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 .
Election/Restrictions
Claims 14-20 are withdrawn from further consideration pursuant to 37 CFR 1.142(b) as being drawn to a nonelected method and controller for performing the method, there being no allowable generic or linking claim. Election was made without traverse in the reply filed on 12-1-25.
Applicant’s election without traverse of claims 1-13 in the reply filed on 12-1-25 is acknowledged.
Claim Objections
Claim 13 is objected to because of the following informalities:
Claim 13 recites “the second fluid”, however, this appears to be the “second treatment fluid”
Appropriate correction is required.
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 5 and 10-11 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.
Claim 5 recites “the treatment fluid” however there are multiple treatment fluids defined previously, “a first treatment fluid” and “a second treatment fluid”. It is unclear which of these treatment fluids is being referred to as “the treatment fluid”.
Claim 10 recites “the second capsule further comprising a buoyancy ring configured to keep the first capsule floating” however according to applicant’s discloser the “buoyancy ring” provides buoyancy to the capsule it is provided on, see applicants discloser, paragraphs 47-48. Therefore, it is unclear how a buoyancy ring of the second capsule can keep the first capsule floating. As a result, the configuration and function of the buoyancy ring are unclear. Claim 11 is rejected as being dependent on an indefinite claim.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 101
35 U.S.C. 101 reads as follows:
Whoever invents or discovers any new and useful process, machine, manufacture, or composition of matter, or any new and useful improvement thereof, may obtain a patent therefor, subject to the conditions and requirements of this title.
Claims 5 and 7-8 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 101 because the claimed invention is directed to an abstract idea without significantly more.
Claim 5 recites “the controller is configured to determine, as a function of (i) the speed of the second capsule and (ii) a period of time during which the treatment fluid or substance is discharged, a length of the second internal wall section”, this could be a mental step including mathematical calculations. The courts do not distinguish between claims that recite mental processes performed by humans and claims that recite mental processes performed on a computer (MPEP 2106.04(a)(2) section Ill). The limitation of “determine” as drafted, is a process that, under its broadest reasonable interpretation, covers performance of the limitations in the mind. That is, nothing in the claim element precludes the steps from practically being performed in the mind. For example, but for the “controller” language, “determine” in the context of this claim encompasses the user mentally or with pen and paper calculating the length of the wall section based on data collected regarding speed and location of the capsule.
This judicial exception is not integrated into a particular practical application because once the determination is made nothing is done based on the mental step. Therefore, the judicial exception is not integrated into a particular practical application.
The claim does not include additional elements that are sufficient to amount to significantly more than the judicial exception. The claim recites multiple capsules for dispensing treatment fluids to an interior surface of a pipe, which are well understood, routine and conventional in pipe treatment art. Claim 5 is therefore not patent eligible.
Claim 7 recites “determine a discharge location of a third treatment fluid or substance of the third capsule”, this could be a mental step including mathematical calculations. The courts do not distinguish between claims that recite mental processes performed by humans and claims that recite mental processes performed on a computer (MPEP 2106.04(a)(2) section Ill). The limitation of “determine” as drafted, is a process that, under its broadest reasonable interpretation, covers performance of the limitations in the mind. That is, nothing in the claim element precludes the steps from practically being performed in the mind. For example, but for the “controller” language, “determine” in the context of this claim encompasses the user mentally deciding where to discharge a third capsule based on data collected from location data of the second capsule.
This judicial exception is not integrated into a particular practical application because once the determination is made nothing is done based on the mental step. Therefore, the judicial exception is not integrated into a particular practical application.
The claim does not include additional elements that are sufficient to amount to significantly more than the judicial exception. The claim recites multiple capsules for dispensing treatment fluids to an interior surface of a pipe, which are well understood, routine and conventional in pipe treatment art. Claim 7 is therefore not patent eligible.
Claim 8 recites “determine, as a function of feedback from the fluid sensor, a time period that it took the second treatment fluid or substance to be fully discharged”, this could be a mental step including mathematical calculations. The courts do not distinguish between claims that recite mental processes performed by humans and claims that recite mental processes performed on a computer (MPEP 2106.04(a)(2) section Ill). The limitation of “determine” as drafted, is a process that, under its broadest reasonable interpretation, covers performance of the limitations in the mind. That is, nothing in the claim element precludes the steps from practically being performed in the mind. For example, but for the “controller” language, “determine” in the context of this claim encompasses the user mentally or with pen and paper calculating a time period based on data collected from a fluid sensor.
