0028, 0036]) over a network ([0020, 0037]).
White teaches the housing and the gas sensor unit but does not expressly teach the housing including a cover having an opening; the gas sensor unit in communication with an external environment outside of the housing via the opening and configured to obtain gas data related to the outdoor air quality of the external environment.
However, Trieste teaches the housing (56 and 20; Figures 2-3) including a cover (20; Figures 2-3) having an opening (64; Figure 2; [0018]); the gas sensor unit (22; Figures 2-3; [0018]) in communication with an external environment ([0018]) outside of the housing (56 and 20) via the opening (64; [0018]) and configured to obtain gas data ([0018]) related to the outdoor air quality of the external environment ([0018]).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have Trieste’s cover having an opening implemented along with White’s housing and obtain gas data related to outdoor air quality in order to determine the presence of combustible and/or harmful gases near the electric metering assembly, this increases the overall safety of the system (See Trieste Jr. [0003, 0018]).
Regarding claim 2, White teaches a power supply ([0016]) configured to provide power ([0016]) to the gas sensor (218a; [0016]).
Regarding claim 3, the combination of White and Trieste teaches a power supply providing power to the gas sensor but does not expressly teach wherein the power supply receives power from the electrical distribution system.
However, Trieste further teaches wherein the power supply (66; Figures 2-3) receives power from the electrical distribution system (33; Figure 2-3; [0019]).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have Trieste's power supply configuration/connection implemented on White and Trieste's power supply since it would allow for avoiding using a different power source to power the gas sensor, this increases the efficiency of the system.
Regarding claim 7, the combination of White and Trieste teaches wherein the housing (56 and 20; Figures 2-3) includes a base (A; annotated Figure 3) and the opening (64; Figures 2-3) extends through a front surface of the cover (20) opposite the base (Figures 2-3 demonstrate that the opening 64 extends through a front surface of the cover 20 which is opposite to the base A).
PNG
media_image1.png
885
891
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Claim 4 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over the combination of White and Trieste in further view of Passaniti et al. (US 20200088705; hereinafter “Passaniti”).
Regarding claim 4, the combination of White and Trieste teaches the one or more processors and the gas sensor but does not expressly teach wherein the one or more processors are configured to execute instructions to vary the temperature of a sensing surface of the gas sensor over a time interval during a sensing operation.
However, Passaniti teaches wherein the one or more processors (14; [0045]; Figures 1-2) are configured to execute instructions ([0026, 0045, 0107]) to vary the temperature of a sensing surface of the gas sensor (10; Figures 1-2; [0026, 0078, 0107]) over a time interval during a sensing operation ([0026, 0107]).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have Passaniti’s variation of sensing surface temperature implemented on White and Trieste’s gas sensor over a time interval during a sensing operation in order to obtain sensor data related to a plurality of different target gases, this permits more than one gas to be measured from the external environment (See Passaniti [0107]).
Claim 5 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over the combination of White and Trieste in further view of Tautenhahn et al. (US 20220270464; hereinafter "Tautenhahn"; cited in the IDS filed on 06/17/2024; previously relied upon by the Examiner).
Regarding claim 5, the combination of White and Trieste teaches the one or more processors and the gas data but does not expressly teach wherein the one or more processors are configured to process the gas data to reduce the dimensionality of the data.
However, Tautenhahn teaches the one or more processors ([0060, 0062, 0105]) are configured to process the gas data to reduce the dimensionality of the data ([0060, 0062, 0105]).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have Tautenhahn's data processing implemented on White and Trieste's gas data since it would increase the data processing rate of the gas data (See Tautenhahn [0062]).
Claim 6 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over the combination of White and Trieste in further view of Fu et al. (CN 111242278; hereinafter “Fu”; English translation provided by the Examiner).
Regarding claim 6, White teaches the one or more processors (205; Figure 2A) are configured to analyze the gas data ([0023-0024, 0034]; claim 1) to determine if an alarm condition is met ([0023-0024, 0034]; claim 1).
The combination of White and Trieste teaches analyzing of the gas data but does not expressly teach implementing a neural network to analyze the gas data.
However, Fu teaches implementing a neural network to analyze the gas data ([0055, 0065]).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have Fu’s neural network implemented to analyze White and Trieste’s data in order to obtain higher detection accuracy when processing the data (See Fu [0055]).
Claim 8 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over the combination of White and Trieste in view of Smedsrud et al. (US 20200309647; hereinafter "Smedsrud"; cited in the IDS filed on 06/17/2024; previously relied upon by the Examiner).
Regarding claim 8, the combination of White and Trieste teaches the gas sensor and the opening but does not expressly teach wherein a hydrophobic mesh is positioned between the gas sensor and the opening.
However, Smedsrud teaches a hydrophobic mesh (22; Figure 1; [0029]) is positioned between the gas sensor (30; Figure 1) and the opening (Figure 1; [0029]).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have Smedsrud's hydrophobic mesh placed between White and Trieste's gas sensor and opening in order to protect the sensor from splashing and spraying liquids and from dust and other debris that may inhibit performance of sensor (See Smedsrud [0029]).
