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 .
Specification
The disclosure is objected to because of the following informalities: Paragraph [0034] states embedment, should amend to state embodiment. Paragraph [0037] states that “The resin is generally referred to by reference numeral 141 in FIG. 2…”, FIG. 2 does not have the reference numeral number 141 and should be amended to FIG. 1 which does have the reference numeral. In paragraph [0040], it is stated that “Overtime, varnish may saturate the filter 140 and make is less effective.”, the word “is” should be amended to “it”. Appropriate correction is required.
Claim Objections
Claim 3 is objected to because of the following informalities: “while the passing liquid.” Is incorrect syntax. Appropriate correction is required.
Claim 4 is objected to because of the following informalities: “and the analyzing occurs after stopping passing the liquid.” Is incorrect syntax. Appropriate correction is required.
Claim 8 is objected to because of the following informalities: “includes a one or more” should state “includes one or more”. Appropriate correction is required.
Claim 10 is objected to because of the following informalities: The claim as stated “illumination fibers are surround the one or more return fibers” should be amended to “illumination fibers surround the one or more return fibers”. Appropriate correction is required.
Claim 11 is objected to because of the following informalities: The claim as stated “a filter contained within a housing through which passing liquid through” contains incorrect syntax and should be amended. Appropriate correction is required
Claim 14 is objected to because of the following informalities: The claim as stated “analyzing occurs after liquid has being passed through the filter.” should be amended to “analyzing occurs after liquid has been passed through the filter.”. Appropriate correction is required.
Claim 17 is objected to because of the following informalities: The claim as stated “a fiber optic cable that includes a one or more illumination fibers” should be amended to “a fiber optic cable that includes one or more illumination fibers”. Appropriate correction is required.
Claim 19 is objected to because of the following informalities: The claim as states “…one or more illumination fibers are surround the…”, this should be amended by removing the word “are”. Appropriate correction is required.
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 1-6 & 11-16 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over US 20170138832 A1; Maguire-Boyle, Samuel James (hereinafter referred to as Maguire-Boyle) in view of US 20180003618 A1; Shinoda, Jitsuo (hereinafter referred to as Shinoda).
Regarding Claim 1, Maguire-Boyle discloses in embodiments of Figures 4-5... a method of monitoring a liquid filter, the method comprising: passing liquid through a filter contained within a housing and a system of monitoring a liquid filter, the system, comprising: passing liquid through a filter contained within a housing (See, Maguire-Boyle, Paragraph [0011]; …for the real-time or near real-time monitoring of filter parameters…”, [0014]; ”… described systems and methods may be employed to monitor accumulation and mitigation of fouling substances in a filter…”, [0019]; “… a fluid is capable of being transported between two points… flow paths include, but are not limited to, a filter housing,…”); providing light into the filter (See, Maguire-Boyle, Figure 4, [0084] “ Light or other electromagnetic radiation 36 is transmitted via optical fibers or other electromagnetic waveguides to a sealed bulkhead 30 extending through the housing 22, so that the electromagnetic radiation can impinge on the substance 202).; receiving reflected light from the filter (See, Maguire-Boyle, Figure 5, [0087] ”In this example, a reflector 32 is used to reflect light or other electromagnetic radiation 36 from the bulkhead 30 to the substance 202 in the filter 20, and to direct electromagnetic radiation from the substance in an opposite direction. In addition, a single waveguide 34 is used to both transmit the electromagnetic radiation from the source 28 to the bulkhead 30, and from the bulkhead to the ICE 208”), and determining that the filter should be cleaned or repaired (See, Maguire-Boyle, [0097] “In step 44, the electromagnetic radiation 204 is evaluated by an ICE 208 to determine the characteristic of the substance 202. In this example, presence of the substance 202 results in fouling of the filter 20 and so, by determining the characteristic of the substance (its presence, type, chemical makeup, location, extent, volume, etc.), the nature of the fouling is also determined”, [0100] “the selected mitigation technique is performed, in order to totally or substantially eliminate the substance 202 from the filter assembly.
