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 .
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on 01/13/2023 and 07/13/2023 was filed. The submission is in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statement is being considered by the examiner.
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 1-20 rejected under 35 U.S.C. 101 because the claimed invention is directed to an abstract idea without significantly more.
Regarding claim 1,
Step 1: Is the claim to a process, machine, manufacture or composition of matter?
Claim 1 is directed to a process (method).
Step 1: yes.
Step 2A, prong 1: Does the claim recite an abstract idea, law of nature, or natural phenomenon?
predicting an operating state of the subway in the time window based on the air pressure information at the moments in the time window. (limitation is directed to a mental process. One can mentally evaluate the air pressure information by use of pen and paper with respect to making a judgement/ prediction that the subway is not going to operate correctly.)
Step 2A, prong 1: If claim limitations, under their broadest reasonable interpretation, covers performance of the limitations as a mental process but for the recitation of generic computer components, then it falls within the mental process grouping of abstract ideas. According, the claim “recites” an abstract idea.
Step 2A, prong 2: Does the claim recite additional elements that integrate the judicial exception into a practical application?
acquiring air pressure information of a mobile terminal used by a user on a subway at respective moments in a time window; and (e.g., insignificant extra solution activity of data gathering, see MPEP 2106.05(g)).
Step 2A, prong 2: Since the claim as a whole, looking at the additional elements individually and in combination, does not contain any other additional elements that are indicative of integration into a practical application, the claim is directed to an abstract idea.
Step 2B: Does the claim recite additional elements that amount to significantly more than the judicial exception?
acquiring air pressure information of a mobile terminal used by a user on a subway at respective moments in a time window; and (e.g., insignificant extra solution activity of mere data gathering or data output), see MPEP 2106.05(g), using components and functions claimed at a high level of generality have been determined by the courts as being well- understood, routine and conventional activities in the field of computer functions (see MPEP 2106.05(d)(II)(i)). Receiving or transmitting data over a network, e.g., using the Internet to gather data, Symantec, 838 F.3d at 1321, 120 USPQ2d at 1362)
Step 2B: Considering the additional elements individually and in combination, and the claim as a whole, the additional elements do not provide significantly more than the abstract idea. Therefore, the claim is not patent eligible.
Regarding claim 2 and analogous claim 12,
Claim 2 incorporates the analysis of the method of claim 1.
Step 2A, Prong 1:
extracting air pressure features corresponding to the moments based on the air pressure data at the moments in the time window. (limitation is directed to a mental process. One can mentally provide air pressure features by use of pen and paper with respect to moments of the air pressure data in a time window.)
Step 2A, prong 1: If claim limitations, under their broadest reasonable interpretation, covers performance of the limitations as a mental process but for the recitation of generic computer components, then it falls within the mental process grouping of abstract ideas. According, the claim “recites” an abstract idea.
Step 2A, prong 2/Step 2B:
collecting air pressure data of the mobile terminal used by the user on the subway at the moments in the time window; and/or (e.g., insignificant extra solution activity of mere data gathering or data output), see MPEP 2106.05(g), using components and functions claimed at a high level of generality have been determined by the courts as being well- understood, routine and conventional activities in the field of computer functions (see MPEP 2106.05(d)(II)(i)). Receiving or transmitting data over a network, e.g., using the Internet to gather data, Symantec, 838 F.3d at 1321, 120 USPQ2d at 1362)
Step 2A, prong 2: Since the claim as a whole, looking at the additional elements individually and in combination, does not contain any other additional elements that are indicative of integration into a practical application, the claim is directed to an abstract idea.
Step 2B: Considering the additional elements individually and in combination, and the claim as a whole, the additional elements do not provide significantly more than the abstract idea. Therefore, the claim is not patent eligible.
Regarding claim 3 and analogous claim 13,
Claim 3 incorporates the analysis of the method of claim 1.
Step 2A, Prong 1:
predicting an estimated operating state and a corresponding probability of the subway in the time window based on the air pressure information at the moments in the time window; and (limitation is directed to a mental process. One can mentally evaluate the operating state by use of pen and paper with respect to moments of the air pressure data in a time window.)
Step 2A, prong 1: If claim limitations, under their broadest reasonable interpretation, covers performance of the limitations as a mental process but for the recitation of generic computer components, then it falls within the mental process grouping of abstract ideas. According, the claim “recites” an abstract idea.