Claims 10-11 and 16-19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over White in view of Matan et al. (US 20220043038; hereinafter “Matan”; cited in the IDS filed on 06/17/2024; previously relied upon by the Examiner) in further view of Longley (US 20190139392; cited in the IDS filed on 06/17/2024; previously relied upon by the Examiner) in further view of Prince (US 2005/0039515).
Regarding claim 10, White teaches a sensing system (Figure 2A) comprising:
an electricity meter (202; Figure 2A) including a memory unit (212; Figure 2A), one or more processors (205; Figure 2A), a communication unit (207 and 208; Figure 2A) configured to communicate over a network ([0020, 0037]), an electrical sensor unit (204; Figure 2A) configured to measure at least one parameter of an electrical distribution system (204; Figure 2A; [0027, 0031-0033]), and a gas sensor (218a; Figure 2A), wherein the gas sensor (218a) is in communication with the processor (205; See Figure 2A) and is configured to provide gas sensor data to the processor (205; [0016]).
White teaches the electric meter but does not expressly teach a plurality of electricity meters and a remote monitor in communication with the plurality of meters over the network, wherein at least one electricity meter of the plurality of electricity meters is configured to communicate the gas sensor data over the network to the remote monitor, wherein the remote monitor is configured to be accessed by a user device; wherein the remote monitor is configured to provide a graphical representation of data to the user device, the graphical representation including a map.
However, Matan teaches it is known in the art to have a sensing system having a plurality of electricity meters ([0052]).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have Matan’s plurality of electricity meters implemented in White’s sensing system in order to gather information of the community, such as air quality of the community, without requiring other equipment (See Matan [0052]).
The combination of White and Matan teaches plurality of meters but does not expressly teach a remote monitor in communication with the plurality of meters over the network, wherein at least one electricity meter of the plurality of electricity meters is configured to communicate the gas sensor data over the network to the remote monitor, wherein the remote monitor is configured to be accessed by a user device; wherein the remote monitor is configured to provide a graphical representation of data to the user device, the graphical representation including a map.
However, Longley teaches a remote monitor (204; Figure 13B, 14A-14C) in communication with the plurality of meters (206; Figures 13B, 14A-14C) over the network ([0101-0102]), wherein at least one meter of the plurality of meters (206) is configured to communicate the gas sensor data (Figure 14C demonstrates the gas data from the plurality of meters 206 presented by the remote monitor 204; [0101-0102, 0116]) over the network ([0101-0102]) to the remote monitor (204), wherein the remote monitor (204) is configured to be accessed by a user device ([0106, 0114-0115, and 0121]).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have Longley’s remote monitor being in communication with White and Matan’s plurality of electric meters in order to display the gas data from different areas in a simultaneous manner (See Longley [0114-0115, 0121, 0142]).
The combination of White, Matan and Longley teaches the remote monitor but does not expressly teach wherein the remote monitor is configured to provide a graphical representation of data to the user device, the graphical representation including a map.
However, Prince teaches that is known in the art to use a monitor ([0005, 0036-0037, 0041]; Figures 16-18) in order provide a graphical representation of data to the user device ([0005, 0036-0037, 0041]), the graphical representation including a map ([0005, 0036-0037, 0041]).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have Prince’s graphical representation, including a map, to present White, Matan and Longley’s gas data in order to visually present traveling direction of the gas, thus presenting geographically where the gas is being displaced.
Regarding claim 11, the combination of White, Matan, Longley and Prince teaches wherein at least one electricity meter (202; Figure 2A: White) of the plurality of electricity meters ([0052]: Matan) includes a power source ([0016]: White) configured to provide power to the associated one or more processors ([0016]: White) and the gas sensor ([0016]: White).
Regarding claim 16, the combination of White, Matan, Longley and Prince teaches wherein one or more electricity meters of the plurality of electricity meters ([0052]: Matan and 206; Figures 13B, 14A-14C: Longley) are configured to alert the remote monitor (204: Longley) when a predetermined alarm condition is met ([0114-0015]: Longley).
Regarding claim 17, the combination of White, Matan, Longley and Prince teaches wherein the one or more processors (205; Figure 2A: White) of the plurality of electricity meters ([0052]: Matan and 206; Figures 13B, 14A-14C: Longley) is configured to implement a neural network to analyze the gas sensor data ([0023-0024, 0034]; claim 1: White and [0106 and 0108-0116]: Longley) to determine if the alarm condition is met ([0023-0024, 0034]; claim 1: White and [0106 and 0108-0116]: Longley).
Regarding claim 18, the combination of White, Matan, Longley and Prince teaches wherein one or more electricity meters (202; Figure 2A: White) of the plurality of electricity meters (202; Figure 2A: White and [0052]: Matan) is configured to record gas detection events into an event log stored in the memory of the electricity meter ([0142]: Longley).
