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 .
Status of Claims
This action is in reply to the application filed on 1/16/2025, wherein:
Claims 1-6 are currently pending and have been examined.
Claim Interpretation
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(f):
(f) Element in Claim for a Combination. – An element in a claim for a combination may be expressed as a means or step for performing a specified function without the recital of structure, material, or acts in support thereof, and such claim shall be construed to cover the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification and equivalents thereof.
The following is a quotation of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph:
An element in a claim for a combination may be expressed as a means or step for performing a specified function without the recital of structure, material, or acts in support thereof, and such claim shall be construed to cover the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification and equivalents thereof.
The claims in this application are given their broadest reasonable interpretation using the plain meaning of the claim language in light of the specification as it would be understood by one of ordinary skill in the art. The broadest reasonable interpretation of a claim element (also commonly referred to as a claim limitation) is limited by the description in the specification when 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is invoked.
As explained in MPEP § 2181, subsection I, claim limitations that meet the following three-prong test will be interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph:
(A) the claim limitation uses the term “means” or “step” or a term used as a substitute for “means” that is a generic placeholder (also called a nonce term or a non-structural term having no specific structural meaning) for performing the claimed function;
(B) the term “means” or “step” or the generic placeholder is modified by functional language, typically, but not always linked by the transition word “for” (e.g., “means for”) or another linking word or phrase, such as “configured to” or “so that”; and
(C) the term “means” or “step” or the generic placeholder is not modified by sufficient structure, material, or acts for performing the claimed function.
Use of the word “means” (or “step”) in a claim with functional language creates a rebuttable presumption that the claim limitation is to be treated in accordance with 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph. The presumption that the claim limitation is interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is rebutted when the claim limitation recites sufficient structure, material, or acts to entirely perform the recited function.
Absence of the word “means” (or “step”) in a claim creates a rebuttable presumption that the claim limitation is not to be treated in accordance with 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph. The presumption that the claim limitation is not interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is rebutted when the claim limitation recites function without reciting sufficient structure, material or acts to entirely perform the recited function.
Claim limitations in this application that use the word “means” (or “step”) are being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, except as otherwise indicated in an Office action. Conversely, claim limitations in this application that do not use the word “means” (or “step”) are not being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, except as otherwise indicated in an Office action.
This application includes one or more claim limitations that do not use the word “means,” but are nonetheless being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, because the claim limitation(s) uses a generic placeholder that is coupled with functional language without reciting sufficient structure to perform the recited function and the generic placeholder is not preceded by a structural modifier. Such claim limitations are:
An “automotive body model acquisition unit” in claim 1;
A “sectioned region setting unit” in claim 1;
A “vibration and noise reduction target panel part model setting unit” in claim 1;
A “vibration mode/equivalent radiation power frequency selection unit” in claim 1;
A “sectioned region weight change peak frequency acquisition unit” in claim 1;
A “sectioned region weight contribution degree calculation unit” in claim 1; and
A “vibration and noise reduction and weight reduction portion identification unit” in claim 1.
Because these claim limitations are being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, they are being interpreted to cover the corresponding structure described in the specification as performing the claimed function, and equivalents thereof.
