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 .
This communication is responsive to application filed on 04/18/2023.
Claims 1-10 are presented for examination.
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statements (IDSs) submitted on 04/18/2023, and 09/09/2024 are in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statement is being considered by the examiner.
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 NOT 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 use the word “means” or “step” or a term used as a substitute for “means” that is a generic placeholder but are nonetheless not being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph because the claim limitation(s) recite(s) sufficient structure, materials, or acts to entirely perform the recited function. Such claim limitations are: an information input unit, a simulation implementation unit, a utilization unit, an information storage unit, a 3D storage unit, a scenario storage unit, a related information storage unit, a term definition output button, a safety guideline outputting button, a safety guideline outputting button, a drawing outputting button, construction simulation activity button, a common information outputting button, an information outputting button, a document outputting button, a drawing outputting button, an experience image outputting button, an inspection item check button, as recited in claims 1-8.
Because this/these claim limitation(s) is/are not being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, it/they is/are not being interpreted to cover only the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification as performing the claimed function, and equivalents thereof.
If applicant intends to have this/these limitation(s) interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, applicant may: (1) amend the claim limitation(s) to remove the structure, materials, or acts that performs the claimed function; or (2) present a sufficient showing that the claim limitation(s) does/do not recite sufficient structure, materials, or acts to perform the claimed function.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 103 which forms the basis for all obviousness rejections set forth in this Office action:
A patent for a claimed invention may not be obtained, notwithstanding that the claimed invention is not identically disclosed as set forth in section 102, if the differences between the claimed invention and the prior art are such that the claimed invention as a whole would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which the claimed invention pertains. Patentability shall not be negated by the manner in which the invention was made.
The factual inquiries for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows:
1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art.
2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue.
3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art.
4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness.
Claims 1-3 and 9-10 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Bergroth et al (J. D. Bergroth, H. M. K. Koskinen, J. O. Laarni, “Use of Immersive 3-D Virtual Reality Environments in Control Room Validations” pgs. 278-289, June 2018) in view of Seki et al (US Publication 2012/0005103 A1).
1. Bergroth et al discloses a construction simulation system for nuclear power plant equipment (See: abstract, Advanced technologies (e.g., virtual and augmented reality) may provide new possibilities to facilitate control room (CR) design and evaluation activities. We studied how immersive three-dimensional (3-D) virtual reality environments may augment and advance the evaluation of safety-critical nuclear power plant CR systems. A multiuser functionality enables several operators to be located and to collaborate in the same virtual CR environment at the same time), the system comprising:
an information input unit into which nuclear power plant installation information related to nuclear power plant equipment is input (See: pg. 280 last paragraph, angle and position inside the 3-D space and are used to create accurate 3-D audio simulation. Operators use the Oculus remote to move and rotate inside the VR CR, which includes four inputs for movement and two inputs for functional purpose. Functional inputs are the main mode to interact with objects and operating systems inside the VR CR);
a simulation implementation unit configured to generate a virtual reality simulation related to the nuclear power plant equipment on the basis of the nuclear power plant equipment (See: Abstract, A multiuser functionality enables several operators to be located and to collaborate in the same virtual CR environment at the same time. There is also a realistic representation of emergency operating procedures in the virtual CR. Spatial audio communication through headsets makes the experience even more realistic. The paper addresses both technical and human factors issues associated with the use of immersive 3-D virtual reality environments in CR validation tests, for example, the amount of technical resources required as compared to normal validation in a real-life physical simulator environment, creation of methodologically new testing opportunities, and new opportunities for data registration and analysis. A new framework has been established for estimating the needed fidelity level of the virtual CR for the type of system evaluation at hand; pg. 287, left side column, the VR CR may create new testing opportunities, that is, simulation of more serious accidents with special effects. For example, the VR CR enables realistically simulating scenarios including fire, smoke, and even earth-quake, thus allowing operators and possibly other NPP personnel (e.g., field operators) to virtually experience the characteristics of critical operations, which cannot be realized in physical simulator environments); and
a utilization unit configured to output the virtual reality simulation (See: pg. 287, left side column, the VR CR may create new testing opportunities, that is, simulation of more serious accidents with special effects. For example, the VR CR enables realistically simulating scenarios including fire, smoke, and even earth-quake, thus allowing operators and possibly other NPP personnel (e.g., field operators) to virtually experience the characteristics of critical operations, which cannot be realized in physical simulator environments; pg. 288 right side column, develop the technical setup (e.g., to allow a more realistic lifelike interaction and greater realism of the VR environment) (Fig. 9). In addition, we aim to test the possibilities of the VR CR environment to support and augment different types of scenario runs and develop new methods and techniques for HF data registration and analysis).
