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 .
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and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114.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 11/25/2025 has been entered.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments, see Remarks, filed 11/25/2025, with respect to the 35 U.S.C. 103 rejections of claims 22-27, 37-39, and 41 have been fully considered and are persuasive. The combination of Farnsworth (WO 9524658 A1), Zhang (US 20130261982 A1), and Smith (US 20050265124 A1) does not explicitly teach “selectively amplify frequencies of the motion data within a plurality of first subranges of frequencies within the range of frequencies representative of an earthquake, wherein each of one or more of the first sub-ranges of the plurality of first sub-ranges is non-contiguous with one or more other first sub-ranges of the plurality of first sub-ranges; selectively attenuate frequencies of the motion data, at least within a plurality of second sub-ranges of frequencies within said range of frequencies representative of an earthquake, wherein each of one or more of the second sub-ranges of the plurality of second sub-ranges is non-contiguous with one or more other second sub-ranges of the plurality of second sub-ranges.” Therefore, the 35 U.S.C. 103 rejections of claims 22-27, 37-39, and 41 have been withdrawn.
Applicant’s arguments, see Remarks, filed 11/25/2025, with respect to the 35 U.S.C. 103 rejection of claim 40 have been fully considered and are persuasive. The combination of Webb (US 20040135698 A1) and Ishizaki (JP 2007003289 A) does not explicitly teach “apply at least one filter on Mz to obtain a weight factor; weight amplitude of the aggregated representation FDx,Y with the weight factor, to obtain a weighted representation, said weighting comprising increasing amplitude of the aggregated representation FDx,Y based on an amplitude of the weight factor.” Therefore, the 35 U.S.C. 103 rejection of claim 40 has been withdrawn.
Applicant’s arguments, see Remarks, filed 11/25/2025, with respect to the rejection of claim 28 under 35 U.S.C. 103 have been fully considered and are persuasive. The combination of Farnsworth (WO 9524658 A1) as modified by Ram (US 20130177061 A1) does not explicitly teach “wherein the complex function depends on at least one predefined frequency; determine magnitude, or data informative of the magnitude, of an aggregation FD of the plurality of complex output data obtained for the plurality of time instants, or of data informative of the plurality of complex output data, wherein the magnitude depends at least on a correlation between one or more frequency components of the motion data obtained in the time window and at least one of the predefined frequency, one or more harmonics or one or more sub-harmonics of the predefined frequency,” Therefore, the rejection has been withdrawn. However, upon further consideration, a new ground(s) of rejection is made in view of Farnsworth (WO 9524658 A1) and Lombriser (US 20140142871 A1). However, Farnsworth does teach when a comparison meets an alerting criterion, generate an alert indicating that an earthquake has been detected. Farnsworth teaches a plurality of filters that filter the motion data on pages 3, 13, 16, 17, 19 and 22. The slope comparator compares the relative magnitudes of the respective slope signals. If the magnitude of the slope of an upwardly directed transition is greater than that of the corresponding downwardly directed transition, the slope comparator produces a predetermined comparator signal that is routed to the seismic magnitude processor to indicate that precursor seismic activity is present. (Pg. 18 Ln(s). [3-9]) This is viewed as when a comparison meets an alerting criterion. The audio alarm is further responsive to the produced presence signal which indicates an earthquake and therefore an alert is generated that indicates an earthquake.
Claim Objections
Claim 28 objected to because of the following informalities: The limitation “determine magnitude, or data informative of the magnitude, of an aggregation FD of the plurality of complex output data” should read “determine magnitude, or data informative of the magnitude, of an aggregation of the plurality of complex output data” as it is unclear what FD is referring to in this context. Appropriate correction is required.
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 28 and 35 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Farnsworth (WO 9524658 A1) as modified by Lombriser (US 20140142871 A1).
Regarding claim 28,
Farnsworth teaches,
A system for detecting an earthquake, the system comprising: (Pg. 1 Ln(s). [3-6] teach “This application relates to a method and apparatus for detecting seismic activity, particularly for detecting local precursor seismic activity so as to forecast an impending earthquake.”)
a processor and memory circuitry configured to: (Pg. 1 Ln(s). [26-29] teaches “a processing unit for detection of precursor seismic activity. The detection mechanism preferably is implemented in digital signal processing (DSP) circuitry.”)
obtain motion data based on data collected by one or more sensors; (Pg. 3 Ln(s). [17-21] teaches “The seismic waves are sensed by using an accelerometer sensitive to the low frequency, long wavelength, low amplitude and associated acceleration of these waves, and produces an electrical signal representative of sensed seismic waves.”)
when a comparison meets an alerting criterion, generate an alert indicating that an earthquake has been detected. (Pg. 18 Ln(s). 2-14 teach “The slope comparator 44 compares the relative magnitudes of the respective slope signals. If the slope comparator 44 determines that the magnitude of the slope of an upwardly directed transition is greater than that of the corresponding downwardly directed transition, the slope comparator 44 produces a predetermined comparator signal that is routed to the seismic magnitude processor 48 to indicate that precursor seismic activity is present. Otherwise, the comparator signal indicates the absence of such activity.” Pg. 21 Ln(s). [18-21] teaches “Accordingly, the alarms preferably alert of any likely near-term earthquake. In particular, the audio alarm 66 is responsive to precursor seismic activity detected in seismic waves, because the advance time between such detection and the onslaught of the earthquake is typically on the order of seconds to minutes. Preferably, the audio alarm 66 includes a clear alert corresponding specifically to that detection.”)
