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) 1-6, 9-11, 13, and 16-17 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by CN 109238686 A (herein Zhao).
Regarding claim 1, Zhao teaches a method comprising:
receiving, by a pressure controller including a data processor, data characterizing at least one of a rate of pressure change at a valve and an air flow to the valve (flow controller 20, pressure sensor 40, controller 50, see p. 5 of translation);
determining, by the data processor, valve operation data associated with the valve, wherein the valve operation data comprises data characterizing at least one of an amount of air flow to the valve with respect to a predefined rate of pressure change and a pressure rate of change at the valve with respect to a predefined air flow rate to the valve (p. 6 teaches “instantaneous pressure of the instantaneous flow are collected by flow controller 20 and the pressure sensor 40 and the ratio of rate of change of pressure and flow with the variation curve C2 of time”; Fig. 16 teaches); and
providing, by the data processor, the valve operation data to a user (a man-machine interaction interface for electrically connecting with the controller 50, in the human-computer interaction interface can display the opening pressure value of the safety valve 60).
Regarding claim 2, Zhao teaches wherein providing the valve operation data comprises providing a plot to a user interface display coupled to the data processor, wherein the plot comprises data characterizing at least one of the amount of air flow to the valve with respect to the predefined rate of pressure change and the pressure rate of change at the valve with respect to the predefined air flow rate to the valve (Fig. 16 teaches plot showing ratio of pressure change to flow rate).
Regarding claim 3, Zhao teaches notifying, automatically by the data processor, the user that the valve is operating in a compromised state based on the valve operation data exceeding a predefined threshold (Fig. 13 and p. 11 teach abrupt decrease of ratio as shown in Fig. 13 which corresponds to threshold, and plot show in in Fig. 13, and p. 8 teaches human-computer interaction interface can display it).
Regarding claim 4, Zhao teaches storing the valve operation data in a memory of the pressure controller (safety detection device stores a corresponding table, p. 4); determining, by the data processor, performance data characterizing a performance of the valve over time; and providing, by the data processor, the performance data to the user (according to the relationship curve in FIG. 12 can also be substantially determining the opening pressure of the safety valve 60, i.e., the fixed volume cavity of the pressure value of the pressure 30 begins to fall, generating pressure value of the inflection point is determined as the opening pressure of the safety valve, p. 10).
Regarding claim 5, Zhao teaches wherein determining the valve operation data further comprises determining one or more of an opening point of the valve and a closing point of the valve (opening pressure of the safety valve, p. 10).
Regarding claim 6, Zhao teaches wherein determining the valve operation data further comprises determining an indication of stiction of the valve (Figs. 12-13 teach point t0 where stiction occurs, particularly the movement that causes sudden change in volume and pressure).
Regarding claim 9, Zhao teaches wherein the valve operation data is determined based on a control pressure received at the pressure controller (controller 50 electrically connected with the pressure sensor 40. the pressure sensor 40 can be in real time the sensed pressure value to the controller 50, p. 5).
Regarding claim 10, Zhao teaches a system (safety valve detecting device 100, p. 5, Fig. 1) comprising:
a valve (valve 60, Fig. 1);
a pressure controller coupled to the valve (controller 50); and
a computing device, including a memory, a data processor and a display, coupled to the pressure controller (human-machine interactive interface, CPU processor, display, p. 5; p. 9 teaches capable of storing tables),
wherein the data processor is configured to execute instructions stored in the memory, which when executed cause the data processor to perform operations comprising equivalent limitations found in claim 1 (see rejection of claim 1 above).
Regarding claim 11, Zhao teaches a user interface display coupled to the data processor (human-machine interactive interface, p. 5), wherein the data processor is configured to perform operations further comprising: providing a plot to the user interface display, wherein the plot comprises data characterizing at least one of the amount of air flow to the valve with respect to the predefined rate of pressure change and the pressure rate of change at the valve with respect to the predefined air flow rate to the valve (Fig. 16 teaches plot showing ratio of pressure change to flow rate).
Regarding claim 13, Zhao teaches wherein the data processor is configured to perform operations further comprising: storing the valve operation data in a memory of the pressure controller (safety detection device stores a corresponding table, p. 4); determining, by the data processor, performance data characterizing a performance of the valve over time; and providing, by the data processor, the performance data to the user (according to the relationship curve in FIG. 12 can also be substantially determining the opening pressure of the safety valve 60, i.e., the fixed volume cavity of the pressure value of the pressure 30 begins to fall, generating pressure value of the inflection point is determined as the opening pressure of the safety valve, p. 10).
Regarding claim 16, Zhao teaches wherein the valve operation data determined further comprises data characterizing one or more of an opening point of the valve and a closing point of the valve (opening pressure of the safety valve, p. 10).
Regarding claim 17, Zhao teaches wherein the valve operation data determined further comprises data characterizing an indication of stiction of the valve (Figs. 12-13 teach point t0 where stiction occurs, particularly the movement that causes sudden change in volume and pressure).
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) 7-8, 12, 18-19 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Zhao as applied to claim 1 above, in further view of US 20100155634 (herein Amaral).
Regarding claims 7-8 and 18-19, Zhao does not explicitly teach, “wherein the valve is a pneumatic valve” or “herein the pneumatic valve is a cabin pressure valve configured in an aircraft.” However, Amaral teaches pneumatic valves to regulate aircraft are known in the art ([0022], [0010]).
For claims 7-8 and 18-19, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the time of filing to incorporate the valve assembly taught by Zhao into the pneumatic valve on the aircraft of Amaral. One would be motivated to do so for at least the purpose of protection so that the internal pressure is maintained within a safe range (p. 1).
Regarding claim 12, Zhao teaches operation ([0046]). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the time of filing to incorporate the alert of Amaral into the system of Zhao. One would be motivated to do so for at least the purpose of simplifying abnormality indications for a user.
Claim(s) 14-15 and 20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Zhao as applied to claim 1 above, in further view of US 20180292431 (Cahill).
Regarding claim 14-15, Zhao does not teach, “a pressure and vacuum source coupled to the pressure controller” and “wherein the pressure and vacuum source is configured to supply pressure to the valve.” However, Cahill teaches pressure values may be controlled by the pressure and/or vacuum pumps 110, 112 ([0027]).
Regarding claim 20, Zhao does not teach, “wherein the pressure controller is a pitot static tester.” However, Cahill teaches pitot-static system 12 ([0025]).
For claims 14-15 and 20, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the time of filing to incorporate the system 12 and pumps 110, 112 of Cahill into the pressure controller 50 of Zhao. One would be motivated to do so for at least the purpose of precisely adjusting pressure output ([0024]).
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to PHILIP FADUL whose telephone number is (571)272-5411. The examiner can normally be reached Mon-Thurs 8pm-6pm.
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
/PHILIP T FADUL/Examiner, Art Unit 2852
Prosecution Insights