DETAILED ACTION
Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status
The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
Response to Amendment
Applicant’s amendment filed 02/10/2026 has been entered. Claims 1-2, 5-22 remain pending. Applicant’s amendment to the limitation of Claim 1 of “generating second process data including data related to the step of processing the input data in the data processing apparatus to form the output data, the functional unit of the utility vehicle, and the operation of the functional unit” to “generating second process data including data related to the step of processing the input data in the data processing apparatus to form the output data or the operation of the functional unit” changes the interpretation of the claim limitation, thus necessitating a new grounds of rejection under 35 U.S.C. 103.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments, see Page 6, filed 02/10/2026 with respect to the 35 U.S.C. 112(a) rejection of Claims 1-2 and 5-22 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive. Applicant details the amendment presented would overcome the 35 U.S.C. 112(a) rejection.
Examiner respectfully disagrees. The 35 U.S.C. 112(a) rejection details two cases previously. The first case, labelled (i), details the limitation “generating first process data including data related to the step of generating signals from the signal source, the functional unit of the utility vehicle, and the operation of the functional unit”. This limitation has the interpretation of requiring 3 constituents since the limitation uses the conjunction “and”, and those 3 constituents are:
data related to the step of generating signals from the signal source
data related to the functional unit of the utility vehicle
data relating to the operation of the functional unit.
Applicant’s amendment is in regards to the second labelled limitation of (ii) which has been amended to “generating second process data including data related to the step of processing the input data in the data processing apparatus to form the output data or the operation of the functional unit”. While Applicant’s amendment removes the second limitation from the 35 U.S.C. 112(a) rejection, it does not remedy the 35 U.S.C. 112(a) rejection as it relates to the limitation labelled (i).
Claim Interpretation
Claim 1 details the amendments:
generating first process data including data related to the step of generating signals from the signal source, the functional unit of the utility vehicle, and the operation of the functional unit
The limitation (i) detail the process data includes data related to followed by a list with the conjunction “and”. Thus because the limitation uses the conjunction of “and”, it is interpreted as requiring all the constituents given.
That is, in the case of (i), the “data related to” is interpreted as:
data related to the step of generating signals from the signal source
data related to the functional unit of the utility vehicle
data relating to the operation of the functional unit.
That is, the generating first process data includes (d), (e), and (f).
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of 35 U.S.C. 112(a):
(a) IN GENERAL.—The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor or joint inventor of carrying out the invention.
The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112:
The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor of carrying out his invention.
Claims 1-2 and 5-22 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(a) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), first paragraph, as failing to comply with the written description requirement. The claim(s) contains subject matter which was not described in the specification in such a way as to reasonably convey to one skilled in the relevant art that the inventor or a joint inventor, or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the inventor(s), at the time the application was filed, had possession of the claimed invention.
Claim 1 details the amendments:
generating first process data including data related to the step of generating signals from the signal source, the functional unit of the utility vehicle, and the operation of the functional unit
The limitation (i) detail the process data includes data related to followed by a list with the conjunction “and”. Thus because the limitation uses the conjunction of “and”, it is interpreted as requiring all the constituents given.
That is, in the case of (i), the “data related to” is interpreted as:
data related to the step of generating signals from the signal source
data related to the functional unit of the utility vehicle
data relating to the operation of the functional unit.
That is, the generating first process data includes (a), (b), and (c).
The specification details the following about the processing data:
[0005] - The method may further include generating process data, assigning the process data to the signals generated independently of the amount of substance or to the output data, and transferring the process data as transfer data to the storage unit of the digital distributed ledger.
[0028] - On the basis of the generated signals from the signal source and/or output data—generally basic data—it is also possible to generate process data which are assigned to individual basic data and are likewise transferred as transfer data to a storage unit of the ledger. These process data may contain, for example, a proof of origin of the basic data and/or a time stamp of the basic data. The process data may be transferred, together with the respective basic data, to the corresponding storage unit of the ledger. As a result, the process data can support the authenticity of the basic data. The authenticity of the basic data can be checked in an even simpler manner in terms of data technology.
[0029] - The transfer data may include the above-mentioned basic data and/or process data.
[0033] - Depending on the respective data category (for example signals generated independently of the emitted amount of substance, output data, process data), it is technically advantageous to use an interface arranged in the utility vehicle.
