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 Objections
Claims 25-30 are objected to because of the following informalities:
In claim 25 line 2, “applying a a first-order” would be clearer if written as -- applying a first-order--
In claim 26 line 5, “system, and” would be clearer if written as --system, where ե equals time, and--.
Appropriate correction is required.
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 16-21 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over U. S. Patent Publication 2014/0369854 to Fullemann in view of U. S. Patent Publication 2011/0241888 to Lu.
Referring to claims 16, Fullemann teaches a method for monitoring the operation of a centrifugal pump, the method comprising:
establishing whether the centrifugal pump (2) is in a stable operating state, wherein the centrifugal pump (2) has a drive motor (7) (1-7; paragraphs [0037]-[0046]);
when the stable operating state exists, monitoring at least one characteristic variable (current IR) of the drive motor in order to establish whether there is an impeller blockage (1-7; paragraphs [0037]-[0046]);
when the impeller blockage is identified, activating the impeller (8) to free-wheel (1-7; paragraphs [0037]-[0046]); and
when the impeller blockage is not identified, analyzing a motor current to identify impairment of the centrifugal pump (2), and shutting down the drive motor (7) by following a downward speed ramp if the impeller blockage is identified (1-7; paragraphs [0037]-[0046]).
Fullemann is silent as to the number of phases of the motor. Lu teaches a method wherein:
a pump (12) has a three-phase drive motor (10) (Fig. 1; paragraph [0021]-[0045]).
It would have been obvious before the invention was effectively filed, to a person having ordinary skill in the art to include the three-phase drive motor as taught by Lu into the method of Fullemann because it has been held that a simple substitution of one known element, the three-phase drive motor of Lu, for another, the generic drive motor of Fullemann, to obtain predictable results, driving the pump, was an obvious extension of prior art teachings, KSR, 550 U.S. at 419, 82 USPQ2d at 1396, MPEP 2141 III B.
Fullemann does not teach the use of frequency spectrum analysis. Lu teaches a method wherein:
analyzing a frequency spectrum of a motor current to identify a fault (Fig. 1; paragraph [0021]-[0045]).
It would have been obvious before the invention was effectively filed, to a person having ordinary skill in the art, to modify the method taught by Fullemann with the frequency spectrum analysis taught by Lu in order to also detect cavitation (Lu abstract).
Referring to claim 17, Fullemann in view of Lu teach a method comprising all the limitations of claim 16, as detailed above, and Fullemann further teaches a method wherein:
the impairment of the centrifugal pump (2) involves an impairment of the impeller (8), or impeller (8) fouling (1-7; paragraphs [0037]-[0046]).
Referring to claim 18, Fullemann in view of Lu teach a method comprising all the limitations of claim 17, as detailed above, and Fullemann further teaches a method comprising:
initiating a cleaning program on identification of the impeller (8) blockage and/or identification of the impeller (8) fouling (1-7; paragraphs [0037]-[0046]).
Referring to claim 19, Fullemann in view of Lu teach a method comprising all the limitations of claim 18, as detailed above, and Fullemann further teaches a method comprising:
performing a cleaning program after identifying the impeller (8) fouling (1-7; paragraphs [0037]-[0046]).
While Fullemann teaches a cleaning program after identifying the impeller (8) fouling, Fullemann does not teach performing a first cleaning program, after identifying the impeller blockage. However, it would have been obvious before the invention was effectively filed, to a person having ordinary skill in the art, to perform a first cleaning program, after identifying the impeller blockage, in order to clear the blockage, since it has been held that mere duplication of essential working parts of a device involve only routine skill in the art (In re Regis Paper Co. v. Bemis Co., 193 USPQ 8), and it has been held that that mere duplication of parts has no patentable significance unless a new and unexpected result is produced (In re Harza, 274 F.2d 669, 124 USPQ 378 (CCPA 1960)).
Referring to claim 20, Fullemann in view of Lu teach a method comprising all the limitations of claim 19, as detailed above, and Fullemann further teaches a method wherein:
the impeller blockage is identified by monitoring a drawn motor current (IR), and the impeller blockage is identified when the drawn motor current (IR) lies above a multiple of a rated current (GS) (1-7; paragraphs [0037]-[0046]).
Referring to claim 21, Fullemann in view of Lu teach a method comprising all the limitations of claim 20, as detailed above, but Fullemann does not teach the use of frequency spectrum analysis. Lu teaches a method wherein:
analyzing the frequency spectrum comprises monitoring a spectral amplitude of the motor current at least at one fault frequency (Fig. 1; paragraph [0021]-[0045]).
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 22-30 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. The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter: the prior art does not teach a method comprising all the limitations of claims 16-22, but more specifically wherein the at least one fault frequency is determined as a function of pole pairs of the stator and/or a stator frequency and/or a motor slip, as given by fr,pump = (1± 1/p (1 - s)) * fs for an induction motor, where p is the number of pole pairs of the stator, s is the motor slip, and fs is the stator frequency.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. Bovill, Hamdan, Becker, and Haynes teach similar methods as claimed, but not the above allowable subject matter.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to BRYAN MATTHEW LETTMAN whose telephone number is (571)270-7860. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 8am-4pm.
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, Essama Omgba can be reached at 469-295-9278. 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.
/BRYAN M LETTMAN/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3746
Prosecution Insights