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 . 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 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.
Priority
Receipt is acknowledged of certified copies of papers required by 37 CFR 1.55.
Election/Restrictions
Applicant's election with traverse of Species 1 in the reply filed on 06/16/2026 is acknowledged. The traversal is on the ground(s) that the technical feature common to Species 1 and Species 2 is not obvious. Fueki only teaches the use of a single, general "absolute pressure gauge claimed configuration of separately providing a fluid gauge pressure sensor and an atmospheric pressure sensor and adding them to calculate absolute pressure. Furthermore, measuring atmospheric pressure separately is specifically intended to precisely correct the deviation of the relative dielectric constant caused by the difference between the "reference atmospheric pressure at the time of creating the database" and the "actual atmospheric pressure at the time of measurement"
Response: The traversal is not persuasive, because: 1) the difference between claim limitation and absolute pressure measurement by Fueki is obvious. An absolute pressure sensor is well known to be functionally equivalent to: a gauge pressure sensor, plus a measurement of atmospheric pressure, because Absolute Pressure = Gauge Pressure + Atmospheric Pressure. Thus, both approaches produce the same quantity needed by the calculation. In other words, It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to replace the absolute pressure sensor of Fueki with a gauge pressure sensor and an atmospheric pressure sensor because obtaining absolute pressure by combining gauge pressure with atmospheric pressure is a well-known alternative technique in the art for determining absolute pressure. The substitution merely replaces one known means of obtaining the same pressure value with another known means, yielding the predictable result of providing absolute pressure for calculating the fluid property. See also MPEP 2143 (B), courts have ruled that Simple substitution of one known element for another to obtain predictable results, is within the purview of a skilled artisan. See KSR Int'l Co. v. Teleflex Inc., 550 U.S. 398, 415-421,82 USPQ2d 1385, 1395-97 (2007). 2). Furthermore, during patent examination, the pending claims must be “given their broadest reasonable interpretation consistent with the specification.” See MPEP 2111. Under a broadest reasonable interpretation (BRI), in this case, the prior art is compared with the claim language not the specification, and Fueki, at least teaches :“a processor comprising a temperature sensor configured to measure a fluid temperature of the fluid to be measured in the flow path, a pressure sensor configured to measure a pressure of the fluid to be measured in the flow path, the processor comprising a fluid relative dielectric constant correction calculation circuit configured to calculate a corrected relative dielectric constant of the fluid to be measured based on the fluid temperature and an absolute fluid pressure” although Fueki is not specifically teach and an atmospheric pressure sensor configured to measure an atmospheric pressure and Fueki does not specifically teach an absolute fluid pressure which is a value obtained by adding a pressure of the fluid to be measured to the atmospheric pressure, however, this is obvious as cited above. As an evidence: see also (WO2021086419A1)1 as an evidentiary art: teaches that a controller can determine absolute pressure by converting gauge pressure using atmospheric pressure, i.e., using the relationship: Absolute Pressure = Gauge Pressure + Atmospheric Pressure. This is a well-established technique in the art. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the invention to modify the system of Fueki to determine absolute pressure from a gauge pressure measurement and an atmospheric pressure measurement, as taught by WO2021086419A1, because WO2021086419A1 teaches that this is a known alternative technique for obtaining absolute pressure. The modification merely substitutes one known technique for obtaining the required absolute pressure with another known technique, yielding the predictable result of providing absolute pressure for use in calculating the fluid property.
Therefore, restriction requirement remains: claims 1-4 and 7 are examined and claims 5-6 are withdrawn.
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.
Claim 7 is
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 7 depends on claim 1 and citing “wherein the processor further comprises an electrostatic capacitance scale correction circuit configured to correct one or both of a deviation when the bubble fraction of the fluid to be measured is 0% and a deviation when the bubble fraction of the fluid to be measured is 100%, which are caused by the insulator in an electrostatic capacitance value measured by the main electrodes.” The claim is unclear as it is not properly defining deviation caused by the insulator, in other words, it appears to have a functional relationship that is not fully defined. Although specification define this function by capacitance value measured by correction electrodes, the claim language is indefinite as is appears to deviation by the insulator can have different interpretations. Is deviation by for example the insulator temperature dependent variations of dielectric properties of insulator or capacitance measured by correction electrodes, the missing part here is source of correction information. MPEP § 2173.02(I) states in part: “if the language of a claim, given its broadest reasonable interpretation, is such that a person of ordinary skill in the relevant art would read it with more than one reasonable interpretation, then a rejection under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, second paragraph is appropriate”.
