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 .
Responsive to communications on 12/23/2022
Claims 1-25 pending
Claims 1-25 rejected
Priority
Application data sheet received on 12/23/2022 does not claim foreign or domestic priority to an earlier filing date. Application data sheet accepted by the examiner.
Information Disclosure Statement
Responsive to IDS received on 12/23/2022. IDS accepted and reviewed by the examiner. All references considered.
Drawings
Responsive to drawings received on 12/23/2022. Drawings accepted by the examiner.
Specification
Responsive to abstract received on 12/23/2022. Abstract contains less than 150 words and no legal or implied phraseology. Abstract is accepted by the examiner.
Responsive to specifications received on 12/23/2022. Specification accepted by the examiner.
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.
Claims 1-14 are 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 applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the applicant), regards as the invention.
Claims 1, 6, and 7 recite the limitation of the received heat or cold factor information. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim because the claims never receive heat or cold factor information.
Claims 2-14 are rejected on their dependency of the rejected claim.
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 1-25 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 101 because the claimed invention recites a judicial exception, an abstract idea, which has not been integrated into practical application and the claims further do not recite significantly more than the judicial exception.
Claim 1
Step 1: Is the claimed invention one of the four statutory categories? :
YES. The claim recites An apparatus which is a machine.
Step 2A Prong 1, inquiry "Is the claim directed to a law of nature, a natural phenomenon or an abstract idea?":
YES. Claim 1 recites: generate a digital twin of the geographic area, wherein the digital twin is a virtual representation of the geographic area,
Generating a digital twin of a geographic area is generating an abstraction of a geographic area based on weather information. This digital twin could be a 2D map which contains heat/cold sinks and sources. For example, a 2D map of an area that records the locations of lakes and trees on a map. The MPEP 2106.04(a)(2)(III)(B) states “If a claim recites a limitation that can practically be performed in the human mind, with or without the use of a physical aid such as pen and paper, the limitation falls within the mental processes grouping, and the claim recites an abstract idea.” Because this claim limitation can be performed by an individual with a pen and paper, the claim recites an abstract idea.
and based on the received heat or cold factor information, spawns a heat or cold distribution model that mirrors a heat or cold distribution of the geographic area;
A heat or cold distribution model is a model which describes how temperature is distributed in an area based on received information. “Spawn” is a textual replacement for generating this model. This claim limitation pertains to receiving data and using it to model the heat distribution in an area. For example, when splitting an area into a grid, one receives information that one square is 60 degrees, while another is 80 degrees. Placing this information into the digital twin would be the heat distribution model. The MPEP 2106.04(a)(2)(III)(B) states “If a claim recites a limitation that can practically be performed in the human mind, with or without the use of a physical aid such as pen and paper, the limitation falls within the mental processes grouping, and the claim recites an abstract idea.” Because this claim limitation can be performed by an individual with a pen and paper, the claim recites an abstract idea.
Step 2A Prong 2, Does the claim recite additional elements that integrate the judicial exception into a practical application?
NO. Claim 1 additionally recites An apparatus for temperature management, comprising:
This claim limitation states that the goal of the process is temperature management. The MPEP 2106.05(h) states “limitations that amount to merely indicating a field of use or technological environment in which to apply a judicial exception do not amount to significantly more than the exception itself, and cannot integrate a judicial exception into a practical application” This claim limitation indicates the environment to apply the exception, and therefore does not integrate the judicial exception into a practical application.
an interface operable to receive heat or cold factor information for a geographic area;
This limitation pertains to the use of computing machinery “an interface” operable towards in generic purpose “receive … information” The MPEP 2106.05(f)(2) states “Use of a computer or other machinery in its ordinary capacity for economic or other tasks (e.g., to receive, store, or transmit data) or simply adding a general purpose computer or computer components after the fact to an abstract idea (e.g., a fundamental economic practice or mathematical equation) does not integrate a judicial exception into a practical application or provide significantly more.” Therefore, this claim limitation does not integrate a judicial exception into a practical application or provide significantly more.
processing circuitry operable to:
The MPEP 2106.05(f)(2) states “Use of a computer or other machinery in its ordinary capacity for economic or other tasks (e.g., to receive, store, or transmit data) or simply adding a general purpose computer or computer components after the fact to an abstract idea (e.g., a fundamental economic practice or mathematical equation) does not integrate a judicial exception into a practical application or provide significantly more.” Therefore, this claim limitation does not integrate a judicial exception into a practical application or provide significantly more.
and perform an action based on the heat or cold distribution model.
This claim limitation does not state what action is performed, how it is performed, or how the action performed relates to the judicial exceptions. The MPEP 2106.05(f)(1) states “The recitation of claim limitations that attempt to cover any solution to an identified problem with no restriction on how the result is accomplished and no description of the mechanism for accomplishing the result, does not integrate a judicial exception into a practical application or provide significantly more because this type of recitation is equivalent to the words ‘apply it’” Therefore this claim limitation does not integrate a judicial exception into a practical application or provide significantly more.
Step 2B, does the claim recite additional elements that amount to significantly more than the judicial exception.
NO. As stated in Step 2A Prong 2, the claim does not recite additional elements that amount to significantly more than the judicial exception.
Based on the above facts, the office concludes that claim 1 is not eligible under 35 USC 101.
Claim 2:The apparatus of claim 1, wherein the processing circuitry is further operable to:
generate the digital twin as a three-dimensional digital twin;
This claim limitation pertains to the generation of a digital twin which was determined to be an abstract idea. The digital twin being three dimensional does not limit the claim limitation from being pertaining to an abstract idea. Therefore this claim limitation is a further recitation of the abstract idea of generating a digital twin.
and predict a future heat or cold distribution of the geographic area as the action to perform.
This claim pertains to the action performed. The claim limitation does not outline how the prediction is performed based on the judicial exceptions. The MPEP 2106.05(f)(1) states “The recitation of claim limitations that attempt to cover any solution to an identified problem with no restriction on how the result is accomplished and no description of the mechanism for accomplishing the result, does not integrate a judicial exception into a practical application or provide significantly more because this type of recitation is equivalent to the words ‘apply it’” Therefore this claim is a further recitation of apply it.
