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 .
Priority
Acknowledgment is made of applicant’s claim for foreign priority under 35 U.S.C. 119 (a)-(d). The certified copy has been filed in parent Application No. 17/757,370, filed on 6/15/2022.
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement submitted on 9/9/2025 has been considered by the examiner.
Drawings
The drawings are objected to under 37 CFR 1.83(a). The drawings must show every feature of the invention specified in the claims. Therefore, the two parallel reference planes and the partial volume of claim 5 must be shown and provided with reference numbers or the features canceled from the claim. No new matter should be entered.
Corrected drawing sheets in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(d) are required in reply to the Office action to avoid abandonment of the application. Any amended replacement drawing sheet should include all of the figures appearing on the immediate prior version of the sheet, even if only one figure is being amended. The figure or figure number of an amended drawing should not be labeled as “amended.” If a drawing figure is to be canceled, the appropriate figure must be removed from the replacement sheet, and where necessary, the remaining figures must be renumbered and appropriate changes made to the brief description of the several views of the drawings for consistency. Additional replacement sheets may be necessary to show the renumbering of the remaining figures. Each drawing sheet submitted after the filing date of an application must be labeled in the top margin as either “Replacement Sheet” or “New Sheet” pursuant to 37 CFR 1.121(d). If the changes are not accepted by the examiner, the applicant will be notified and informed of any required corrective action in the next Office action. The objection to the drawings will not be held in abeyance.
Claim Interpretation
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(f):
(f) Element in Claim for a Combination. – An element in a claim for a combination may be expressed as a means or step for performing a specified function without the recital of structure, material, or acts in support thereof, and such claim shall be construed to cover the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification and equivalents thereof.
The following is a quotation of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph:
An element in a claim for a combination may be expressed as a means or step for performing a specified function without the recital of structure, material, or acts in support thereof, and such claim shall be construed to cover the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification and equivalents thereof.
The claims in this application are given their broadest reasonable interpretation using the plain meaning of the claim language in light of the specification as it would be understood by one of ordinary skill in the art. The broadest reasonable interpretation of a claim element (also commonly referred to as a claim limitation) is limited by the description in the specification when 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is invoked.
As explained in MPEP § 2181, subsection I, claim limitations that meet the following three-prong test will be interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph:
(A) the claim limitation uses the term “means” or “step” or a term used as a substitute for “means” that is a generic placeholder (also called a nonce term or a non-structural term having no specific structural meaning) for performing the claimed function;
(B) the term “means” or “step” or the generic placeholder is modified by functional language, typically, but not always linked by the transition word “for” (e.g., “means for”) or another linking word or phrase, such as “configured to” or “so that”; and
(C) the term “means” or “step” or the generic placeholder is not modified by sufficient structure, material, or acts for performing the claimed function.
Use of the word “means” (or “step”) in a claim with functional language creates a rebuttable presumption that the claim limitation is to be treated in accordance with 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph. The presumption that the claim limitation is interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is rebutted when the claim limitation recites sufficient structure, material, or acts to entirely perform the recited function.
Absence of the word “means” (or “step”) in a claim creates a rebuttable presumption that the claim limitation is not to be treated in accordance with 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph. The presumption that the claim limitation is not interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is rebutted when the claim limitation recites function without reciting sufficient structure, material or acts to entirely perform the recited function.
Claim limitations in this application that use the word “means” (or “step”) are being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, except as otherwise indicated in an Office action. Conversely, claim limitations in this application that do not use the word “means” (or “step”) are not being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, except as otherwise indicated in an Office action.
This application includes one or more claim limitations that do not use the word “means,” but are nonetheless being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, because the claim limitation(s) uses a generic placeholder that is coupled with functional language without reciting sufficient structure to perform the recited function and the generic placeholder is not preceded by a structural modifier. Such claim limitation(s) is/are:
a fixing device … configured to effect a non-positive connection in claim 17
Because this/these claim limitation(s) is/are being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, it/they is/are being interpreted to cover the corresponding structure described in the specification as performing the claimed function, and equivalents thereof.
