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 .
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
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) 1-7 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Maser et al. (US 2007/0095859 A1).
Re: Claim 1, Maser discloses a device capable of performing the claimed method for optimizing fluid dispensement via a fluid dispensement system integrated with a beverage dispensing system including a storage cabinet (162) used to maintain desired environmental characteristics of a dispensed beverage contained therein (Fig. 1, walk in cooler), a pressurized gas source (116, 118), pressurized gas regulators (120), pressurized gas distribution lines (122), beverage distribution lines (108), beverage vessels (104), and beverage dispensers (103), the fluid dispensement system comprising a gateway (300) including a processor (152), a network interface (309) adapted for connection to the beverage dispensers, a network interface connected to one or more sensors including one or more flow sensors (Depicted in Fig. 3) and one or more environmental sensors (304), and at least one memory (153) including computer program code (Para. 56, program code), comprising:
identifying at least one metric for a fluid flowing through a beverage distribution line from a beverage vessel to a beverage dispenser (Para. 54, identifying a metric of fluid flow);
identifying a reference value for the at least one metric for the fluid (Para. 54, ascertaining reference value);
performing an analysis of the fluid based on the at least one metric for the fluid (Para. 56, performing analysis;
comparing results of the analysis with the reference value (Para. 56, comparing results with reference value); and
performing at least one action based on determining that there has been a change in the at least one metric relative to the reference value (Para. 56, controller takes action accordingly based on change).
Re: Claim 2, Maser discloses a device capable of performing the claimed method including:
monitoring at least one environmental parameter associated with the storage cabinet (Para. 29, direct and maintain temperature of the cabinet);
monitoring at least one signal quality metric associated with the fluid flowing through the beverage distribution line (Para. 54, monitoring metric of flow);
analyzing the at least one environmental parameter in conjunction with analyzing at least one signal quality metric (Para. 60, temperature, pressure, gas detection analyzed); and
diagnosing at least one potential problem with the fluid based on the at least one environmental parameter and the at least one signal quality metric (Para. 60, diagnosing a potential problem based on temperature and flow readings).
Re: Claim 3, Maser discloses a device capable of performing the claimed method including at least one environmental parameter comprises at least one of line temperature, line pressure, line fluid volume flow rate, fluid color, fluid spectral signature, fluid dissolved gas concentrations, barometric pressure within the storage cabinet, humidity within the storage cabinet, ambient temperature within the storage cabinet, and ambient gas concentrations within the storage cabinet (Para. 60, temperature, pressure, gas detection analyzed).
Re: Claim 4, Maser discloses a device capable of performing the claimed method including activating at least one electrical or mechanical component configured to modify at least one of one or more of the at least one signal quality metrics (Para. 54, controls valves based on metrics).
Re: Claim 5, Maser discloses a device capable of performing the claimed method including the change in the at least one signal quality metric relative to the at least one signal quality metric indicates an issue with the flow of the fluid in the line (Para. 56, the change detected can mean an issue with the flow that the device responds to).
Re: Claim 6, Maser discloses a device capable of performing the claimed method including analyzing the change in the at least one signal quality metric relative to the at least one signal quality metric (Para. 56, the change analyzed to be responded to).; and remotely or autonomously diagnosing a potential issue with the line as a cause of the issue with the flow based on analyzing the change in at least one signal quality metric relative to the at least one signal quality metric (Fig. 3, Para. 62, remotely diagnose an issue).
Re: Claim 7, Maser discloses a device capable of performing the claimed method including generating a report including information regarding the potential issue (Para. 57, reports generated based on sensed information).
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(s) 21-22 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Maser et al. (US 2007/0095859 A1) as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Kippersund et al. (US 2011/0271769 A1).
Re: Claim 21, Maser discloses a device capable of performing the claimed method including at least one sensor (302) performing the step of identifying at least one metric (Para. 302, flow sensor for identifying a metric) except for specifying what kind of flow sensor. However, Kippersund teaches at least one sensor (150) comprising a first transducer (100A) and a second transducer (100B), wherein the first transducer and the second transducer are arranged relative to each other to establish a signal path (210) between the first transducer and the second transducer through the fluid (Fig. 2, Para. 45, first and second transducer est. a signal path through fluid).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time of the effective filing date to include a sensor as claimed for a flow meter as taught by Kippersund, since Kippersund states in paragraph 2 that such a modification is known in the art to provide a highly accurate means for measuring flow of fluid without the use of moving parts that may be subject to failure or contamination over time, and further such a measuring apparatus offer a relatively low cost of installation and operation.
Re: Claim 22, the device of Maser as modified by Kippersund in the rejection of claim 21 above is capable of performing the claimed method of the first transducer sends a first ultrasonic signal at a first transmission time to the second transducer based and the second transducer receives the first ultrasonic signal at a first receipt time and sends a second ultrasonic signal to the first transducer at a second transmission time, and the first transducer receives the second ultrasonic signal at a second receipt time (Kippersund: Fig. 2, Para. 49, transducer alternate between sending and receiving ultrasonic signals).
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. References cited on the PTO-892 provide additional examples of beverage systems with monitoring and ultrasonic flow meters.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to CHARLES P. CHEYNEY whose telephone number is (571)272-9971. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday, 8:00 am - 4:30 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, Paul Durand can be reached at 571-272-4459. 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.
/CHARLES P. CHEYNEY/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3754
Prosecution Insights