Claim 3:The apparatus of claim 1, wherein the processing circuitry is further operable to:
generate a recommendation for a countermeasure to reduce or increase a temperature within the geographic area as the action to perform.
This claim limitation refers to the action performed. The claim limitation states to generate a recommendation. A recommendation is a judgement call or providing an opinion. The MPEP 2106.04(a)(2)(III) states “Accordingly, the "mental processes" abstract idea grouping is defined as concepts performed in the human mind, and examples of mental processes include observations, evaluations, judgments, and opinions. “ Therefore this claim limitation recites an abstract idea.
Claim 4:The apparatus of claim 1, wherein the processing circuitry is further operable to:
generate, based on the heat or cold distribution model, a heat-optimized or cold- optimized travel path for a user within the geographic area as the action to perform.
The generation of a heat/cold optimized path for a user within a geographic area is to determine a path for a user to take that avoids hot/cold spots on a map. This is an observation of a map and an evaluation of the path that causes the least hot/cold disturbance. The MPEP 2106.04(a)(2)(III) states “Accordingly, the "mental processes" abstract idea grouping is defined as concepts performed in the human mind, and examples of mental processes include observations, evaluations, judgments, and opinions. “ Therefore the claim recites an abstract idea.
Claim 5:The apparatus of claim 1, wherein the processing circuitry is further operable to:
estimate a heat or cold risk of a user based on a constitution of the user as the action to perform.
Estimating a heat or cold risk to a user based on the constitution of a user is an evaluation. For example, a senior citizen may have a high heat risk. The MPEP 2106.04(a)(2)(III) states “Accordingly, the "mental processes" abstract idea grouping is defined as concepts performed in the human mind, and examples of mental processes include observations, evaluations, judgments, and opinions. “Therefore, the claim recites an abstract idea.
Claim 6:The apparatus of claim 1, wherein the received heat or cold factor information comprises a heat source, a cold source, a heat sink, or a cold sink within the geographic area.
This claim limitation pertains to received heat or cold factor information. As stated in claim 1, the usage of generic computing machinery to receive data does not integrate the judicial exception into a practical application. The received information comprising a heat/cold sink/source pertains to the type of information received which does not provide significantly more.
Claim 7:The apparatus of claim 1, wherein the processing circuitry is further operable to:
generate the digital twin of the geographic area as a grid of cells, wherein each of the cells includes a data value related to the received heat or cold factor information.
This claim limitation is a further recitation of the generation of the digital twin, where the 2D model is split up into cells on a grid. Where the information received is put into grid cells. As outlined above in claim 1, this is a further recitation of the abstract idea of generating a digital twin model, where this is an action which can be performed by an individual with a pen and paper, and therefore recites a mental process.
Claim 8:The apparatus of claim 7, wherein the heat or cold factor information comprises weather, building density, building type, building arrangement, HVAC (heating, ventilation, and air conditioning), vegetation, water, surface reflectivity, or traffic density information.
The received information comprising “weather, building density, building type, building arrangement, HVAC (heating, ventilation, and air conditioning), vegetation, water, surface reflectivity, or traffic density information” pertains to the type of information received which does not provide significantly more.
Claim 9:
The apparatus of claim 1, wherein the processing circuitry is further operable to:
generate the digital twin of the geographic area as a grid of cells;
This claim limitation is a further recitation of the generation of the digital twin, where the 2D model is split up into cells on a grid. Where the information received is put into grid cells. As outlined above in claim 1, this is a further recitation of the abstract idea of generating a digital twin model, where this is an action which can be performed by an individual with a pen and paper, and therefore recites a mental process.
and determine a priority order of the cells for a temperature change simulation based on a significance of the heat or cold factor information on heat distribution within the cells.
Determining the priority order of the cells based on a signigiance of heat/cold factor within the cells is to observe the different amounts of heat/cold factors within the cells and then to pass an evaluation for which should be prioritized. For example, a cell with many heat sources should be prioritized. The MPEP 2106.04(a)(2)(III) states “Accordingly, the "mental processes" abstract idea grouping is defined as concepts performed in the human mind, and examples of mental processes include observations, evaluations, judgments, and opinions. “ Therefore the claim recites a mental process.
Claim 10:
The apparatus of claim 1, wherein the processing circuitry is further operable to: generate the digital twin of the geographic area as a grid of cells;
This claim limitation is a further recitation of the generation of the digital twin, where the 2D model is split up into cells on a grid. Where the information received is put into grid cells. As outlined above in claim 1, this is a further recitation of the abstract idea of generating a digital twin model, where this is an action which can be performed by an individual with a pen and paper, and therefore recites a mental process.
forming a group of any of the cells having heat or cold distributions that are impacted by the heat or cold factor information similarly;
Forming a group of cells having heat or cold distributions that are impacted by the heat or cold factor information similarly is grouping 2 or more cells by similar conditions. For example, two cells which both contain trees may be grouped as similar. This is an observation of cells and an evaluation of groupings. The MPEP 2106.04(a)(2)(III) states “Accordingly, the "mental processes" abstract idea grouping is defined as concepts performed in the human mind, and examples of mental processes include observations, evaluations, judgments, and opinions. “
and perform a simulation of temperature change for one of the cells in the group, wherein a result of the simulation is applicable to each of the cells of the group.
This claim limitation does not describe or outline what the simulation pertains to in the above claim. The MPEP 2106.05(f)(1) states “The recitation of claim limitations that attempt to cover any solution to an identified problem with no restriction on how the result is accomplished and no description of the mechanism for accomplishing the result, does not integrate a judicial exception into a practical application or provide significantly more because this type of recitation is equivalent to the words ‘apply it’” Therefore this claim limitation does not integrate the above judicial exceptions into a practical application.