Farnsworth does not explicitly teach,
apply at least one filter comprising a complex function on the motion data for each of a plurality of time instants of a time window, to obtain a plurality of complex output data, wherein the complex function depends on at least one predefined frequency; determine magnitude, or data informative of the magnitude, of an aggregation FD of aggregate the plurality of complex output data obtained for the plurality of time instants, or of data informative of the plurality of complex output data, wherein the magnitude depends at least on a correlation between one or more frequency components of the motion data obtained in the time window and at least one of the predefined frequency, one or more harmonics or one or more sub-harmonics of the predefined frequency, wherein the predefined frequency is within a range of frequencies representative of an earthquake,
Lombriser teaches,
apply at least one filter comprising a complex function on the motion data for each of a plurality of time instants of a time window, to obtain a plurality of complex output data, (Para. [0057] teaches “The third modification of the implementation relies on that, in the last stage of the original Bruun FFT, the real and imaginary components of the complex FFT are computed. For the detection of the dominant frequency however only the magnitude is needed. The Bruun FFT defines in the last stage S a multiplication.”)
wherein the complex function depends on at least one predefined frequency; (Para. [0036] teaches “A digital filter 230 may implement a third order Butterworth filter with a 3 dB cut-off frequency of 128 Hz that advantageously reinforces the analog filter before the signal is downsampled to a 256 Hz signal by a downsampler 2400.” (i.e. the filtration at a predefined frequency occurs before the complex function and therefore it is dependent upon it.)
determine magnitude, or data informative of the magnitude, of an aggregation FD of the plurality of complex output data obtained for the plurality of time instants, or of data informative of the plurality of complex output data, (Para. [0057] teaches “to determine the complex result, where m and n are the indexes of the values of the previous stage as in the standard Bruun FFT procedure. The magnitude could then be computed by summing up the squares as in |f.sub.s(k)|.sup.2=Re(f.sub.s(k)).sup.2+Im(f.sub.s(k)).sup.2. The invention uses the Butterfly unit and the cosine table also used by the other Bruun FFT stages to compute the magnitude directly using the law of cosines:”)
wherein the magnitude depends at least on a correlation between one or more frequency components of the motion data obtained in the time window and at least one of the predefined frequency, one or more harmonics or one or more sub-harmonics of the predefined frequency, wherein the predefined frequency is within a range of frequencies representative of an earthquake, (Para(s). [0058-0059] teach “Using the law of cosines allows computing the magnitude in 3 steps using the available butterfly and thus no additional hardware is required. In the first step is computed using the corresponding cosine table entry and f.sub.s-1(n) as multiplicants, zero as first, and f.sub.7(m) as second summand. As a second step, f.sub.s-1.sup.2(n) can be computed by setting the multiplicants both to f.sub.s-1(n) and the summands to zero. In a third step, the output of the first step is multiplied by f.sub.s-1 (m), the first summand is set to zero, and the second to the output of the second step. The maximum frequency magnitude m.sub.f can be found by setting m.sub.f initially to zero, and iteratively compare it to the output of the third magnitude computation step. In case a larger magnitude is found, the value m.sub.f is set to this new maximum and its index is stored. After having computed all |f.sub.s(k)|.sup.2, the index then contains”)
wherein the predefined frequency is within a range of frequencies representative of an earthquake, (Para. [0069] teaches “Advantageously, the proportions of those address spaces may be chosen depending on the frequency of events expected. In case many events or events of longer duration are expected, the acceleration frame data space can be chosen larger, leaving less room for signal parameter storage. The management of the address spaces may therefore be performed according to expected events to be detected.” Para. [0070] teaches “This is important for longer bursts of vibrations generating events, such as during an earthquake.”)
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Farnsworth with apply at least one filter comprising a complex function on the motion data for each of a plurality of time instants of a time window, to obtain a plurality of complex output data, wherein the complex function depends on at least one predefined frequency; determine magnitude, or data informative of the magnitude, of an aggregation FD of aggregate the plurality of complex output data obtained for the plurality of time instants, or of data informative of the plurality of complex output data, wherein the magnitude depends at least on a correlation between one or more frequency components of the motion data obtained in the time window and at least one of the predefined frequency, one or more harmonics or one or more sub-harmonics of the predefined frequency, wherein the predefined frequency is within a range of frequencies representative of an earthquake such as that of Lombriser.
One of ordinary skill would have been motivated to modify Farnsworth, because using expected frequencies can allow the device to plan for the amount of storage required to analyze and classify the event as seen in Para. [0069] of Lombriser. Furthermore, using a complex function such as a Fourier transform to analyze a signal is well-known in signal processing.
Regarding claim 35,
Farnsworth further teaches,
The system of claim 28,
at least one first filtering function depending on at least one first frequency located in a range of frequencies representative of an earthquake; and at least one second filtering function depending on at least one second frequency located in a range of frequencies representative of an earthquake, wherein the first frequency is different from the second frequency. (Pg. 3 Ln(s) 30-33 teaches “The detection mechanism preferably is implemented in digital signal processing (DSP) circuitry. In another embodiment, the electrical signal representative of the electromagnetic radiation is passed through a low-pass filter to defeat undesirable high-frequency components, and is then passed through one or more high-Q band-pass filters to isolate one or more desired frequency components.”)
