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 .
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statements (IDS) submitted on 04/23/2024, 09/11/2024, 11/25/2024 and 12/05/2024 are in compliance with the provisions of 35 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the IDS have been considered by the examiner.
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 1-41 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as anticipated by or, in the alternative, under 35 U.S.C. 103 as obvious over McCormick (US 2019/0316951 A1).
Regarding Claim 1, McCormick (‘951) discloses A liquid level sensor system for a liquid storage tank, the system comprising: ([0002]: “Embodiments of the invention relate generally to the use of radar to measure levels of fluids and other materials in a storage tank and particularly to the use of millimeter wave radar to measure such storage tank levels.”)
McCormick (‘951) discloses at least one sensor comprising: ([0043]: “Referring now to FIG. 1, a block diagram of a tank level measurement instrument 100 according to an embodiment of the invention is shown.”)
McCormick (‘951) discloses a plurality of radar transmitters and one or more radar receivers ([0043]: “There are four such receive antennas (indicated at 122) and three such transmit antennas (indicated at 121) in some embodiments.”)
McCormick (‘951) discloses wherein an antenna associated with each of the plurality of radar transmitters is at a respectively unique location relative to the liquid storage tank ([0043]: “Multiple antennas are used when angle measurements are important.”; [0042]: “Multiple antennas are used on the disclosed embodiments to simplify circuitry and also so that a slight change in arrival time of an adjacent antenna’s signal can be used to determine the angle from which the radar signal was sent.”; Fig. 1 shows antenna array 121, 122 with transmit and receive antennas at different positions)
McCormick (‘951) discloses at least one processor configured to determine, in view of the respective radar returns from combinations of the plurality of radar transmitters and one or more receivers, a single liquid level output for the liquid storage tank ([0043]: “A digital front end 106 receives the converted signals and quickly digitizes and stores their values in its analog buffers for use by a digital signal processor 108, which performs digital signal processing of the received signals using the Zoom Fast Fourier transform to determine distance. Computing module 107 works with memory 109 to choreograph all of the digital signal processing and other functions. Serial port 110 sends the determined distance values for each of the desired tank levels to an external control such as Telemetry Control unit 129.”; [0044]: “Typically, the computing unit 107 only selects the level that is within a known range associated with a stronger signal level.”)
Regarding Claim 2, McCormick (‘951) discloses the system of claim 1.
McCormick (‘951) discloses wherein the one or more processors is a single processor ([0043]: “Computing module 107 works with memory 109 to choreograph all of the digital signal processing and other functions.”; [0039]: “A processor runs Zoom or similar Fourier transforms on the signals to directly determine distance.”; Fig. 1 shows single computing module 107 and digital signal processor 108 in mmWave Control unit 120)
Regarding Claim 3, McCormick (‘951) discloses the system of claim 1.
McCormick (‘951) discloses wherein a liquid level measurement is determined for each combination of a transmitter and receiver via angular processing of the radar return ([0042]: “Multiple antennas are used on the disclosed embodiments to simplify circuitry and also so that a slight change in arrival time of an adjacent antenna’s signal can be used to determine the angle from which the radar signal was sent.”; [0043]: “Multiple antennas are used when angle measurements are important.”; [0039]: “These single-chip sensors can provide range, angle, and velocity determination, all in a small package.”)
Regarding Claim 4, McCormick (‘951) discloses the system of claim 1.
McCormick (‘951) teaches wherein the plurality of radar transmitters and one or more radar receivers comprises a plurality of radar transmitters and a single radar receiver defining a multiple-input, single-output radar sensor arrangement ([0043]: “There are four such receive antennas (indicated at 122) and three such transmit antennas (indicated at 121) in some embodiments.”; [0042]: “The disclosed embodiments employ several transmit and receive antennas which are unlike other tank level monitoring methods.”)