[0075] - In parallel with the output data D_aus and signals S_sen, which can together be referred to as basic data, process data D_p1 and D_p2 are generated. These process data may comprise specific information, for example the time stamp of the basic data, the origin of the basic data, the identification of the control unit 20, of the processing stage 30 or of another technical unit, features of the functional unit 12, 14, features of the sensor system 18, 18′ or further features with respect to the current working process of the functional unit 12, 14. The process data D_p1 may be generated in the processing stage 30, whereas the process data D_p2 may be generated in the control unit 20. The process data D_p1 and D_p2 are assigned to the respective basic data and are transferred as transfer data TD to the corresponding storage unit S1 or S2.
[0076] - All of the transfer data TD, that is to say basic data S_sen, D_aus and process data D_p1, D_p2, are stored in the ledger 40 in an unalterable and encrypted manner.
As [0075] details process data D_p1 and D_p2, it is interpreted that D_p1 would correspond to the first process data and D_p2 corresponds to the second process data. [0075] further details the process data comprises specific information with the list with the conjunction OR, with the list including:
time stamp of the basic data
origin of the basic data
identification of the control unit
identification of the processing stage
identification of another technical unit
features of the functional unit
features of the sensor system
further features with respect to the current working process of the functional unit
Paragraph [0028] details that the process data can include “a proof of origin of the basic data and/or a time stamp of the basic data”, which includes the option of either the proof of origin of the basic data or the time stamp of the basic data or the option of the proof of origin of the basic data and the time stamp of the basic data.
The specification details in [0075] that the processing data may include a singular option while [0028] details the processing data may include two options. As the claim limitation utilizes the conjunction “and”, the specification is silent with the requirements as detailed in the claims as requiring three options for the data to be related to.
Claims 2 and 5-22 are rejected due to dependence on Claim 1.
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.
Claims 1-2, 5-6, 12-14, 16-19, and 21-22 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Grichnik (US20090300422) in view of Liu (CN107945090A) and Sonnad (US20190073701).
In regards to Claim 1, Grichnik teaches “generating signals from a signal source independently of the amount of substance (engine system includes various physical sensors provided for measuring parameters of machine operating environment or parameters – [0018]; input parameters include parameters that control operations of various characteristics of the engine and parameters that are associated with conditions corresponding to the operations of the engine, the input parameters including engine speed, fuel rate, injection timing, intake manifold temperature, intake manifold pressure, inlet valve actuation end of current, IVA timing, injection pressure, total fuel injection quantity, oxygen/fuel molar ratio, atmospheric pressure, total induction mass flow – [0036]);
transmitting the signals to a data processing apparatus as input data for determining the emitted amount of substance (server computer may be coupled to the machine via any appropriate communication means including computer network or wireless telecommunication link – [0020]; input parameters are input into model to determine output parameters – [0034], Figure 3);
processing the input data in the data processing apparatus to form output data which represents the emitted amount of substance (model takes input parameters to provide output parameters, where the output parameters are the levels of substance emitting from the exhaust system – [0034]-[0035]; output parameters correspond to sensing parameters, and include emission level of NOx, soot emission level, HC emission level – [0037]);
generating first process data including data related to the step of generating signals from the signal source, the functional unit of the utility vehicle, and the operation of the functional unit (measured parameters refer to parameters relevant to the sensing parameters and indicative of the state of a component or components of machine 105 including the engine 110, [i.e. data relating to the functional unit of the utility vehicle] – [0031]; processor sends data for processing and analysis, where the processor sends data generated in the operation process including confidence index, undesired operational conditions [i.e. data related to the operation of the functional unit], relevant values of input parameters, and other information about the machine including identification, time and date of the data [data related to the step of generating signals from the signal source], virtual sensor model types, and configuration parameters – [0081]);
assigning the first process data to the signals generated independently of the amount of substance (measured parameters are detailed as being relevant and associated with the state of the engine 110 in [0031], and [0081] details that the processor sends data including the undesired operation conditions and other information including time and date of data with the input parameters, thus associating the data together [i.e. assigning to]);
generating second process data including data related to the step of processing the input data in the data processing apparatus to form the output data or the operation of the functional unit (model includes mathematical or physical model indicating interrelationships [i.e. second process data including data related to the step of processing the input data in the data processing apparatus to form the output data] between input parameters and output parameters – [0038]; model established and operated according to a particular rules corresponding to a particular type of model using the data records and the interrelationships of the model which can be verified by using the data records – [0039]);
assigning the second process data to the output data (interrelationships are associated with [i.e. assigned to] the output parameters [i.e. output data] – [0038]).”
