DETAILED ACTION
The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA . The amendment filed 03/04/2026 has been received and considered. Claim 21 is new. Claims 1, 2, and 4-21 are presented for examination.
Continued Examination Under 37 CFR 1.114
A request for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, including the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e), was filed in this application after final rejection. Since this application is eligible for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114. Applicant's submission filed on 03/04/2026 has been entered.
Claim Objections
Claim 8, line 6 includes the typo “the plurality underground volumes”. Examiner interprets as “the plurality of underground volumes" for examination purposes.
Appropriate correction or clarification is required.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(b):
(b) CONCLUSION.—The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph:
The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the applicant regards as his invention.
Claims 5, 13, 14, and 20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which applicant regards as the invention.
Claim 5 recites the limitation "the digital model of the inside surface" in line(s) 4-5. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. There is no "digital model of the inside surface" anteceding this limitation.
Claim 13 recites the limitation "the second digital model of the inside surface" in line(s) 4-5. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. There is no "second digital model of the inside surface" anteceding this limitation.
Claim 20 recites the limitation "the one or more processors" in line(s) 3. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. There are no "one or more processors" anteceding this limitation.
Dependent claims inherit the defect of the claim from which they depend.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 101
35 U.S.C. 101 reads as follows:
Whoever invents or discovers any new and useful process, machine, manufacture, or composition of matter, or any new and useful improvement thereof, may obtain a patent therefor, subject to the conditions and requirements of this title.
Claims 1, 2, and 4-21 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 101 because the claimed invention is directed to an abstract idea without significantly more.
Independent claim 1, Step 1: a method (process = 2019 PEG Step 1 = yes).
Independent claim 1, Step 2A, Prong One: Claim 1 recites:
performing, by the one or more processors, degradation analysis of the inside surface of the underground volume by comparing the generated digital surface model of the inside surface of the underground volume with a digital model of a reference inside surface of the underground volume
These limitations are substantially drawn to mental concepts: observation, evaluation, judgment, opinion; but for the recitation of generic computer components. These limitations, as drafted and under a broadest reasonable interpretation "can be performed in the human mind or by a human using a pen and paper". Information and/or data also fall within the realm of abstract ideas because information and data are intangible. See Electric Power Group1 (Electric Power hereinafter): “Information… is an intangible”. These activities can be characterized as entailing a user simply comparing data – analyzing (observations, evaluations) and deciding/determining (judgments), i.e., processing information and/or data, that can be performed in the human mind or by a human using a pen and paper. The claimed invention further reads “4… the comparing of the digital surface model of the inside surface of the underground volume with the digital model of the reference inside surface of the underground volume comprising measuring distance between points in the point cloud with the reference inside surface of the underground volume”.
If a claim limitation, under its broadest reasonable interpretation, covers mental processes, then it falls within the "(c) Mental processes" grouping of abstract ideas (2019 PEG Step 2A, Prong One: Abstract Idea Grouping? = Yes, (c) Mental processes).
Independent claim 1, Step 2A, Prong two: As to the limitations “one or more processors", they are recited as performing generic computer functions routinely used in computer applications.
As to the limitations "for creating and causing to be visualized a model of degradation of an inside surface of an underground volume… the point cloud data generated by a scanner senser that scanned the inside surface of the underground volume", the limitations appear to be just “apply it” limitations, because the limitations invoke computers or other machinery merely as a tool to perform an existing process.
As to the limitations “receiving point cloud data of the inside surface of the underground volume… the point-cloud data representing three-dimensional points on the inside surface of the underground volume”, these limitations describe the concept of “mere data gathering”, which corresponds to the concepts identified as abstract ideas by the courts. Data gathering, including when limited to particular content does not change its character as information, is also within the realm of abstract ideas. Data gathering has not been held by the courts to be enough to qualify as “significantly more”. As to the limitations “causing to be visualized a result of the degradation analysis by displaying a visualization of the degradation with respect to the inside surface of the underground volume”, these limitations describe the concept of displaying, which corresponds to the concepts identified as abstract ideas by the courts. Displaying has not been held by the courts to be enough to qualify as “significantly more”. See Electric Power.
As to the limitations “generating, by one or more processors, a digital surface model of the inside surface of the underground volume from the received point-cloud data, the generating comprising processing the point-cloud data to generate a surface mesh of interconnections between points in the point-cloud to reconstruct a three-dimensional surface geometry corresponding to the inside surface they represent no more than just “apply it” limitations, because they recite only the idea of a solution or outcome, i.e., they fail to recite details of how a solution to a problem is accomplished.
This judicial exception is not integrated into a practical application (2019 PEG Step 2A, Prong Two: Additional elements that integrate the Judicial exception/Abstract idea into a practical application? = NO).