Maguire-Boyle in these embodiments does not disclose the spectrometer; and determining that the filter should be cleaned or repaired based on rate of change of a color of the reflected light.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill, in the art as of the effective filing date of the claimed invention to incorporate a FTIR spectrometer, especially a spectrometer on a chip, into the system of Maguire-Boyle because according to Maguire-Boyle, in some embodiments, suitable structural components for the example optical computing devices are described in one or more of commonly owned U.S. Pat. Nos. 6,198,531, 6,529,276, 7,123,844 (spectrometer on a chip), 7,834,999, 7,911,605, 7,920,258 and 8,049,881, 8,208,147, 8,358,418 and US publication no. 2013/0286399 (See Maguire-Boyle [0030]) in order to determine filter degradation through color change (See, US Pat. Nos. 7,123,844, [0162]-[0164]) .
Shinoda also discloses analyzing with a FTIR spectrometer (See, Shinoda, [0028] “The determination method a includes : measuring an infrared ray absorption spectrum of the lubricating oil using a Fourier transform infrared spectrometer ; and calculating a total content of the antioxidant and an altered substance having an antioxidant function to determine a degradation degree of the lubricating oil from the obtained content.”) as well as determining that the filter should be cleaned or repaired based on rate of change of a color of the reflected light (See, Shinoda, [0012], “…determining a degradation degree of the lubricating oil and a mixture degree of foreign substances based on the color difference of the substances or the color difference of the lubricating oil.”)
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill, in the art as of the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to use the FTIR spectrometer taught by both Maquire-Boyle and Shinoda with the method taught by Shinoda because both systems utilize a FTIR for analyzing the sample, however only Shinoda enables the calculation of life expectancy for the filter in its determination method.
Regarding Claim 2, Maguire-Boyle and Shinoda teach the method of claim 1.
Shinoda discloses wherein determining that the rate of change has stopped changing below a certain threshold (See, Shinoda, Fig. 5., [0038]; “In the above (ii) method, the lubricating oil (lubricating oil liquid) itself is used as a sample oil and a color difference (ΔE and/or a maximum color difference) of the lubricating oil is measured using the colorimeter.”, [0043]; “…method in accordance with Membrane Patch Colorimetry (MPC) method of a turbine oil described in ASTM D7843.”) Shinoda discloses a maximum color difference which would be a point of no rate of change occurring in a certain threshold and using the ASTM D7843 standard to determine that value.
Regarding Claim 3, Maguire-Boyle and Shinoda teach the method of claim 1.
Maguire-Boyle discloses wherein the analyzing occurs while the passing liquid (See, Maguire-Boyle, Paragraph [0001],” …provides for in situ evaluation of filter parameters with opticoanalytical devices.”, and [0011]; “…the optical computing devices described in more detail below can advantageously provide real-time or near real-time in situ monitoring of filter parameters, without requiring time-consuming or destructive analyses that take place in a laboratory, or that require a filter to be taken off-line.”, Figure 3; Maquire-Boyle denotes points in the filter to be able to attach and analyze filter parameters with the optical computing device (200) described while the filter is in use (in-situ)).
Regarding Claim 4 Maguire-Boyle and Shinoda teach the method of claim 1.
Maguire-Boyle discloses further comprising stopping passing liquid and the analyzing occurs after stopping passing the liquid (See, Maguire-Boyle, [0020] “It should be noted that the term flow path does not necessarily imply that a fluid is flowing therein, rather that a fluid is capable of being transported or otherwise flowable therethrough.”, [0100] “In other examples, the mitigation technique could be performed while the feed 12 is not flowed into the filter assembly 14.”, [0101] “Simultaneous with, or at least after (and possibly before), performance of the mitigation technique, an evaluation of the mitigation technique can be performed…. This evaluation can be performed in real time, while the mitigation technique is being performed, and possibly while the filter 20 is still online.”) Maguire-Boyle discloses that the filter can be analyzed during a period where the flow is stopped to see the efficacy of the mitigation technique that was performed.
Regarding Claim 5, Maguire-Boyle and Shinoda teach the method of claim 1.
Maguire-Boyle discloses wherein the light is white light (See, Maguire-Boyle, [0109] “The electromagnetic radiation 204 from the substance 202 may comprise light. As used herein, the term “light” encompasses electromagnetic radiation in visible, ultra-violet, near infrared and infrared regions of electromagnetic spectra.”).