Claim 11:
The apparatus of claim 10, wherein the processing circuitry is further operable to:
dynamically group any of the cells having heat or cold distributions that are impacted by the heat or cold factor information similarly based on updated received heat or cold factor information.
Forming a group of cells having heat or cold distributions that are impacted by the heat or cold factor information similarly is grouping 2 or more cells by similar conditions. For example, two cells which both have elevated temperature. This being done dynamically means it is based on received information. This is an observation of received information and an evaluation of groupings. The MPEP 2106.04(a)(2)(III) states “Accordingly, the "mental processes" abstract idea grouping is defined as concepts performed in the human mind, and examples of mental processes include observations, evaluations, judgments, and opinions. “
Claim 12:The apparatus of claim 1, wherein the processing circuitry is further operable to: provide, as the performed action, an image of the heat or cold distribution model, wherein the image comprises a heat or cold distribution map, a heat or cold flow map, or an air flow map of the geographic area.
The claim limitation states to output an image of the models which were determined to be an abstract idea. Providing the image of the map is an insignificant application of the judicial exception. The MPEP 2106.05(f)(2) states “Use of a computer or other machinery in its ordinary capacity for economic or other tasks (e.g., to receive, store, or transmit data) or simply adding a general purpose computer or computer components after the fact to an abstract idea (e.g., a fundamental economic practice or mathematical equation) does not integrate a judicial exception into a practical application or provide significantly more.” Therefore this claim limitation does not integrate a judicial exception into a practical application or provide significantly more.
Claim 13:The apparatus of claim 1, wherein the processing circuitry is further operable to: generate the digital twin of the geographic area as a grid of cells;
This claim limitation is a further recitation of the generation of the digital twin, where the 2D model is split up into cells on a grid. Where the information received is put into grid cells. As outlined above in claim 1, this is a further recitation of the abstract idea of generating a digital twin model, where this is an action which can be performed by an individual with a pen and paper, and therefore recites a mental process.
and for at least two of the cells, spawn different heat or cold distribution models.
Spawning different heat or cold distribution models is the change the values in cells to a different substation. This is a further recitation of the abstract idea of modifying a distribution model by changing the numbers on the grid, and therefore recites an abstract idea.
Claim 14:
The apparatus of claim 1, wherein: at least a portion of the heat factor information is received from a sensor located in the geographic area;
This claim limitation pertains to the received temperature which was determined to be the usage of a computer for its ordinary task of receiving data. Similarly, this claim recites a generic computing component “a sensor” for its ordinary task “sensing.” Therefore, this claim is a further recitation of generic computer machinery for its ordinary task and does not provide significantly more than the judicial exception.
and the heat or cold distribution model comprises an actual temperature of a location within the geographic area.
This claim limitation is a further recitation of the abstract idea of building a heat or cold distribution model which was determined to be an abstract idea. This claim limitation states that the information used in the model is taken from sensor data, which can reasonably be performed by an individual by observing and recording the sensor data. Therefore, this limitation does not provide significantly more than the judicial exception.
Claims 15-25:Claims 15-25 contain effectively similar limitations to those already discussed in claims 1-14, and are therefore rejected under the same rational. Additionally, claims 15-25 state A component of a system for temperature management, comprising: processing circuitry; and a non-transitory computer-readable storage medium including instructions that, when executed by the processing circuitry, cause the processing circuitry to:
This claim limitation outlines generic computing machinery used in the claims. The MPEP 2106.05(f)(2) states “Use of a computer or other machinery in its ordinary capacity for economic or other tasks (e.g., to receive, store, or transmit data) or simply adding a general purpose computer or computer components after the fact to an abstract idea (e.g., a fundamental economic practice or mathematical equation) does not integrate a judicial exception into a practical application or provide significantly more.” Therefore this claim limitation does not integrate a judicial exception into a practical application or provide significantly more.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
The following is a quotation of the appropriate paragraphs of 35 U.S.C. 102 that form the basis for the rejections under this section made in this Office action:
A person shall be entitled to a patent unless –
(a)(1) the claimed invention was patented, described in a printed publication, or in public use, on sale, or otherwise available to the public before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
(a)(2) the claimed invention was described in a patent issued under section 151, or in an application for patent published or deemed published under section 122(b), in which the patent or application, as the case may be, names another inventor and was effectively filed before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claims 1-2, 6-8, 12, 14-16, 18, 20-21, and 24-25 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Koh (“WO 2021/112756 A1).
Claim 1:
Koh makes obvious An apparatus for temperature management, comprising: (page 1 line 5: “The present disclosure relates to a method and apparatus for modelling a surface temperature distribution of a surface of a built environment, for example for the purpose of optimising the design of such environments.”)
an interface operable to (page 20 line 1 : “Turning now to Figure 3, an example architecture of an apparatus 300 for modelling a surface temperature distribution of a built environment is shown.” … line 25: “The computing device 300 includes at least one or more of the following standard, commercially available, computer components, all interconnected by a bus 335:
(a) random access memory (RAM) 326;
(b) at least one computer processor 328, and
(c) at least one network interface connector (NIC) 330 which connects the computer device 300 to a data communications network and/or to external devices.”)
receive heat or cold factor information for a geographic area (page 8 line 20: “A method 100 for modelling a temperature distribution of a surface of a built environment comprises a first step 110 of obtaining input data. The input data may include the following:” … page 9 lines 12-20: “The geographical location of the built environment, including latitude and longitude, which are used to compute the solar incident angle in a shortwave radiation exchange model.