A review of the specification shows that the corresponding structure described in the specification as performing the claimed functions, and equivalents thereof is as follows:
An “automotive body model acquisition unit” in claim 1 is shown in figure 1 as part of the arithmetic processing unit 11; is described in para. 0022, as “illustrated in FIG. 1, the vibration and noise reduction analysis device 1 is configured by a personal computer (PC) or the like, and includes a display device 3, an input device 5, a memory storage 7, a working data memory 9, and an arithmetic processing unit 11”; and further described in para. 0029 as “illustrated in FIG. 1, the arithmetic processing unit 11 includes an automotive body model acquisition unit 13, a sectioned region setting unit 15, a vibration and noise reduction target panel part model setting unit 17, a vibration mode/equivalent radiation power peak frequency selection unit 19, a sectioned region weight change peak frequency acquisition unit 21, a sectioned region weight contribution degree calculation unit 23, and a vibration and noise reduction and weight reduction portion identification unit 25, and is configured by a central processing unit (CPU) such as a PC. Each of these units functions when the CPU executes a predetermined program”;
A “sectioned region setting unit” in claim 1 is shown in figure 1 as part of the arithmetic processing unit 11; is described in para. 0022, as “illustrated in FIG. 1, the vibration and noise reduction analysis device 1 is configured by a personal computer (PC) or the like, and includes a display device 3, an input device 5, a memory storage 7, a working data memory 9, and an arithmetic processing unit 11”; and further described in para. 0029 as “illustrated in FIG. 1, the arithmetic processing unit 11 includes an automotive body model acquisition unit 13, a sectioned region setting unit 15, a vibration and noise reduction target panel part model setting unit 17, a vibration mode/equivalent radiation power peak frequency selection unit 19, a sectioned region weight change peak frequency acquisition unit 21, a sectioned region weight contribution degree calculation unit 23, and a vibration and noise reduction and weight reduction portion identification unit 25, and is configured by a central processing unit (CPU) such as a PC. Each of these units functions when the CPU executes a predetermined program”;
A “vibration and noise reduction target panel part model setting unit” in claim 1 is shown in figure 1 as part of the arithmetic processing unit 11; is described in para. 0022, as “illustrated in FIG. 1, the vibration and noise reduction analysis device 1 is configured by a personal computer (PC) or the like, and includes a display device 3, an input device 5, a memory storage 7, a working data memory 9, and an arithmetic processing unit 11”; and further described in para. 0029 as “illustrated in FIG. 1, the arithmetic processing unit 11 includes an automotive body model acquisition unit 13, a sectioned region setting unit 15, a vibration and noise reduction target panel part model setting unit 17, a vibration mode/equivalent radiation power peak frequency selection unit 19, a sectioned region weight change peak frequency acquisition unit 21, a sectioned region weight contribution degree calculation unit 23, and a vibration and noise reduction and weight reduction portion identification unit 25, and is configured by a central processing unit (CPU) such as a PC. Each of these units functions when the CPU executes a predetermined program”;
A “vibration mode/equivalent radiation power frequency selection unit” in claim 1 is shown in figure 1 as part of the arithmetic processing unit 11; is described in para. 0022, as “illustrated in FIG. 1, the vibration and noise reduction analysis device 1 is configured by a personal computer (PC) or the like, and includes a display device 3, an input device 5, a memory storage 7, a working data memory 9, and an arithmetic processing unit 11”; and further described in para. 0029 as “illustrated in FIG. 1, the arithmetic processing unit 11 includes an automotive body model acquisition unit 13, a sectioned region setting unit 15, a vibration and noise reduction target panel part model setting unit 17, a vibration mode/equivalent radiation power peak frequency selection unit 19, a sectioned region weight change peak frequency acquisition unit 21, a sectioned region weight contribution degree calculation unit 23, and a vibration and noise reduction and weight reduction portion identification unit 25, and is configured by a central processing unit (CPU) such as a PC. Each of these units functions when the CPU executes a predetermined program”;
A “sectioned region weight change peak frequency acquisition unit” in claim 1 is shown in figure 1 as part of the arithmetic processing unit 11; is described in para. 0022, as “illustrated in FIG. 1, the vibration and noise reduction analysis device 1 is configured by a personal computer (PC) or the like, and includes a display device 3, an input device 5, a memory storage 7, a working data memory 9, and an arithmetic processing unit 11”; and further described in para. 0029 as “illustrated in FIG. 1, the arithmetic processing unit 11 includes an automotive body model acquisition unit 13, a sectioned region setting unit 15, a vibration and noise reduction target panel part model setting unit 17, a vibration mode/equivalent radiation power peak frequency selection unit 19, a sectioned region weight change peak frequency acquisition unit 21, a sectioned region weight contribution degree calculation unit 23, and a vibration and noise reduction and weight reduction portion identification unit 25, and is configured by a central processing unit (CPU) such as a PC. Each of these units functions when the CPU executes a predetermined program”;
A “sectioned region weight contribution degree calculation unit” in claim 1 is shown in figure 1 as part of the arithmetic processing unit 11; is described in para. 0022, as “illustrated in FIG. 1, the vibration and noise reduction analysis device 1 is configured by a personal computer (PC) or the like, and includes a display device 3, an input device 5, a memory storage 7, a working data memory 9, and an arithmetic processing unit 11”; and further described in para. 0029 as “illustrated in FIG. 1, the arithmetic processing unit 11 includes an automotive body model acquisition unit 13, a sectioned region setting unit 15, a vibration and noise reduction target panel part model setting unit 17, a vibration mode/equivalent radiation power peak frequency selection unit 19, a sectioned region weight change peak frequency acquisition unit 21, a sectioned region weight contribution degree calculation unit 23, and a vibration and noise reduction and weight reduction portion identification unit 25, and is configured by a central processing unit (CPU) such as a PC. Each of these units functions when the CPU executes a predetermined program”; and
A “vibration and noise reduction and weight reduction portion identification unit” in claim 1 is shown in figure 1 as part of the arithmetic processing unit 11; is described in para. 0022, as “illustrated in FIG. 1, the vibration and noise reduction analysis device 1 is configured by a personal computer (PC) or the like, and includes a display device 3, an input device 5, a memory storage 7, a working data memory 9, and an arithmetic processing unit 11”; and further described in para. 0029 as “illustrated in FIG. 1, the arithmetic processing unit 11 includes an automotive body model acquisition unit 13, a sectioned region setting unit 15, a vibration and noise reduction target panel part model setting unit 17, a vibration mode/equivalent radiation power peak frequency selection unit 19, a sectioned region weight change peak frequency acquisition unit 21, a sectioned region weight contribution degree calculation unit 23, and a vibration and noise reduction and weight reduction portion identification unit 25, and is configured by a central processing unit (CPU) such as a PC. Each of these units functions when the CPU executes a predetermined program”.
