Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status
The present application is being examined under the pre-AIA first to invent provisions.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to the instant amendment have been considered but are moot because the new ground of rejection does not rely on any reference applied in the prior rejection of record for any teaching or matter specifically challenged in the argument.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
Claim 16 is 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 16 recites a pump not connected to an external device but claim 1 recites pump limitations connected with multiple external devices. The limitation “external device” is ambiguous because it is unclear whether the pump is considered isolated from the motor, controller, data connections, and/or other external devices. If the pump is not connected to an external device in light of claim 1, then clarification is requested as to the scope of an external device connection or lack of connection.
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 pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 103(a) which forms the basis for all obviousness rejections set forth in this Office action:
(a) A patent may not be obtained though the invention is not identically disclosed or described as set forth in section 102, if the differences between the subject matter sought to be patented and the prior art are such that the subject matter as a whole would have been obvious at the time the invention was made to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which said subject matter 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 pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 103(a) 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, 4-9, and 16 are rejected under pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 103(a) as being unpatentable over Sustaeta et al. (PG/PUB 20090204234) in view over Stiles et al. (PG/PUB 20140205465) in view over Kang et al. (PG/PUB 20080155529).
Claim 1
Sustaeta et al. teaches a pump unit but does not expressly teach the integration and handheld limitations described below. Stiles teaches the integration and Kang teaches the handheld limitations described below, and comprising:
an electric drive motor (Figure 9, 0004-0005, 0008)
a pump driven by the electric drive motor (Figure 9, 0004-0005, 0008)
a control device for controlling the drive motor, the control device including a speed control of the motor (Figure 9, 0024)
data interface comprising a network connection, for transferring data to the control device via the network (Figure 9, 0013, 0025, 0051, 0071-72, 0165)
Sustaeta does not teach the integration described below. Stiles teaches the integration described below.
wherein the control device is integrated in the pump (Stiles et al., Figure 1, Figure 2 e.g. see combined/integrated controller, display, and pump enclosure)
One of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was made applying the teachings of Stiles, namely providing an integrated controller, to the teachings of Sustaeta et al, namely providing a controller with a pump system, would achieve an expected and predictable result via combining said elements using known methods of integration to provide an integrated pump system as described. Stiles is in the same field of endeavor, ABSTRACT, summary of invention.
Sustaeta et al, as modified by Stiles, teaches:
wherein said control device comprises at least one microprocessor and at least one storage means configured to store at least one control program executable by said microprocessor (Sustaeta et al , 0179, 0236 e.g. see memory with pump applications for controlling a pump motor)
wherein user applications can be (e.g. as interpreted, an intended use of the application because the application is capable of being transferred) downloaded via the network and stored into the storage means for execution by the microprocessor to control the electric drive motor driving the pump (Sustaeta et al , 0182, 0200-0201, Figure 9-912, 913, 914, 966)
The applied prior art does not teach the handheld limitations described below. Kang et al. teaches the handheld limitations described below.
wherein the pump unit is designed such that a user of the pump unit can use a handheld device to send data information to the control device (Sustaeta et al Figure 9 -913, 912, see Kang for portable device, reading on “handheld device” ABSTRACT, Figure 2-230, Figure 1)
wherein the control device is configured to be connected directly with the remote handheld device such that the at least one storage means stores said user applications received from the remote handheld device via the data interface, and wherein the electric drive motor is controlled according to at least one of said user applications stored into the storage means and executed by the microprocessor (Kang, ABSTRACT, Figure 1, Figure 2, Figure 3, see Stiles for application programs including at least setup and pump parameters, 0200-0201)
One of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was made applying the teachings of Kang, namely interfacing a handheld device for facilitating application installation and setup, to the teachings of Sustaeta et al, as modified, namely providing a controller configured with network communication to a remote computer for providing applications, would achieve an expected and predictable result of adapting the application programs of Sustaeta et al, provided via a remote computer, to employ portable means for installing the application programs. Kang is reasonably pertinent to a problem of accessing remote equipment and would commend itself to the remotely located pump systems by facilitating application installation and automated setup, ABSTRACT, summary of invention. In particular, one of ordinary skill in the art given user applications (e.g. see pump software) stored in memory of a pump system in light of a remote handheld device configured to install software, would achieve an expected and predictable result via adapting the portable software to comprise pump application programs for updating and/or installing pump applications required to control motor operations.