This judicial exception is not integrated into a particular practical application because once the determination is made nothing is done based on the mental step. Therefore, the judicial exception is not integrated into a particular practical application.
The claim does not include additional elements that are sufficient to amount to significantly more than the judicial exception. The claim recites multiple capsules for dispensing treatment fluids to an interior surface of a pipe, which are well understood, routine and conventional in pipe treatment art. Claim 8 is therefore not patent eligible.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
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 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 and 9 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Parrella et al. US 2023/0102801 (US’801).
Regarding claim 1, US’801 teaches a pipe treatment assembly (pipe reconditioning system, abstract), comprising:
a first capsule configured to be deployed within a pipe comprising a pipe fluid (deployment sled 405, for delivering an epoxy to an internal pipe section to recondition the pipe, fig. 9-10, para. 60-63),
the first capsule comprising: a first housing comprising a first discharge port (mixing unit 408 connected to deployment passages 408a, see fig. 9a, para. 60), and
a first treatment fluid or substance disposed within the first housing and configured to exit the first housing through the first discharge port into the pipe fluid as the first capsule moves along the pipe to treat a first internal wall section of the pipe (epoxy is discharged onto the internal surface of the pipe after it is dispensed through the deployment passage, para. 60, see fig. 9a);
and a second capsule configured to be deployed within the pipe (robotic delivery system 400b, para. 65, see fig. 11),
the second capsule comprising: a second housing comprising a second discharge port (delivery system 400b includes nozzles that deliver a final coating process after the pipe reconditioning system 400, 400a, 400c has been used to deploy a corrosion resistant, resin coating that optimizes flow, para. 65),
a second treatment fluid or substance disposed within the second housing (final coating process of epoxy, para. 65-67, see fig. 11),
the second capsule configured to discharge the second treatment fluid or substance through the second discharge port into the pipe fluid as the second capsule moves along the pipe to treat a second internal wall section of the pipe adjacent the first internal wall section of the pipe (the delivery systems are used for treating sections of pipe with epoxy coatings, para. 60-67, therefore they are configured to treat adjacent internal wall sections, applications recitation of discharge the second treatment fluid ... to treat a second internal wall section of the pipe adjacent the first internal wall section of the pipe reads on the intended use of the apparatus. The structure of the firs capsule and second capsule of US’801 would be capable of treating adjacent wall sections and therefore reads on the claimed configuration).
Regarding claim 9, US’801 teaches the pipe treatment assembly of claim 1. wherein the first and second treatment fluid or substance comprise at least one of a corrosion inhibitor (the epoxy of US’801 prevents corrosion of the interior surface of the pipe, para. 12-13 and 65)
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.
This application currently names joint inventors. In considering patentability of the claims the examiner presumes that the subject matter of the various claims was commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the claimed invention(s) absent any evidence to the contrary. Applicant is advised of the obligation under 37 CFR 1.56 to point out the inventor and effective filing dates of each claim that was not commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the later invention in order for the examiner to consider the applicability of 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(C) for any potential 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) prior art against the later invention.
Claim(s) 2 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over US’801 as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Patterson US 3,690,348 (US’348).
Regarding claim 2, US’801 teaches the pipe treatment assembly of claim 1.
US’801 does not teach wherein the second capsule further comprises: a valve coupled to the second discharge port, and an actuator coupled to the second housing, the actuator configured to open the valve at a predetermined location of the second capsule within the pipe such that the second treatment fluid or substance treats the second internal wall section.
US’348 teaches a novel pipeline valve transportable by pipeline fluid adapted for isolating pipeline sections to permit location of a leak, and to stop the flow of pipeline fluid (abstract). A command (slave) signal actuator, e.g., a three way two-position solenoid valve 22 controls the flow of pipeline fluid to and from the annular space 15 surrounded by cylindrical elastic sleeve 16. Tube or pipe 24 and discharge tube or pipe 26 receive pipeline fluid for discharge at the low pressure end of the valve 1 from the elastic sleeve 16. by the signal receiver in compartment 14, valve 22 allows the discharge (col. 3-4). Therefore, the assembly of US’801 can be modified to include a valve and actuator that can be activated to apply the coating when the capsule is positioned for treating the selected section of pipe, as discussed above (see US’801 fig. 13a-l, para. 60-71).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the apparatus of US’801 to include wherein the second capsule further comprises: a valve coupled to the second discharge port, and an actuator coupled to the second housing, the actuator configured to open the valve at a predetermined location of the second capsule within the pipe such that the second treatment fluid or substance treats the second internal wall section because US’348 teaches that including a valve and actuator can provide controlled release of the coating fluid when treating a section of pipe and combining prior art elements according to known methods to yield predictable results is obvious, see MPEP 2141 III (A).