For examination, it is interpreted that source of correction is a pair of correction electrodes configured to measure an electrostatic capacitance of the insulator provided in a region where an electric flux line generated between the pair of correction electrodes does not pass through the flow path.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
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.
Claim 1 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Fueki, JP 2000249673 A in view of Aspelund, US 6655221 B1.
Claim 1
Fueki2 in figs.1-5 teaches:
A bubble fraction meter for measuring a bubble fraction of a fluid to be measured, the bubble fraction meter comprising:
a pipe 1 comprising a flow path 2 through which the fluid (e.g., ¶0001 multiphase fluid, oil and water and gas bubbles) to be measured flows (e.g., figs.1-2);
a pair of main electrodes (3 and or 3’) disposed at positions facing each other (e.g., 4 and 5 or 4’ ,5’) across the flow path 2 in the pipe 1 and configured to measure an electrostatic capacitance (capacitance that is correlated to the dielectric or permittivity in ¶0005) of the fluid (multiphase fluid oil water gas) to be measured in the flow path 2; and
a processor 11 comprising a temperature sensor 10 configured to measure a fluid temperature of the fluid to be measured in the flow path 2, a pressure sensor 9 configured to measure a pressure of the fluid to be measured in the flow path 2, the processor 11 comprising a fluid relative dielectric constant correction calculation circuit configured to calculate a corrected relative dielectric constant of the fluid (ε in eq.2 ¶0005) to be measured based on the fluid temperature and an absolute fluid pressure (¶0009-0011 : an absolute pressure gauge (9) and a thermometer (10) are used to correct density and dielectric-constant parameters for temperature and pressure, and ultimately to correct the flow rate).
Fueki does not specifically teach an insulator, a pair of main electrodes disposed at positions facing each other across the flow path in the insulator. Although Fueki does not specifically teach and an atmospheric pressure sensor configured to measure an atmospheric pressure, which is a value obtained by adding a pressure of the fluid to be measured to the atmospheric pressure, however, these are obvious over prior art.
In the similar field of endeavor, Aspelund in figs.5,6A teaches: an insulator (39), a pair of main electrodes (40,40b) disposed at positions facing each other across the flow path in the insulator(39). Aspelund also teaches an atmospheric pressure sensor configured to measure an atmospheric pressure (last paragraph: the results are "recalculated... from the prevailing pressure and temperature conditions during measurement." Earlier in the document, absolute pressure and temperature measurement are mentioned as part of the overall system (in the "Objects of the Invention" section, where it notes standard piping needs "taps for differential pressure measurements, absolute pressure measurement and temperature measurement"). So the patent does contemplate separate pressure and temperature sensors feeding into calculating unit 31, and this final paragraph confirms their role: enabling the conversion of the calculated phase fractions/flow rates from actual measurement conditions to standard conditions, which is standard practice for fiscal/custody-transfer-grade flow measurement in oil and gas).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to use Aspelund’s insulator for Fueki‘s bubble fraction meter comprising a flow path through which the modified Fueki‘s fluid to be measured flows; a pair of main electrodes disposed at positions facing each other across the flow path in the modified Fueki‘s insulator. One of ordinary skill in the art knows insulator lets the electric field pass through the fluid inside the bore rather than short-circuiting through the insulator would have been motivated to make this modification in order to avoid short circuiting any electrode and creating electrical field through the fluid. Although Fueki is not specifically teach an atmospheric pressure sensor configured to measure an atmospheric pressure and Fueki does not specifically teach an absolute fluid pressure which is a value obtained by adding a pressure of the fluid to be measured to the atmospheric pressure, however, this is obvious: An absolute pressure sensor is well known to be functionally equivalent to: a gauge pressure sensor, plus a measurement of atmospheric pressure, because Absolute Pressure = Gauge Pressure + Atmospheric Pressure. Thus, both approaches produce the same quantity needed by the calculation. In other words, It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to replace the absolute pressure sensor of the prior art with a gauge pressure sensor and an atmospheric pressure sensor because obtaining absolute pressure by combining gauge pressure with atmospheric pressure is a well-known alternative technique in the art for determining absolute pressure. The substitution merely replaces one known means of obtaining the same pressure value with another known means, yielding the predictable result of providing absolute pressure for calculating the fluid property. See also MPEP 2143 (B), courts have ruled that Simple substitution of one known element for another to obtain predictable results, is within the purview of a skilled artisan. See KSR Int'l Co. v. Teleflex Inc., 550 U.S. 398, 415-421,82 USPQ2d 1385, 1395-97 (2007). 2).
