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 Examination Under 37 CFR 1.114
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 final rejection. 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and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114. Applicant's submission filed on 5/19/2026 has been entered.
Response to Amendment
Applicant's previously submitted amendment filed on 4/24/2026 has been entered.
Claims 1 and 9-10 have been amended.
Claims 2-8 and 11-13 are as previously presented.
Claim 14 has been added.
Claims 1-14 are still pending in this application, with claim 1 being independent.
Applicant’s arguments regarding the prior 35 U.S.C. 112(a) and 35 U.S.C. 112(b) rejections of claims 1-13 are persuasive [p. 11: “Applicant has amended claim 1 to address the Examiner's concerns”], and the rejections are withdrawn.
Applicant’s arguments regarding the prior 35 U.S.C. 103 rejections of claims 1-13 are not persuasive [Remarks p. 11-15: “Applicant respectfully traverses the rejections of claims 1-13 under 35 U.S.C. § 103 as allegedly being unpatentable over Chandrasekharan in view of Baggett. A primafacie case of obviousness has not been established…Claims 2-13 are also allowable at least by virtue of their dependence from claim 1.”].
The instant claims are directed towards conventional structure known in the “pipeline temperature control equipment used in a semiconductor equipment” arts: wherein a conventional controller [i.e., a processor] is configured to control multiple heating assemblies according to temperature measurements, wherein each heating assembly comprises a heating device [i.e., heating distinct sections of the pipeline], a first temperature measuring device, a second temperature measuring device [i.e., each providing temperature measurements inherently corresponding to a particular section of the pipeline and thus a heating state of the heating device of that particular section], and a control device [i.e., conventional structure known in the art capable of controlling heating assemblies/temperature measuring devices].
Chandrasekharan (US 20200051834 A1) also discloses pipeline temperature control equipment [fig. 1: 167], a processor [system controller 180], multiple heating devices corresponding to multiple sections of pipeline [fig. 2A: heater zones 250-1 to 250-N; para. 0047; figs. 2B-C: TCR heater 283], multiple temperature measuring devices [figs. 2B-C: thermocouple 284, figs. 2B-C: TCR heater 283]. Wherein the controller is conventionally used to monitor sensor data and control connected heating devices to achieve a desired heating response, specifically, the controller is capable of monitoring the thermocouples, and controlling the heating devices accordingly [so as to provide, e.g., a progressive heating profile of gas lines so as to reduce the risk of condensation; fig. 2A; paras. 0015, 30].
Chandrasekharan discloses that this conventional structure is capable of determining that a measured temperature differs from an expected value, and controlling a heating of the pipeline accordingly [i.e., in order to address abnormal readings due to the location of the thermocouple, feedback from the temperatures measured is used to make a determination if an override falls below or goes above a particular value; paras. 0030, 32-33].
Baggett (US 20190304820 A1) also discloses a conventional processor, and that it is known to have redundant sensors near each other, so as to, e.g., adapt to a failure of a sensor [para. 0067].
Given the structure of Chandrasekharan and Baggett, selecting a heating response [a deactivation or an adjustment of heating of a particular heating device] according to a measurement of a temperature sensor or any combination of sensors, wherein a sensor may fail, would be an obvious matter of design choice, as necessitated by the specific requirements of the given application [e.g., in order to control operations of a corresponding heating device through a corresponding control device, until a temperature of the corresponding heated part meets the target temperature]. For example, Chandrasekharan further discloses uniform heating in a first heater zone to a first target temperature [para. 0063], and given redundant sensors in the first heater zone, and similar redundant sensors in an adjacent/second downstream heater zone desired to be at a different, higher target temperature [i.e., for the progressive heating of Chandrasekharan], given a failure of a specific sensor, selecting which of any of the remaining sensors [i.e., each sensor corresponding a heating state of a heating device of a particular section of the pipeline ] to use as a representation of the failed sensor would merely be selected from the available sensors/heating devices, the determination being made with considerations to the different target temperatures of each heated part, the locations/proximity of the sensor/heating device to the failed sensor, etc. The prior art discloses the structure of claim 1, the structure capable of monitoring sensors and determining a controlling of heating devices to different target temperatures, and responding to a failed sensor. Thus, applicants arguments are not persuasive.
