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 Interpretation
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(f):
(f) Element in Claim for a Combination. – An element in a claim for a combination may be expressed as a means or step for performing a specified function without the recital of structure, material, or acts in support thereof, and such claim shall be construed to cover the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification and equivalents thereof.
The following is a quotation of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph:
An element in a claim for a combination may be expressed as a means or step for performing a specified function without the recital of structure, material, or acts in support thereof, and such claim shall be construed to cover the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification and equivalents thereof.
The claims in this application are given their broadest reasonable interpretation using the plain meaning of the claim language in light of the specification as it would be understood by one of ordinary skill in the art. The broadest reasonable interpretation of a claim element (also commonly referred to as a claim limitation) is limited by the description in the specification when 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is invoked.
As explained in MPEP § 2181, subsection I, claim limitations that meet the following three-prong test will be interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph:
(A) the claim limitation uses the term “means” or “step” or a term used as a substitute for “means” that is a generic placeholder (also called a nonce term or a non-structural term having no specific structural meaning) for performing the claimed function;
(B) the term “means” or “step” or the generic placeholder is modified by functional language, typically, but not always linked by the transition word “for” (e.g., “means for”) or another linking word or phrase, such as “configured to” or “so that”; and
(C) the term “means” or “step” or the generic placeholder is not modified by sufficient structure, material, or acts for performing the claimed function.
Use of the word “means” (or “step”) in a claim with functional language creates a rebuttable presumption that the claim limitation is to be treated in accordance with 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph. The presumption that the claim limitation is interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is rebutted when the claim limitation recites sufficient structure, material, or acts to entirely perform the recited function.
Absence of the word “means” (or “step”) in a claim creates a rebuttable presumption that the claim limitation is not to be treated in accordance with 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph. The presumption that the claim limitation is not interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is rebutted when the claim limitation recites function without reciting sufficient structure, material or acts to entirely perform the recited function.
This application does not use the word “means” (or “step”); therefore, no limitations in this application are being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph.
Claim Objections
Claim 11 is objected to because of the following informalities:
In claim 11, line 5, the recitation “the mass flow controllers” should read –the plurality of mass flow controllers--.
Appropriate correction is required.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
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.
(a)(2) the claimed invention was described in a patent issued under section 151, or in an application for patent published or deemed published under section 122(b), in which the patent or application, as the case may be, names another inventor and was effectively filed before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claims 1-3 and 5-9 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by US2019/0204857 (“Yasuda”).
Regarding claim 1, Yasuda discloses (see fig. 1) a flow ratio controller, comprising:
an inlet (mainly defined by “ML”) configured to receive an input process gas flow (process gas from gas source “GS”);
an inlet pressure sensor (“MP”) configured to measure an inlet pressure (“P0”) of the input process gas flow;
a first outlet (top one of outlets “BL”, relative to the orientation of fig. 1) configured to output a first portion of the input process gas flow;
a second outlet (bottom one of outlets “BL”, relative to the orientation of fig. 1) configured output a second portion of the input process gas flow;
a first flow valve (valve “3” of top fluid branch, relative to the orientation of fig. 1; see also fig. 2) configured to control a flow of the input process gas to the first outlet;
a second flow valve (valve “3” of bottom fluid branch, relative to the orientation of fig. 1; see also fig. 2) configured to control a flow of the input process gas to the second outlet;
a first position sensor (position sensor “34” of top fluid branch, relative to the orientation of fig. 1; see also fig. 2) configured to measure a first valve position of the first flow valve;
a first outlet pressure sensor (“41” and/or “42” of top fluid branch, relative to the orientation of fig. 1) configured to measure a first outlet pressure of the first outlet;
a second position sensor (position sensor “34” of bottom fluid branch, relative to the orientation of fig. 1; see also fig. 2) configured to measure a second valve position of the second flow valve;
a second outlet pressure sensor (“41” and/or “42” of bottom fluid branch, relative to the orientation of fig. 1) configured to measure a second outlet pressure of the second outlet; and
control circuitry (mainly defined by “COM”, “5” and/or “44”) configured to control the first flow valve and the second flow valve using a valve flow model (see specification paragraph [0041]) and based on a predetermined flow ratio for the first outlet and the second outlet, the inlet pressure, the first valve position, the second valve position, the first outlet pressure, and the second outlet pressure (see specification paragraph [0041]).
