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 12/6/2022 , wherein: Claim s 1-20 are currently pending and have been examined. Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103 In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status. The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 103 which forms the basis for all obviousness rejections set forth in this Office action: A patent for a claimed invention may not be obtained, notwithstanding that the claimed invention is not identically disclosed as set forth in section 102, if the differences between the claimed invention and the prior art are such that the claimed invention as a whole would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which the claimed invention pertains. Patentability shall not be negated by the manner in which the invention was made. Claims 1-3, 7- 10, 14-16, and 20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over US 11,281,824 to Van der Velden (hereinafter referred to as Van der Velden), in view of US 9 , 213 , 788 to Huynh et al. (hereinafter referred to as Huynh). In regards to claim 1, Van der Velden discloses a method for performing seamless analysis of geometric components in a multi-domain collaborative simulation environment (method of simulating a real-world physical object by automatically setting conditions for a simulation of the real world physical object represented by a CAD model, col. 2, lines 9-30) , comprising: generating a simulation interface object ( defining may leverage a database of stored, predefined rules that link functionality with simulation conditions such as loading and boundary conditions, col. 2, lines 9-30 ) corresponding to a geometric component in a first simulation environment (embodiment begins by analyzing morphology of a CAD model that represents a real-world physical object and identifying a function of an element of the CAD model, col. 2, lines 9-30) , wherein the simulation interface object comprises load and boundary conditions associated with the geometric component ( having identified the function of an element of the CAD model the method continues by defining a loading and boundary condition based upon rules that correspond to the identified function, col. 3, lines 9-30; rules used in the defining may correspond to both the identified function of the element of the CAD model and the solver type of the simulation, col. 2, lines 31-44 ) ; dynamically accessing the load and boundary conditions associated with the geometric component (one or more rules corresponding to the identified function of the element of the CAD model are pre-defined user developed rules that associate a loading condition and a boundary condition with functionality of an element of a CAD model and the rules are stored in a database, col. 3, lines 24-46) in a second simulation environment ( computing device implementing the method communicates with the database to access said predefined rules that associate simulation conditions with functional elements of CAD models, col. 8, lines 34-42 ) via the simulation interface object (embodiments may combine automatically identified loading and boundary conditions with product material information, i.e., characteristics, formal requirement specifications, and machine learning to fully automate generating a simulation template, i.e., the simulation conditions, col. 6, lines 17-35) , wherein the first simulation environment and the second simulation environment correspond to different domains ( system defines loading condition and boundary conditions for the element of the CAD model based upon rules corresponding to the identified function and the defining automatically sets conditions in a simulation of the object, col. 3, lines 4-23 ) ; performing analysis of the geometric component in the second simulation environment based on the load and boundary conditions (embodiment may generate a computation mesh based on the CAD model, transfer the loading and boundary conditions from the CAD geometry to the mesh model, and a finite element simulation solver is used with the model and the model's defined conditions to determine behavior, e.g., stress and strain, of the model, col. 10, lines 23-36) ; and generating results of the analysis of the geometric component (results of the simulation can be used to improve the design of the real world object through an optimization simulation or to generate the real- world object itself through interface with a manufacturing machine, col. 10, lines 23-36), but fails to disclose generating results of the analysis on a graphical user interface associated with the second simulation environment. Huynh, in the related field of modeling and analyzing a physical system, teaches generating results of the analysis on a graphical user interface associated with the second simulation environment (updated simulation results is displayed in illustrative GUI 400C shown in fig. 4C, col. 13 , lines 1-14 , fig. 4C). It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was filed to provide the method of Van der Velden with the ability to present analysis results on a GUI to the user as taught by the method of Huynh. The motivation for doing so would have been to provide a number of different displays for the user to view the simulation results produced by the simulation tool (Huynh, col. 10, line 64 – col. 11, line 14 ). In regards to claim 2, modified Van der Velden discloses the method of claim 1, but fails to disclose wherein the simulation interface object communicatively connects the first simulation environment and the second simulation environment (embodiments may combine automatically identified loading and boundary conditions with product material information, i.e., characteristics, formal requirement specifications, and machine learning to fully automate generating a simulation template, i.e., the simulation conditions, col. 6, lines 17-35), but fails to disclose connects