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 .
DETAILED ACTION
This is responsive to the claims filed 12/13/2024. Claims 1 – 20 are pending in this application.
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement filed 12/13/2024 is acknowledged by the examiner.
Double Patenting
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 § 2146 et seq. 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 filing of a terminal disclaimer by itself is not a complete reply to a nonstatutory double patenting (NSDP) rejection. A complete reply requires that the terminal disclaimer be accompanied by a reply requesting reconsideration of the prior Office action. Even where the NSDP rejection is provisional the reply must be complete. See MPEP § 804, subsection I.B.1. For a reply to a non-final Office action, see 37 CFR 1.111(a). For a reply to final Office action, see 37 CFR 1.113(c). A request for reconsideration while not provided for in 37 CFR 1.113(c) may be filed after final for consideration. See MPEP §§ 706.07(e) and 714.13.
The USPTO Internet website contains terminal disclaimer forms which may be used. Please visit www.uspto.gov/patent/patents-forms. The actual 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/apply/applying-online/eterminal-disclaimer.
Claims 1, 2, 3, 11, 12, 17 and 18 are rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claims 1, 1, 3, 15, 17, 15 and 18 of U.S. Patent No. 12,196,335.
Although the claims at issue are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other because claim 1 of the present application requires “a motor connected to a valve handle coupling configured to apply a torque from the motor to a handle of the water shut-off valve to selectively open or close the water shut-off valve to control flow of water through the water shut-off valve; one or more motor sensors configured to detect one or more operating characteristics of the motor while the torque is applied to the handle of the water shut-off valve by the motor via the valve handle coupling; and a controller communicatively connected to the motor and the one or more motor sensors, wherein the controller is configured to: control the motor to actuate the water shut-off valve; obtain a plurality of operating characteristic measurements of the one or more motor sensors at a corresponding plurality of times during actuation of the water shut-off valve; determine one or more operating metric values for the water shut-off valve based upon the plurality of operating characteristic measurements; and determine the operating status of the water shut-off valve based upon the one or more operating metric values”, claim 1 of the reference patent discloses “a motor connected to a valve handle coupling configured to apply a torque from the motor to a handle of the water shut-off valve to selectively open or close the water shut-off valve to control flow of water through the water shut-off valve; an adjustable connector mechanism configured to removably attach to the pipe and to hold the motor in an operating position relative to the water shut-off valve, wherein the operating position is adjustable by a user through adjusting one or more components of the adjustable connector mechanism; a torque sensor configured to detect the torque applied to the handle of the water shut-off valve by the motor; and a controller communicatively connected to the motor and the torque sensor, wherein the controller is configured to execute instructions to: control the motor to actuate the water shut-off valve at least once at each of a plurality of times; obtain a plurality of torque measurements from the torque sensor at the plurality of times; generate an operating metric value for the water shut-off valve at each of the plurality of times based upon the corresponding torque measurements; and determine an operating status of the water shut-off valve based upon at least one of the plurality of operating metric values”.
Similarly claims 2, 3, 11, 12, 17 and 18 are rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claims 1, 3, 15, 17, 15 and 18 of U.S. Patent No. 12,196,335.
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 1, 4 – 11, 13 - 17, and 19 - 20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over US Patent to Lowitz et al. (11,105,705) in view of US Patent to Hood et al. (4,957,274).
Regarding claims 1, 4 - 5 Lowitz et al. disclose a motor (371, Fig. 21) connected to a valve handle coupling configured to apply a torque from the motor to a handle (921, Fig. 21) of the water shut-off valve (920, Fig. 21) to selectively open or close the water shut-off valve to control flow of water through the water shut-off valve.
Lowitz et al. do not disclose one or more motor sensors configured to detect one or more operating characteristics of the motor while the torque is applied to the handle of the water shut-off valve by the motor via the valve handle coupling; and a controller communicatively connected to the motor and the one or more motor sensors, wherein the controller is configured to: control the motor to actuate the water shut-off valve; obtain a plurality of operating characteristic measurements of the one or more motor sensors at a corresponding plurality of times during actuation of the water shut-off valve; determine one or more operating metric values for the water shut-off valve based upon the plurality of operating characteristic measurements; and determine the operating status of the water shut-off valve based upon the one or more operating metric values.
However, determining the proper operation of a motor for actuating a valve is well known in the art as taught by Hood et al. Hood et al. teach a plurality of motor sensors (Col. 2, lines 37 – 44) to determine the precise operation of the actuating motor.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to the person having ordinary skill in the art at a time prior to the effective filing date of the application to have modified valve disclosed by Lowitz et al. with the motor control taught by Hood et al. to control the operation of the valve by monitoring the precise rotational position of the actuating motor.
Reading claims 6 – 7, Lowitz et al. disclose motor current detector (Col. 20, Lines 9 – 18). Examiner maintains the current detector inherently would detect a valve of current supplied to the electric motor. .