Regarding claim 2, Yasuda discloses the control circuitry (mainly defined by “COM”, “5” and/or “44”) is configured to:
determine, without a flow meter (via pressure differential across flow elements “43”; see fig. 2), a first flow rate (flow rate calculated by circuit “44” and communicated with master controller “COM”) at the first outlet (top one of outlets “BL”, relative to the orientation of fig. 1) based on the inlet pressure (“P0”), the first outlet pressure (“P2”), and the first valve position (assessed by position sensor “34”);
determine, without a flow meter (via pressure differential across flow elements “43”; see fig. 2), a second flow rate (flow rate calculated by circuit “44” and communicated with master controller “COM”) at the second outlet (bottom one of outlets “BL”, relative to the orientation of fig. 1) based on the inlet pressure (“P0”), the second outlet pressure (“P2”), and the second valve position (assessed by position sensor “34”); and
control at least one of the first flow valve (“3”) and the second flow valve (“3”) based on the first flow rate, the second flow rate, and the predetermined flow ratio (see specification paragraph [0041].
Regarding claim 3, Yasuda discloses the control circuitry (mainly defined by “COM”, “5” and/or “44”) is configured to:
control the first flow valve (valve “3” of top fluid branch, relative to the orientation of fig. 1; see also fig. 2) to create a sonic flow condition (“speed of sound”; see specification paragraph [0066]) through the first flow valve (“3”) while the first flow valve is open; and
control the second flow valve (valve “3” of bottom fluid branch, relative to the orientation of fig. 1; see also fig. 2) to create a sonic flow condition (“speed of sound”; see specification paragraph [0066]) through the second flow valve (“3”) while the second flow valve is open.
Regarding claim 5, Yasuda discloses the flow ratio controller comprises three (three valves “3” of three flow controller units “10”; see figs. 1 and 2) or more flow valves (valves “3” of flow controller units “10”; see figs. 1 and 2) including the first flow valve (valve “3” of top fluid branch, relative to the orientation of fig. 1; see also fig. 2) and the second flow valve (valve “3” of bottom fluid branch, relative to the orientation of fig. 1; see also fig. 2), each of the three or more flow valves having an orifice (“43”), a position sensor (“34”), and an outlet pressure sensor (“42”), wherein the control circuitry is configured to calculate flow through each of the three or more flow valves and control each of the three or more flow valves to satisfy a pre-determined split ratio (see specification paragraph [0041]).
Regarding claim 6, Yasuda discloses the first flow valve (“3”) and the second flow valve (“3”) each comprise a piezoelectric valve (see specification paragraph [0049]).
Regarding claim 8, Yasuda discloses the valve flow model (see specification paragraph [0041]) is a predetermined model relating valve position (detected by position sensors “34”), flow (calculated via “44”), input pressure (“P0”), and output pressure (“P2”) for each of the first (“3”) and second (“3”) flow valves.
Regarding claim 9, Yasuda discloses a manifold (conduit manifold connecting gas source “GS” to flow controllers “10”; see fig. 1) configured to distribute the input process gas flow (process gas from gas source “GS”) to the first flow valve (“3”) and the second flow valve (“3”), wherein the inlet pressure sensor (“MP”) is configured to measure the inlet pressure in the manifold (see specification paragraph [0041]).
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.
The factual inquiries for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 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.
Claim 7 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Yasuda, as applied to claim 1 above, in view of US8576032 (“Herbert”).
Regarding claim 7, Yasuda discloses the first position sensor (“3”) and the second position sensor (“3”) as claimed except for each of the first position sensor and the second position sensor comprising at least one of a capacitive position sensor, a strain gauge position sensor, a Hall effect position sensor, or an optical position sensor.
Herbert teaches a position sensor (see specification col. 21, lines 35-43) which can be a capacitive transducer or an optical transducer.
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time of filing of the invention to modify the invention of Yasuda by configuring each of the first position sensor and the second position sensors to comprise a capacitive position sensor, as taught by Herbert, to be able to detect more precise displacement measurements, and because it is simple substitution of one known position sensor element for another to obtain predictable position sensing results.
Claims 11-13, 15, 17, 18 and 20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Yasuda in view of US11187561 (“Ding”).