• Weather data (for example, in EPW format, the ASHRAE International Weather for Energy Calculations (IWEC) weather data representing a typical meteorological year of the chosen location). The weather data may include global horizontal radiation (Wh/m2), direct normal radiation (Wh/m2), diffuse horizontal radiation (Wh/m2), dry bulb temperature (Tdb), dew point 20 temperature (Tdp) (0 C), relative humidity (%), horizontal infrared radiation intensity (Wh/m2), wind speed (m/s), etc.”) ; processing circuitry operable to: (page 20 line 12: “In the example shown in Figure 3, the apparatus 300 is computing device in the form of a commercially available server computer system based on a 32 bit or a 15 64 bit Intel architecture”) generate a digital twin of the geographic area, wherein the digital twin is a virtual representation of the geographic area, (page 8 line 25: “Geometry data relating to the geometry of the surface of a 3D scene corresponding to the built environment to be modelled (including one or more building structures, and surrounding features such as ground and urban features such as pavements, roads, grass, trees, etc.). For example, the geometry data may be provided in a 3D format such as STL format, and 30 may comprise a plurality of triangular patches (or patches of other shapes), each having a surface normal. The patches can be of non-uniform lengths and arbitrary orientations. The 3D surface geometry is particularly suitable for ray tracing as the ray-surface intersection can be resolved for an arbitrary patch size and orientation.” … page 10 line 15: “For example, at step 120, the method 100 may comprise generating a plurality of grid points from the geometry data. Typically, each grid point will have coordinates of the centroid of one of the patches of the surface. Additionally, each grid point may have the same normal vector as the surface patch with which it is associated”) and based on the received heat or cold factor information, spawns a heat or cold distribution model that mirrors a heat or cold distribution of the geographic area; (page 11 line 7: “At step 126, an initialization operation may be performed. Each surface patch, and its associated grid point generated at step 120, may be assigned an initial surface temperature”) and perform an action based on the heat or cold distribution model. (page 18 line 11: “If so, the method 100 ends, and the surface temperature distribution is output by aggregating the computed surface temperature of each surface patch after the plurality of time steps” Examiner note: Where the examiner is interpreting this as an action performed,
Claim 2:
The apparatus of claim 1, wherein the processing circuitry is further operable to:
generate the digital twin as a three-dimensional digital twin; (page 3-4 line 32: “The method may comprise generating an octree structure based on the input geometrical data; wherein said Monte Carlo ray-tracing is performed in accordance with the octree structure, such that for each ray, only surface patches contained in octree cubes in the path of the ray are used for a ray-patch intersection test.” )and predict a future heat or cold distribution of the geographic area as the action to perform. (page 11 line 15: “Next, an iterative computation is performed for each of a plurality of time steps, beginning at a simulation start time, and ending after a predetermined duration. (Examiner note: ie: a future time step) For example, each of N time steps may have a fixed duration equal to (end time - start time)/N. … page 18 line 1 “At step 139, the surface temperature of each surface patch, and its associated grid point generated at step 120, may be re initialised to be the computed surface temperature at the end of the current time step.” Examiner note: See also page 26 line 4: “In Figure 10, the 3D surface temperature distribution at three selected timings 1030hrs, 1330hrs and 1630hrs on 21 June are displayed.” Where the selection of the timing is a prediction of a future distribution in an area.
Claim 6:The apparatus of claim 1, wherein the received heat or cold factor information comprises a heat source, a cold source, a heat sink, or a cold sink within the geographic area. (page 8 line 23: “a first step 110 of obtaining input data” … “This may include, for each material from which one or more buildings in the built environment is composed, and/or from which surrounding surfaces such as trees, ground surfaces and the like are composed, the following” Examiner note: Where trees under BRI encompass heat sinks from par 27 of the specifications “The BEV image 313 has potential heat sinks (e.g., trees, lakes, etc.)”
Claim 7:
The apparatus of claim 1, wherein the processing circuitry is further operable to:
generate the digital twin of the geographic area as a grid of cells, page 10 line 15: “For example, at step 120, the method 100 may comprise generating a plurality of grid points from the geometry data. Typically, each grid point will have coordinates of the centroid of one of the patches of the surface. Additionally, each grid point may have the same normal vector as the surface patch with which it is associated”) wherein each of the cells includes a data value related to the received heat or cold factor information (page 11 line 7: “At step 126, an initialization operation may be performed. Each surface patch, and its associated grid point generated at step 120, may be assigned an initial surface temperature”)
Claim 8:The apparatus of claim 7, wherein the heat or cold factor information comprises: (page 8 line 24: “The input data may include the following:”)
Weather (page 9 line 15 “Weather data”) , building density (page 9 line 2: “This may include, for each material from which one or more buildings in the built environment is composed, … material density”), , building type, building arrangement (page 8 line 25: “Geometry data relating to the geometry of the surface of a 3D scene corresponding to the built environment to be modelled (including one or more building structures,”) , HVAC (heating, ventilation, and air conditioning), vegetation (page 9 line 5: “and/or from which surrounding surfaces such as trees, ground surfaces and the like are composed”) , water, surface reflectivity (page 14 line 25: “The factor of rr is applied as the surfaces are treated as Lambertian surfaces, i.e. perfectly diffusely reflecting, which is applicable for most urban features, i.e. concrete, pavement, grass etc.”), or traffic density information.
Claim 12:The apparatus of claim 1, wherein the processing circuitry is further operable to: provide, as the performed action, an image of the heat or cold distribution model, wherein the image comprises a heat or cold distribution map, a heat or cold flow map, or an air flow map of the geographic area.
page 26 line 4: “In Figure 10, the 3D surface temperature distribution at three selected timings
1030hrs, 1330hrs and 1630hrs on 21 June are displayed.” Examiner note: A heat distribution map
PNG
media_image1.png
200
400
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Claim 14:The apparatus of claim 1, wherein:
at least a portion of the heat factor information is received from a sensor located in the geographic area; (Page 11 col 11: “In some embodiments, the initial surface temperature may be assigned based on one or more measurements of the surface temperature.”) Examiner note: Where one ordinarily skilled in the art recognizes that measurements of surface temperature are made with sensors.
and the heat or cold distribution model comprises an actual temperature of a location within the geographic area. (page 8 line 10: “It is important to note that the modules in embodiments of the present invention are designed to be independent and can be customised to accommodate the actual solar and wind weather conditions”)
Claim 15:
Claim 15 is substantially similar to claim 1 except that it also recites A component of a system for temperature management, (page 1 line 5: “The present disclosure relates to a method and apparatus for modelling a surface temperature distribution of a surface of a built environment, for example for the purpose of optimising the design of such environments. “) comprising: processing circuitry; (page 21 line 20: “Alternatively, such actions may be embodied in 20 the structure of circuitry that implements such functionality) and a non-transitory computer-readable storage medium including instructions that, when executed by the processing circuitry, cause the processing circuitry to: (page 21 line 30: “The processes may be embodied in a non-transient machine-readable and/or computer-readable medium for configuring a computer system to execute 30 the method. The software modules may be stored within and/or transmitted to a computer system memory to configure the computer system to perform the functions of the module”)
Therefore claim 15 is rejected under a substantially similar rational to claim 1.