Step 2A, prong 2/Step 2B:
acquiring the operating state of the subway in the time window based on the estimated operating state and the corresponding probability of the subway in the time window. (e.g., insignificant extra solution activity of mere data gathering or data output), see MPEP 2106.05(g), using components and functions claimed at a high level of generality have been determined by the courts as being well- understood, routine and conventional activities in the field of computer functions (see MPEP 2106.05(d)(II)(i)). Receiving or transmitting data over a network, e.g., using the Internet to gather data, Symantec, 838 F.3d at 1321, 120 USPQ2d at 1362)
Step 2A, prong 2: Since the claim as a whole, looking at the additional elements individually and in combination, does not contain any other additional elements that are indicative of integration into a practical application, the claim is directed to an abstract idea.
Step 2B: Considering the additional elements individually and in combination, and the claim as a whole, the additional elements do not provide significantly more than the abstract idea. Therefore, the claim is not patent eligible.
Regarding claim 4 and analogous claim 14,
Claim 4 incorporates the analysis of the method of claim 3.
Step 2A, Prong 1:
predicting estimated operating states of the subway at the moments in the time window based on the air pressure information at the moments in the time window; and (limitation is directed to a mental process. One can mentally evaluate the operating state by use of pen and paper with respect to moments of the air pressure data in a time window.)
Step 2A, prong 1: If claim limitations, under their broadest reasonable interpretation, covers performance of the limitations as a mental process but for the recitation of generic computer components, then it falls within the mental process grouping of abstract ideas. According, the claim “recites” an abstract idea.
Step 2A, prong 2/Step 2B:
acquiring the estimated operating state and the corresponding probability of the subway in the time window based on the estimated operating states of the subway at the moments in the time window. (e.g., insignificant extra solution activity of mere data gathering or data output), see MPEP 2106.05(g), using components and functions claimed at a high level of generality have been determined by the courts as being well- understood, routine and conventional activities in the field of computer functions (see MPEP 2106.05(d)(II)(i)). Receiving or transmitting data over a network, e.g., using the Internet to gather data, Symantec, 838 F.3d at 1321, 120 USPQ2d at 1362)
Step 2A, prong 2: Since the claim as a whole, looking at the additional elements individually and in combination, does not contain any other additional elements that are indicative of integration into a practical application, the claim is directed to an abstract idea.
Step 2B: Considering the additional elements individually and in combination, and the claim as a whole, the additional elements do not provide significantly more than the abstract idea. Therefore, the claim is not patent eligible.
Regarding claim 5 and analogous claim 15,
Claim 5 incorporates the analysis of the method of claim 4.
Step 2A, Prong 1:
predicting,…based on the air pressure information at the moments in the time window, whether the subway is in a stop state or a move state at the moments in the time window; and/or (limitation is directed to a mental process. One can mentally evaluate the air pressure information by use of pen and paper with respect to judge if the subway is in a stop or move state.)
predicting,…based on the air pressure information at the moments in the time window, whether the subway is in an enter state or an exit state at the moments in the time window if it is determined that the subway is in the move state. (limitation is directed to a mental process. One can mentally evaluate the air pressure information by use of pen and paper with respect to judge if the subway is in an exit or enter state.)
Step 2A, prong 1: If claim limitations, under their broadest reasonable interpretation, covers performance of the limitations as a mental process but for the recitation of generic computer components, then it falls within the mental process grouping of abstract ideas. According, the claim “recites” an abstract idea.
Step 2A, prong 2/Step 2B:
by using a pre-trained dynamic and static state prediction model (e.g., mere instructions to apply the judicial exception, (see MPEP 2106.05(f)).
by using a pre-trained enter and exit prediction model (e.g., mere instructions to apply the judicial exception, (see MPEP 2106.05(f)).
Step 2A, prong 2: Since the claim as a whole, looking at the additional elements individually and in combination, does not contain any other additional elements that are indicative of integration into a practical application, the claim is directed to an abstract idea.
Step 2B: Considering the additional elements individually and in combination, and the claim as a whole, the additional elements do not provide significantly more than the abstract idea. Therefore, the claim is not patent eligible.
Regarding claim 6 and analogous claim 16,
Claim 6 incorporates the analysis of the method of claim 3.