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to configure the radar system of McCormick (‘951) with multiple transmitters and a single receiver as a multiple-input, single-output arrangement. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to make this modification because McCormick (‘951) discloses that multiple antennas can be configured in various arrangements, and using multiple transmitters with a single receiver is a known radar configuration that simplifies receiver circuitry while still enabling angle determination. There would have been a reasonable expectation of success because McCormick discloses the use of multiple transmit and receive antennas in various configurations.
Regarding Claim 5, McCormick (‘951) discloses the system of claim 4.
McCormick (‘951) discloses wherein the plurality of radar transmitters are respectively operable at different times to obtain a plurality of liquid level measurements ([0038]: “FMCW continuously transmits a frequency modulated signal to determine range, velocity, and angle of the object being detected relative to the antenna plane.”; [0043]: “Mixers 103 multiply the signal currently being transmitted with a returned signal that was previously transmitted a few moments ago.”)
Regarding Claim 6, McCormick (‘951) discloses the system of claim 1.
McCormick (‘951) discloses wherein the plurality of radar transmitters and one or more radar receivers define a multiple-input multiple-output radar sensor arrangement ([0043]: “There are four such receive antennas (indicated at 122) and three such transmit antennas (indicated at 121) in some embodiments.”; [0042]: “The disclosed embodiments employ several transmit and receive antennas which are unlike other tank level monitoring methods.”)
Regarding Claim 7, McCormick (‘951) discloses the system of claim 6.
McCormick (‘951) discloses wherein the plurality of radar transmitters are respectively operable with the common plurality of receivers at different times to obtain a plurality of liquid level measurements ([0043]: “Mixers 103 multiply the signal currently being transmitted with a returned signal that was previously transmitted a few moments ago.”; [0038]: “FMCW continuously transmits a frequency modulated signal to determine range, velocity, and angle of the object being detected relative to the antenna plane.”)
Regarding Claim 8, McCormick (‘951) discloses the system of claim 1.
McCormick (‘951) discloses wherein the at least one processor is integrally provided with the at least one sensor ([0045]: “FIG. 2C shows an example of a single-board embodiment, indicated at 210, where the Telemetry Control unit 200 and the mmWave Control unit 201 are implemented on a single board.”; [0039]: “The invention in some embodiments employs a single-chip sensor having mmWave measurement capability, such as one of the TI family of mmWave sensors.”)
Regarding Claim 9, McCormick (‘951) discloses the system of claim 1.
McCormick (‘951) discloses wherein the at least one processor comprises a first processor and a second processor at respectively different locations ([0043]: “A digital front end 106 receives the converted signals and quickly digitizes and stores their values in its analog buffers for use by a digital signal processor 108, which performs digital signal processing of the received signals using the Zoom Fast Fourier transform to determine distance. Computing module 107 works with memory 109 to choreograph all of the digital signal processing and other functions.”; [0044]: “it is up to a computer 133 in the Telemetry Control unit 129 to determine which signal strengths and/or which distances are important.”; [0044]: “This tank level Telemetry Control unit 129 (including a display therefor) may be physically co-located with the mmWave Control unit 120 but is typically located on the side of the tank for easier access by the user so he/she does not need to precariously climb on the tank to read the levels.”; [0045]: “Where the Telemetry Control unit 200 is used, the serial data line 208 may be less than an inch (e.g., 0 inches) long or several hundred feet depending upon if this is a self-contained mmWave Control/Telemetry Control unit or a mmWave Control unit that is located remotely from the Telemetry Control unit.”)
Regarding Claim 10, McCormick (‘951) discloses the system of claim 1.
McCormick (‘951) discloses wherein the at least one processor is configured to: generate data as a function of distance from each respective radar return ([0043]: “A digital front end 106 receives the converted signals and quickly digitizes and stores their values in its analog buffers for use by a digital signal processor 108, which performs digital signal processing of the received signals using the Zoom Fast Fourier transform to determine distance.”; [0061]: “Once the frequency is determined for each fluid layer or obstruction, the distance equation explained earlier, d=fc/2S, is run for each frequency. Each frequency is indicative of a reflection from that liquid, an interface, or an object, and is correlated back to distance.”)
