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 § 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) 1-9, 11, 13, and 16-19 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Single Buoy Moorings Inc. (WO2008/071637) hereinafter SBM.
SBM discloses a protective system for a structure enclosing a fluid, the protective system comprising: a containment material (9) as seen in Figure 2 arranged on at least one portion of an external surface of the structure, the at least one portion of the external surface of the structure corresponding to a fraction of the external surface of the structure; and at least one leak detection sensor (43) as depicted in Figure 7A arranged such that the containment material covers or encompasses the at least one leak detection sensor, wherein containment material is configured to collect at least a portion of the fluid thereby containing leakage of the fluid outside of the structure in the event of a leak in the structure in the at least one portion, and wherein the leakage of the fluid into the containment material triggers a detection of the leak by the leak detection sensor (see claim 1).
Regarding claim 2, wherein the containment material comprises at least one of a porous material having closed non connected cavities, a porous material having open connected cavities, or a flexible material configured to expand and form a cavity when subjected to pressure from the at least portion of fluid (page 7, lines 4 to page 8, line 31).
Regarding claim 3, wherein the containment material is a porous material that absorbs the at least portion of fluid in the event of the leak (page 7, lines 4 to page 8, line 31).
Regarding claim 4, wherein the containment material comprises at least one of a fiber-based material, a textile material, a foam, a three-dimensional printed porous material, or a porous adhesive (page 7, lines 4 to page 8, line 31).
Regarding claim 5, wherein the containment material comprises a textile material having a three-dimensional porous structure (page 7, lines 4 to page 8, line 31).
Regarding claim 6, wherein the containment material is made of a superposition of layers, each layer of the superposition of layers comprising at least one of a porous material having closed non-connected cavities, a porous material having open connected cavities, a flexible material configured to expand and form a cavity when subjected to pressure from the at least portion of fluid, a fiber based material, a textile material, a foam or a porous adhesive (page 7, lines 4 to page 8, line 31).
Regarding claim 7, wherein at least two different layers of the superposition of layers comprise the leak detection sensor as seen in Figure 7A.
Regarding claim 8, further comprising an outer hull enclosing the containment material (8) as can be seen in Figure 1.
Regarding claim 9, wherein the at least one portion of the external surface comprises a structure repair element thereon, (the covering could be considered a structural repair element).
Regarding claim 11, a method for protecting a structure enclosing a fluid, the method comprising: installing at least one leak detection sensor on at least one leak detection sensor on at least one portion of an external surface of the structure; and applying a containment material on the at least one portion of the external surface of the structure corresponding to a fraction of the external surface of the structure, such that the containment material covers or encompasses the at least one leak detection sensor, wherein the containment material is configured to collect at least a portion of the fluid thereby containing leakage of the fluid outside of the structure in the event of a leak in the structure in the at least one portion, and wherein the leakage of the fluid in the containment material triggers a detection of the leak by the leak detection sensor. The apparatus as identified in claim 1 would inherently meet this method claim.
Regarding claim 13, arranging an outer hull (8) as seen in Figure 8 enclosing the containment material as indicate din claim 8.
Regarding claims 16 and 18, wherein the structure enclosing the fluid is a pipe or a tank (page 1, lines 12-15)(uses pipe and hose interchangeably in reference).
Regarding claims 17 and 19, wherein the containment material is configured to collect the at least portion of the fluid in at least one cavity formed in the containment material (the material is in an enclosed area as seen in the Figures indicated).
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) 10 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over SBM.
SBM fails to disclose dimensions further fails to disclose wherein the protective system has a thickness in a range between 1 mm and 30 cm.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was made to utilize the protective system within the thickness range as claimed, since such a modification would involve a mere change in the size of a component (A change in size is generally recognized as being within the level of ordinary skill in the art). See MPEP2144.04. The motivation for doing so would be to utilize the leak system in a variety of different sized piping applications.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 12, 14, and 15 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 claim 12, the following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter: the prior art fails to disclose or render obvious “prior to installing the at least one leak detection sensor and applying the containment material: installing a structure repair element on the at least one portion of the external surface of the structure” in combination with the other limitations set forth in the independent claims.
Regarding claim 14, the following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter: the prior art fails to disclose or render obvious “applying the containment material in a non-cured state, applying a fluid under pressure in the containment material, curing the containment material” in combination with the other limitations set forth in the independent claims.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to CRAIG M SCHNEIDER whose telephone number is (571)272-3607. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 8am-5pm.
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, Alford Kindred can be reached at (571) 272-4037. 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.
/CRAIG M SCHNEIDER/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3753
Prosecution Insights