Regarding Claim 6, Maguire-Boyle and Shinoda teach the method of claim 5.
Maguire-Boyle discloses in some embodiments to incorporate a spectrometer, especially a spectrometer on a chip as an iteration of a suitable structural component of the optical computing device. Examples of suitable components are disclosed in one or more of commonly owned U.S. Pat. Nos. 6,198,531, 6,529,276, 7,123,844 (See, Column 26, Lines 21-35, “Spectrometer on a Chip”), 7,834,999, 7,911,605, 7,920,258 and 8,049,881, 8,208,147, 8,358,418 and US publication no. 2013/0286399 (See, Maguire-Boyle, [0030]).
Regarding Claim 11, Maguire-Boyle discloses a system for monitoring a liquid filter (See, Maguire-Boyle , [0012] “… these devices can be configured to specifically detect and/or measure a particular component or characteristic of interest of a filter, such as a presence and extent of a known fouling substance, thereby allowing qualitative and/or quantitative analyses of the filter to occur without having to undertake a time-consuming sample processing procedure”, Fig 9), the system includes: a filter contained within a housing through which passing liquid through (See, Maguire-Boyle, Paragraph [0011]; …for the real-time or near real-time monitoring of filter parameters., [0014]; ”… described systems and methods may be employed to monitor accumulation and mitigation of fouling substances in a filter…”, [0019]; “… a fluid is capable of being transported between two points… flow paths include, but are not limited to, a filter housing,…”) a filter measurement system that includes: a cable for providing light into the filter (See, Maguire-Boyle, [0023] “[0084] As depicted in FIG. 4, the ICE 208 and an electromagnetic radiation source 28 (such as, a laser, a light emitting diode, optical lamp, fluorescent excitation source, etc.) are located outside of the filter housing 14. Light or other electromagnetic radiation 36 is transmitted via optical fibers or other electromagnetic waveguides to a sealed bulkhead”) and receiving reflected light from the filter (See, Maguire-Boyle, [0086] Electromagnetic radiation 204 that is reflected from, transmitted through, fluoresces from, or otherwise emanates from the substance 202 is directed to the ICE 208 for evaluation); and a controller for determining that the filter should be cleaned or repaired (See, Maguire-Boyle, Fig 9, [0067], [[0113] “The detector 212 produces an output that is correlated to a characteristic of the substance 202. The method can include selecting a technique which mitigates a presence of the substance 202 in the filter assembly 14, based on the detector 212 output.”, [0102] “ If the method 40 eventually indicates that the filter 20 can no longer effectively perform its function (e.g., it is no longer cost effective to perform mitigation treatments, no mitigation treatment is adequately effective, or the filter's integrity has been compromised), it may be determined that replacement of the filter is appropriate.”).
Maguire-Boyle in these embodiments does not disclose based on rate of change of a color of the reflected light.
Shinoda discloses based on rate of change of a color of the reflected light (See, Shinoda, [0012], “…determining a degradation degree of the lubricating oil and a mixture degree of foreign substances based on the color difference of the substances or the color difference of the lubricating oil.”).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill, in the art as of the effective filing date of the claimed invention to incorporate a FTIR spectrometer, especially a spectrometer on a chip, into the system of Maguire-Boyle because according to Maguire-Boyle, in some embodiments, suitable structural components for the example optical computing devices are described in one or more of commonly owned U.S. Pat. Nos. 6,198,531, 6,529,276, 7,123,844 (spectrometer on a chip), 7,834,999, 7,911,605, 7,920,258 and 8,049,881, 8,208,147, 8,358,418 and US publication no. 2013/0286399 (See Maguire-Boyle [0030]) in order to determine filter degradation through color change (See, US Pat. Nos. 7,123,844, [0162]-[0164])
Shinoda also discloses analyzing with a FTIR spectrometer (See, Shinoda, [0028] “The determination method a includes : measuring an infrared ray absorption spectrum of the lubricating oil using a Fourier transform infrared spectrometer ; and calculating a total content of the antioxidant and an altered substance having an antioxidant function to determine a degradation degree of the lubricating oil from the obtained content.”) as well as determining that the filter should be cleaned or repaired based on rate of change of a color of the reflected light (See, Shinoda, [0012], “…determining a degradation degree of the lubricating oil and a mixture degree of foreign substances based on the color difference of the substances or the color difference of the lubricating oil.”)
