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 status
This action is in response to applicant filed on 04/18/2025. Claims 19-38 are pending for examination.
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.
Claim 19-38 provisionally rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claims 42-61 of copending Application No. 19/075,151 (reference application). Although the claims at issue are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other because although the claims at issue are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other because claims 42-61 of copending Application No. 19/075,151 disclose every limitation of claims 19-38 in the instant application.
This is a provisional nonstatutory double patenting rejection because the patentably indistinct claims have not in fact been patented.
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(s) 19, 20, 21, 23, 30-32, 34-36 and 38 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Yang et al. (US 2011/0093220) in view of Alonso (US 2010/0312502).
Regarding claim 19: Yang disclose a pipeline leak detection apparatus for detection and location of a leak in a pipeline, the apparatus comprising:
a first pressure sensing device and a second pressure device fluidly connected to the pipeline (Fig. 1, item 22);
a memory (Abstract: inherent as stored profiles are used to detect a locate leaks);
a processor disposed in communication with the memory and communicatively connected to the first and second pressure sensing devices (Fig. 1, item 24), wherein the processor is configured to issue a plurality of instructions stored in the memory pipeline (¶0061: The module-based acoustic leak detection system with its local processing capability can be used to perform on-line real-time data processing (means to store (hence memory implicitly present) and process data (processor implicitly present) to execute the directional filtering function and provide powerful and effective filtering results to eliminate acoustic noised generated from non-related segments of the pipelines.) causing the processor to:
upon a first trigger event, instruct the first pressure sensing device to measure pressure and to transmit a first data set to the processor (¶0064: the signal gather from the non-intrusive sensor 30 will be used to compare against the signals gather by the non-intrusive sensor 28, with a certain time delay, upstream (Fig. 2A) and downstream (Fig. 2B) of the non-intrusive sensor 28 depending of the nature of the background noise, the sensor response frequency, as well as actual installation restriction with ¶0033 for utilizing GPS time tagging approach based on leak event detecting (triggering event of detecting leaks) times registered by either intrusive or non-intrusive sensors at two or more different locations along the pipeline to calculate the precise leak location based on time of flight relationship);
analyze the first data set to identify a first pressure event (¶0064: at the end of intrusive and non-intrusive sensor pair, signals gathered at non-intrusive sensor 30 at time t (PAt) are used to compare against signals gathered at intrusive sensor 28 at time t+/-.DELTA.t (PCt+.DELTA.t or PCt-.DELTA.t) where .DELTA.t is the delay time or traveling time of the interesting acoustic signals traveling from sensor 30 to sensor 32 and vice versa. At the other pipe end, where the separate pair of independent non-intrusive sensors 32 and 34 is used, a similar algorithm).
Yang does not explicitly disclose to determine whether the first data set is the only data set or if it is a data set received from the second pressure sensing device;
analyze the first data set for the first pressure event responsive to determining the first data set was received from the second pressure sensing device; and
determine a location of the first pressure event along the pipeline.
In analogous art regarding leak detection, Alonso disclose determine whether the first data set is the only data set or if it is a data set received from the second pressure sensing device and analyze the first data set for the first pressure event responsive to determining the first data set was received from the second pressure sensing device (¶0026: L be the position of the leak (1), let Vf and Vp be the propagation velocities (2) in the fluid and the walls respectively, and let Tf and Tp be the respective times taken for the transients to reach the measuring cell (3), and ¶0028: As soon as the leak is confirmed, it must, for example, have occurred inside the local processor monitoring zone amongst other constraints, an alarm is emitted through the communications network (6) which is picked up by the other processors as well as by the microcomputer containing the HMI. Certainty and Location Accuracy Indices are attributed to the leak as it is detected by different local processors and as a function of the discrepancies between the positions transmitted by each one of them); and
determine a location of the first pressure event along the pipeline (¶0035: the precision of the arrival times of the characteristic waveforms of the fluid dynamic transient, caused by the rupture in the pipeline are maximized, and consequently the leak can be located with greater accuracy.).
Before the effective filing date, it would have been obvious to the one of the ordinary skill in the art to include the feature to determine whether the first data set is the only data set or if it is a data set received from the second pressure sensing device; analyze the first data set for the first pressure event responsive to determining the first data set was received from the second pressure sensing device; and determine a location of the first pressure event along the pipeline as disclose by Alonso, to the apparatus of Yang. The motivation is to increase the accuracy of the location. (¶0035)
Regarding claim 20: The combination of Yang and Alonso disclose the apparatus of claim 19, wherein the instructions further cause the apparatus to, if the location is not within a distance uncertainty of the first pressure sensing device or located at the first pressure sensing device, report the location of the first pressure event is to a user via a user interface (Alonso: ¶0024, ¶0028).