Independent claim 1, Step 2B: As discussed with respect to Step 2A, Prong two, the claim recites one or more processors. They are recited at a high level of generality and as performing generic computer functions routinely used in computer applications. Generic computer components recited as performing generic computer functions that are well-understood, routine and conventional activities amount to no more than implementing the abstract idea with a computerized system. The use of a computer to implement the abstract idea of a mathematical or mental algorithm has not been held by the courts to be enough to qualify as “significantly more”. Their collective functions merely provide conventional computer implementation, which is described in the specification (underline emphasis added):
'[0058] "computing system" is defined broadly as including any device or system (or a combination thereof) that includes at least one physical and tangible processor, and a physical and tangible memory capable of having thereon computer-executable instructions that may be executed by a processor. [0059] … a computing system 800 includes at least one hardware processing unit 802 and memory 804. The processing unit 802 includes a general-purpose processor'.
As discussed with respect to Step 2A, Prong two, the limitations "for creating and causing to be visualized a model of degradation of an inside surface of an underground volume… the point cloud data generated by a scanner senser that scanned the inside surface of the underground volume" appear to be just “apply it” limitations, because the limitations invoke computers or other machinery merely as a tool to perform an existing process. See Section 2106.05(f) [R-10.2019] of the MPEP. As to the limitations “the point cloud data generated by a scanner senser that scanned the inside surface of the underground volume", they are recited at a high level of generality and as performing generic sensor functions routinely used in sensor applications. The specification reads (underline emphasis added): '[0064]… Examples of input mechanisms 812B might include, for instance… sensors of any type'.
As discussed with respect to Step 2A, claim recites data gathering and displaying at a high level of generality; and therefore, these limitations remain insignificant extra-solution activity even upon reconsideration. See MPEP § 2106.05(g).
As discussed with respect to Step 2A, Prong two, limitations reciting only the idea of a solution or outcome are just “apply it” limitations, because they fail to recite details of how a solution to a problem is accomplished. See MPEP 2106.05(f)(1). As to the limitations "generating, by one or more processors, a digital surface model of the inside surface of the underground volume from the received point-cloud data, the generating comprising processing the point-cloud data to generate a surface mesh of interconnections between points in the point-cloud to reconstruct a three-dimensional surface geometry corresponding to the inside surface", the limitations are so broad that little is known about how the "generate a surface mesh of interconnections between points" are performed. Examiner notes that both the claimed invention and the specification are mute about mesh or grid and interconnections, edges, arcs, segments, links, lines, connections, connectors, branches, or legs. The specification merely reads (underline emphasis added):
'[0034] Figure 3, for example, illustrates a digital model 300 of the inside surface of an underground volume, which takes the form of a manhole… This digital model 300 was generated using a point cloud that includes points positioned so as to represent a position of an associated point on the inside surface of the manhole.'
Taken alone, the individual additional elements do not amount to significantly more than the above-identified judicial exception (the abstract idea). Looking at the additional elements as an ordered combination adds nothing that is not already present when looking at the additional elements taken individually. There is no indication that their combination improves the functioning of a computer itself or improves any other technology. Therefore, the claims do not amount to significantly more than the abstract idea itself (2019 PEG Step 2B: NO).
Claims 19 and 20 recite substantially the same elements as claim 1 and are rejected for the same reasons above. Further, the additional elements of these claims are rejected below.
Independent claims 19 and 20, Step 2A Prong two and 2B: As to the further additional elements computing system, processors, and computer-readable media, they are interpreted as drawn to a generic computer. (See Independent claim 1, Step 2B above).
Dependent claims, Step 2A, Prong One: The claim limitations further the mental concepts of their independent claim. If a claim limitation, under its broadest reasonable interpretation, covers mental processes, then it falls within the "(c) Mental processes" grouping of abstract ideas (2019 PEG Step 2A, Prong One: Abstract Idea Grouping? = Yes, (c) Mental processes).
Dependent claims, Step 2A Prong two:
As to the limitations "5… the displaying of the degradation with respect to the inside surface of the underground volume comprising: displaying a visualization of the degradation with respect to the digital model of the inside surface of the underground volume", "6… the displaying of the degradation with respect to the inside surface of the underground volume comprising: displaying a visualization of the degradation with respect to the digital model of the reference inside surface of the underground volume", "8… digitally representing the plurality of underground volumes in a computing system, the digital representation for at least some of the plurality underground volumes, including the particular underground volume, including 1) a representation of a geographic location of the underground volume, and 2) a digital model of an inside surface of the underground volume… and causing a visualized representation of the particular underground volume to be displayed on a digital map such that a position of the visualized representation of the particular underground volume corresponds to the representation of the geographic location of the particular underground volume, the visualized representation of the particular underground volume on the digital map including a visual representation of the generated degradation score for the particular underground volume", and "18… the causing to be displayed the visualization of the digital surface model of the degradation with respect to the inside surface of the underground volume being performed using virtual reality or mixed reality”, these limitations describe the concept of displaying, which corresponds to the concepts identified as abstract ideas by the courts. Displaying has not been held by the courts to be enough to qualify as “significantly more”. See Electric Power.
