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 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.
Claims 1 – 12 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over US Patent Application Publication No. 2007/0084340 to Dou et al. (hereinafter referred to as Dou) in view of US Patent Application Publication No. 2021/0348959 to Xu et al. (hereinafter referred to as Xu).
In regard to claim 1, as shown in figure 1, Dou discloses an apparatus capable of separating a gaseous phase from a multiphase feed material of solids, liquids, and gases. The apparatus includes a case (8) whose inside forms a separation chamber arranged to receive a flow of a multiphase feed material thereinto via an inlet (5). The top pipe extension (2) forms a first outlet conduit that can be considered to be arranged in use to convey an exit flow of gaseous material which becomes separated from the multiphase feed material when in the separation chamber. The liquid circuit exit connection flange (10) forms a second outlet conduit that can be considered to be arranged in use to convey an exit flow of the remainder of the multiphase feed material following separation of the gaseous material. As shown in figure 2, at step “28” a flow rate of the separated gas, which is in the first outlet conduit, can be measured. Dou does not disclose how the flow rate is measured. Thus, Dou fails to teach a differential pressure measurement arrangement that is associated with the first outlet conduit and is arranged to measure a difference between the pressures of the gaseous material inside the conduit at two-spaced-apart locations along the conduit, to thereby enable a measurement of a flowrate of the gaseous material through the conduit.
Xu discloses a similar separator, as shown in figure 1, that can be fed a multiphase stream at an inlet (22) and has an outlet for separated gas (23) and another outlet (25) for the remaining material from the feed stream. As discussed in paragraph [0004], a differential pressure flowmeter is well-known flowmeter for measuring the flow of gas in applications of this type. A differential pressure flowmeter inherently measures a difference in pressure at two points of the gaseous flow.
Thus, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Dou to form the flowmeter as a differential pressure flowmeter in association with the first outlet conduit as suggested by Xu as this is a well-known flowmeter that predictably can be used to measure the flow of a gaseous stream in applications of type.
In regard to claim 2, the differential pressure flowmeter in Xu inherently includes a differential pressure sensor.
In regard to claims 3 and 4, Dou discloses a gamma ray phase volume fraction meter (14) associated with the second outlet conduit (10). In figure 2, Dou also includes a similar step (29) of measuring the flow rate of the multiphase flow. Dou similarly does not disclose how this flow rate is measured. Thus, Dou fails to teach a differential pressure measurement arrangement that is associated with the second outlet conduit and is arranged to measure a difference between the pressures of the gaseous material inside the conduit at two-spaced-apart locations along the conduit, to thereby enable a measurement of a flowrate of the gaseous material through the conduit. It would similarly have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Dou to form the flowmeter as a differential pressure flowmeter in association with the second outlet conduit as suggested by Xu as this is a well-known flowmeter that predictably can be used to measure the flow of a multiphase stream in applications of type.
In regard to claim 5, Dou is used as the primary reference. Dou does not specifically disclose a pressure measurement device that is arranged to measure the pressure of material inside the separation chamber. Pressure measurement devices are well known in the art. Predictably a pressure measurement device can be located at any point in the apparatus where a user desires a pressure to be monitored. It would further have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Dou and Xu to include a pressure measurement device arranged to measure pressure of the material inside of the separation chamber in order to allow a user to monitor the pressure inside of the separation chamber.
In regard to claim 6, Dou is used as the primary reference disclosing the separation chamber, which has a central axis as shown figure 1. The inlet (5) for delivering the flow of feed material is arranged in a lateral direction to the central axis. The separation chamber is shown to be of a generally conical internal shape extending in the direction of the central axis, with a decreasing distance between its internal side wall and the central axis when moving away from the inlet. The first outlet (2) has an overflow discharge located at an upper in use end wall coaxial with the central axis, and region, and the second outlet (10) is an underflow discharge arranged at a lower in use end region coaxial with the central axis.
In regard to claims 7 – 11, Dou does not show the first or second outlet conduits to be arranged in these configurations. There is no evidence the size and or shape of the conduits affects the separation. As discussed in MPEP 2144.04(IV)(A) and 2144.04(IV)(B), changes in size and shape are considered to be obvious absent persuasive evidence that the size/shape results in a performance difference. Thus, it would further have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Dou and Xu to modify the first and/or second outlet conduit to have the size/shape as recited in claims 7 – 11 of the present application as there is no evidence that any of these configurations affect the performance of the separator.
In regard to claim 12, in Dou, the second outlet conduit (10) extends away from the separator and can be considered to be spaced away from the separator.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
US 6,413,297 discloses a similar multiphase separator having a flow meter (27) for measuring the flow rate of the gas outlet stream.
US 2024/0027242 discloses a system using differential pressures to measure a flow rate of a multiphase fluid.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Robert Clemente whose telephone number is (571)272-1476. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 9-5.
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, Benjamin Lebron can be reached at 571-272-0475. 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.
/ROBERT CLEMENTE/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1773
Prosecution Insights