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 .
Continued Examination Under 37 CFR 1.114
A request for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, including the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e), was filed in this application after final rejection. Since this application is eligible for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114. Applicant's submission filed on 02/25/2026 has been entered.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
Claims 1-11 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(a) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), first paragraph, as failing to comply with the written description requirement. The claim(s) contains subject matter which was not described in the specification in such a way as to reasonably convey to one skilled in the relevant art that the inventor or a joint inventor, or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the inventor(s), at the time the application was filed, had possession of the claimed invention. Regarding claim 1, language of the “controller configured to convert the measured distance to a liquid level and a fill volume using stored data with known dimensions comprising internal diameter and internal height”, raises a new matter issue because nowhere in the specification is disclosed the capability of the controller to perform the required function. Claims 2-11 are rejected because the claims inherit the same issue of claim 1 because of its dependency.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
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.
Claims 1, 3, 5-7 and 11 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Nguyen (WO 2018/187681).
Claims 1, 3 and 11
Nguyen discloses a smart cap device (120) comprising a base portion (defined by portion of the cap 120 that is attached to container 110) attached to an opening of a container (110) (see [0036] and [0037]) having known dimensions containing a liquid material (see [0032]); an internal cavity housing a laser sensor (130) disposed in the cap and oriented to measure a distance from the cap into the container without the sensor contacting the material (see figure 1a, [0040], [0041]; a controller/processor operatively coupled to the sensor, the controller/processor capable to convert the measured distance to a liquid level and a fill volume using stored data indicative of the known dimensions of the container, wherein the known dimensions comprise an internal diameter and internal height of the container (see [0027] and [0052]). Nguyen, paragraph [0027], discloses the controller/processor modulate the intensity and duration of UV radiation emitted by the UV light sources based on the change of liquid level. If the bottle is full, the controller/processor may turn the UV lights on, but in case the bottle is partially nearly empty, the controller/processor will turn on lights that are submerged near the surface of the liquid. Nguyen, paragraph [0026], discloses the controller/processor polls the liquid level sensor to detect level of liquid in the container. Further, in paragraph [0031], is disclosed the liquid level sensor monitors the volume of liquid in the container, wherein it is known that the volume of liquid and/or volume of a cylinder is based on diameter and height of the cylinder. Therefore, controller and the liquid level sensor of Nguyen is capable to convert the measured distance to a liquid level and a fill volume using an internal diameter and height of the container. Nguyen further discloses communications interface comprising a cellular transceiver/antenna configured to transmit the liquid level and fill volume to a remote service, i.e. a smartphone, tablet, or server, receive at least one of configuration data and software updates from the remote service, and generate an alert based on the level of the material (see [0012], [0013], [0029], [0050] and [0051]).
Claim 5
Nguyen further discloses the alert includes illuminating a light source (defined by UV light) (see [0026]) and generates a notification on a remote computing device (see [0050]).
Claim 6
Nguyen further discloses the sensor system detects, via a first sensor, a first level of a material within the container system at a first time (see [0026]); and provides information indicative of the first level of the material to the remote service (see [0050]).
Claim 7
Nguyen further discloses the base portion seals the opening of the container (see [0036]).
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.
Claim 2 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Nguyen (WO 2018/187681) as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Ward (US 2018/0291911).
Nguyen discloses the sensor detects the level of liquid material using an optical/laser sensor (see [0040]). Nguyen does not explicitly disclose the sensor is a laser time of flight. However, Ward discloses a sensing system that detects a liquid level using laser time of flight (see [0029] and [0113]). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Nguyen having the sensor that detect the level of liquid being a laser time of flight as taught by Ward as an alternative method of knowing and/or measuring the level of liquid within the container.
Claims 4 and 10 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Nguyen (WO 2018/187681) as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Krafft (US 2020/0339309).
