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 .
Priority
Receipt is acknowledged of certified copies of papers required by 37 CFR 1.55.
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on 3/7/2024 is in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statement is being 4.
Response to Amendment
Acknowledgement is made of the preliminary amendment(s) filed 3/7/2024.
Claim Interpretation
5. The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(f):
(f) Element in Claim for a Combination. – An element in a claim for a combination may be expressed as a means or step for performing a specified function without the recital of structure, material, or acts in support thereof, and such claim shall be construed to cover the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification and equivalents thereof.
The following is a quotation of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph:
An element in a claim for a combination may be expressed as a means or step for performing a specified function without the recital of structure, material, or acts in support thereof, and such claim shall be construed to cover the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification and equivalents thereof.
This application includes one or more claim limitations that use the word “means” or “step” but are nonetheless not being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph because the claim limitation(s) recite(s) sufficient structure, materials, or acts to entirely perform the recited function. Such claim limitation(s) is/are:
Regarding claim 13 although the recitation contains a generic placeholder (member) modified by a function, the recitation “a member for determining the tilt of at least a portion of the floating structure”, the recital was established with sufficient structure and therefore is NOT being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph
Because this/these claim limitation(s) is/are not being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, it/they is/are not being interpreted to cover only the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification as performing the claimed function, and equivalents thereof.
If applicant intends to have this/these limitation(s) interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, applicant may: (1) amend the claim limitation(s) to remove the structure, materials, or acts that performs the claimed function; or (2) present a sufficient showing that the claim limitation(s) does/do not recite sufficient structure, materials, or acts to perform the claimed function.
The claims in this application are given their broadest reasonable interpretation using the plain meaning of the claim language in light of the specification as it would be understood by one of ordinary skill in the art. The broadest reasonable interpretation of a claim element (also commonly referred to as a claim limitation) is limited by the description in the specification when 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is invoked.
As explained in MPEP § 2181, subsection I, claim limitations that meet the following three-prong test will be interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph:
(A) the claim limitation uses the term “means” or “step” or a term used as a substitute for “means” that is a generic placeholder (also called a nonce term or a non-structural term having no specific structural meaning) for performing the claimed function;
(B) the term “means” or “step” or the generic placeholder is modified by functional language, typically, but not always linked by the transition word “for” (e.g., “means for”) or another linking word or phrase, such as “configured to” or “so that”; and
(C) the term “means” or “step” or the generic placeholder is not modified by sufficient structure, material, or acts for performing the claimed function.
Use of the word “means” (or “step”) in a claim with functional language creates a rebuttable presumption that the claim limitation is to be treated in accordance with 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph. The presumption that the claim limitation is interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is rebutted when the claim limitation recites sufficient structure, material, or acts to entirely perform the recited function.
Absence of the word “means” (or “step”) in a claim creates a rebuttable presumption that the claim limitation is not to be treated in accordance with 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph. The presumption that the claim limitation is not interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is rebutted when the claim limitation recites function without reciting sufficient structure, material or acts to entirely perform the recited function.
Claim limitations in this application that use the word “means” (or “step”) are being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, except as otherwise indicated in an Office action. Conversely, claim limitations in this application that do not use the word “means” (or “step”) are not being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, except as otherwise indicated in an Office action.
Regarding claim 14 the recitation “….means for control in orientation by magnetization” is being treated as interpreting 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
7. 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 1, 3 & 13 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 1 the recitation “at least one transmitter capable of transmitting data as a function of the position data…” is ambiguous and overly broad. With emphasis on the phrase “capable of”, this is an indefinite and / or relative phrase and raises the question as to whether the claimed transmitter, transmits data as a function of position data or not?
Suggested recitation: “at least one transmitter that transmits data as a function of the position data…”
Regarding claim 1 the recitation “…delimited at least by the solid wall and in which air can be trapped in the immersed state of the casing, and a second space referred to as the lower space, delimited by the porous wall…” is ambiguous and overly broad. With emphasis on the phrase “can be”, this is an indefinite and / or relative phrase and raises the question as to whether air is trapped in the immersed state of the casing or not?