Claim 16:Claim 16 is effectively similar to claim 2. Claim 16 is rejected under a substantially similar rational to claims 2 and 15.
Claim 20:The component of claim 15, wherein the received heat or cold factor information comprises a heat or cold source or a heat or cold sink within the geographic area. page 8 line 23: “a first step 110 of obtaining input data” … “This may include, for each material from which one or more buildings in the built environment is composed, and/or from which surrounding surfaces such as trees, ground surfaces and the like are composed, the following” Examiner note: Where trees under BRI encompass heat sinks from par 27 of the specifications “The BEV image 313 has potential heat sinks (e.g., trees, lakes, etc.)”
Claim 21:Claim 21 is effectively similar to claim 7. Claim 21 is rejected under a substantially similar rational to claims 7 and 15.
Claim 24:Claim 24 is effectively similar to claim 12. Claim 24 is rejected under a substantially similar rational to claims 12 and 15.
Claim 25:Claim 25 is effectively similar to claim 14. Claim 25 is rejected under a substantially similar rational to claims 14 and 15.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 103 which forms the basis for all obviousness rejections set forth in this Office action:
A patent for a claimed invention may not be obtained, notwithstanding that the claimed invention is not identically disclosed as set forth in section 102, if the differences between the claimed invention and the prior art are such that the claimed invention as a whole would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which the claimed invention pertains. Patentability shall not be negated by the manner in which the invention was made.
Claims 4 and 18 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Koh and Neset (“Navigating urban heat – Assessing the potential of a pedestrian routing tool.”)
Claim 4:The apparatus of claim 1, wherein the processing circuitry is further operable to:
Koh does not expressly recite generate, based on the heat or cold distribution model, a heat-optimized or cold- optimized travel path for a user within the geographic area as the action to perform.
Neset however makes obvious generate, based on the heat or cold distribution model, a heat-optimized or cold- optimized travel path for a user within the geographic area as the action to perform. (page 3 col 2: “The WayFinder tool provides guidance to pedestrians in urban spaces and assists them in selecting routes that minimize the distance and time in areas exposed to extreme environmental conditions such as urban heat islands or flooding. Wayfinder Heat provides users with a set of routing suggestions containing information about the length of the sections of the routes through risk areas with higher heat levels, as well as the total length of each suggested route. The user is provided with a set of points of interest to choose as destinations, at a distance of 400–1000 m from the user’s current geographical position. The points of interest are selected as locations such as public libraries, museums, or cafe’s, to which a pedestrian would seek shelter from high temperatures, being situated within an adequate distance. After a user selects a destination, the tool provides a number of suggested routes retrieved through the Google Directions API and Open Route Service API”)
PNG
media_image2.png
563
336
media_image2.png
Greyscale
fig 1 . Examiner note: Where the examiner understands the streets to be color coded to be the heat distribution model.
Koh and Neset are analogous art to the claimed invention because they are from the same field of endeavor called Urban heat. Before the effective filing date, it would have been obvious to a person ordinarily skilled in the art to combine Koh and Neset. The rational for doing so would have been to follow a teaching and motivation proposed in the prior art. Koh states Page 1 line 13: “The heat stress due to radiant heat gain of the surface has a significant impact on human health and outdoor activity during the day and dramatically increases energy consumption from use of air conditioning.” Neset also discusses heat stress, stating page 2 par 1: “the potential impact of heat on human health requires likewise awareness and behavioral adaptation to cope with heat in everyday urban navigation” …. Par 4: “This study is part of the Citizen Sensing project, resilience. The Wayfinder Heat 5 focusing on the development of climate services to increase urban climate prototype was developed as a derivative of the WayFinder tool (Opach et al., 2021) and aims to support urban pedestrians in navigating urban heat,”). Therefore it would have been obvious to combine the heat modeling of Koh with the usage of the WayFinder tool for the benefit of supporting pedestrians to improve impact to their human health and outdoor activity to obtain the invention as specified in the claims.
Claim 18:Claim 24 is effectively similar to claim 4, except that claim 18 requires a “heat optimized path”. Claim 24 is rejected under a substantially similar rational to claims 4 and 15, where the path of Neset is considered a “heat optimized path”.
(2) Claims 5 and 19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Koh and Guzman-Echavarria (“Beyond heat exposure — new methods to quantify and link personal heat exposure, stress, and strain in diverse populations and climates: The journal Temperature toolbox”)
Claim 5:
The apparatus of claim 1, wherein the processing circuitry is further operable to:
Koh does not expressly recite estimate a heat or cold risk of a user based on a constitution of the user as the action to perform.
Guzman_Echavarria however makes obvious estimate a heat or cold risk of a user based on a constitution of the user as the action to perform.