Step 2A, prong 2/Step 2B:
acquiring the operating state of the subway in the time window based on the estimated operating state and the corresponding probability of the subway in the time window and with reference to a preset probability threshold and an operating state of the subway in a previous time window in a subway state sequence; or (e.g., insignificant extra solution activity of mere data gathering or data output), see MPEP 2106.05(g), using components and functions claimed at a high level of generality have been determined by the courts as being well- understood, routine and conventional activities in the field of computer functions (see MPEP 2106.05(d)(II)(i)). Receiving or transmitting data over a network, e.g., using the Internet to gather data, Symantec, 838 F.3d at 1321, 120 USPQ2d at 1362)
acquiring the operating state of the subway in the time window based on the estimated operating state and the corresponding probability of the subway in the time window and with reference to a pre-generated state transfer information table and an operating state of the subway in a previous time window in a subway state sequence. (e.g., insignificant extra solution activity of mere data gathering or data output), see MPEP 2106.05(g), using components and functions claimed at a high level of generality have been determined by the courts as being well- understood, routine and conventional activities in the field of computer functions (see MPEP 2106.05(d)(II)(i)). Receiving or transmitting data over a network, e.g., using the Internet to gather data, Symantec, 838 F.3d at 1321, 120 USPQ2d at 1362)
Step 2A, prong 2: Since the claim as a whole, looking at the additional elements individually and in combination, does not contain any other additional elements that are indicative of integration into a practical application, the claim is directed to an abstract idea.
Step 2B: Considering the additional elements individually and in combination, and the claim as a whole, the additional elements do not provide significantly more than the abstract idea. Therefore, the claim is not patent eligible.
Regarding claim 7 and analogous claim 17,
Claim 7 incorporates the analysis of the method of claim 6.
Step 2A, Prong 1:
detecting whether the probability is greater than or equal to the preset probability threshold; and (limitation is directed to a mental process. One can mentally evaluate the probability by use of pen and paper with respect to judging if the probability is greater than or equal to a threshold.)
taking the estimated operating state of the subway in the time window as the operating state of the subway in the time window if the probability is greater than or equal to the preset probability threshold. (limitation is directed to a mental process. One can mentally evaluate the probability by use of pen and paper with respect to judging if the probability is greater than or equal to a threshold.)
Step 2A, prong 1: If claim limitations, under their broadest reasonable interpretation, covers performance of the limitations as a mental process but for the recitation of generic computer components, then it falls within the mental process grouping of abstract ideas. According, the claim “recites” an abstract idea.
Regarding claim 8 and analogous claim 18,
Claim 8 incorporates the analysis of the method of claim 7.
Step 2A, prong 2/Step 2B:
acquiring the operating state of the subway in the previous time window from the subway state sequence as the operating state of the subway in the time window if the probability is less than the preset probability threshold. (e.g., insignificant extra solution activity of mere data gathering or data output), see MPEP 2106.05(g), using components and functions claimed at a high level of generality have been determined by the courts as being well- understood, routine and conventional activities in the field of computer functions (see MPEP 2106.05(d)(II)(i)). Receiving or transmitting data over a network, e.g., using the Internet to gather data, Symantec, 838 F.3d at 1321, 120 USPQ2d at 1362)
Step 2A, prong 2: Since the claim as a whole, looking at the additional elements individually and in combination, does not contain any other additional elements that are indicative of integration into a practical application, the claim is directed to an abstract idea.
Step 2B: Considering the additional elements individually and in combination, and the claim as a whole, the additional elements do not provide significantly more than the abstract idea. Therefore, the claim is not patent eligible.
Regarding claim 9 and analogous claim 19,
Claim 9 incorporates the analysis of the method of claim 6.
Step 2A, Prong 1:
detecting, based on the operating state of the subway in the previous time window and the estimated operating state and the corresponding probability of the subway in the time window, whether the probability is less than a corresponding state transfer probability in the state transfer information table; and (limitation is directed to a mental process. One can mentally evaluate the operating state by use of pen and paper with respect to if the probability is less than the state transfer probability.)
taking the operating state of the subway in the previous time window as the operating state of the subway in the time window if the probability is less than a corresponding state transfer probability in the state transfer information table. (limitation is directed to a mental process. One can mentally evaluate the operating state by use of pen and paper with respect to if the probability is less than the state transfer probability.)