Claim 30 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Farnsworth (WO 9524658 A1) as modified by Lombriser (US 20140142871 A1) as applied to claim 28 above, and further in view of Zhang (US 20130261982 A1) and Smith (US 20050265124 A1).
Regarding claim 30,
Farnsworth does not explicitly teach,
the system of claim 28,
wherein the at least one filter is operative to, for a range of frequencies representative of an earthquake: amplify frequencies of the motion data within each given first range of frequencies of av plurality of different first ranges of frequencies within said range,
attenuate frequencies of the motion data within each given second range of frequencies of a plurality of different second ranges of frequencies within said range.
Nevertheless, Zhang teaches,
wherein the at least one filter is operative to, for a range of frequencies representative of an earthquake: attenuate frequencies of the motion data within each given second range of frequencies of a plurality of different second ranges of frequencies within the range of frequencies representative of an earthquake; (Para. [0045] teaches “s shown in FIG. 4, at step 402, earthquake parameters may be gridded over selected ranges, so that theoretical seismograms are calculated individually for each grid.” Para. [0045] teaches “At step 408, the seismograms may be filtered with band-pass filters having different passband frequency ranges, and thus divided into multiple frequency ranges. Then, the maximum amplitude arrival times of each filtered seismogram are obtained.” Para. [0054] teaches “These waveforms of the seismogram may be band-pass filtered into multiple frequency ranges, and then the arrival times of the maximum amplitudes of each waveform may be obtained. For each frequency ranges, the waveforms may be aligned according to the initial arrival times and the maximum amplitude arrival times, and thus two groups of waveforms for the input seismogram may be obtained.” Band pass filters select a range of frequencies and attenuate all other ranges outside of the passband.)
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the combination of Farnsworth and Lombriser wherein the at least one filter is operative to, for a range of frequencies representative of an earthquake: attenuate frequencies of the motion data within each given second range of frequencies of a plurality of different second ranges of frequencies within said range such as that of Zhang.
One of ordinary skill would have been motivated to modify the combination of Farnsworth and Lombriser, because it would isolate the important frequencies for determining an earthquake. Pg. 13 Ln(s). [34-38] and Pg. 14 Ln(s). [1-5] of Farnsworth also teaches “The respective electrical signals produced by the respective sensing mechanisms 10, 12 and 14 are routed to the signal conditioning mechanism 16. The signal conditioning mechanism 16 conditions the electrical signals so as to produce signals suitable for use by the detection mechanism 18 in the detection of precursor seismic activity. The signal conditioning mechanism 16 may comprise transformers, rectifiers, voltage dividers, filters, amplifiers or compensation circuitry, in various combinations, so as to, among other things, optimize selectivity and sensitivity, to compensate for non-ideal behavior in the sensing mechanisms 10, 12 or 14, to minimize effects of noise, or to perform other functions.” Furthermore, Para. [0054] of Zhang teaches that the method would allow the arrival times of the maximum amplitudes of each waveform to be obtained.
The combination of Farnsworth, Lombriser, and Zhang does not explicitly teach,
amplify frequencies of the motion data within each given first range of frequencies of a plurality of different first ranges of frequencies within the range of frequencies representative of an earthquake; however, Farnsworth does teach a bandpass filter which passes certain frequencies of a plurality of frequencies that are not attenuated.
Smith teaches,
amplify frequencies of the motion data within each given first range of frequencies of a plurality of different first ranges of frequencies; (Para. [0107] teaches “The electronic band-pass filter 12 uses a blocking capacitor 40 to isolate the detector 14 from the filter 12, an amplifier stage 42 to increase motion detector output signal level, two fourth-order high-pass filter stages 44 to eliminate low-frequency signals due to mechanical object motion, one fourth-order low-pass filter stage 46 to band limit the signal 26 and to eliminate high-frequency noise, and a final amplifier stage 48 to match the output of the filter to the input range of the data collection system 36.”)
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the combination of Farnsworth, Lombriser, and Zhang with amplify frequencies of the motion data within each given first range of frequencies of a plurality of different first ranges of frequencies within said range such as that of Smith.
One of ordinary skill would have been motivated to modify the combination of Farnsworth, Lombriser, and Zhang, because it would allow the system to make the signals that are relevant for earthquake detection easier to distinguish as well as to match the output of the filter to the input of the data collection system as seen in Para. [0107] of Zhang. Pg. 13 Ln(s). [34-38] and Pg. 14 Ln(s). [1-5] of Farnsworth also teaches “The respective electrical signals produced by the respective sensing mechanisms 10, 12 and 14 are routed to the signal conditioning mechanism 16. The signal conditioning mechanism 16 conditions the electrical signals so as to produce signals suitable for use by the detection mechanism 18 in the detection of precursor seismic activity. The signal conditioning mechanism 16 may comprise transformers, rectifiers, voltage dividers, filters, amplifiers or compensation circuitry, in various combinations, so as to, among other things, optimize selectivity and sensitivity, to compensate for non-ideal behavior in the sensing mechanisms 10, 12 or 14, to minimize effects of noise, or to perform other functions.”