PNG
media_image3.png
805
846
media_image3.png
Greyscale
(page 3)
Page 2 col 2 par 2: “Under varying environmental heat loads, both inter- and intra-individual (i.e. features that a person can change over time) human factors may predispose a person to various levels of heat stress and related health outcomes [14–16] (Figures 1 and 2). In cities, for instance, higher thermal exposures arise at the landscape level, transferred to buildings, and finally to individuals [7]. Personal factors such as physical characteristics (i.e. mass and surface corporal area) and activities [17,18] determine the metabolic rate and, thus, internal heat production, while clothing affects heat loss. Moreover, age, sex, aerobic fitness, acclimatization, medical and neurological disorders (i.e. diabetes, Alzheimer’s), physical disabilities, alcohol use, certain medications, and drugs also modify susceptibility to heat [15,19–24]. Other considerations affecting heat risk may include socio-demographic and behavioral factors, such as infrastructure access and housing insecurity [25–27], cultural practices [15,16], digital visibility [28], or occupation (e.g. outdoor workers [16,29–36]). Because of these differences, a critical perspective in PHE research involves explaining who is affected by heat exposure and how overexposure that leads to UHS occurs by connecting environmental data with an individual’s physiological, behavioral, or subjective responses [4]. “ … conclusion par 1: “This study extends heat exposure research by linking PHE to thermal stress and strain over time, incorporating personal attributes rather than focusing solely on environmental heat loads.”
Koh and Guzman_Echavarria are analogous art to the claimed invention because they are from the same field of endeavor called urban heat. Before the effective filing date, it would have been obvious to a person ordinarily skilled in the art to combine Koh and Guzman_Echavarria. The rational for doing so would have been to follow a motivation proposed in the prior art. Koh states Page 1 line 13: “The heat stress due to radiant heat gain of the surface has a significant impact on human health and outdoor activity during the day and dramatically increases energy consumption from use of air conditioning. In view of the above, it has become increasingly important to consider thermal comfort when designing urban spaces.” Guzman_Echavarria abstract states “Results reveal misclassifications in heat stress or strain due to incomplete environmental data and assumed equivalent physiology and activities between people. Heat strain is most poorly represented by PHE alone for the elderly, non- acclimatized, those engaged in strenuous activities, and when negating solar radiation. Moreover, humid versus dry heat across climates elicits distinct thermal responses from the body. We outline criteria for inclusive PHE evaluations connecting heat exposure, stress, and strain while using physio logical-based methods to avoid misclassifications. This work underlines the value of moving from “one-size-fits-all” thermal indices to “fit-for-purpose” approaches using personalized information.” Therefore it would have been obvious to combine the heat modeling of Koh with personalized heat stress and risk factor calculations of Guzman_Echavarria for the benefit of correctly classifying heat stress in at risk individuals to obtain the invention as specified in the claims.
Claim 19:Claim 19 is effectively similar to claim 5. Claim 19 is rejected under a substantially similar rational to claims 5 and 15.
(3) Claims 9, 13 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Koh and Jandaghian (“Sensitivity analysis of physical parameterizations in WRF for urban climate simulations and heat island mitigation in Montreal”)
Claim 9:Koh makes obvious The apparatus of claim 1, wherein the processing circuitry is further operable to: generate the digital twin of the geographic area as a grid of cells; page 10 line 15: “For example, at step 120, the method 100 may comprise generating a plurality of grid points from the geometry data. Typically, each grid point will have coordinates of the centroid of one of the patches of the surface. Additionally, each grid point may have the same normal vector as the surface patch with which it is associated)
Jandaghian however makes obvious and determine a priority order of the cells for a temperature change simulation based on a significance of the heat or cold factor information on heat distribution within the cells. Page 10 col 1: The horizontal domain of the simulations was composed off our two-way nested domains with 37×22, 43×34, 91×61,and 145 × 91 grid points, and a grid spacing of 9, 3, 1 and 0.333 km2, respectively. The simulations were conducted with the initial and boundary conditions obtained from the North American Regional Reanalysis (NARR) with a grid resolution of 32 km and a time resolution of 3-h. All options for all domains are the same, except the cumulus model that is not activated for domain 4 and the ML UCM that is only activated for this domain. The simulation domains are shown in Fig. 1: the black presents urban and build-up lands and the blue presents water bodies in each domain based on USGS land use categories. Examiner note: Where the cells in the innermost domain contain the highest priority order of the cells for the temperature change simulation (testing UHI mitigation strategies).
Koh and Jandaghian are analogous art to the claimed invention because they are from the same field of endeavor called heat modeling. Before the effective filing date, it would have been obvious to a person ordinarily skilled in the art to combine Koh and Jandaghian. The rational for doing so would have been to follow a teaching and motivation proposed in the prior art. The model of Jandaghian similarly to Koh studies abstract: “urban heat island.” Jandaghian states page 2 par 1: “Previous efforts in urban climate simulations are mostly performed using coarse grid cells, because of limitation of computational resources. In recent years, with further advancement of supercomputers and parallel processing, fine resolution grid cells (sub-kilometer) approach has become a new trend (Touchaei and Wang, 2015; Touchaei et al., 2016). The fine-resolution grid spacing provides more detailed information on the spatial variation of the air temperature;”
Therefore, it would have been obvious to combine the modeling workflow of Koh which uses grids with the finer resolution gridding of Jadnaghian which uses different models /priority resolution modeling for the differing grid scales for the benefit of allowing more detailed information in areas of greater interest without limiting computational resources. to obtain the invention as specified in the claims.
Claim 13:The apparatus of claim 1, wherein the processing circuitry is further operable to:
Koh makes obvious generate the digital twin of the geographic area as a grid of cells; and for at least two of the cells page 10 line 15: “For example, at step 120, the method 100 may comprise generating a plurality of grid points from the geometry data. Typically, each grid point will have coordinates of the centroid of one of the patches of the surface. Additionally, each grid point may have the same normal vector as the surface patch with which it is associated)
Koh does not expressly recite spawn different heat or cold distribution models.
Jandaghian, however, makes obvious spawn different heat or cold distribution models. (page 8: “To calculate the skin temperature in UCMs, WRF simplifies the heterogeneity of urban surfaces into a single class of an impervious surface and use Eq 1.
PNG
media_image4.png
93
527
media_image4.png
Greyscale
“WRF assumes the thermal roughness length of the grassland over impervious surfaces”
Examiner note: Where one ordinarily skilled in the art gleans the temperature of each square in the grid to be the combination of the urban fraction and rural fraction times the temperature based on urban and rural. Where this makes obvious two different spawned heat distribution models if the cell is 100% rural or urban.