Suggested recitation: “…delimited at least by the solid wall and in which air is able to be trapped in the immersed state of the casing, and a second space referred to as the lower space, delimited by the porous wall…”
Regarding claim 1 the recitation “…which the liquid to be monitored can circulate,…”, is ambiguous and overly broad. With emphasis on the phrase “can circulate”, this is an indefinite and / or relative phrase and raises the question as to whether air is trapped in the immersed state of the casing or not?
Suggested recitation: “…which the liquid to be monitored circulates,…”.
Regarding claim 3 the recitation “…at least one filter element that may be placed around the porous wall …” is ambiguous and overly broad. With emphasis on the phrase “may be”, this is an indefinite and / or relative phrase and raises the question as to whether the filter is placed around the porous wall or not?
Suggested recitation: “….at least one filter element placed around the porous wall …”
Regarding claim 13 the recitation “a portion of the floating structure capable of supplying position data…” is ambiguous and overly broad. With emphasis on the phrase “capable of”, this is an indefinite and / or relative phrase and raises the question as to whether the claimed a portion of the floating structure supplies position data or not?
Suggested recitation: “a portion of the floating structure supplies position data…”
Claims 2, 4-12 and 14-15 are rejected based on their dependency of rejected claims 1, 3 and / or 13.
Regarding claims 1, 5, & 6 the recitation “the second lower space” lacks antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
Regarding claims 5, & 6 the recitations “the inner length” lacks antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
Regarding claims 5 & 6 the recitation “interface” lacks antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
Regarding claims 10 & 11 the recitation “the attachment members” lacks antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claim 1 would be allowable if rewritten or amended to overcome the rejection(s) under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), 2nd paragraph, set forth in this Office action.
The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter:
Farotto (US 20140157992 A1) discloses a magnetic suspension density measuring device for use in hostile environments and a related operating method; in particular, the following discussion will make explicit reference, without any loss of generality, to use of the measuring device in a wine-making environment, in the field of a wine-making process. (Summary of Invention)
Snell et al (US 20080223130 A1) discloses A sensor for measuring density of a liquid that comprises a float unit having a sealed hollow casing that contains a first magnet and a strain-gauge unit having a sealed hollow casing that contains a strain gauge and a second magnet arranged coaxially to the first magnet. Coaxiality of the magnets is provided by means of a guide rod installed on the casing of the strain-gauge unit and used to guide the float unit by inserting the guide rod into the central opening of the float unit casing. A characteristic feature of the sensor is that changes in the density of the liquid that cause displacement of the float cause detectable deformations of the strain gauge via forces of magnetic interaction between the first and second magnets without physical contact between the magnets. (Abstract)
The cited pertinent art does not anticipate nor render obvious a casing for housing a floating structure and an attachment system for attaching the casing, in that said casing, intended to be immersed in a liquid to be monitored, has a first end referred to as closed and a second end and extends from the first end in the direction of the second end, forming a chamber delimited by a solid wall and a wall referred to as the porous wall provided with through openings so as to form, inside the chamber, in the manner of a diving bell, at least a first space referred to as the upper space, delimited at least by the solid wall and in which air is able to be trapped in the immersed state of the casing, and a second space referred to as the lower space, delimited by the porous wall and inside which the liquid to be monitored can circulate.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
US 11913968 B2 Automatic liquid density measurement device
US 9816908 B2 Liquid density measuring device
US 5900547 A Automatic density of liquid determination method
US 4353253 A Device for measuring the density of fluids
US 3597972 A COMBINED LEVEL INDICATOR AND HYDROMETER
US 3392589 A Specific gravity measurement system
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ANDRE J ALLEN whose telephone number is (571)272-2174. The examiner can normally be reached Mon-Fri. 9am-5PM.
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, Kristina M Deherrera can be reached at (303) 297-4237. 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.
/ANDRE J ALLEN/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2855