Step 2A, prong 1: If claim limitations, under their broadest reasonable interpretation, covers performance of the limitations as a mental process but for the recitation of generic computer components, then it falls within the mental process grouping of abstract ideas. According, the claim “recites” an abstract idea.
Step 2A, prong 2/Step 2B:
acquiring the operating state of the subway in the previous time window from the subway state sequence; (e.g., insignificant extra solution activity of mere data gathering or data output), see MPEP 2106.05(g), using components and functions claimed at a high level of generality have been determined by the courts as being well- understood, routine and conventional activities in the field of computer functions (see MPEP 2106.05(d)(II)(i)). Receiving or transmitting data over a network, e.g., using the Internet to gather data, Symantec, 838 F.3d at 1321, 120 USPQ2d at 1362)
Step 2A, prong 2: Since the claim as a whole, looking at the additional elements individually and in combination, does not contain any other additional elements that are indicative of integration into a practical application, the claim is directed to an abstract idea.
Step 2B: Considering the additional elements individually and in combination, and the claim as a whole, the additional elements do not provide significantly more than the abstract idea. Therefore, the claim is not patent eligible.
Regarding claim 10,
Claim 10 incorporates the analysis of the method of claim 9.
Step 2A, Prong 1:
taking the estimated operating state of the subway in the time window as the operating state of the subway in the time window if the probability is greater than or equal to the corresponding state transfer probability in the state transfer information table. (limitation is directed to a mental process. One can mentally evaluate the probability by use of pen and paper with respect to judging if the probability is greater than or equal to a threshold.)
Step 2A, prong 1: If claim limitations, under their broadest reasonable interpretation, covers performance of the limitations as a mental process but for the recitation of generic computer components, then it falls within the mental process grouping of abstract ideas. According, the claim “recites” an abstract idea.
Regarding claim 11,
Step 1: Is the claim to a process, machine, manufacture or composition of matter?
Claim 11 is directed to a machine (electronic device).
Step 1: yes
Step 2A, prong 2/Step 2B:
An electronic device, comprising: at least one processor; and (e.g., mere instructions to apply the judicial exception, (see MPEP 2106.05(f)).
a memory communicatively connected with the at least one processor; (e.g., mere instructions to apply the judicial exception, (see MPEP 2106.05(f)).
wherein the memory stores instructions executable by the at least one processor, and the instructions are executed by the at least one processor to enable the at least one processor to perform a method, (e.g., mere instructions to apply the judicial exception, (see MPEP 2106.05(f)).
Step 2A, prong 2: Since the claim as a whole, looking at the additional elements individually and in combination, does not contain any other additional elements that are indicative of integration into a practical application, the claim is directed to an abstract idea.
Step 2B: Considering the additional elements individually and in combination, and the claim as a whole, the additional elements do not provide significantly more than the abstract idea. Therefore, the claim is not patent eligible.
The rest of the analysis for claim 11 is analogous to claim 1.
Regarding claim 20,
Step 1: Is the claim to a process, machine, manufacture or composition of matter?
Claim 20 is directed to a manufacture (non-transitory computer readable storage medium).
Step 1: yes
Step 2A, prong 2/Step 2B:
A non-transitory computer readable storage medium with computer instructions stored thereon, wherein the computer instructions are used for causing a method, (e.g., mere instructions to apply the judicial exception, (see MPEP 2106.05(f)).
Step 2A, prong 2: Since the claim as a whole, looking at the additional elements individually and in combination, does not contain any other additional elements that are indicative of integration into a practical application, the claim is directed to an abstract idea.
Step 2B: Considering the additional elements individually and in combination, and the claim as a whole, the additional elements do not provide significantly more than the abstract idea. Therefore, the claim is not patent eligible.
The rest of the analysis for claim 20 is analogous to claim 1.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
The following is a quotation of the appropriate paragraphs of 35 U.S.C. 102 that form the basis for the rejections under this section made in this Office action:
A person shall be entitled to a patent unless –
(a)(1) the claimed invention was patented, described in a printed publication, or in public use, on sale, or otherwise available to the public before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
(a)(2) the claimed invention was described in a patent issued under section 151, or in an application for patent published or deemed published under section 122(b), in which the patent or application, as the case may be, names another inventor and was effectively filed before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claims 1-4, 6-10, 11-14 and 16-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) as being anticipated by Liu et al (CN Patent No. 110278324, "Liu").
