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. 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 protection element comprises two different parts: a first part comprising an adhesive layer for fixing the protection element to the sensing device and a second part wrapped around the full circumference of the pipe and around the device arranged on the pipe” of claim 5 must be shown or the feature(s) canceled from the claim(s). No new matter should be entered. The limitations of “ the protection element comprises a third different part which prevents an overlying section of an adhesive layer of the second part from sticking on the pipe ” of claim 7 must be shown or the feature(s) canceled from the claim(s). No new matter should be entered. The limitations of “ the third part directly abuts the peripheral surface of the pipe ” of claim 8 must be shown or the feature(s) canceled from the claim(s). No new matter should be entered. The limitations of “the protection element is fixed to the pipe by an adhesive connection between the adhesive layer of the second part and a peripheral surface of the third part ” of claim 9 must be shown or the feature(s) canceled from the claim(s). No new matter should be entered. The limitations of “ the first part comprises an adhesive layer which is stuck to the sensing device ” of claim 10 must be shown or the feature(s) canceled from the claim(s). No new matter should be entered. The limitations of “ subcomponents of the device are mechanically fixed together by the adhesive layer of the first part ” of claim 1 1 must be shown or the feature(s) canceled from the claim(s). No new matter should be entered. The limitations of “ the protection element comprising a first part fixed to the sensing device and a second part wrapped around the sensing device for protection of the sensing device against mechanical impacts ” of claim 1 4 must be shown or the feature(s) canceled from the claim(s). No new matter should be entered. The limitations of “ the second part is wrapped around a peripheral surface of the third part being adhesively fixed to the third part ” of claim 16 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 Objections Claim s 1- 2, 5, 12 and 15-16 are objected to because of the following informalities: Regarding claim 1 , the claim recites “the device” in line 5 , this term had not been previously recited in the claim. Perhaps Applicant means “the temperature sensing device”? Appropriate correction is required. Regarding claim 2 , the claim recites “the device” in line 2 . Perhaps Applicant means “the temperature sensing device”? Appropriate correction is required. Regarding claim 5 , the claim recites “the device” in line 4 . Perhaps Applicant means “the temperature sensing device”? Appropriate correction is required. Regarding claim 12, the claim recites “ the adhesive layers ” in line 3, this term had not been previously recited in the claim. Perhaps Applicant means “the adhesive layer”? Appropriate correction is required. Regarding claim 15 , the claim recites “the device” in line 3 . Perhaps Applicant means “the temperature sensing device”? Appropriate correction is required. Regarding claim 16 , the claim recites “the device” in line 3 . Perhaps Applicant means “the temperature sensing device”? Appropriate correction is required. Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102 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. Claim s 1-4 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102 (a)(1) as being anticipated by Kakigi Noubo et al. (JP 2006242574) (hereinafter Kakigi Noubo ) . Regarding claim 1, Kakigi Noubo teaches a n assembly to protect a sensing device comprising a pipe (tube) (2) configured for transportation of a fluid, a sensing device (thermocouple) (10) arranged on a peripheral surface of the pipe (tube) (2) and in thermal contact with the pipe (tube) (2) and a protection element (protective cover) (1) for protection of the sensing device against mechanical impacts and for thermal isolation of the device against the environment (see page 1, lines 13-28, page 2, lines 7-11 and Figures 5a-b) . Regarding claim 2 , Kakigi Noubo further teaches the protection element (protective) (1) encloses the pipe (tube) (2) and the device (thermocouple) (10) , which is arranged on the pipe (tube ) (2) (see Figure 5a-b) . Regarding claim 3, Kakigi Noubo the sensing device is a temperature sensor (thermocouple) (10) configured to measure the temperature of the pipe surface (tube) (2) (see page 2, lines 1-6) . Regarding claim 4 , Kakigi Noubo further teaches the pipe (tube) (2) is arranged in a heating system (see page 1, lines 13-15) . 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. 