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 .
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
(a)(1) the claimed invention was patented, described in a printed publication, or in public use, on sale, or otherwise available to the public before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
(a)(2) the claimed invention was described in a patent issued under section 151, or in an application for patent published or deemed published under section 122(b), in which the patent or application, as the case may be, names another inventor and was effectively filed before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claims 1-5, 7 and 9-11 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) &(a)(2) as being anticipated by Uplinger et al. (U.S. Publication No. 2020/0015708, hereinafter Uplinger).
With respect to Claim 1, Uplinger discloses a gas characterization method [see fig 1c unless otherwise noted], comprising:
transmitting a transmit signal from a transmit antenna [108] into a gaseous sample [172], the transmit signal is in a radio or microwave frequency range [para 21] of the electromagnetic spectrum; [para 159]
detecting a response at a receive antenna [110] that results from transmission of the transmit signal into the gaseous sample; using the detected response to characterize the gaseous sample [para 169.
With respect to Claim 2, Uplinger discloses that the gaseous sample is flowing. [172 is a gas flow]
With respect to Claim 3, Uplinger discloses that the gaseous sample is disposed within a container [196].
With respect to Claim 4, Uplinger discloses that the gaseous sample is a homogenous gas. Exhaled breath is homogenous.
With respect to Claim 5, Uplinger discloses that the gaseous sample comprises air. Exhaled breath comprises air.
With respect to Claim 7, Uplinger discloses that the gaseous sample comprises carbon dioxide, and the transmit antenna and the receive antenna are in a carbon dioxide detector. See para 169.
With respect to Claim 9, Uplinger discloses that characterizing the gaseous sample comprises comparing the detected response with a stored signal. See para 171-172 and fig 8 shows two examples.
With respect to Claim 10, Uplinger discloses that characterizing the gaseous sample comprises determining presence of a gas in the gaseous sample or determining absence of the gas in the gaseous sample. See para 169 and consider that determining a concentration of 0% is determining an absence of the gas.
With respect to Claim 11, Uplinger discloses that characterizing the gaseous sample comprises determining whether the detected response matches a stored signal or determining whether the detected response deviates from a stored signal. Para 172, compares to known stored spectral signals. Fig 8 shows two such examples.
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 6 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Uplinger.
With respect to Claim 6, Uplinger discloses various detected gases but does not disclose that the gaseous sample comprises carbon monoxide, and the transmit antenna and the receive antenna are in a carbon monoxide detector.
Para 172 indicates that any gas with a known spectra can be detected. Fig 8 shows an example of two such gasses. Official Notice is given that Carbon Monoxide has a known spectra.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify Uplinger such that that the gaseous sample comprises carbon monoxide, and the transmit antenna and the receive antenna are in a carbon monoxide detector for the benefit of detecting deadly carbon monoxide gas.
Claim 8 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Uplinger in view of JPS59204747, hereinafter JP.
With respect to Claim 8, Uplinger doesn’t disclose that the transmit antenna and the receive antenna are in a smoke detector.
JP shows that microwave based smoke detectors are well known, see abstract.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify Uplinger such that the transmit antenna and the receive antenna are in a smoke detector for the benefit of detecting smoke.
Claims 12-17 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Uplinger in view of Simpson (U.S. Patent No. 4,596,915, hereinafter Simpson).
With respect to Claim 12, Uplinger discloses a gas sensor, comprising:
a transmit antenna [108] that is configured to transmit a transmit signal,
a transmit circuit [118] that is electrically connectable to the transmit antenna, the transmit circuit is configured to generate the transmit signal to be transmitted by the transmit antenna, the transmit signal is in a radio or microwave frequency range [para 21] of the electromagnetic spectrum;
a receive antenna [110] that detects a signal resulting from transmission of the transmit signal by the transmit antenna; a receive circuit [120] that is electrically connectable to the receive antenna, the receive circuit is configured to receive the signal detected by the receive antenna;
a gaseous sample space [interior of 193] adjacent to the transmit antenna and the receive antenna, the gaseous sample space having a gaseous sample [172] into which the transmit signal is transmitted; a data storage device [para 247] that stores at least one sample gas signal; a processor [602] in communication with the receive circuit and with the data storage device, the processor is configured to execute instructions to compare the signal detected by the receive antenna with the at least one sample gas signal [para 169].
Uplinger does not disclose that the antennas comprise a strip of conductive material.
Simpson shows that microwave antennas comprise strips of conductive metal, see column 2, line 58-column 3, line 17.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention that Uplinger’s antennas would comprise a strip of conductive material because this is what antennas are made from.
With respect to Claim 13, Uplinger discloses that the data storage device stores a plurality of sample gas signals. See para 172, each detected gas needs a reference spectra.
With respect to Claim 14, Uplinger discloses that the data storage device comprises a database. See para 172, the plurality of spectra would constitute a database.
With respect to Claim 15, Uplinger discloses that the receive circuit includes an analog to digital converter [638] that converts the signal detected by the receive antenna into a digital form. See para 179 and consider that a DAC is necessary to turn an analog EM wave into usable digital information.
With respect to Claim 16, Uplinger does not disclose a carbon monoxide detector that includes the gas sensor of claim 12.
Para 172 indicates that any gas with a known spectra can be detected. Fig 8 shows an example of two such gasses. Official Notice is given that Carbon Monoxide has a known spectra.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify Uplinger such that that the gaseous sample comprises carbon monoxide, and the transmit antenna and the receive antenna are in a carbon monoxide detector for the benefit of detecting deadly carbon monoxide gas.
With respect to Claim 17, Uplinger discloses a carbon dioxide detector that includes the gas sensor of claim 12. See para 169.
Claim 18 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Uplinger and Simpson in further view of JP.
With respect to Claim 18, Uplinger does not disclose a smoke detector that includes the gas sensor of claim 12.
JP shows that microwave based smoke detectors are well known, see abstract.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify Uplinger such that the transmit antenna and the receive antenna are in a smoke detector for the benefit of detecting smoke.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ALEX T DEVITO whose telephone number is (571)270-7551. The examiner can normally be reached 12pm- 8 pm EST M-S.
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, John Breene can be reached at 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.
/ALEX T DEVITO/Examiner, Art Unit 2855
/JOHN E BREENE/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2855
Prosecution Insights