McCormick (‘951) discloses determine from the generated data a local maximum within a range of potential liquid level measurements for each respective radar return (Fig. 5 caption: “Fourier transform and Zoom transforms reveal multiple Frequency for each fluid layer.”; [0061]: “Each frequency is indicative of a reflection from that liquid, an interface, or an object, and is correlated back to distance. From there, distances corresponding to known obstructions or tank limitations (e.g., dimensions) are ignored.”)
McCormick (‘951) discloses determine the single liquid level output based upon the determined local maxima of the radar returns ([0044]: “Typically, the computing unit 107 only selects the level that is within a known range associated with a stronger signal level.”; [0041]: “The external control, when used, parses the data to determine obstructions and distances to the levels of different fluids within the tank.”)
Regarding Claim 11, McCormick (‘951) discloses the system of claim 10.
McCormick (‘951) teaches wherein the at least one processor is further configured to: determine a position value corresponding to each of the determined local maxima in the radar returns ([0061]: “Once the frequency is determined for each fluid layer or obstruction, the distance equation explained earlier, d=fc/2S, is run for each frequency. Each frequency is indicative of a reflection from that liquid, an interface, or an object, and is correlated back to distance.”; [0044]: “The tank level data is sent from serial port 110 to serial port 131 in millimeter-accurate distances and signal strengths approximately once every second. Many distances and signal strengths may be sent per sample”)
McCormick (‘951) teaches average the determined position values to determine the single liquid level output ([0041]: “The external control can also compare previous measurements with new measurements to detect false measurements in some embodiments.”)
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to average the determined position values to determine the single liquid level output. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to do so because averaging multiple measurements is a well-known technique in the signal processing art to reduce noise and improve measurement accuracy. There would have been a reasonable expectation of success because McCormick discloses comparing multiple measurements and selecting optimal values.
Regarding Claim 12, McCormick (‘951) discloses the system of claim 1.
McCormick (‘951) discloses wherein the at least one processor is configured to: compare a near-range return in each radar return to a predetermined power threshold ([0044]: “it is up to a computer 133 in the Telemetry Control unit 129 to determine which signal strengths and/or which distances are important.”; [0009]: “automatically selecting intermediate frequency signals having a signal strength above a predefined minimum”)
McCormick (‘951) discloses determine the single liquid level output by averaging liquid level measurements only from ones of the radar returns with a near-range return that is below the predetermined power threshold ([0013]: “the computer is operable to ignore distances that represent the distance between the top of the tank and one or more of foam, gas, fog, mist, ice, sand, debris, chemical residue, and obstructions in a tank.”; [0059]: “Since plastic obstructions, foam and gases have a lower dielectric than most fluids, they can be ignored by using appropriate software filters, thus allowing the mmWave radar embodiments disclosed herein to determine the desired liquid levels.”)
Regarding Claim 13, McCormick (‘951) discloses the system of claim 1.
McCormick (‘951) discloses wherein the at least one processor is configured to: determine whether a liquid level measurement from each of the radar returns is within an expected range ([0041]: “The external control can also use the tank dimensions, once received, to filter out undesirable (e.g., nonsensical) level readings.”; Abstract: “automatically select intermediate frequency signals having a signal strength above a predefined minimum or distances within a predefined distance window for further processing.”)
McCormick (‘951) discloses average the liquid level measurements from only the liquid level measurements that are within the expected range to determine the single liquid level output ([0044]: “Typically, the computing unit 107 only selects the level that is within a known range associated with a stronger signal level.”; [0041]: “The external control can also compare previous measurements with new measurements to detect false measurements in some embodiments.”)
Regarding Claim 14, McCormick (‘951) discloses the system of claim 1.
