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 Objections
Claims 1 (and its related dependent claims), 10, and 13 are objected to because of the following informalities:
Regarding claims 1 and 13, the claimed, “liquid” lacks antecedent basis in the claims, and should be amended to “fluid” as previously claimed.
Regarding claim 10, the claimed, “further comprising hydro-dynamic elements” is unclear. As claimed, it cannot be determined which part of the sensor includes these “elements”, and the claim should be amended to clarify this deficiency.
Appropriate correction is required.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
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 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) 13, 14, and 16 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Vagle et al. (US Pub. # 20130047737), hereinafter referred to as Vagle.
Regarding claim 13, Vagle teaches, “A kit for retrofitting a pressure sensor having an internal deformable diaphragm, said kit comprising: a) a lengthened elastomeric conduit having an external diaphragm (Fig. 1, 2; ref. # 2, 5; see para. [0025]); b) a non-compressible fluid for filling said elastomeric conduit (see para. [0029]); c) a mounting configured to secure said lengthened elastomeric conduit at least partially immersed in a material undergoing pressure measurement (2, 4, 7, 5, 8 in 1 and 3); wherein said mounting is further configured to secure said lengthened elastomeric conduit in fluid flow with at least one non-compressible fluid, such that pressure exerted by said material undergoing measurement, is transmitted via said external diaphragm, through said non-compressible liquid to an internal diaphragm of a pressure sensor, to allow measurement of the deformation of said internal diaphragm (ref. # 5 and 8 w/ 4; see para. [0024, 0025, 0028, 0029, 0030, 0036]).”
Regarding claim 14, Vagle teaches, “wherein said lengthened elastomeric conduit is pre-filled with said non-compressible fluid (see para. [0029]).”
Regarding claim 16, Vagle teaches, “wherein said elastomeric conduit is formed of a flexible material such that movement of said elastomeric conduit in response to flow of a material being measured, prevents residue buildup upon said external diaphragm (pressure pad 2 is flexible thus movable and configured to prevent residue buildup).”
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) 15 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Vagle (US Pub. # 20130047737).
Regarding claim 15, Vagle does not necessarily teach, “wherein said lengthened elastomeric conduit is formed of a material selected from: nitrile rubber (NBR), silicone, EPDM rubber, HNBR, and Viton®.” However, pressure pads are well known in the art of pressure measuring and testing for being made of flexible and resilient materials such as rubber or silicone. It would have been obvious to one skilled in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Vagle’s invention to include wherein said lengthened elastomeric conduit is formed of a material selected from: nitrile rubber (NBR), silicone, EPDM rubber, HNBR, and Viton®.
The ordinary artisan would have been motivated to modify Vagle’s invention for at least the purpose of ensuring flexibility at the point of increased pressure within a pipe or conduit, resulting in reduced wear or damage of the sensor. Here the examiner takes Official notice.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 1–12 are allowed (notably, claims 1–12 stand objected as shown above, and once these minor deficiencies are overcome, the claims will be allowable).
Regarding claims 1–12, the prior art does not teach or suggest the claimed, “ b) a rigid external tube, filled with a non-compressible fluid; c) a deformable internal diaphragm having a first side in contact with said pressure measuring mechanism and a second side in contact with said non-compressible fluid; d) a lengthened elastomeric conduit, having an external diaphragm, said lengthened elastomeric conduit in fluid flow with said rigid external tube such that said non- compressible fluid fills said lengthened elastomeric conduit; wherein said elastomeric conduit is formed of a flexible material such that movement of said elastomeric conduit in response to flow of a material being measured, prevents residue buildup upon said external diaphragm; e) a mounting for mounting said lengthened elastomeric conduit such that at least a portion of said lengthened elastomeric conduit is immersed in a material in need of pressure measurement”. The combination of limitations as shown above are allowable over the prior art of record, alone or in combination.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. See PTO–892 form. The references cited herewith teach pressure sensors configured similarly to the present application.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to RYAN D WALSH whose telephone number is (571)272-2726. The examiner can normally be reached M-F, 8:30am-6:30pm.
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, Walter Lindsay can be reached at 571-272-1674. 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.
/RYAN D WALSH/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2852