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill, in the art as of the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to use the FTIR spectrometer taught by both Maquire-Boyle and Shinoda with the method taught by Shinoda because both systems utilize a FTIR for analyzing the sample, however only Shinoda enables the calculation of life expectancy for the filter in its determination method.
Regarding Claim 12, Maguire-Boyle and Shinoda teach the method of claim 11.
Shinoda discloses wherein determining that the rate of change has stopped changing below a certain threshold (See, Shinoda, [0038]; “In the above (ii) method, the lubricating oil (lubricating oil liquid) itself is used as a sample oil and a color difference (ΔE and/or a maximum color difference) of the lubricating oil is measured using the colorimeter.”, [0043]; “…method in accordance with Membrane Patch Colorimetry (MPC) method of a turbine oil described in ASTM D7843.”) Shinoda discloses a maximum color difference, which is a point of no rate of change occurring in a certain threshold, using the ASTM D7843 standard to determine that value.
Regarding Claim 13, Maguire-Boyle and Shinoda teach the system of claim 11.
Maguire-Boyle discloses wherein the analyzing occurs while liquid is being passed through the filter(See, Maguire-Boyle, Paragraph [0001], ”…provides for in situ evaluation of filter parameters with opticoanalytical devices.”, and [0011]; “…the optical computing devices described in more detail below can advantageously provide real-time or near real-time in situ monitoring of filter parameters, without requiring time-consuming or destructive analyses that take place in a laboratory, or that require a filter to be taken off-line.”, [0078] “… at least one of the devices is imbedded in a surface of the filter..”).
Regarding Claim 14, Maguire-Boyle and Shinoda teach the system of claim 11.
Maguire-Boyle discloses wherein the analyzing occurs after liquid has being passed through the filter (See, Maguire-Boyle, [0078] “…one of the devices is adjacent an output of the permeate 16, one of the devices is adjacent an output of the concentrate 18, and multiple devices are located in each of two heads 24 that close off ends of the housing 22.”).
Regarding Claim 15, Maguire-Boyle and Shinoda teach the system of claim 11.
Maguire-Boyle discloses wherein the light is white light (See, Maguire-Boyle, [0109] The integrated computational element 208 can receive the electromagnetic radiation 204 from the substance 202 with the filter 20 being in situ, or at least while the filter 20 is received in the filter assembly 14. The electromagnetic radiation 204 from the substance 202 may comprise light. As used herein, the term “light” encompasses electromagnetic radiation in visible, ultra-violet, near infrared and infrared regions of electromagnetic spectra.”).
Regarding Claim 16, Maguire-Boyle and Shinoda teach the system of claim 11.
Maguire-Boyle discloses in some embodiments to incorporate a spectrometer, especially a spectrometer on a chip as an iteration of a suitable structural component of the optical computing device. Examples of suitable components are disclosed in one or more of commonly owned U.S. Pat. Nos. 6,198,531, 6,529,276, 7,123,844 (See, Column 26, Lines 21-35, “Spectrometer on a Chip”), 7,834,999, 7,911,605, 7,920,258 and 8,049,881, 8,208,147, 8,358,418 and US publication no. 2013/0286399 (See, Maguire-Boyle, [0030]).
Claims 7-10 & 17-19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over US 20170138832 A1; Maguire-Boyle, Samuel James (hereinafter referred to as Maguire-Boyle) in view of US 20180003618 A1; Shinoda, Jitsuo (hereinafter referred to as Shinoda) and in further view of US 20050259254 A1; Soller, Babs R. (hereinafter referred to as Soller).
Regarding Claim 7, Maguire-Boyle and Shinoda disclose the method of claim 5, wherein the light is provided into the filter (See, Maguire-Boyle, [0025] “Whether reflected, transmitted or re-radiated electromagnetic radiation is analyzed by the detector may be dictated by the structural parameters of the optical computing device, as well as other considerations known to those skilled in the art.”)