If applicant does not intend to have this/these limitation(s) interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, applicant may: (1) amend the claim limitation(s) to avoid it/them being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph (e.g., by reciting sufficient structure to perform the claimed function); or (2) present a sufficient showing that the claim limitation(s) recite(s) sufficient structure to perform the claimed function so as to avoid it/them being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph.
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 1-19 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.
Claim 1 recites “wherein one coupler element of the at least two coupler elements is disposed at the outlet” in lines 10-11. However, the claim already recites that “one coupler element of the at least two coupler elements is disposed at the inlet” in lines 9-10. It is unclear if the “one coupler element” disposed at inlet in line 9 is the same as the “one coupler element” disposed at the outlet in line 10. In light of the specification and drawings, the examiner has interpreted the claim to mean “wherein [[one]] another coupler element of the at least two coupler elements is disposed at the outlet” in lines 10-11.
Claims 2-19 depend on claim 1 and are rejected for inheriting the same problem.
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 1-19 are rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claims 1-18 of U.S. Patent No. 12,098,939. Although the claims at issue are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other as shown below.
As for claim 1, U.S. Patent 12,098,939 claims a measuring tube arrangement of a measuring device for detecting a mass flow rate, a viscosity, a density, and/or a variable derived therefrom, of a flowable medium (claim 1), the measuring tube arrangement comprising:
two measuring tubes, which extend parallel to each other, configured to conduct the flowable medium therethrough, wherein each measuring tube includes an inlet having an inlet direction and an outlet having an outlet direction, and wherein each measuring tube is bent at least once between the inlet and the outlet (claim 1);
a coupler arrangement configured to mechanically couple the two measuring tubes, the coupler arrangement including at least two coupler elements, wherein one coupler element of the at least two coupler elements is disposed at the inlet, and wherein [[one]] another coupler element of the at least two coupler elements is disposed at the outlet (claim 1);
two magnet arrangements arranged on the two measuring tubes, wherein precisely one measuring arrangement is arranged on one measuring tube of two measuring tubes and wherein each magnet arrangement includes at least two magnets (claim 1);
a connecting body configured to mechanically detachably connect the measuring tube arrangement to a carrier unit, wherein the connecting body is connected to each inlet and each outlet of the respective measuring tubes (claim 1).
As for claim 2, U.S. Patent 12,098,939 claims that the inlet direction and the outlet direction are oriented oppositely (claim 2).
As for claim 3, U.S. Patent 12,098,939 claims that each measuring tube includes two legs whose respective longitudinal axes extend parallel to each other (claim 3).
As for claim 4, U.S. Patent 12,098,939 claims that each measuring tube includes a longitudinal plane that divides the respective measuring tube into two sides (claim 4),
wherein each longitudinal axis of the corresponding leg of the corresponding measuring tube extends in the respective longitudinal plane (claim 4), and
wherein the magnet arrangements are disposed on the sides, facing away from each other, of the measuring tubes (claim 4).
As for claim 5, U.S. Patent 12,098,939 claims that the at least two magnets of each magnet arrangement are disposed exclusively in a partial volume delimited by two parallel reference planes and an outer surface of one of the two measuring tubes (claim 5),
wherein the reference planes extend parallel to a longitudinal plane extending through the two longitudinal axes of the legs of the respective measuring tube (claim 5), and
wherein the reference planes contact the outer surface (claim 5).
As for claim 6, U.S. Patent 12,098,939 claims that each measuring tube comprises a measuring tube body having a wall thickness of less than 1 millimeter (claim 6).
As for claim 7, U.S. Patent 12,098,939 claims that each measuring tube includes at least one at least partially planar attachment surface (claim 7),
wherein at least one magnet of the at least two magnets of the magnet arrangement is disposed on the at least one attachment surface (claim 7).
As for claim 8, U.S. Patent 12,098,939 claims that the connecting body includes planar mounting surfaces configured to enable mechanically detachable installation of the measuring tube arrangement into a carrier unit in a position defined by the mounting surfaces (claim 8).