In regard to claim 1, Liu teaches A method comprising: acquiring air pressure information of a mobile terminal used by a user on a subway at respective moments in a time window; and (Liu, paragraph 0012, “Through the above method, the subway operation status is determined according to the altitude data converted from the air pressure data collected [acquiring air pressure information] by the barometer sensor in the mobile terminal, and then whether the subway enters or exits the station is determined according to the subway operation status.”)
predicting an operating state of the subway in the time window based on the air pressure information at the moments in the time window. (Liu, paragraph 0010, “Determine the subway operation status [operating state of the subway] according to the altitude data in the current statistical period, and the altitude data is determined according to the air pressure data collected by the barometer sensor;”)
In regard to claim 11, the claim recites similar limitations as corresponding claim 1, and is rejected for similar reasons as claim 1 using similar teachings and rationale.
Liu further teaches An electronic device, comprising: at least one processor; and a memory communicatively connected with the at least one processor; wherein the memory stores instructions executable by the at least one processor, and the instructions are executed by the at least one processor to enable the at least one processor to perform a method, wherein the method comprises: (Liu, paragraph 0143, “The memory 901 is used for storing computer programs executed by the processor 902.”)
In regard to claim 20, the claim recites similar limitations as corresponding claim 1, and is rejected for similar reasons as claim 1 using similar teachings and rationale.
Liu further teaches A non-transitory computer readable storage medium with computer instructions stored thereon, wherein the computer instructions are used for causing a method, wherein the method comprises: (Liu, paragraph 0149, “The embodiment of the present application also provides a computer-readable storage medium, which stores computer-executable instructions for executing the above-mentioned processor, and includes a program for executing the above-mentioned processor.”)
In regard to claim 2 and analogous claim 12, Liu teaches the method of claim 1.
Liu further teaches collecting air pressure data of the mobile terminal used by the user on the subway at the moments in the time window; and/or (Liu, paragraph 0006, “During the subway ride, people can use the mobile terminal to read books, listen to music, watch movies, watch TV series, etc. to pass the time, so when waiting for the train, they hope to obtain the information of the subway entering and leaving the station, so how to use the mobile terminal to detect the subway entering and exiting the station, is a problem that needs to be considered first.” And paragraph 0025, “Through the above method, the operating state of the subway can be determined according to the altitude data [collecting air pressure data] obtained in the current statistical period, and the detection of the state of the subway entering and leaving the station can be determined based on this.”)
extracting air pressure features corresponding to the moments based on the air pressure data at the moments in the time window. (Liu, paragraph 0027, “The first determining unit is used to determine the operation state of the subway according to the altitude data in the current statistical period, and the altitude data is determined according to the air pressure data collected by the barometer sensor [extracting air pressure features];”)
In regard to claim 3 and analogous claim 13, Liu teaches the method of claim 1.
Liu further teaches predicting an estimated operating state and a corresponding probability of the subway in the time window based on the air pressure information at the moments in the time window; and (Liu, paragraph 0032, “and/or estimate the arrival time information [estimated operating state] and prompt the user according to the user's arrival station information and subway operation line data.” And paragraph 0096, “Wherein, the first preset threshold may be the maximum value of the difference between the maximum value of the altitude data and the minimum value of the altitude data within a collection period, wherein the collection period is longer than the statistics period [probability of the subway in the time window].)
acquiring the operating state of the subway in the time window based on the estimated operating state and the corresponding probability of the subway in the time window. (Liu, paragraph 0032, “The prompting unit is used to determine the station information of the subway currently entering the station and prompt the user according to the user's originating station information and the subway operation line data; and/or according to the user's arrival site information and the subway operation line data, when the subway arrives Prompt the user before arriving at the station; and/or estimate the arrival time information [estimated operating state and the corresponding probability of the subway in the time window] and prompt the user according to the user's arrival station information and subway operation line data.”)
In regard to claim 4 and analogous claim 14, Liu teaches the method of claim 3.