Regarding claim 11, Yasuda discloses (see fig. 1) a precision gas distribution system, comprising:
a gas source (“GS”); and
a flow ratio controller (mainly defined by “ML”, “MP”, “COM” and “10”; see fig. 1) configured to:
receive the gases from the gas source via an inlet (“ML”); and
control delivery of respective portions of the gases to a plurality of outlets (“BL”) of the flow ratio controller according to a predetermined flow ratio for the plurality of outlets by controlling a plurality of flow valves using a valve flow model (see specification paragraph [0041]) and based on an inlet pressure (“P0”) at the inlet, valve positions (determined by position sensor “34”) of the plurality of flow valves, and outlet pressures (“P2”) of the plurality of outlets (see specification paragraph [0041]).
Yasuda does not disclose the gas source being a plurality of mass flow controllers configured to control flow of respective gases to respective outlets, and the flow ratio controller configured to: receive the gases from the mass flow controllers via the inlet.
However, Ding teaches a precision gas distribution system (see figs. 1 and 8B), comprising: a plurality of mass flow controllers (“101a”, “101b”, and “101m”) configured to control flow of respective gases to respective outlets (outlets of mass flow controllers “101a”, “101b”, and “101m”); and a flow ratio controller (“800B”; see fig. 8B) configured to: receive the gases from the mass flow controllers via an inlet (“803”; see fig. 8B).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time of filing of the invention to modify the invention of Yasuda by configuring the gas source to be a plurality of mass flow controllers configured to control flow of respective gases to respective outlets, and the flow ratio controller configured to: receive the gases from the mass flow controllers via the inlet, as taught by Ding, to be able to supply multiply gases or mixtures of gases to the plurality of outlets.
Regarding claim 12, Yasuda discloses the flow ratio controller (mainly defined by “ML”, “MP”, “COM” and “10”; see fig. 1) comprises:
an inlet pressure sensor (“MP”) configured to measure an inlet pressure of an input process gas flow comprising the gases at the inlet (“ML”);
wherein the plurality of outlets (“BL”) comprise a first outlet (top one of outlets “BL”, relative to the orientation of fig. 1) configured to output a first portion of the input process gas flow and a second outlet (bottom one of outlets “BL”, relative to the orientation of fig. 1) configured output a second portion of the input process gas flow;
wherein the plurality of flow valves comprise a first flow valve (valve “3” of top fluid branch, relative to the orientation of fig. 1; see also fig. 2) configured to control a flow of the input process gas to the first outlet and a second flow valve (valve “3” of bottom fluid branch, relative to the orientation of fig. 1; see also fig. 2) configured to control a flow of the input process gas to the second outlet, the flow ratio controller further comprising:
a first position sensor (position sensor “34” of top fluid branch, relative to the orientation of fig. 1; see also fig. 2) configured to measure a first valve position (see specification paragraph [0041]) of the first flow valve;
a first outlet pressure sensor (outlet pressure sensor “P2” of top fluid branch, relative to the orientation of fig. 1; see also fig. 2) configured to measure a first outlet pressure of the first outlet;
a second position sensor (position sensor “34” of bottom fluid branch, relative to the orientation of fig. 1; see also fig. 2) configured to measure a second valve position of the second flow valve;
a second outlet pressure sensor (outlet pressure sensor “P2” of bottom fluid branch, relative to the orientation of fig. 1; see also fig. 2) configured to measure a second outlet pressure of the second outlet; and
control circuitry (mainly defined by “COM”, “5” and/or “44”) configured to control the first flow valve and the second flow valve using a valve flow model (see specification paragraph [0041]) and based on a predetermined flow ratio for the first outlet and the second outlet, the inlet pressure, the first valve position, the second valve position, the first outlet pressure, and the second outlet pressure.
Regarding claim 13, Yasuda discloses the control circuitry is configured to:
control the first flow valve (valve “3” of top fluid branch, relative to the orientation of fig. 1; see also fig. 2) to create a sonic flow condition (“speed of sound”; see specification paragraph [0066]) through the first flow valve while the first flow valve is open; and
control the second flow valve (valve “3” of bottom fluid branch, relative to the orientation of fig. 1; see also fig. 2) to create a sonic flow condition (“speed of sound”; see specification paragraph [0066]) through the second flow valve while the second flow valve is open.
Regarding claim 15, Yasuda discloses the first flow valve (“3”) and the second flow valve (“3”) each comprise a piezoelectric valve (see specification paragraph [0049]).
Regarding claim 17, Yasuda discloses the valve flow model (see specification paragraph [0041]) is a predetermined model relating valve position (detected by position sensors “34”), flow (calculated via “44”), input pressure (“P0”), and output pressure (“P2”) for each of the first (“3”) and second (“3”) flow valves.