McCormick (‘951) discloses wherein the at least one processor is configured to: generate near range return and corresponding position data for each of the radar returns ([0012]: “the computer is operable to ignore distances representing the distance between the top of the tank and chemical residue that may collect on the enclosure.”; [0044]: “Many distances and signal strengths may be sent per sample”)
McCormick (‘951) discloses select the position data corresponding to the lowest of the near-range returns to determine the single liquid level output ([0044]: “Typically, the computing unit 107 only selects the level that is within a known range associated with a stronger signal level.”; [0014]: “the computer is further operable to identify a dissimilar fluid interface by determining whether a first intermediate frequency signal is followed by a second intermediate frequency signal having a lower signal strength than the first intermediate frequency signal”)
Regarding Claim 15, McCormick (‘951) discloses the system of claim 14.
McCormick (‘951) discloses wherein the at least one processor is configured to: determine an expected liquid level measurement ([0041]: “The external control can also use the tank dimensions, once received, to filter out undesirable (e.g., nonsensical) level readings.”; [0045]: “The keypad 202 and display 209 are used to program and define undesirable obstructions in the tank, desired tank level windows, and distance to the bottom of the tank.”)
McCormick (‘951) discloses determine a liquid level measurement from the radar sensors that is closest to the expected liquid level measurement to determine the single liquid level output ([0044]: “Typically, the computing unit 107 only selects the level that is within a known range associated with a stronger signal level.”; [0041]: “The external control can also compare previous measurements with new measurements to detect false measurements in some embodiments.”)
Regarding Claim 16, McCormick (‘951) discloses the system of claim 1.
McCormick (‘951) discloses in combination with the liquid storage tank ([0072]: “This figure shows a typical tank 1300 which holds a few hundred gallons of liquid chemicals such as fracking fluids.”; Fig. 6C shows mmWave Control unit 600 mounted on tank 650; Fig. 13 shows enclosure 1301 mounted on tank 1300)
Regarding Claim 17, McCormick (‘951) discloses the system of claim 16.
McCormick (‘951) discloses wherein the respectively unique locations are exterior to the liquid storage tank ([0072]: “Embodiments of the invention make monitoring the tank 1300 much more convenient by providing an enclosure 1301 that is extremely easy to use and install, since no holes need to be drilled and the mmWave Control unit and Telemetry Control unit contained therein can read the tank level through the plastic tank wall even though it may be ½ inch thick.”; [0071]: “The mmWave Control unit 1209 typically faces the bottom of the plastic enclosure 1201 and the tank fluid when properly mounted.”)
Regarding Claim 18, McCormick (‘951) discloses the system of claim 17.
McCormick (‘951) discloses wherein the plurality of radar transmitters and one or more radar receivers transmit or receive through a common exterior wall of the liquid storage tank ([0072]: “the mmWave Control unit and Telemetry Control unit contained therein can read the tank level through the plastic tank wall even though it may be ½ inch thick. The radar passes through the tank wall and a return echo from the fluid is similarly received.”; [0070]: “The radar can transmit through plastic tank walls which makes it ideal for smaller plastic ‘tote’ containers.”)
Regarding Claim 19, McCormick (‘951) discloses the system of claim 18.
McCormick (‘951) discloses wherein the plurality of radar transmitters and one or more radar receivers are fixedly mounted at a predetermined distance from the exterior common wall ([0071]: “Double-sided tape 1207 may be used to allow quick attachment to tanks. Screws holes 1210 allow screws to be used for attaching the enclosure 1201 to a tank.”; [0069]: “When the housing 1101 is properly mounted on the tank, the radar antennas 122 (see FIG. 1) are centered over the tank access hole”)
Regarding Claim 20, McCormick (‘951) discloses the system of claim 19.
McCormick (‘951) discloses wherein the plurality of radar transmitters and one or more radar receivers are mounted to the common exterior wall ([0071]: “Double-sided tape 1207 may be used to allow quick attachment to tanks. Screws holes 1210 allow screws to be used for attaching the enclosure 1201 to a tank.”; [0072]: “The enclosure 1301 sits on top of the tank 1300.”)
Regarding Claim 21, McCormick (‘951) discloses the system of claim 16.