Regarding claim 21: The combination of Yang and Alonso disclose the apparatus of claim 19, wherein the instructions further cause the apparatus to use a temperature measurement from a temperature sensing device to determine the location of the first pressure event. (Yang: ¶0023)
Regarding claim 23: The combination of Yang and Alonso disclose the apparatus of claim 19, but does not explicitly disclose the limitation of claim 23. However, claim 23 is merely duplicating the action of measuring a second pressure event and determining the location of the pressure event. Since the combination of Yang and Alonso is already teaching said limitation, Before the effective filing date, it would have been obvious to the one of the ordinary skill in the art to include wherein the instructions further cause the apparatus to: wait for a second trigger event when the first pressure event is not present; and instruct the first pressure sensing device to measure pressure and to transmit a second data set to the processor upon the second trigger event; analyze the second set to identify a second pressure event; determine whether the second data set is the only data set or if it is a data set received from the second pressure sensing device; analyze the second data set for the second pressure event, if the second data set was received from the second pressure sensing device; an determine a location of the second pressure event along the pipeline, since it has been held that mere duplication of the essential working parts of a device involves only routine skill in the art. St. Regis Paper Co. v. Bemis Co., 193 USPQ 8.
Regarding claim 30: Claim 30 is rejected for the same reasons of claim 19.
Regarding claim 31: Claim 31 is rejected for the same reasons of claim 20.
Regarding claim 32: Claim 32 is rejected for the same reasons of claim 21.
Regarding claim 34: Claim 34 is rejected for the same reasons of claim 21.
Regarding claim 35: Claim 35 is rejected for the same reasons of claim 23.
Regarding claim 36: Claim 36 is rejected for the same reasons of claim 19.
Regarding claim 38: Claim 30 is rejected for the same reasons of claim 23.
Claim(s) 24 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Yang et al. (US 2011/0093220) in view of Alonso (US 2010/0312502) and further in view of Lewis et al. (US 7,051,580).
Regarding claim 24: The combination of Yang and Alonso disclose the apparatus of claim 19, but does not explicitly disclose wherein one or more of the first and second pressure sensing devices includes a fitting configured to dispose the pressure sensing device having the fitting on a pipeline or pipeline network.
In analogous art regarding pressure sensing devices, Lewis disclose wherein one or more of the first and second pressure sensing devices wherein one or more of the first and second pressure sensing devices includes a fitting configured to dispose the pressure sensing device having the fitting on a pipeline or pipeline network (Col. 3, Lines 50-65).
Before the effective filing date, it would have been obvious to the one of the ordinary skill in the art to include the feature of wherein one or more of the first and second pressure sensing devices includes a fitting configured to dispose the pressure sensing device having the fitting on a pipeline or pipeline network, as disclose by Lewis, to the system of the combination of Yang and Alonso. The motivations is to facilitate direct connection monitoring of primary containment pipping (Col. 4, Lines 60-67)
Claim(s) 25 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Yang et al. (US 2011/0093220) in view of Alonso (US 2010/0312502) and further in view of Haseloh et al. (US 8,479,566).
Regarding claim 25: The combination of Yang and Alonso disclose the apparatus of claim 19, but does not explicitly disclose wherein one or more of the first and second pressure sensing devices includes a ball valve, bleed-off valve, a quarter turn valve or a small-bore valve.
In analogous art regarding pressure sensing devices, Haseloh disclose wherein one or more of the first and second pressure sensing devices includes a ball valve, bleed-off valve, a quarter turn valve or a small-bore valve. (Col. 2, Lines 37-45)
Before the effective filing date, it would have been obvious to the one of the ordinary skill in the art to include the feature of wherein one or more of the first and second pressure sensing devices includes a ball valve, bleed-off valve, a quarter turn valve or a small-bore valve, as disclose by Haseloh, to the system of the combination of Yang and Alonso. The motivation is allow efficient opening and closing of the pipeline.
Claim(s) 26 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Yang et al. (US 2011/0093220) in view of Alonso (US 2010/0312502) and further in view of Appler et al. (US 2008/0190208).
Regarding claim 26: The combination of Yang and Alonso disclose the apparatus of claim 19, but does not explicitly disclose wherein one or more of the first and second pressure sensing devices includes a fitting configured to connect to a hose.
In analogous art regarding pressure sensing devices, Appler disclose wherein one or more of the first and second pressure sensing devices includes a fitting configured to connect to a hose. (Col. 2, Lines 37-45)
Before the effective filing date, it would have been obvious to the one of the ordinary skill in the art to include the feature of wherein one or more of the first and second pressure sensing devices includes a fitting configured to connect to a hose, as disclose by Appler, to the system of the combination of Yang and Alonso. The motivation is allow easier acces and installation of the sensing device (Fig. 3, ¶0050)
Claim(s) 27-29 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Yang et al. (US 2011/0093220) in view of Alonso (US 2010/0312502) and further in view of Brown (US 2007/0068225).