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 nonobviousness. Claim s 5-8 and 10-11 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kakigi Noubo in view o f Leermann et al. (US 2021/0371707) (hereinafter Leermann) . Regarding claim 5 , Kakigi Noubo teaches all the limitations of claim 1, and further teaches the protection element comprises a first part comprising an adhesive layer (heat resistant tape) (3) for fixing the protection element (protective cover) (1) to the sensing device (thermocouple) (10) (see Figures 5a-b) . However, Kakigi Noubo does not explicitly teach the protection element comprising two parts, a second part wrapped around the full circumference of the pipe and around the device arranged on the pipe. Leermann teach es the protection element (support tape) (3) comprising two parts ( part with upper adhesive strip (4) and free area (6) ) , a second part (free area) (6) wrapped around the full circumference of the pipe and around the device arranged on the pipe (see paragraphs 0031-003 3 and Figure s 1- 2 and 4-5 ) (Note: the combination of Kakigi Noubo in view of Leermann will provide the protection element compris ing two different parts: a first part comprising an adhesive layer for fixing the protection element to the sensing device and a second part wrapped around the full circumference of the pipe a nd around the device arranged on the pipe ) . It would have been obvious to one with ordinary skill in the art before the effecti 3 ve filing date of the claimed invention to modify the protection element as taught by Kakigi Noubo with two different parts as taught by Leermann. One would be motivated to make this combination in order to provide low manufacturing cost Regarding claim 6 , Kakigi Noubo in view of Leermann teaches all the limitations of claim 5, and further teaches the protection element is fixed to the pipe (elongated good) (1) by an adhesive connection between an adhesive layer ( adhesive strip) (5) of the second part (free area) (6) and the peripheral surface of the pipe (elongated good) (1) (see Leermann, Figure s 2 and 5 ) . Regarding claim 7 , Kakigi Noubo in view of Leermann teaches all the limitations of claim 5, and further teaches the protection element comprises a third different part ( part with bottom/right adhesive strip (4) ) which prevents an overlying section of an adhesive layer (upper/left adhesive layer) (4) of the second part (free area) (6) from sticking on the pipe (see Leermann, Figure 5) . Regarding claim 8 , Kakigi Noubo in view of Leermann teaches all the limitations of claim 7, wherein the third part (part with bottom/right adhesive strip (4)) directly abuts the peripheral surface of the pipe (see Leermann; Figure 5). Regarding claim 10, Kakigi Noubo in view of Leermann teaches all the limitations of claim 5, Kakigi Noubo further teaches the first part comprises an adhesive layer (heat resistant tape) (3) which is stuck to the sensing device (thermocouple) (10) (see Figure 5a-b). Regarding 11, Kakigi Noubo in view of Leermann teaches all the limitations of claim 10, Kakigi Noubo subcomponents of the device are mechanically fixed together by the adhesive layer (heat resistant tape) (3) of the first part (see Figures 5a-b). Claim s 5-9 , 12 and 14 -16 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kakigi Noubo in view of Lodde et al. (EP 2034576 ) (hereinafter L odde ). Regarding claim 5, Kakigi Noubo teaches all the limitations of claim 1, and further teaches the protection element comprises a first part comprising an adhesive layer (heat resistant tape) (3) for fixing the protection element (protective cover) (1) to the sensing device (thermocouple) (10). However, Kakigi Noubo does not explicitly teach the protection element comprising two parts, a second part wrapped around the full circumference of the pipe and around the device arranged on the pipe. Lodde teach es the protection element (sheath) (1a) comprising two parts (regions (5a,5b)) , a second part (region ) ( 5a) wrapped around the full circumference of the pipe and around the device arranged on the pipe (see page 5, lines 6-13 and Figure 6 ) (Note: the combination of Kakigi Noubo in view of L odde will provide the protection element compris ing two different parts: a first part comprising an adhesive layer for fixing the protection element to the sensing device and a second part wrapped around the full circumference of the pipe a nd around the device arranged on the pipe ) . It would have been obvious to one with ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the protection element as taught by Kakigi Noubo with two different parts as taught by Lodde . One would be motivated to make this combination in order to provide low manufacturing cost and to protect the temperature sensing device from abrasion and vibration noise. Regarding claim 7, Kakigi Noubo in view of L odde teaches all the limitations of claim 5, and further teaches the protection element comprises a third different part ( part covered by second carrier (4)) which prevents an overlying section of an adhesive layer ( adhesive layer) (3) of the second part ( region) (5a ) from sticking on the pipe (see Lodde; Figure 6 ). Regarding claim 8, Kakigi Noubo in view of Lodde teaches all the limitations of claim 7, and further teaches the third part ( part covered by second carrier (4)) directly abuts the peripheral surface of the pipe (see Lodde, Figure 6 ). Regarding claim 9 , Kakigi Noubo in view of L odde teaches all the limitations of claim 7, and further teaches the protection element i s fixed to the pipe by an adhesive connection between the adhesive layer (adhesive layer) (3) of the second par t (region) (5a) and a peripheral surface of the third par t (part covered by second carrier (4)) (see Lodde; Figure 6) . Regarding claim 12, Kakigi Noubo in view of Lodde as claim 5, Lodde further teaches the protection element comprises several layers (first carrier (2), second carrier (4), adhesive layer (3)) stacked in a direction radial to the pipe surface (see Lodde; Figure 6), wherein a base layer (first carrier) (2) different from the adhesive layers (adhesive layer) (3) is consistently formed in all parts (see Lodde; Figure 6). Regarding claim 14, Kakigi Noubo teaches an assembly configured for the protection of a sensing device (thermocouple) (10) during