McCormick (‘951) discloses wherein the liquid storage tank is a low-profile storage tank ([0072]: “This figure shows a typical tank 1300 which holds a few hundred gallons of liquid chemicals”; Figs. 12-13 show low-profile plastic tote containers). The term “low-profile” is not defined in the claims and has no specific structural meaning. The tank disclosed in McCormick (‘951) is a low-profile storage tank.
Regarding Claim 22, McCormick (‘951) discloses the system of claim 21.
McCormick (‘951) discloses wherein the liquid storage tank is a low-capacity storage tank ([0072]: “This figure shows a typical tank 1300 which holds a few hundred gallons of liquid chemicals”; [0070]: “The radar can transmit through plastic tank walls which makes it ideal for smaller plastic ‘tote’ containers.”). The term “low-capacity” is not defined in the claims and has no specific structural meaning. A tank holding “a few hundred gallons” is a low-capacity storage tank.
Regarding Claim 23, McCormick (‘951) discloses the system of claim 22.
Regarding the limitation wherein the liquid storage tank is a mobile storage tank, McCormick (‘951) teaches tanks including portable tote containers ([0070]: “The radar can transmit through plastic tank walls which makes it ideal for smaller plastic ‘tote’ containers.”; [0072]: “This figure shows a typical tank 1300 which holds a few hundred gallons of liquid chemicals such as fracking fluids.”).
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention that the generally-disclosed tank of McCormick (‘951) could be any suitable type of tank, including a mobile storage tank. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to use a mobile storage tank where portability is desired, such as in the oil field applications disclosed by McCormick, and there would have been a reasonable expectation of success because the radar level gauge system operates the same regardless of whether the tank is stationary or mobile.
Regarding Claim 24, McCormick (‘951) discloses the system of claim 23.
Regarding the limitation wherein the mobile storage tank is included in a recreational vehicle, a recreational boat, a food truck, or a semi-truck equipped with living quarters, McCormick (‘951) teaches tanks for various applications ([0003]: “Storage tanks are used to store many types of liquids, such as oil, water, liquid fuels, liquid chemicals, and the like.”).
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention that the generally-disclosed tank of McCormick (‘951) could be any suitable type of tank in any suitable environment, including a tank included in a recreational vehicle, a recreational boat, a food truck, or a semi-truck equipped with living quarters. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to use the radar level gauge system in these vehicle applications where liquid level monitoring is needed, and there would have been a reasonable expectation of success because the radar level gauge system operates the same regardless of the vehicle in which the tank is installed.
Regarding Claim 25, McCormick (‘951) discloses the system of claim 23.
Regarding the limitation wherein the liquid storage tank is a water tank, McCormick (‘951) teaches tanks for storing various liquids including water ([0003]: “Storage tanks are used to store many types of liquids, such as oil, water, liquid fuels, liquid chemicals, and the like.”).
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention that the generally-disclosed tank of McCormick (‘951) could be any suitable type of tank for storing any suitable liquid, including a water tank. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to use a water tank where water storage is needed, and there would have been a reasonable expectation of success because water is explicitly listed as one of the liquids that may be stored in tanks monitored by the system.
Regarding Claim 26, McCormick (‘951) discloses the system of claim 23.
Regarding the limitation wherein the water tank is a grey or black water storage tank, the terms “grey” and “black” refer to the color or type of water stored in the tank. Color does not affect the structure of the liquid level sensor system or the tank. McCormick (‘951) teaches tanks for storing various liquids ([0003]: “Storage tanks are used to store many types of liquids, such as oil, water, liquid fuels, liquid chemicals, and the like.”).
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention that the generally-disclosed tank of McCormick (‘951) could store any suitable type of water, including grey or black water. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to use a grey or black water storage tank where waste water storage is needed, and there would have been a reasonable expectation of success because the radar level gauge system operates the same regardless of the color or type of water stored in the tank.
Regarding Claim 27, McCormick (‘951) discloses the system of claim 1.
