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 .
Drawings
The drawings are objected to as failing to comply with 37 CFR 1.84(p)(5) because they do not include the following reference sign(s) mentioned in the description: P1 and P2. 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. 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.
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 temperature sensor of Claims 3 and 4 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
The claims are objected to because they include reference characters e.g. P1, P2 which are not enclosed within parentheses.
Reference characters corresponding to elements recited in the detailed description of the drawings and used in conjunction with the recitation of the same element or group of elements in the claims should be enclosed within parentheses so as to avoid confusion with other numbers or characters which may appear in the claims. See MPEP § 608.01(m).
Claims 1 and 5 are objected to because of the following informalities:
Regarding Claim 1, the claim recites “a pressure sensing device” twice. This phrase should be clarified utilizing the terms “first” and “second” where appropriate.
Regarding Claim 1, it should be clarified the “amplified fluid velocity” and “amplified velocity point” are the same/at the same location.
Regarding Claim 1, it should be clarified “sensor mV differential pressure” is the sensor mV differential pressure of the pressure sensing devices.
Regarding Claims 1 and 5, the claims recite “at said locations P1 and P2” and “said fluid pressure P1 and said fluid pressure P2”. The claim needs to be clarified as to if P1 and P2 are pressures or locations and P1 and P2 need to be utilized consistently in the claim.
Regarding Claim 5, the “detected values of said fluid pressure” should be clarified as being the “sensed” values
Appropriate correction is required.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(b):
(b) CONCLUSION.—The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph:
The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the applicant regards as his invention.
Claims 1 – 8 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor (or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the applicant), regards as the invention.
Regarding Claims 1 and 5, the term “slightly” is a relative term which renders the claim indefinite. The term “slightly” is not defined by the claim, the specification does not provide a standard for ascertaining the requisite degree, and one of ordinary skill in the art would not be reasonably apprised of the scope of the invention. It is unclear as to what distances can be considered “slightly” downstream, thus rendering the claim indefinite.
Regarding Claims 1 and 5, the claim recites “a digital processing unit … being capable of determining …” or similar. It is unclear as to if the digital processing unit is merely capable of performing such a determination or is configured to actually do the determination, thus rendering the claim indefinite.
Regarding Claims 2 and 6, the claims recite “said … guiding-element … can move parallel”. It’s unclear as to if the guiding-element is merely capable of moving or if it is configured to do so, thus rendering the claim indefinite.
Regarding Claims 2 and 6, the term “extending” is a relative term which renders the claim indefinite. The term “extending” is not defined by the claim, the specification does not provide a standard for ascertaining the requisite degree, and one of ordinary skill in the art would not be reasonably apprised of the scope of the invention. It is unclear as to how the measurement range is “extended” and with respect to what it is extended, thus rendering the claim indefinite.
Regarding Claim 5, the claim recites “preselected flow area to balance amplified velocity with fluid pressure drop”. It is unclear as to what velocity is being amplified, where the fluid pressure drop is located, how specifically the velocity and drop are being balanced, and what the criteria are for a balanced state, thus rendering the claim indefinite.
Regarding Claim 5, the claim recites “by (P1 – P2) independent of a ratio”. This does not appear to make grammatical sense, thus rendering the claim indefinite. If the claim intends to recite P1 subtracted by P2, the parenthesis should be omitted.
Regarding Claim 5, the claim recites “a method of determining said static pressure”. The claim recites no method steps for determining said static pressure, thus rendering the claim indefinite.
Claims dependent upon a rejected claim are therefore rejected as well.
Allowable Subject Matter
None of the prior art of record appears to read on the invention as understood by the Examiner and the subject matter of the claims appears to be allowable if the rejections under 35 U.S.C. 112 can be overcome. However upon applicant's amendment to overcome the rejections and objections raised by the Examiner and upon the Examiner's better understanding of the invention a comparison of the prior art to the claims will again be made. The closest pieces of prior art appears to be US 2017/0322059 and US 4231262.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ALEXANDER MERCADO whose telephone number is (571)270-7094. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Thursday 9am - 4pm 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.
ALEXANDER A. MERCADO
Primary Examiner
Art Unit 2855
/ALEXANDER A MERCADO/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2855