Claim 31 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Farnsworth (WO 9524658 A1) and Lombriser (US 20140142871 A1) as applied to claim 28 above, and further in view of Ram (US 20130177061 A1).
Regarding claim 31,
Farnworth does not explicitly teach,
the system of claim 28, wherein the complex output data obtained for a given time instant comprises a vector associated with a magnitude and a direction, wherein said magnitude is correlated to the amplitude of the motion data of the motion data at the given time instant and said direction is correlated to the given time instant.
Nevertheless, Ram further teaches,
wherein the complex output data obtained for a given time instant comprises a vector associated with a magnitude and a direction, wherein said magnitude is correlated to the amplitude of the data of the data at this given time instant and said direction is correlated to the given time instant. (Para. [0023] teaches “be configured to present at its output a vector of L samples (elements) in length (i.e. the UW length), each sampled at Rs, every 1/(Na*Rs) time period. These vectors may represent un-modulated samples at intervals of 1/Rs.” Para. [0029] teaches “The complex output vectors of FFT module (16) may be presented at the input of absolute value calculation (ABS) block (17), for at least the purpose of obtaining a metric of magnitude (also referred to herein as FFT amplitude). ABS block (17) may be implemented in many ways. In some embodiments, the amplitude value of FFT results may be calculated, for example by using the following approximation.”)
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the combination of Farnsworth and Lombriser, wherein the complex output data obtained for a given time instant comprises a vector associated with a magnitude and a direction, wherein said magnitude is correlated to the amplitude of the motion data of the motion data at this given time instant and said direction is correlated to the given time instant. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the combination of Farnsworth and Lombriser, because Ram shows that the output of a Fast Fourier Transform can be given as a vector with magnitude and direction. Using this output allows important information about the data to be readily available.
Claim 32 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Farnsworth (WO 9524658 A1) as modified by Lombriser (US 20140142871 A1) as applied to claim 28 above, and further in view of Zhang (US 20130261982 A1).
Regarding claim 32,
Farnsworth does not explicitly teach,
the system of claim 28, wherein the at least one filter includes at least one decay function configured to attenuate, over time, amplitude of data to which it is applied.
Nevertheless, Zhang teaches,
wherein the at least one filter is operative to, for a range of frequencies representative of an earthquake: attenuate frequencies of the motion data within each given second range of frequencies of a plurality of different second ranges of frequencies within said range; (Para. [0045] teaches “At step 408, the seismograms may be filtered with band-pass filters having different passband frequency ranges, and thus divided into multiple frequency ranges. Then, the maximum amplitude arrival times of each filtered seismogram are obtained.” Para. [0054] teaches “These waveforms of the seismogram may be band-pass filtered into multiple frequency ranges, and then the arrival times of the maximum amplitudes of each waveform may be obtained. For each frequency ranges, the waveforms may be aligned according to the initial arrival times and the maximum amplitude arrival times, and thus two groups of waveforms for the input seismogram may be obtained.” Band pass filters select and a range of frequencies and attenuate all other ranges outside of the passband.)
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the combination of Farnsworth and Lombriser wherein the at least one filter is operative to, for a range of frequencies representative of an earthquake: attenuate frequencies of the motion data within each given second range of frequencies of a plurality of different second ranges of frequencies within said range such as that of Zhang.
One of ordinary skill would have been motivated to modify the combination of Farnsworth and Lombriser, because it would isolate the important frequencies for determining an earthquake. Pg. 13 Ln(s). [34-38] and Pg. 14 Ln(s). [1-5] of Farnsworth also teaches “The respective electrical signals produced by the respective sensing mechanisms 10, 12 and 14 are routed to the signal conditioning mechanism 16. The signal conditioning mechanism 16 conditions the electrical signals so as to produce signals suitable for use by the detection mechanism 18 in the detection of precursor seismic activity. The signal conditioning mechanism 16 may comprise transformers, rectifiers, voltage dividers, filters, amplifiers or compensation circuitry, in various combinations, so as to, among other things, optimize selectivity and sensitivity, to compensate for non-ideal behavior in the sensing mechanisms 10, 12 or 14, to minimize effects of noise, or to perform other functions.” Furthermore, Para. [0054] of Zhang teaches that the method would allow the arrival times of the maximum amplitudes of each waveform to be obtained.
Claims 33 and 34 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Farnsworth (WO 9524658 A1) as modified by Lombriser (US 20140142871 A1) as applied to claim 28 above, and further in view of Webb (US 20040135698 A1).
Regarding claim 33,
The combination of Farnsworth and Lombriser do not explicitly teach the system of claim 28,
configured to: when the magnitude or data informative of the magnitude exceeds a first threshold, trigger a first-time window; and upon completion of the first-time window, compute FD during a second time window and monitor FD during the second time window, wherein if data representative of FD exceeds a second threshold a number of times which is equal to N, generate an alert indicating that an earthquake has been detected, wherein N≥1.