McCormick (‘951) discloses further comprising at least one display, wherein a fullness or emptiness status of the liquid storage tank, based upon the last determined single liquid level output, is visually presented on the at least one display ([0071]: “The Telemetry Control unit 1204 includes a display 1202 shows various types of information, such as the depth, volume (e.g., gallons), sensor error messages, setup messages, and the like.”; [0072]: “Display 1303 shows the user the status of the system and current level and volume.”; [0044]: “An OLED display (not expressly shown) may show diagnostics, temperature, and current tank level depth, as well as the number of gallons, barrels, and/or liters”)
Regarding Claim 28, McCormick (‘951) discloses the system of claim 27.
McCormick (‘951) teaches a display ([0071]: “The Telemetry Control unit 1204 includes a display 1202”; [0045]: “keypad 202 and display 209”; [0044-0045], [0041]: “Relevant levels and volume can be shown to the user on a display. This data is often transmitted wirelessly using satellite or cellular telemetry methods for display on web sites where information emails and alerts and reports can be generated depending upon the end user's needs.”).
Regarding the limitation wherein the at least one display is a touch sensitive display, touch sensitive displays were well-known and commonly used for human-machine interfaces in industrial monitoring and control applications at the time of the invention. Substituting a touch sensitive display for a conventional display is a substitution of known equivalents for the same purpose of displaying information to a user. Under MPEP 2144.06, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to substitute a touch sensitive display for the display taught by McCormick (‘951) because both display types were known to be suitable for displaying measurement information to users. There would have been a reasonable expectation of success because touch sensitive displays are compatible with display output systems and would modernize the display of McCormick (‘951).
Regarding Claim 29, McCormick (‘951) discloses the system of claim 27.
McCormick (‘951) discloses wherein a liquid level alert or notification, based on a last determined single liquid level output, is visually presented on the at least one display ([0071]: “The Telemetry Control unit 1204 includes a display 1202 shows various types of information, such as the depth, volume (e.g., gallons), sensor error messages, setup messages, and the like.”; [0068]: “Text, email, and phone information reports are made by the server 1009 to user 1011 as needed or upon a tank alert condition or on a scheduled basis.”)
Regarding Claim 30, McCormick (‘951) discloses the system of claim 27.
McCormick (‘951) teaches display capability at various locations ([0044]: “This tank level Telemetry Control unit 129 (including a display therefor) may be physically co-located with the mmWave Control unit 120 but is typically located on the side of the tank for easier access by the user”).
Regarding the limitation wherein the at least one display is a central control display for a vehicle system, the rearrangement or relocation of parts is generally considered obvious if it does not modify the operation of the device. See MPEP 2144.04(VI)(C) and In re Japikse, 181 F.2d 1019 (CCPA 1950). The location of the display (whether as a standalone unit or integrated into a vehicle’s central control display) does not change the operation or function of the liquid level sensor system. McCormick (‘951) discloses that the display can be located remotely from the sensor, and a person of ordinary skill in the art would recognize that integrating the display with a vehicle’s central control display is merely a rearrangement of the display location that does not affect the liquid level sensing functionality.
Regarding Claim 31, McCormick (‘951) discloses the system of claim 27.
McCormick (‘951) discloses wherein the display is associated with a user device, the user device being selected from the group of a smartphone, a tablet computer device, a laptop computer device, a notebook computer device or a desktop computer device ([0068]: “Data is collected from the cellular and satellite provider by server 1009 and web pages are generated for use by user 1011. These web pages can be designed to show current tank fluid levels, volume, tank level changes, days on site, location history, and the like.”; [0044]: “it may be used to send tank level information to an external web site and generate informative emails, charts and graphs of the tank contents”)
Regarding Claim 32, McCormick (‘951) discloses the system of claim 1.
McCormick (‘951) discloses wherein the system is further configured to make the single liquid level output retrievable from a user device ([0068]: “Data is collected from the cellular and satellite provider by server 1009 and web pages are generated for use by user 1011.”; [0044]: “Telemetry Control unit 129 may be used to display tank level data to the user and/or it may be used to send tank level information to an external web site”)
Regarding Claim 33, McCormick (‘951) discloses the system of claim 32.
