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 statements (IDS) were filed in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statement is being considered by the examiner.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
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 (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) 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.
The following is a quotation of the appropriate paragraphs of 35 U.S.C. 102 that form the basis for the rejections under this section made in this Office action:
A person shall be entitled to a patent unless –
(a)(1) the claimed invention was patented, described in a printed publication, or in public use, on sale, or otherwise available to the public before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claim(s) 1, 2, 4, 6 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Lutz US 11167078.
As to claim 1, Lutz teaches “Adapter for circulating a fluid temperature conditioning medium to cool or heat a pressure sensor (Figure 2; Column 1, line 66 to Column 2, line 12), the adapter comprising: a supply line defined by the adapter (Figure 2, 2); a discharge line defined by the adapter (Figure 2, 3); a cavity (Figure 2, 1; Column 7, line 58 to Column 8, line 13) defined by the adapter integrally with the supply line and the discharge line in a manner connecting the supply line and the discharge line in such a way that the fluid temperature conditioning medium can be circulated from the supply line through the cavity to the discharge line (Figure 2, 1; Column 7, line 58 to Column 8, line 13); a recess defined by the adapter integrally with the supply line, the discharge line and the cavity and configured to elongate along a longitudinal axis and having a first end disposed spaced apart from a second end along the longitudinal axis (Figure 2, 5; Column 7, line 58 to Column 8, line 13) wherein when in use the first end of the recess faces a measuring medium and the second end of the recess is configured to receive therein the pressure sensor (Figure 2); and wherein the cavity is configured to surround the recess so that the temperature conditioning medium can flow within the cavity and around the recess in a recirculating manner (Column 7, line 58 to Column 8, line 13).”
As to claim 2, Lutz teaches “wherein the adapter is designed to be weld-free and solder-free (Column 4, lines 27-43).”
As to claim 4, Lutz teaches “wherein the adapter is made of a metallic material (Column 3, lines 32-40).”
As to claim 6, Lutz teaches “wherein said adapter is manufactured using a metal 3D printing process (Column 3, lines 32-40; Column 4, lines 27-43).”
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
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 (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) 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.
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(s) 3, 5, 16-20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Lutz US 11167078.
As to claim 3, Lutz teaches “wherein the adapter is manufactured using a manufacturing process (Column 4, lines 27-43).”
The prior art does not explicitly teach “an additive manufacturing process.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the filing of the invention to arrive at the claimed invention by using what is taught by Lutz. Lutz teaches that the adapter can be manufactured using various techniques such as 3D printing and injection molding. Based on these teachings, on of ordinary skill in the art has the knowledge to use other manufacturing processes to end at the same result.
As to claim 5, Lutz does not explicitly teach “wherein the adapter is implemented to be seal- free.”
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the filing of the invention to arrive at the claimed invention by using what is taught by Lutz. Lutz teaches that the adapter can be manufactured using various techniques such as 3D printing and injection molding, Column 4, lines 27-43, Based on these teachings, on of ordinary skill in the art has the knowledge to use other manufacturing processes to end at the same result.
As to claim 16, Lutz teaches “wherein the adapter is made of a material with a thermal conductivity greater than 30 W - (m - K)1 and comprises pure copper, pure aluminum or pure magnesium (Column 2, lines 13-25; Column 2, lines 32-40. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the filing of the invention to use a desired material over another with predictable results. Choosing one material over another involves routine skill in the art).
As to claim 17, Lutz teaches “wherein the adapter is made of a material with a thermal conductivity greater than 30 W - (m -K)' and comprises a copper alloy (Column 2, lines 13-25; Column 2, lines 32-40. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the filing of the invention to use a desired material over another with predictable results. Choosing one material over another involves routine skill in the art).
As to claim 18, Lutz teaches “wherein the adapter is made of a material with a thermal conductivity greater than 30W- (m - K)-1 and comprises graphite (Column 2, lines 13-25; Column 2, lines 32-40. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the filing of the invention to use a desired material over another with predictable results. Choosing one material over another involves routine skill in the art).
As to claim 19, Lutz teaches “wherein the adapter is made of a material with a thermal conductivity greater than 30W- (m - K)-1 and a melting point above 600C and with a density of less than 5 g cm-1 (Column 2, lines 13-25; Column 2, lines 32-40. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the filing of the invention to use a desired material over another with predictable results. Choosing one material over another involves routine skill in the art).
As to claim 20, Lutz teaches “wherein the adapter is made of a material with a thermal conductivity greater than 30W- (m - K)-1 and a density of less than 5 g cm-1 (Column 2, lines 13-25; Column 2, lines 32-40. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the filing of the invention to use a desired material over another with predictable results. Choosing one material over another involves routine skill in the art).
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14 and 15 are objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims. Claim 7 pertains to a cavity with a defined roughness, this feature is not taught by the prior art. Claim 8 teaches a porous, sponge like material, this is not taught by the prior art. Claims 9-10 depend from claim 8. Claim 11 teaches stability elements which are not taught by the prior arts. Claim 12 teaches a specific thermal conductivity and density, which is not taught by the prior art. Claim 13 teaches a pressure connection connected to the recess. This feature is not taught by the prior art. Claim 14 teaches a sleeve which is not taught by the prior art. Claim 15 teaches a mounting bore which is not taught by the prior arts.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to TARUN SINHA whose telephone number is (571)270-3993. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday, 10AM-6PM 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, Laura Martin can be reached at (571) 272-2160. 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.
/TARUN SINHA/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2855
Prosecution Insights