As to the limitations "16… detecting user selection of the visual representation of the particular underground volume on the digital map; and in response to detecting the user selection, causing to be displayed the degradation score” and "17… detecting user selection of the visual representation of the particular underground volume on the digital map; and in response to detecting the user selection, performing the causing to be displayed the visualization of the digital surface model of the degradation with respect to the inside surface of the underground volume", a GUI is a well-known graphical modeling means, and it is well-understood, routine, and conventional in the art.
This judicial exception is not integrated into a practical application of the exception (2019 PEG Step 2A, Prong Two: Additional elements that integrate the Judicial exception/Abstract idea into a practical application? = NO).
Dependent claims, Step 2B:
As discussed with respect to Step 2A, Prong two, claims recite displaying, these limitations are recited at a high level of generality; and therefore, remain insignificant extra-solution activity even upon reconsideration.
As discussed with respect to Step 2A, Prong two, and the GUI limitations, GUIs have been found by the courts as not adding an inventive component/concept to claims to render them patentable. See MPEP 2106.04(a)(2), 2106.05(a). The GUI is described in the specification (underline emphasis added):
"[0064] While not all computing systems require a user interface, in some embodiments, the computing system 800 includes a user interface system 812 for use in interfacing with a user. The user interface system 812 may include output mechanisms 812A as well as input mechanisms 812B. The principles described herein are not limited to the precise output mechanisms 812A or input mechanisms 812B".
Therefore, the claims do not amount to significantly more than the abstract idea itself (2019 PEG Step 2B: NO).
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 set forth in Graham v. John Deere Co., 383 U.S. 1, 148 USPQ 459 (1966), that are applied for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103(a) 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.
Examiner would like to point out that any reference to specific figures, columns and lines should not be considered limiting in any way, the entire reference is considered to provide disclosure relating to the claimed invention.
Claims 1, 2, 4-17, and 19-21 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103(a) as being unpatentable over Li et al., (Li hereinafter), U.S. Pre–Grant publication 20210396842, taken in view of Claudio et al., (Claudio hereinafter) U.S. Pre–Grant publication 20220057367 (see IDS dated 9/10/24) and further in view of Vineet R. Kamat, (Kamat hereinafter) U.S. Pre–Grant publication 20140200863.
As to claim 1, Li discloses a method for creating and causing to be visualized a model of degradation of an inside surface of an underground volume (see "degradation" as "defect", "[0126]… algorithms first train surface and internal defect image data such as a surface defect image, a ground penetrating radar B-Scan image, an X-ray backscattering image, and an ultrasonic image, to establish a defect diagnosis model"), the method comprising: receiving point cloud data of the inside surface of the underground volume, the point cloud data generated by a scanner senser that scanned the inside surface of the underground volume, the point-cloud data representing three-dimensional points on the inside surface of the underground volume (see "[0137]… tunnel environment is scanned by using the laser 3D scanner, to obtain point cloud information"); generating, by one or more processors, a digital surface model of the inside surface of the underground volume from the received point-cloud data (see '[0215]… tunnel three-dimensional reconstruction is performed based on three-dimensional point cloud data, and defect recognition results and scoring results obtained based on visible light and infrared image inspection are overlaid into the three-dimensional model')… performing, by the one or more processors, degradation analysis of the inside surface of the underground volume by comparing the generated digital surface model of the inside surface of the underground volume with a digital model of a reference inside surface of the underground volume (see "degradation" as "defect diagnosis", "[0127]… control section is configured to: [0128] construct a deep neural network-based defect diagnosis model; [0129]… construct a data set by using historical surface defect and internal defect information and a marked pixel-level defect type, and train the deep neural network- based defect diagnosis model"); and causing to be visualized a result of the degradation analysis by displaying a visualization of the degradation with respect to the inside surface of the underground volume (see '[0215]… tunnel three-dimensional reconstruction is performed based on three-dimensional point cloud data, and defect recognition results and scoring results obtained based on visible light and infrared image inspection are overlaid into the three-dimensional model, to enable a maintenance person to quickly determine a priority of the defect degree, and quickly position a corresponding position of the defect for maintenance'; "[0210] Through comprehensive defect scoring and three-dimensional visualization, a maintenance person can quickly determine a priority of a defect degree, and quickly position a corresponding position of the defect'').