McCormick (‘951) discloses wherein the user device is a smartphone, a tablet computer device, or a laptop or notebook computer device ([0068]: “web pages are generated for use by user 1011”; [0044]: “Telemetry Control unit 129 may transmit data to a remote site using a cellular modem 136 or satellite modem 137.”; [0068]: “Text, email, and phone information reports are made by the server 1009 to user 1011 as needed or upon a tank alert condition or on a scheduled basis.”)
Regarding Claim 34, McCormick (‘951) discloses the system of claim 27.
McCormick (‘951) discloses further comprising a centralized processor device in communication with the at least one display ([0045]: “The Telemetry Control unit 200 may have a computer 206 to analyze the data from the mmWave Control unit 201, and the display 209 for the user to show diagnostics, level and volume.”),
McCormick (‘951) discloses the centralized processor device receiving a single liquid level output for each of a plurality of liquid storage tanks ([0068]: “The cellular provider collects data from remote tanks 1004 using servers 1008 which puts the data on the internet 1010.”; [0045]: “Serial data line 208 between the Telemetry Control unit 201 and the mmWave Control unit 200 transfers distance readings to the Telemetry Control unit.”),
McCormick (‘951) discloses wherein each of the plurality of liquid storage tanks are associated with a plurality of independently operable radar transmitters and receivers to measure the liquid level therein ([0043]: “There are four such receive antennas (indicated at 122) and three such transmit antennas (indicated at 121) in some embodiments.”)
Regarding Claim 35, McCormick (‘951) discloses the system of claim 27.
McCormick (‘951) discloses wherein the processor is a centralized processor in communication with the at least one display ([0045]: “The Telemetry Control unit 200 may have a computer 206 to analyze the data from the mmWave Control unit 201, and the display 209 for the user to show diagnostics, level and volume.”),
McCormick (‘951) discloses the centralized processor configured to: determine the single liquid level output for each respective one of a plurality of liquid storage tanks respectively associated with a plurality of independently operable radar sensors to measure the liquid level therein ([0068]: “The cellular provider collects data from remote tanks 1004 using servers 1008 which puts the data on the internet 1010.”; [0044]: “Typically, the computing unit 107 only selects the level that is within a known range associated with a stronger signal level.”),
McCormick (‘951) discloses report the respective single liquid level output for all of the plurality of liquid storage tanks via the at least one display ([0068]: “Data is collected from the cellular and satellite provider by server 1009 and web pages are generated for use by user 1011. These web pages can be designed to show current tank fluid levels, volume, tank level changes, days on site, location history, and the like. Data may be presented in graphical or tabular form.”)
Regarding Claim 36, McCormick (‘951) discloses the system of claim 1.
McCormick (‘951) discloses wherein the liquid storage tank is subject to solid or liquid buildup inside of the liquid storage tank, the solid or liquid buildup producing transient localized effects in liquid level measurements with the plurality of independently operable radar sensors ([0040]: “embodiments of the invention are impervious to sand, dirt and debris build up because of the novel and inventive methods used.”; [0059]: “Embodiments of the invention are impervious to most of these real-world tank level difficulties because the invention can be isolated from the fluid in the tank and the mmWave signals work well with a variety of chemicals. Since plastic obstructions, foam and gases have a lower dielectric than most fluids, they can be ignored by using appropriate software filters”; [0013]: “the computer is operable to ignore distances that represent the distance between the top of the tank and one or more of foam, gas, fog, mist, ice, sand, debris, chemical residue, and obstructions in a tank.”)
Regarding Claim 37, McCormick (‘951) discloses the system of claim 36.
Regarding the limitation wherein the liquid storage tank is a grey water tank or a black water tank in a vehicle, the terms “grey” and “black” refer to the color or type of water stored in the tank. Color does not affect the structure of the liquid level sensor system or the tank. McCormick (‘951) teaches tanks for storing various liquids ([0003]: “Storage tanks are used to store many types of liquids, such as oil, water, liquid fuels, liquid chemicals, and the like.”).
