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 .
The Preliminary Amendment filed on 05/22/2024 has been acknowledged.
Priority
Receipt is acknowledged of certified copies of papers required by 37 CFR 1.55.
Drawings
The drawings are objected to under 37 CFR 1.83(a) because they fail to show “depth component” as described in the specification on in Paragraph [0025] on Page 8. Any structural detail that is essential for a proper understanding of the disclosed invention should be shown in the drawing. MPEP § 608.02(d). 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.
Specification
The title of the invention is not descriptive. A new title is required that is clearly indicative of the invention to which the claims are directed.
The following title is suggested: System For Automatically Detecting, Monitoring And Controlling Loading Of Explosive Material By Determining Relative Depth Of Sensor Element In Borehole Relative To Fluid Outlet
Claim Interpretation
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 do not use the word “means,” but are nonetheless being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, because the claim limitation(s) uses a generic placeholder that is coupled with functional language without reciting sufficient structure to perform the recited function and the generic placeholder is not preceded by a structural modifier. Such claim limitation(s) is/are:
“…the system is configured to automatically determine a depth ("the outlet depth") of the fluid outlet in the fluid explosive material based on the sensor element depth and the relative depth” in claim 2;
“…the system is configured to determine the sensor element depth based on the measured values” in claim 7.
Because this/these claim limitation(s) is/are being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, it/they is/are being interpreted to cover the corresponding structure described in the specification as performing the claimed function, and equivalents thereof.
Specification states:
In Paragraph [0054], the instant application describes the corresponding structures of an electronic system controller being “the system is configured to automatically determine a depth ("the outlet depth") of the fluid outlet in the fluid explosive material based on the sensor element depth and the relative depth” and being “the system is configured to determine the sensor element depth based on the measured values.”
If applicant does not intend 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 avoid it/them being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph (e.g., by reciting sufficient structure to perform the claimed function); or (2) present a sufficient showing that the claim limitation(s) recite(s) sufficient structure to perform the claimed function so as to avoid it/them being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph.
See MPEP 2181 (I.B) - The mere use of the term "means" with no associated function rebuts the presumption that 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is invoked. A function must be recited within the claim limitation, but it is not necessary that a particular format be used. Typically, the claim limitation will use the linking word "for" to associate "means" or a generic placeholder with the function. However, other linking words may be used, such as "so that" or "configured to", provided it is clear that the claim element is reciting a function. In certain circumstances, it is also not necessary to use a linking word if other words used with "means", or the generic placeholder, convey the function. Such words, however, cannot convey specific structure for performing the function or the phrase will not be treated as invoking 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph. For example, "ink delivery means", "module configured to deliver ink" and "means for ink delivery" could all be interpreted as claim elements that invoke 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph. See Signtech USA, 174 F.3d at 1356.
Claim Objections
Claim 12-22 are objected to because of the following informalities: In regards to claim 12 line 5, the element number “106” should be deleted. Appropriate correction is required. The remaining claims are objected due to their dependency.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 1-11 are allowed.
Claims 12 would be allowable if rewritten or amended to overcome the claim objection set forth in this Office action.
The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter: In the Examiner’s opinion in regards to claim 1, Xinglin et al (CN 102865900 B) teaches a fiber grating liquid level sensor having an optical fiber (1) engraved with a fiber Bragg grating (2) and a sensing fiber Bragg grating (4) being inserted into a first capillary metal tube (2) and a second capillary metal tube (5) (Paragraph 0034). The sensor is placed in the liquid to be measured. When the liquid level changes, external pressure acts on the pressure sensitive diaphragm (8) causing the pressure-sensitive diaphragm (8) to deform slightly (Paragraph 0037).
However, Xinglin et al does not teach the structural limitations of the system further comprising a depth component configured to automatically determine a relative depth of the sensor element in the borehole relative to a fluid outlet while the fluid outlet is loading the fluid explosive material in the borehole where the stated limitations are not suggested in addition to not being anticipated or taught in combination with the remaining limitations of independent claim 1. The remaining claims are allowed due to their dependency.
In the Examiner’s opinion in regards to claim 12, Heller et al (US 20070169933 A1) teaches a sensor assembly (51) for determining fluid properties in a subsurface well that includes a sensor apparatus (52) and a pump assembly (54) wherein the pump assembly (54) operates to move the first fluid (38) through, along or around the sensor apparatus (52). During this process, the sensor apparatus (52) can sense or otherwise determine one or more fluid properties of the first fluid (38). These fluid properties can include one or more of pressure, flow, refractive index, specific conductivity, temperature, oxidation-reduction potential, pH, dissolved oxygen, or any other suitable properties (Paragraph 0051). Once the relevant fluid properties have been sensed by the sensor apparatus (52), the pump assembly (54) can pump the first fluid (38) to the controller (17), the fluid receiver (18) or to another region of the fluid monitoring system (10), as required (Paragraph 0052; Figure 1).
However, Heller et al does not teach the system further comprising the method steps of automatically determining a relative depth of the sensor element in the borehole relative to a fluid outlet while the fluid outlet is loading the fluid explosive material in the borehole where the stated limitations are not suggested in addition to not being anticipated or taught in combination with the remaining limitations of independent claim 12 upon overcoming the claim objection. The remaining claims will be allowed due to their dependency.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Piscsalko et al (US 10690805 B2) - The invention of this application relates to a measuring device that can be deployed in a borehole or any deep excavation or opening to inspect the borehole and/or excavation, in particular, to inspect the bottom and/or side walls of the excavation and provide fast and reliable information about the quality, shape and/or verticality of the borehole and/or excavation.
Fitzgerald (US 20050138830 A1) - The present invention relates to a method for the determination of the depth of equipment lowered into a borehole by means of a cable. In particular, the invention provides a method for the determination of the depth of a tool in a borehole for making measurements or performing operations, or for correcting such depth determinations made at the surface.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JERMAINE L JENKINS whose telephone number is (571)272-2179. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 7-3 EST.
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, Peter Macchiarolo can be reached at 571-272-2375. 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.
/J.L.J/ Examiner, Art Unit 2855
/PETER J MACCHIAROLO/ Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2855
Prosecution Insights