Webb teaches,
configured to: when the magnitude or data informative of the magnitude exceeds a first threshold, trigger a first-time window; and upon completion of the first-time window, compute FD during a second time window and monitor FD during the second time window, wherein if data representative of FD exceeds a second threshold a number of times which is equal to N, generate an alert indicating that an earthquake has been detected, wherein N≥1. (Para. [0037] teaches “If the power spectral density (PSD) of the incoming processed signal rises above the preselected yet easily reprogrammable trigger value within the selected window of time,” Fig. 4 teaches adding the signal to a power spectral density Integral sum and when that sum reaches a trigger threshold outputting an alarm.)
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the combination Farnsworth and Lombriser when data representative of FD exceeds a first threshold, trigger a first-time window; and upon completion of the first-time window, compute FD during a second time window and monitor FD during the second time window, wherein if data representative of FD exceeds a second threshold a number of times which is equal to N, generate an alert indicating that an earthquake has been detected, wherein N≥1 such as that of Webb.
One of ordinary skill would have been motivated to modify the combination of Farnsworth and Lombriser because Webb Para. [0017] teaches an “advantage of the present invention is that it provides highly accurate detection of earthquake related primary wave (P-wave) motion and generates an output that can be transmitted to remote locations as part of a system dedicated to announcing the impending arrival of an earthquake.” Detecting data through multiple time periods and counting the number of times the data exceeds a threshold would reduce false alarms.
Regarding claim 34,
The combination of Farnsworth and Lombriser does not explicitly teach,
the system of claim 28,
wherein the at least one filter is configured to amplify frequency components corresponding to the predefined frequency, or to sub-harmonics of the predefined frequency.
Webb teaches,
wherein the at least one filter is configured to amplify frequency components corresponding to the predefined frequency, or to sub-harmonics of the predefined frequency. (Claim 1 teaches “signal amplifying and filtering means responsive to said electrical signals and operative to amplify and pass signals having frequencies within the range of approximately 0.5 to 15 Hz;”)
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the combination Farnsworth and Lombriser wherein the at least one filter is configured to amplify frequency components corresponding to the predefined frequency, or to sub-harmonics of the predefined frequency such as that of Webb.
One of ordinary skill would have been motivated to modify the combination of Farnsworth and Lombriser because, Webb Para. [0017] teaches an “advantage of the present invention is that it provides highly accurate detection of earthquake related primary wave (P-wave) motion and generates an output that can be transmitted to remote locations as part of a system dedicated to announcing the impending arrival of an earthquake.” Amplifying a certain part of a signal that corresponds with earthquakes would allow them to be more readily detected because amplification increases the strength of the signal.
Claim 36 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Farnsworth (WO 9524658 A1) as modified by Lombriser (US 20140142871 A1) as applied to claim 28 above, and further in view Webb (US 20040135698 A1) and Ishizaki (JP 2007003289 A).
Regarding claim 36,
The combination of Farnsworth and Lombriser does not explicitly teach,
the system of claim 28, configured to:
obtain motion data (Mx, My) respectively collected along at least two different spatial axes apply at least one filter on at least M.sub.X, M.sub.Y to obtain respectively filtered data aggregate at least FD.sub.X, FD.sub.Y into an aggregated representation FD.sub.X,Y; perform (i) or (ii);
(i): compare, at least once, data representative of FD.sub.X,Y to at least one threshold; and when this comparison meets an alerting criterion, generate an alert indicating that an earthquake has been detected;
or (ii): obtain motion data Mz collected along a third axis Z, different from X and Y; apply at least one filter on M.sub.Z to obtain filtered data FDz; weight the aggregated representation FD.sub.X,Y based on FDz, to obtain FD.sub.X,Y,Z; compare, at least once, FD.sub.X,Y,Z to at least one threshold; and when this comparison meets an alerting criterion, generate an alert indicating that an earthquake has been detected.
Webb further teaches,
obtain motion data (Mx, My) respectively collected along at least two different spatial axes (X, Y); (Para. [0025] teaches “The detector assembly includes a main printed circuit (PC) board 12 having formed thereon a plurality of signal traces 14 for conducting electrical signals between various device components affixed to the board. Mounted on board 12 are three piezo-electric sensor subassemblies 16, 18 and 20, respectively oriented to sense motion in the three orthogonal directions X, Y and Z, as suggested by the double headed arrows 22, 24 and 26.”)
apply at least one filter on at least M.sub.X, M.sub.Y to obtain respectively filtered data FD.sub.X, FD.sub.Y; (Para. [0027] teaches “Also mounted to board 12 are a plurality of buffering amplifiers 40 for receiving electrical output signals generated by the piezo-electric sensors via the signal traces 14, and a plurality of amplifier/filter units 42 including analog low-pass and high-pass filters.”)
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the combination of Farnsworth and Lombriser with obtain motion data (Mx, My) respectively collected along at least two different spatial axes apply at least one filter on at least M.sub.X, M.sub.Y to obtain respectively filtered data FD.sub.X, FD.sub.Y such as that of Webb.
One of ordinary skill would have been motivated to modify the combination of Farnsworth and Lombriser, because the seismic motion data could be more than one dimensional and if the system only measured in one dimension it would miss indicators for earthquakes. Also, Webb Para. [0017] teaches an “advantage of the present invention is that it provides highly accurate detection of earthquake related primary wave (P-wave) motion and generates an output that can be transmitted to remote locations as part of a system dedicated to announcing the impending arrival of an earthquake.”