If applicant does not intend to have these limitations interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, applicant may: (1) amend the claim limitations to avoid them being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph (e.g., by reciting sufficient structure to perform the claimed function); or (2) present a sufficient showing that the claim limitation(s) recite(s) sufficient structure to perform the claimed function so as to avoid it/them being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(b):
(b) CONCLUSION.—The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph:
The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the applicant regards as his invention.
Claim 1 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor, or for pre-AIA the applicant regards as the invention.
Claim 1 recites the limitations: an “automotive body model acquisition unit”; a “sectioned region setting unit”; a “vibration and noise reduction target panel part model setting unit”; a “vibration mode/equivalent radiation power frequency selection unit”; a “sectioned region weight change peak frequency acquisition unit”; a “sectioned region weight contribution degree calculation unit”; and a “vibration and noise reduction and weight reduction portion identification unit”. The limitation is indefinite because it is unclear what structure is associated with each of the units. The specification only describes the various units in para. 0029 as part of the arithmetic processing unit 11: “illustrated in FIG. 1, the arithmetic processing unit 11 includes an automotive body model acquisition unit 13, a sectioned region setting unit 15, a vibration and noise reduction target panel part model setting unit 17, a vibration mode/equivalent radiation power peak frequency selection unit 19, a sectioned region weight change peak frequency acquisition unit 21, a sectioned region weight contribution degree calculation unit 23, and a vibration and noise reduction and weight reduction portion identification unit 25, and is configured by a central processing unit (CPU) such as a PC. Each of these units functions when the CPU executes a predetermined program”. For examination purposes, each of the units will be interpreted as software.
The rejections that follow are interpreted in light of the 35 USC 112 rejections discussed above.
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 1-5 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 101 because the claimed invention is directed to an abstract idea without significantly more. The claims recite a system and method for time series data analysis which is considered a judicial exception because it falls under Mental Processes. This judicial exception is not integrated into a practical application as discussed below and the claims do not include additional elements that are sufficient to amount to significantly more than the judicial exception as discussed below.
This rejection follows the 2019 Revised Patent Subject Matter Eligibility Guidance, 84 Fed Reg 4, January 7, 2019, pp. 50-57 (“2019 PEG”)(MPEP 2106).
Analysis
Step 1 (Statutory Categories) – 2019 PEG pg. 53 (See MPEP 2106.03)
Claims 1-5 are directed to the statutory category of a process, machine, or manufacture.