Claim 4.
The pump unit of any of claim 1,
further comprising a programming module, said programming module (7) being a software module incorporated into the software of the control device (4) itself (Stiles, ABSTRACT, Figure 3A, Figure 4, see Sustaeta, Figure 9-970 e.g. see application configured to receive at least setup parameters from user computer, see also the programming module of Stiles for receiving user input for parameter setting)
Claim 5.
The pump unit of claim 1,
wherein the pump unit is a centrifugal pump (0163, 0199)
Claim 6. The pump unit of claim 1,
wherein the network connection is an internet connection (0200-0201, Figure 9)
Claim 7.
A system comprising the pump unit of claim 1 and a handheld device to send data information to the control device (supra claim 1, Kang, for mobile phone)
Claim 8.
The system of claim 7, wherein the handheld device is a mobile phone (supra claim 1, Kang)
Claim 9.
The system of claim 7, wherein the network connection is an internet connection (supra claim 1, Figure 9)
Claim 16.
The pump unit of claim 1 wherein the pump unit is not connected with an external control device (supra claim 1, wherein the pump represents an isolated unit, i.e., not integrated, such that the external device does not provide a direct connection to the pump)
Claim 2 is under pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 103(a) as being unpatentable over Sustaeta et al. (PG/PUB 20090204234) in view over Stiles et al. (PG/PUB 20140205465) in view over Kang et al. (PG/PUB 20080155529)in view over Tailor (PG/PUB 20080162706).
Claim 2. The pump unit of claim 1 but does not teach the interpreter limitations described below. Tailor teaches the interpreter limitations described below
wherein the storage means comprises a user application storage and an interpreter storage (e.g. as interpreted, memory space within the storage means for storing applications and interpreter application)
wherein the control device is configured so that at least one of said user application created by the user is stored in this user application storage (Tailor, Figure 1-26, 24, 0010, see also storage for setup application stored in memory space/portion of the memory of the controller, Stiles, 0026. As interpreted, a user application program shares a memory space and represents a storage area of the memory while the interpreter storage represents a memory section reserved for the interpreter application).
One of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was made adapting the memory of Sustaeta, as modified, to comprise a memory section storing both an interpreter and an application program would achieve an expected and predictable result of converting a pump program into executable commands. Tailor teaches a memory architecture for storing both programs and an interpreter while Sustaeta, as modified, teaches a storage means comprising a program to edit and pump program. Accordingly, integrating a program interpreter enables the program functions to be realized.
Claims 3 and 17 are rejected under pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 103(a) as being unpatentable over Sustaeta et al. (PG/PUB 20090204234) in view over Stiles et al. (PG/PUB 20140205465) in view over Kang et al. (PG/PUB 20080155529) in view over Tailor (PG/PUB 20080162706) in view over Fang (USPN 8060933)
Claim 3.
The pump unit of claim 2 but does not teach the change limitations described below. Fang teaches the change limitations described below
wherein the storage means comprises an additional basic storage comprising a basic program (e.g. see application within the memory space of the storage means or memory space reserved for basic applications) which cannot be changed or created by user, which is configured to control basic functions of the electric drive motor (supra claim 1 for application programs controlling basic motor functions, see also basic program of Sustaeta, as modified, comprising pump motor control, see also controller functions, supra claim 1, see also “additional basic storage” within central controller memory, see Fang for preventing program modifications, ABSTRACT, summary of invention)
One of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was made applying the teachings of Fang, namely preventing program modifications, to the teachings of Sustaeta, as modified, namely providing basic pump programs in a memory in addition to the memory comprising the interpreter program would achieve an expected and predictable result of securing pump programs from modification in a basic storage. One of ordinary skill in the art would realize an improved invention, as described by Fang, ABSTRACT)
Claim 17.