While Li discloses "degradation" as "defect" and/or "defect diagnosis", Li fails to expressly disclose degradation.
Claudio discloses degradation. (See “[0035]… summarizing the pipe condition within a single pipe condition score that takes into account the specific degradations of different parts of the pipe”).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in this art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to use Claudio with Li, because Claudio points out that "[0175]… timed predictions may improve the planning of pipe inspections and renewal in a number of different ways. For example, pipe renewal can be planned in advance in order to prevent pipes to exceed a threshold probability of pipe failure. The pipes may also be ranked by probabilities of failures at a defined time", and as a result, Claudio reports that "[0176] The probabilities of failures can be displayed to an operator, so that the operator is able to determine which are the pipe sections to inspect or repaired in priority. This allows adapting pipe inspection plans. This may also be performed by displaying a map with colors corresponding to the expected probabilities of failure of the pipes".
Li and Claudio do not disclose, but Kamat discloses the generating comprising processing the point-cloud data to generate a surface mesh of interconnections between points in the point-cloud to reconstruct a three-dimensional surface geometry corresponding to the inside surface (see “0039] The GIS data of the GIS and CAD data 10 can be used to represent… buried utilities, as well as other features in the HV simulation… The geometry part is typically in a two-dimensional (2D) form as points, lines, or polygons. Creating the 3D models from the 2D geometry can ensure that the 3D models have the same spatial attribute and real-world location as the underlying 2D geometry… [0041]… Points, for instance, are somewhat commonly used in computer vision technologies where 3D objects are often created rapidly using an input of point cloud data. Traditionally, in 3D simulations, objects are represented through surfaces and sometimes through solids. In surface representation, the 3D object's surface is made up of polygons like triangles and quadrangles. The polygons are bound together to form a polygonal mesh").
As to the limitations "processing the point-cloud data to generate a surface mesh of interconnections between points in the point-cloud to reconstruct a three-dimensional surface geometry corresponding to the inside surface", the limitations are so broad that little is known about how the "generate a surface mesh of interconnections between points" are performed. Examiner notes that both the claimed invention and the specification are mute about mesh or grid and interconnections, edges, arcs, segments, links, lines, connections, connectors, branches, or legs. The specification merely reads (underline emphasis added):
'[0034] Figure 3, for example, illustrates a digital model 300 of the inside surface of an underground volume, which takes the form of a manhole… This digital model 300 was generated using a point cloud that includes points positioned so as to represent a position of an associated point on the inside surface of the manhole.'
Li, Claudio, and Kamat are analogous art because they are related to subterranean volume modeling.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in this art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to use Kamat with Li and Claudio, because Kamat discloses that "[0077] [t]he accuracy of the visualization of buried infrastructure aids an excavation operator in the decision-making process. The aspect of accuracy encompasses multiple parameters, including the positional accuracy of utility data… the framework may ensure the positional accuracy of the utility models through the use of georeferenced 3D models", and as a result, Kamat reports that the "[0078] [g]eoreferencing utility location can enable the visualization of utilities with other elements--such as a terrain model and real-world data (e.g., GPS sensor input). Without georeferencing utility models, the creator of the virtual scene manually specifies the location and orientation of each utility element, and adjusts its display scale during every interaction of the scene. Thus georeferenced buried utility 3D models help ensure the feasibility and accuracy of the visualization… the framework uses a common coordinate system with the same units for storing or converting all elements of a scene, such as utilities, terrain, and sensors".
As to claim 2, Li discloses the digital surface model of the inside surface of the underground volume being a first digital surface model of the inside surface of the underground volume as the inside surface existed at a first time, the underground volume also having a second digital surface model of the inside surface of the underground volume as the inside surface existed at a second time that is different than the first time, the degradation analysis comprising a degradation velocity analysis that compares the first digital surface model with the second digital surface model (see "[0127]… control section is configured to: [0128] construct a deep neural network-based defect diagnosis model; [0129]… construct a data set by using historical surface defect and internal defect information and a marked pixel-level defect type, and train the deep neural network- based defect diagnosis model").
As to claim 4, Li discloses the comparing of the digital surface model of the inside surface of the underground volume with the digital model of the reference inside surface of the underground volume comprising measuring distance between points in the point cloud with the reference inside surface of the underground volume (see "[0137]… tunnel environment is scanned by using the laser 3D scanner, to obtain point cloud information; a position of the robot platform in the tunnel, namely, the number of kilometers of the position, the size from the tunnel side wall, or the like, is determined through matching and comparison between two pieces of point cloud at different moments, to position the robot itself; the robot platform performs movement; coordinates of the moving robot platform, a tunnel bottom plate, a tunnel side wall, a tunnel vault, and various obstacles in a grid map are determined by using a grid map representation method, to construct the grid map").
