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 without traverse of Subspecies 1.b. and 2.d. in the reply filed on 22 June 2026 is acknowledged.
Claims 27, 28, and 39 – 48 are withdrawn from further consideration pursuant to 37 CFR 1.142(b) as being drawn to a nonelected Species, there being no allowable generic or linking claim.
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 21 – 26 and 29 – 37 are rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over Claims 1 – 6 and 9 - 18 of U.S. Patent No. 11, 067,549. Although the claims at issue are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other because:
Regarding Claim 21, all of the limitations are taught in Claim 1 of the US Patent where a reduced frequency is a form of an adjusted frequency.
Regarding Claim 22, all of the limitations are taught in Claim 2 of the US Patent.
Regarding Claim 23, all of the limitations are taught in Claim 3 of the US Patent.
Regarding Claim 24, all of the limitations are taught in Claim 4 of the US Patent.
Regarding Claim 25, all of the limitations are taught in Claim 5 of the US Patent.
Regarding Claim 26, all of the limitations are taught in Claim 6 of the US Patent.
Regarding Claim 29, all of the limitations are taught in Claim 9 of the US Patent.
Regarding Claim 30, all of the limitations are taught in Claim 10 of the US Patent.
Regarding Claim 31, all of the limitations are taught in Claim 11 of the US Patent.
Regarding Claim 32, all of the limitations are taught in Claim 12 of the US Patent.
Regarding Claim 33, all of the limitations are taught in Claim 13 of the US Patent.
Regarding Claim 34, all of the limitations are taught in Claim 14 of the US Patent.
Regarding Claim 35, all of the limitations are taught in Claim 15 of the US Patent.
Regarding Claim 36, all of the limitations are taught in Claim 16 of the US Patent.
Regarding Claim 37, Claim 17 of the US Patent discloses a method performed by an apparatus for sampling landfill gas flowing through a pipe, the apparatus comprising at least one sensor coupled to the pipe, and a controller, the method comprising: adjusting a frequency of landfill gas sampling based at least on the available battery charge and/or the available power supply voltage of the apparatus, wherein adjusting the frequency of landfill gas sampling comprises adjusting a frequency of operation of at least one pump for pumping landfill gas to the at least one sensor such that the at least one pump continues to pump the landfill gas to the at least one sensor, but at an adjusted frequency where a reduced frequency is a form of an adjusted frequency.
The US Patent fails to expressly disclose obtaining a measure of an available battery charge and/or an available power supply voltage of the apparatus, however, as adjusting the frequency is based on the available battery charge and/or an available power supply voltage, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to measure it for the benefit of performing the adjusting.
Regarding Claim 38, all of the limitations are taught in Claim 18 of the US Patent.
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.
Claim(s) 21, 22, and 35 - 38 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Brookshire et al. (US 2001/0005812), in view of Miller et al. (US 2019/0069245).
Regarding Claim 21, Brookshire discloses an apparatus for sampling landfill gas flowing through a pipe, in at least Figure 1 and 2, the apparatus comprising: at least one sensor (PT1, 60, 76, 78, 80, 88) being coupled to the pipe (section between 42 and 58) (Figure 2); and at least one controller (74). Brookshire also discloses a power supply voltage (118) [0057].
Brookshire fails to expressly disclose the controller is configured to: adjust a frequency of landfill gas sampling based at least in part on an available battery charge and/or an available power supply voltage of the apparatus, wherein adjusting the frequency of landfill gas sampling comprises adjusting a frequency of operation of at least one pump for pumping landfill gas to the at least one sensor such that the at least one pump continues to pump the landfill gas to the at least one sensor, but at an adjusted frequency.
Brookshire does disclose landfill gas sampling requires operation of at least one pump (46) for pumping landfill gas to the at least one sensor [0033, 0035, 0044].
Miller teaches a controller (1120) adjusting the frequency of sampling at least in part on available power supply voltage to an apparatus [0201, 0202, 0215].
As such, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the applicant’s invention to modify Brookshire to adjust the frequency of landfill gas sampling based at least in part on an available battery charge and/or an available power supply voltage of the apparatus, as taught by Miller, so that adjusting the frequency of landfill gas sampling comprises adjusting a frequency of operation of at least one pump for pumping landfill gas to the at least one sensor such that the at least one pump continues to pump the landfill gas to the at least one sensor, but at an adjusted frequency i.e. applying Miller’s adjustment to Brookshire’s landfill gas sampling, for the benefit of saving power should the power supply voltage go below a threshold level, as taught by Miller [0201, 0202, 0215].
Regarding Claim 22, Brookshire discloses an enclosure in which the at least one sensor is disposed (see box enclosing the components of Figure 2 and through which 50, 52, 56, 110, 112, pass).
Brookshire fails to disclose the enclosure comprises a hermetic seal.
Brookshire does disclose the enclosure comprises a pressurized enclosure (68) with an access door [0039, 0047].
