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 .
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to claim(s) 1-20 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. See new ground of rejection below, necessitated by amendment.
Drawings
The drawings are objected to under 37 CFR 1.83(a). The drawings must show every feature of the invention specified in the claims. Therefore, the “pump” and “sensor device arranged in the pump” must be shown or the feature(s) canceled from the claim(s). No new matter should be entered.
Corrected drawing sheets in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(d) are required in reply to the Office action to avoid abandonment of the application. Any amended replacement drawing sheet should include all of the figures appearing on the immediate prior version of the sheet, even if only one figure is being amended. The figure or figure number of an amended drawing should not be labeled as “amended.” If a drawing figure is to be canceled, the appropriate figure must be removed from the replacement sheet, and where necessary, the remaining figures must be renumbered and appropriate changes made to the brief description of the several views of the drawings for consistency. Additional replacement sheets may be necessary to show the renumbering of the remaining figures. Each drawing sheet submitted after the filing date of an application must be labeled in the top margin as either “Replacement Sheet” or “New Sheet” pursuant to 37 CFR 1.121(d). If the changes are not accepted by the examiner, the applicant will be notified and informed of any required corrective action in the next Office action. The objection to the drawings will not be held in abeyance.
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 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.
Claim(s) 1-6, 9-14, and 20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Phillips et al. (US 20030222656), hereinafter ‘Phillips’ and further in view of Tomlinson (US 20090115435), hereinafter ‘Tomlinson’.
Regarding Claims 1 and 20, Phillips discloses a sensor device for detecting a state of a lubricant, the sensor device comprising: a sensor unit configured to measure the impedance of the lubricant according to the frequency of an applied alternating current; an evaluation unit configured to determine a state of the lubricant based on the measured impedance (Clm 87 sensing impedance characteristics of engine oil to determine the relative condition of said oil, applying an electric potential across said electrodes in order to generate an electric current through said oil; applying a sinusoidal excitation frequency of a first value to said electrodes to produce a frequency dependent response through said oil; varying said excitation frequency; and measuring and recording the frequency-dependent current to determine the impedance characteristics of said oil and thereby assess its relative condition).
Phillips fails to explicitly disclose the impedance is determined over a defined frequency range via impedance spectroscopy.
Tomlinson discloses a hand-held impedance spectroscopy analysis device for analyzing fluids wherein impedance is determined over a defined frequency range via impedance spectroscopy (Abstract disclosing The data acquisition circuit is operable to transmit excitation signals to the electrodes, wherein the excitation signals are applied at each frequency in a predetermined set of frequencies, and the data acquisition circuit is further operable to receive response signals from the electrodes indicative of the fluid sample at each frequency in the predetermined set of frequencies and to convert the response signals into a magnitude and phase angle data set) for the benefit of determining properties of the fluid sample.
Therefore it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to combine a similar technique of analyzing fluid as taught by Phillips in an alternative environment by and providing systems and methods that employ impedance spectroscopy (IS) for analyzing fluids via a hand-held impedance spectroscopy analysis device for analyzing fluids wherein impedance is determined over a defined frequency range for the benefit of determining properties of the fluid sample as taught by Tomlinson in the Abstract.
Regarding Claim 2, Phillips further discloses wherein the sensor unit has a housing having a supply opening and a discharge opening for supplying and discharging lubricant to the housing and from the housing (Para [0124] removable potentiostat module 12 includes a metal housing 16 that preferably includes an intermediate threaded section 18 that is precisely machined to correspond to the existing threaded bore 20 of the oil pan wall 14. On the end of the metal housing 16 there is found semi-permanently connected to distal threaded portion 22 the replaceable sensor assembly 24; the intermediate threaded section 18 is screwed into threaded bore 20, replaceable sensor assembly 24 extends into the engine crankcase where it is exposed to the lubricating oil 26; Para [0128] the replaceable sensor assembly 24 includes a plastic housing 54 which is actually in direct contact with the hot lubricating oil medium 26).
Regarding Claims 3 and 11, Phillips further discloses wherein the sensor unit has at least two electrodes arranged to contact with the lubricant (Clm 1 bringing electrodes into contact with a sample of oil; Para [0127] the electrode configuration 58 is preferably produced in an interdigitated (IDT) configuration wherein the respective two (2) closely parallel electrodes have a gap between; Para [0134] lubricating oil 26 directly in contact with the electrode configuration 58).
Regarding Claims 4 and 12, Phillips further discloses wherein the sensor unit has an alternating current source, which is connected to the electrodes in order to apply alternating current to the electrodes (Para [0096] electronic instrument means for producing a relatively low frequency AC signal connected to said electrodes; Claim 64 an applied voltage, and an alternating current signal).
Regarding Claims 5 and 13, Phillips further discloses wherein the evaluation unit is configured to compare the measured impedance with a reference value (Para [0056] compare used oil with new oil; Para [0115]; Claim 66).