As to claim 5, Li discloses the displaying of the degradation with respect to the inside surface of the underground volume comprising: displaying a visualization of the degradation with respect to the digital model of the inside surface of the underground volume (see "[0215]… tunnel three-dimensional reconstruction is performed based on three-dimensional point cloud data, and defect recognition results and scoring results obtained based on visible light and infrared image inspection are overlaid into the three-dimensional model, to enable a maintenance person to quickly determine a priority of the defect degree, and quickly position a corresponding position of the defect for maintenance").
As to claim 6, Li discloses the displaying of the degradation with respect to the inside surface of the underground volume comprising: displaying a visualization of the degradation with respect to the digital model of the reference inside surface of the underground volume (see "[0215]… tunnel three-dimensional reconstruction is performed based on three-dimensional point cloud data, and defect recognition results and scoring results obtained based on visible light and infrared image inspection are overlaid into the three-dimensional model"; '[0212]… the "multi-eye" gimbal is set up, the laser ranging module is used as the center, and the distance measured by the laser ranging module from the measured surface is used as reference, to correct directions of the visible light camera and the infrared camera, to ensure that imaging is performed on the same target region').
As to claim 7, Li discloses the underground volume comprising at least a portion of a (see "[0220] The recognition method… applied to geological abnormal bodies such as… underground pipelines").
As to claim 8, while Li discloses the underground volume being a particular underground volume, the method being further for organizing models of degradation of a plurality of underground volumes that includes the particular underground volume, the method comprising… for at least the particular underground volume, performing the following: generating a degradation score for the particular underground volume using the digital surface model of the inside surface of the particular underground volume (see "[0207]… Tunnel lining surface defect result analysis is performed and includes: scoring the defect severity according to measured geometrical parameters of defects of cracks, peeling-off, and leakage, where the score is positively related to danger levels; and calculating a sum of scores of all defects in a comprehensive defect image obtained after data overlaying, and sorting according to scores"); Claudio discloses digitally representing the plurality of underground volumes in a computing system, the digital representation for at least some of the plurality underground volumes, including the particular underground volume (see "[0176] The probabilities of failures can be displayed to an operator, so that the operator is able to determine which are the pipe sections to inspect or repaired in priority. This allows adapting pipe inspection plans. This may also be performed by displaying a map with colors corresponding to the expected probabilities of failure of the pipes"; "[0045] FIG. 1 displays a network of pipes on which a method according to the invention may be implemented"), including 1) a representation of a geographic location of the underground volume, and 2) a digital model of an inside surface of the underground volume (see "[0057] The method 200 applies to a pipe network… formed of interconnected pipes. The pipes are split into sections. A pipe section may be either an entire pipe, or a part of a pipe. It may be useful to split large pipes into a plurality of sections, because the section may be located into different environments, and thus pipe condition may evolve differently over time for the various sections of the same pipe. Conversely, adjacent and interconnected pipes may be grouped within the same pipe section, if they share certain properties (for example, the same material, thickness, etc.). Pipe sections may be defined according to different rules. For example, the pipes may be split into sections"; "[0080]… values of pipe parameters can be retrieved, for each pipe section, using some kind of storage or database"); and causing a visualized representation of the particular underground volume to be displayed on a digital map such that a position of the visualized representation of the particular underground volume corresponds to the representation of the geographic location of the particular underground volume, the visualized representation of the particular underground volume on the digital map including a visual representation of the generated degradation score for the particular underground volume (see "[0176] The probabilities of failures can be displayed to an operator, so that the operator is able to determine which are the pipe sections to inspect or repaired in priority. This allows adapting pipe inspection plans. This may also be performed by displaying a map with colors corresponding to the expected probabilities of failure of the pipes. [0177] The FIG. 5 represents the relationship between predicted and actual pipe failures, with a model respectively with and without using pipe condition scores").
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in this art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to use Claudio with Li, (see supra).
As to claim 9, Li discloses the generating a degradation score (see "[0215]… tunnel three-dimensional reconstruction is performed based on three-dimensional point cloud data, and defect recognition results and scoring results obtained based on visible light and infrared image inspection are overlaid into the three-dimensional model") comprising measuring spatial distances between the reference inside surface on the particular underground volume and respective points in the point cloud (see "[0137]… tunnel environment is scanned by using the laser 3D scanner, to obtain point cloud information; a position of the robot platform in the tunnel, namely, the number of kilometers of the position, the size from the tunnel side wall, or the like, is determined through matching and comparison between two pieces of point cloud at different moments, to position the robot itself; the robot platform performs movement; coordinates of the moving robot platform, a tunnel bottom plate, a tunnel side wall, a tunnel vault, and various obstacles in a grid map are determined by using a grid map representation method, to construct the grid map").