Regarding claims 8 – 10, in the combination, Lowitz et al. teach a flow detector (410, Fig. 21) to determine the proper operation of the shutoff valve. Lowitz et al. further teach remote connectivity (Col. 5, Lines 44 – 47).
Regarding claims 11 and 13, Lowitz et al. controlling, by one or more processors of a controller (440, Fig. 21), a motor (371, Fig. 21) to actuate the water shut-off valve, wherein the motor is connected to a valve handle coupling configured to apply a torque from the motor to a handle (921, Fig. 21) of the water shut-off valve (920, Fig. 21) to selectively open or close the water shut-off valve to control flow of water through the water shut-off valve.
Lowitz et al. do not disclose obtaining, by the one or more processors, a plurality of operating characteristic measurements from one or more motor sensors configured to detect one or more operating characteristics of the motor at a corresponding plurality of times while the torque is applied to the handle of the water shut-off valve by the motor via the valve handle coupling; determining, by the one or more processors, one or more operating metric values for the water shut-off valve based upon the plurality of operating characteristic measurements; and determining, by the one or more processors, the operating status of the water shut-off valve based upon the one or more operating metric values.
However, determining the proper operation of a motor for actuating a valve is well known in the art as taught by Hood et al. Hood et al. teach a plurality of motor sensors (Col. 2, lines 37 – 44) to determine the precise operation of the actuating motor.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to the person having ordinary skill in the art at a time prior to the effective filing date of the application to have modified valve disclosed by Lowitz et al. with the motor control taught by Hood et al. to control the operation of the valve by monitoring the precise rotational position of the actuating motor.
Reading claim 14, Lowitz et al. disclose motor current detector (Col. 20, Lines 9 – 18). Examiner maintains the current detector inherently would detect a valve of current supplied to the electric motor.
Regarding claims 15 - 16, in the combination, Lowitz et al. teach a flow detector (410, Fig. 21) to determine the proper operation of the shutoff valve.
Regarding claim 17, Lowitz et al. disclose a water shut-off valve (920, Fig. 21) attached to a pipe (830, Fig. 21) of a water supply system that, when executed by one or more processors (440, Fig. 21) of a computer system, cause the computer system to: control a motor (371, Fig. 1) to actuate the water shut-off valve, wherein the motor is connected to a valve handle coupling configured to apply a torque from the motor to a handle (921, Fig. 210 of the water shut-off valve to selectively open or close the water shut-off valve to control flow of water through the water shut-off valve
Lowitz et al. do not disclose obtaining a plurality of operating characteristic measurements from one or more motor sensors configured to detect one or more operating characteristics of the motor at a corresponding plurality of times while the torque is applied to the handle of the water shut-off valve by the motor via the valve handle coupling; determine one or more operating metric values for the water shut-off valve based upon the plurality of operating characteristic measurements; and determine the operating status of the water shut-off valve based upon the one or more operating metric values.
However, determining the proper operation of a motor for actuating a valve is well known in the art as taught by Hood et al. Hood et al. teach a plurality of motor sensors (Col. 2, lines 37 – 44) to determine the precise operation of the actuating motor.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to the person having ordinary skill in the art at a time prior to the effective filing date of the application to have modified valve disclosed by Lowitz et al. with the motor control taught by Hood et al. to control the operation of the valve by monitoring the precise rotational position of the actuating motor.
Regarding claim 19, in the combination, Lowitz et al. teach a flow detector (410, Fig. 21) to determine the proper operation of the shutoff valve.
Reading claim 20, Lowitz et al. disclose motor current detector (Col. 20, Lines 9 – 18). Examiner maintains the current detector inherently would detect a valve of current supplied to the electric motor.
Claims 2 – 3 and 17 - 18 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over US Patent to Lowitz et al. (11,105,705) in view of US Patent to Cordray et al. (8,342,478).
Lowitz et al. do not disclose a torque sensor to determine the operating characteristic of the motor.
However, Cordray et al. teach a torque sensor (270, Fig. 2) to detect the position of the valve when torque is applied.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to the person having ordinary skill in the art at a time prior to the effective filing date of the application to have modified valve actuator disclosed by Lowitz et al. with the torque sensor taught by Cordray et al. to ensure proper functioning of the shutoff valve by measuring the torque applied by the motor to the valve handle.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. US Patent to Burlage et al. (7,392,817) and US Patent Application Publication to Kochan et al. (2014/0230924) disclosing automatic shut-off valves.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to UMASHANKAR VENKATESAN whose telephone number is (571)270-5602. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday 9:30 AM - 6:00 PM.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner' s supervisors Craig Schneider can be reached at (571) 272-3607 or Ken Rinehart can be reached at (571) 272-4881. 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 Patent Center. Status information for published applications may be obtained from Patent Center. Status information for unpublished applications is available through Patent Center for authorized users only. Should you have questions about access to Patent Center, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free).
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) Form at https://www.uspto.gov/patents/uspto-automated- interview-request-air-form.
/UMASHANKAR VENKATESAN/
Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3753