As for claim 9, U.S. Patent 12,098,939 claims a measuring tube system, comprising:
a measuring tube arrangement according to claim 1 (claim 9); and
a hose system and/or plastic tube system configured to enable flow measurement in automated industrial or laboratory installations (claim 9),
wherein a measuring arrangement is connected to the hose system and/or plastic tube system and is configured to measure at least one of a flow rate, a volumetric flow rate, and the mass flow rate of the flowable medium (claim 9).
As for claim 10, U.S. Patent 12,098,939 claims that the measuring tube arrangement and the hose system and/or plastic tube system are disposed in a container configured to maintain a sterility of the measuring tube arrangement and of the hose system and/or plastic tube system until the container is opened (claim 10),
wherein the measuring tube system is sterilized by at least one of radiation sterilization, hot steam sterilization, and gas sterilization, wherein the radiation sterilization includes gamma radiation sterilization (claim 10) or electron beam sterilization.
As for claim 11, U.S. Patent 12,098,939 claims that at least one process monitoring unit is connected to the hose system and/or plastic tube system (claim 11),
wherein the at least one process monitoring unit comprises at least one of: a pressure measuring transducer; a temperature sensor; a scale; a pH sensor; a density sensor; a flow meter for determining a mass flow rate, a volumetric flow and/or a flow rate (Laursen: 7); a flow switch; a fill-level sensor; a conductivity sensor; a concentration sensor; an oxygen sensor; and a turbidity sensor (claim 11).
As for claim 12, U.S. Patent 12,098,939 claims a carrier unit of a measuring device for detecting a mass flow rate, a viscosity, a density, and/or a variable derived therefrom, of a flowable medium (claim 1), the carrier unit comprising:
a carrier unit body configured to enable mounting a measuring tube arrangement according to claim 1, wherein the carrier unit body includes a receptacle (inside 236) for the measuring tube arrangement (claim 1), and
wherein the carrier unit body includes at least two opposing side surfaces that bound the receptacle transversely to a longitudinal direction of the measuring tube arrangement or to a longitudinal direction of the carrier unit body (claim 1);
at least one vibration exciter configured to excite the measuring tube arrangement to vibrate, wherein the at least one vibration exciter is disposed on one of the opposing side surfaces (claim 1); and
at least two vibration sensors configured to detect deflections of vibrations of the measuring tube arrangement, wherein the at least two vibration sensors are disposed on the opposing side surfaces, and wherein the at least two vibration sensors are arranged at an offset from the at least one vibration exciter in the longitudinal direction (claim 1).
As for claim 13, U.S. Patent 12,098,939 claims that each vibration sensor comprises two coil devices that are disposed at an offset from each other in the longitudinal direction of the carrier unit body (claim 12).
As for claim 14, U.S. Patent 12,098,939 claims that the at least one vibration exciter and the at least two vibration sensors each comprise at least one coil device, wherein the coil devices are respectively disposed in a depression in the carrier unit body (claim 13).
As for claim 15, U.S. Patent 12,098,939 claims that each coil device comprises at least one printed circuit board coil (claim 14).
As for 16, U.S. Patent 12,098,939 claims that the carrier unit body includes an end face in which the receptacle is disposed, wherein the end face is configured as a bearing surface for the connecting body of the measuring tube arrangement (claim 15).
As for claim 17, U.S. Patent 12,098,939 claims that, at the end face, a fixing device is disposed, which is configured to effect a non-positive connection between the connecting body of the measuring tube arrangement and the carrier unit body, wherein the non-positive connection is effected via a force action of the fixing device on the connecting body in a longitudinal direction of the receptacle (claim 16).
As for claim 18, U.S. Patent 12,098,939 claims that the end face includes an end recess in which the bearing surface for the connecting body of the measuring tube arrangement is disposed (claim 17).
As for claim 19, U.S. Patent 12,098,939 claims that each of the at least two opposing side surfaces includes a guide extending perpendicular to a longitudinal direction of the receptacle, the guide configured to effect a positive connection between the connecting body of the measuring tube arrangement and carrier unit body (claim 18).
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)(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 1-3, 5, 8, 12, 14 and 16 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) as being anticipated by U.S. Patent 10,794,744 issued to Skinkle (“Skinkle”).