Independent claim 1 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 101 because the claimed invention may be interpreted as directed to non-statutory subject matter of software per se. As per MPEP 2106.03, non-limiting examples of claims that are not directed to any of the statutory categories include: Products that do not have a physical or tangible form, such as information (often referred to as "data per se") or a computer program per se (often referred to as "software per se") when claimed as a product without any structural recitations. Claims directed to an Apparatus must be distinguished from the prior art in terms of structure rather than function, In re Danly 263 F.2d 844, 847, 120 USPQ 582, 531 (CCPA 1959). A claim containing a "recitation with respect to the manner in which a claimed apparatus is intended to be employed does not differentiate the claimed apparatus from a prior art apparatus" if the prior art apparatus teaches all the structural limitations of the claim. Ex parte Masham, 2 USPQ2d 1657 (bd Pat. App. & Inter. 1987). However, the claim does not positively recite any elements that necessarily constitute a system or apparatus, such as computer hardware. It is not clear what structure is included or excluded by the claim language. The structural limitations of these claims are interpreted as computer code or software per-se and are not statutory. Claim 1 recites a device comprising an “automotive body model acquisition unit”; a “sectioned region setting unit”; a “vibration and noise reduction target panel part model setting unit”; a “vibration mode/equivalent radiation power frequency selection unit”; a “sectioned region weight change peak frequency acquisition unit”; a “sectioned region weight contribution degree calculation unit”; and a “vibration and noise reduction and weight reduction portion identification unit”. Applicant’s specification merely states in para. 0029, that “illustrated in FIG. 1, the arithmetic processing unit 11 includes an automotive body model acquisition unit 13, a sectioned region setting unit 15, a vibration and noise reduction target panel part model setting unit 17, a vibration mode/equivalent radiation power peak frequency selection unit 19, a sectioned region weight change peak frequency acquisition unit 21, a sectioned region weight contribution degree calculation unit 23, and a vibration and noise reduction and weight reduction portion identification unit 25, and is configured by a central processing unit (CPU) such as a PC. Each of these units functions when the CPU executes a predetermined program”. Applicant’s specification does not provide a definition for a “unit”. Under the broadest reasonable interpretation the claimed device comprising units may be interpreted as software per se, which is not statutory (see MPEP 2106.03). Here, Applicant has claimed a system defined merely by software or terms synonymous with software or files, namely a "module" lacking storage on a non-transitory medium, which does not enable any underlying functionality to occur. Examiner recommends amending the claim to clearly include hardware in order to overcome this rejection. Additionally, any amendments must be fully supported by the specification.
Step 2A, Prong 1 (Do the claims recite an abstract idea?) – 2019 PEG pg. 54 (See MPEP 2106.04(a)-(c))
For independent claims 1 and 2, the claims recite an abstract idea of: vibration and noise reduction analysis. The steps of independent claim 1 recite the abstract idea (in bold below) of: A vibration and noise reduction analysis device for a panel part of an automobile, the vibration and noise reduction analysis device being configured to reduce vibration and noise of the panel part caused by vibration from a vibration source and a noise source in the automobile and identify a portion at which a weight of an automotive body of the automobile can be reduced, the device comprising: an automotive body model acquisition unit configured to acquire an automotive body model including a body frame part model and a panel part model obtained by modeling each of a body frame part and a panel part forming the automotive body of the automobile with a mesh, in which an excitation position where the vibration from the vibration source and the noise source is input is set; a sectioned region setting unit configured to set a plurality of sectioned regions sectioned based on the body frame part model and the panel part model in the automotive body model; a vibration and noise reduction target panel part model setting unit configured to set, as a vibration and noise reduction target panel part model, a panel part model of a panel part to be reduced in vibration and noise among the panel part models in the automotive body model in response to an instruction from an operator; a vibration mode/equivalent radiation power peak frequency selection unit configured to perform vibration analysis using the automotive body model, to obtain a vibration behavior of the vibration and noise reduction target panel part model and a frequency characteristic of equivalent radiation power which is an index of the vibration and noise, and to select a vibration mode having a large contribution to the vibration and noise and a peak frequency of the equivalent radiation power corresponding to the vibration mode; a sectioned region weight change peak frequency acquisition unit configured to change a weight of one or a plurality of sectioned regions in the automotive body model, to perform the vibration analysis for each combination of weights of the sectioned regions in the automotive body model, and to acquire a peak frequency of equivalent radiation power of the vibration and noise reduction target panel part model in a vibration mode selected by performing processing in the vibration mode/equivalent radiation power peak frequency selection unit; a sectioned region weight contribution degree calculation unit configured to perform multivariate analysis in which the peak frequency of the equivalent radiation power of the vibration and noise reduction target panel part model is set as an objective variable and the weight of the sectioned region is set as an explanatory variable, and to calculate a contribution degree of the weight of the sectioned region to the peak frequency of the equivalent radiation power of the vibration and noise reduction target panel part model; and a vibration and noise reduction and weight reduction portion identification unit configured to identify a portion to be reduced in weight in the automotive body of the automobile in order to reduce the vibration and noise of the panel part to be reduced in vibration and noise based on the calculated contribution degree of each of the sectioned regions. Independent claim 2 recites similar steps that recite the abstract idea. Independent claims 1 and 2, as drafted, are a process that, under the broadest reasonable interpretation, covers Mental Processes. If the claim limitations, under the broadest reasonable interpretation, covers concepts performed in the human mind, but for the recitation of additional elements including generic computer components, then it falls within the “Mental Processes” grouping of abstract ideas. If the claim limitations, under the broadest reasonable interpretation, covers mental processes but for the recitation of additional elements including generic computer components, then it falls within the “Mental Processes” grouping of abstract ideas. Other than reciting the abstract idea, the independent claims recite additional elements including generic computer components such as “an automotive body model acquisition unit; a sectioned region setting unit; a vibration and noise reduction target panel part model setting unit; a vibration mode/equivalent radiation power frequency selection unit; a sectioned region weight change peak frequency acquisition unit; a sectioned region weight contribution degree calculation unit; and a vibration and noise reduction and weight reduction portion identification unit; and a computer”, and nothing in the claims precludes the steps from being performed as a method of organizing human activity. Accordingly, the independent claims recite an abstract idea.
