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 § 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) 1, 3, 6, 12-15 and 17 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Zeng et al. (CN 210221150, hereafter referred to as Zeng).
Regarding claims 1 and 14, Zeng teaches an anti-vandalism mounting system for monitoring the physical variables of water in open channels, comprising: a first member 1, comprising a base (base of box body 1) with a plurality of perforations for introducing a plurality of anchoring means for fixing the first member to an installation surface 16 of the system (see figure 1: connectors 8; see figure 6); a second member 11; a third member (side wall of box body 1), arranged externally which is attached to the first and second members from inside the system by anchoring means; and a fourth member 6, pivotally arranged on the third member (see figure 2); wherein the first member comprises a plurality of compartments (see figure 2: by way of partition plates 2 & 3) to house a plurality of devices (antenna 9, water level monitoring host 5, etc.) for the operation of the system and for the monitoring of physical variables to be protected by the system (see figure 2); and wherein the system comprises an energy generating device (solar panel 15; see claim 7, ‘storage battery’) and a safety device 7, so that the fourth member is fixed to the third member of the system.
However, Zeng does not explicitly teach a plurality of safety devices, so that the fourth member is fixed to the third member of the system; a second member 11, which is fixed on the first member of the system by means of a plurality of anchoring means; and a fourth member 6, pivotally arranged at the bottom of the third member.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to modify the device of Zeng since it has been held that mere duplication of the essential working parts of a device involves only routine skill in the art. St Regis Paper Co. v. Bemis Co., 193 USPQ 8.
Zeng teaches that the second member 11 is fixed, but does not explicitly disclose how it can be fixed.
It would have been an obvious matter of design choice to use a plurality of anchoring means to secure a second member to a first member, since applicant has not disclosed that fixing the second member on the first member of the system by means of a plurality of anchoring means, solves any stated problem or is for any particular purpose and it appears that the invention would perform equally well with any widely accepted means of fixing a sensor casing to a housing base.
Additionally, Zeng does teach the fourth member 6, pivotally arranged at the top of the third member; however, it has been held that rearranging parts of an invention involves only routine skill in the art. In re Japikse, 86 USPQ 70.
Regarding claim 3, Zeng further teaches wherein the energy generating device is a photovoltaic solar panel 7.
Regarding claims 6 and 17, Zeng further teaches at least one element 5 for measuring the height of water; however, the element is mounted on the first member instead of the third member.
However, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to modify the device of Zeng since it has been held that rearranging parts of an invention involves only routine skill in the art. In re Japikse, 86 USPQ 70.
Regarding claims 12 and 13, since it has been held that rearranging parts of an invention involves only routine skill in the art. In re Japikse, 86 USPQ 70.
Regarding claim 15, Zeng teaches herein the stage of providing an energy generating device in the system further comprises arranging said energy generating device together with an impact resistant cover 6 on said energy generating device in the fourth member, wherein the energy generating device corresponds to a photovoltaic solar panel 7.
Claim(s) 2 and 5 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Zeng in view of Bartholomew et al. (WO 2019/155222, hereafter referred to as Bartholomew).
Regarding claims 2 and 5, Zeng further teaches wherein said device includes a battery (see claim 7), a wireless communication antenna 9, and at least one energy, measurement and telecommunications controller device (see para. 0028, ‘the type is SSCK-12AA-contact type electronic water gauge, mainly comprising a microcontroller, a real-time clock circuit, a large capacity memory, long-distance communication and solar energy charging control circuit’).
Zeng does not explicitly teach a plurality of batteries, at least one anti-humidity device, or the at least one ultrasonic sensor.
Bartholomew teaches a similar device which includes a plurality of batteries (see figure 10); and an ultrasonic sensor 105 (see page 6, lines 12-16, ‘the air pressure waves generated by the air pressure wave generating element 105 may, for example, be sound waves (though in other examples, the air pressure waves may be in the ultrasound range’); and an anti-humidity device 1040; Bartholomew further teaches a camera (see claim 9).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to modify the device of Zeng with the teaching of Bartholomew since it has been held that mere duplication of the essential working parts of a device involves only routine skill in the art. St Regis Paper Co. v. Bemis Co., 193 USPQ 8.
The use of ultrasonic sensors in the art is well known; adding anti-humidity capabilities has well known advantages in the art.
Additionally, regarding the particular uses of the camera, 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 USPQ 2d 1647 (1987).
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 4, 7-11, 16 and 18-21 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.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JAMEL E WILLIAMS whose telephone number is (571)270-7027. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Thursday 10am-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, 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.
/JAMEL E WILLIAMS/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2855