Furthermore, page 10 col 1: “The horizontal domain of the simulations was composed off our two-way nested domains with 37×22, 43×34, 91×61,and 145 × 91 grid points, and a grid spacing of 9, 3, 1 and 0.333 km2, respectively. The simulations were conducted with the initial and boundary conditions obtained from the North American Regional Reanalysis (NARR) with a grid resolution of 32 km and a time resolution of 3-h. All options for all domains are the same, except the cumulus model that is not activated for domain 4 and the ML UCM that is only activated for this domain. The simulation domains are shown in Fig. 1: the black presents urban and build-up lands and the blue presents water bodies in each domain based on USGS land use categories.” Examiner note: Where the cells in the innermost domain contain different models than the other domains which are all present in the simulation.
Koh and Jandaghian are analogous art to the claimed invention because they are from the same field of endeavor called heat modeling. Before the effective filing date, it would have been obvious to a person ordinarily skilled in the art to combine Koh and Jandaghian. The rational for doing so would have been to follow a teaching and motivation proposed in the prior art.
The model of Jandaghian similarly to Koh studies abstract: “urban heat island.” Koh measures urban surfaces by treating them as page 14 line 25: “perfectly diffusely reflecting, which is applicable for most
urban features, i.e. concrete, pavement, grass etc” When integrating the model of Koh to rural features, one ordinarily skilled in the art would recognize that a different model which treats reflections differently would have to be used.
Furthermore Jandaghian states page 2 par 1: “Previous efforts in urban climate simulations are mostly performed using coarse grid cells, because of limitation of computational resources. In recent years, with further advancement of supercomputers and parallel processing, fine resolution grid cells (sub-kilometer) approach has become a new trend (Touchaei and Wang, 2015; Touchaei et al., 2016). The fine-resolution grid spacing provides more detailed information on the spatial variation of the air temperature;”
Therefore, it would have been obvious to combine the modeling workflow of Koh which uses grids for urban temperature measurements with the finer resolution gridding of Jadnaghian which uses different models /priority resolution modeling for the differing grid scales and rural measurements for the benefit of allowing more detailed information in areas of greater interest as well as measuring temperature accurately under rural conditions without limiting computational resources. To obtain the invention as specified in the claims.
Claim 22:Claim 22 is effectively similar to claim 9. Claim 22 is rejected under a substantially similar rational to claims 9 and 15.
(4) Claims 10 and 23 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Koh and Li (“BUILDING ENERGY MODELLING AT URBAN SCALE: INTEGRATION OF REDUCED ORDER ENERGY MODEL WITH GEOGRAPHICAL INFORMATION”)
Claim 10:
Koh makes obvious The apparatus of claim 1, wherein the processing circuitry is further operable to:
generate the digital twin of the geographic area as a grid of cells page 10 line 15: “For example, at step 120, the method 100 may comprise generating a plurality of grid points from the geometry data. Typically, each grid point will have coordinates of the centroid of one of the patches of the surface. Additionally, each grid point may have the same normal vector as the surface patch with which it is associated;
Li however makes obvious forming a group of any of the cells having heat or cold distributions that are impacted by the heat or cold factor information similarly; and perform a simulation of temperature change for one of the cells in the group, wherein a result of the simulation is applicable to each of the cells of the group. (page 192 col 2 par 2: “Under the assumption that the urban environments within one census tract are similar, this case study defined 257 climate zones (examiner note: cells) after the aggregation of the 288 census tracts to match the zoning data, and then calculates the four urban parameters separately … “To reduce computational effort and reflect similar microclimate conditions within a large scope, these 257 microclimate zones are further aggregated into 50 zones in the end, according to the similarity of parameter values. It then calculated the UHI effect, represented as the monthly average difference compared with dry-bulb temperature in weather stations. The resultant actual temperature then served in energy calculations as the true ambient temperature”)
Koh and Li are analogous art to the claimed invention because they are from the same field of endeavor called urban modeling. Before the effective filing date, it would have been obvious to a person ordinarily skilled in the art to combine Koh and Li. The rational for doing so would have been to follow a teaching and motivation proposed in the prior art. Li states page 191 par 1: “it uses a simplified monthly-calculation based energy model that significantly reduces computational load without compromising estimation accuracy” Therefore, it would have been obvious to combine the modeling workflow of Koh with grouping of Li for the benefit of reducing computational load of the model without compromising accuracy to obtain the invention as specified in the claims.
Claim 23:Claim 23 is effectively similar to claim 10. Claim 23 is rejected under a substantially similar rational to claims 10 and 15.
(5) Claims 11 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Koh, Li, and Lee (KR 20180116508 A)
Claim 11:The apparatus of claim 10, wherein the processing circuitry is further operable to:
Li makes obvious group any of the cells having heat or cold distributions that are impacted by the heat or cold factor information similarly based on page 192 col 2 par 2: “Under the assumption that the urban environments within one census tract are similar, this case study defined 257 climate zones (examiner note: cells) after the aggregation of the 288 census tracts to match the zoning data, and then calculates the four urban parameters separately … “To reduce computational effort and reflect similar microclimate conditions within a large scope, these 257 microclimate zones are further aggregated into 50 zones in the end, according to the similarity of parameter values. It then calculated the UHI effect, represented as the monthly average difference compared with dry-bulb temperature in weather stations. The resultant actual temperature then served in energy calculations as the true ambient temperature”)
Koh and Li do not expressly recite dynamically … updated
Lee however makes obvious dynamically … updated (par 20: “Additionally, when the temperature data input unit (110) receives temperature data (hereinafter referred to as new temperature data) calculated from a new weather station, it transmits the new temperature data to the new temperature data clustering unit (140). “… par 25: “The new temperature data clustering unit (140) identifies a cluster corresponding to the grid point closest to the location of the new weather station for the new temperature data, and transmits a new temperature data allocation request to the cluster analysis unit (140) to request the allocation of the new temperature data to the identified cluster.”)
