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 .
1. Claims 13-22 are presented for examination and claims 1-12 are cancelled.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
2. The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(b):
(b) CONCLUSION.—The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph:
The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the applicant regards as his invention.
2.1 Claims 13-22 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor (or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the applicant), regards as the invention.
Claims 13, recites the limitation "the steady state" in line 16. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
Claim 17, recites the limitation "the steady state" in line 18. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
In claim 13, the limitation -“generating a non-flow temperature” and “generating a flow temperature” is unclear what variable been used to generated the temperature or if has been a unit converted. Clarification and appropriate correction are required.
In claim 17, the limitation - “calculate a non-flow temperature” and “calculate a flow temperature” is unclear what variable been used to calculate the temperature or if it has been a unit converted. Clarification and appropriate correction are required.
As per claims 19-15 and 18-22, these claims are at least rejected for their dependencies, directly or indirectly, on the rejected claims 13 and 17. They are therefore rejected as set forth above.
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.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
3. The following is a quotation of the appropriate paragraphs of 35 U.S.C. 102 that form the basis for the rejections under this section made in this Office action:
A person shall be entitled to a patent unless –
(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.
3.1 Claim(s) 13, 16-17 and 20-22 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Lee et al. (US 2019/00333109 A1).
Regarding claims 13 and 17, Lee discloses a method for determining sap flow density ([0005], calculates sap flow density by measuring), comprising:
a single needle comprising a hot source and thermal sensor has the heat source and the thermal sensor are disposed on a single plane ([0053] ([0042], sap flow measuring device having the microneedle probe) and comprise the sensor unit 50 that include two temperature measuring sensors 51 and 52, and a heater 53).
control unit in communication with the needle ([0025], a control unit which calculates sap flow density based on a value measured by a sensor unit of the microneedle probe) the control unit arranged to:
under a no-flow and flow condition:
supplying a first heat energy (Fig. 2, [0055], [0065], [0066], the heater 53 of the sensor unit 50 installed on the microneedle probe 1 forms a heat field by being supplied with the current and continuously generating heat) to a plant-inserted single needle sap flow sensor so as to achieve a pre-determined steady state temperature ([0049], [0064], The microneedle probe 1 is configured to be inserted into a xylem (vessel) of a plant to be measured and to measure a flow of sap flowing in the xylem in a minimally invasive manner);
generating or calculate a no-flow and flow temperature distribution ([0054], [0005], The temperature measuring sensors 51 and 52 is configured to measure a change in resistance caused by a change in temperature by using a temperature coefficient of resistance of the pattern of metal such as platinum. A temperature difference between upper and lower. In addition, a thermocouple may be used as the temperature measuring sensors 51 and 52);
determining a no-flow and flow heat plume endpoint Z1 and endpoint Z2, respectively displaced in an x-axis under the no-flow and flow condition ([0005], [0066], measures and calculates, from a temperature difference, a degree to which the heat is dissipated at night in the case of absence of the sap flow and the case of presence of the sap flow, a heat field deformation (HFD) technology which configures an invasive probe having a temperature measuring probe and a heater probe and the sap flow measuring device , the heater 53 of the sensor unit 50 installed on the microneedle probe 1 forms a heat field by being supplied with the current and continuously generating heat) and
calculating the sap flow density (SFD) in accordance with a difference between heat plume endpoints Z2 and Z1 and times needed to achieve the steady state temperature in no-flow and flow conditions ([0025], [0065], [0066], calculates sap flow density based on a value measured by a sensor unit of the microneedle probe; and a degree to which a heat field, which is created by heat generated by a heater at a center, is deformed due to a sap flow, and a stem heat balance (SHB) technology which uses a temperature difference between upper and lower portions of a stem which is caused by a sap flow and heat generated by a heater installed outside the stem of the plant).
Regarding claims 16 and 20, Lee discloses the single needle sap sensor ([0042], sap flow measuring device having the microneedle probe) has the heat source and the thermal sensor are disposed on a single plane ([0053] The sensor unit 50 may include two temperature measuring sensors 51 and 52, and a heater 53).
Regarding claim 21, Lee discloses the single needle comprises a plurality of heating elements (Fig. 2, [0056], the multiple sensor units 50 may be installed and include multiple heater and temperature sensor).
Regarding claim 22, Lee discloses determining sap flow density of a plant ([0005], calculates sap flow density by measuring, by using the temperature measuring probe, a degree to which a heat field).
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
4 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.
4.1 Claim(s) 15 and 19 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Lee et al. (US 2019/00333109 A1) in view of Molina et al. (Effect of irrigation on sap flux density variability and water use estimate in cherry (Prunus avium) for timber production: Azimuthal profile, radial profile and sapwood estimation).
