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 .
Continued Prosecution Application
A request for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, including the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e), was filed in this application after allowance or after an Office action under Ex Parte Quayle, 25 USPQ 74, 453 O.G. 213 (Comm'r Pat. 1935). Since this application is eligible for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, prosecution in this application has been reopened pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114. Applicant's submission filed on May 15, 2026 has been entered.
Response to Amendment
Applicant’s amendment filed May 15, 2026 has been entered. Claims 22-23 have been amended. Claim 24 has been previously cancelled. Applicant’s arguments in conjunction with the amendment have been carefully reviewed but they are not found persuasive. In particular, claim 23 has been amended to recite determination of “at least a portion of the separating device”. Upon review of the originally-filed disclosure, the Examiner is unable to identify support for the newly-recited limitation. It is noted that the specification appears to describe sensing displacement of the separating device as a whole, but does not appear to describe sensing displacement of only a portion of the separating device. In other words, the Examiner has not identified disclosure describing sensing displacement of a selected portion, subsection, or region of the separating device as now claimed. Therefore, the following rejection under 35 U.S.C. 112 (a) is made.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of 35 U.S.C. 112(a):
(a) IN GENERAL.—The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor or joint inventor of carrying out the invention.
The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112:
The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor of carrying out his invention.
Claim 23 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(a) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), first paragraph, as failing to comply with the written description requirement. The claim(s) contains subject matter which was not described in the specification in such a way as to reasonably convey to one skilled in the relevant art that the inventor or a joint inventor, or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the inventor(s), at the time the application was filed, had possession of the claimed invention. The specification, as originally filed, fails to provide adequate written description support for the claimed limitation “based on a sensed displacement of at least a portion of the sensing device”. It is noted that the originally-filed specification consistently describes sensing displacement of the separating device. See, e.g., paragraphs [0030], [0032], [0034] and [0036], each of which describes a sensor configured to sense a displacement of the separating device and processing based on the sensed displacement of the separating device. The originally-filed disclosure does not describe sensing displacement of only a portion, subsection, segment, region or less than the entirely of the separating device. Nor does the specification disclose that determinations regarding liquid level, threshold exceedance or abnormal operating conditions may be made from displacement measurements of only a portion of the separating device. The Examiner therefore finds that the originally-filed specification does not reasonably convey to one of ordinary skill in the art that Applicant was in possession of the presently claimed subject matter at the time of filing. Applicant is invited to identify explicit support in the originally-filed specification.
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 23, 34-37 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.
As to claim 23, the limitation of “at least a portion of the separating device” renders the scope of the claim unclear. The claim fails to identify which portion of the separating device is being sensed, how such portion is selected, whether different portions would produce different displacement measurements, or how displacement of the unspecified portion is correlated to the determinations recited in the claim.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 18-22, 25-33 are allowed as set forth in the Notice of Allowability dated February 18, 2026.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to HUNG HENRY NGUYEN whose telephone number is (571)272-2124. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 7:00AM-4:30PM.
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, Toan Minh Ton can be reached at 571-272-2303. 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.
HUNG HENRY NGUYEN
Primary Examiner
Art Unit 2882
Hvn
5/21/26
/HUNG V NGUYEN/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2882
Prosecution Insights