As to claim 10, Li discloses the degradation score being a result of applying a statistical calculation on the distances (see "[0207]… calculating a sum of scores of all defects in a comprehensive defect image obtained after data overlaying, and sorting according to scores"; "[0208]… a crack and peeling-off image captured by visible light is used as a base map, a leakage defect possibly appears in an additional infrared image, and geometrical parameters of all defects are estimated based on distance information and the scoring is performed according to danger levels").
As to claim 11, Li discloses the generation of the degradation score being performed by applying the point cloud (see "[0215]… tunnel three-dimensional reconstruction is performed based on three-dimensional point cloud data, and defect recognition results and scoring results obtained based on visible light and infrared image inspection are overlaid into the three-dimensional model") as input to a machine learning model that is configured to generate degradation scores using point clouds (see "[0141] The control section constructs a deep neural network-based defect diagnosis model, constructs a data set by using historical surface defect and internal defect information and a marked pixel-level defect type, and train the deep neural network-based defect diagnosis model; and receives defect information in real time and inputs the received defect information into a trained defect automatic recognition and diagnosis model, and automatically recognizes a type, a position, and a contour of a defect").
As to claim 12, Li discloses the digital surface model of the inside surface of the particular underground volume being a first digital surface model of the inside surface of the particular underground volume as the inside surface existed at a first time, the particular underground volume also having a second digital surface model of the inside surface of the particular underground volume as the inside surface existed at a second time that is different than the first time (see "[0127]… control section is configured to: [0128] construct a deep neural network-based defect diagnosis model; [0129]… construct a data set by using historical surface defect and internal defect information and a marked pixel-level defect type").
As to claim 13, Li discloses the degradation score generated for the particular underground volume using the first digital surface model of the particular underground volume being a first degradation score (see "[0215]… tunnel three-dimensional reconstruction is performed based on three-dimensional point cloud data, and defect recognition results and scoring results obtained based on visible light and infrared image inspection are overlaid into the three-dimensional model"), the method further comprising: generating a second degradation score for the particular underground volume using the second digital model of the inside surface of the particular underground volume ([0129]… construct a data set by using historical surface defect and internal defect information and a marked pixel-level defect type", "[0207]… calculating a sum of scores of all defects in a comprehensive defect image obtained after data overlaying, and sorting according to scores").
As to claim 14, Claudio discloses generating a degradation velocity score using at least the first degradation score and the second degradation score (see "[0079] These parameters have an influence on the evolution of pipe condition, and the probability of pipe failure over time. For example, a pipe that is subject to extreme temperature, high humidity, or the vibration created by a nearby infrastructure will be subject to a faster degradation. The degradation rate also depends on structural parameters of the pipes, for example the material and diameter of the pipe"; "[0117]… condition scores are obtained for each pipe, which correspond to different parts of the pipe section. For example, the observation can generate a vector of 3 pipe conditions scores for a pipe section: [0118] an inner coating condition score; [0119] an outer coating condition score; [0120] a joint condition score").
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in this art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to use Claudio with Li, (see supra).
As to claim 15, Claudio discloses wherein the degradation score is a degradation velocity score, the generating of the degradation score being performed using at least the first digital surface model and the second digital surface model of the inside surface of the particular underground volume (see "[0023] The predictive model thus provides accurate time-based probabilities of pipe failures, because the predictive function provides a good estimation of the evolution of probabilities in time, while the instantaneous probability of failure determined based on pipe condition scores provide good estimations of the probability of failure of a pipe at the current time"; "[0079] These parameters have an influence on the evolution of pipe condition, and the probability of pipe failure over time. For example, a pipe that is subject to extreme temperature, high humidity, or the vibration created by a nearby infrastructure will be subject to a faster degradation. The degradation rate also depends on structural parameters of the pipes, for example the material and diameter of the pipe").
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in this art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to use Claudio with Li, (see supra).
As to claim 16, Claudio discloses detecting user selection of the visual representation of the particular underground volume on the digital map; and in response to detecting the user selection, causing to be displayed the degradation score (see "[0176] The probabilities of failures can be displayed to an operator, so that the operator is able to determine which are the pipe sections to inspect or repaired in priority. This allows adapting pipe inspection plans. This may also be performed by displaying a map with colors corresponding to the expected probabilities of failure of the pipes. [0177] The FIG. 5 represents the relationship between predicted and actual pipe failures, with a model respectively with and without using pipe condition scores").
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in this art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to use Claudio with Li, (see supra).