in real-time. Huynh, in the related field of modeling and analyzing a physical system, teaches connects in real time (improved simulation tool is provided that allows a user to modify one or more aspects of a physical system and obtain updated simulation results in real time, col. 4, lines 57-67). It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was filed to provide the method of Van der Velden with the ability to connect in real time as taught by the method of Huynh. The motivation for doing so would have been in response to changes requested by the user, the simulation tool delivers updated simulation results by leveraging previously computed data while updating computations relating to components who se parameters are changed (Huynh, col. 4, line 57 – col. 5, line 8). In regards to claim 3, modified Van der Velden discloses the method of claim 1, and discloses further comprising: generating associative copies of the load and boundary conditions associated with the geometric component being analyzed in the first simulation environment (system defines loading condition and boundary conditions for the element of the CAD model based upon rules corresponding to the identified function and the defining automatically sets conditions in a simulation of the object, col. 3, lines 4-23) in the second simulation environment using the simulation interface object (embodiment may generate a computation mesh based on the CAD model, transfer the loading and boundary conditions from the CAD geometry to the mesh model, and a finite element simulation solver is used with the model and the model's defined conditions to determine behavior, e.g., stress and strain, of the model, col. 10, lines 23-36) . In regards to claim 7, modified Van der Velden discloses the method of claim 1, and further discloses wherein generating the simulation interface object (embodiment begins by analyzing morphology of a CAD model that represents a real-world physical object and identifying a function of an element of the CAD model, col. 2, lines 9-30) corresponding to the geometric component in the first simulation environment (having identified the function of an element of the CAD model the method continues by defining a loading and boundary condition based upon rules that correspond to the identified function, col. 3, lines 9-30; rules used in the defining may correspond to both the identified function of the element of the CAD model and the solver type of the simulation, col. 2, lines 31-44) , comprises: generating the load and boundary conditions associated with the geometric component in the first simulation environment (one or more rules corresponding to the identified function of the element of the CAD model are pre-defined user developed rules that associate a loading condition and a boundary condition with functionality of an element of a CAD model and the rules are stored in a database, col. 3, lines 24-46) ; and generating the simulation interface object corresponding to the geometric component in the first simulation environment (computing device implementing the method communicates with the database to access said predefined rules that associate simulation conditions with functional of elements of CAD models, col. 8, lines 34-42) using the generated load and boundary conditions (embodiments may combine automatically identified loading and boundary conditions with product material information, i.e., characteristics, formal requirement specifications, and machine learning to fully automate generating a simulation template, i.e., the simulation conditions, col. 6, lines 17-35) . In regards to claim 8, Van der Velden discloses a product data management system (method of simulating a real-world physical object by automatically setting conditions for a simulation of the real world physical object represented by a CAD model, col. 2, lines 9-30) comprising: a processing unit; and a memory unit communicatively coupled to the processing unit (system includes a processor and memory with computer code instructions to cause the system to set the simulation conditions, col. 3, lines 4-23) , wherein the memory unit comprises: a simulation interface module (Examiner note, in accordance with para. 0020 of Applicant’s specification, a “module” is interpreted as software)(system includes a processor and memory with computer code instructions to cause the system to set the simulation conditions, col. 3, lines 4-23) configured to: generate a simulation interface object (defining may leverage a database of stored, predefined rules that link functionality with simulation conditions such as loading and boundary conditions, col. 2, lines 9-30) corresponding to the geometric component in a first simulation environment (embodiment begins by analyzing morphology of a CAD model that represents a real-world physical object and identifying a function of an element of the CAD model, col. 2, lines 9-30) , wherein the simulation interface object comprises load and boundary conditions associated with the geometric component (having identified the function of an element of the CAD model the method continues by defining a loading and boundary condition based upon rules that correspond to the identified function, col. 3, lines 9-30; rules used in the defining may correspond to both the identified function of the element of the CAD model and the solver type of the simulation, col. 2, lines 31-44) ; dynamically access the load and boundary conditions associated with the geometric component (one or more rules corresponding to the identified function of the element of the CAD model are pre-defined user developed rules that associate a loading condition and a boundary condition with functionality of an element of a CAD model and the rules are stored in a database, col. 3, lines 24-46) in a second simulation environment (computing device implementing the method communicates with the database to access said predefined rules