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 .
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 filing of a terminal disclaimer by itself is not a complete reply to a nonstatutory double patenting (NSDP) rejection. A complete reply requires that the terminal disclaimer be accompanied by a reply requesting reconsideration of the prior Office action. Even where the NSDP rejection is provisional the reply must be complete. See MPEP § 804, subsection I.B.1. For a reply to a non-final Office action, see 37 CFR 1.111(a). For a reply to final Office action, see 37 CFR 1.113(c). A request for reconsideration while not provided for in 37 CFR 1.113(c) may be filed after final for consideration. See MPEP §§ 706.07(e) and 714.13.
The USPTO Internet website contains terminal disclaimer forms which may be used. Please visit www.uspto.gov/patent/patents-forms. The actual 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/apply/applying-online/eterminal-disclaimer.
Claims 4-20 are rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claims 4-18 of U.S. Patent No. 12,050,118 B2.
Although the claims at issue are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other because the claims of the instant application are broader and thus, fully met, by the claims of the Patent.
Regarding claim 4, the Patent recites a measuring apparatus for measuring parameters of a liquid, the measuring apparatus comprising (claim 4, preamble, c. 14, ll. 29-30): an electronic control unit operable (c. 14, l. 31) correlate a change in a multiphase parameter to measured pulse output of the measuring apparatus (c. 14, ll. 33-35), and to determine a gas volume fraction from an output of a first pressure sensor disposed upstream of the measuring apparatus (c. 14, ll. 35-37), a second pressure sensor disposed downstream of the measuring apparatus (c. 14, ll. 38-39), and a pulse sensor disposed in a flow conduit proximate to the measuring apparatus (c. 14, ll. 39-40).
Claims 5-10 are similarly met by claims 5-10 of the Patent.
Regarding claim 11, the Patent recites a multi-phase flow meter comprising (claim 11, preamble, c. 14, l. 54): a flow conduit (c. 14, l. 55); a rotor positioned in the flow conduit, the rotor comprising a plurality of blades (c. 14, ll. 56-57); a generator coupled to the rotor (claim 14); a first pressure sensor disposed upstream of the rotor (claim 11, c. 14, l. 58); a second pressure sensor disposed downstream of the rotor (c. 14, ll. 60-61); a pulse sensor disposed in the flow conduit proximate the plurality of blades (c. 14, ll. 64-65); and a control unit electrically coupled to the first pressure sensor, the second pressure sensor, and the pulse sensor (c. 15, ll. 1-3), wherein the control unit is configured to determine a gas volume fraction from an output of the first pressure sensor, the second pressure sensor, and the pulse sensor (c. 15, ll. 3-6).
Claims 12-20 are similarly met by claims 11-18.
Claim Objections
Claim 4 is objected to because “operable correlate” (Claims filed 7/29/24, l. 3) is unclear and should be amended to read - - operable to correlate - -, or similar.
Claim 20 is objected to because the sentence should begin with a capitalized word.
Appropriate correction is required.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(d):
(d) REFERENCE IN DEPENDENT FORMS.—Subject to subsection (e), a claim in dependent form shall contain a reference to a claim previously set forth and then specify a further limitation of the subject matter claimed. A claim in dependent form shall be construed to incorporate by reference all the limitations of the claim to which it refers.
The following is a quotation of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, fourth paragraph:
Subject to the following paragraph [i.e., the fifth paragraph of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112], a claim in dependent form shall contain a reference to a claim previously set forth and then specify a further limitation of the subject matter claimed. A claim in dependent form shall be construed to incorporate by reference all the limitations of the claim to which it refers.
Claim 15 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(d) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, 4th paragraph, as being of improper dependent form for failing to further limit the subject matter of the claim upon which it depends, or for failing to include all the limitations of the claim upon which it depends.
Claim 15 does not further limit the subject matter of claim 11 because it recites a limitation recited in claim 11 (Claims filed 7/29/24, page 23, ll. 20-21. Applicant may cancel the claim(s), amend the claim(s) to place the claim(s) in proper dependent form, rewrite the claim(s) in independent form, or present a sufficient showing that the dependent claim(s) complies with the statutory requirements.
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) 4-8 and 10 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Kitami et al. (US 2005/0255367 A1).
Regarding claim 4, Kitami et al. discloses a measuring apparatus (10; fig. 1) for measuring parameters of a liquid (¶ [0055]), the measuring apparatus (10) comprising: an electronic control unit operable correlate a change in a multiphase parameter to measured pulse output of the measuring apparatus (some electronic control means is required to determine the total gas-liquid flow and the gas volume rate, from the differential pressure from differential pressure measuring portion 12 and the rotation frequency of rotators 17; ¶ [0060]), and to determine a gas volume fraction from an output of a first pressure sensor (12) disposed upstream of the measuring apparatus (differential pressure measuring portion 12 measures pressure upstream of measuring chamber 16 of flowmeter 10; fig. 1 and ¶ [0056]), a second pressure sensor (12) disposed downstream of the measuring apparatus (differential pressure measuring portion 12 measures pressure downstream of measuring chamber 16 of flowmeter 10; fig. 1 and ¶ [0056]), and a pulse sensor (sensor that detects rotation frequency of rotators 17; ¶ [0059]) disposed in a flow conduit (16) proximate to the measuring apparatus (10).