Regarding Claims 6 and 14, Phillips further discloses wherein the sensor unit is configured to measure the impedance of the lubricant in an initial state of the lubricant, and to store this as a reference value (Para [0028] method of electrochemical data analysis that the produced information (at each distinct frequency) can, in its entirety, afford quantitative, analytical-quality data for not only determining an oil's operational acceptance, but even predicting its eventual condemnation. As the resultant data points are appropriately processed and subsequently stored in computer memory, the calculated magnitude impedance of the oil medium can serve as a specific indication of the attendant degradation, water contamination, and fuel dilution levels in operational engine oils; Para [0148] automatic calibration of on-line monitoring system 10 which engages itself to produce a baseline impedance output indication; Para [0039] electronic instrument package and ample memory installed, invaluable self-calibration capabilities can be realized for error-free application across different brands and types of engine oils).
Regarding Claim 9, Phillips further discloses wherein the sensor device has a temperature sensor, which is designed to measure a temperature of the lubricant, and wherein the evaluation unit is designed to determine the state of the lubricant based on the measured impedance and the measured temperature (Para [0111] precisely timed (and stored) cold-start impedance measurements can afford critical data on the deterioration of the candidate oil's viscosity. With built-in temperature sensing, vital impedance data related to the changes in the temperature dependency of the oil under test can be precisely analyzed to achieve such important correlation capabilities; Para [0129] Embedded within the inner cavity 70 of the plastic housing 54, and preferably isolated from the electrode configuration 58, the temperature sensitive resistor 66 provides a reliable voltage output for determining the temperature of the lubricating oil medium; Clm 87 sensing impedance characteristics of engine oil to determine the relative condition of said oil).
Regarding Claim 10, Phillips further discloses wherein the sensor device is part of a lubrication system, in particular a central lubrication system, or wherein the sensor device is arranged separately from a lubrication system in a laboratory environment (Fig. 20, monitoring system with sensor device within oil/lubricant system; oil in internal combustion engine).
Claim(s) 7, 8, 15-18 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Phillips et al. (US 20030222656), hereinafter ‘Phillips’ in view of Tomlinson (US 20090115435), hereinafter ‘Tomlinson’ as applied to claims 1 and 14 above, and further in view of Potyrailo et al. (US 20170138922), hereinafter ‘Potyrailo’.
Regarding Claims 7 and 15, Phillips in view of Tomlinson disclose the device according to claims 1 and 14 above. Phillips fails to explicitly disclose the sensor device has a temperature-control unit, and wherein the temperature-control unit is designed to regulate the temperature of the lubricant, at least in the sensor unit, to a predetermined temperature.
Potyrailo discloses a sensor in contact with oil of a rotor system and measurements of impedance of the fluid, further using a thermal element to produce a local change in the temperature of the fluid in proximity to the sensing region to a predetermined temperature above or below the bulk of the fluid in the container with the sensor for the benefit of providing measurements at different temperatures resulting in providing information about species of interest and other chemical constituents which allows an improvement of the sensor accuracy of determinations of properties of species of interest Para [0155].
Therefore it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to combine the sensor device having a temperature-control unit, and wherein the temperature-control unit is designed to regulate the temperature of the lubricant, at least in the sensor unit, to a predetermined temperature and provide for the benefit of providing measurements at different temperatures resulting in providing information about species of interest and other chemical constituents which allows an improvement of the sensor accuracy of determinations of properties of species of interest as taught by Potyrailo in Para [0155].
Regarding Claims 8 and 16, Phillips in view of Tomlinson in view of Potyrailo disclose the device according to claims 7 and 15 above. Potyrailo further discloses wherein the evaluation unit is designed to compare the measured impedance with a reference value, wherein the reference value corresponds to the impedance of a reference lubricant at the predetermined temperature (comparison between two or more temperatures provides benefits as disclosed in Para [0155] measurements of impedance parameters of fluids may be performed at two or more temperatures of the fluid. Measurements at different temperatures provide information about species of interest and other species in the fluid when measured as the frequency dispersion profiles over the broad frequency range or when measured as frequency responses over the relatively narrow frequency range. Performing analysis of resonant impedance spectra of the sensor collected at different temperatures and determining two or more properties of the fluid per temperature based on the analyzed resonant impedance spectra allows an improvement of the sensor accuracy of determinations of properties of species of interest).
Regarding Claim 17, Phillips in view of Tomlinson further discloses wherein the sensor device has a temperature sensor, which is designed to measure a temperature of the lubricant, and wherein the evaluation unit is designed to determine the state of the lubricant based on the measured impedance and the measured temperature (Para [0111] precisely timed (and stored) cold-start impedance measurements can afford critical data on the deterioration of the candidate oil's viscosity. With built-in temperature sensing, vital impedance data related to the changes in the temperature dependency of the oil under test can be precisely analyzed to achieve such important correlation capabilities; Para [0129] Embedded within the inner cavity 70 of the plastic housing 54, and preferably isolated from the electrode configuration 58, the temperature sensitive resistor 66 provides a reliable voltage output for determining the temperature of the lubricating oil medium; Clm 87 sensing impedance characteristics of engine oil to determine the relative condition of said oil).
