Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status
1. The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
Response to Amendment
2. Applicant’s arguments filed November 11, 2024. Claims 1-10 and 16-21 cancelled. Claims 11-15 have been presented for examination.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 101
3. 35 U.S.C. 101 reads as follows:
Whoever invents or discovers any new and useful process, machine, manufacture, or composition of matter, or any new and useful improvement thereof, may obtain a patent therefor, subject to the conditions and requirements of this title.
Claims 11-15 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 101 because the claimed invention is directed to a judicial exception (i.e., a law of nature, a natural phenomenon, or an abstract idea).
Claim 11 is drawn to a method of inspecting a well pumping unit with sensor/accelerometer for recording acceleration data output which could be performed by a human and (under prong 2A) does not claim additional elements integrated into a practical application given the reasoning below and (under prong 2B) does not recite additional elements which amount to significantly more, given that "acceleration versus time data exceeding first threshold and transforming time data versus frequency data" can be performed solely with generic computer components used by a human hand.
Claim 11 also includes:"..transforming acceleration versus time data to acceleration versus frequency data"- (Mental Processes -(recording, plotting data on graph on any device) notwithstanding a computer or mobile device implementation for information).
This could also be considered as data gathering and analyzing).
For these reasons, there is no inventive concept in the claim, and thus it is ineligible
Claim 12: “..monitoring a number of times an amplitude of the acceleration versus frequency data exceeds a second predetermined threshold; and producing an alert when the number reaches a predetermined level”- Mental process (monitoring data- such as number of times amplitude exceeds threshold for alert).
Claim 13: “..producing the alert when the number reaches the predetermined level in a predetermined time period”- Mental process (monitoring data for producing alert).
Claim 14: “..producing the alert when a rate of the number reaching the predetermined level per predetermined time period increases”- Mental process (monitoring data rate for producing alert).
Claim 15: “..monitoring the number of times the amplitude of the acceleration versus frequency data exceeds the second predetermined threshold in a predetermined range of frequencies”- Mental process (monitoring data for plotting from threshold data).
Double Patenting
4. Claim 11 rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting over claims 1 and 3 of U.S. Patent No. 12203359 B2 since the claims, if allowed, would improperly extend the “right to exclude” already granted in the patent.
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 §§ 706.02(l)(1) - 706.02(l)(3) 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 USPTO Internet website contains terminal disclaimer forms which may be used. Please visit www.uspto.gov/patent/patents-forms. The 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/process/file/efs/guidance/eTD-info-I.jsp.
5. Claim 11 of the application (18/943094) as shown in the table below contains every element of claims 1 and 3 of the patented application.
Claims of instant application 18/943094
Claims of U.S. Patent No. 12203359 B2
11. A method of inspecting a well pumping unit, the method comprising: attaching a sensor assembly to the pumping unit, the sensor assembly including an accelerometer;
recording acceleration versus time data output by the sensor assembly; and
in response to an amplitude of the acceleration versus time data exceeding a first predetermined threshold, transforming the acceleration versus time data to acceleration versus frequency data.
1.A sensor assembly for use with a well pumping unit, the sensor assembly comprising: a gyroscope configured to detect a rate of rotation about at least one gyroscope axis; an accelerometer configured to detect acceleration along at least one accelerometer axis; and a housing assembly containing the gyroscope and the accelerometer, the housing assembly including a pumping unit interface configured to attach the housing assembly to the pumping unit, in which the at least one gyroscope axis is collinear with the at least one accelerometer axis.
2. The sensor assembly of claim 1, further comprising at least one processor disposed in the housing assembly, the processor being configured to perform a Fast Fourier Transformation on data output by at least one of the gyroscope and the accelerometer.
3. The sensor assembly of claim 1, further comprising at least one processor disposed in the housing assembly, the processor being configured to transform time-based data output by at least one of the gyroscope and the accelerometer to frequency-based data.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
6. 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.
7. Claim(s) 11-13 and 15 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Ebrahimi et al. (US PGPUB 2018/0298744).
As per Claim 11, Ebrahimi discloses a method of inspecting a well pumping unit, the method (para 12, monitoring component in a pumping unit for a wellbore) comprising: attaching a sensor assembly to the pumping unit, the sensor assembly including an accelerometer (para 28, pumping unit 100 may include one or more sensors to detect and monitor vibration of pumping unit 100, include a sensor 171 (e.g., accelerometer) to measure vibration);
recording acceleration versus time data output by the sensor assembly (Abstract, measuring vibration data in the time domain using sensor, para 32, accelerometer used to measure magnitude of vibrations in the direction of accelerometer's axis of orientation); and
in response to an amplitude of the acceleration versus time data exceeding a first predetermined threshold (para 29, measured by accelerometer may be monitored over time to determine trends in frequencies and amplitudes, para 08, convert data in the time domain to data in frequency domain; to determine that data above a first threshold and output an indication based on the determination (i.e., in response to exceeding threshold)), transforming the acceleration versus time data to acceleration versus frequency data (para 38, data from the accelerometers may be converted from time -based data to frequency-based data and plotted to generate frequency spectrum 400 (i.e., transforming data), para 11, convert data in the time domain to data in frequency domain; to output indication based on the quantification (i.e., transforming data)).