Examiner notes that when the cited prior art teaches all of the positively recited structure of the claimed apparatus, it will be held that the prior art apparatus is capable of performing all of the claimed functional limitations of the claimed apparatus. The courts have held that: (1) "apparatus claims cover what a device is, not what a device does." Hewlett-Packard Co. v. Bausch & Lomb Inc., 909 F.2d 1464, 1469, 15 USPQ2d 1525, 1528 (Fed. Cir. 1990), and (2) a claim containing a "recitation with respect to the manner in which a claimed apparatus is intended to be employed does not differentiate the claimed apparatus from a prior art apparatus" if the prior art apparatus teaches all the structural limitations of the claim. Ex parte Masham, 2 USPQ2d 1647 (Bd. Pat. App. & Inter. 1987). MPEP § 2114.
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 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.
The following claim limitations are being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph:
Claim 1:
the limitation “heating device” is being interpreted as an electric heating device such as a resistive element, and equivalents thereof [para. 0036].
the limitation “temperature measuring device” is being interpreted as an infrared temperature sensor, a laser temperature sensor, a thermocouple, and equivalents thereof [para. 0037].
the limitation “control device” is being interpreted as a switch, a variable resistor, and equivalents thereof [para. 0037].
Because these claim limitations are being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) they are being interpreted to cover the corresponding structure described in the specification as performing the claimed function, and equivalents thereof.
If applicant does not intend to have these limitations interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f), applicant may: (1) amend the claim limitations to avoid them being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) (e.g., by reciting sufficient structure to perform the claimed function); or (2) present a sufficient showing that the claim limitations recite sufficient structure to perform the claimed function so as to avoid them being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph.
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 14 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 14:
The recitation of “wherein the following comprises controlling the corresponding heating device according to a measured value of a first temperature measuring device of a heating assembly corresponding to the adjacent heated part and a target temperature of the adjacent heated part” renders the claim indefinite because it seems to be directed to the apparatus of claim 1 and a method step of using the apparatus [i.e., configuring a processor so as to control heating devices according to connected measuring devices, so as to achieve a particular heating profile/response; see MPEP 2173.05(p)].
However, in view of the control method of claim 2 (applied to the apparatus of claim 1), Examiner will interpret claim 14 as similarly being directed towards “A pipeline temperature control method, applied to the pipeline temperature control equipment according to claim 1…” .
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.
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.
Claims 1-8 and 11-13 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Chandrasekharan (US 20200051834 A1) in view of Baggett (US 20190304820 A1).
Regarding claim 1, Chandrasekharan discloses:
A pipeline temperature control equipment [fig. 1: vapor delivery system 167], used in a semiconductor equipment [fig. 1: substrate processing system 120; para. 0070], comprising a processor [fig. 1: system controller 180] and multiple heating assemblies [fig. 2A: heater zones 250-1 to 250-N; para. 0047: “A plurality of heater zones 250-1, 250-2, ... , 250-N (collectively heater zones 250) (where N is an integer greater than one) are used to heat gas lines, valves and/or other components along the gas flow paths.”],
wherein the multiple heating assemblies are distributed along an extension direction of a temperature-controlled pipeline to correspondingly control temperatures of multiple heated parts of the temperature-controlled pipeline, and each of the multiple heating assemblies corresponds to a respective heated part of the multiple heated parts [Multiple heating zones are arranged along gas lines, so as to provide a progressive heating profile of gas lines so as to reduce the risk of condensation; fig. 2A; paras. 0015, 30: “In other features, the N heater zones are arranged around gas lines from a source to a processing chamber. The N heater zones provide a progressive heating profile from the source to the processing chamber.”, “Progressive heating may be used to overcome condensation risks in gas lines.”], and comprises a respective heating device [figs. 2B-C: TCR heater 283], a respective first temperature measuring device [figs. 2B-C: thermocouple 284], a respective second temperature measuring device [figs. 2B-C: TCR heater 283], and a respective control device [figs. 2B-CL: controller 280];
both the first temperature measuring device and the second temperature measuring device in each heating assembly are used to measure a real-time temperature [see fig. 7, showing a temperature T1 measured by thermocouple 284, and a temperature T2 measured by TCR heater 283] of a heated part of the multiple heated parts in the temperature-controlled pipeline corresponding to the heating device in the heating assembly [para. 0032: “A resistance of the TCR-based heater can be measured to provide an average temperature in the heater zone... Temperature is also monitored in each zone using a TC to provide a local temperature (representing a point location in the heater zone).”];