Examiner takes Official Notice it is common knowledge in the art to include a hermetic seal on the door of a pressurized enclosure.
As such, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the applicant's invention to modify the access door to include an hermetic seal meeting the limitation of the enclosure comprising an hermetic seal for the benefit of ensuring the gap between the door and pressurized enclosure does not leak.
Regarding Claim 35, Brookshire discloses an enclosure configured to receive a section of the pipe (see box enclosing the components of Figure 2 and through which 50, 52, 56, 110, 112, pass).
Regarding Claim 36, Brookshire discloses a wireless transmitter (inherently present to transmit the signal forming the RF, satellite, or other wireless link) [0034].
Regarding Claim 37, Brookshire discloses a method performed by an apparatus for sampling landfill gas flowing through a pipe, the apparatus comprising at least one sensor (PT1, 60, 76, 78, 80, 88) coupled to the pipe (section between 42 and 58) (Figure 2), and a controller (74). Brookshire also discloses a power supply voltage (118) [0057].
Brookshire fails to expressly disclose the method comprising: obtaining a measure of an available battery charge and/or an available power supply voltage of the apparatus; and adjusting a frequency of landfill gas sampling based at least on the available battery charge and/or the available power supply voltage of the apparatus, wherein adjusting the frequency of landfill gas sampling comprises adjusting a frequency of operation of at least one pump for pumping landfill gas to the at least one sensor such that the at least one pump continues to pump the landfill gas to the at least one sensor, but at an adjusted frequency.
Brookshire does disclose landfill gas sampling requires operation of at least one pump (46) for pumping landfill gas to the at least one sensor [0033, 0035, 0044].
Miller teaches a controller (1120) obtain a measure of an available battery charge and/or an available power supply voltage of the apparatus; and adjusting the frequency of sampling at least in part on available power supply voltage to an apparatus [0201, 0202, 0215].
As such, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the applicant’s invention to modify Brookshire to obtain a measure of an available battery charge and/or an available power supply voltage of the apparatus; and adjust a frequency of landfill gas sampling based at least on the available battery charge and/or the available power supply voltage of the apparatus, as taught by Miller, so that adjusting the frequency of landfill gas sampling comprises adjusting a frequency of operation of at least one pump for pumping landfill gas to the at least one sensor such that the at least one pump continues to pump the landfill gas to the at least one sensor, but at an adjusted frequency i.e. applying Miller’s adjustment to Brookshire’s landfill gas sampling, for the benefit of saving power should the power supply voltage go below a threshold level, as taught by Miller [0201, 0202, 0215].
Regarding Claim 38, Brookshire discloses an enclosure in which the at least one sensor is disposed, wherein the enclosure is configured to receive a section of the pipe (see box enclosing the components of Figure 2 and through which 50, 52, 56, 110, 112, pass).
Claim(s) 23 and 26 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Brookshire et al. (US 2001/0005812), in view of Miller et al. (US 2019/0069245), in further view of Scherer et al. (US 2012/0287418).
Regarding Claim 23, Brookshire fails to disclose thermal insulation positioned to retain heat from the section of pipe.
Brookshire does disclose the temperature of the section of pipe is measured [0051].
Scherer teaches thermal insulation to thermally isolate an interior of an enclosure from its surroundings [0059].
As such, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the applicant's invention to modify the combination to position thermal insulation on an internal surface of Brookshire's enclosure to retain heat from the internal components, including the section of the pipe for the benefit of isolating the interior of the enclosure from its surroundings, as taught by Scherer [0059], so that the surroundings of where Brookshire's temperature measurement is occurring can be controlled.
Regarding Claim 26, Brookshire discloses at least one active heating element (120) configured to emit heat within the enclosure [0057] and the at least one controller (74)
The combination fails to expressly disclose the at least one controller is configured to control the at least one active heating element.
Examiner takes Official Notice it is common knowledge in the art to configure a controller to control active heating elements.
As such, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the applicant's invention to modify Brookshire to utilize the controller to control the active heating element for the benefit of controlling the temperature in cold weather, as taught by Brookshire [0057], and shutting off the active heating element during warm weather.
Claim(s) 24 and 25 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Brookshire et al. (US 2001/0005812), in view of Miller et al. (US 2019/0069245), in further view of Scherer et al. (US 2012/0287418), in further view of Cross (US 4494380).
Regarding Claim 24, the combination fails to disclose at least one thermal
conductivity component configured for enhancing a thermal conductivity of the section of the pipe.
Cross teaches at least one thermal conductivity component (32) configured for enhancing a thermal conductivity of a section of pipe (channel) (Col 3, lines 23 - 40)
As such, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the applicant's invention, in the combination, to modify Brookshire's pipe to include at least one thermal conductivity component configured for enhancing it’s a thermal conductivity for the benefit of drying the gas prior to analyzing it, as taught by Cross (Col 1, lines 9 - 14).
Regarding Claim 25, Cross discloses the thermal conductivity component comprises a heat sink (Col 3, lines 17 - 33).