Koh and Lee are analogous art to the claimed invention because they are from the same field of endeavor called temperature modeling. Before the effective filing date, it would have been obvious to a person ordinarily skilled in the art to combine Koh and Lee. The rational for doing so would have been to follow a teaching and motivation proposed in the prior art. Lee states par 3: “When analyzing large volumes of data, it allows for the efficient extraction of information about the entire dataset by clustering similar objects into groups that effectively represent the whole data and observing them. Cluster analysis using meteorological data facilitates the identification of meteorological characteristics by topography forming clusters by identifying the meteorological characteristics of Korea by cluster.” … par 7: “In addition, the problem that the present invention aims to solve is to provide a clustering device and method for assigning temperature data of a new weather station to a cluster corresponding to the grid point closest to the coordinates of the new weather station. … par 12: “In addition, according to the present invention, clustering of temperature data generated from new weather stations can be performed without reanalyzing the entire temperature data.”
Therefore, it would have been obvious to combine the modeling workflow of Koh with the clustering techniques of Lee for the benefit of efficient extraction of relevant data alongside processing data from new sensors/weather statements without having to re-analyze the data to obtain the invention as specified in the claims.
(6) Claims 3 and 17 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Koh, Jandaghian, and Ramanasankaran_2022 (US 20230169223 A1)
Claim 3:
The apparatus of claim 1, wherein the processing circuitry is further operable to:
Koh does not expressly recite generate a recommendation for a countermeasure to reduce or increase a temperature within the geographic area as the action to perform.
Jandaghian however makes obvious generate page 22 par 2: “This proposed model is an appropriate platform for urban climate simulation in Montreal (Canada) to study mitigation strategies of urban heat island phenomenon. Increasing surface reflectivity as an effective method is used to mitigate the UHI intensity over the domain of interest. Therefore, the albedo of roofs, walls, and roads were increased from 0.2 to 0.65, 0.6, and 0.45, respectively. The averaged 2-m air temperature calculations in these simulations indicate a decrease by 0.2 °C over Montreal.” Examiner note: Where Jandaghian models different heat mitigation strategies for testing, but does not expressly recommend one of them.
Koh and Jandaghian are analogous art to the claimed invention because they are from the same field of endeavor called heat modeling. Before the effective filing date, it would have been obvious to a person ordinarily skilled in the art to combine Koh and Jandaghian. The rational for doing so would have been to follow a teaching and motivation proposed in the prior art. Koh states abstract: “The present disclosure relates to a method and apparatus for modelling a surface temperature distribution of a surface of a built environment, for example for the purpose of optimising the design of such environments.” Where it is understood by one ordinarily skilled in the art that the term optimizing implies that the simulation may be used to test different parameters for decreasing urban heat. Jandaghian provides a method for accomplishing that result, (the testing of different mitigation strategies) and states page 2 col 3: “To mitigate the adverse effects of urban heat island phenomenon, we also investigate the effects of increasing surface reflectivity with these different parameterization”
Therefore it would have been obvious to combine the modeling workflow of Koh which models heat distribution with testing of surface reflectivity to optimize for the design of the environment for the benefit of testing heat mitigation strategies to mitigate the adverse effects of the urban heat island phenomenon and to obtain the invention as specified in the claims.
Koh and Jandaghian do not expressly recite a recommendation
Ramanasankaran however makes obvious a recommendation (abstract: “The building system operates to generate a recommendation based on the plurality of inference values for the data point for the plurality of future times, the recommendation recommending making one or more updates to the building, and cause a graphic representation of the building to display an indication of the recommendation.”)
Ramanasankaran is analogous art to the claimed invention because it is from the same field of endeavor called digital twin modeling. Before the effective filing date, it would have been obvious to a person ordinarily skilled in the art to combine Koh, Jandaghian, and Ramanasankaran. The rational for doing so would have been to follow a teaching proposed in the prior art. Koh states page 19 line 11: “the method 100 enables individual heat transfer components to be identified, thereby enabling the identification of the main source of thermal load and facilitating design of targeted heat control measures for enhanced building energy efficiency. Ramanasankaran similarly provides a method to enable this in par 232: “Referring now to FIG. 22, a system 2200 where triggers and actions that can be constructed and learned for a digital twin is shown, according to an exemplary embodiment. Considering a building where a room in the building has a thermostat, the building data platform 100 can construct triggers and/or actions of an agent of a digital twin or the room. The triggers and/or actions can be determined (Examiners note: recommendations) with an energy reduction reward function 2204 by a learning service 2206. The energy reduction reward function 2204 can produce triggers and/or actions that have values that minimize energy usage.”
Therefore, it would have been obvious to combine the workflow of Koh which enables identification of heat control measures for building energy efficiency with the recommendation engine which provides energy reduction determinations of Ramanasankaran for the benefit of improving building efficiency and to obtain the invention as specified in the claims.
Claim 17:Claim 17 is effectively similar to claim 3. Claim 17 is rejected under a substantially similar rational to claims 3 and 15.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Tonekaboni (“SCOUTS: A Smart Community Centric Urban Heat Monitoring Framework”) abstract: “The proposed framework, Smart Community-centric Urban Thermal Sensing (SCOUTS), seamlessly support a variety of human, and vehicle-borne sensors in conjunction with satellite and weather station data to accurately map the heat hazards of urban regions and communities.”
Mcrae (“Integration of the WUDAPT, WRF, and ENVI-met models to simulate extreme daytime temperature mitigation strategies in San Jose, California” – simulates various weather mitigation strategies through modeling with the usage of multiple models.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to AHMAD HUSSAM SHALABY whose telephone number is (571)272-7414. The examiner can normally be reached Mon-Fri 7:30am - 5pm.
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, Emerson Puente can be reached at 5712723652. 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.
/A.H.S./Examiner, Art Unit 2187
/EMERSON C PUENTE/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2187
Prosecution Insights