Dependent claims 3-5 recite similar limitations as independent claims 1 and 2; and when analyzed as a whole are held to be patent ineligible under 35 U.S.C 101 because the additional recited limitations only refine the abstract idea further. Other than reciting the abstract idea, the dependent claims do not recite similar additional elements including generic computer components as the independent claims. If a claim limitation, under its broadest reasonable interpretation, covers mental processes, but for the recitation of generic computer components, then it falls within the “Certain Methods of Organizing Human Activity” grouping of abstract ideas.
Step 2A, Prong 2 (Does the claim recite additional elements that integrate the judicial exception into a practical application?) – 2019 PEG pg. 54 (See MPEP 2106.04(d)-(c))
This judicial exception is not integrated into a practical application. In particular, independent claims 1 and 2 only recite the additional elements of “an automotive body model acquisition unit; a sectioned region setting unit; a vibration and noise reduction target panel part model setting unit; a vibration mode/equivalent radiation power frequency selection unit; a sectioned region weight change peak frequency acquisition unit; a sectioned region weight contribution degree calculation unit; and a vibration and noise reduction and weight reduction portion identification unit; and a computer”. A plain reading of the Figures and associated descriptions in the specification reveals that generic processors may be used to execute the claimed steps. The additional elements are recited at a high level of generality (i.e., as a generic processor performing generic computer functions) such that it amounts to no more than mere instructions to apply the exception using generic computer components (See MPEP 2106.05(f)) and limits the judicial exception to a particular environment (See MPEP 2106.05(h)). Mere instructions to apply an exception using a generic computer component and limiting the judicial exception to a particular environment doesn’t integrate the abstract idea into a practical application in Step 2A. Accordingly, these additional elements do not integrate the abstract idea into a practical application because it does not impose any meaningful limits on practicing the abstract idea. Hence, independent claims 1 and 2 are directed to an abstract idea.
Dependent claims 3-5, do not recite similar additional elements as the independent claims including generic computer components. The judicial exception is not integrated into a practical application because the additional elements in the dependent claims are also recited at a high-level of generality such that it amounts to more no more than mere instructions to apply the exception using generic computer components. Therefore, the additional elements do not integrate the abstract idea into a practical application because they also do not impose any meaningful limits on practicing the abstract idea. Also, the claims do not affect an improvement to another technology or technical field; the claims do not amount to an improvement of the functioning of a computer system itself; the claims do not effect a transformation or reduction of a particular article to a different state or thing; and the claims do not move beyond a general link of the use of an abstract idea to a particular technological environment.
Step 2B (Does the claim recite additional elements that amount to significantly more than the judicial exception?) – 2019 PEG pg. 56 (See MPEP 2106.05)
Independent claims 1 and 2 do not include additional elements that are sufficient to amount to significantly more than the judicial exception. As discussed above with respect to integration of the abstract idea into a practical application, the recited additional elements amount to no more than mere instructions to apply the exception using a generic computer component (See MPEP 2106.05(f)) and limits the judicial exception to the particular environment of computers (See MPEP 2106.05(h)). The additional elements of the instant underlying process, when taken in combination, together do not offer substantially more than the sum of the function of the elements when each is taken alone. Mere instructions to apply an exception using a generic computer component cannot provide an inventive concept in Step 2B.
In addition, the dependent claims 3-5 do not include additional elements that are sufficient to amount to significantly more than the judicial exception. As discussed above with respect to integration of the abstract idea into a practical application, the additional elements of the dependent claims to perform the claimed limitations, amounts to no more than mere instructions to apply the exception using a generic computer component (See MPEP 2106.05(f)). Similar to the independent claims, mere instructions to apply an exception using a generic computer component cannot provide an inventive concept. Also, for the same reasoning as the independent claims, the additional elements of the limitations of the dependent claims, when considered individually and as an ordered combination, together do not offer significantly more than the sum of the functions of the elements when each is taken alone and the dependent claims as a whole, do not amount to significantly more than the abstract idea itself. For these reasons, the dependent claims also are not patent eligible.