Maguire-Boyle and Shinoda do not disclose wherein the light is provided into the filter via a fiber optic cable.
Soller discloses wherein the light is provided into the filter via a fiber optic cable. (See, Soller, Fig 7A, [0046] “Light can be passed by the shutter system 110 into a fiber optic cable 116a or 116d and guided to the sample 102 to illuminate the sample or can be passed by the shutter system 110 into a second portion of the fiber optic cable 116b and guided to the spectrograph 114.”)
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art as of the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to modify the receiving medium disclosed by Maquire-Boyle ( See, Maguire-Boyle, [0043] “…such as, via an optical fiber or other electromagnetic waveguide”) with the electromagnetic waveguide (fiber optic cable, reference number 116a, 116d, 116c) taught by Soller resulting in a method to receive and transmit light into the sample to measure reflectance of the optically interacted light.
Regarding Claim 8 - 10, Maguire-Boyle, Soller, and Shinoda teach the method of claim 7, the method of claim 8, and the method of claim 9.
Soller discloses wherein the fiber optic cable includes a one or more illumination fibers and one or more return fibers (See, Soller, Fig 7B, Reference numbers 116a & 116d, 116b)
Soller discloses wherein light is provided into the filter by the one or more illumination fibers, is reflected from a resin in the filter and provided to the spectrometer via the one or more return fibers (See, Soller, [0036] FIG. 7B is a schematic end view of an arrangement of fibers in the fiber optic cable for delivering light to a sample and the fibers in the fiber optic cable for porting reflected light from the sample to a spectrograph.)
Soller discloses wherein the one or more illumination fibers are surround the one or more return fibers (See, Soller, [0079] “As shown in FIG. 7B, the sample bundle 116a or 116d can be a ring 710 of individual fibers that surrounds a bundle of fibers 116c formed of individual fibers…”)
Regarding Claim 17 Maguire-Boyle and Shinoda disclose the system of claim 11,
Maguire-Boyle and Shinoda do not disclose wherein the cable is a fiber optic cable that includes a one or more illumination fibers and one or more return fibers.
Soller discloses wherein the cable is a fiber optic cable that includes a one or more illumination fibers and one or more return fibers (See, Soller, See, Soller, Fig 7A, Fig 7B; Reference numbers 116a & 116d, 116c, [0083] “… the light illumination bundles 116a and 116d and the light detection bundle 116c…)
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art as of the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to modify the receiving medium disclosed by Maquire-Boyle ( See, Maguire-Boyle, [0043] “…such as, via an optical fiber or other electromagnetic waveguide”) with the electromagnetic waveguide (fiber optic cable) taught by Soller resulting in a system able to receive and transmit light into the sample to measure reflectance of the optically interacted light.
Regarding Claims 18 & 19, Maguire-Boyle, Soller, and Shinoda the system of claim 17, and the system of claim 18.
Soller discloses wherein the fiber optic cable includes a one or more illumination fibers and one or more return fibers (See, Soller, [0036] FIG. 7B is a schematic end view of an arrangement of fibers in the fiber optic cable for delivering light to a sample and the fibers in the fiber optic cable for porting reflected light from the sample to a spectrograph)
Soller discloses wherein light is provided into the filter by the one or more illumination fibers, is reflected from a resin in the filter and provided to the spectrometer via the one or more return fibers (See, Soller, Fig 7A (116a, 116d, 116c, 114), [0036] FIG. 7B is a schematic end view of an arrangement of fibers in the fiber optic cable for delivering light to a sample and the fibers in the fiber optic cable for porting reflected light from the sample to a spectrograph.”)
Soller discloses wherein the one or more illumination fibers are surround the one or more return fibers (See, Soller, Figure 7A & 7B, [0083] “… the light illumination bundles 116a and 116d and the light detection bundle 116c…)
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ALEC STONE WESTALL whose telephone number is (571)270-5874. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday: 7:30AM-5:00PM EST (9-5-4).
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, Bobby Ramdhanie can be reached at 571-270-3240. 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.
/A.S.W./ Examiner, Art Unit 1779
/Bobby Ramdhanie/ Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 1779
Prosecution Insights