both the first temperature measuring device and the second temperature measuring device in each heating assembly are connected to the respective control device [see figs. 2B-C];
and the control device in each heating assembly is connected to the processor [see fig. 1, showing controller 180 connected to vapor delivery system 167];
the processor is configured to, for each of the multiple heating assemblies, according to
a target temperature of a corresponding heated part [In order to effect the desired progressive heating profile of the pipeline, ideal temperatures as a function of a length of the pipeline are disclosed, wherein each heater zone corresponds to a particular location along the length of the pipeline; para. 0055: “Referring now to FIG. 3, a graph illustrates ideal temperature as a function of length along a gas flow path to a processing chamber. In some applications, it is desirable for the temperature of the gas flow path to monotonically increase as the gas traverses the plurality of heater zones 250.”] and
a measured value of the first temperature measuring device [i.e., a temperature T1 of thermocouple 284; para. 0048: “Referring now to FIG. 2B, the controller 280 may be used to control operation of the heater zones 250. A heater driver 282 may be used to supply power to the TCR heaters 283. One or more temperature sensors or thermocouples 284 may be used to sense temperature in the heater zones 250.”],
control operations of a corresponding heating device through a corresponding control device, until a temperature of the corresponding heated part meets the target temperature [para. 0063: “Control can be performed using a control system similar to those shown in FIGS. 2B and 2C. In this example, the TC 920 monitors the average temperature in the oven 910. The controller 280 stores the resistive ratios of the TCRs and controls the power output to the TCR heaters based thereon. In some examples, the resistive ratios of the TCRs are maintained by the controller 280 to maintain uniform temperature in each of the heater zones.”];
the processor is further configured to, for any one of the multiple heating assemblies, when the measured value of the first temperature measuring device is abnormal [In order to address abnormal readings due to the location of the thermocouple, feedback from the temperatures measured is used to make a determination if an override falls below or goes above a particular value; paras. 0030, 32-33: “If a thermocouple (TC) is located at a pressure drop/expansion location, the thermocouple will sense a low temperature and the gas line may be heated hotter than desired. If the thermocouple is located away from the pressure drop, localized cooling may occur… As will be described further below, a combination of primary control and secondary override/monitoring is performed using the feedback from the TCR heater and the TC in each heater zone. In a first approach, the temperature that is sensed by the TC is used as a control set point for the heater zone and the average temperature that is sensed by the TCR heater is used as monitor/override. If the average temperature of the heater zone falls below or goes above a particular value, the controller uses a default duty cycle.”] within a preset time period [i.e., within the time period of the average temperature], according to a measured value of the second temperature measuring device [i.e., T2 is an average temperature taken over a preset time period; para. 0032: “A resistance of the TCR-based heater can be measured to provide an average temperature in the heater zone.”] and the target temperature of the corresponding heated part [i.e., an ideal temperature corresponding to a particular location on a length of the pipeline], control the corresponding heating device by the corresponding control device to heat the corresponding heated part [i.e., the default duty cycle is supplied to the corresponding heater]
the processor is further configured to, when measured values of of the multiple heating assemblies are abnormal within their respective preset time periods, control the corresponding heating device by the corresponding control device to follow a heating state of a heating device of an adjacent heated part to heat the corresponding heated part [Although Chandrasekharan does not explicitly disclose using a heating state of a heating device of an adjacent heated part, nor of any determination of an abnormality of the T2 measuring device, Chandrasekharan does disclose supplying a ‘default power’ to the heater when T1 is determined to be abnormal. Specifically, assuming the temperature T2 to be an accurate representation of the actual temperature of the heating zone, if, as seen in step #732, T2 is not within a predetermined range, the measurements of T1 are ignored (steps #734/#744 are avoided), and a default power is supplied to the heater. Therefore, one having ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the invention, would have recognized that using a heating state of an adjacent heating device (i.e., that it is safe to still supply the default power corresponding to the defined ideal target temperature for the corresponding position along the length of the pipeline) to the corresponding heater, as one of a finite number of predictable, equivalent solutions that would still provide the progressive heating profile desired, and would have been motivated to do so in light of Chandrasekharan disclosing supplying the default power in step #750, and since the heating state of a nearby adjacent heating zone would have a target temperature close to the target temperature of the corresponding heating zone, relative to the proximity of the heating zones along the length of the pipeline.].