Claim 4
Nguyen discloses the processor comprising a memory coupled to the processor/controller (see [0015]). Nguyen does not explicitly disclose the level of the material within the container is associated with a first time, and wherein the processor is further configured to determine a usage trend based on the level of the material measured at a first time and the level of material measured at the sensor at a second time; and generate a second alert based on the usage trend. However, Krafft discloses a sensor (disposed within a smart cap device, the sensor is configured to detect a level of liquid within a container (see [0015], [0096], [0103], [0106] and [0107]), and a processor configured to generate an alert based on the level of the material (see [0171] and [01 76]), wherein the level of the material within the container is associated with a first time. Krafft discloses the device is provided with a level gauge that measures the liquid level within the device (see [0096]). Krafft further discloses the processor and the at least one memory are further configured to determine a usage trend based on the level of the material measured at a first time (h0) and the level of material measured at the sensor at a second time (h1); and generate a second alert based on the usage trend (see [0121] and [0171]). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Nguyen having the processor/controller and the memory with the required capabilities as taught by Krafft for a more efficient and informational usage of the smart cap device.
Claim 10
Nguyen further discloses a battery (190) could be provided in the smart cap device (see [0031]). Nguyen does not disclose a charging port to receive power for the sensor system. However, Krafft discloses a smart cap device (304) comprising an interior portion (312) including electronic features (see [0097]). Krafft further discloses a charging port could be provided to receive power for sensor system. Krafft discloses a battery could be wired charged through, for example a USB cable (see [0023]). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Nguyen having a charging port as taught by Krafft for charging capabilities of the battery disposed in the smart cap device.
Claim 8 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Nguyen (WO 2018/187681) as applied to claim 1 above.
Nguyen does not disclose the capacity of the container. However, Applicant specification acknowledges 55-gallon drum is a standard size of a container (see [0041]). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Nguyen having the container with the required size because 55-gallon containers are a standard size for a container holding liquid.
Claim 9 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Nguyen (WO 2018/187681) as applied to claim 1 above, and further in views of Hoffman (US 2022/0127061).
Nguyen discloses the electronic structure, such as the battery, the sensor, the processor/controller and the antenna could be provided in the interior of the smart cap device (see figure 1a). Nguyen does not disclose a removable lid providing access to the internal cavity, wherein the internal cavity further houses the battery to power the sensor system. However, Hoffman discloses a cap assembly (24) comprising a battery (58) disposed within a housing of the cap assembly, and a removable lid/inner wall (42) could be removable in order to allow replacement of the battery (see figure 3a and [0127]). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Nguyen having a removable wall/lid as taught by Hoffman for allowing replacement of the battery disposed in the smart cap device.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 02/25/2026 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive. Regarding applicant’s argument that Nguyen does not disclose the internal diameter and internal height of the container, the examiner disagrees. Nguyen discloses the liquid level sensor monitors the volume of liquid in the container, wherein it is known that the volume of liquid and/or volume of a cylinder is based on diameter and height of the cylinder. The formula to calculate the volume of a cylinder is known to be: V=
π
r
^
2
h
. It is known that the diameter of a cylinder is twice its radius. Then, if Nguyen knows the volume of the liquid in the container, therefore knows the dimensions, such as diameter and height of the container. The controller and the liquid level sensor of Nguyen is capable to convert the measured distance to a liquid level and a fill volume using an internal diameter and height of the container. Regarding applicant’s argument that Nguyen does not disclose a cellular transceiver, the examiner disagrees. Nguyen discloses a communication interface which is cellular transceiver/antenna capable to performed the required function of claim 1 (see [0012], [0013], [0029], [0050] and [0051]).
Conclusion
Examiner has cited particular paragraphs and/or columns and line numbers in the references as applied to the claims above for the convenience of the applicant. Although the specified citations are representative of the teachings of the art and are applied to the specific limitations within the individual claim, other passages and figures may apply as well. It is respectfully requested of the applicant, in preparing responses, to fully consider the references in entirety as potentially teaching all or part of the claimed invention, as well as the context of the passage as taught by the prior art or prior art(s) disclosed by the Examiner (in the attached PTO-892 form).
Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a). 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 RAFAEL A. ORTIZ whose telephone number is (571)270-5240. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday 9am - 6pm.
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, Orlando E. Aviles can be reached at 571-270-5531. 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.
RAFAEL A. ORTIZ
Primary Examiner
Art Unit 3736
/RAFAEL A ORTIZ/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3736
Prosecution Insights