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 .
Acknowledgement is made of the preliminary amendment filed on 4/18/2025. Accordingly, claims 1-12 are pending for consideration on the merits in this Office Action.
Priority
Acknowledgment is made of applicant’s claim for foreign priority under 35 U.S.C. 119 (a)-(d).
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on 5/13/2024 and 8/21/2024 were filed on or after the mailing date of the application. The submissions are in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statements are being considered by the examiner.
Specification
Applicant is reminded of the proper content of an abstract of the disclosure.
A patent abstract is a concise statement of the technical disclosure of the patent and should include that which is new in the art to which the invention pertains. The abstract should not refer to purported merits or speculative applications of the invention and should not compare the invention with the prior art.
If the patent is of a basic nature, the entire technical disclosure may be new in the art, and the abstract should be directed to the entire disclosure. If the patent is in the nature of an improvement in an old apparatus, process, product, or composition, the abstract should include the technical disclosure of the improvement. The abstract should also mention by way of example any preferred modifications or alternatives.
Where applicable, the abstract should include the following: (1) if a machine or apparatus, its organization and operation; (2) if an article, its method of making; (3) if a chemical compound, its identity and use; (4) if a mixture, its ingredients; (5) if a process, the steps.
Extensive mechanical and design details of an apparatus should not be included in the abstract. The abstract should be in narrative form and generally limited to a single paragraph within the range of 50 to 150 words in length.
See MPEP § 608.01(b) for guidelines for the preparation of patent abstracts.
The abstract of the disclosure is objected to because the abstracts speak to the merits of the invention i.e. “enables remote-controlled optimization of cooling processes.”. A corrected abstract of the disclosure is required and must be presented on a separate sheet, apart from any other text. See MPEP § 608.01(b).
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(b):
(b) CONCLUSION.—The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph:
The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the applicant regards as his invention.
Claims 9-12 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor (or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the applicant), regards as the invention.
Regarding Claim 9, the limitation “substantially identical cooling tower” is a relative term which renders the claim indefinite. The term “substantially” is not defined by the claim, the specification does not provide a standard for ascertaining the requisite degree, and one of ordinary skill in the art would not be reasonably apprised of the scope of the invention.
Therefore, the claim is indefinite and is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, second paragraph.
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.
Claim(s) 1-4 and 6-12 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Meyers et al. (US2019/0145722).
Regarding Claims 1 and 6, Meyers teaches a cooling tower for cooling process water [0005] comprising:
- sensors [see 0050] for the ongoing monitoring of at least one consumable parameter in the form of an inflow, consumption, supply, and/or a property of a consumable of the cooling tower [0014; 0015] and for the ongoing monitoring of at least one machine parameter of the cooling tower relating to the transport and/or the cooling of the process water [0072];
- a data output for transmitting measurement data obtained from the cooling tower by means of such monitoring by sensor [0050; 0051; 0057-0059; 0073-0075]; -
at least one data input for receiving external control data for controlling the cooling tower [0061; 0073-0075] and
- a programmable logic controller [136] for controlling the cooling tower on the basis of the received control data and measurement data obtained by means of monitoring by sensor [0061-0075; fig 2].
For clarity, in regard to Claim 6, the method as claimed is carried out during the normal operation of the apparatus of Meyers, as modified, above.
Regarding Claims 2 and 7, Meyers teaches the invention of claim 1 above and Meyers teaches wherein the sensors are designed to measure actual values of at least two of the following consumable parameters or machine parameters: fill level, consumption, or concentration of a biocide; fill level, consumption, or concentration of an agent for scale prevention and/or hardness stabilization; fill level, consumption, or concentration of an anti-corrosion agent; pH of an alkali or acid; fill level or consumption of a lubricant; conductance, turbidity, or microbial load of the process water; temperature of the process water in the region of the cooling tower; drive speed of at least one fan for transporting ambient air for evaporation of the process water; valve position on a line, flow through a line, or coating thickness in a line for the consumable or the process water; performance of a pump for the process water; performance of a dosing device for the consumable [0071; 0050; where sensors measures at least PH value and temperature].
For clarity, in regard to Claim 7, the method as claimed is carried out during the normal operation of the apparatus of Meyers, as modified, above.
Regarding Claims 3 and 8, Meyers teaches the invention of claim 1 above and Meyers teaches wherein the controller is programmed to automatically adjust a machine state and/or operating mode of the cooling tower - including the monitored consumable parameters and/or machine parameters on the basis of the received control data [0110].
For clarity, in regard to Claim 8, the method as claimed is carried out during the normal operation of the apparatus of Meyers, as modified, above.
Regarding Claims 4 and 9, Meyers teaches the invention of claim 1 above and Meyers teaches wherein the data input is designed for wireless reception of the control data from a cross-machine monitoring system, and the data output is designed to transmit the measurement data wirelessly thereto [0005; 0074; 0075; where the system can have two or more towers controlled by the controller].
For clarity, in regard to Claim 9, the method as claimed is carried out during the normal operation of the apparatus of Meyers, as modified, above.
Regarding Claim 10, Meyers teaches the invention of claim 9 above and Meyers teaches wherein the control data are calculated by the cross-machine monitoring system [136] on the basis of the transmitted measurement data [at least a heat transfer coefficient] of an ongoing production process [Ammonia plant] taking into account the cooling tower, and corresponding measurement data [heat exchanger temperature] of at least one historical production process with the same and/or with a substantially identical cooling tower [0121-0127].
Regarding Claim 11, Meyers teaches the invention of claim 10 above and Meyers teaches wherein the control data are calculated by the cross-machine monitoring system on the basis of the transmitted measurement data and at least one environmental condition measured in the region of the cooling tower and/or at least one measured property of cooling water cooled with the process water [temperature measured at heat exchanger; 011-0127; where the limitation is claimed in the alternative].
Regarding Claim 12, Meyers teaches the invention of claim 9 above and Meyers teaches wherein the cross-machine monitoring system is further configured to generate/output from the transmitted measurement data instructions for the replenishment of at least one monitored consumable and to transmit them to the cooling tower [0121-0127; see specifically 0127].
Claim(s) 5 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Meyers et al. (US2019/0145722) in view of Schulz et al. (US2010/0139214).
Regarding Claim 5, Meyers teaches the invention of claim 4 above and teaches a measuring device for detecting at least one property of ambient air; and a heat exchange unit [104] downstream of the cooling tower f[102] or cooling coolant water with the cooled process water [; a supply unit connected to the cooling tower for providing a consumable of the cooling tower; a disposal unit connected to the cooling tower for the disposal and processing of the process water [0041-0043; where the claims are recited in the alternative].
Meyers does not teach a filling plant comprising the cooling tower.
However, Schulz teaches a filling plant [0002] having a cooling tower [22, 32; 0035] where one of ordinary skill in the art could have combined the elements as claimed by known methods and that in combination, each element would perform the same function as it did separately and one of ordinary skills would have recognized that the results of the combination were predictable i.e. for the obvious advantage of controlling the temperature of the heat transport medium.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify the assembly of Meyers to have a filling plant comprising the cooling tower in view of the teachings of Schulz where the elements could have been combined by known methods with no change in their respective functions, and the combination would have yielded predictable results i.e. for the obvious advantage of controlling the temperature of the heat transport medium.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to LARRY L FURDGE whose telephone number is (313)446-4895. The examiner can normally be reached M-R 6a-3p; F 6a-10a.
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, Jerry Fletcher can be reached at 571-270-5054. 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.
/LARRY L FURDGE/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3763