Regarding claims 5-7, Kitami et al. discloses wherein the measuring apparatus (10) is a flow meter (¶ [0056); wherein the flow meter comprises a flow conditioner (gas-liquid mixing chamber 14 is a flow conditioner; ¶ [0058]); wherein the flow meter comprises a nozzle at an inlet of the flow meter (gas-liquid mixing chamber 14 may be a static mixer that evenly mixes the gas and liquid for feeding into measuring chamber 16 and therefore directs the flow of fluid and functions as a nozzle; ¶ [0058]).
Regarding claim 8, Kitami et al. discloses wherein the measuring apparatus is a pump (rotators 17 comprise a positive-displacement flowmeter with driving and following of rotators 17 that moves liquid and gases through measuring chamber 16 and thus, functions as a pump; ¶ [0082]).
Regarding claim 10, Kitami et al. discloses wherein the measuring apparatus is an inline turbine (flowmeter may be an inline turbine wheel 109; fig. 17(A)).
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) 1-3 and 11-19 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kitami et al. (US 2005/0255367 A1) in view of Holm et al. (US 2020/02235639 A1).
Regarding claim 1, Kitami et al. discloses a method for measuring parameters of a liquid using a multi-phase flow meter (10; fig. 1), the method comprising: measuring pressure drops across the multi-phase flow meter (using differential pressure measuring portion 12), the multi-phase flow meter (10) comprising: a flow conduit (16); a rotor (17) positioned in the flow conduit (16), the rotor (17) comprising a plurality of blades (blades of rotators 17; fig. 1); a first pressure sensor (12) disposed upstream of the rotor (differential pressure measuring portion 12 measures pressure upstream of measuring chamber 16 of flowmeter 10; fig. 1 and ¶ [0056]); a second pressure sensor (12) disposed downstream of the rotor (differential pressure measuring portion 12 measures pressure downstream of measuring chamber 16 of flowmeter 10; fig. 1 and ¶ [0056]); a pulse sensor disposed in the flow conduit (16) proximate the plurality of blades (sensor that detects rotation frequency of rotators 17; ¶ [0059]); and a control unit configured to determine a gas volume fraction from an output of the first pressure sensor (12), the second pressure sensor (12), and the pulse sensor (some electronic control means is required to determine the total gas-liquid flow and the gas volume rate from the differential pressure from differential pressure measuring portion 12 and the rotation frequency of rotators 17; ¶ [0060]): measuring pressure upstream of the multi-phase flow meter (with differential pressure measuring portion 12); and identifying at least one fluid parameter based, at least in part, on a correlation of a change in a multiphase flow parameter to pulse output (a total gas-liquid flow and a gas volume rate are identified based, at least in part, on a correlation of change of differential pressure and the rotation frequency of rotators 17; figs. 2, 3 and ¶ [0060]).
Regarding claim 2, Kitami et al. discloses wherein the at least one fluid parameter is flow rate (a flow rate of each of the gas and the liquid is determined from the correlation; ¶ [0065]).
Regarding claim 3, Kitami et al. discloses wherein the at least one fluid parameter is gas volume fraction (a total gas-liquid flow and the gas volume rate is determined; ¶ [0060]).
Kitami et al. is silent on a generator.
Holm et al. teaches a generator (200; fig. 1A) coupled to a rotor (202; ¶ [0018]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of filing to modify the apparatus of Kitami et al. with the generator of Holm et al. to provide a flow meter that is self-powered.
Regarding claim 9, Kitami et al. discloses the invention as set forth above with regard to claim 4.
Kitami et al. is silent on a generator.
Holm et al. teaches a turbine (202) operable to generate power for an electronic control via fluid flow through a measuring apparatus a generator (turbine 202 and generator 200 are generate power for an electronic device that measures flow velocity, water quality, etc. for a water system; ¶¶ [0003, 0018]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of filing to modify the apparatus of Kitami et al. with the generator of Holm et al. to provide a flow meter that is self-powered.