Regarding claims 15 and 19, Lee discloses the limitations of claims 13 and 17, as state oabve ut fails to discloses the limitation of claim 15 and 19. However, Molina discloses the control unit is arranged to adjust irrigation responsively to the sap flow density (Title, Effect of irrigation on sap flux density variability to estimate the irrigation demand of these plantations).
Lee and Molina are analogous art. They relate to sap flow sensor.
Therefore, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art to modify azimuthal variation in sap flux density, taught by Molina, incorporated with microneedle probe for measuring a sap flow in a plant, taught by Lee, in order to provide the optimal irrigation schedule.
Allowable Subject Matter
5. Claims 14 and 18 would be allowable if rewritten to overcome the rejection(s) under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), 2nd paragraph, set forth in this Office action and to include all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
Citation Pertinent prior art
6. The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
JINSONG et al. (AU 2020104203 A4) discloses measuring forward and reverse sap flow densities of tree trunks. The device comprises a sensor and a controller; the sensor comprising an upper probe, a middle probe and a lower probe that are equally spaced from top to bottom along an extending direction of a tree.
Granier (US4745805A) discloses a process for the measurement of the flow of raw sap in the stem of a tree or other plant, and a device for the embodiment of the process. According to this process, two holes of small diameter are made in the stem, and a heating probe equipped with a thermocouple is introduced into the upper hole at the level of the sap-wood, and a non-heating probe is introduced into the lower hole.
Bavel et al. (US 2005/0121536 A1) discloses integrated system for monitoring sap flow and simultaneously performing data-logging and automatically scheduling irrigation in a field; comprising a plurality of in situ sap flow gauges that perform its comprehensive computer-controlled tasks in the field being irrigated. This plurality of sap flow gauge can be detached from and reattached to a like plurality of plant stems as appropriate.
Sangwoong et al. (KR 10-2040182 B1) discloses plant sap flow rate measuring method according to the invention, (a) inserting a probe for heating and temperature measurement in the plant; (b) repeatedly measuring a temperature difference, which is a difference between a non-heating temperature, which is a temperature in a non-heated state of the probe, and a heating temperature, which is a temperature in a heated state of the probe, for a predetermined period of time, so that the reference value is the maximum value among the measured temperature differences.
Álvaro López-Berna (A single-probe heat pulse method for estimating sap velocity in trees) discloses heat transport in sapwood, convective velocity (Vh) is estimated from the temperature increase in the heater after the application of a heat pulse (ΔT). The method was validated against measurements performed with the compensation heat pulse (CHP) technique in field trees of six different species.
A reference to specific paragraphs, columns, pages, or figures in a cited prior art reference is not limited to preferred embodiments or any specific examples. It is well settled that a prior art reference, in its entirety, must be considered for allthat it expressly teaches and fairly suggests to one having ordinary skill in the art. Stated differently, a prior art disclosure reading on a limitation of Applicant's claim cannot be ignored on the ground that other embodiments disclosed wereinstead cited. Therefore, the Examiner's citation to a specific portion of a single prior art reference is not intended to exclusively dictate, but rather, to demonstrate an exemplary disclosure commensurate with the specific limitations being addressed. In re Heck, 699 F.2d 1331, 1332-33,216 USPQ 1038, 1039 (Fed. Cir. 1983) (quoting In re Lemelson, 397 F.2d 1006, 1 009, 158 USPQ 275, 277 (CCPA 1968)). In re: Upsher-Smith Labs. v. Pamlab, LLC, 412 F.3d 1319, 1323, 75 USPQ2d 1213, 1215 (Fed. Cir. 2005); In re Fritch, 972 F.2d 1260, 1264, 23 USPQ2d 1780, 1782 (Fed. Cir. 1992); Merck& Co. v. Biocraft Labs., Inc., 874 F.2d804, 807, 10 USPQ2d 1843, 1846 (Fed. Cir. 1989); In re Fracalossi, 681 F.2d 792,794 n.1, 215 USPQ 569, 570 n.1 (CCPA 1982); In re Lamberti, 545 F.2d 747, 750, 192 USPQ 278, 280 (CCPA 1976); In re Bozek, 416 F.2d 1385, 1390, 163USPQ 545, 549 (CCPA 1969).
Conclusion
7. Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed Kidest Worku whose telephone number is 571-272-3737. If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner's supervisor, Ali Mohammad 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.
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.
Information regarding the status of an application may be obtained from the Patent Application information Retrieval IPAIRI system. Status information for published applications may be obtained from either Private PMR or Public PAIR. Status information for unpublished applications is available through Private PAIR only. For more information about the PAIR system, see http://pair-direct.uspto.gov. Should you have questions on access to the Private PAG system, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217- 9197.
/KIDEST WORKU/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2119