The pump unit of claim 3, wherein the microprocessor is configured to execute at least one of said user applications separately from the basic program (supra claim 1, wherein the controller executes an ‘efficiency optimization -970,” supra claim 1 where the controller executes a display control application, a program application, and/or a data input application separate from the basic program (Stiles ‘465, Figure 4A), supra claim 3 where a separate memory running a ‘basic application,’ the ‘basic application adapted to execute a motor control application)
Claim 10 is rejected under pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 103(a) as being unpatentable over Sustaeta et al. (PG/PUB 20090204234) in view over Stiles et al. (PG/PUB 20140205465) in view over Kang et al. (PG/PUB 20080155529) in view over Stiles (PG/PUB 20120020810)
Claim 10. The system of claim 5, wherein the centrifugal pump is configured to be used as a recirculation pump (Stiles, 0022)
One of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was made applying the teachings of Stile ‘810 for providing a recirculation pump to the teachings of Sustaeta namely providing centrifugal pump, would achieve an expected and predictable result of expanding upon the pump functions as described. Stiles ‘810 is in the same field of endeavor.
Claims 11-14 are rejected under pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 103(a) as being unpatentable over Sustaeta et al. (PG/PUB 20090204234) in view over Stiles et al. (PG/PUB 20140205465) in view over Kang et al. (PG/PUB 20080155529) in view over Stiles (PG/PUB 20120063921)
Claim 11.
The pump unit of claim 1 but does not expressly teach the limitations described below. Stiles ‘921 teaches the limitations described below,
wherein at least one of said user applications is a combination of program elements comprising at least one input parameter, at least one operator, and at least one action (Figure 4B)
One of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was made applying the teachings Stiles ‘921 namely providing a flow algorithm with input, operators, and output, to the teachings of Sustaeta namely controlling a pump via a pump setup, would achieve an expected and predictable result via adapting the application program to comprise the pump algorithms of Stiles for optimizing operation and pump protection as described, ABSTRACT, summary of invention.
Claim 12.
The pump unit of claim 11, wherein the at least one input parameter is a flowrate, a pressure, or a temperature value measured by a sensor arranged in the pump unit (Stiles, Figure 4B, supra claim 11
Claim 13.
The pump unit claim 11, wherein the at least one operator is a logical operator, the at least one input parameter being compared by the logical operator to a reference value, and the at least one action being taken if the at least one input parameter exceeds the reference value (Stiles, Figure 4B, supra claim 11
Claim 14. The pump unit of wherein the logical operator is selected from the group consisting of 'greater than,''smaller than,' and 'equal to.' (Stiles, Figure 4B, supra claim 11
Claim 15 is rejected under pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 103(a) as being unpatentable over Sustaeta et al. (PG/PUB 20090204234) in view over Stiles et al. (PG/PUB 20140205465) in view over Kang et al. (PG/PUB 20080155529) in view over Stiles (PG/PUB 20120063921) in view over Stavale (PG/PUB 20070212229)
Claim 15.
The pump unit of claim 11 but does not expressly teach the speed or off limitations described below. ‘229 teaches the speed or off limitations described below,
wherein the at least one action defines how the electric drive motor is operated in response to the at least one input parameter exceeding the reference value, the electric drive motor being then switched on or switched off or its speed being adjusted (0036, Figure 2)
One of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was made applying the teachings Stiles ‘229 namely providing a flow algorithm with input, operators, and output for controlling pump actions based on input comparisons to defined limits, to the teachings of Sustaeta, namely controlling a pump via a pump setup, would achieve an expected and predictable result via adapting the application program to implement protection applications as described, ABSTRACT, summary of invention.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
20120111114 20070183902 20070163929 20060078435 20010041139 20130106321 20120111114 7654976 2000100411 339 20110172833 5812394 20120029705
Integration
20120020810 20110081255 20090204234 20090204234 6757665 20010041139 20140205465)
20130129536 20120063921 20120020810 20120020810 20130129536 20120063921 20120020810 20120063921 20070212229 20040120804 6663349 20010041139 9/20/2011
20140205465 20130268213 20130129536
Conclusion
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 DARRIN D DUNN whose telephone number is (571)270-1645. The examiner can normally be reached M-Sat (10-8) PST.
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, Robert Fennema can be reached at 571-272-2748. 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.
/DARRIN D DUNN/Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2117
Prosecution Insights