However, Chandrasekharan does not disclose a determination of whether or not the device measuring T2 is abnormal, specifically, Chandrasekharan does not disclose:
the processor is further configured to, when measured values of both the first temperature measuring device and the second temperature measuring device in any one of the multiple heating assemblies are abnormal within their respective preset time periods, control the corresponding heating device by the corresponding control device to follow a heating state of a heating device of an adjacent heated part to heat the heated part.
Baggett, in a similar field of endeavor (i.e., temperature measurement and control), teaches:
the processor is further configured to, when measured values of both the first temperature measuring device and the second temperature measuring device in any one of the multiple heating assemblies are abnormal within their respective preset time periods, control the corresponding heating device by the corresponding control device to follow a heating state of a heating device of an adjacent heated part to heat the heated part [Baggett discloses multiple thermal monitoring devices 160, corresponding to the multiple first and second measuring devices of the multiple heating assemblies, Baggett teaching wherein if any one device fails, the output from the remaining devices may be used to identify a failure of the device, Baggett further teaching that the thermal monitoring devices may be used in pairs (i.e., as a first and second temperature measuring device of a heater zone), as well as using a temperature measuring device of an adjacent, or close, heating zone; para. 0067: “Furthermore, redundant thermal monitoring devices 160, such as redundant TCs/RTDs, may be implemented in each zone due in order to account for potential high failure rates of the devices. By providing multiple redundant TCs/RTDs, if one fails, the output from the remaining TCs/RTDs may be compared with each other. As such, if a large temperature difference is identified between primary and secondary (e.g., redundant) sensors, such a scenario could be identified as a failure of the TC or RTD, and the system may be placed in a “hold” mode, rather than attempting to drive the heater(s) 136 to match the output of the TC/RTD. Redundant TCs/RTDs, for example, may be positioned close to one another for redundancy, and for uniformity, pairs of TCs/RTDs may be positioned at various locations about the thermal chuck 130”].
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the invention, to modify the equipment of Chandrasekharan, by further including a determination of whether or not the second temperature measuring device is abnormal, specifically wherein:
the processor is further configured to, when measured values of both the first temperature measuring device and the second temperature measuring device in any one of the multiple heating assemblies are abnormal within their respective preset time periods, control the corresponding heating device by the corresponding control device to follow a heating state of a heating device of an adjacent heated part to heat the heated part [A person having ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the invention, would have been motivated to configure Chandrasekharan’s processor to determine when both measured values T1 and T2 are abnormal, as taught by Baggett, since Baggett teaches this accounts for failure of the devices that improves uniformity and temperature accuracy; paras. 0066-67: “Multiple locations for the temperature measurement on the workpiece 118 are further contemplated. For example, temperatures may be monitored at several locations around the workpiece for uniformity (e.g., inner and outer zones may be adjusted and controlled for better uniformity). Thus, having multiple thermal monitoring devices 160 at multiple locations advantageously improves uniformity and temperature accuracy. Furthermore, redundant thermal monitoring devices 160, such as redundant TCs/RTDs, may be implemented in each zone due in order to account for potential high failure rates of the devices.”].
Regarding claim 2, Chandrasekharan in view of Baggett discloses the pipeline temperature control temperature according to claim 1.
