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 .
This Office Action is in response to Applicant’s amendment filed 12/01/2025. Claims 40, 43-46, 49-57, and 59 are currently pending in this application.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
Applicant’s amendment to claims 55-57 overcomes the previous rejection under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph. The rejection is hereby withdrawn.
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.
Claims 40, 43-46, 49-53, and 58 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Bass (U.S. 2019/0101452 A1).
Claim 40, Bass teaches:
A system for monitoring a state of excessive heat in one or more components of an electrical system (Bass, Paragraph [0008]), comprising:
at least one detection unit (Bass, Fig. 1: 202, 204), each detection unit mounted with respect to a component of the electrical system to be monitored so as to be in thermal contact with the component to be monitored (Bass, Paragraph [0010], The circuitry of Fig. 1 is enclosed in a case which is in thermal communication with the case (see Bass, Paragraph [0033]).), each detection unit comprising a controller (Bass, Fig. 1: 202, Bass, Paragraph [0022], The wireless transmitter 214 is a preferably a Wi-Fi transmitter and effectively controls how and when to transmit the temperature detected. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, at the time of filing, for the wireless transmitter 214 to have a controller for controlling the signal transmission.) and a power source (Bass, Fig. 1: 204), wherein the power source supplies constant power to the controller (Bass, Paragraph [0026], Power is supplied from the battery 204 to the sensor module 202 when the thermostatic switch 206 is closed. Therefore, when the thermostatic switch 206 is closed, constant power, i.e. continuous power over a period of time, is provided to the sensor module 202, which includes wireless transmitter 214. Additionally, “constant” power may also be interpreted as the power source being readily available when the transmitter 214 needs to transmit, and only requires the closing of a switch 206 or 208 to connect the power source.); and
at least one repeater unit remotely located with respect to each detection unit, the repeater unit being configured to receive a signal from at least one of the detection units representative of a state of excessive heat present at the associated component of the electrical system (Bass, Paragraph [0003], The central location is functionally equivalent to a repeater unit for receiving signals transmitted by the wireless temperature sensors.) and a warning signal associated therewith is emitted (Bass, Paragraph [0040], An alert is observed by a user regarding a rising temperature that is sensed by the sensor module.):
wherein the at least one detection unit further comprises a passive temperature operated contact closure that is triggered when any heat generated at the component to be monitored exceeds a predetermined temperature (Bass, Paragraphs [0026-0027], When the temperature of the switch reaches a predetermined threshold temperature, the thermostatic switch 206 closes. The thermostatic switch 206 is functionally equivalent to a passive temperature operated contact closure.), wherein the triggered passive temperature operated contact closure causes the controller to control a transmitter mounted within the detection unit to transmit the signal to the repeater unit (Bass, Paragraph [0040], When the thermostatic switch is closed, current from the battery flows to the sensor module and the sensing device transmits temperature data.) and
wherein the controller is configured to transmit a periodic OK signal from the transmitter to the repeater unit (Bass, Paragraph [0029], An override switch 208 may be used to connect the sensor module to the battery, effectively causing the power supply to provide constant power instead of relying on the closing of the thermostatic switch 206. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, at the time of filing, for the sensing device to be capable of transmitting when the power is provided (see Bass, Paragraph [0040]). The transmitted signal is thus functionally equivalent to an OK signal because it effectively allows the user to manually connect the battery 204 and test/maintain the sensor module, wherein the transmission from the transmitter 214 is indicative that the detection unit is “OK”.).
Bass does not explicitly teach:
The at least one repeater unit to emit the warning signal.
However, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, at the time of filing, for the alert that is observed by the user to be located at the repeater unit, as a matter of engineering choice. Such a modification would not change the principal operation of the system, as a whole, and would yield predictable results. See MPEP 2144.04.
Claim 43, Bass further teaches:
A system according to claim 40, wherein the signal transmitted by the detection unit is the form of an electromagnetic radiation signal (Bass, Paragraph [0022], Example signals include radio and infrared.).
Claim 44, Bass further teaches:
A system according to claim 40, wherein the signal transmitted by the detection unit is in the form of an electromagnetic optical or non-radio frequency signal (Bass, Paragraph [0022], Example signals include LASER and infrared.).
Claim 45, Bass further teaches:
A system according to claim 40, wherein the detection unit comprises a body configured to be mounted to a surface of the component to be monitored such that a rise in temperature of the component to be monitored will result in a rise in temperature of the body (Bass, Paragraphs [0033] and [0039-0040], The circuitry is mounted to a case so that the temperature of the case is transferred to the circuitry.).
Claim 46, Bass further teaches:
A system according to claim 45, wherein the body is formed from a heat conductive material to conduct heat generated in the component to be monitored to the passive temperature operated contact closure (Bass, Paragraphs [0033] and [0039-0040], The circuitry is mounted to a case, which conducts the heat, so that the temperature of the case is transferred to the circuitry.).
Claim 49, Bass further teaches:
A system according to claim 1, wherein the controller is configured to encode the signal transmitted by the transmitter (Bass, Paragraph [0022], The wireless transmitter 214 is preferably a Wi-Fi transmitter. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art for the Wi-Fi transmitter to effectively encode, i.e. modulate, the temperature data from the temperature sensor into a form that is transmittable via the Wi-Fi signal. Such a modification would not change the principal operation of the system, as a whole, and would yield predictable results.).
Claim 50, Bass further teaches:
A system according to claim 49, wherein the encoded signal generated by the controller comprises an ID code that is received by the repeater unit and which identifies the detection unit transmitting the encoded signal (Bass, Paragraph [0003], It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, at the time of filing, for the transmitting sensing device to include an ID in its transmission. Such a modification would ensure the system’s ability to report temperatures sensed by the temperature sensing device and the ability for the user to interpret said reported temperatures. For example, if a sensing device does not identify itself to the user, the user would not be able to determine which one of the attached components, e.g. bearing 302, is experiencing the excessive temperature.).