Bergroth et al does not specify but Seki et al discloses installation information (See: par [0010] match determination unit which determines similarity in one or more installation positions of one or more of pieces of equipment and piping components in a building between the 3-D already-existing model and the 3-D new-construction model on the basis of comparison of the 3-D already-existing model and the 3-D new-construction model; and a progress selection unit which selects, as one or more portions of installation schedule data corresponding to the 3-D new-construction model, one or more portions of the installation progress data corresponding to one or more matching portions of the 3-D already-existing model, on the basis of data indicating a correspondence relationship between the 3-D already-existing model and the installation progress data; [0033] The embodiment explained below is an example in which matching portions of design data (including equipment specifications, piping routes, and welding points) of a plant to be newly constructed and an already-constructed plant are determined, and an installation schedule of the plant to be newly constructed is automatically produced on the basis of installation progress data obtained during construction of the already-constructed plant, where a means for automatically producing the installation schedule is provided in the embodiment; [0087] The present invention can be applied to construction work for power generation plants such as thermal or nuclear power plants).
It would have been obvious before the effective filing date to combine the construction simulation as taught by Seki et al to immersive 3-D virtual reality environments of Bergroth et al would be to produce a detailed installation schedule for a plant to be newly constructed, by utilizing installation procedures and the amounts of man-hours corresponding to the complicated installation (Seki et al, par [0011]).
2. Bergroth et al discloses the construction simulation system of The construction simulation system of wherein the nuclear power plant equipment installation information comprises at least one of a three-dimensional (3D) model, a scenario, general information, an experience image, a video, a checklist, and other information of the nuclear power plant equipment (See: pg. 281 right side column, The evaluation sessions were audio and video recorded. Two physical video cameras were set up in the room space where the VR evaluation was organized. In addition to these physical cameras that were aimed at capturing the operator activity with the VR headset and workstations, a set of virtual cameras were placed in the VR CR environment), wherein the 3D model of the nuclear power plant equipment comprises design information (See: pg. 279, right side column, The VR CR design started in the Fortum Control Centres and HMI team because there was a need to have a better tool for evaluating CR layouts. As the layout design is nowadays done in 3-D design software, this part was basically just a design import task to another design environment), wherein the scenario comprises a scenario generated on the basis of experience data and related procedures experienced by an operator in installation of existing nuclear power plant equipment, wherein the general information comprises reference information having at least one of term definitions and safety guidelines (See: Abstract, immersive three-dimensional (3-D) virtual reality environments may augment and advance the evaluation of safety-critical nuclear power plant CR systems), wherein the experience image comprises data taken when the operator installed the existing nuclear power plant equipment (See: pg. 281 right side column, The evaluation sessions were audio and video recorded. Two physical video cameras were set up in the room space where the VR evaluation was organized. In addition to these physical cameras that were aimed at capturing the operator activity with the VR headset and workstations, a set of virtual cameras were placed in the VR CR environment), wherein the video comprises a video related to nuclear power plant equipment of a preceding power plant (See: pg. 281 right side column, The evaluation sessions were audio and video recorded. Two physical video cameras were set up in the room space where the VR evaluation was organized. In addition to these physical cameras that were aimed at capturing the operator activity with the VR headset and workstations, a set of virtual cameras were placed in the VR CR environment), wherein the checklist comprises inspection items to inspect at a time of installing the nuclear power plant equipment, and wherein the other information comprises two-dimensional (2D) drawings.