Chandrasekharan as modified by Baggett further discloses: A pipeline temperature control method comprising:
S1: receiving a temperature control command [para. 0064: “At 1020, a predetermined temperature is maintained in the oven based upon the measured temperature and a desired temperature.”];
S2: for each of the multiple heating assemblies, when the measured value of the first temperature device is normal within the preset time period, according to the target temperature of the corresponding heated part and the measured value of the first temperature measuring device, controlling the operations of the corresponding heating device through the corresponding control device, until temperature of the corresponding heated part meets the target temperature [see fig. 7, showing steps 734/744, wherein depending on a temperature T1 being less than or greater than threshold values, power is increased (738) or decreased (748) to the heater];
S3: for any one of the multiple heating assemblies, when the measured value of the first temperature measuring device is abnormal and the measured value of the second temperature measuring device is normal within the preset time period, according to the measured value of the second temperature measuring device and the target temperature of the corresponding heated part, controlling the corresponding heating device by the corresponding control device to heat the corresponding heated part [i.e., if T2 is NOT within a range TH1A to TH1B (see fig. 7, showing step #732), thus indicating a stop limit/override situation with regards to T1, a default power is supplied to the heater, and/or a notification is generated; para. 0054: “At 732… In some examples, an absolute value of the difference between T1 and T2 is compared to the predetermined temperature threshold.”];
S4: when the measured values of both the first temperature measuring device and the second temperature measuring device in any one the multiple heating assemblies are abnormal within their respective preset time periods, controlling the corresponding heating device by the corresponding control device to follow the heating state of the heating device of the adjacent heated part to heat the corresponding heated part [Baggett teaches determining a failure of either the first or second measuring device in order to continue heating; para. 0067].
Regarding claim 3, Chandrasekharan in view of Baggett discloses the pipeline temperature control method according to claim 2.
Chandrasekharan further discloses wherein the step S2 comprises:
when the measured value of the first temperature measuring device increases with time within the preset time period [i.e., the temperature of the gas line increasing], according to the measured value of the first temperature measuring device and the target temperature of the heated part corresponding to the first temperature measuring device, controlling the corresponding heating device by the corresponding control device to heat, making the temperature of the heated part meet the target temperature [see fig. 7, showing a loop wherein T1 is monitored (#720), and after a determination step #732, power is supplied to the heater in a positive outcome #738 or #748, or in a negative outcome #750.].
Regarding claim 4, Chandrasekharan in view of Baggett discloses the pipeline temperature control method according to claim 3.
Chandrasekharan further discloses wherein the step S2 comprises:
when the measured values of both the first temperature measuring device and the second temperature measuring device increase with time within the preset time period [i.e., the temperature of the gas line increasing], and an absolute value of a difference between the measured value of the first temperature measuring device and the measured value of the second temperature measuring device does not exceed a first preset difference [i.e., normal operation, positive outcome at #732]; or, the measured value of the first temperature measuring device is greater than the measured value of the second temperature measuring device, and the absolute value of the difference between the measured value of the first temperature measuring device and the measured value of the second temperature measuring device exceeds the first preset difference [i.e., abnormal operation, negative outcome at #732], according to the measured value of the first temperature measuring device and the target temperature of the heated part corresponding to the first temperature measuring device [An absolute value of a difference between T1 and T2 may be used at #732, wherein T1 may be larger than T2; fig. 7: #732; para. 0054: “In some examples, an absolute value of the difference between T1 and T2 is compared to the predetermined temperature threshold.”], controlling the corresponding heating device by the corresponding control device to heat, making the temperature of the heated part meet the target temperature [i.e., after comparing T1 and T2 with a predetermined temperature threshold (#732), the default duty cycle is supplied to the heater in a negative outcome (#750), or an increased or decreased power is supplied to the heater in a positive outcome (#738/#748); fig. 7].
Regarding claim 5, Chandrasekharan in view of Baggett discloses the pipeline temperature control method according to claim 3.
Chandrasekharan further discloses wherein the step S2 comprises:
when the measured value of the first temperature measuring device increases with time within the preset time period [i.e., the temperature of the gas line increasing] and the measured value of the second temperature measuring device remains unchanged within the preset time period [i.e., wherein T2 remains unchanged, and stays between TH1A and TH1B; fig. 7: #732], according to the measured value of the first temperature measuring device and the target temperature of the heated part corresponding to the first temperature measuring device [fig. 7: steps #720, #724], controlling the corresponding heating device by the corresponding control device to heat, making the temperature of the heated part meet the target temperature [i.e., after comparing T1 and T2 with a predetermined temperature threshold (#732), the default duty cycle is supplied to the heater in a negative outcome (#750), or an increased or decreased power is supplied to the heater in a positive outcome (#738/#748); fig. 7].