Webb does not explicitly teach,
aggregate at least FD.sub.X, FD.sub.Y into an aggregated representation FD.sub.X,Y; perform (i) or (ii);
(i): compare, at least once, data representative of FD.sub.X,Y to at least one threshold; and when this comparison meets an alerting criterion, generate an alert indicating that an earthquake has been detected;
or (ii): obtain motion data Mz collected along a third axis Z, different from X and Y; apply at least one filter on M.sub.Z to obtain filtered data FDz; weight the aggregated representation FD.sub.X,Y based on FDz, to obtain FD.sub.X,Y,Z; compare, at least once, FD.sub.X,Y,Z to at least one threshold; and when this comparison meets an alerting criterion, generate an alert indicating that an earthquake has been detected.
Nevertheless, Ishizaki teaches,
aggregate at least FD.sub.X, FD.sub.Y into an aggregated representation FD.sub.X,Y; perform (i) or (ii); (Para. [0034] teaches “Therefore, the calculated acceleration corresponds to an acceleration obtained by vector synthesis of the accelerations in the X-direction and Y-direction components.”
(i): compare, at least once, data representative of FD.sub.X,Y to at least one threshold; and when this comparison meets an alerting criterion, generate an alert indicating that an earthquake has been detected; Para. [0050] teaches “The control unit 30 compares the maximum value of the internal and external calculation values stored in the memory unit 29 (hereinafter, sometimes simply referred to as the "maximum value") with the internal and external calculation value that the control unit 30 acquires from the calculation unit 34 (hereinafter, sometimes referred to as the "acquired calculation value").The calculation unit 34 which is a calculation means corresponds to the acceleration calculation unit 26, the speed calculation unit 27 and the SI value calculation unit 28. If the acquired calculation value is greater than the maximum value stored in the storage unit 29, the control unit 30 overwrites the acquired calculation value in the storage unit 29 as the maximum value and stores it therein. The control unit 30 has a function of controlling the display unit 9, the shutoff valve 3 and the alarm unit 4. When at least one of the conditions (4) to (7) is satisfied, the control unit 30 outputs an alarm signal to the shutoff valve 3 and the alarm unit 4.” Para. [0054] teaches “The earthquake evaluation device.”
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the combination of Farnsworth, Lombriser, and Webb with aggregate at least FD.sub.X, FD.sub.Y into an aggregated representation FD.sub.X,Y; perform (i) or (ii); (i): compare, at least once, data representative of FD.sub.X,Y to at least one threshold; and when this comparison meets an alerting criterion, generate an alert indicating that an earthquake has been detected such as that of Ishizaki.
One of ordinary skill would have been motivated to modify the combination of Farnsworth, Lombriser, and Webb, because according to Para. [0007] of Ishizaki “Conventional earthquake evaluation methods can accurately evaluate short-period earthquake motion, but in the case of long-period earthquake motion with acceleration and SI value smaller than the threshold value, such as the Tonankai earthquake and Nankai earthquake, they are evaluated as small-scale earthquakes.” Therefore, one would be motivated to modify Webb in order to better monitor long period earthquakes.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 22-27 and 37-41 are allowed. The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter:
With respect to claims 22, 37, and 41,
Farnsworth (WO 9524658 A1) teaches,
A method that senses one or more physical parameters, including acoustic waves having frequencies from approximately 0 Hz to 15 Hz, electromagnetic waves having frequencies from approximately 0 Hz through 35 Hz and seismic waves having frequencies from approximately 0 Hz through 15 Hz, and detecting precursor seismic activity indicated therein. (Abstract) The precursor seismic activity is used to detect an earthquake. ((Pg. 1 Ln(s). [3-6)) The seismic waves are detected by an accelerometer and the detected signals are passed through filters. (Pg. 3 Ln(s). [30-37]) These filters amplify certain detect signals and attenuate other certain signals based on frequency through the use of band pass and low pass filters. (Pg(s). 16 & 17) Through the use of the filters they create at least 16 pass-bands which divide the frequency ranges of 1-31 Hz into approximately 2 Hz increments. (Pg. 26) After the signals are filtered the amplitudes of the signals are compared to a threshold and if the amplitudes exceed a threshold an alarm is sounded indicating the presence of an earthquake. (Pg. 19 Ln(s). [4-32] & Pg. 21 Ln(s). [18-21]) However, they do not explicitly teach that there are attenuated frequency ranges between any of the 16 pass bands.
Zhang (US 20130261982 A1) teaches,
Using seismograms for a real-time estimation of earthquake parameters. (Abstract) They further teach filtering signals using difference band-pass filters dividing the signal into multiple frequency ranges. (Para. [0045] & Para. [0054])) Furthermore, they teach an example frequency ranges of 0.1-0.04 Hz and 0.03 - 0.06 Hz that are passed through. These frequency ranges overlap meaning that the frequencies that are attenuated are noncontiguous, but the bands that are passed through are contiguous as the pass ranges overlap. (Para. [0039]) Therefore, they do not explicitly teach pass-bands that are non-contiguous or that there is a range of frequencies that are attenuated between the pass-bands.
