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 .
Election/Restrictions
Applicant’s election without traverse of invention I in the reply filed on 6/4/25 is acknowledged.
No claims need to be withdrawn, because Applicant has canceled the non-elected claim, 11.
Specification
The specification is object to, because it does not have the required Brief Description of the Drawings. See MPEP §608.01(f).
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.
Claims 1, 5-10, and 12-18 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.
In claim 1, in the indented clause, “a. a portable device...”, the following language appears: “ii) sensors to perform chemical analysis both for quantitative and qualitative assessment and acceptance, i.e. measuring the % content of a plurality of chemical elements in the fuel”. This is a broad and narrow version of the same limitation in the same claim.
The remaining claims are rejected only for the defects they inherit through dependence on claim 1.
Examiner has interpreted and suggests amending the claims as follows, with additions underlined, deletions double-bracketed or struck through, and all changes in boldface:
1. A system for real-time measurements and analysis of fuel oils for quantitative and qualitative assessment and acceptance of the fuel, which is configured to perform the acquisition, monitoring, presentation, analysis and storage of numerous parameters in real time, during a ship's refueling or fuel cargo loading-unloading process, and is implemented using:
a. a portable device configured to be installed at the leading edge of the ship's bunkering or fuel cargo loading-unloading pipe, in line with the fuel flow and including i) means employing ultrasound technology and ii) sensors to perform chemical analysis both for quantitative and qualitative assessment and acceptance, [[i.e.]] wherein the chemical analysis comprises measuring the % content of a plurality of chemical elements in the fuel;
b. a cloud application, and
c. a mobile application.
Claim Interpretation
In light of Applicant's specification (see page 4, section 4.1; and figure 4), Examiner has construed the limitation that the device be "in line with the fuel flow" (claim 1, indented clause, “a. a portable device...”) as encompassing an arrangement where a pipe section in line with the fuel flow comprises sensors but does not interrupt or obstruct the fuel flow.
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.
Note that, in the following rejections, the highlighting indicates differences from the exact claim language, or items involved in an obviousness argument.
Claim(s) 1, 5-7, and 12-14 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Premanadhan et al. (WO 2021/002803 A1) in view of Gysling (2007/0001208).
Regarding claim 1, and claims 5-7 and 12-14 depending therefrom, Premanadhan et al. disclose a system for real-time measurements and analysis (see paragraph 35) of fuel oils (see paragraph 33) for quantitative and qualitative assessment and acceptance of the fuel (see paragraphs 33 and 45), which is configured to perform the acquisition, monitoring, presentation, analysis and storage of numerous parameters (see paragraphs 34-35) in real time (see paragraphs 35 and 52), during a ship's refueling or fuel cargo loading-unloading process (see paragraph 2), and is implemented using:
a. a portable device (202; see paragraph 49) configured to be installed at the leading edge of the ship's bunkering or fuel cargo loading-unloading pipe (supra), in line with the fuel flow (see paragraph 49) and including ... ii) sensors (206; see paragraph 49) to perform ... analysis both for quantitative and qualitative assessment and acceptance (see paragraphs 45 and 49), ... ;
b. a cloud application (see paragraphs 41, 105, and 107), and
c. a mobile application (see paragraph 41).
Premanadhan et al. do not disclose the highlighted limitations:
a. a portable device configured to be installed at the leading edge of the ship's bunkering or fuel cargo loading-unloading pipe, in line with the fuel flow and including i) means employing ultrasound technology and ii) sensors to perform chemical analysis both for quantitative and qualitative assessment and acceptance, i.e. measuring the % content of a plurality of chemical elements in the fuel;
Gysling disclose ultrasound sensors used to perform chemical analysis of oil being transferred, measuring the % content of a plurality of chemical elements in it (see paragraphs 27 and 40).
It would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art, to modify the invention of Premanadhan et al. to include i) means employing ultrasound technology and ii) sensors to perform chemical analysis both for quantitative and qualitative assessment and acceptance, i.e. measuring the % content of a plurality of chemical elements in the fuel, similarly to the invention of Gysling, because such a configuration is effective for determining chemical components of the liquid, as suggested by Gysling (see paragraphs 26-27).
Regarding claim 5, this combination of references further teaches the system according to claim 1, whereby the means employing ultrasound technology are means to i) provide measurements of parameters related to the quantity of the fuel (see paragraph 27 of Gysling), ii) identify the category/type of the fuel (see paragraph 45 of Premanadhan et al.) and iii) detect adulteration of the fuel with air bubbles (see paragraph 40 of Gysling).
Regarding claim 6, this combination of references further teaches the system according to claim 1, whereby the portable device has the shape of a pipe (204; see Premanadhan et al.; paragraph 49).
Regarding claim 7, this combination of references further teaches the system according claim 1, whereby the portable device includes an Electronic Control Unit (abb.: "ECU") including an embedded processing unit (210; see paragraphs 49-50 of Premanadhan et al.), a cellular transceiver or a satellite transceiver or a radio link for communication with a local router/gateway (see paragraphs 105 and 107) and a real time clock (inherent in “processor”), which ECU is connected with sensors (see paragraphs 49-50) and is configured to transmit measurements stored in the ECU to the cloud application and the mobile application (see paragraphs 41, 49-50, 105, and 107).
Regarding claim 12, see the foregoing rejection of claim 6.
Regarding claim 13, see the foregoing rejection of claim 7.
Regarding claim 14, see the foregoing rejection of claim 7.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 8-10 and 15-18 would be allowable if rewritten 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 and to include all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter:
The prior art does not disclose or suggest, "iii. identifying the category/type of the fuel; ... v. performing instant chemical analysis ... ; vi. setting threshold limits of any of said parameters, category/type of fuel, adulteration of the fuel with air bubbles, and chemical analysis, and vii. providing notifications and alarms in case any threshold limit is exceeded", in combination with the remaining claim elements as set forth in claim 8, and claims 9-10 and 15-18 depending therefrom.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Casimiro et al. (2010/0217536) is cited for disclosing a bunker fuel transfer system with real-time monitoring of numerous parameters.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to GEOFFREY T EVANS whose telephone number is (571)272-2369. The examiner can normally be reached M-F, 9 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, 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.
/WALTER L LINDSAY JR/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2852
/GEOFFREY T EVANS/Examiner, Art Unit 2852