Claim(s) 3-5 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over US’801 in view of US’348 as applied to claim 2 above, and further in view of Hartog et al. US 2012/0067126 (US’126).
Regarding claims 3-5, the modified apparatus of US’801 teaches the pipe treatment assembly of claim 2.
The modified apparatus of US’801 does not teach, wherein the second capsule further comprises: one or more sensors or instruments coupled to the second housing, and a controller operationally coupled to the actuator, the controller configured to control, as a function of feedback received from the one or more sensors or instruments and as a function of location information of the first internal wall section, the actuator to open the valve at the predetermined location, with regard to claim 3wherein the one or more sensors or instruments comprise a speedometer configured to measure a speed of the second capsule, the controller configured to control, as a function of feedback from the speedometer, the actuator to open the valve a predetermined amount based on the speed of the second capsule to regulate a flow of the second treatment fluid or substance and fully treat the second internal wall section, with regard to claim 4, wherein the controller is configured to determine, as a function of (i) the speed of the second capsule and (ii) a period of time during which the treatment fluid or substance is discharged, a length of the second internal wall section, with regard to claim 5.
US’126 teaches apparatus and a method for monitoring of a pipe inspection tool in a pipeline (abstract). The pipe inspection tool includes instruments that relate the location of the pipe inspection tool to time, and then calculating the speed of advance of the pipe inspection tool through the pipeline (para. 37-39). he apparatus may include a data interpretation device for determining information on the state of the pipeline based on the acoustic signature of the pipe inspection tool as it passes through the pipeline (para. 18-20 and 38). The current invention provides an accurate and easily operable means to monitor the progress of a pig passing through a pipeline by determining its location and speed of movement. The ability to reliably track the position of a pig in a pipeline is particularly useful in instances where the pig becomes stuck, the last reported position being the most likely location (para. 3 and 57). The calculation of the speed reads on speedometer. Therefore, US’126 teaches that the capsules speed can provide position data which can be used by the modified apparatus of US’801 to track the treatment process of US’801 in case the capsule becomes stuck to insure proper application of the coating.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the modified apparatus of US’801 to include wherein the second capsule further comprises: one or more sensors or instruments coupled to the second housing, and a controller operationally coupled to the actuator, the controller configured to control, as a function of feedback received from the one or more sensors or instruments and as a function of location information of the first internal wall section, the actuator to open the valve at the predetermined location, with regard to claim 3 wherein the one or more sensors or instruments comprise a speedometer configured to measure a speed of the second capsule, the controller configured to control, as a function of feedback from the speedometer, the actuator to open the valve a predetermined amount based on the speed of the second capsule to regulate a flow of the second treatment fluid or substance and fully treat the second internal wall section, with regard to claim 4, wherein the controller is configured to determine, as a function of (i) the speed of the second capsule and (ii) a period of time during which the treatment fluid or substance is discharged, a length of the second internal wall section, with regard to claim 5 because US’126 teaches that the capsules speed can provide position data which can be used by the modified apparatus of US’801 to track the treatment process of US’801 in case the capsule becomes stuck to insure proper application of the coating and use of known technique to improve similar methods in the same way is obvious, see MPEP 2141 III (C).
Claim(s) 6-7 and 10-11 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over US’801 as applied to claim 1 above and in view of US’348 and US’126 as applied to claim 3 above, and further in view of Rajeh et al. US 2022/0120370 (US’370).
Regarding claims 6-7, the modified apparatus of US’801 teaches the pipe treatment assembly of claims 3 and 4.
The modified apparatus of US’801 does not teach wherein the one or more sensors or instruments comprise a global positioning system (GPS) device, and the controller is configured to control the actuator to open, as a function of (i) feedback received from the GPS device and (ii) location information of the first internal wall section, the valve at the predetermined location, with regard to claim 6 and wherein the second capsule further comprises a GPS logger configured to record a location of a termination of the second internal wall section usable by a third capsule to determine a discharge location of a third treatment fluid or substance of the third capsule, with regard to claim 7.