that associate simulation conditions with functional elements of CAD models, col. 8, lines 34-42) via the simulation interface object (embodiments may combine automatically identified loading and boundary conditions with product material information, i.e., characteristics, formal requirement specifications, and machine learning to fully automate generating a simulation template, i.e., the simulation conditions, col. 6, lines 17-35) , and wherein the first simulation environment and the second simulation environment correspond to different domains (system defines loading condition and boundary conditions for the element of the CAD model based upon rules corresponding to the identified function and the defining automatically sets conditions in a simulation of the object, col. 3, lines 4-23) ; and a solver module (Examiner note, in accordance with para. 0020 of Applicant’s specification, a “module” is interpreted as software) (system includes a processor and memory with computer code instructions to cause the system to set the simulation conditions, col. 3, lines 4-23) configured to: perform analysis of the geometric component in the second simulation environment based on the load and boundary conditions (embodiment may generate a computation mesh based on the CAD model, transfer the loading and boundary conditions from the CAD geometry to the mesh model, and a finite element simulation solver is used with the model and the model's defined conditions to determine behavior, e.g., stress and strain, of the model, col. 10, lines 23-36) ; and generate results of the analysis of the geometric component (results of the simulation can be used to improve the design of the real world object through an optimization simulation or to generate the real-world object itself through interface with a manufacturing machine, col. 10, lines 23-36) but fails to disclose generate results of the analysis on a graphical user interface associated with the second simulation environment. Huynh, in the related field of modeling and analyzing a physical system, teaches generate results of the analysis on a graphical user interface associated with the second simulation environment (updated simulation results is displayed in illustrative GUI 400C shown in fig. 4C, col. 13, lines 1-14, fig. 4C). It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was filed to provide the method of Van der Velden with the ability to present analysis results on a GUI to the user as taught by the method of Huynh. The motivation for doing so would have been to provide a number of different displays for the user to view the simulation results produced by the simulation tool (Huynh, col. 10, line 64 – col. 11, line 14). In regards to claim 9, modified Van der Velden discloses the system of claim 8, and further di sclose s wherein the simulation interface object is configured to communicatively connect the first simulation environment and the second simulation environment (embodiments may combine automatically identified loading and boundary conditions with product material information, i.e., characteristics, formal requirement specifications, and machine learning to fully automate generating a simulation template, i.e., the simulation conditions, col. 6, lines 17-35), but fails to disclose connects in real-time. Huynh, in the related field of modeling and analyzing a physical system, teaches connects in real time (improved simulation tool is provided that allows a user to modify one or more aspects of a physical system and obtain updated simulation results in real time, col. 4, lines 57-67). It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was filed to provide the method of Van der Velden with the ability to connect in real time as taught by the method of Huynh. The motivation for doing so would have been in response to changes requested by the user, the simulation tool delivers updated simulation results by leveraging previously computed data while updating computations relating to components whose parameters are changed (Huynh, col. 4, line 57 – col. 5, line 8). . In regards to claim 10, modified Van der Velden discloses the system of claim 9 , and discloses wherein the simulation interface module (Examiner note, in accordance with para. 0020 of Applicant’s specification, a “module” is interpreted as software) (system includes a processor and memory with computer code instructions to cause the system to set the simulation conditions, col. 3, lines 4-23) is configured to generate associative copies of the load and boundary conditions associated with the geometric component being analyzed in the first simulation environment (system defines loading condition and boundary conditions for the element of the CAD model based upon rules corresponding to the identified function and the defining automatically sets conditions in a simulation of the object, col. 3, lines 4-23) in the second simulation environment using the simulation interface object (embodiment may generate a computation mesh based on the CAD model, transfer the loading and boundary conditions from the CAD geometry to the mesh model, and a finite element simulation solver is used with the model and the model's defined conditions to determine behavior, e.g., stress and strain, of the model, col. 10, lines 23-36) . In regards to claim 14, modified Van der Velden discloses the system of claim 8, and further discloses wherein in generating the simulation interface object (embodiment begins by analyzing morphology of a CAD model that represents a real-world physical object and identifying a function of an element of the CAD model, col. 2, lines 9-30) corresponding to the geometric component in the first simulation environment (having identified the function of an element of the CAD model the method continues by defining a loading and boundary condition based upon rules that correspond to the identified function, col. 3, lines 9-30; rules used in the defining