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
The action is in response to the Applicant’s communication filed on 01/10/2025.
Claims 1-20 are pending, where claims 1, 9 and 15 are independent.
This application claims the continuation benefit of the application number 14/949739, 15/621947, 16685804, 17668255 and 18/234843 are incorporated herein and the priority benefit of the provisional application no. 61/083171 filed on 11/22/2014 also incorporated herein.
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on 09/05/2025 has been filed after the filing date of the application. The submission is in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statement is being considered by the examiner.
Multiple filed related applications
Applicants have filed multiple related applications (14/949739, 15/621947, 16685804, 17668255 and 18/234843). To date, some of the related applications have been allowed or under NOA and it appears that some related applications are stand pending, yet to be examined. There are plurality of co-pending related Applications and double patenting is proper. See MPEP 804 and 1490 (VI) D:
Statutory Double Patenting
A rejection based on double patenting of the “same invention” type finds its support in the language of 35 U.S.C. 101 which states that “whoever invents or discovers any new and useful process... may obtain a patent therefor...” (Emphasis added). Thus, the term “same invention,” in this context, means an invention drawn to identical subject matter. See Miller v. Eagle Mfg. Co., 151 U.S. 186 (1894); In re Vogel, 422 F.2d 438, 164 USPQ 619 (CCPA 1970); In re Ockert, 245 F.2d 467, 114 USPQ 330 (CCPA 1957).
A statutory type (35 U.S.C. 101) double patenting rejection can be overcome by canceling or amending the claims that are directed to the same invention so they are no longer coextensive in scope. The filing of a terminal disclaimer cannot overcome a double patenting rejection based upon 35 U.S.C. 101.
Claims 1, 9 and 15 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 101 as claiming the same invention as that of 1, 9 and 15 of USP No. 12,196,585 B1 (Appl. No. 18/234843). This is a statutory double patenting rejection. Because the limitations of the instant conflicting claim are anticipated, the claim language of the instant claims are identical to the limitations of the patent as shown in the table (for comparison) and the applications are claiming common subject matter, as follows:
Instant Application No. 19/017346
USP No. 12,196,585 B1 (Appl. No. 18/234843)
Title
Resource Consumption Measurement System and Method
Resource Consumption Measurement System and Method
Claim 1. A system configured to obtain irrigation water consumption data pertinent to a water-monitored property, the system comprising:
a non-transitory computer readable medium; and
computer program code, encoded on the non-transitory computer readable medium, configured to cause at least one processor of one or more processors to perform the steps of: identifying, based on first actual water usage data, one or more future time periods occurring at regular intervals when water consumption is not likely to occur or is likely minimal within the water-monitored property;
opening and closing each of one or more irrigation valves in accordance with calibration schedule data during a first period of time within the one or more future time periods occurring at regular intervals when water consumption is not likely to occur or is likely minimal within the water-monitored property,
wherein each of the one or more irrigation valves is associated with a watering zone of the water-monitored property;
identifying a calibration valve open time and a calibration valve close time for each of the one or more irrigation valves in accordance with the calibration schedule data during the first period of time;
receiving second actual water usage data for usage that occurred between the calibration valve open time and the calibration valve close time for each of the one or more irrigation valves during the first period of time; and
calculating a first computed flow rate for at least one irrigation valve of the one or more irrigation valves based on the calibration valve open time, the calibration valve close time, and the second actual water usage data for the usage that occurred between the calibration valve open time and the calibration valve close time during the first period of time.
1. A system configured to obtain irrigation water consumption data pertinent to a water-monitored property, the system comprising:
a non-transitory computer readable medium; and
computer program code, encoded on the non-transitory computer readable medium, configured to cause at least one processor of one or more processors to perform the steps of: identifying, based on first actual water usage data, one or more daily, weekly, or monthly future time periods when water consumption is not likely to occur or is likely minimal within the water-monitored property;
opening and closing each of one or more irrigation valves in accordance with calibration schedule data during a first period of time within the one or more daily, weekly, or monthly future time periods when water consumption is not likely to occur or is likely minimal within the water-monitored property, wherein each of the one or more irrigation valves is associated with a watering zone of the water-monitored property;
identifying a calibration valve open time and a calibration valve close time for each of the one or more irrigation valves in accordance with the calibration schedule data during the first period of time;
receiving second actual water usage data for usage that occurred between the calibration valve open time and the calibration valve close time for each of the one or more irrigation valves during the first period of time; and
calculating a first computed flow rate for each of the one or more irrigation valves based on the calibration valve open time, the calibration valve close time, and the second actual water usage data for the usage that occurred between the calibration valve open time and the calibration valve close time during the first period of time.
Claims 2-20 are parallel to claims 1-20 of the USP No. 12,196,585 B1 (Appl. No. 18/234843).