Subject Matter Overcoming 35 USC §102/§103
Claims 1-5 would be allowable if rewritten to overcome the rejections under 35 U.S.C. 101 and 35 U.S.C. 112(b) set forth in this Office Action.
The following is an examiner’s statement of reasons for subject matter of independent claim 2 overcoming the prior art rejections under 35 USC §102/§103.
The closest prior art of record is JP 2019114114 to Nishida (hereinafter referred to as Nishida), US 20220245303 to Nakagawa et al. (hereinafter referred to as Nakagawa 303), and US 20220350940 to Nakagawa et al. (hereinafter referred to as Nakagawa 940). Allowable subject matter is indicated because none of the prior art of record, alone or in combination, appears to teach or fairly suggest or render obvious the combination set forth in independent claims 1 and 2. For dependent claim 2, the prior art of Nishida, Nakagawa 303, and Nakagawa 940 specifically do not disclose: “an automotive body model acquisition step of acquiring an automotive body model including a body frame part model and a panel part model obtained by modeling each of a body frame part and a panel part forming the automotive body of the automobile with a mesh, in which an excitation position where the vibration from the vibration source and the noise source is input is set; a sectioned region setting step of setting a plurality of sectioned regions sectioned based on the body frame part model and the panel part model in the automotive body model; a vibration and noise reduction target panel part model setting step of setting, as a vibration and noise reduction target panel part model, a panel part model of a panel part to be reduced in vibration and noise among the panel part models in the automotive body model; a vibration mode/equivalent radiation power peak frequency selection step of performing vibration analysis using the automotive body model, obtaining a vibration behavior of the vibration and noise reduction target panel part model and a frequency characteristic of equivalent radiation power which is an index of vibration and noise, and selecting a vibration mode having a large contribution to the vibration and noise and a peak frequency of the equivalent radiation power corresponding to the vibration mode; a sectioned region weight change peak frequency acquisition step of changing a weight of one or a plurality of sectioned regions in the automotive body model, performing the vibration analysis for each combination of weights of the sectioned regions in the automotive body model, and acquiring a peak frequency of equivalent radiation power of the vibration and noise reduction target panel part model in a vibration mode selected by performing processing in the vibration mode/equivalent radiation power peak frequency selection step; a sectioned region weight contribution degree calculation step of performing multivariate analysis in which the peak frequency of the equivalent radiation power of the vibration and noise reduction target panel part model is set as an objective variable and the weight of the sectioned region is set as an explanatory variable, and calculating a contribution degree of the weight of the sectioned region to the peak frequency of the equivalent radiation power of the vibration and noise reduction target panel part model; and a vibration and noise reduction and weight reduction portion identification step of identifying a portion to be reduced in weight in the automotive body of the automobile in order to reduce vibration and noise of the panel part to be reduced in vibration and noise based on the calculated contribution degree of each of the sectioned regions”. Dependent claims 3-5 are allowable over the prior art by virtue of their dependency on an allowed claim.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Nagagawa et al. (US 2022/0350940) teaches a vibration noise reduction analysis method for automotive panel parts acquires optimal distribution of beads to be provided in an automotive panel part to reduce noise caused by vibration of the panel part.
Nagagawa et al. (US 2022/0245303) teaches a vibration noise reduction analysis method for automotive panel parts is executed by a computer and used for reducing vibration noise in a panel part caused by vibrations transmitted from an exciter of an automobile to the panel part through vibration transmission frame parts;
Ageba (US 20250371218) teaches an automotive body design method according to the present invention designs an automotive body in which vibration-damping properties of a body-in-white structure of the automotive body is improved by bonding and joining a sheet-like part to a surface of an automotive part configuring the body-in-white structure;
Li et al. (US 20250298935) teaches methods and systems for designing noise and vibration absorbers and particularly to methods and systems for designing noise and vibration absorbers for thin wall structures at broadband width
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Paul Schwarzenberg whose telephone number is (313) 446-6611. The examiner can normally be reached on Monday-Thursday (7:30-6:30).
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, Christine Behncke, can be reached on (571) 272-8103. 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.
/PAUL S SCHWARZENBERG/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3695 1/27/2026