As for claim 1, Skinkle discloses a measuring tube arrangement (Fig. 3) of a measuring device for detecting a mass flow rate, a viscosity, a density, and/or a variable derived therefrom, of a flowable medium, the measuring tube arrangement comprising:
two measuring tubes (208, 208’), which extend parallel to each other, configured to conduct the flowable medium therethrough, wherein each measuring tube includes an inlet (at 206) having an inlet direction and an outlet (at 206’) having an outlet direction, and wherein each measuring tube is bent at least once between the inlet and the outlet (see Fig. 3);
a coupler arrangement (210, 210’) configured to mechanically couple the two measuring tubes, the coupler arrangement including at least two coupler elements (210, 210’), wherein one coupler element (210) of the at least two coupler elements is disposed at the inlet, and wherein [[one]] another coupler element (210’) of the at least two coupler elements is disposed at the outlet;
two magnet arrangements (220, 220’) arranged on the two measuring tubes, wherein precisely one measuring arrangement (220) is arranged on one measuring tube of two measuring tubes (see Fig. 4) and wherein each magnet arrangement includes at least two magnets (see Fig. 4);
a connecting body (212) configured to mechanically detachably connect (col. 7, lines 59-65) the measuring tube arrangement to a carrier unit (236), wherein the connecting body is connected to each inlet and each outlet of the respective measuring tubes (see Fig. 4).
As for claim 2, Skinkle discloses that the inlet direction and the outlet direction are oriented oppositely (see Fig. 3).
As for claim 3, Skinkle discloses that each measuring tube includes two legs whose respective longitudinal axes extend parallel to each other (see Fig. 3).
As for claim 5, Skinkle discloses that the at least two magnets of each magnet arrangement are disposed exclusively in a partial volume delimited by two parallel reference planes and an outer surface of one of the two measuring tubes (see Fig. 4),
wherein the reference planes extend parallel to a longitudinal plane extending through the two longitudinal axes of the legs of the respective measuring tube (see Fig. 4), and
wherein the reference planes contact the outer surface (see Fig. 4).
As for claim 8, Skinkle discloses that the connecting body (212) includes planar mounting surfaces (see Fig. 6) configured to enable mechanically detachable installation of the measuring tube arrangement into a carrier unit in a position defined by the mounting surfaces.
As for claim 12, Skinkle discloses a carrier unit (236, 202) of a measuring device for detecting a mass flow rate, a viscosity, a density, and/or a variable derived therefrom, of a flowable medium, the carrier unit comprising:
a carrier unit body (236, 202) configured to enable mounting a measuring tube arrangement according to claim 1 (see the rejection of claim 1 above), wherein the carrier unit body includes a receptacle (inside 236) for the measuring tube arrangement, and
wherein the carrier unit body (236, 202) includes at least two opposing side surfaces (of 202, see Fig. 3) that bound the receptacle transversely to a longitudinal direction of the measuring tube arrangement or to a longitudinal direction of the carrier unit body;
at least one vibration exciter (224) configured to excite the measuring tube arrangement to vibrate, wherein the at least one vibration exciter is disposed on one of the opposing side surfaces (see Fig. 5); and
at least two vibration sensors (222, 222) configured to detect deflections of vibrations of the measuring tube arrangement, wherein the at least two vibration sensors are disposed on the opposing side surfaces (see Fig. 5), and wherein the at least two vibration sensors are arranged at an offset from the at least one vibration exciter in the longitudinal direction (see Fig. 5).
As for claim 14, Skinkle discloses that the at least one vibration exciter (224) and the at least two vibration sensors (222, 222) each comprise at least one coil device (col. 6, lines 42-46), wherein the coil devices are respectively disposed in a depression (see Fig. 5) in the carrier unit body.
As for 16, Skinkle discloses that the carrier unit body includes an end face (interior face of 232) in which the receptacle is disposed (see Fig. 3), wherein the end face is configured as a bearing surface for the connecting body of the measuring tube arrangement (see Fig. 3).
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.