Liu further teaches predicting estimated operating states of the subway at the moments in the time window based on the air pressure information at the moments in the time window; and (Liu, paragraph 0032, “The prompting unit is used to determine the station information of the subway currently entering the station and prompt the user according to the user's originating station information and the subway operation line data; and/or according to the user's arrival site information and the subway operation line data, when the subway arrives Prompt the user before arriving at the station; and/or estimate the arrival time information [predicting estimated operating states of the subway ] and prompt the user according to the user's arrival station information and subway operation line data.”)
acquiring the estimated operating state and the corresponding probability of the subway in the time window based on the estimated operating states of the subway at the moments in the time window. (Liu, paragraph 0032, “The prompting unit is used to determine the station information of the subway currently entering the station and prompt the user according to the user's originating station information and the subway operation line data; and/or according to the user's arrival site information and the subway operation line data, when the subway arrives Prompt the user before arriving at the station; and/or estimate the arrival time information [estimated operating states of the subway] and prompt the user according to the user's arrival station information and subway operation line data.”)
In regard to claim 6 and analogous claim 16, Liu teaches the method of claim 3.
Liu further teaches acquiring the operating state of the subway in the time window based on the estimated operating state and the corresponding probability of the subway in the time window and with reference to a preset probability threshold and an operating state of the subway in a previous time window in a subway state sequence; or (Liu, paragraph 0024, “If the difference is less than the first preset threshold and the altitude data variance is less than the second preset threshold [reference to a preset probability threshold], then determine that the subway operating state of the current statistical period is a static state; otherwise, determine that the subway operating state of the current statistical cycle is a driving state .”)
acquiring the operating state of the subway in the time window based on the estimated operating state and the corresponding probability of the subway in the time window and with reference to a pre-generated state transfer information table and an operating state of the subway in a previous time window in a subway state sequence. (Liu, paragraph 0112, “After determining the user's starting station information, each time the subway enters the station, the terminal device 100 can also determine the station information of the subway currently entering the station according to the user's starting station information and the pre-stored subway operation line data [a pre-generated state transfer] and The user is prompted.”)
In regard to claim 7 and analogous claim 17, Liu teaches the method of claim 6.
Liu further teaches detecting whether the probability is greater than or equal to the preset probability threshold; and (Liu, paragraph 0096, “Wherein, the first preset threshold may be the maximum value of the difference between the maximum value of the altitude data and the minimum value of the altitude data within a collection period, wherein the collection period is longer than the statistics period.
Taking the collection period as 1 minute and the statistical period as 5s as an example, one collection period contains 12 statistical periods. In this way, the difference between the maximum value of the altitude data and the minimum value of the altitude data in each statistical period is calculated separately, and The maximum difference value within the collection period is selected as the first preset threshold.”)
taking the estimated operating state of the subway in the time window as the operating state of the subway in the time window if the probability is greater than or equal to the preset probability threshold. (Liu, paragraph 0032, “and/or estimate the arrival time information [estimated operating state] and prompt the user according to the user's arrival station information and subway operation line data.” And paragraph 0096, “Taking the collection period as 1 minute and the statistical period as 5s as an example, one collection period contains 12 statistical periods. In this way, the difference between the maximum value of the altitude data and the minimum value of the altitude data in each statistical period is calculated separately, and The maximum difference value within the collection period is selected as the first preset threshold.”)
In regard to claim 8 and analogous claim 18, Liu teaches the method of claim 7.
Liu further teaches acquiring the operating state of the subway in the previous time window from the subway state sequence as the operating state of the subway in the time window if the probability is less than the preset probability threshold. (Liu, paragraph 0141, “The second determining subunit is used to determine that the subway operating state of the current statistical period is a static state if the difference is less than the first preset threshold [less than the preset probability threshold] and the variance of the altitude data is less than the second preset threshold; otherwise, determine the current statistical cycle The periodic subway running state is the running state.”)
In regard to claim 9 and analogous claim 19, Liu teaches the method of claim 6.
Liu further teaches acquiring the operating state of the subway in the previous time window from the subway state sequence; (Liu, paragraph 0148, “The processor 902 is configured to call the computer program stored in the memory 901 to execute step S21 as shown in FIG. The air pressure data collected by the meter sensor is determined, and in step S22, the terminal device determines whether the subway enters or exits the station according to the current statistical period and the subway operation status of the previous statistical period [previous time window from the subway state sequence;].”)