Regarding claim 18, Yasuda discloses a manifold (conduit manifold connecting gas source “GS” to flow controllers “10”; see fig. 1) configured to distribute the input process gas flow (process gas from gas source “GS”) to the first flow valve (“3”) and the second flow valve (“3”), wherein the inlet pressure sensor (“MP”) is configured to measure the inlet pressure (“P0”) in the manifold.
Regarding claim 20, the combination of Yasuda and Ding, above, discloses the invention as claimed except for a temperature sensor configured to measure a temperature of the input process gas flow, the control circuitry configured to control the first and second flow valves based on the temperature.
However, Ding teaches (see fig. 8B) a precision gas distribution system comprising a temperature sensor (“811”) configured to measure a temperature of an input process gas flow (“803”), control circuitry (“810”) configured to control first (“807a”) and second (“807b”) flow valves based on the temperature (see specification col. 4, lines 50-59, and col. 8, lines 26-29).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time of filing of the invention to further modify the combination of Yasuda and Ding by employing a temperature sensor configured to measure a temperature of the input process gas flow, as taught by Ding, to allow for more accurate calculations of flow metrics.
Claim 16 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Yasuda in view of Ding, as applied to claims 11 and 12 above, and further in view of Herbert.
Regarding claim 16, the combination of Yasuda and Ding discloses the first position sensor (Yasuda, “3”) and the second position sensor (Yasuda, “3”) as claimed except for each of the first position sensor and the second position sensor comprising at least one of a capacitive position sensor, a strain gauge position sensor, a Hall effect position sensor, or an optical position sensor.
Herbert teaches a position sensor (see specification col. 21, lines 35-43) which can be a capacitive transducer or an optical transducer.
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time of filing of the invention to further modify the combination of Yasuda and Ding by configuring each of the first position sensor and the second position sensors to comprise a capacitive position sensor, as taught by Herbert, to have be able to detect more precise displacement measurements, and because it is simple substitution of one known position sensor element for another to obtain predictable position sensing results.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 4 and 10 are objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
Claims 14 and 19 would be allowable if rewritten to overcome the claim objection(s), set forth in this Office action and to include all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter:
Regarding claim 4, the closest prior art does not disclose or render obvious the flow ratio controller, wherein the first flow valve comprises a first loss region in series with a second Loss region, wherein the control circuitry is configured to control the first flow valve based on calculating a first laminar flow through the first loss region and calculating a first choked flow through the second loss region, in combination with the limitations of the base claim.
Regarding claim 10, the closest prior art does not disclose or render obvious the flow ratio controller, wherein the control circuitry is configured to: determine a rate of change of the inlet pressure based on measurements from the inlet pressure sensor; and based on the inlet pressure and the rate of change of the inlet pressure, control the first flow valve and the second flow valve to maintain the inlet pressure within a predetermined range of a predetermined inlet pressure, in combination with the limitations of the base claim.
Regarding claim 14, the closest prior art does not disclose or render obvious the precision gas distribution system, wherein the first flow valve comprises a first loss region in series with a second loss region, wherein the control circuitry is configured to control the first flow valve based on calculating a first laminar flow through the first loss region and calculating a first sonic flow through the second loss region, in combination with the limitations of the base claim.
Regarding claim 19, the closest prior art does not disclose or render obvious the precision gas distribution system, wherein the control circuitry is configured to: determine a rate of change of the inlet pressure based on measurements from the inlet pressure sensor; and based on the inlet pressure and the rate of change of the inlet pressure, control the first flow valve and the second flow valve to maintain the inlet pressure within a predetermined range of a predetermined inlet pressure, in combination with the limitations of the base claim.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. US20220129020 discloses a flow ratio control device having valve position sensors and pressure sensors to determine flow rate. US10698426 discloses a flow ratio control device having a single inlet pressure sensor and a plurality of flow branch pressure sensors to determine flow through respective flow branches.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Hailey K. Do whose direct telephone number is (571)270-3458 and direct fax number is (571)270-4458. The examiner can normally be reached on Monday-Thursday (8:00AM-5:00PM ET) and Friday (8:00AM-12:00PM ET).
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 supervisors, Kenneth Rinehart at 571-272-4881, or Craig M. Schneider at 571-272-3607. 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.
/HAILEY K. DO/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3753
Prosecution Insights