As to claim 17, Claudio discloses detecting user selection of the visual representation of the particular underground volume on the digital map (see "[0176] The probabilities of failures can be displayed to an operator, so that the operator is able to determine which are the pipe sections to inspect or repaired in priority. This allows adapting pipe inspection plans. This may also be performed by displaying a map with colors corresponding to the expected probabilities of failure of the pipes. [0177] The FIG. 5 represents the relationship between predicted and actual pipe failures, with a model respectively with and without using pipe condition scores"); and in response to detecting the user selection, performing the causing to be displayed the visualization of the digital surface model of the degradation with respect to the inside surface of the underground volume (see "[0117]… condition scores are obtained for each pipe, which correspond to different parts of the pipe section. For example, the observation can generate a vector of 3 pipe conditions scores for a pipe section: [0118] an inner coating condition score").
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in this art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to use Claudio with Li, (see supra).
As to claims 19 and 20, these claims recite a computing system and a computer program product for performing the method of claim 1. Li discloses "[0246]… an electronic device, including a memory, a processor, and a computer program stored in the memory and capable of being run on the processor, where the processor implements the foregoing method when executing the program" for performing a method that teaches claim 1. Therefore, claims 19 and 20 are rejected for the same reasons given above.
As to claim 21, Claudio discloses the visualization of the degradation with respect to the inside surface of the underground volume showing different degrees of degradation using different colors (see "[0176]… displaying a map with colors corresponding to the expected probabilities of failure of the pipes").
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in this art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to use Claudio with Li, (see supra).
Claim 18 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103(a) as being unpatentable over Li taken in view of Claudio in view of Kamat as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Cote et al. (Cote hereinafter), U.S. Patent 9881419 (see IDS dated 9/10/24).
As to claim 18, while Li, Claudio, and Kamat disclose the causing to be displayed the visualization of the digital surface model of the degradation with respect to the inside surface of the underground volume, Li, Claudio, and Kamat fail to disclose being performed using virtual reality or mixed reality.
Cote discloses (see "FIG. 1 is an example augmented reality view 100 of a street, in which computer-generated features are overlaid upon a view of the actual street… computer-generated graphics depicting the underground portions of a manhole 110 and a pipe 120 are overlaid upon a view of the street captured by a camera… computer-generated text 130 calling out important information related to the waste water management system is overlaid upon the view of the physical street… In such a dynamic view the location and appearance of the overlaid portions of a manhole 110, pipe 120 and text 130 may be updated on a frame-by-frame basis to coincide with changes in perspective, for example, as the camera is moved" in col 1, Iines 44-65).
Li, Claudio, Kamat, and Cote are analogous art because they are related to subterranean volume modeling.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in this art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to use Cote with Li, Claudio, and Kamat, because Cote points out that "computer-generated features overlaid in augmented reality are typically derived from a three-dimensional (3-D) model that corresponds to the physical environment being augmented. Elements of the 3-D model have a position in a 3-D space of the model. The position in the 3-D space of the model relates to a position within the physical environment being augmented. To create an augmented reality view, a view of the physical environment is captured from a particular position, facing in a particular orientation. The 3-D model is queried, and it is determined which elements of the 3-D model would be visible from a corresponding position in the 3-D space of the model, if facing in a corresponding orientation. The visible elements are used to produce computer-generated features that are overlaid upon the view of the physical environment", and as a result, Cote reports that "[i]n this manner, an augmented reality view is created that blends the real and the virtual. FIG. 1 is an example augmented reality view 100 of a street, in which computer-generated features are overlaid upon a view of the actual street… computer-generated graphics depicting the underground portions of a manhole 110 and a pipe 120 are overlaid upon a view of the street captured by a camera… computer-generated text 130 calling out important information related to the waste water management system is overlaid upon the view of the physical street… The computer-generated text may provide the user with information that is not apparent by simple visual inspection of the street" (see col. 1, lines 28-58).
Response to Arguments
Regarding the claim objections, the amendment corrected no deficiencies.
Regarding the rejections under 112, the amendment corrected some deficiencies, and those objections are withdrawn.
Regarding the rejections under 101, Applicant's arguments have been considered, but they are not persuasive. Applicant argues, (see page 9, next to last paragraph to page 10, next to last paragraph):
‘… After setting forth significant foundation, the Borden Declaration includes a declaration that "[h]aving possession of the Application, a wastewater system professional would understand that [the] claimed invention improves safety of municipal workers, provides a rapid, objective and high-resolution mechanism for identifying degradation in wastewater systems such as is infeasible by human inspection" (see paragraph 38 of the Borden Declaration).