detecting, based on the operating state of the subway in the previous time window and the estimated operating state and the corresponding probability of the subway in the time window, whether the probability is less than a corresponding state transfer probability in the state transfer information table; and (Liu, paragraph 0095, “Determine whether the difference between the maximum value of the altitude data and the minimum value of the altitude data is smaller than a first preset threshold, if yes, perform step S223, otherwise, perform step S225.” And paragraph 0148, “The processor 902 is configured to call the computer program stored in the memory 901 to execute step S21 as shown in FIG. The air pressure data collected by the meter sensor is determined, and in step S22, the terminal device determines whether the subway enters or exits the station according to the current statistical period and the subway operation status of the previous statistical period.”)
taking the operating state of the subway in the previous time window as the operating state of the subway in the time window if the probability is less than a corresponding state transfer probability in the state transfer information table. (Liu, paragraph 0095, “Determine whether the difference between the maximum value of the altitude data and the minimum value of the altitude data is smaller than a first preset threshold, if yes, perform step S223, otherwise, perform step S225.” And paragraph 0148, “The processor 902 is configured to call the computer program stored in the memory 901 to execute step S21 as shown in FIG. The air pressure data collected by the meter sensor is determined, and in step S22, the terminal device determines whether the subway enters or exits the station according to the current statistical period and the subway operation status of the previous statistical period.”)
In regard to claim 10, Liu teaches the method of claim 9.
Liu further teaches taking the estimated operating state of the subway in the time window as the operating state of the subway in the time window if the probability is greater than or equal to the corresponding state transfer probability in the state transfer information table. (Liu, paragraph 0060, “The inventor found that using the accelerometer installed in the mobile terminal to detect the status of the subway entering and exiting the station, when it is detected that the acceleration of the subway form the user is taking is less than zero, it is determined that the current subway is in the stage of decelerating and entering the station; when the acceleration value is greater than or equal to zero , it is determined that the train is accelerating and starting, and further combined with the subway map to determine the station information of the subway arrival station and remind it.”)
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.
This application currently names joint inventors. In considering patentability of the claims the examiner presumes that the subject matter of the various claims was commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the claimed invention(s) absent any evidence to the contrary. Applicant is advised of the obligation under 37 CFR 1.56 to point out the inventor and effective filing dates of each claim that was not commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the later invention in order for the examiner to consider the applicability of 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(C) for any potential 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) prior art against the later invention.
Claims 5 and 15 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Liu, in view of Xing et al (Dynamic State Estimation for the Advanced Brake System of Electric Vehicles by Using Deep Recurrent Neural Networks, "Xing").
In regard to claim 5 and analogous claim 15, Liu teaches the method of claim 4.
Liu further teaches predicting, by using a pre-trained enter and exit prediction model based on the air pressure information at the moments in the time window, whether the subway is in an enter state or an exit state at the moments in the time window if it is determined that the subway is in the move state. (Liu, paragraph 0105, “Based on the detection method for detecting the state of the subway entering and leaving the station provided by the embodiment of the present invention, a prompt can be given when the subway is determined to enter the station.”)
However, Liu does not explicitly teach predicting, by using a pre-trained dynamic and static state prediction model based on the air pressure information at the moments in the time window, whether the subway is in a stop state or a move state at the moments in the time window; and/or
Xing teaches predicting, by using a pre-trained dynamic and static state prediction model based on the air pressure information at the moments in the time window, whether the subway is in a stop state or a move state at the moments in the time window; and/or (Xing, pg. 9538, Col. 1, paragraph 1, “The LSTMRNN model can capture the long-term dependence between the brake pressure and the vehicle dynamic state [air pressure information]s to generate reasonable multistep predictions. This multistep prediction [predicting] approach can contribute to more efficient energy management strategies, vehicle motion prediction, and driving intention inference since a reasonably long-term vehicle dynamic state is predicted.”)
Liu and Xing are related to the same field of endeavor (i.e. estimation). In view of the teachings of Xing, it would have been obvious for a person with ordinary skill in the art to apply the teachings of Xing to Liu before the effective filing date of the claimed invention in order to have a higher accuracy on predictions. (Xing, abstract, “The testing results indicate that the proposed integrated TSM method can achieve a more reliable multistep prediction with a higher accuracy compared to that of the other methods, which demonstrates the feasibility and effectiveness of the proposed approach.”)
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to SKYLAR K VANWORMER whose telephone number is (703)756-1571. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 6:00am to 3:00 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, Usmaan Saeed can be reached at (571) 272-4046. 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.
/S.K.V./Examiner, Art Unit 2146
/USMAAN SAEED/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2146