Regarding claim 6, Chandrasekharan in view of Baggett discloses the pipeline temperature control method according to claim 2.
Chandrasekharan further discloses wherein the step S3 comprises:
when the measured values of both the first temperature measuring device and the second temperature measuring device increase with time within the preset time period [i.e., the temperature of the gas line increasing], the measured value of the first temperature measuring device is less than the measured value of the second temperature measuring device, and an absolute value of a difference between the measured value of the first temperature measuring device and the measured value of the second temperature measuring device exceeds a first preset difference [An absolute value of a difference between T1 and T2 is used, wherein T1 may be lower than T2; fig. 7: #732; para. 0054: “In some examples, an absolute value of the difference between T1 and T2 is compared to the predetermined temperature threshold.”], according to the measured value of the second temperature measuring device and the target temperature of the heated part corresponding to the second temperature measuring device [fig. 7: steps #720, #724], controlling the corresponding heating device by the corresponding control device to heat making the temperature of the heated part meet the target temperature [i.e., an increased or decreased power is supplied to the heater in a positive outcome (#738/#748); fig. 7].
Regarding claim 7, Chandrasekharan in view of Baggett discloses the pipeline temperature control method according to claim 2.
Chandrasekharan further discloses wherein the step S3 comprises:
when the measured value of the second temperature measuring device increases with time within the preset time period [i.e., the temperature of the gas line increasing] and the measured value of the first temperature measuring device remains unchanged within the preset time period, according to the measured value of the second temperature measuring device and the target temperature of the heated part corresponding to the second temperature measuring device [An absolute value of a difference between T1 and T2 is used, wherein T1 may remain the same; fig. 7: #732; para. 0054: “In some examples, an absolute value of the difference between T1 and T2 is compared to the predetermined temperature threshold.”], controlling the corresponding heating device by the corresponding control device to heat, making the temperature of the heated part meet the target temperature [see fig. 7, showing a loop wherein T2 is monitored (#724), and after a determination step #732, power is supplied to the heater in a positive outcome #738 or #748, or in a negative outcome #750.].
Regarding claim 8, Chandrasekharan in view of Baggett discloses the pipeline temperature control method according to claim 2.
Chandrasekharan further discloses wherein the step S3 comprises:
when the measured value of the first temperature measuring device continues to exceed a first preset value or a jump amplitude exceeds a second preset value for a preset number of times within the preset time period [fig. 3: #744, temperature threshold #TH3], and the measured value of the second temperature measuring device increases with time within the preset time period [i.e., the temperature of the gas line increasing], according to the measured value of the second temperature measuring device and the target temperature of the heated part corresponding to the second temperature measuring device, controlling the corresponding heating device by the corresponding control device to heat, making the temperature of the heated part meet the target temperature [para. 0055: “If 734 is false, the method continues at 744 and determines whether the temperature T1 is greater than or equal to a temperature threshold TH3. If 744 is true, the method reduces power or the duty cycle to the TCR heater at 748.”].
Regarding claim 11, Chandrasekharan in view of Baggett discloses the pipeline temperature control method according to claim 2.
Chandrasekharan further discloses, after the step S4:
after heating the heated part for the preset time period, obtaining a current temperature of the heated part [i.e., monitoring T1 at #720], and determining an absolute value of a difference between the target temperature of the heated part and the current temperature is less than a preset value [see #734, #744, wherein T1 is compared to values TH2, TH3, and in view of the disclosed ideal target temperature, is equivalent to an absolute value of a difference between T1 and the target temperature], controlling the corresponding heating device by the corresponding control device of the heated part to maintain a constant temperature through heating [see fig. 7, showing a loop wherein power is increased or decreased to the heater (#738/#748) such that T1 is maintained between TH3 to TH2].
Regarding claim 12, Chandrasekharan in view of Baggett discloses the pipeline temperature control temperature according to claim 1.