US’370 teaches a modular isolation robot Module 220, as well as one or more proximal components represented collectively as module 222, may include equipment associated with one or more tasks such as measurement and logging (e.g., ultrasonic sensors and on-board data storage capacity for storing collected data), location sensing (e.g., GPS sensors), in line inspection (e.g., video cameras, still cameras, and lighting), communication (e.g., antennas for transmitting collected data when requested, at predetermined time intervals, or in substantially real time to the surface), sampling, cleaning, pumping, maintenance, and leak detection. Modules 220, 222 may additionally or alternatively include batteries or cleaning fluid (e.g., a canister of nitrogen or other inert gas). In some embodiments, a positioning sensor, such as a GPS, may collect and transmit data via an antenna at substantially the same time that an onboard camera collects and transmits images of the inside of the pipeline. An operator or image processing system, such as a computing device with a processor and memory, may view the images and detect portions of the pipeline that require maintenance and may associate the required action with the location of robot 200 when the image was acquired. The robot may be driven remotely to the location and may be instructed to perform the associated required maintenance (para. 16-18). Therefore, the sensor of the modified apparatus of US’801 can include a GPS sensor that provides real time location information that can be used for performing the pipe coating process.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the modified apparatus of US’801 to include wherein the one or more sensors or instruments comprise a global positioning system (GPS) device, and the controller is configured to control the actuator to open, as a function of (i) feedback received from the GPS device and (ii) location information of the first internal wall section, the valve at the predetermined location, with regard to claim 6 and wherein the second capsule further comprises a GPS logger configured to record a location of a termination of the second internal wall section usable by a third capsule to determine a discharge location of a third treatment fluid or substance of the third capsule, with regard to claim 7 because US’370 teaches the sensor of the modified apparatus of US’801 can include a GPS sensor that provides real time location information that can be used for performing the pipe coating process and combining prior art elements according to known methods to yield predictable results is obvious, see MPEP 2141 III (A).
Regarding claims 10-11, the modified apparatus of US’801 teaches the pipe treatment assembly of claim 1.
The modified apparatus of US’801 does not teach wherein the pipe comprises a second pipe fluid immiscible with the pipe fluid, the second capsule further comprising a buoyancy ring configured to keep the first capsule floating on an interface of the pipe fluid and the second pipe fluid, with regard to claim 10 and wherein the pipe fluid comprises water and the second pipe fluid comprise oil, the buoyancy ring comprising a material with a density that is lower than water but greater than oil to maintain the second capsule floating on the interface of the water and oil, with the second discharge port facing the water such that the second treatment fluid or substance discharges into the water, with regard to claim 11.
However, the particular fluid in the pipe reads on the intended use of the pipe treatment assembly and any do not modify the structure of the pipe treatment assembly. Therefore the limitations of wherein the pipe comprises a second pipe fluid immiscible with the pipe fluid, the first capsule floating on an interface of the pipe fluid and the second pipe fluid, with regard to claim 10 and wherein the pipe fluid comprises water and the second pipe fluid comprise oil, to maintain the second capsule floating on the interface of the water and oil, with the second discharge port facing the water such that the second treatment fluid or substance discharges into the water, with regard to claim 11, reads on the intended use of the buoyancy ring.
US’370 teaches a robot including a first rubber expander configured to selectively expand from a first state to a second state (abstract). The rubber expanders allow for selective treatment of pipe portions (para. 4-5, and 15). The rubber expander expands radial include a flexible membrane configured to selectively expand or contract the interior pipe surface to create or release a seal, respectively. Therefore, the expander can be considered to be ring shaped. Further rubber is a material according to applicants’ specification that provides the described buoyancy, see paragraph 48 of applicants specification. Therefore, US’370 teaches a buoyancy ring configured to keep a capsule floating, the buoyancy ring comprising a material with a density that is lower than water but greater than oil.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the apparatus of US’801 to include the second capsule further comprising a buoyancy ring configured to keep the first capsule floating, the buoyancy ring comprising a material with a density that is lower than water but greater than oil because US’370 teaches it can be included in a pipe treatment robot to assist in selective treatment of pipe portions and combining prior art elements according to known methods to yield predictable results is obvious, see MPEP 2141 III (A).
Claim(s) 8 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over US’801 in view of US’348 and US’126 as applied to claim 3 above, and further in view of Ahmari et al. US 2022/0250123 (US’123).
Regarding claim 8, the modified apparatus of US’801 teaches the pipe treatment assembly of claim 3.
The modified apparatus of US’801 does not teach wherein the second capsule comprises a fluid sensor configured to sense an absence of the second treatment fluid or substance within the second capsule and the controller is configured to determine, as a function of feedback from the fluid sensor, a time period that it took the second treatment fluid or substance to be fully discharged.
