DETAILED ACTION
Claim 1 is cancelled.
Claims 2-21 are pending.
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 .
Double Patenting
The nonstatutory double patenting rejection is based on a judicially created doctrine grounded in public policy (a policy reflected in the statute) so as to prevent the unjustified or improper timewise extension of the “right to exclude” granted by a patent and to prevent possible harassment by multiple assignees. A nonstatutory double patenting rejection is appropriate where the conflicting claims are not identical, but at least one examined application claim is not patentably distinct from the reference claim(s) because the examined application claim is either anticipated by, or would have been obvious over, the reference claim(s). See, e.g., In re Berg, 140 F.3d 1428, 46 USPQ2d 1226 (Fed. Cir. 1998); In re Goodman, 11 F.3d 1046, 29 USPQ2d 2010 (Fed. Cir. 1993); In re Longi, 759 F.2d 887, 225 USPQ 645 (Fed. Cir. 1985); In re Van Ornum, 686 F.2d 937, 214 USPQ 761 (CCPA 1982); In re Vogel, 422 F.2d 438, 164 USPQ 619 (CCPA 1970); In re Thorington, 418 F.2d 528, 163 USPQ 644 (CCPA 1969).
A timely filed terminal disclaimer in compliance with 37 CFR 1.321(c) or 1.321(d) may be used to overcome an actual or provisional rejection based on nonstatutory double patenting provided the reference application or patent either is shown to be commonly owned with the examined application, or claims an invention made as a result of activities undertaken within the scope of a joint research agreement. See MPEP § 717.02 for applications subject to examination under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA as explained in MPEP § 2159. See MPEP § 2146 et seq. for applications not subject to examination under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA . A terminal disclaimer must be signed in compliance with 37 CFR 1.321(b).
The USPTO Internet website contains terminal disclaimer forms which may be used. Please visit www.uspto.gov/patent/patents-forms. The filing date of the application in which the form is filed determines what form (e.g., PTO/SB/25, PTO/SB/26, PTO/AIA /25, or PTO/AIA /26) should be used. A web-based eTerminal Disclaimer may be filled out completely online using web-screens. An eTerminal Disclaimer that meets all requirements is auto-processed and approved immediately upon submission. For more information about eTerminal Disclaimers, refer to www.uspto.gov/patents/process/file/efs/guidance/eTD-info-I.jsp.
Claim 1 is rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claim 9, of U.S. Patent No. 11,136,773. Although the claims at issue are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other because the examined application claims are anticipated by the reference claims.
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 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.
Claims 2-21 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Seneff, US Patent No. 6,079,950 (hereinafter Seneff) in view of Laflamme et al., US Patent Application Publication No. 2012/0101647 (hereinafter Laflamme).
Regarding claims 2-21, the combination of Seneff and Laflamme teaches all the claimed limitations, as outlined below.
Regarding claims 2 and 6-7 and corresponding claims 11, 15-17, and 20-21, Seneff teaches: - a managed water system comprising: a body of water in a vessel; a first sensor that determines a temperature of the body of water; a circulation system that circulates the body of water; a first ancillary system joined in a closed loop with the vessel and the circulation system, wherein the first ancillary system alters the body of water as the body of water flows through the first ancillary system; and at least one controller communicably coupled to the first sensor and the circulation system, wherein the at least one controller is configured to: control the circulation system; determine a first set of measurements of the temperature of the body of water, the first set of measurements comprising a first temperature of the body of water at a first time and a second temperature of the body of water at a second time; evaluate the first set of measurements using at least one algorithm; a second sensor configured to determine a flow rate of the body of water through the circulation system disposed in the closed loop between the circulation system and the vessel; wherein the at least one controller is further configured to: determine a second set of measurements of the flow rate of the body of water; evaluate the second set of measurements using the at least one algorithm; and communicate a result of evaluating the second set of measurements (Figs 1-2, C2 L51-67, C3 L57-67, and C4 L1-14).
Seneff fails to clearly specify - communicate a result of evaluating the first set of measurements, wherein the result comprises an amount of time to heat the body of water to a target temperature; wherein the result further comprises a time at which to begin heating the body of water to reach a target temperature at a target time
However, Laflamme teaches - communicate a result of evaluating the first set of measurements, wherein the result comprises an amount of time to heat the body of water to a target temperature; wherein the result further comprises a time at which to begin heating the body of water to reach a target temperature at a target time (Para 0110-0113).
The applied prior art is considered analogous art to the claimed invention because they relate to same field of endeavor. They relate to controlling water systems.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify the above pool recirculation control system, as taught by Seneff, and incorporating the control scheme of controlling based on time needed to reach target temperature, as taught by Laflamme.
One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to do this modification in order to provide reduce energy consumption, as suggested by Laflamme (See Para 0006).
Regarding claims 3-5, 9-10, 12-14, and 18-19, Seneff further teaches:
Claim 3 and corresponding claim 12 - wherein the first ancillary system comprises a heating system that heats the body of water (Figs 1-2, C2 L51-67, C3 L57-67, and C4 L1-14).
Claim 4 and corresponding claim 13 - wherein the at least one controller comprises a timer (Figs 1-2, C2 L51-67, C3 L57-67, and C4 L1-14).
Claim 5 and corresponding claim 14 - wherein the vessel is a swimming pool (Figs 1-2, C2 L51-67, C3 L57-67, and C4 L1-14).
Claim 9 and corresponding claim 18 - wherein the at least one controller is further configured to: output first instructions for the first ancillary system to begin heating the volume of water at the start time (Figs 1-2, C2 L51-67, C3 L57-67, and C4 L1-14).
Claim 10 and corresponding claim 19 - wherein the at least one controller is further configured to: determine the body of water is at the target temperature; and output second instructions for the first ancillary system to cease operation (Figs 1-2, C2 L51-67, C3 L57-67, and C4 L1-14).
Regarding claim 8, Laflamme, further teaches - wherein the at least one controller is further configured to: receive a request to for a temperature of the body of water to be a target temperature at a target time; calculate an amount of time needed to heat the body of water to the target temperature; and determine a start time to begin heating the body of water in order for the temperature of the body of water to be the target temperature at the target time (Para 0110-0113).
Citation of Pertinent Prior Art
The following prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure:
1. Chow, Tin Tai, et al. "Analysis of a solar assisted heat pump system for indoor swimming pool water and space heating." Applied energy 100 (2012): 309-317.
2. Allen, US Patent No. 7,484,938 – relates to electronic control for pool pump.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to CARLOS R ORTIZ RODRIGUEZ whose telephone number is (571)272-3766. The examiner can normally be reached on Mon-Fri 10:00 am- 6:30 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, Mohammad Ali can be reached on 571-272-4105. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300.
Information regarding the status of an application may be obtained from the Patent Application Information Retrieval (PAIR) system. Status information for published applications may be obtained from either Private PAIR or Public PAIR. Status information for unpublished applications is available through Private PAIR only. For more information about the PAIR system, see http://pair-direct.uspto.gov. Should you have questions on access to the Private PAIR system, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative or access to the automated information system, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
/CARLOS R ORTIZ RODRIGUEZ/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2119
Prosecution Insights