Regarding claim 27: The combination of Yang and Alonso disclose the apparatus of claim 19, but does not explicitly disclose wherein at least one of the first and second pressure sensing devices includes a differential pressure transducer.
In analogous art regarding pressure sensing devices, Brown has a leak detection system (abstract) and teaches at least one of the pressure sensing means comprises 3 differential pressure transducer (¶0048: for fluid builds up in the variable area 414, static pressure builds in the cross-bore 420 and is measured by the pressure sensor in pressure port 418. Though the present embodiment has been described with respect to differential pressure sensors, two gage pressure or absolute pressure sensors could also be used to make this measurement and paragraph 24 for the transducer circuit and pneumatics 148 receives a 0-200 pounds per square inch (PSI) supply of air 108 and provides control pressure 110 as a function of the control signal 144 from control circuitry 142. Sensing means 150 senses signals from a pressure sensor 152 of control pressure 110 and 3 mechanical position sensor 154, and provides conditioned pressure 112 and position 114 measurements to the control circuit).
Before the effective filing date, it would have been obvious to the one of the ordinary skill in the art to include the feature of wherein at least one of the first and second pressure sensing devices includes a differential pressure transducer, as disclose by Brown, to the system of the combination of Yang and Alonso. The motivation is allow efficient measuring pressure in fluid buildup (¶0048).
Regarding claim 28: The combination of Yang and Alonso disclose the apparatus of claim 19, but does not explicitly disclose wherein at least one of the first and second pressure sensing devices includes an absolute pressure transducer.
In analogous art regarding pressure sensing devices, Brown has a leak detection system (abstract) and at least one of the pressure sensing means comprises an absolute pressure transducer (¶0048: for fluid builds up in the variable area 414, static pressure builds in the cross-bore 420 and is measured by the pressure sensor in pressure port 418. Though the present embodiment has been described with respect to differential pressure sensors, two gage pressure or absolute pressure sensors could also be used to make this measurement and ¶0024: for the transducer circuit and pneumatics 148 receives a 0-200 pounds per square inch (PSI) supply of air 108 and provides control pressure 110 as a function of the control signal 144 from control circuitry 142. Sensing means 150 senses signals from a pressure sensor 152 of control pressure 110 and a mechanical position sensor 154, and provides conditioned pressure 112 and position 114 measurements to the control circuit).
Before the effective filing date, it would have been obvious to the one of the ordinary skill in the art to include the feature of wherein at least one of the first and second pressure sensing devices includes an absolute pressure transducer, as disclose by Brown, to the system of the combination of Yang and Alonso. The motivation is allow efficient measuring pressure in fluid buildup (¶0048).
Regarding claim 29: The combination of Yang and Alonso disclose the apparatus of claim 19, but does not explicitly disclose wherein at least one of the first and second pressure sensing devices includes a gauge referenced pressure transducer.
In analogous art regarding pressure sensing devices, Brown has a leak detection system (abstract) and teaches at least one of the pressure sensing means comprises a gauge referenced pressure transducer (¶0048: for fluid builds up in the variable area 414, static pressure builds in the cross-bore 420 and is measured by the pressure sensor in pressure port 418. Though the present embodiment has been described with respect to differential pressure sensors, two gauge pressure or absolute pressure sensors could also be used to make this measurement and ¶0024 for the transducer circuit and pneumatics 148 receives a 0-200 pounds per square Inch (PSI) supply of air 108 and provides control pressure 110 as a function of the control signal 144 from control circuitry 142. Sensing means 150 senses signals from a pressure sensor 152 of control pressure 110 and a mechanical position sensor 154, and provides conditioned pressure 112 and position 114 measurements to the control circuit).
Before the effective filing date, it would have been obvious to the one of the ordinary skill in the art to include the feature of wherein at least one of the first and second pressure sensing devices includes a gauge referenced pressure transducer, as disclose by Brown, to the system of the combination of Yang and Alonso. The motivation is allow efficient measuring pressure in fluid buildup (¶0048).
Allowable Subject Matter
Claim 22, 33, 37 is 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.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record cited in the PTO-892 and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to OMAR CASILLASHERNANDEZ whose telephone number is (571)270-5432. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday, 8:30AM-4:30PM.
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, Davetta Goins can be reached at (571) 272-2957. 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.
/OMAR CASILLASHERNANDEZ/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2689
Prosecution Insights