This application currently names joint inventors. In considering patentability of the claims the examiner presumes that the subject matter of the various claims was commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the claimed invention(s) absent any evidence to the contrary. Applicant is advised of the obligation under 37 CFR 1.56 to point out the inventor and effective filing dates of each claim that was not commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the later invention in order for the examiner to consider the applicability of 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(C) for any potential 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) prior art against the later invention.
Claims 1-5, 12-14 and 19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over U.S. Patent 6,138,517 issued to Laursen et al. (“Laursen”) in view of U.S. Patent 10,794,744 issued to Skinkle (“Skinkle”).
As for claim 1, Laursen discloses a measuring tube arrangement of a measuring device for detecting a mass flow rate (Abstract), a viscosity, a density, and/or a variable derived therefrom, of a flowable medium, the measuring tube arrangement comprising:
two measuring tubes (1, 101), which extend parallel to each other (see Fig. 2), configured to conduct the flowable medium therethrough, wherein each measuring tube includes an inlet (2) having an inlet direction and an outlet (3) having an outlet direction, and wherein each measuring tube is bent at least once between the inlet and the outlet (see Fig. 1);
a coupler arrangement (14, 14) configured to mechanically couple the two measuring tubes, the coupler arrangement including at least two coupler elements (14, 14), wherein one coupler element (14) of the at least two coupler elements is disposed at the inlet (see Fig. 1), and wherein [[one]] another coupler element (14) of the at least two coupler elements is disposed at the outlet (see Fig. 1);
two magnet arrangements (5, 6 and 105, 106) arranged on the two measuring tubes, wherein precisely one magnet arrangement (5, 6) is arranged on one measuring tube (1) of the two measuring tubes, and wherein each magnet arrangement includes at least two magnets (see Figs. 1 and 2); and
a connecting body (10), wherein the connecting body is connected to each inlet and each outlet of the respective measuring tubes (see Figs. 1 and 2).
Laursen does not disclose that the connecting body is configured to mechanically detachably connect the measuring tube arrangement to a carrier unit.
However, Skinkle discloses a connecting body (212, 232) that is configured to mechanically detachably connect (col. 7, lines 59-65) a measuring tube arrangement to a carrier unit (236).
It would have been obvious for one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the present application to modify the connecting body of Laursen to mechanically detachably connect to a carrier unit as disclosed by Skinkle in order to protect the measuring tube arrangement (Skinkle: col. 7, lines 44-45).
As for claim 2, Laursen as modified by Skinkle discloses that the inlet direction and the outlet direction are oriented oppositely (Laursen: see Fig. 1).
As for claim 3, Laursen as modified by Skinkle discloses that each measuring tube includes two legs whose respective longitudinal axes extend parallel to each other (Laursen: see Fig. 1).
As for claim 4, Laursen as modified by Skinkle discloses that each measuring tube includes a longitudinal plane that divides the respective measuring tube into two sides (Laursen: see Fig. 2),
wherein each longitudinal axis of the corresponding leg of the corresponding measuring tube extends in the respective longitudinal plane (Laursen: see Fig. 2), and
wherein the magnet arrangements are disposed on the sides, facing away from each other, of the measuring tubes (Laursen: see Fig. 2).
As for claim 5, Laursen as modified by Skinkle discloses that the at least two magnets of each magnet arrangement are disposed exclusively in a partial volume delimited by two parallel reference planes and an outer surface of one of the two measuring tubes (Laursen: see Figs. 2 and 3),
wherein the reference planes extend parallel to a longitudinal plane extending through the two longitudinal axes of the legs of the respective measuring tube (Laursen: see Figs. 2 and 3), and
wherein the reference planes contact the outer surface (Laursen: see Figs. 2 and 3).