Regarding Claim 18, Phillips further discloses wherein the sensor device is part of a lubrication system, in particular a central lubrication system, or wherein the sensor device is arranged separately from a lubrication system in a laboratory environment (Fig. 20, monitoring system with sensor device within oil/lubricant system; oil in internal combustion engine).
Claim(s) 19, 21, 23, 24 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Phillips et al. (US 20030222656), hereinafter ‘Phillips’ in view of Tomlinson (US 20090115435), hereinafter ‘Tomlinson’ as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Halalay et al. (US 20060232267), hereinafter ‘Halalay’.
Regarding Claims 19, 21, 23 and 24, Phillips in view of Tomlinson disclose a lubrication system comprising: at least one lubrication point (Fig. 20, within oil pan which houses oil 26, having oil pan wall 14); a lubricant tank (Fig. 20, oil pan with oil pan wall 14); a sensor device according to claim 1 (Clm 87 sensing impedance characteristics of engine oil to determine the relative condition of said oil, applying an electric potential across said electrodes in order to generate an electric current through said oil; applying a sinusoidal excitation frequency of a first value to said electrodes to produce a frequency dependent response through said oil; varying said excitation frequency; and measuring and recording the frequency-dependent current to determine the impedance characteristics of said oil and thereby assess its relative condition), the sensor device being arranged in one or more of the lubricant-conducting lines, in the pump, in a lubricant collection tank (Fig. 20, sensor assembly located within lubricating oil 26 of oil pan with oil pan wall 14), and/or at the at least one lubrication point (of Claim 24 Fig. 20, within oil pan which houses oil 26, having oil pan wall 14 with sensor assembly 24).
Phillips discloses the sensor system for oil condition monitoring used in a pump platform (Para [0154]) however fails to explicitly disclose a pump configured to deliver lubricant from the lubricant tank to the at least one lubrication point; one or more lubricant-conducting lines connecting the lubricant tank, the pump and the at least one lubrication point.
Halalay discloses determining quality of lubricating oils in use wherein an impedance sensor can be located in the oil pan, for Claim 23, or oil passages, for Claim 21, and lubricating oil is continually pumped from it’s sump in the oil pan around over moving parts of the engine (Para [0038, 0043] A portion of the oil circulated through the engine by its oil pump was routed through an impedance sensor; The sensor shown in FIG. 5 can be located, for example, in the oil passages or the oil pan of an operating vehicle engine. During operation of the engine, lubricating oil is continually pumped from its sump in the oil pan around and over moving parts of the engine) for the benefit of determining the quality of lubricating oils used in engines, machines, or other lubricated mechanisms, and use of electrical measurements to estimate the quality (for example, the remaining useful life) of such a lubricating material in its operating environment.
Therefore it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to combine a pump configured to deliver lubricant from the lubricant tank to the at least one lubrication point; one or more lubricant-conducting lines connecting the lubricant tank, the pump and the at least one lubrication point for the benefit of determining the quality of lubricating oils used in engines, machines, or other lubricated mechanisms, and use of electrical measurements to estimate the quality (for example, the remaining useful life) of such a lubricating material in its operating environment as taught by Halalay in Para [0038, 0043].
Claim(s) 22 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Phillips et al. (US 20030222656), hereinafter ‘Phillips’ in view of Tomlinson (US 20090115435), hereinafter ‘Tomlinson’, in view of Halalay et al. (US 20060232267), hereinafter ‘Halalay’ as applied to claim 19 above and further in view of Palazzo et al. (US 20200300830), hereinafter ‘Palazzo’.
Regarding Claim 22, Phillips in view of Tomlinson in view of Halalay disclose the system according to Claim 19 above.
Halalay fails to explicitly disclose wherein the sensor device is arranged in the pump.
Palazzo discloses an oil quality sensor with an arrangement of the sensor in the pump (Claims 5 and 6) for the benefit of measuring the quality of oil passing through the pump (Para [0008]).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to combine and provide the sensor in the pump for the benefit of measuring the quality of oil passing through the pump as taught by Palazzo in Para [0008].
Further Phillips in view of Tomlinson in view of Halalay in view of Palazzo disclose the claimed invention except for the location of the sensor. It would have been obvious to one with ordinary skill in the art at the time of the invention, to arrange the sensor in an alternative location such as the pump as taught in Palazzo, since it has been held that rearranging parts of an invention involves only routine skill in the art. In re Japikse, 8 USPQ 70.
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 ALESA ALLGOOD whose telephone number is (571)270-5811. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 7:30 AM-3:30 PM.
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, Eman Alkafawi can be reached at (571) 272-4448. 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.
/ALESA ALLGOOD/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2858
Prosecution Insights