Regarding claim 19, the combination of White, Matan, Longley and Prince teaches wherein the remote monitor (204; Figure 13B, 14A-14C: Longley) is configured to retrieve the gas sensor date (Figure 14c; [0116]: Longley) from the plurality of electricity meters (206: Longley and [0052]: Matan).
Claim 12 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over the combination of White, Matan, Longley and Prince in further view of Tautenhahn.
Regarding claim 12, the combination of White, Matan, Longley and Prince teaches the one or more processors of at least one electricity meter of the plurality of electricity meters and the gas data but does not expressly teach wherein the one or more processors are configured to process the gas data to reduce the dimensionality of the data.
However, Tautenhahn teaches the one or more processors ([0060, 0062, 0105]) are configured to process the gas data to reduce the dimensionality of the data ([0060, 0062, 0105]).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have Tautenhahn's data processing implemented on White, Matan, Longley and Prince's gas data since it would increase the data processing rate of the gas data (See Tautenhahn [0062]).
Claims 13-15 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over the combination of White, Matan, Longley and Prince in further view of Londergan et al. (US 20140238100; hereinafter "Londergan"; cited in the IDS filed on 06/17/2024; previously relied upon by the Examiner).
Regarding claim 13, the combination of White, Matan, Longley and Prince teaches the remote monitor, the network and the plurality of electricity meters but does not expressly teach transmitting one or more gas detection modules to the meter.
However, Londergan teaches the remote monitor (616; [0120]) transmitting one or more gas detection modules ([0120]) to the meter (605; [0120]).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to having Londergan's one or more gas detection modules being transmitted to White, Matan, Longley and Prince 's electricity meter in order to correct the gas data and provided adequate gas sensor data (See Londergan [0120]).
Regarding claim 14, the combination of White, Matan, Longley, Prince and Londergan teaches wherein the gas detection module includes a heater profile (616/622; [0120]: Londergan).
Regarding claim 15, the combination of White, Matan, Longley, and Prince teaches the remote monitor and the plurality of electricity meters but does not expressly teach selectively activate and/or deactivate a gas detection module stored in the meter.
However, Londergan teaches selectively activate and/or deactivate a gas detection module stored in the meter (616; [0120]).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have Londergan's activation and/or deactivation of a gas detection module implemented on White, Matan, Longley, and Prince's system in order to correct the gas data and provided adequate gas sensor data (See Londergan [0120]).
Claim 20 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over White in view of Longley in further view of Fu.
Regarding claim 20, White teaches a method ([0021-0025]) of determining environmental conditions ([0021-0025]) from a utility meter (202; Figure 2A) comprising: providing a utility meter (202; Figure 2A) along a utility distribution system ([0027, 0031- 0033]), the utility meter (202) having a utility sensor unit (204; Figure 2A; [0027, 0031- 0033]) configured to measure at least one parameter associated with the utility distribution system ([0027, 0031-0033]) and a gas sensor unit (218a; Figure 2A) in communication with an external environment ([0009, 0015-0017, 0021, 0026-0027]); obtaining, via the gas sensor unit (218A), gas sensor data associated with the air quality of the external environment ([0009, 0015-0017, 0021, 0026-0027]); analyze the gas sensor data ([0023-0024, 0034]; claim 1) to determine if an alarm condition is met ([0023-0024, 0034]; claim 1).
White teaches the gas sensor data but does not expressly teach transmitting the gas sensor data to a remote monitor via a network; implementing a neural network to analyze the gas sensor.
However, Longley teaches transmitting the gas sensor data (Figure 14C demonstrates the gas data presented by the remote monitor 204; [0101-0102, 0116]) to a remote monitor (204; Figure 13B, 14A-14C) via a network ([0101-0102]).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention Longley's remote monitor presenting White and Matan's gas data in order to display the gas data from different areas in a simultaneous manner (See Longley [0114-0115, 0121, 0142]).
The combination of White and Longley teaches analyzing of the gas data but does not expressly teach implementing a neural network to analyze the gas data.
However, Fu teaches implementing a neural network to analyze the gas data ([0055, 0065]).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have Fu’s neural network implemented to analyze White and Longley’s data in order to obtain higher detection accuracy when processing the data (See Fu [0055]).
Allowable Subject Matter
Claim 9 is 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.
In claim 9, the specific limitations of "wherein the housing includes an overhang extending outwardly from an external surface above the opening" in combination with the remaining limitations as claimed are neither anticipated nor made obvious over the prior art made of record.
Conclusion
Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a). Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a).
A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of the advisory action. In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the mailing date of this final action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ANTHONY W MEGNA FUENTES whose telephone number is (571)272-6456. The examiner can normally be reached M-F: 8AM-4PM.
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, Laura Martin can be reached at 571-272-2160. 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.
/ANTHONY W MEGNA FUENTES/ Examiner, Art Unit 2855
/LAURA MARTIN SWEENEY/ Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2855
Prosecution Insights