Claim 51, Bass further teaches:
A system according to claim 50, wherein the repeater unit, upon receiving the encoded signal emits a warning signal that identifies the detection unit that generated the signal (Bass, Paragraph [0003], It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, at the time of filing, for the transmitting sensing device to include an ID in its transmission. Such a modification would ensure the system’s ability to report temperatures sensed by the temperature sensing device and the ability for the user to interpret said reported temperatures. For example, if a sensing device does not identify itself to the user, the user would not be able to determine which one of the attached components, e.g. bearing 302, is experiencing the excessive temperature.).
Claim 52, Bass further teaches:
A system according to claim 50, wherein upon triggering of the passive temperature operated contact closure, the controller controls the transmitter of the detection unit to transmit the signal multiple times over a predetermined period to ensure the signal is received by the repeater unit (Bass, Paragraph [0040], When the thermostatic switch is closed, current from the battery flows to the sensor module and the sensing device transmits temperature data. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, at the time of filing, for sensing device to be capable of being activated and deactivated repeatedly based on the temperature of the thermostatic switch (see Bass, Paragraph [0026]). Therefore, it is within the scope of the teachings of Bass for the step of transmitting to repeat over a predetermined period of time, e.g. the operating life of the sensing device.).
Claim 53, Bass further teaches:
A system according to claim 49, wherein the detection unit comprises a light source (Bass, Fig. 1: 210) mounted on a surface thereof (Bass, Fig. 2: 210) and upon triggering of the passive temperature operated contact closure, the controller controls the light source to become illuminated to identify the detection unit (Bass, Paragraph [0030], The LED is powered when power is applied to the sensor module, and power is applied when the thermostatic switch closes (see Bass, Paragraph [0026]).).
Claim 54 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Bass (U.S. 2019/0101452 A1) in view of Berger et al. (U.S. 2010/0150122 A1).
Claim 54, Bass teaches:
A system according to claim 40.
Bass does not specifically teach:
Further comprising an interrogation device for interrogating the status of each detection unit when in a passive state.
Berger teaches:
An interrogation device (Berger, Fig. 4: “Wake-Up or Trigger Event”, C31) for interrogating the status of each detection unit (Berger, Fig. 4: C32) when in a passive state (Berger, Paragraph [0297], The passive transceiver is woken up similarly to a passive RFID tag.).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, at the time of filing, to incorporate the teaching of a system, as taught by Berger.
The motivation would be to further utilize power saving techniques of the system in Berger to improve battery life (see Berger, Paragraph [0298]).
Claim 59 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Bass (U.S. 2019/0101452 A1) in view of O’Neal et al. (U.S. 2009/0140872 A1).
Claim 59, Bass further teaches:
A system according to claim 1.
Bass does not specifically teach:
Wherein upon the repeater unit failing to receive an OK signal within a predetermined time period, the repeater unit will transmit a fault signal to a maintenance provider for attention.
O’Neal teaches:
Wherein upon the repeater unit failing to receive an OK signal within a predetermined time period (O’Neal, Paragraphs [0042-0044], Under normal operating conditions, the condition monitoring system 140 receives operational data from the machines 110, which are functionally equivalent to OK signals.), the repeater unit will transmit a fault signal to a maintenance provider for attention (O’Neal, Paragraphs [0042-0044], The subscriber 150 may instead receive an alarm signal from condition monitoring system 140 and schedules a maintenance accordingly.).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, at the time of filing, to modify the system in Bass by integrating the teaching of the condition monitoring system, as taught by O’Neal.
The motivation would be to service a machine prior to the manifestation of a failure condition (see O’Neal, Paragraph [0044]).
Allowable Subject Matter
Claim 55-57 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.
As per claims 55-57, the closest related prior art to the Applicant’s claimed invention is Bass (U.S. 2019/0101452 A1). Bass discloses a sensing device having a thermostatic switch that, when exposed to a predetermined threshold temperature, closes, thus connecting a battery for powering a sensor (see Bass, Paragraphs [0039-0040]). Bass, however, does not disclose the use of a magnet member to close a reed switch that is connected to the power supply, as is required in claims 55-57 of the present invention. Berger discloses an RSN (remote sensor node) that is capable of determining whether a magnetic reed switch changes state (see Berger, Paragraph [0323]). The RSN in Berger, however, does not further teach the additional limitations of Applicant’s claimed 55-57, and it would not have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, at the time of filing, to modify the teachings of Bass and Berger to conclude at the Applicant’s claimed invention, without using improper hindsight reasoning.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 12/01/2025 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
In response to applicant's argument that the references fail to show certain features of the invention, it is noted that the features upon which applicant relies (i.e., “constant power” and “periodic OK signal”) are not recited in the rejected claim(s). Although the claims are interpreted in light of the specification, limitations from the specification are not read into the claims. See In re Van Geuns, 988 F.2d 1181, 26 USPQ2d 1057 (Fed. Cir. 1993). As argued by the Applicant on Page 2 of the Applicant’s remarks, the intended interpretation of the Applicant’s invention includes a power source that provides constant power at all times with the capability of the detection unit to enter a “lower-power” mode, and for the periodic OK signal to be transmitted and interpreted to indicate that the detection unit is operating to its intended function. Both limitations, however, are not inherently or explicitly defined by the Applicant’s claimed invention without reading limitations from the specification into the claims.
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 JAMES J YANG whose telephone number is (571)270-5170. The examiner can normally be reached 9:30am-6:00p M-F.
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, BRIAN ZIMMERMAN can be reached at (571) 272-3059. 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.
/JAMES J YANG/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2686