DETAILED ACTION
Claims 1-15 and 17 are pending in the present application.
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 submitted under 35 U.S.C. 119(a)-(d), which papers have been placed of record in the file.
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on 7/17/2024 and 7/31/2026 were filed. The submission is in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statement is being considered by the examiner.
Claim Objections
Claim 11 is objected to because of the following informalities:
In claim 11, lines 1-5, the phrase “the processing unit being arranged to evaluate qualimetry parameters representative of a quality of a fluid supply, said qualimetry parameters comprising the turbidity of the fluid” is repeated. For the purpose of examination, the duplication has not been included.
Appropriate correction is required.
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.
(a)(2) the claimed invention was described in a patent issued under section 151, or in an application for patent published or deemed published under section 122(b), in which the patent or application, as the case may be, names another inventor and was effectively filed before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claims 1-2, 5-11, 14-15, and 17 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Lee (KR 10-1845238, hereinafter Lee).
Regarding claim 1, Lee teaches a fluid meter (see Fig. 1, 2, and 5, all elements) comprising: a conduit in which the fluid circulates (see Fig. 1-2 and translation page 2, para. 8, main body 10 is a conduit for fluid circulation); an ultrasonic measuring device arranged to measure a flow rate of the fluid in said conduit (see Fig. 1-2 and translation page 3, para. 5, ultrasonic measuring device 20), and comprising an upstream transducer arranged to generate an upstream ultrasonic signal in the conduit, and a downstream transducer arranged to generate a downstream ultrasonic signal in the conduit (see Fig. 1-2 and translation page 3, para. 5, ultrasonic measuring device 20 includes upstream and downstream ultrasonic transducers 35 for generating respective upstream and downstream ultrasonic signals as shown and described); an emitter arranged to emit a light signal into said conduit (see Fig. 1-2 and translation page 3, para. 2-3, light emitter 21 emits light signal into conduit 10); a receiver arranged to receive the light signal after this has travelled a predefined path in said conduit (see Fig. 1-2 and translation page 3, para. 2-3, light receiver 22 receives light signal from the light emitter 21 after traveling across conduit 10); and a processing unit arranged to acquire an electrical signal produced by the receiver, and to evaluate a turbidity of the fluid from said electrical signal (see Fig. 5 and translation page 3, para. 9 through page 4, para. 3, processing unit 50/60 receives sensor electrical signals and evaluates turbidity of the fluid as described).
Regarding claim 2, Lee above teaches all of the limitations of claim 1.
Furthermore, Lee teaches that the fluid circulates in the conduit in a first direction (see Fig. 2, fluid circulates along the longitudinal axis of the conduit 10), and wherein the predefined path extends in a second direction, perpendicular to the first direction (see Fig. 2, fluid circulates along the longitudinal axis of the conduit 10 and extends in a second direction in the radial direction perpendicular to the longitudinal axis).
Regarding claim 5, Lee above teaches all of the limitations of claim 1.
Furthermore, Lee teaches that the conduit comprises two holes, and wherein the emitter and the receiver each extend at least partially through one of the holes (see Fig. 2 and translation page 2, para. 9, emitter 21 and receiver 22 placed in through holes of the conduit 10).
Regarding claim 6, Lee above teaches all of the limitations of claims 1 and 5.
Furthermore, Lee teaches that the two holes are located on the conduit at diametrically opposite positions (see Fig. 2 and translation page 2, para. 9, emitter 21 and receiver 22 placed in through holes of the conduit 10 in diametrically opposed positions as shown).
Regarding claim 7, Lee above teaches all of the limitations of claim 1.
Furthermore, Lee teaches that the electrical signal is an electric current, and wherein the turbidity evaluated by the processing unit is inversely proportional to said electric current (see translation page 3, para. 2, discussion of CdS cell as a receiver, wherein a CdS cell is a photoresistor and thus the turbidity is inversely proportional to the electric current as decreased transmission of light (higher turbidity) across the conduit increases the resistance of the cell and thus reduces the current).
Regarding claim 8, Lee above teaches all of the limitations of claim 1.
Furthermore, Lee teaches that the emitter and the receiver being positioned downstream of the upstream transducer and of the downstream transducer of the ultrasonic measuring device (see Fig. 2, emitters 21 and receivers 22 positioned within the physical property detection unit 20 upstream or downstream of the ultrasonic transducers 35 as shown).
Regarding claim 9, Lee above teaches all of the limitations of claim 1.
Furthermore, Lee teaches that the processing unit being arranged to evaluate qualimetry parameters representative of a quality of a fluid supply, said qualimetry parameters comprising the turbidity of the fluid (see Fig. 5 and translation page 3, para. 9 through page 4, para. 3, processing unit 50/60 receives sensor electrical signals and evaluates turbidity of the fluid as described, considered to be a qualimetry parameter of the fluid supplied through the meter).
Regarding claim 10, Lee above teaches all of the limitations of claims 1 and 9.
Furthermore, Lee teaches that the qualimetry parameters further comprising a temperature of the fluid (see Fig. 2, physical property detection unit 20 includes temperatures sensor 28).
