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 is a first action on the merits of the application. Claims 45-64 are pending.
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 45-54 and 59 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.
Claim 45: The claim recites the limitation “the pressure sensors” in line 10. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. For the purposes of examination only, line 10 will be interpreted as “configured to transfer data related to the differential pressure sensor
Claims 46-54 are rejected because of their dependence from claim 45.
Claim 59: The claim recites the limitation “the pressure sensors” in line 2. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. For the purposes of examination only, line 2 will be interpreted as “data related to the differential pressure sensor
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 45-46 and 48-54 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Danfoss Power Electronics AS (DE202017104205U1) in view of Arthur et al. (US 2018/0140989 A1).
Regarding claim 45, Danfoss discloses a pressure sensor arrangement 1 (Fig. 1; [0020]) used to measure two points inside a filter 93 (Fig. 12; [0038]) (i.e., a monitoring device for a filtration system) comprising:
pairs of pipe connection points 2 (Fig. 1; [0029]) coupled with respective pressure sensors 31 to 34 (Fig. 4; [0031]) (i.e., a first fluid connection fitting; a second fluid connection fitting; a differential pressure sensor in fluid communication with the first fluid connection fitting and the second fluid connection fitting); and
a plastic cover 38 and a plastic housing 39 (Fig. 8; [0028]) (i.e., a housing, wherein the differential pressure sensor is disposed within the housing).
However, Danfoss does not explicitly disclose (i) a control circuit configured to receive signals from the differential pressure sensor, the control circuit disposed within the housing; or (ii) a communications circuit comprising an antenna, wherein the monitoring device is configured to transfer data related to the pressure sensors to an external data network.
Arthur discloses a differential pressure sensor 300 (Figs. 2, 3; [0053]) comprising a processor 320 programmed to receive sensed pressure data from a sensor 315 and perform analytics to determine the condition of a filter and generate alerts representative of such condition ([0059]), wherein the sensor 315 and the processor 320 are within a housing 200 ([0053]) (i.e., a control circuit configured to receive signals from the differential pressure sensor, the control circuit disposed within the housing); and comprising an antenna 335 of a wireless circuitry 325 for transmission ([0059]) of communications from the sensor representative of the condition of the filter ([0060]) for wireless coupling to a network via an internet of things (IoT) protocol (Fig. 16; [0094]) (i.e., a communications circuit comprising an antenna, wherein the monitoring device is configured to transfer data related to the pressure sensors to an external data network).
Therefore, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to modify the arrangement of Danfoss by providing (i) a control circuit configured to receive signals from the differential pressure sensor, the control circuit disposed within the housing; or (ii) a communications circuit comprising an antenna, wherein the monitoring device is configured to transfer data related to the pressure sensors to an external data network as taught by Arthur because this configuration allows a a differential pressure sensor to be coupled to a network to allow an internet of things (IoT) protocol (Arthur, [0094]).
Regarding claim 46, Danfoss teaches that hoses 20 which are connected to the upper pair of pressure sensor connections/pipe connection points 2 (Fig. 3; [0022]) (i.e., further comprising a first fluid conduit and a second fluid conduit, wherein the first fluid conduit is configured to be received by the first fluid connection fitting and the second fluid conduit is configured to be received by the second fluid connection fitting).
Regarding claim 48, Danfoss teaches that the pressure sensor arrangement 1 is located outside a motor drive housing 10 (Fig. 3; [0020]), and that the pressure sensor arrangement 1 is not located within any other structure (Fig. 3), so it would have been obvious to the practitioner of Danfoss in view of Arthur that the pressure sensor arrangement is mounted outside a housing comprising the filter (Figs. 3, 9) (i.e., wherein the housing is mounted outside the filtration system).
Regarding claim 49, Arthur teaches that data from a filter may be communicated to a mobile device or directly to a cloud platform via a cellular connection ([0084], [0138]) (i.e., wherein the monitoring device is configured to transfer data related to the pressure sensors to a cellular tower).
Regarding claim 50, Arthur discloses a battery 330 used to power the processor, sensor, and circuitry ([0059]), so it would have been obvious for the practitioner of Danfoss in view of Arthur to provide a power supply circuit comprising a battery so that external power supply is not needed (Arthur, Figs. 2, 3) (i.e., further comprising a power supply circuit, the power supply circuit comprising a battery).
Regarding claims 51-54, Arthur teaches that the pressure sensor may be a Temperature Humidity Pressure Sensor ([0091]) to monitor air temperature and humidity of the air before and after the filter ([0132]) (i.e., further comprising a temperature sensor (claim 51); the temperature sensor in fluid communication with at least one of the first fluid connection fitting and the second fluid connection fitting (claim 52); further comprising a humidity sensor (claim 53); the humidity sensor in fluid communication with at least one of the first fluid connection fitting and the second fluid connection fitting (claim 54)).
Claim 47 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Danfoss in view of Arthur, as applied to claim 45 above, and as evidenced by Lauw et al. (US 2019/0393762 A1).