The limitations of the instant conflicting claim are inherently anticipating or the claim language of the instant claims are identical to the limitations of the patent as shown in the table (for comparison) and as for example (as for example the limitation “identifying, based on first actual water usage data, one or more future time periods occurring at regular intervals when water consumption is not likely to occur or is likely minimal within the water-monitored property; opening and closing each of one or more irrigation valves in accordance with calibration schedule data during a first period of time within the one or more future time periods occurring at regular intervals when water consumption is not likely to occur or is likely minimal within the water-monitored property” of the application is equivalent to the limitation “identifying, based on first actual water usage data, one or more daily, weekly, or monthly future time periods when water consumption is not likely to occur or is likely minimal within the water-monitored property; opening and closing each of one or more irrigation valves in accordance with calibration schedule data during a first period of time within the one or more daily, weekly, or monthly future time periods when water consumption is not likely to occur or is likely minimal within the water-monitored property” of the patent) in scope and they use the identical limitations and produce the same end result of obtaining irrigation water consumption data pertinent to a water monitoring property.
Examiner note: The limitation “one or more future time periods occurring at regular intervals” of the application inherently anticipating the limitation “one or more daily, weekly, or monthly future time periods” of the patent.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 101
35 U.S.C. 101 reads as follows:
A rejection based on double patenting of the “same invention” type finds its support in the language of 35 U.S.C. 101 which states that “whoever invents or discovers any new and useful process... may obtain a patent therefor...” (Emphasis added). Thus, the term “same invention,” in this context, means an invention drawn to identical subject matter. See Miller v. Eagle Mfg. Co., 151 U.S. 186 (1894); In re Vogel, 422 F.2d 438, 164 USPQ 619 (CCPA 1970); In re Ockert, 245 F.2d 467, 114 USPQ 330 (CCPA 1957).
Claims 1-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 101 as claiming the same invention as that of claims 1-20 of USP No. 12,196,585 B1 (Appl. No. 18/234843).
This is a statutory double patenting rejection. Because they use the anticipating inherently or identical limitations and produce the same end result. See Miller v. Eagle Mfg. Co., 151 U.S. 186 (1894); In re Vogel, 422 F.2d 438, 164 USPQ 619 (CCPA 1970); In re Ockert, 245 F.2d 467, 114 USPQ 330 (CCPA 1957). See MPEP 804 (II)(A) “- claims may be differently worded and still define the same Invention”.
A statutory type (35 U.S.C. 101) double patenting rejection can be overcome by canceling or amending the claims that are directed to the same invention, so they are no longer coextensive in scope. The filing of a terminal disclaimer cannot overcome a double patenting rejection based upon 35 U.S.C. 101.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 1, 9 and 15 along with the respective dependent claims would be allowable if rewritten or amended to overcome the rejection(s) under double patenting and/or 35 U.S.C. 101, set forth in this Office action.
Citation of Pertinent Prior Art
It is noted that any citations to specific, pages, columns, lines, or figures in the prior art references and any interpretation of the reference should not be considered to be limiting in any way. A reference is relevant for all it contains and may be relied upon for all that it would have reasonably suggested to one having ordinary skill in the art. See MPEP 2141.02 VI. PRIOR ART MUST BE CONSIDERED IN ITS ENTIRETY, i.e., as a whole and 2123.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. The prior art made of record:
Rainone, et al. USPGPub No. 2016/0037736 A1 discloses a methods for controlling water flow in a water distribution system (e.g., irrigation system) interrupted or modified to optimize the water supply.
Javey, et al. USPGPub No. 2010/0289652 A1 discloses a method directed to water usage data and interacting with water usage based on water usage data collection.
Klein, et al. US PGPub No. 2015/0319941 A1 discloses a method for controlling irrigation schedules and automatically updating irrigation schedules based on qualitative and quantitative feedback.
Savelle, et al. US PGPub No. 2009/0271045 A1 discloses a product for monitoring water usage and maintaining water use for a billing site through intelligent irrigation water management.
Bailey, et al. US PGPub No. 2005/0107924 A1 discloses an irrigation control device updates one or more watering schedules stored in a memory module, based on the received signals, and generates control signals to execute a watering schedule.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Md Azad whose telephone @(571)272-0553 or email: md.azad@uspto.gov. The examiner can normally be reached on Mon-Thu 9AM-5PM.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Mohammad Ali can be reached on (571)272-4105. 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 and the Private Patent Application Information Retrieval (PAIR) system. Status information for published applications may be obtained from Patent Center or Private PAIR. Status information for unpublished applications is available through Patent Center and Private PAIR for authorized users only. Should you have questions about access to the Private PAIR system, 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.
/Md Azad/
Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2119