Grichnik is silent with regards to the language of “transferring the output data and the second process data as transfer data to a first storage unit of a digital distributed ledger; a second storage unit of the digital distributed ledger separate from the first storage unit of the digital distributed ledger.”
Liu teaches “transferring the output data and the second process data as transfer data to a first storage unit of a digital distributed ledger (storage module is used to register the exhaust gas analysis report in the blockchain and broadcast it to the entire network – [0100]; computer program 42 is divided into a first acquisition module, an analysis module, and a storage module – [0117]; includes a second acquisition module, i.e. second process data – [0105]); a second storage unit of the digital distributed ledger separate from the first storage unit of the digital distributed ledger (smart contract is stored on the blockchain – [0064]; The smart contract and the exhaust gas analysis report are stored in different blocks of the blockchain, therefor are stored in different storage units).”
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Grichnik to incorporate the teaching of Liu to store the exhaust gas analysis report in a blockchain, i.e. digital distributed leader, and to store different data in different blocks on the blockchain. By using the blockchain to store the exhaust analysis of vehicles and other data associated with the vehicle, this is an improvement in the authority of the data associated with the vehicle.
Grichnik in view of Liu are silent with regards to the language of “transferring the signals generated independently of the amount of substance and the first process data as further transfer data to a storage unit of the digital distributed ledger.”
Sonnad teaches “transferring the signals generated independently of the amount of substance and the first process data as further transfer data to a storage unit of the digital distributed ledger (system can receive, i.e. transferring, vehicle telemetry data, i.e. signals, from the sensors and vehicle and store the data in a blockchain, i.e. digital distributed ledger – [0018]; vehicle telemetry data includes data collected from plural sensors including accelerometer, position sensor, geolocation sensor – [0020]).”
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Grichnik in view of Liu to incorporate the teaching of Sonnad to store the vehicle telemetry data on the blockchain. By storing the vehicle telemetry data on the blockchain, this is an improvement to verification and association of the data with the vehicle.
In regards to Claim 2, Grichnik in view of Liu and Sonnad teach the claimed limitations as detailed above. Grichnik further teaches “transmitting the signals generated independently of the amount of substance as input data to a data processing apparatus which contains at least one neural network as a trained model for processing the input data (processor generates virtual sensor model to build interrelationships between input parameters and output parameters and the virtual sensor model corresponds to a computational model built on a neural network – [0053]; neural network is trained by selected data records including the output and input parameters – [0055]); and
generating the output data in the data processing apparatus using the at least one neural network (virtual sensor model, i.e. neural network, interrelates the input parameters with output parameters – [0055]).”
With regards to Claim 5, Grichnik in view of Liu and Sonnad teach the claimed limitations as detailed above. Grichnik is silent with regards to the language of “storing the transfer data in an unalterable manner.”
Liu further teaches “storing the transfer data in an unalterable manner (no node can tamper with the exhaust gas analysis report, i.e. unalterable – [0069]).”
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Grichnik in view of Liu and Sonnad to incorporate the further teaching of Liu to store the exhaust gas analysis report so that it cannot be tampered with. By using the blockchain to store the exhaust analysis of vehicles and other data associated with the vehicle, this is an improvement in the authority of the data associated with the vehicle.
With regards to Claim 6, Grichnik in view of Liu and Sonnad teach the claimed limitations as detailed above. Grichnik is silent with regards to the language of “storing the transfer data in encrypted form.”
Liu further teaches “storing the transfer data in encrypted form (encryption module is used to encrypt the data and register it in the blockchain – [0032]).”
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Grichnik in view of Liu and Sonnad to incorporate the further teaching of Liu to use encryption on the data stored on the blockchain. By using the blockchain to store the encrypted data associated with the vehicle, this is an improvement in the authority of the data associated with the vehicle.