As for claim 12, Laursen as modified by Skinkle discloses a carrier unit (Laursen: 8 and Skinkle: 236) of a measuring device for detecting a mass flow rate, a viscosity, a density, and/or a variable derived therefrom, of a flowable medium, the carrier unit comprising:
a carrier unit body (Laursen: 8 and Skinkle: 236) configured to enable mounting a measuring tube arrangement according to claim 22 (see the rejection of claim 22 above), wherein the carrier unit body includes a receptacle (Laursen: 9) for the measuring tube arrangement, and
wherein the carrier unit body (Laursen: 8 and Skinkle: 236) includes at least two opposing side surfaces (Laursen: see Fig. 2 and Skinkle: sides of 236, see Fig. 3) that bound the receptacle transversely to a longitudinal direction of the measuring tube arrangement or to a longitudinal direction of the carrier unit body;
at least one vibration exciter (Laursen: 4, 16, 104, 116) configured to excite the measuring tube arrangement to vibrate, wherein the at least one vibration exciter is disposed on one of the opposing side surfaces (Laursen: suggested by col. 6, lines 31-33); and
at least two vibration sensors (Laursen: 5, 6, 105, 106) configured to detect deflections of vibrations of the measuring tube arrangement, wherein the at least two vibration sensors are disposed on the opposing side surfaces (Laursen: see Fig. 2), and wherein the at least two vibration sensors are arranged at an offset from the at least one vibration exciter in the longitudinal direction (Laursen: see Figs. 1 and 2).
As for claim 13, Laursen as modified by Skinkle discloses that each vibration sensor comprises two coil devices that are disposed at an offset from each other in the longitudinal direction of the carrier unit body (Laursen: see Figs. 1 and 2).
As for claim 14, Laursen as modified by Skinkle discloses that the at least one vibration exciter (Laursen: 4, 16, 104, 116) and the at least two vibration sensors (Laursen: 5, 6, 105, 106) each comprise at least one coil device (Laursen: see Figs. 2 and 3), wherein the coil devices are respectively disposed in a depression (Laursen: 9) in the carrier unit body (Laursen: 8).
As for claim 19, Laursen as modified by Skinkle discloses that each of the at least two opposing side surfaces (Laursen: see Fig. 2 and Skinkle: sides of 236, see Fig. 3) includes a guide (Skinkle: 242) extending perpendicular to a longitudinal direction of the receptacle, the guide (Skinkle: 242) configured to effect a positive connection between the connecting body (Skinkle: 212, 232) of the measuring tube arrangement and carrier unit body (Skinkle: 236).
Claim 6 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over U.S. Patent 6,138,517 issued to Laursen et al. (“Laursen”) in view of U.S. Patent 10,794,744 issued to Skinkle (“Skinkle”) as applied to claim 1, further in view of U.S. Patent 10,209,113 issued to Young et al. (“Young”).
As for claim 6, Laursen as modified by Skinkle discloses the measuring tube arrangement of claim 1 (see the rejection of claim 1 above).
Laursen as modified by Skinkle disclose not discloses that each measuring tube comprises a measuring tube body having a wall thickness of less than 1 millimeter.
However, Young discloses measuring tubes (102a, 102b) that each comprise a measuring tube body having a wall thickness of less than 1 millimeter (col. 2, lines 48-50).
It would have been obvious for one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the present application to modify the measuring tubes of Laursen and Skinkle to have a wall thickness of less than 1 millimeter as disclosed by Young in order to have improved flow measurement sensitivity (col. 2, lines 51-53).
Claim 7 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over U.S. Patent 6,138,517 issued to Laursen et al. (“Laursen”) in view of U.S. Patent 10,794,744 issued to Skinkle (“Skinkle”) as applied to claim 1, further in view of U.S. Patent 5,349,872 issued to Kalotay et al. (“Kalotay”).
As for claim 7, Laursen as modified by Skinkle discloses the measuring tube arrangement of claim 1 (see the rejection of claim 1 above).
Laursen as modified by Skinkle does not disclose that each measuring tube includes at least one at least partially planar attachment surface,
wherein at least one magnet of the at least two magnets of the magnet arrangement is disposed on the at least one attachment surface.
However, Kalotay discloses (Fig. 3) measuring tubes (12, 301-303 and 14, 304-307) that each include at least one at least partially planar attachment surface (302 or 306),
wherein at least one magnet (165 or 166) of at least two magnets of a magnet arrangement is disposed on the at least one attachment surface (see Fig. 3).