3. Seki et al discloses the construction simulation system of claim 1, further comprising: an information storage unit configured to store the nuclear power plant equipment installation information, wherein the information storage unit comprises: a 3D storage unit configured to store 3D model information; a scenario storage unit configured to store scenario information that refers to installation experience data of the nuclear power plant equipment and the WPP/QCI procedure documents; and a related information storage unit configured to store at least one of term definitions, general matters, attachments, and corresponding procedures required for construction of the nuclear power plant equipment (See: par [0010] The present invention provides a construction simulation apparatus including: a first database in which a three-dimensional design model of an already-constructed plant (which is hereinafter referred to as the 3-D already-existing model) is recorded; a second database in which installation progress data obtained during construction of the already-constructed plant is recorded; a third database in which a three-dimensional design model of a plant to be newly constructed (which is hereinafter referred to as the 3-D new-construction model) is recorded; a match determination unit which determines similarity in one or more installation positions of one or more of pieces of equipment and piping components in a building between the 3-D already-existing model and the 3-D new-construction model on the basis of comparison of the 3-D already-existing model and the 3-D new-construction model; and a progress selection unit which selects, as one or more portions of installation schedule data corresponding to the 3-D new-construction model, one or more portions of the installation progress data corresponding to one or more matching portions of the 3-D already-existing model, on the basis of data indicating a correspondence relationship between the 3-D already-existing model and the installation progress data, where the one or more matching portions of the 3-D already-existing model are extracted by the match determination unit and respectively match the one or more portions of the 3-D new-construction model).
9. Seki et al discloses the construction simulation system of claim 1, wherein the utilization unit is capable of operating the nuclear power plant installation simulation program (See: par [0010] match determination unit which determines similarity in one or more installation positions of one or more of pieces of equipment and piping components in a building between the 3-D already-existing model and the 3-D new-construction model on the basis of comparison of the 3-D already-existing model and the 3-D new-construction model; and a progress selection unit which selects, as one or more portions of installation schedule data corresponding to the 3-D new-construction model, one or more portions of the installation progress data corresponding to one or more matching portions of the 3-D already-existing model, on the basis of data indicating a correspondence relationship between the 3-D already-existing model and the installation progress data; [0033] The embodiment explained below is an example in which matching portions of design data (including equipment specifications, piping routes, and welding points) of a plant to be newly constructed and an already-constructed plant are determined, and an installation schedule of the plant to be newly constructed is automatically produced on the basis of installation progress data obtained during construction of the already-constructed plant, where a means for automatically producing the installation schedule is provided in the embodiment; [0087] The present invention can be applied to construction work for power generation plants such as thermal or nuclear power plants).
Claim 10. The instant claim recites substantially same limitation as the above rejected claim 1, and therefore rejected under the same rationale.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claim 4 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. Claims 5-8 depend on claim 4. Therefore, dependent claims 5-8 would be allowable by virtue of their dependency on the allowable dependent claim.
The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter:
None of the cited prior art references of record fully anticipate or render obvious the independent claims in particular the limitation of: “a first screen for selecting the nuclear power plant equipment to be constructed; a second screen outputting information on the construction of the nuclear power plant equipment; a third screen outputting information on construction activity information of the nuclear power plant equipment and allowing an operator to select a simulation; and a fourth screen outputting a simulation for the construction of the nuclear power plant equipment” as recited in claim 4.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
White et al (US Patent No. 6, 445, 964 B1) discloses simulates a virtual machine based upon the actual parameters of the robot, modify its control parameters, and then rerun the program, until the desired behavior of the target machine is achieved, target machine's simulated kinematic behavior produced by the virtual reality simulation workstation exhibits the desired dynamic spatial geometry profile, the customized spatial parameter data stored in the workstation is processed by the virtual reality simulation program, to produce a sequence of kinematic control instructions that are downloaded into the micro controller of the target machine, cause the robot to exhibit its intended on-line sequential kinematic behavior (Abstract).
Qin et al (S. Qin, Q. Wang, X. Chen, “Application of virtual reality technology in nuclear device design and research” 2020) discloses the design and development of a VR technology in a nuclear fission device is described, including the display interface of the melting pit and containment parameters, virtual roaming of the nuclear plant, and the operational flow of the main loop of the nuclear power plant, all in three dimensions (Abstract); to develop a virtual system for visualizing the assembly/dis assembly processes of a tokamak device and, with the help of a 6D force-feedback arm, test its feasibility, ergonomics, and relative complexity (pg. 2 right side column).
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to KIBROM K GEBRESILASSIE whose telephone number is (571)272-8571. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 9:00 AM-5:30 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, Rehana Perveen can be reached at 571 272 3676. 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.
KIBROM K. GEBRESILASSIE
Primary Examiner
Art Unit 2189
/KIBROM K GEBRESILASSIE/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2189 06/04/2026
Prosecution Insights