With regards to Claim 12, Grichnik in view of Liu and Sonnad teach the claimed limitations as detailed above. Grichnik is silent with regards to the language of “utilizing blockchain technology to carry out at least one of the steps of processing the input data and transferring the output data.”
Liu further teaches “utilizing blockchain technology to carry out at least one of the steps of processing the input data and transferring the output data (storage module is used to register the exhaust gas analysis report in the blockchain and broadcast it to the entire network, i.e. transferring the output data – [0100]).”
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Grichnik in view of Liu and Sonnad to incorporate the further teaching of Liu to utilize blockchain technology. By using the blockchain to store the exhaust analysis of vehicles and other data associated with the vehicle, this is an improvement in the authority of the data associated with the vehicle.
In regards to Claim 13, Grichnik in view of Liu and Sonnad teach the claimed limitations as detailed above. Grichnik further teaches “the substance of the emitted amount of substance comprises at least one of NOx, CO2, CO, CmHn, N, NH4, P, and K (output parameters correspond to sensing parameters, and include emission level of NOx, soot emission level, HC emission level – [0037]).”
In regards to Claim 14, Grichnik in view of Liu and Sonnad teach the claimed limitations as detailed above. Grichnik further teaches “the functional unit comprises at least one of an internal combustion engine, an exhaust gas aftertreatment system, and a filling or application device for liquid manure (internal combustion engine – [0019])”
In regards to Claim 16, Grichnik in view of Liu and Sonnad teach the claimed limitations as detailed above. Grichnik further teaches “transferring data to the storage unit of the digital distributed ledger on the basis of a comparison between the signals from the signal source and at least one predefined reference value (processor determines whether the specific values of input parameters, i.e. signal source, are qualified input values by a comparison between the value and the range of the input parameter, i.e. at least one predefined reference value – [0072]; if the processor determines that the values of input parameters are not qualified input values, the processor can discard corresponding values of output parameters, i.e. not transferred – [0074]; if processor determines the values of input parameters are qualified input values, it may calculate a confidence index – [0075]).”
In regards to Claim 17, Grichnik in view of Liu and Sonnad teach the claimed limitations as detailed above. Grichnik further teaches “the predefined reference value as a calibration value represents a calibration state of the functional unit (processor performs input quality check based on calibration data, where the process obtains a range of each input parameter from the calibration data, i.e. calibration state – [0071]; processor determines whether the specific values of input parameters, i.e. signal source, are qualified input values by a comparison between the value and the range of the input parameter, i.e. predefined reference value – [0072]), and the signal from the signal source represents an actual state of the functional unit (engine system includes various physical sensors provided for measuring parameters of machine operating environment or parameters – [0018]; measured parameters refer to parameters relevant to the sensing parameters and indicative of the state of a component or components of machine 105 including the engine 110 – [0031])
In regards to Claim 18, Grichnik in view of Liu, and Sonnad teaches the claimed limitations as detailed above. Grichnik further teaches “transmitting the input data to the data processing apparatus if a value of the signal from the signal source is greater than the predefined reference value (processor determines whether the specific values of input parameters, i.e. signal source, are qualified input values by a comparison between the value and the range of the input parameter – [0072], Range of input parameter includes a lower value and an upper value, thus the qualified input value would be greater than the lower value of the range; if the processor determines that the values of input parameters are not qualified input values, the processor can discard corresponding values of output parameters, i.e. not transferred – [0074]; if processor determines the values of input parameters are qualified input values, it may calculate a confidence index – [0075]).”
In regards to Claim 19, Grichnik in view of Liu, and Sonnad teaches the claimed limitations as detailed above. Grichnik teaches “transferring the transfer data to the first storage unit of the digital distributed ledger if a value of the signal from the signal source is greater than the predefined reference value (processor determines whether the specific values of input parameters, i.e. signal source, are qualified input values by a comparison between the value and the range of the input parameter – [0072], Range of input parameter includes a lower value and an upper value, thus the qualified input value would be greater than the lower value of the range; if the processor determines that the values of input parameters are not qualified input values, the processor can discard corresponding values of output parameters, i.e. not transferred – [0074]; if processor determines the values of input parameters are qualified input values, it may calculate a confidence index – [0075]).”