In view of Chandrasekharan disclosing the conventional practice of selecting the position of a heating device and temperature measuring devices so as to determine how to control he heating device, [para. 0052: “How the temperature will be controlled will vary depending upon where the thermocouple is located.”], including, e.g., proximity of the heating device to the respective heated part, Chandrasekharan as modified by Baggett further discloses wherein:
for the multiple heating assemblies, positions of each of the corresponding heating devices, the corresponding first temperature measuring devices, and the corresponding second temperature measuring devices with respect to the corresponding heated parts of the temperature-controlled pipeline are identical.
In this case, selecting a given position of each heating device and temperature measuring device such that they are identical with respect to the corresponding heated part would have flown naturally to one of ordinary skill in the art as necessitated by the specific requirements of a given application, e.g., the physical properties of the corresponding heated part.
Regarding claim 13, Chandrasekharan in view of Baggett discloses the pipeline temperature control temperature according to claim 1.
Chandrasekharan further discloses:
wherein the heating state comprises at least one heating parameter selected from
a current output parameter of the heating device of the adjacent heated part or a heat preservation power of the heating device of the adjacent heated part [para. 0048: “Current sensors 288 may be used to sense current supplied to the TCR heaters by the heater driver 282.”; paras. 0008-0011],
and controlling the corresponding heating device to follow the heating state comprises controlling the corresponding heating device according to the at least one heating parameter [para. 0006: “In other features, the controller is configured to selectively control power supplied to the resistive heater in each of the N heater zones based on the local temperature and selectively override power supplied to the resistive heater in each of the N heater zones based on the average temperature.”].
Regarding claim 14, Chandrasekharan in view of Baggett discloses the pipeline temperature control temperature according to claim 1.
In this case, since Chandrasekharan discloses the pipeline temperature control equipment of claim 1, which comprises structure capable of the controlling multiple heating devices according to temperature measuring devices, wherein a method of controlling the equipment at least includes a progressive heating along the pipeline [see claim 1 above], wherein Bagget teaches it is known to modify control methods such that the modularity of a system which includes a plurality of heating devices and measurement devices, is further exploited by advantageously using the extra/redundant measuring devices to account for device failures, specifically that when unexpected differences of measured vales are received by the processor, the processor may further control heating devices to at least “hold” instead of increasing or reducing a driving of a corresponding heating device [i.e., the normal operation of the processor when controlling equipment with no failures, Chandrasekharan as modified by Baggett further discloses:
wherein the following comprises controlling the corresponding heating device according to a measured value of a first temperature measuring device of a heating assembly corresponding to the adjacent heated part and a target temperature of the adjacent heated part [e.g., if a normal state is detected according to readings compared between measuring devices of adjacent assemblies, both corresponding heating devices may be controlled to their own target temperature, wherein the target temperatures for these specific two adjacent assemblies along the pipeline are the same].
Examiner notes it would have also been obvious to select a particular target temperature/heating device response for a given particular situation of compared measurement values, at least according to the requirements of the given application, e.g., in order to heat the pipeline gradually along the pipeline, to maintain a specific uniform temperature along the pipeline, or to account for heating/measurement device failures.
Claims 9-10 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Chandrasekharan (US 20200051834 A1) in view of Baggett (US 20190304820 A1) as applied to claim 2 above, and further in view of Nobuta (US 20220073284 A1, priority JP 2020150065 A filed 9/7/20).
Regarding claim 9, Chandrasekharan in view of Baggett discloses the pipeline temperature control method according to claim 2.
Chandrasekharan as modified by Baggett further discloses wherein the step S4 comprises:
when the measured value of the second temperature measuring device remains unchanged within the preset time period [i.e., an abnormal T2, wherein T2 remains unchanged, but does not stay between TH1A and TH1B (negative outcome at #732), and/or if indicated as failing per the teachings of Baggett], controlling the corresponding heating device by the corresponding control device to follow the heating state of the heating device of the adjacent heated part to heat the heated part [i.e., after comparing T1 and T2 and arriving at a negative determination, the default duty cycle is supplied to the heater in a negative outcome (#750)].
Nobuta, in the same field of endeavor, teaches that abnormal readings from temperature sensors are may be indicative of short and open faults in the sensor [i.e., the well-understood behavior of conventional sensors; para. 0031: “Also, in the case where a failure occurs in the temperature sensor 7, such a short circuit in the thermistor or the wiring of the thermistor, for example, the resistance value of the temperature sensor 7 decreases and the voltage of the temperature detection value increases. Also, when disconnection or the like occurs in the thermistor or the wiring of the thermistor, the resistance value of the temperature sensor 7 increases and the voltage of the temperature detection value decreases.”].
