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 § 112
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(b):
(b) CONCLUSION.—The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph:
The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the applicant regards as his invention.
Claim 9 and its related dependent claims are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being incomplete for omitting essential steps, such omission amounting to a gap between the steps. See MPEP § 2172.01. The omitted steps are:
Details of what constitutes the “perform a combustion test on a test sample” in combination with the claimed, “outputting, by the controller, the gas mixture from the gas reservoir for use in the combustion test”. Specific steps of what is involved or takes place during the “combustion test” should be claimed, ensuring there is support in the specification.
Claim 9 and its related dependent claims are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor (or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the applicant), regards as the invention.
Regarding claim 9, it is unclear what constitutes the “test sample”. The claim should be amended to clarify this limitation in combination with the remaining claim language.
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, 7, 8, 17, and 18 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Qin et al. (CN208771224), hereinafter referred to as Qin.
Regarding claim 1, Qin teaches, “A gas mixing system comprising: a first conduit to receive nitrogen gas (Fig. 1, ref. # 4; para. [0026–0028]); a second conduit to receive inlet air gas (2); a gas reservoir (1) coupled to the first conduit and the second conduit (1 w/ 2 & 4); a gas mixing manifold (5 w/ 1, 2, & 4) coupled to the gas reservoir, the first conduit, and the second conduit; an oxygen sensor (11 w/ 5) coupled to the gas mixing manifold; and a controller (6) configured to: select a target oxygen concentration for a gas mixture (para. [0026–0028]) for a combustion test (notably, the “combustion test” limitations throughout claims 1, 2, 7, 8, 17, and 18 are intended use/functional limitations, thus not required by the claimed system/method, as the gas mixture as taught by Qin teaches this limitation); measure, using the oxygen sensor, an oxygen concentration in the inlet air gas received via the second conduit ([0026–0028]); control a nitrogen gas flow in the first conduit and an inlet air gas flow in the second conduit to fill the gas reservoir with a gas mixture having the selected target oxygen concentration, based on the measured oxygen concentration in the inlet air gas ([0026–0028]); and control outlet of the gas mixture from the gas reservoir for use in a combustion test (via 51; para. [0029–0032]).”
Regarding claim 2, Qin teaches, “wherein the controller is further configured to: measure, using the oxygen sensor, an oxygen concentration of the gas mixture in the gas reservoir to determine whether the gas mixture in the gas reservoir has the selected target oxygen concentration (abstract; [0026–0032]).”
Regarding claim 7, Qin teaches, “a purge valve connected to the oxygen sensor and configured to purge gas from a conduit connected to the oxygen sensor (52 acts as a purge valve connected to 11).”
Regarding claim 8, Qin teaches, “a pressure regulator connected to the gas reservoir and configured to control an outlet pressure for the gas reservoir (52 acts as a pressure regulator).”
Regarding claim 17, Qin teaches, “A method comprising: selecting, by a controller (Fig. 1, ref. # 6) of a gas mixing system, a target oxygen concentration (via 11) for a gas mixture (2, 3, 4 into 1; para. [0026–0028]) for a combustion test; measuring, by the controller and using an oxygen sensor, an oxygen concentration in an inlet air gas source or ambient air source received by the gas mixing apparatus ([0026–0028]); controlling, by the controller, a nitrogen gas flow and an inlet air gas flow from the inlet air gas source or ambient air from an ambient air source to fill a gas reservoir of the gas mixing system with the gas mixture having the selected target oxygen concentration, based on the measured oxygen concentration in the inlet air gas or the ambient air ([0026–0028]); and outputting, by the controller (6), the gas mixture from the gas reservoir for use in the combustion test (via 51; see para. [0029–0032] of control discussion).”
Regarding claim 18, Qin teaches, “measuring an oxygen concentration of the gas mixture in the gas reservoir to determine whether the gas mixture in the gas reservoir has the selected target oxygen concentration (abstract; [0026–0032]).”
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) 19 and 20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Qin (CN208771224) in view of Engl et al. (DE102004022988), hereinafter referred to as Engl.
Regarding claims 19 and 20, Qin does not appear to teach, “calibrating the oxygen sensor using oxygen gas from an oxygen gas source; calibrating the oxygen sensor using nitrogen gas from a nitrogen gas source.” However, Engl teaches the deficiencies of Qin (see Fig. 1, 2; para. [0024–0042] and discussion related to using oxygen/nitrogen in calibration). It would have been obvious to one skilled in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Qin’s invention to include calibrating the oxygen sensor using oxygen gas from an oxygen gas source; calibrating the oxygen sensor using nitrogen gas from a nitrogen gas source.
The ordinary artisan would have been motivated to modify Qin’s invention for at least the purpose of accurate sensing of the desired gas which allows the most accurate measuring and testing results.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 3–6 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.
Regarding claims 3–5, the prior art does not teach or suggest the claimed, “a valve to select between the oxygen gas from the third conduit or a gas from the gas mixing manifold; and wherein the controller is further configured to: calibrate the oxygen sensor using the oxygen gas from the third conduit.”
Regarding claim 6, the prior art does not teach or suggest the claimed, “a first mass flow controller to control the flow of nitrogen gas in the first conduit; a second mass flow controller to control the flow of inlet air gas in the second conduit; and back pressure regulator connected from the first mass flow controller and the second mass controller to the gas reservoir.”
Claims 9–16 would be allowable if rewritten or amended to overcome the rejection(s) under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), 2nd paragraph, set forth in this Office action.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. See PTO–892 form. The references cited herewith teach gas mixing systems and devices with configurations similar to the present application.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to RYAN D WALSH whose telephone number is (571)272-2726. The examiner can normally be reached M-F, 8:30am-6:30pm.
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, Walter Lindsay can be reached at 571-272-1674. 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.
/RYAN D WALSH/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2852
Prosecution Insights