The combination fails to expressly disclose the heat sink is made of corrosion resistant metal.
Examiner takes Official Notice it is common knowledge in the art heat sinks are made of corrosion resistant metal e.g. aluminum alloys.
As such, it would have been obvious to utilize a corrosion resistance metal such as an aluminum alloy in the heat sink for the benefit of a material with a high thermal conductivity value which can withstand environmental conditions with minimal maintenance.
Claims 29 – 31 and 34 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Brookshire et al. (US 2001/0005812), in view of Miller et al. (US 2019/0069245), in further view of Cross (US 4494380).
Regarding Claim 29, Brookshire discloses a sampling subsystem comprising: a gas inlet port (port comprising inlet of 61) and a gas outlet port (port comprising outlet of 63), where the at least one sensor device is coupled to the gas outlet port (Figure 2); an enclosure coupled to the pipe (see box enclosing the components of Figure 2 and through which 50, 52, 56, 110, 112, pass), the enclosure comprising a region in which the at least one sensor is disposed (Figure 2); and a gas flow passage from the gas inlet port, over the at least one sensor device, and to the gas outlet port (from 61, through 60, through 62, through 63) (Figure 2).
Brookshire fails to expressly disclose a thermoelectric condenser and the gas flow passage passing adjacent to and in thermal contact with the thermoelectric condenser.
Cross teaches a thermoelectric condenser (Figure 1) (Col 2, line 58 - 61); a gas flow passage (channel) passing adjacent to and in thermal contact with the thermoelectric condenser (Figure 1).
As such, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the applicant's invention, in the combination, to modify Brookshire to include a thermoelectric condenser and the gas flow passage passing adjacent to and in thermal contact with the thermoelectric condenser for the benefit of drying the gas prior to analyzing it, as taught by Cross (Col 1, lines 9 - 14).
Regarding Claim 30, Cross teaches the thermoelectric condenser comprises at least one channel at a surface of a block (28) (Figure 1).
The combination would have been obvious for the same reasons as discussed regarding the rejection of Claim 29 above.
Regarding Claim 31, Cross teaches the thermoelectric condenser is covered by at least one chilled plate (48 contacting 28 on the cold side and is therefore chilled as well) (Col 3, line 7 - 40) (Figure 1), and the at least one channel is configured to direct a gas sample across the at least one chilled plate (Col 3, lines 38 - 40).
The combination would have been obvious for the same reasons as discussed regarding the rejection of Claim 29 above.
Regarding Claim 34, Brookshire discloses the at least one sensor device comprises a pressure sensor (PT1) and a sensor configured to measure an amount of gas of a predetermined type (76, 78, or 80) [0043].
Claim 32 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Brookshire et al. (US 2001/0005812), in view of Miller et al. (US 2019/0069245), in further view of Cross (US 4494380), in further view of Scherer et al. (US 2012/0287418).
Regarding Claim 32, Brookshire discloses the at least one sensor device (76, 78, or 80) is a gas sensor [0043] disposed in the enclosure (Figure 2) and coupled to the pipe through at least one gas sampling port (70) [0044] (Figure 2).
The combination fails to expressly disclose thermal insulation positioned to retain heat from the section of the pipe in the enclosure.
Scherer teaches thermal insulation to thermally isolate an interior of an enclosure from its surroundings [0059].
As such, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the applicant's invention, in the combination, to modify Brookshire to position thermal insulation on an internal surface of the enclosure to retain heat from the internal components, including the section of the pipe in the enclosure for the benefit of isolating the interior of the enclosure from its surroundings, as taught by Scherer [0059], so that the surrounds of where Brookshire's temperature measurement is occurring can be controlled.
Claim 33 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Brookshire et al. (US 2001/0005812), in view of Miller et al. (US 2019/0069245), in further view of Cross (US 4494380), in further view of Laub (US 2012/0206715).
Regarding Claim 33, Brookshire discloses the sampling subsystem comprises an orifice block (60) [0036].
Brookshire fails to disclose the gas flow passage comprises at least one fluid knock-out.
Cross teaches the gas flow passage comprises at least one fluid knock-out (46).
The combination would have been obvious for the same reasons regarding the rejection of Claim 29 above.
The combination fails to expressly disclose the sampling subsystem comprises a filter for at least one of a particulate and a corrosive gas.
Laub teaches a sampling subsystem (Figure 4) comprises a filter (116) for particulate [0026].
As such, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the applicant's invention, in the combination, to include a filter for particulate in Brookshire's sampling subsystem for the benefit of reducing particulate in the gas which can affect the sensors, as taught by Laub [0017, 0026].
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ALEXANDER MERCADO whose telephone number is (571)270-7094. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Thursday 9am - 4pm EST.
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, Laura Martin can be reached at (571) 272-2160. 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.
ALEXANDER A. MERCADO
Primary Examiner
Art Unit 2855
/ALEXANDER A MERCADO/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2855
Prosecution Insights