may correspond to both the identified function of the element of the CAD model and the solver type of the simulation, col. 2, lines 31-44) , the simulation interface module (Examiner note, in accordance with para. 0020 of Applicant’s specification, a “module” is interpreted as software) (system includes a processor and memory with computer code instructions to cause the system to set the simulation conditions, col. 3, lines 4-23) is configured to: generate the load and boundary conditions associated with the geometric component in the first simulation environment (one or more rules corresponding to the identified function of the element of the CAD model are pre-defined user developed rules that associate a loading condition and a boundary condition with functionality of an element of a CAD model and the rules are stored in a database, col. 3, lines 24-46) ; and generate the simulation interface object corresponding to the geometric component in the first simulation environment (computing device implementing the method communicates with the database to access said predefined rules that associate simulation conditions with functional of elements of CAD models, col. 8, lines 34-42) using the generated load and boundary conditions (embodiments may combine automatically identified loading and boundary conditions with product material information, i.e., characteristics, formal requirement specifications, and machine learning to fully automate generating a simulation template, i.e., the simulation conditions, col. 6, lines 17-35) . In regards to claim 15, modified Van der Velden discloses a non-transitory computer-readable storage medium having machine-readable instructions stored therein (system includes a processor and memory with computer code instructions to cause the system to set the simulation conditions, col. 3, lines 4-23) , that when executed by a product data management system (method of simulating a real-world physical object by automatically setting conditions for a simulation of the real world physical object represented by a CAD model, col. 2, lines 9-30) , cause the product data management system to perform method (system includes a processor and memory with computer code instructions to cause the system to set the simulation conditions, col. 3, lines 4-23) steps comprising: generating a simulation interface object (defining may leverage a database of stored, predefined rules that link functionality with simulation conditions such as loading and boundary conditions, col. 2, lines 9-30) corresponding to a geometric component in a first simulation environment (embodiment begins by analyzing morphology of a CAD model that represents a real-world physical object and identifying a function of an element of the CAD model, col. 2, lines 9-30) , wherein the simulation interface object comprises load and boundary conditions associated with the geometric component (having identified the function of an element of the CAD model the method continues by defining a loading and boundary condition based upon rules that correspond to the identified function, col. 3, lines 9-30; rules used in the defining may correspond to both the identified function of the element of the CAD model and the solver type of the simulation, col. 2, lines 31-44) ; dynamically accessing the load and boundary conditions associated with the geometric component (one or more rules corresponding to the identified function of the element of the CAD model are pre-defined user developed rules that associate a loading condition and a boundary condition with functionality of an element of a CAD model and the rules are stored in a database, col. 3, lines 24-46) in a second simulation environment (computing device implementing the method communicates with the database to access said predefined rules that associate simulation conditions with functional elements of CAD models, col. 8, lines 34-42) via the simulation interface object (embodiments may combine automatically identified loading and boundary conditions with product material information, i.e., characteristics, formal requirement specifications, and machine learning to fully automate generating a simulation template, i.e., the simulation conditions, col. 6, lines 17-35) , and wherein the first simulation environment and the second simulation environment correspond to different domains (system defines loading condition and boundary conditions for the element of the CAD model based upon rules corresponding to the identified function and the defining automatically sets conditions in a simulation of the object, col. 3, lines 4-23) ; performing analysis of the geometric component in the second simulation environment based on the load and boundary conditions (embodiment may generate a computation mesh based on the CAD model, transfer the loading and boundary conditions from the CAD geometry to the mesh model, and a finite element simulation solver is used with the model and the model's defined conditions to determine behavior, e.g., stress and strain, of the model, col. 10, lines 23-36) ; and generating result of the analysis of the geometric component (results of the simulation can be used to improve the design of the real world object through an optimization simulation or to generate the real-world object itself through interface with a manufacturing machine, col. 10, lines 23-36), but fails to disclose generating results of the analysis on a graphical user interface associated with the second simulation environment. Huynh, in the related field of modeling and analyzing a physical system, teaches generating results of the analysis on a graphical user interface associated with the second simulation environment (updated simulation results is displayed in illustrative GUI 400C shown in fig. 4C, col. 13, lines 1-14, fig. 4C). It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was filed to provide the method of Van der Velden with the ability to