It would have been obvious for one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the present application to modify the measuring tubes of Laursen and Skinkle to have the at least one partially planar attachment surface as disclosed by Kalotay in order to permit coils and magnets to be fabricated as a separate sub-assembly in advance (Kalotay: col. 6, lines 24-28).
Claims 9-11 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over U.S. Patent 6,138,517 issued to Laursen et al. (“Laursen”) in view of U.S. Patent 10,794,744 issued to Skinkle (“Skinkle”) as applied to claim 1, further in view of U.S. Patent 9,939,303 issued to Regen et al. (“Regen”).
As for claim 9, Laursen as modified by Skinkle discloses a measuring tube system, comprising:
a measuring tube arrangement according to claim 1 (see the rejection of claim 1 above).
Laursen as modified by Skinkle does not disclose a hose system and/or plastic tube system as recited.
However, Regen discloses a hose system and/or plastic tube system configured to enable flow measurement in automated industrial or laboratory installations (Abstract),
wherein a measuring arrangement (3, 4) is connected to the hose system (see Fig. 1) and/or plastic tube system and is configured to measure at least one of a flow rate (Abstract), a volumetric flow rate, and the mass flow rate of the flowable medium. Regen discloses that the measuring tube system can be packaged and sterilized for biopharmaceutical applications (col. 6, lines 62-65 and col. 8, lines 59-65).
It would have been obvious for one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the present application to modify the measuring tube arrangement of Laursen and Skinkle to be part of a measuring tube system that includes a hose system as disclosed by Regen in order to provide a flow measurement system for biopharmaceutical applications (col. 6, lines 62-65 and col. 8, lines 59-65).
As for claim 10, Laursen as modified by Skinkle and Regen discloses that the measuring tube arrangement and the hose system and/or plastic tube system are disposed in a container configured to maintain a sterility of the measuring tube arrangement and of the hose system and/or plastic tube system until the container is opened (Regen: col. 8, lines 59-65),
wherein the measuring tube system is sterilized by at least one of radiation sterilization, hot steam sterilization, and gas sterilization, wherein the radiation sterilization includes gamma radiation sterilization (Regen: col. 8, lines 59-65) or electron beam sterilization.
As for claim 11, Laursen as modified by Skinkle and Regen discloses that at least one process monitoring unit (Laursen: 7) is connected to the hose system and/or plastic tube system,
wherein the at least one process monitoring unit comprises at least one of: a pressure measuring transducer; a temperature sensor; a scale; a pH sensor; a density sensor; a flow meter for determining a mass flow rate, a volumetric flow and/or a flow rate (Laursen: 7); a flow switch; a fill-level sensor; a conductivity sensor; a concentration sensor; an oxygen sensor; and a turbidity sensor.
Claim 15 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over U.S. Patent 6,138,517 issued to Laursen et al. (“Laursen”) in view of U.S. Patent 10,794,744 issued to Skinkle (“Skinkle”) as applied to claim 14, further in view of DE 102015120087 by Schwenter et al. (“Schwenter”).
As for claim 15, Laursen as modified by Skinkle discloses the carrier unit of claim 14 (see the rejection of claim 14 above).
Laursen as modified by Skinkle does not discloses that each coil device comprises at least one printed circuit board coil.
However, Schwenter discloses coil devices (3.I, 3.II, 3.III) that each comprise at least one printed circuit board coil (7-10).
It would have been obvious for one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the present application to modify the coil devices of Laursen and Skinkle to comprise at least one printed circuit board coil as disclosed by Schwenter in order to increase measurement performance and save costs compared to a winding spool coil (Schwenter: see the paragraph beginning: “The design of the first component …”).
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
U.S. Patent 6,308,580 issued to Crisfield et al. (“Crisfield”) is cited for all that it discloses including a measuring tube arrangement with couplers and a connecting body.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JUSTIN N OLAMIT whose telephone number is (571)270-1969. The examiner can normally be reached M-F, 8 am - 5 pm (Pacific).
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, Stephen Meier can be reached at (571) 272-2149. 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.
/JUSTIN N OLAMIT/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2853