Regarding claim 11, Lee above teaches all of the limitations of claims 1 and 8.
Furthermore, Lee teaches that the processing unit being arranged to evaluate qualimetry parameters representative of a quality of a fluid supply, said qualimetry parameters comprising the turbidity of the fluid (see Fig. 5 and translation page 3, para. 9 through page 4, para. 3, processing unit 50/60 receives sensor electrical signals and evaluates turbidity of the fluid as described, considered to be a qualimetry parameter of the fluid supplied through the meter), the qualimetry parameters further comprising a temperature of the fluid (see Fig. 2, physical property detection unit 20 includes temperatures sensor 28) and the processing unit being arranged to evaluate a speed of sound in the fluid by using the ultrasonic measuring device, then to evaluate the temperature of the fluid from the speed of sound (see translation page 3, para. 4-5, processing unit evaluates speed of sound (Doppler) and includes temperature measurements of the fluid as described).
Regarding claim 14, Lee above teaches all of the limitations of claims 1 and 9.
Furthermore, Lee teaches a communication module (see Fig. 5, communication module included within 50 and 60), the processing unit being arranged to receive, via the communication module, a request emitted by a system external to the fluid meter, and to, in response to said request, transmit the qualimetry parameters to said system (see Fig. 5 and translation page 4, para. 3, processing unit 50 configured to provided data to the detecting unit 60 (system external to the fluid meter) upon request of the detecting unit).
Regarding claim 15, Lee above teaches all of the limitations of claim 1.
Furthermore, Lee teaches a measuring method (see translation page 3, para. 9 through page 4, para. 3, discussion of measuring method), implemented in the processing unit of the fluid meter according to claim 1 (see rejection of claim 1 above), comprising the steps of: controlling the emitter such that it emits the light signal into the conduit (see translation page 3, para. 9 through page 4, para. 3, discussion of measuring method including light emitter control); acquiring the electrical signal produced by the receiver (see translation page 3, para. 9 through page 4, para. 3, discussion of measuring method including light receiver measurement); and evaluating a turbidity of the fluid from said electrical signal (see translation page 3, para. 9 through page 4, para. 3, discussion of measuring method including turbidity measurement).
Regarding claim 17, Lee above teaches all of the limitations of claims 1 and 15.
Furthermore, Lee teaches a non-transitory computer-readable storage medium, on which a computer program according to claim 16 comprising instructions which make a processing unit of a fluid meter execute the steps of the measuring method according to claim 15 is stored (see translation page 3, para. 9 through page 4, para. 3, discussion of memory storing programs for conducting the method described).
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.
Claims 3 and 4 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Lee.
Regarding claim 3, Lee above teaches all of the limitations of claim 1.
Lee fails to specifically teach that the light signal is an infrared signal.
However, Lee teaches that an LED emitter configured to detect suspended matter in the fluid (see translation page 3, para. 2, discussion of LED emitter).
Therefore, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, to modify the device of Lee such that an IR LED was utilized rather than a visible LED. This is because the wavelength of the emitter has direct correlation to the sensitivity and penetration of the light as is known in the art and thus the LED wavelength would have been selected based on the types of suspended particles in the fluid in a routine manner.
Regarding claim 4, Lee above teaches all of the limitations of claim 1.
Furthermore, Lee teaches that the emitter is a light-emitting diode (see translation page 3, para. 2, use of LED).
Lee fails to specifically teach that the receiver is a photodiode.
However, Lee teaches that the receiver is a CdS photoresistor (see translation page 3, para. 2, discussion of CdS cell as a receiver).
Therefore, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, to modify the device of Lee such that the receiver was a photoresistor. This is because the use of CdS cells or photodiode would have been selected based on the desired sensitivity of the receiver balanced against the cost of the device as is known in the art.
Claims 12 and 13 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Lee as applied to claim 9 above, and further in view of Armon et al. (US PGPUB 2012/0185184 A1, hereinafter Armon).
Regarding claims 12 and 13, Lee above teaches all of the limitations of claims 1 and 9.
Lee fails to teach that the fluid meter further comprises at least one pressure sensor, the qualimetry parameters further comprising a pressure measured by said pressure sensor; wherein the fluid meter further comprises an upstream pressure sensor, positioned on a side of an upstream end of the conduit, and a downstream pressure sensor, positioned on a side of a downstream end of the conduit, the qualimetry parameters further comprising a pressure value representative of a pressure difference between an upstream pressure measured by the upstream pressure sensor and a downstream pressure measured by the downstream pressure sensor.
Armon teaches a system and method for monitoring the quality of a fluid via meters (see Abstract and [0011]), including pairs of pressure sensors for determining pressure drops between the upstream and downstream side of fluid meters (see [0017]).
Therefore, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, to include in the fluid meter of Lee a pair of pressure sensors upstream and downstream of the meter as suggested by Armon. This allows for the identification of leaks associated with the fluid meter as described by Armon (see [0017]).
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to NATHANIEL T WOODWARD whose telephone number is (571)270-0704. The examiner can normally be reached M-F: 9:00 AM - 5:00 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, 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.
/NATHANIEL T WOODWARD/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2855
Prosecution Insights