present analysis results on a GUI to the user as taught by the method of Huynh. The motivation for doing so would have been to provide a number of different displays for the user to view the simulation results produced by the simulation tool (Huynh, col. 10, line 64 – col. 11, line 14). In regards to claim 16, modified Van der Velden discloses the storage medium of claim 15, and further discloses wherein the product data management system is configured to perform method steps comprising: generating associative copies of the load and boundary conditions associated with the geometric component being analyzed in the first simulation environment (system defines loading condition and boundary conditions for the element of the CAD model based upon rules corresponding to the identified function and the defining automatically sets conditions in a simulation of the object, col. 3, lines 4-23) in the second simulation environment using the simulation interface object (embodiment may generate a computation mesh based on the CAD model, transfer the loading and boundary conditions from the CAD geometry to the mesh model, and a finite element simulation solver is used with the model and the model's defined conditions to determine behavior, e.g., stress and strain, of the model, col. 10, lines 23-36) . In regards to claim 20, modified Van der Velden discloses the storage medium of claim 15, and further discloses wherein, in generating the simulation interface object (embodiment begins by analyzing morphology of a CAD model that represents a real-world physical object and identifying a function of an element of the CAD model, col. 2, lines 9-30) corresponding to the geometric component in the first simulation environment (having identified the function of an element of the CAD model the method continues by defining a loading and boundary condition based upon rules that correspond to the identified function, col. 3, lines 9-30; rules used in the defining may correspond to both the identified function of the element of the CAD model and the solver type of the simulation, col. 2, lines 31-44) , the product data management system is configured to perform method steps comprising: generating the load and boundary conditions associated with the geometric component in the first simulation environment (one or more rules corresponding to the identified function of the element of the CAD model are pre-defined user developed rules that associate a loading condition and a boundary condition with functionality of an element of a CAD model and the rules are stored in a database, col. 3, lines 24-46) ; and generating the simulation interface object corresponding to the geometric component in the first simulation environment (computing device implementing the method communicates with the database to access said predefined rules that associate simulation conditions with functional of elements of CAD models, col. 8, lines 34-42) using the generated load and boundary conditions (embodiments may combine automatically identified loading and boundary conditions with product material information, i.e., characteristics, formal requirement specifications, and machine learning to fully automate generating a simulation template, i.e., the simulation conditions, col. 6, lines 17-35) . Subject Matter Overcoming 35 USC §102/§103 Claims 4-6, 11-13, and 16-18 are 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 an examiner’s statement of reasons for subject matter of dependent clams 4-6 , 11-13, and 16-18 overcoming the prior art rejections under 35 USC §102/§103 . The closest prior art of record is US 11,281,824 to Van der Velden (hereinafter referred to as Van der Velden), US 9,213,788 to Huynh et al. (hereinafter referred to as Huynh), and US 11,797,730 to Yuan (hereinafter referred to as Yuan ) . 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 dependent claims 4-6 , and 16-18. For dependent claim s 4, 11 , and 17, the prior art of Van der Velden , Huynh , and Yuan specifically do not disclose: “ determining whether at least one property value of the load and boundary conditions associated with the geometric component is modified in the first simulation environment; and if the at least one property value of the load and boundary conditions associated with the geometric component is modified, dynamically updating the second simulation environment based on the at least one modified property value of the load and boundary conditions in real-time ” . Dependent claims 5, 6, 12, 13, 18, and 19 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. Schlenz ( WO 2026017216 ) teaches wherein a first simulation file is adapted based on the identified change, and the simulation is performed with the adapted first simulation file based on the simulation parameter using the electronic computer . Ren ( CN113935167B ) teaches m ulti-domain coupling numerical modeling and simulation system and method . Peng ( EP 4350511 ) teaches a collaborative simulation method and an apparatus . Laili ( CN 115061772 ) teaches a multi-field simulation model integrating method and system. Harris ( US 20210133294 ) - teaches wherein a simulation suggestion engine may further automatically identify and load simulation parameters (boundary conditions) for the one or more suggested simulations/simulation tools . Yuan et al. (US 11797730) – teaches frozen boundary multi-domain parallel mesh generation. Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to FILLIN "Examiner name" \* MERGEFORMAT Paul Schwarzenberg whose telephone number is FILLIN "Phone number" \* MERGEFORMAT (313) 446-6611 . The examiner can normally be reached on FILLIN "Work schedule?" \* MERGEFORMAT Monday-Thursday (7:30-6:30) . Examiner interviews are available via telephone, in-person, and video conferencing using a USPTO supplied web-based collaboration t ool. To schedule an interview, a pplicant 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 2/2 3 /2026