Therefore, in view of Chandrasekharan and Baggett disclosing structure and a method for measuring real-time temperatures from temperature measuring devices, wherein the pipeline is predictably heated in a gradual manner along the pipeline (i.e., the pipeline is expected to be at different, e.g., increasing temperatures along the pipeline), wherein the method additionally provides algorithms for device failures, it would have been obvious to a PHOSITA to configure the invention of Chandrasekharan and Baggett to also detect short circuit faults in a temperature measuring device so as to arrive at claim 9, specifically wherein the measured value of the second temperature measuring device remaining unchanged within the preset time period is indicative of a short circuit fault, since Nobuta teaches this improves safety to the user [i.e., the system provides real-time user protection such that if a sensor fails in an open or closed state, the resulting abnormal reading (e.g., an expected value at a sensor to be gradually increasing or decreasing but instead remaining unchanged) received by the processor immediately triggers fail-safe protocols to protect the user; para. 0032: “The transport vehicle control system 100 executes fail-safe control on the article transport vehicle 3, based on the temperature detection value.”]
Regarding claim 10, Chandrasekharan in view of Baggett discloses the pipeline temperature control method according to claim 2.
Chandrasekharan as modified by Baggett further discloses wherein the step S4 comprises:
when the measured value of the second temperature measuring device continues to exceed a first preset value [i.e., an abnormal T2, wherein T2 exceeds TH1B (negative outcome at #732), and/or if indicated as failing per the teachings of Baggett] or a jump amplitude exceeds a second preset value for a preset number of times within the preset time period, controlling the corresponding heating device by the corresponding control device to follow the heating state of the heating device of the adjacent heated part to heat the heated part [i.e., after comparing T1 and T2 and arriving at a negative determination, the default duty cycle is supplied to the heater in a negative outcome (#750)]
Nobuta, in the same field of endeavor, teaches that abnormal readings from temperature sensors are may be indicative of short and open faults in the sensor [i.e., the well-understood behavior of conventional sensors; para. 0031: “Also, in the case where a failure occurs in the temperature sensor 7, such a short circuit in the thermistor or the wiring of the thermistor, for example, the resistance value of the temperature sensor 7 decreases and the voltage of the temperature detection value increases. Also, when disconnection or the like occurs in the thermistor or the wiring of the thermistor, the resistance value of the temperature sensor 7 increases and the voltage of the temperature detection value decreases.”].
Therefore, in view of Chandrasekharan and Baggett disclosing structure and a method for measuring real-time temperatures from temperature measuring devices, wherein the pipeline is predictably heated in a gradual manner along the pipeline (i.e., the pipeline is expected to be at different, e.g., increasing temperatures along the pipeline), wherein the method additionally provides algorithms for device failures, it would have been obvious to a PHOSITA to configure the invention of Chandrasekharan and Baggett to also detect open circuit faults in a temperature measuring device so as to arrive at claim 10, specifically
wherein the measured value of the second temperature measuring device continuing to exceed the first preset value within the preset time period is indicative of an open circuit fault, and the jump amplitude exceeding the second preset value for the preset number of times within the preset time period is indicative of a poor contact, since Nobuta teaches this improves safety to the user [i.e., the system provides real-time user protection such that if a sensor fails in an open or closed state, e.g., intermittent disconnection due to poor contact, the resulting abnormal reading (e.g., an expected value at a sensor to be stable at a particular value but instead changing to a lower value) received by the processor immediately triggers fail-safe protocols to protect the user; para. 0032: “The transport vehicle control system 100 executes fail-safe control on the article transport vehicle 3, based on the temperature detection value.”].
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to THEODORE J EVANGELISTA whose telephone number is (571)272-6093. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday, 9am - 5pm 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, Edward F Landrum can be reached at (571) 272-5567. 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.
/THEODORE J EVANGELISTA/Examiner, Art Unit 3761 /EDWARD F LANDRUM/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3761