As per Claim 12, Ebrahimi discloses the method of claim 11, further comprising: monitoring a number of number an amplitude of the acceleration versus frequency data exceeds a second predetermined threshold (para 29, accelerometer may be monitored over number to determine vibrational trends in frequencies and amplitudes, para 06, converting data in the time domain to vibration data in the frequency domain; determining that data above a second threshold, para 41, monitor the number of count to determine exceed of predetermined number threshold, determine level of wear); and
producing an alert when the number reaches a predetermined level (para 42, when a threshold amplitude or a count has been exceeded (e.g., three or level four thresholds), which trigger a signal being sent an alarm being raised (e.g., sounded)).
As per Claim 13, Ebrahimi discloses the method of claim 12, in which the producing comprises producing the alert when the number reaches the predetermined level in a predetermined time period (para 42, window 502 may be sized to control when a threshold amplitude or a count components has been exceeded, which trigger a signal being sent and an alarm being raised (e.g., sounded), window 502 may set threshold amplitude, filtering raw signals allow in the range of interest, para 66, determine vibration data in a first frequency band above a threshold for period of time).
As per Claim 15, Ebrahimi discloses the method of claim 12, in which the monitoring comprises monitoring the number of times the amplitude of the acceleration versus frequency data exceeds the second predetermined threshold in a predetermined range of frequencies (para 29, accelerometer monitored over number to determine trends in frequencies and amplitudes, para 06, converting data in the time domain to data in the frequency domain; determining that data above a second threshold, para 41, monitor the number of count to determine exceed of predetermined number threshold).
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
8. The following is a quotation of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 103(a) which forms the basis for all obviousness rejections set forth in this Office action:
(a) A patent may not be obtained though the invention is not identically disclosed or described as set forth in section 102 of this title, if the differences between the subject matter sought to be patented and the prior art are such that the subject matter as a whole would have been obvious at the time the invention was made to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which said subject matter pertains. Patentability shall not be negatived by the manner in which the invention was made.
9. The factual inquiries set forth in Graham v. John Deere Co., 383 U.S. 1, 148 USPQ 459 (1966), that are applied for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103(a) are summarized as follows:
1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art.
2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue.
3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art.
4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness.
10. This application currently names joint inventors. In considering patentability of the claims under pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 103(a), the examiner presumes that the subject matter of the various claims was commonly owned at the time any inventions covered therein were made absent any evidence to the contrary. Applicant is advised of the obligation under 37 CFR 1.56 to point out the inventor and invention dates of each claim that was not commonly owned at the time a later invention was made in order for the examiner to consider the applicability of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 103(c) and potential pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102(e), (f) or (g) prior art under pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 103(a).
11. Claim 14 is rejected under pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 103(a) as being unpatentable over Ebrahimi et al. (US 2018/0298744) in view of ROBISON (WO 2022035503 A1).
As per Claim 14, Ebrahimi fails to discloses the method of claim 12, in which the producing comprises producing the alert when a rate of the number reaching the predetermined level per predetermined time period increases.
In analogous art, ROBISON discloses the method of claim 12, in which the producing comprises producing the alert when a rate of the number reaching the predetermined level per predetermined time period increases (page 19, lines 15-18).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to modify teaching of converting the vibration data in the time domain to vibration data in the frequency domain disclosed by Ebrahimi to use an inspection sensor assembly, system and method for use with a pumping unit as taught by ROBISON to number of times that the acceleration amplitude exceeds a predetermined threshold in a certain frequency range of interest is determined [ROBISON , page 13, lines 23-27].
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to MIRZA ALAM whose telephone number is (469) 295-9286. The examiner can normally be reached on 8:00AM-5:00PM.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Steven Lim can be reached on 571-270-1210. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300.
Information regarding the status of an application may be obtained from the Patent Application Information Retrieval (PAIR) system. Status information for published applications may be obtained from either Private PAIR or Public PAIR. Status information for unpublished applications is available through Private PAIR only. For more information about the PAIR system, see http://pair-direct.uspto.gov. Should you have questions on access to the Private PAIR system, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative or access to the automated information system, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000
/MIRZA F ALAM/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2688