In regards to Claim 21, Grichnik in view of Liu and Sonnad teach the claimed limitations as detailed above. Grichnik further teaches “wherein the first process data includes data indicative of an origin of the signals, an identification of a control unit receiving the signals, feature information of the functional unit, feature information of the signal source, or information indicative of a current working process of the functional unit (processor sends data for processing and analysis, where the processor sends data generated in the operation process including confidence index, undesired operational conditions, relevant values of input parameters [i.e. feature information of the signal source], and other information about the machine including identification, time and date of the data, virtual sensor model types, and configuration parameters – [0081]).”
In regards to Claim 22, Grichnik in view of Liu and Sonnad teach the claimed limitations as detailed above. Grichnik further teaches “wherein the second process data includes data indicative of an origin of the input data, an identification of a control unit receiving the output data, an identification of the data processing apparatus, feature information of the functional unit, or information indicative of a current working process of the functional unit (model includes mathematical or physical model indicating interrelationships [i.e. second process data including data related to the step of processing the input data in the data processing apparatus to form the output data] between input parameters and output parameters – [0038]; model established and operated according to a particular rules corresponding to a particular type of model using the data records and the interrelationships of the model which can be verified by using the data records – [0039]).”
Claims 7-9 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Grichnik in view of Liu and Sonnad as applied to claim 6 above, and further in view of Nenov (US20190260575).
In regards to Claim 7, Grichnik in view of Liu and Sonnad teach the claimed limitations as detailed above. Grichnik in view of Lui and Sonnad is silent with regards to the language of “encrypting the transfer data in a processing stage connected downstream of the data processing apparatus before transferring the transfer data to the digital distributed ledger.”
Nenov teaches “encrypting the transfer data in a processing stage connected downstream of the data processing apparatus before transferring the transfer data to the digital distributed ledger (device stores data 220 and the data can be stored decrypted, with the data encrypted prior to transmission to a ledger node, i.e. encrypted downstream – [0042])
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Grichnik in view of Lui and Sonnad to incorporate the teaching of Nenov to store the data and then encrypt the data that it sends to the ledger. By encrypting the data that is sent to the ledger, this is an improvement to prevent corruption and/or loss of data.
In regards to Claim 8, Grichnik in view of Liu and Sonnad teach the claimed limitations as detailed above. Grichnik in view of Liu and Sonnad are silent with regards to the language of “encrypting the transfer data in a control unit of the utility vehicle before transferring the transfer data to the digital distributed ledger.”
Nenov teaches “encrypting the transfer data in a control unit of the utility vehicle before transferring the transfer data to the digital distributed ledger (source/access device, i.e. control unit, stores data 220 and the data can be stored decrypted, with the data encrypted prior to transmission to a ledger node – [0042]; source/access device includes encryption module 214 – [0043], Figure 2)
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Grichnik in view of Lui and Sonnad to incorporate the teaching of Nenov to store the data and then encrypt the data that it sends to the ledger. By encrypting the data that is sent to the ledger, this is an improvement to prevent corruption and/or loss of data.
In regards to Claim 9, Grichnik in view of Liu, Sonnad, and Nenov teach the claimed limitations as detailed above. Grichnik in view of Liu and Sonnad are silent with regards to the language of “transferring the encrypted transfer data to the digital distributed ledger with a data interface of the utility vehicle.”
Nenov further teaches “transferring the encrypted transfer data to the digital distributed ledger with a data interface of the utility vehicle (source/access device stores data 220 and the data can be stored decrypted, with the data encrypted prior to transmission to a ledger node – [0042]; source/access device includes network interface, i.e. data interface – [0043], Figure 2)
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Grichnik in view of Lui, Sonnad, and Nenov to incorporate the further teaching of Nenov to store the data and then encrypt the data that it sends to the ledger through the network interface. By encrypting the data that is sent to the ledger, this is an improvement to prevent corruption and/or loss of data.
Claims 10-11 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Grichnik in view of Liu and Sonnad as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Hookham-Miller (US20190098015A1),
In regards to Claim 10, Grichnik in view of Liu and Sonnad teach the claimed limitations as detailed above. Grichnik in view of Liu and Sonnad are silent with regards to the language of “accessing data content or a copy of the data content of the storage unit of the digital distributed ledger on the basis of an access authorization.”