Claims 2-4 and 7 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Fueki, JP 2000249673 A in view of Aspelund, US 6655221 B1 and Schneider , US20130026084A1.
Claim 2
Fueki in view of Aspelund teaches the bubble fraction meter according to claim 1, but does not teach further comprising: a pair of correction electrodes configured to measure an electrostatic capacitance of the insulator are provided in a region where an electric flux line generated between the pair of correction electrodes does not pass through the flow path. However, it is well known to use correction electrodes to detect the other unwanted influences on the measurement capacitance. For example,
In the similar field of endeavor, Schneider in figs.1-5,9B teaches a pair of correction electrodes (C11 C12, ¶0003,0032,0063: correction electrodes related to determining distortion from wall and air gap capacitance) configured to measure an electrostatic capacitance of the (plastic wall and air gap) are provided in a region where an electric flux line generated between the pair of correction electrodes (C11, C12 see better shown in e.g., fig.5) does not pass through the flow path (in pipe 22). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to use Schneider‘s pair of correction electrodes for the modified Fueki‘s insulator configured to measure an electrostatic capacitance of the modified Fueki’s insulator are provided in a region where an electric flux line generated between the pair of correction electrodes does not pass through the modified Fueki’s flow path. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to make this modification in order to detect and compensate the influence of wall on capacitance measurements and improve the accuracy (e.g.,¶0003-0004 Schneider).
Claim 3
Fueki in view of Aspelund Schneider teaches the bubble fraction meter according to claim 2, Schneider teaches wherein an AC voltage for measurement is alternately applied to the pair of main electrodes and the pair of correction electrodes without affecting each other (e.g., ¶0053: sensor system selectively connects the electrodes to an evaluation unit so that different electrode pairs can be used for different capacitive measurements/¶0032: The level detection measurement and the coupling measurement are advantageously chronologically staggered) for the same reason and motivation as cited above.
Claim 4
Fueki in view of Aspelund Schneider teaches the bubble fraction meter according to claim 2, Schneider teaches wherein an opposing direction of the pair of main electrodes and an opposing direction of the pair of correction electrodes cross each other (see figs. 1 and 5) for the same reason and motivation as cited above.
Claim 7
Fueki in view of Aspelund teaches the bubble fraction meter according to claim 1, the combination does not teach wherein the processor further comprises an electrostatic capacitance scale correction circuit configured to correct one or both of a deviation when the bubble fraction of the fluid to be measured is 0% and a deviation when the bubble fraction of the fluid to be measured is 100%, which are caused by the insulator in an electrostatic capacitance value measured by the main electrodes.
In the similar field of endeavor, Schneider in e.g., figs. 1-5, 9B teaches a processor configured to correct a deviation (e.g., ¶0003,0032,0063 broadly interpreted as measurement sensor C1 is capacitance of wall and fluid while capacitance of correction electrodes C12,C22 is only capacitance of wall and ¶0063 teaches the correction that means deviation of capacitance measurement capacitance of wall from measurement capacitance C1) when a bubble fraction of the fluid to be measured is 0% which are caused by the wall (30) in an electrostatic capacitance value measured by the main electrodes (C1 in fig.9B). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to use Schneider‘s electrostatic capacitance scale correction circuit for the modified Fueike‘s processor wherein the modified Fueike‘s processor further comprises an electrostatic capacitance scale correction circuit configured to correct a deviation when the bubble fraction of the modified Fueike‘s fluid to be measured is 0% which caused by the modified Fueike‘s insulator in an electrostatic capacitance value measured by the modified Fueike‘s main electrodes. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to make this modification in order to detect and compensate the influence of wall on capacitance measurements and improve the accuracy (e.g.,¶0003-0004 Schneider).
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Fatemeh E. Nia whose telephone number is (469)295-9187. The examiner can normally be reached 9:00 am to 4:00 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, Kristina 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.
/FATEMEH ESFANDIARI NIA/Examiner, Art Unit 2855
1 e.g., ¶0036: Measuring the pressure may include measuring the absolute or gauge pressure within the enclosure of the flow reference. For example, a pressure sensor located within the enclosure or fluidly connected to the enclosure may measure the gauge pressure within the enclosure. The controller may convert the gauge pressure to an absolute pressure using atmospheric pressure, which may be stored as a known parameter, such as known parameters 310. The pressure sensor within the enclosure may also measure the absolute pressure, which may be converted into the gauge pressure if needed.
2 Prior art of record
Prosecution Insights