Danfoss teaches that the filter is for filtering air for a motor drive (Fig. 12; [0037], [0038]), which was known in the art to be a filter for filtering dust, as evidenced by Lauw (Abstract: “motor drive”; [0042]: “dust filter”) (i.e., wherein the filtration system is a dust collector).
Claims 55-56 and 58-64 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Danfoss in view of Arthur.
Regarding claim 55, Danfoss implicitly discloses a method of measuring pressure at two points inside a filter (Figs. 3, 9; [0038]) (i.e., a method of monitoring a dust collector system) comprising:
mounting a pressure sensor arrangement 1 on and adjacent to a motor drive housing 10 (Figs. 3; [0020], [0021]) comprising a filter 93 (Fig. 9; [0037]) (i.e., mounting a monitoring device on or adjacent to the dust collector system);
pressure sensor arrangement 1 comprising pairs of pipe connection points 2 (Fig. 1; [0029]) coupled with respective pressure sensors 31 to 34 (Fig. 4; [0031]) (i.e., the monitoring device comprising a first fluid connection fitting; a second fluid connection fitting) coupled with respective pressure sensors 31 to 34 (Fig. 4; [0031]) (i.e., a differential pressure sensor in fluid communication with the first fluid connection fitting and the second fluid connection fitting); and a plastic cover 38 and a plastic housing 39 (Fig. 8; [0028]) (i.e., a housing, wherein the differential pressure sensor is disposed within the housing).
However, Danfoss does not explicitly disclose (i) a method of remotely monitoring a dust collector system; (ii) transferring pressure data related to the dust collector system to an external data network; (iii) a control circuit configured to receive signals from the differential pressure sensor, wherein the control circuit is disposed within the housing; or (iv) a communications circuit comprising an antenna.
Arthur discloses a differential pressure sensor 300 (Figs. 2, 3; [0053]) comprising a processor 320 programmed to receive sensed pressure data from a sensor 315 and perform analytics to determine the condition of a filter and generate alerts representative of such condition ([0059]), wherein the sensor 315 and the processor 320 are within a housing 200 ([0053]) (i.e., a control circuit configured to receive signals from the differential pressure sensor, wherein the control circuit is disposed within the housing); and comprising an antenna 335 of a wireless circuitry 325 for transmission ([0059]) of communications from the sensor representative of the condition of the filter ([0060]) for wireless coupling to a network via an internet of things (IoT) protocol (Fig. 16; [0094]) and so that a user on a mobile device can monitor filter performance (Fig. 4; [0060]) (i.e., remotely monitoring a dust collector system; transferring pressure data related to the dust collector system to an external data network; a communications circuit comprising an antenna).
Regarding claim 56, Danfoss teaches that hoses 20 which are connected to the upper pair of pressure sensor connections/pipe connection points 2 (Fig. 3; [0022]) (i.e., further comprising a first fluid conduit and a second fluid conduit, wherein the first fluid conduit is configured to be received by the first fluid connection fitting and the second fluid conduit is configured to be received by the second fluid connection fitting).
Regarding claim 58, Danfoss teaches that the pressure sensor arrangement 1 is located outside a motor drive housing 10 (Fig. 3; [0020]), and that the pressure sensor arrangement 1 is not located within any other structure (Fig. 3), so it would have been obvious to the practitioner of Danfoss in view of Arthur that the pressure sensor arrangement is mounted outside a housing comprising the filter (Figs. 3, 9) (i.e., wherein the housing is mounted outside the filtration system).
Regarding claim 59, Arthur teaches that data from a filter may be communicated to a mobile device or directly to a cloud platform via a cellular connection ([0084], [0138]) (i.e., wherein the monitoring device is configured to transfer data related to the pressure sensors to a cellular tower).
Regarding claim 60, Arthur discloses a battery 330 used to power the processor, sensor, and circuitry ([0059]), so it would have been obvious for the practitioner of Danfoss in view of Arthur to provide a power supply circuit comprising a battery so that external power supply is not needed (Arthur, Figs. 2, 3) (i.e., further comprising a power supply circuit, the power supply circuit comprising a battery).
Regarding claims 61-44, Arthur teaches that the pressure sensor may be a Temperature Humidity Pressure Sensor ([0091]) to monitor air temperature and humidity of the air before and after the filter ([0132]) (i.e., further comprising a temperature sensor (claim 61); the temperature sensor in fluid communication with at least one of the first fluid connection fitting and the second fluid connection fitting (claim 62); further comprising a humidity sensor (claim 63); the humidity sensor in fluid communication with at least one of the first fluid connection fitting and the second fluid connection fitting (claim 64)).
Claim 57 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Danfoss in view of Arthur, as applied to claim 55 above, and as evidenced by Lauw.
Danfoss teaches that the filter is for filtering air for a motor drive (Fig. 12; [0037], [0038]), which was known in the art to be a filter for filtering dust, as evidenced by Lauw (Abstract: “motor drive”; [0042]: “dust filter”) (i.e., wherein the filtration system is a dust collector).
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to GABRIEL E GITMAN whose telephone number is (571)272-7934. The examiner can normally be reached M-Th 7:15-5:45pm.
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, In Suk Bullock can be reached at 571-272-3471. 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.
/GABRIEL E GITMAN/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1772