Regarding claim 11, Kitami et al. discloses a multi-phase flow meter (10; fig. 1) comprising: a flow conduit (16); a rotor (17) positioned in the flow conduit (16), the rotor (17) comprising a plurality of blades (blades of rotators 17; fig. 1); a first pressure sensor (12) disposed upstream of the rotor (differential pressure measuring portion 12 measures pressure upstream of measuring chamber 16 of flowmeter 10; fig. 1 and ¶ [0056]); a second pressure sensor (12) disposed downstream of the rotor (differential pressure measuring portion 12 measures pressure downstream of measuring chamber 16 of flowmeter 10; fig. 1 and ¶ [0056]); a pulse sensor disposed in the flow conduit (16) proximate the plurality of blades (sensor that detects rotation frequency of rotators 17; ¶ [0059]); and a control unit electrically coupled to the first pressure sensor (12), the second pressure sensor (12), and the pulse sensor (sensor that detects rotation frequency of rotators 17), wherein the control unit is configured to determine a gas volume fraction from an output of the first pressure sensor (12), the second pressure sensor (12), and the pulse sensor (some electronic control means is required to determine the total gas-liquid flow and the gas volume rate from the differential pressure from differential pressure measuring portion 12 and the rotation frequency of rotators 17; ¶ [0060]).
Regarding claim 12, Kitami et al. discloses wherein the first pressure sensor (12) and the second pressure sensor (12) measure a pressure drop across the rotor (differential pressure measuring portion 12 measures a pressure drop across rotators 17; ¶ [0056]).
Regarding claim 13, Kitami et al. discloses wherein the pulse sensor measures a fluid pulse induced by the plurality of blades (a fluid pulse induced by the blades of rotators 17 is measured by measuring a rotation frequency of rotators 17; ¶ [0059]).
Regarding claim 18, Kitami et al. discloses wherein the rotor is a pump (rotators 17 comprise a positive-displacement flowmeter with driving and following of rotators 17 that moves liquid and gases through measuring chamber 16 and thus, functions as a pump; ¶ [0082]).
Kitami et al. is silent on a generator.
Holm et al. teaches a generator (200; fig. 1A) coupled to a rotor (202; ¶ [0018]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of filing to modify the apparatus of Kitami et al. with the generator of Holm et al. to provide a flow meter that is self-powered.
Regarding claims 14-17, Kitami et al. discloses the invention as set forth above with regard to claim 11, and further discloses wherein the control unit is electrically coupled to the first pressure sensor (12), the second pressure sensor (12), and the pulse sensor (some electronic control means is required to determine the total gas-liquid flow and the gas volume rate from the differential pressure from differential pressure measuring portion 12 and the rotation frequency of rotators 17; ¶ [0060]); wherein the control unit determines a gas volume fraction from an output of the first pressure sensor (12), the second pressure sensor (12), and the pulse sensor (some electronic control means is required to determine the total gas-liquid flow and the gas volume rate from the differential pressure from differential pressure measuring portion 12 and the rotation frequency of rotators 17; ¶ [0060]); wherein phase flow rates are calculated from the gas volume fraction (flow rates of each of the gas and the liquid are acquired from the total gas-liquid flow and the gas void fraction; ¶ [0065]).
Kitami et al. is silent on a generator.
Holm et al. teaches a generator (200; fig. 1A) coupled to a rotor (202; ¶ [0018]); wherein the generator (200) produces electrical power that is supplied to an electric load (generator 200 produces electrical power supplied to devices that measure flow velocity, water quality, etc. in water systems; ¶ [0003]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of filing to modify the apparatus of Kitami et al. with the generator of Holm et al. to provide a flow meter that is self-powered.
Regarding claim 19, Kitami is silent on a stator.
Holm et al. teaches a stator (300) positioned upstream of a rotor (at least portions of stator segments 301 of stator 300 are positioned upstream of portions of blades 201 of rotor 202; fig. 3).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of filing to modify the apparatus of Kitami et al. with the generator with stator of Holm et al. to provide a flow meter that is self-powered.
Claim(s) 20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kitami et al. (US 2005/0255367 A1) in view of Holm et al. (US 2020/02235639 A1), and further in view of Morgenthale et al. (US 5,831,176).
Regarding claim 20, Kitami et al. in view of Holm et al. disclose the invention as set forth above with regard to claim 11 and Kitami et al. further discloses a temperature sensor (13; fig. 1) disposed downstream of the rotor (17).
Kitami et al. in view of Holm et al. are silent on an upstream temperature sensor.
Morgenthale et al. teaches a flow meter (10; figs. 1 and 2) with a rotor (22), a first temperature sensor (18) disposed upstream of the rotor (temperature probe 18 is disposed upstream of turbine 22; fig. 1).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of filing to modify the apparatus of Kitami et al. in view of Holm et al. with the additional temperature sensor disposed upstream of the rotor as taught in Morgenthale et al. to provide reliable flowmeter results by using redundant temperature measurements (Morgenthale et al., c. 4, ll. 22-25).
Contact Information
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Erika J. Villaluna whose telephone number is (571)272-8348. The examiner can normally be reached Mon-Fri 9:00 am - 5:30 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, Stephanie Bloss can be reached at (571) 272-3555. 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.
/ERIKA J. VILLALUNA/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2852
Prosecution Insights