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention that the generally-disclosed tank of McCormick (‘951) could be any suitable type of tank in any suitable environment, including a grey water tank or a black water tank in a vehicle. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to use a grey or black water tank in a vehicle where vehicle waste water storage is needed, and there would have been a reasonable expectation of success because the radar level gauge system operates the same regardless of the color or type of water stored in the tank or the environment in which the tank is installed.
Regarding Claim 38, McCormick (‘951) discloses the system of claim 37.
Regarding the limitation wherein the vehicle is a recreational vehicle, McCormick (‘951) teaches tanks for various applications ([0003]: “Storage tanks are used to store many types of liquids, such as oil, water, liquid fuels, liquid chemicals, and the like.”).
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention that the generally-disclosed tank of McCormick (‘951) could be installed in any suitable vehicle, including a recreational vehicle. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to use the radar level gauge system in a recreational vehicle where liquid level monitoring is needed, and there would have been a reasonable expectation of success because the radar level gauge system operates the same regardless of the vehicle in which the tank is installed.
Regarding Claim 39, McCormick (‘951) discloses the system of claim 1.
McCormick (‘951) teaches wherein the liquid storage tank has an uneven wall thickness, the uneven wall thickness producing localized effects in the radar returns ([0072]: “the mmWave Control unit and Telemetry Control unit contained therein can read the tank level through the plastic tank wall even though it may be ½ inch thick.”; [0059]: “Since plastic obstructions, foam and gases have a lower dielectric than most fluids, they can be ignored by using appropriate software filters, thus allowing the mmWave radar embodiments disclosed herein to determine the desired liquid levels.”; [0062]: “In general, the dielectric constant E of a material or fluid will dictate how much of the transmitted energy is returned back to the receiver in the mmWave Control unit.”) McCormick (‘951) teaches that the system handles various tank materials and wall characteristics. A tank with uneven wall thickness would produce varying reflections based on the dielectric properties described by McCormick, and the system is designed to handle such variations through software filtering.
Regarding Claim 40, McCormick (‘951) discloses the system of claim 39.
Regarding the limitation wherein the liquid storage tank is a water tank, McCormick (‘951) teaches tanks for storing various liquids including water ([0003]: “Storage tanks are used to store many types of liquids, such as oil, water, liquid fuels, liquid chemicals, and the like.”).
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention that the generally-disclosed tank of McCormick (‘951) could be any suitable type of tank for storing any suitable liquid, including a water tank. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to use a water tank where water storage is needed, and there would have been a reasonable expectation of success because water is explicitly listed as one of the liquids that may be stored in tanks monitored by the system.
Regarding Claim 41, McCormick (‘951) discloses the system of claim 40.
Regarding the limitation wherein the water tank supplies freshwater or collects nonpotable water inside a recreational vehicle, a recreational boat, a food truck, or a semi-truck equipped with living quarters, McCormick (‘951) teaches tanks for storing various liquids including water ([0003]: “Storage tanks are used to store many types of liquids, such as oil, water, liquid fuels, liquid chemicals, and the like.”).
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention that the generally-disclosed tank of McCormick (‘951) could be any suitable type of water tank in any suitable environment, including a water tank that supplies freshwater or collects nonpotable water inside a recreational vehicle, a recreational boat, a food truck, or a semi-truck equipped with living quarters. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to use such configurations where freshwater supply or nonpotable water collection is needed in these vehicle types, and there would have been a reasonable expectation of success because the radar level gauge system operates the same regardless of the type of water stored or the vehicle in which the tank is installed.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to REMASH R GUYAH whose telephone number is (571)270-0115. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 7:30-4:30.
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, Vladimir Magloire can be reached at (571) 270-5144. 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.
/REMASH R GUYAH/Examiner, Art Unit 3648
/VLADIMIR MAGLOIRE/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3648