Thus, there is now evidence in the record that the claimed invention of Claims 1, 19 and 20 (as amended) would be understood by one of ordinary skill in the art (having possession of the Application) to have a significant practical application representing a technical improvement that is simply not available or infeasible by conventional methods of human inspection…’
As argued by Applicant, the specification reads (underline emphasis added):
'[0009] Thus, visualization of the degradation analysis may be viewed by a human user at any time and from any place. This may be performed for numerous underground volumes allowing the user to virtually inspect many underground volumes at their convenience, comfort, and safety. For instance, the user may be presented with a digital map, and may select any of the underground volumes from the digital map and see the results of the degradation analysis and/or a visualization of a model of the degradation at will. This is particularly advantageous as manual inspection of underground volumes can be difficult, unsafe, and perhaps even impossible for the user to perform. Entry into some confined spaces (such as manholes) can even be dangerous or fatal due to the gasses and other confined space hazards…
[0022] Thus, visualization of the degradation analysis may be viewed by a human user at any time and from any place. This may be performed for numerous underground volumes allowing the user to virtually inspect many underground volumes at their convenience, comfort, and safety. For instance, the user may be presented with a digital map, and may select any of the underground volumes from the digital map and see the results of the degradation analysis and/or a visualization of a model of the degradation at will. This is particularly advantageous as manual inspection of underground volumes can be difficult, unsafe and perhaps even impossible for the user to perform. Entry into some confined spaces (such as manholes) can even be dangerous or fatal due to the gasses and other confined space hazards…
[0047] As an example only, those models may be organized onto a digital map, allowing a user to select a particular underground volume for a virtual inspection and/or perhaps to view more information about the degradation of that underground volume. A priority of the underground volume may also be rendered that shows which underground volume have most urgent repairs
The MPEP reads (underline emphasis added):
'2106.04(d)(1) Evaluating Improvements in the Functioning of a Computer, or an Improvement to Any Other Technology or Technical Field in Step 2A Prong Two [R-10.2019]... the "improvements" analysis in Step 2A determines whether the claim pertains to an improvement to the functioning of a computer or to another technology… invention may integrate the judicial exception into a practical application by demonstrating that it improves the relevant existing technology although it may not be an improvement over well-understood, routine, conventional activity… the word "improvements" in the context of this consideration is limited to improvements to the functioning of a computer or any other technology/technical field, whether in Step 2A Prong Two or in Step 2B...'.
Examiner's response: Applicant's argument is not persuasive, because the claims may provide improved mental concepts, as pointed out by Applicant – see supra, but do not provide limitations such that an improvement to the functioning of a computer itself or to any other technology is realized. An improved mental concept is a species of the genus mental concepts and is not an improvement to the functioning of a computer itself or to any other technology. An improved abstract idea is a species of the genus abstract idea. The claimed invention lacks “improvements to the functioning of a computer or any other technology/technical field". See supra, Specification paragraphs [0009], [0022], [0047], and MPEP § 2106.04(d)(1):'the word "improvements"… is limited to improvements to the functioning of a computer or any other technology/technical field'.
Regarding the computer-readable media rejections under 101, the amendment corrected all deficiencies and the rejections are withdrawn.
Regarding the arguments with respect to the rejection under 103, Applicant’s arguments with respect to the independent claims have been fully considered, but they are not persuasive. Applicant argues that the prior art disclosures in the previous rejection fail to teach the newly added limitations. These features of Applicants' claims and arguments were newly added. The previous Office Action could not have pointed out disclosures of a limitation that was not claimed before. Independent claims are rejected over Li taken in view of Claudio further in view of Kamat instead of Li taken in view of Claudio, and Kamat is newly cited. See rejection supra.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Muhammad Haris Malik, U.S. Pre–Grant publication 20150170022, teaches “[0260] The composite plate and the pipe were modeled as the shell element… The element type S4R was used to mesh the composite plate and the pipes… [0261]… FIG. 8C illustrates a mesh configuration for the composite pipe model".
Bo Gao, U.S. Patent 7830373, teaches “providing mesh line generation means for calculating and generating mesh lines of a ruled surface from the two three-dimensional alignments with pre-determined mesh line spacing data, using the perpendicular method, or using the distributed method" (see col. 17, lines 17-22).
Examiner would like to point out that any reference to specific figures, columns and lines should not be considered limiting in any way, the entire reference is considered to provide disclosure relating to the claimed invention.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JUAN CARLOS OCHOA whose telephone number is (571)272-2625. The examiner can normally be reached Mondays, Tuesdays, Thursdays, and Fridays 9:30AM - 8:00 PM.
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, Renee Chavez can be reached at 571-270-1104. 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.
/JUAN C OCHOA/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2186
1 Electric Power Group, LLC v. Alstom S.A., 119 USPQ2d 1739 Fed. Cir. 2016
Prosecution Insights