DETAILED ACTION
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 2/24/2026 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive. Applicant has canceled claim 2 and incorporated its limitations into claim 1. Applicant argues that Makel does not teach “wherein the display device includes a normal operation lighting portion, a maintenance lighting portion, and a use stop lighting portion, and the control device turns on any of the normal operation lighting portion, the maintenance lighting portion, and the use stop lighting portion on a basis of a determination in the second step.” Applicant argues that the Makel reference “discloses generally a display which displays user operating prompts and station condition messages” and that the examiner “makes an unsupported comment” in the office action. Examiner disagrees with these arguments.
The amended limitations of claim 1 simply claims a display device which is capable of displaying a light or a sequence of lights based on the determination in the second step. Under the broadest reasonable interpretation, claim 1 now teaches a controller that can illuminate light A based on operation A, illuminate light B based on operation B and illuminate light C based on operation C. Makel teaches “the liquid crystal display (LCD) for displaying user operating prompts and station condition messages; a viewport accessing a schematic of the storage tank and pump skid showing line, valving and leak detection (LD) layouts, and having red/green LED lights indicating status of the pump, valves and LD sensors; the cellular phone transceiver; and manual override controls.” Makel teaches a display which is capable to displaying prompt and messages, which are typically illuminated since it is a LED screen. Makel also teaches red/green LED lights indicating the status of a pump, valves and sensors. The red/green lights are illuminated based on the status of a pump. If a pump is operational, then a green light is illuminated or if the pump is not operational, the red light is illuminated. This concept reads on the claim language of amended claim 1 since both Makel and claim 1 teach a concept in which a certain light is illuminated based on the current operation or status of an element. For these reasons the arguments are not persuasive.
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.
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, 4, 5, 6, 8, 9 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Fujiwara US 20180094655 in view of Butler US 20110320140 and in further view of Danielson US 6003363 and in further view of Makel US 5586050.
As to claim 1, Fujiwara teaches “A liquid pressure apparatus monitoring system (Figure 1, 10) comprising: a liquid pressure apparatus (Figure 1, 12); a liquid pressure sensor that monitors a liquid pressure inside the liquid pressure apparatus (Figure 1, 52; [0050]); a display device that displays a state of the liquid pressure apparatus (Figure 2, 66); and a control device (Figure 2, 62), wherein the control device is configured to determine, in a first step, the state of the liquid pressure apparatus from states of normal operation (Abstract), and stop of use on a basis of a signal acquired from the liquid pressure sensor ([0127]), and display, in a second step, on the display device ([0075]; [0076]), the state of the liquid pressure apparatus as the state of the normal operation (Abstract), and the stop of use on a basis of a determination result of the first step ([0125] to [0127]).” Fujiwara does not explicitly teach that maintenance needs to be done of elements that are considered faulty.
Butler teaches “maintenance, the maintenance ([0041] teaches “The overflow detection system 101 then activates a warning system 522 in the faucet that communicates the leak condition and need for repair or maintenance to the user.”).”
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the filing of the invention to combine the teachings of Butler with Fujiwara. When a monitoring system indicates a faulty element, it would be obvious for the user to address the issue and replacement any parts as necessary. Butler explicitly teaches that a monitoring system can identify a faulty element that needs to be replaced under routine maintenance.
The prior arts do not teach a reset switch.
Danielson teaches “a returning device that returns a state of the display device to an initial state (Column 5, lines 6-13).”
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the filing of the invention to combine the teachings of Danielson with Butler and Fujiwara. A reset switch is known in the art since it allows for a system to reset, preventing damage by re-starting operation by bringing operations back to a reference baseline.
The prior arts do not teach “wherein the display device includes a normal operation lighting portion, a maintenance lighting portion, and a use stop lighting portion, and the control device turns on any of the normal operation lighting portion, the maintenance lighting portion, and the use stop lighting portion on a basis of a determination in the second step”.
Makel teaches ““wherein the display device includes a normal operation lighting portion, a maintenance lighting portion, and a use stop lighting portion, and the control device turns on any of the normal operation lighting portion, the maintenance lighting portion, and the use stop lighting portion on a basis of a determination in the second step (Column 4, lines 22-38).”
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the filing of the invention to combine the teachings of Danielson with Butler and Fujiwara. Having a display device that illuminates different lights for different responses is common in the art since this allows the user to visually determine the status of the liquid monitoring system.
As to claim 3, Makel teaches “wherein the display device includes a liquid crystal display, and the control device displays, on the liquid crystal display, a start date of the normal operation, a start date and time of transition to the maintenance, and a start date and time of transition to the stop of use (Column 4, lines 22-38. Based on this, one of ordinary skill in the art could adjust the display to display the desired data).”
As to claim 4, Butler teaches “further comprising a sound generator, wherein the control device activates the sound generator when the state is determined as the maintenance in the second step of the control device ([0038]. This prior art teaches an auditory cue that can be executed after certain parameters are met by the detection system. Based on this, one of ordinary skill in the art can program the system to generate the auditory cue for specific times, thresholds, etc).”
As to claim 5, Butler teaches “wherein the control device activates the sound generator when the state is determined as the stop of use in the second step of the control device ([0038]. This prior art teaches an auditory cue that can be executed after certain parameters are met by the detection system. Based on this, one of ordinary skill in the art can program the system to generate the auditory cue for specific times, thresholds, etc).”
As to claim 6, Butler teaches “wherein the control device varies a tone generated when the sound generator is activated between a case where the state is determined as the maintenance and a case where the state is determined as the stop of use ([0038]. This prior art teaches an auditory cue that can be executed after certain parameters are met by the detection system. Based on this, one of ordinary skill in the art can program the system to generate the auditory cue for specific times, thresholds, etc).”
As to claim 8, Fujiwara teaches “wherein a signal is transmitted between the liquid pressure sensor and the control device in a wired manner or a wireless manner (Figure 1, 52 and 50 are connected to detector 54).”
As to claim 9, Fujiwara teaches “wherein an operation panel is provided (Figure 2, 64).” Fujiwara does not explicitly state that this panel is located outside but only that it is a part of the detector system.
Butler teaches “outside, and a signal is transmitted between the operation panel and the control device in the wired manner or the wireless manner ([0022]).”
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the filing of the invention to combine the teachings of Butler with Fujiwara. Having remote elements is known since it allows the user to analyze data from a setting away from the physical location of the sensor.
Claim(s) 7 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Fujiwara US 20180094655 in view of Butler US 20110320140 and in further view of Danielson US 6003363 and in further view of Huang US 20030101799.
As to claim 7, Fujiwara teaches “each including the liquid pressure sensor, wherein the control device executes the first step and the second step corresponding to each of the liquid pressure apparatuses on a basis of a signal acquired from the plurality of liquid pressure sensors (Figure 1; Abstract).” Fujiwara teaches multiple pressure sensors but does not teach multiple pressure apparatuses, although it would be obvious to duplicate a known element such as a liquid pressure apparatus.
Huang teaches “comprising a plurality of the liquid pressure apparatuses (Figure 6; [0038]).”
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the filing of the invention to combine the teachings of Huang with Danielson and Butler and Fujiwara. Many systems have multiple liquid containers that require monitoring. Using a plurality of sensors to monitor multiple containers allows for the user to monitor multiple containers.
Conclusion
THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. 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 TARUN SINHA whose telephone number is (571)270-3993. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday, 10AM-6PM EST.
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.
/TARUN SINHA/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2855