Smith (US 20050265124 A1) teaches,
Detecting tool wear using a microwave Doppler-based acoustic emission sensor and predicting tool wear based on the detected acoustic emission. (Abstract) They further teach amplifying signals after they have passed through bandpass and high pass filter stages. (Para. [0107]) However, they do not explicitly teach that the signals are filtered such that a plurality of noncontiguous subranges of frequency are amplified and another subset are attenuated.
Webb (US 20040135698 A1) teaches,
A P-wave sensing apparatus that includes one to three orthogonally disposed miniature sensors that function as inertia monitoring devices with respect to motion of the external supporting structures, a plurality of amplifying and filtering circuits for amplifying and filtering the outputs generated by the sensors. (Abstract) They further teach that the amplifier/ filtering units include low-pass and high-pass filters which output a signal that is compared to an appropriate amplitude. If an appropriate amplitude is sensed an alarm is sounded indicating an earthquake. (Para. [0027]) However, the high-pass and low pass filters only pass two frequency ranges 0-0.15 Hz and 0.5 Hz and above. Therefore, they do not explicitly teach attenuating a plurality of noncontiguous frequency sub ranges as only the frequencies of 0.15-0.5 are attenuated.
As seen above none of the known prior art explicitly teaches and it would be non-obvious to combine the known prior art to teach,
“selectively amplify frequencies of the motion data within a plurality of first subranges of frequencies within the range of frequencies representative of an earthquake, wherein each of one or more of the first sub-ranges of the plurality of first sub-ranges is non-contiguous with one or more other first sub-ranges of the plurality of first sub-ranges; selectively attenuate frequencies of the motion data, at least within a plurality of second sub-ranges of frequencies within said range of frequencies representative of an earthquake, wherein each of one or more of the second sub-ranges of the plurality of second sub-ranges is non-contiguous with one or more other second sub-ranges of the plurality of second sub-ranges; wherein the first sub-ranges and the second sub-ranges are such that at least one first sub-range lies between two second sub-ranges, or at least one second sub-range lies between two first sub-ranges;”
Therefore, claims 22, 37, and 41, include allowable subject matter. Claims 23-27 are allowable due to their dependence upon claim 22 and claims 38 and 39 are allowable due to their dependence upon claim 37.
With respect to claim 40,
Webb (US 20040135698 A1) teaches,
A P-wave sensing apparatus that includes one to three orthogonally disposed miniature sensors that function as inertia monitoring devices with respect to motion of the external supporting structures, a plurality of amplifying and filtering circuits for amplifying and filtering the outputs generated by the sensors. (Abstract) The sensors obtain motion data in three directions x, y, and z. They further teach that the amplifier/ filtering units include low-pass and high-pass filters which filter the motion data and output a signal that is compared to an appropriate amplitude. If the appropriate amplitude is sensed an alarm is sounded indicating an earthquake. (Para. [0027]) However, they do not explicitly teach aggregating the filtered x and y data into an aggregated representation or generating a weight factor from the z data.
Ishizaki (JP 2007003289 A) teaches,
An earthquake evaluation method and an earthquake evaluator for evaluating an earthquake in conformity with actual damage. (Abstract) They further finding an acceleration which represents a synthesis of accelerations in the x and y directions. (Para. [0034]) They also gather acceleration data in a z direction. (Para. [0093]) However, they do not explicitly teach that the data collected in the z direction is filtered to obtain a weighted value used to weight the amplitude of the aggregated x and y signal.
Mollineaux (US 20140316708 A1) teaches,
A sensor for structural health monitoring that includes a tri-axis microelectromechanical systems (MEMS) accelerometer and a tri-axis MEMS gyrometer. (Abstract) They further teach coupling the results of an accelerometer measuring x and y axis rotation and magnetometer measuring z axis rotation to correct for bias in the measurement. (Para. [0021]) However, they do not explicitly teach weight factor.
Farnsworth (WO 9524658 A1) teaches,
A method that senses one or more physical parameters, including acoustic waves having frequencies from approximately 0 Hz to 15 Hz, electromagnetic waves having frequencies from approximately 0 Hz through 35 Hz and seismic waves having frequencies from approximately 0 Hz through 15 Hz, and detecting precursor seismic activity indicated therein. (Abstract) The precursor seismic activity is used to detect an earthquake. ((Pg. 1 Ln(s). [3-6)) The seismic waves are detected by an accelerometer and the detected signals are passed through filters. (Pg. 3 Ln(s). [30-37]) These filters amplify certain detect signals and attenuate other certain signals based on frequency through the use of band pass and low pass filters. (Pg(s). 16 & 17) After the signals are filtered the amplitudes of the signals are compared to a threshold and an if the amplitudes exceed a threshold an alarm indicating the presence of an earthquake is started. (Pg. 19 Ln(s). [4-32] & Pg. 21 Ln(s). [18-21]) However, they do not explicitly teach applying a filter to data collected along a vertical access to find a weight factor.
Zhang (US 20130261982 A1) teaches,
Using seismograms for a real-time estimation of earthquake parameters. (Abstract) They further teach filtering signals using difference band-pass filters dividing the signal into multiple frequency ranges. (Para. [0045] & Para. [0054])) However, they do not explicitly teach applying a filter to data collected along a vertical axis to find a weight factor.