US’123 teaches a pipeline scraper apparatus that may clean an inside surface of a pipeline (abstract). Sensors that are shown in FIG. 3 associate with the various fluid tanks that may be present. The lubricant storage tank 500 is shown with two optional sensors: a composition sensor 560 and a level sensor 561. The composition sensor 560 may determine if the appropriate mixture of water to thickening agent is present in the lubricant in the lubricant storage tank 500. The level sensor 561 of the lubricant storage tank 500 may detect the amount of lubricant in the lubricant storage tank. The level sensor 526 of the water storage tank 520 may detect the amount of water in the water storage tank. the level sensor for the lubricant storage tank may indicate that an amount of lubricant in the lubricant storage tank is insufficient based upon a lubricant level set point in the memory of the computer Second, the control system (through the computer) may set a control valve outlet position (partially open) for both the water storage tank and the thickener storage tank. While this occurs, the control program (through the computer) may turn on the power to the water storage tank discharge pump and the thickener storage tank discharge pump (to facilitate pumping of water and thickener). Third, when the same lubricant level senor indicates a sufficient level of lubricant in the lubricant storage tank versus the set point in memory, the control system (through the computer) may reverse these actions to halt fabrication of lubricant (para. 47-57 and 142). Therefore, US’123 teaches level sensor data can be used to feed back control to a pipeline operation, which in the process of US’801 includes discharging a treatment fluid, to insure proper operation of the process.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the modified apparatus of US’801 to include wherein the second capsule comprises a fluid sensor configured to sense an absence of the second treatment fluid or substance within the second capsule and the controller is configured to determine, as a function of feedback from the fluid sensor, a time period that it took the second treatment fluid or substance to be fully discharged because US’123 teaches level sensor data can be used to feed back control to a pipeline operation to insure proper operation of the process and combining prior art elements according to known methods to yield predictable results is obvious, see MPEP 2141 III (A).
Claim(s) 12-13 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over US’801 as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Xu, Qiao-qing CN 11207266 (CN’266) (machine translation used for citation).
Regarding claims 12-13, the modified apparatus of US’801 teaches the pipe treatment assembly of claim 1.
The modified apparatus of US’801 does not teach wherein the second capsule further comprises a propeller odometer driven by a rotatable propeller configured to measure a travel distance of the second capsule as a function of rotations of the propeller, with regard to claim 12 and wherein the rotatable propeller is arranged to disturb a flow of the pipe fluid to facilitate a dissolution or mixing of the second treatment fluid or substance in the pipe fluid as the second fluid exits the second capsule, with regard to claim 13.
CN’266 teaches an amphibious pipeline detection device (abstract). The device includes the first distance measuring tool 4 including propellers 41 the first distance measuring tool 4 comprises a propeller 41 and the connected first incremental encoder, the propeller 41 rotates to drive the first incremental encoder count. In the present embodiment, the first ranging tool 4 further comprises a single-chip microcomputer. the drive trolley 1 forward in the water, the water flow drives the propeller 41 to rotate, each rotating a circle of a first incremental encoder sending a certain pulse signal, single chip microcomputer reads out the parameters, calculating the distance and recording and transmission. of the display device on the ground it can be seen that the distance detection device to advance (page 5). More accurate measurement result, by correlation calculation software, can be obtained by combining the distance measuring tool with other location measuring data (page 6). The examiner notes that the recitation of facilitate a dissolution or mixing of the second treatment fluid or substance in the pipe fluid as the second fluid exits the second capsule reads on the intended use of the apparatus and a recitation of the intended use of the claimed invention must result in a structural difference between the claimed invention and the prior art in order to patentably distinguish the claimed invention from the prior art. If the prior art structure is capable of performing the intended use, then it meets the claim. The propeller would be capable of interacting with fluid in the pipe and therefore would be capable of performing the recited function.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the modified apparatus of US’801 to include wherein the second capsule further comprises a propeller odometer driven by a rotatable propeller configured to measure a travel distance of the second capsule as a function of rotations of the propeller, with regard to claim 12 and wherein the rotatable propeller is arranged to disturb a flow of the pipe fluid to facilitate a dissolution or mixing of the second treatment fluid or substance in the pipe fluid as the second fluid exits the second capsule, with regard to claim 13 because CN’266 teaches more accurate measurement result, by correlation calculation software, can be obtained by combining propeller distance measuring tool with other location measuring data and combining prior art elements according to known methods to yield predictable results is obvious, see MPEP 2141 III (A).
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ERIN FLANAGAN BERGNER whose telephone number is (571)270-1133. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 8:00-5:00.
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, Joshua Allen can be reached at 571-270-3176. 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.
/ERIN F BERGNER/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1713