Hookham-Miller teaches “accessing data content or a copy of the data content of the storage unit of the digital distributed ledger on the basis of an access authorization (apparatus can be configured to communicate the digital signature to a block chain and the apparatus is configured to retrieve the requested data – [0026]-[0027]; The apparatus may be configured to control access to the data based on at least one of a password, a user ID, a smart card, an equipment ID, and a token - [0031]).”
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Grichnik in view of Liu and Sonnad to incorporate the teaching of Hookham-Miller to use a digital signature and control access with the accessing of the data from the blockchain. By using access authorization to the distributed ledger, this is an improvement that minimizes the security risks and maintains data integrity.
With regards to Claim 11, Grichnik in view of Liu, Sonnad, and Hookham-Miller teach the claimed limitations as detailed above. Grichnik is silent with regards to the language of “effecting access to the data content or the copy of the data content of the storage unit of the digital distributed ledger using a data network.”
Hookham-Miller further teaches “effecting access to the data content or the copy of the data content of the storage unit of the digital distributed ledger using a data network (a cloud network 70 of computing nodes 2 provide a blockchain, vehicle 34 communicates data over link 76 with a data processing and storage server 71, communication occurs via interface part 73 of the server 71, data stored in a memory 74 of the server where a record 75 is maintained for the vehicle 34 – [0075], Figure 6; “The in-car system may also be configured to connect to a blockchain access gateway 9. Alternatively, or in addition, the access to a relevant blockchain may be arranged via the server apparatus 19, as explained above” - [0090]; “Use of a secure identity code, token or the like linked to the vehicle can be used to limit the number of person who have access rights to the data” - [0096]).”
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Grichnik in view of Liu, Sonnad, and Hookham-Miller to incorporate the further teaching of Hookham-Miller to use a data network to affect access to the data content or the copy of the data content of the storage unit of the digital distributed ledger. By using the data network to affect access to the distributed ledger, this is an improvement that enables secure and efficient data transaction between interconnected nodes.
Claim 15 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Grichnik in view of Liu and Sonnad as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Pott (US20040045278).
In regards to Claim 15, Grichnik in view of Liu and Sonnad teach the claimed limitations as detailed above. Grichnik in view of Liu and Sonnad is silent with regards to the language of “the signals generated independently of the amount of substance represent at least one of an exhaust gas temperature, a torque of an internal combustion engine, a speed of an internal combustion engine, and a variable influencing a liquid manure composition.”
Pott teaches “the signals generated independently of the amount of substance represent at least one of an exhaust gas temperature, a torque of an internal combustion engine, a speed of an internal combustion engine, and a variable influencing a liquid manure composition (invention uses rotational speed of the internal combustion engine and/or operating temperature of the internal combustion engine – [0026]).”
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Grichnik in view of Liu and Sonnad to incorporate the teaching of Pott to use the rotational speed of the internal combustion engine as a signal. By using the rotational speed of the internal combustion engine as the parameter, this is an improvement to determine the emission values of the exhaust gas of a vehicle.
Claim 20 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Grichnik in view of Liu and Sonnad as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of De Sanctis (US20100211260).
In regards to Claim 20, Grichnik in view of Liu and Sonnad teach the claimed limitations as detailed above. Grichnik in view of Liu and Sonnad are silent with regards to the language of “checking that the emitted amount of substance complies with a predetermined limit value.”
De Sanctis teaches “checking that the emitted amount of substance complies with a predetermined limit value (remote unit comprises comparison means for comparing the polluting emissions calculated for the vehicle with one or more reference values, i.e. predetermined limit value, for the definition of price rating or for incentive plans related to the use of the vehicle, i.e. complies with – [0045]).”
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Grichnik in view of Liu and Sonnad to incorporate the teaching of De Sanctis to compare the pollution emissions for a vehicle to reference values. By comparing the emission to reference values this is an improvement that yields predictable results in the evaluation of the pollution emissions from a vehicle.
Conclusion
Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a). Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a).
A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of the advisory action. In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the mailing date of this final action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to YOSSEF KORANG-BEHESHTI whose telephone number is (571)272-3291. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday 10:00 am - 6:30 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, Catherine Rastovski can be reached at (571) 270-0349. 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.
/YOSSEF KORANG-BEHESHTI/Examiner, Art Unit 2857
Prosecution Insights