transportation of the same, comprising the sensing device (thermocouple) (10) and a protection element (protective cover) (1) the protection element comprising a first part fixed to the sensing device (thermocouple) (10) (see page 1, lines 13-28, page 2, lines 7-11 and Figures 5a-b) . However, Kakigi Noubo does not explicitly teach a second part wrapped around the sensing device for protection of the sensing device against mechanical impacts. Lodde teaches the protection element (sheath) (1a) comprising a second part (region) (5a) wrapped around the sensing device for protection of the sensing device against mechanical impacts (see page 5, lines 6-13 and Figure 6) (Note: the combination of Kakigi Noubo in view of Lodde will provide the protection of a sensing device during transportation of the same, comprising the sensing device and a protection element, the protection element comprising a first part fixed to the sensing device and a second part wrapped around the sensing device for protection of the sensing device against mechanical impacts ). It would have been obvious to one with ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the protection element as taught by Kakigi Noubo with a second part taught by Lodde. One would be motivated to make this combination in order to provide low manufacturing cost and to protect the temperature sensing device from abrasion and vibration noise. Regarding claim 15, Kakigi Noubo teaches a protection element (protective cover) (1) comprises a first part comprising a first adhesive layer (heat resistant tape) (3) which is configured to be adhesively fixed to a sensing device (thermocouple) (10) (see Figures 5a-b). However, Kakigi Noubo does not explicitly teach two different parts: a first part comprising a first adhesive layer, which is configured to be adhesively fixed to a sensing device, and a second part comprising a second adhesive layer, wherein the second part is configured to be wrapped around the device for protection against outer mechanical impacts and for thermal isolation against the environment, wherein the second part has a larger surface area than the first part. Lodde teaches a protection element (sheath) (1a) comprising two different parts: a first part (region) (5b) comprising a first adhesive layer (adhesive) (3), and a second part (region) (5b) comprising a second adhesive layer (adhesive) (3), wherein the second part (region) (5a) is configured to be wrapped around the device for protection against outer mechanical impacts and for thermal isolation against the environment, wherein the second part (region) (5a) has a larger surface area than the first part (region) (5B) (see page 5, lines 6-13 and Figures 2 and 6). It would have been obvious to one with ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the protection element as taught by Kakigi Noubo with a second part taught by Lodde. One would be motivated to make this combination in order to provide low manufacturing cost and to protect the temperature sensing device from abrasion and vibration noise. Regarding claim 16, the prior combination teaches all the limitations of claim 15, Lodde further teaches wherein the protection element (sheath) (1a) comprises a third different part (part covered by second carrier (4)) (see Figure 6) configured consistently between the first part (region) (5b) and the second part (region) (5a) and configured to be wrapped around the device, wherein the second part (region) (5a) is wrapped around a peripheral surface of the third part being adhesively fixed to the third part (part covered by second carrier 4) (see Figure 6). Claim 13 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kakigi Noubo in view of Lodde as applied to claim 12 above, in further view of Kim Seong Hun (KR 101059322) (hereinafter Kim). Regarding claim 13 , Kakigi Noubo in view of Lodde teaches all the imitations of claim 12 . However, Lodde does not explicitly teach the second part comprises a protection layer stacked on the base layer opposite to the adhesive layer and configured to protect the device against outer impacts. Kim teaches the second part (part where protective layer (130) overlap) comprises a protection layer ( protective layer ) (130) stacked on the base layer (insulation) (120) opposite to the adhesive layer (adhesive layer) (150) and configured to protect the device against outer impacts (see Figure 1 and pa ge 3, lines 12-16 and page 6, lines 10-13) . It would have been obvious to one with ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the protection element as taught by the prior combination with a protection layer stacked on the base layer opposite to the adhesive layer and configured to protect the device against outer impacts as taught by Kim . One would be motivated to make this combination in order to provide to protect the temperature sensing device from abrasion , vibration noise and harsh external environments . Conclusion Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to FILLIN "Examiner name" \* MERGEFORMAT JANICE M SOTO whose telephone number is FILLIN "Phone number" \* MERGEFORMAT (571)270-7707 . The examiner can normally be reached FILLIN "Work Schedule?" \* MERGEFORMAT M-F 8:00am-4:00pm . 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, FILLIN "SPE Name?" \* MERGEFORMAT John Breene can be reached at FILLIN "SPE Phone?" \* MERGEFORMAT 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. /JANICE M SOTO/ Examiner, Art Unit 2855 /JOHN E BREENE/ Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2855