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 .
Election/Restrictions
Applicant's election with traverse of Group I in the reply filed on September 9, 2026 is acknowledged. The traversal is on the ground(s) that claims 15, 19 and 25 . This is not found persuasive because these claims describe additional structure of a completely different scope and therefore should be examined separately.
The requirement is still deemed proper and is therefore made FINAL.
Claims 15, 19, 25-28, 36-38, 48 and 52-53 are withdrawn from further consideration pursuant to 37 CFR 1.142(b), as being drawn to a nonelected invention, there being no allowable generic or linking claim.
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.
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.
Claim(s) 1-6, 8, 12 and 57 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Schweiger et al. (US 2022/0236130, hereafter Schweiger) in view of Remboski et al. (US 10,877,060, hereafter Remboski)
Schweiger teaches an atmospheric measurement device, comprising: an atmospheric probe (pressure sensor 1) having an aerodynamic profile defined by an outer surface (housing 2); a plurality of ports (pressure ports 4) extending through the outer surface and an inner surface of the atmospheric probe; and a plurality of pressure sensors (pressure measurement cell 5), each pressure sensor of the plurality of pressure sensors positioned within the atmospheric probe and adjacent a respective one of the plurality of ports; wherein each pressure sensor of the plurality of pressure sensors is configured in sealing engagement (seal 22) with the respective one of the plurality of ports. (par. 86, Fig. 1)
Schweiger does not explicitly teach the atmospheric measurement device is configured to calculate a wind speed and a wind direction based on pressure data received from the plurality of pressure sensors.
Remboski teaches an atmospheric probe (anemometer 10A, 10B) having an aerodynamic profile defined by an outer surface (housing); a plurality of ports (ports 16) extending through the outer surface and an inner surface of the atmospheric probe; and a plurality of pressure sensors (sensors 18) each pressure sensor of the plurality of pressure sensors positioned within the atmospheric probe and adjacent a respective one of the plurality of ports, wherein the atmospheric measurement device is configured to calculate a wind speed and a wind direction based on pressure data received from the plurality of pressure sensors. (col. 4, lines 9-29, col. 4, line 42 – col. 5, line 24, Figs. 1A-1B)
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was filed to modify the structure of Schweiger to include a processor to calculate a wind speed and wind direction, as taught by Remboski, in order to provide this information about the environment around the probe.
With respect to claim 2, Schweiger, as modified by Remboski, teaches the plurality of pressure sensors is arranged about the aerodynamic profile in a manner enabling the atmospheric measurement device to determine a first angle of the wind direction through a range of 360⁰ about a vertical axis of the atmospheric probe and a second angle of the wind direction through a range of ±30 about a horizontal axis of the atmospheric probe. (Remboski, col. 4, lines 9-29, col. 4, line 42 – col. 5, line 24, Figs. 1A-1B)
With respect to claims 3-5, although Schweiger, as modified by Remboski, does not explicitly teach the plurality of ports comprises a first row positioned in an upper hemisphere of the atmospheric probe and a second row positioned in a lower hemisphere of the atmospheric probe, each of the first and second rows comprising six ports spaced equidistantly apart about a vertical axis of the atmospheric probe, wherein the first row is positioned approximately 20⁰ above a reference plane separating the upper and lower hemispheres and the second row is positioned approximately 20⁰ below the reference plane, and a third row positioned in the upper hemisphere of the atmospheric probe, the third row comprising four ports spaced equidistantly apart about the vertical axis of the atmospheric probe, this would have been an obvious alternative arrangement to provide pressure measurements in a wider variety of locations.
With respect to claim 6, Schweiger, as modified by Remboski, teaches the plurality of pressure sensors is mounted to a sensor substrate positioned within the atmospheric probe.
With respect to claim 8, Schweiger, as modified by Remboski, teaches a mounting structure (mount 22) for the device, a primary substrate positioned within the housing; a processor and a memory disposed on the primary substrate, the processor configured to receive a signal from each of the plurality of pressure sensors and to calculate the wind direction and the wind speed based on the signals. (Remboski, col. 4, lines 9-29, col. 4, line 42 – col. 5, line 28, Figs. 1A-1B) Although the references do not discuss a hand-held housing from which the atmospheric probe extends; and a display configured to display the wind direction and the wind speed, these would be an obvious additional structure to make the device available in a wider variety of applications.
With respect to claim 12, although Schweiger, as modified by Remboski, does not explicitly teach a cover configured to selectively enclose the atmospheric probe, this would be an obvious additional application to protect the device.
With respect to claim 57, Schweiger, as modified by Remboski, teaches The outer surface is cylindrical and the plurality of ports are arranged in a row extending about a circumference of the outer surface. (Remboski, col. 4, lines 9-29, col. 4, line 42 – col. 5, line 28, Figs. 1A-1B)
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. US 7,093,483 and US 10,288,513 each teach inventions having similarities to the claimed subject matter.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Jill E Culler whose telephone number is (571)272-2159. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 8:30-5:00.
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.
/JILL E CULLER/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2853
Prosecution Insights