Smith (US 20050265124 A1) teaches,
Detecting tool wear using a microwave Doppler-based acoustic emission sensor and predicting tool wear based on the detected acoustic emission. (Abstract) They further teach amplifying signals after they have passed through bandpass and high pass filter stages. (Para. [0107]) However, they do not explicitly teach applying a filter to data collected along a vertical axis to find a weight factor.
As seen above none of the known prior art explicitly teaches and it would be non-obvious to combine the known prior art to teach,
“apply at least one filter on Mz to obtain a weight factor; weight amplitude of the aggregated representation FDx,Y with the weight factor, to obtain a weighted representation, said weighting comprising increasing amplitude of the aggregated representation FDx,Y based on an amplitude of the weight factor,”
Therefore, claim 40, includes allowable subject matter.
Claim 29 is objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims. The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter:
Farnsworth (WO 9524658 A1) teaches,
A method that senses one or more physical parameters, including acoustic waves having frequencies from approximately 0 Hz to 15 Hz, electromagnetic waves having frequencies from approximately 0 Hz through 35 Hz and seismic waves having frequencies from approximately 0 Hz through 15 Hz, and detecting precursor seismic activity indicated therein. (Abstract) The precursor seismic activity is used to detect an earthquake. ((Pg. 1 Ln(s). [3-6)) The seismic waves are detected by an accelerometer and the detected signals are passed through filters. (Pg. 3 Ln(s). [30-37]) These filters amplify certain detect signals and attenuate other certain signals based on frequency through the use of band pass and low pass filters. (Pg(s). 16 & 17) Through the use of the filters they create at least 16 pass-bands which divide the frequency ranges of 1-31 Hz into approximately 2 Hz increments. (Pg. 26) After the signals are filtered the amplitudes of the signals are compared to a threshold and if the amplitudes exceed a threshold an alarm is sounded indicating the presence of an earthquake. (Pg. 19 Ln(s). [4-32] & Pg. 21 Ln(s). [18-21]) However, they do not explicitly teach that there are attenuated frequency ranges between any of the 16 pass bands.
Zhang (US 20130261982 A1) teaches,
Using seismograms for a real-time estimation of earthquake parameters. (Abstract) They further teach filtering signals using difference band-pass filters dividing the signal into multiple frequency ranges. (Para. [0045] & Para. [0054])) Furthermore, they teach an example frequency ranges of 0.1-0.04 Hz and 0.03 - 0.06 Hz that are passed through. These frequency ranges overlap meaning that the frequencies that are attenuated are noncontiguous, but the bands that are passed through are contiguous as the pass ranges overlap. (Para. [0039]) Therefore, they do not explicitly teach pass-bands that are non-contiguous or that there is a range of frequencies that are attenuated between the pass-bands.
Smith (US 20050265124 A1) teaches,
Detecting tool wear using a microwave Doppler-based acoustic emission sensor and predicting tool wear based on the detected acoustic emission. (Abstract) They further teach amplifying signals after they have passed through bandpass and high pass filter stages. (Para. [0107]) However, they do not explicitly teach that the signals are filtered such that a plurality of noncontiguous subranges of frequency are amplified and another subset are attenuated.
Webb (US 20040135698 A1) teaches,
A P-wave sensing apparatus that includes one to three orthogonally disposed miniature sensors that function as inertia monitoring devices with respect to motion of the external supporting structures, a plurality of amplifying and filtering circuits for amplifying and filtering the outputs generated by the sensors. (Abstract) They further teach that the amplifier/ filtering units include low-pass and high-pass filters which output a signal that is compared to an appropriate amplitude. If an appropriate amplitude is sensed an alarm is sounded indicating an earthquake. (Para. [0027]) However, the high-pass and low pass filters only pass two frequency ranges 0-0.15 Hz and 0.5 Hz and above. Therefore, they do not explicitly teach attenuating a plurality of noncontiguous frequency sub ranges as only the frequencies of 0.15-0.5 are attenuated.
As seen above none of the known prior art explicitly teaches and it would be non-obvious to combine the known prior art to teach,
“selectively amplify frequencies of the motion data within a plurality of first subranges of frequencies within the range of frequencies representative of an earthquake, wherein each of one or more of the first sub-ranges of the plurality of first sub-ranges is non-contiguous with one or more other first sub-ranges of the plurality of first sub-ranges; selectively attenuate frequencies of the motion data, at least within a plurality of second sub-ranges of frequencies within said range of frequencies representative of an earthquake, wherein each of one or more of the second sub-ranges of the plurality of second sub-ranges is non-contiguous with one or more other second sub-ranges of the plurality of second sub-ranges; wherein the first sub-ranges and the second sub-ranges are such that at least one first sub-range lies between two second sub-ranges, or at least one second sub-range lies between two first sub-ranges;”
Therefore, claim 29 includes allowable subject matter.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner
should be directed to JOSHUA L FORRISTALL whose telephone number is 703-756-4554. The examiner
can normally be reached Monday-Friday 8:30 AM- 5 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, Andrew Schechter can be reached on 571-272-2302. 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.
/JOSHUA L FORRISTALL/Examiner, Art Unit 2857
/ANDREW SCHECHTER/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2857
Prosecution Insights