DETAILED ACTION
Election/Restrictions
Applicant's election with traverse of Group 1 in the reply filed on 12/4/2025 is acknowledged. The traversal is on the ground(s) that the restriction is not a valid restriction because the identified groups are not subcombinations of a combination.
This is not found persuasive. Applicant argues that that the office did not identify a combination of which Group 1 and Group 2 are a part of, and that Claim 1 does not represent a combination as it recites fewer elements than any of Group 1 or Group 2. The examiner respectfully disagrees as the combination of elements is an oscilloscope that would be able to perform both of the function of Group 1 and Group 2 at the same time. The claims are not restricted as a combination-subcombination, the claims are restriction as subcombinations, usable together. Once with ordinary skill in the art is aware that digital signal oscilloscopes are capable of performing a plurality of different functions. As indicated in the prior requirement for restriction, dated 11/06/2025, each of the identified subcombinations are distinct as they do not overlap in scope and are not obvious variants each other.
Applicant argues that the restriction of Group 3 should be withdrawn as it is been amended to be dependent on claim 1. This argument is not persuasive as the limitations of Group 3 are distinct from both Groups 1 and 2 as they do not overlap in scope and are not obvious variants each other.
The requirement is still deemed proper and is therefore made FINAL.
Claims 13-17 and 21-22 are withdrawn from further consideration as being drawn to a nonelected Groups 2 and 3, due to there being no allowable generic or linking claim.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 1-12 and 18-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 101 because the claimed invention is directed to an abstract idea without significantly more. The claims recite an abstract idea as discussed below. This abstract idea is not integrated into a practical application for the reasons discussed below. The claims do not include additional elements that are sufficient to amount to significantly more than the judicial exception for the reasons discussed below.
Step 1 of the 2019 Guidance requires the examiner to determine if the claims are to one of the statutory categories of invention. Applied to the present application, the claims belong to one of the statutory classes of a process or product as a computer implemented method or a computer system/product.
Step 2A of the 2019 Guidance is divided into two Prongs. Prong 1 requires the examiner to determine if the claims recite an abstract idea, and further requires that the abstract idea belong to one of three enumerated groupings: mathematical concepts, mental processes, and certain methods of organizing human activity.
Claim 1 is copied below, with the limitations belonging to an abstract idea being underlined.
An instrument comprising:
an input port;
a display;
one or more processors; and
a computer readable medium storing instructions that, when executed by the one or more processors, cause the instrument to perform functions comprising:
generating a first dataset indicating voltages of a signal detected at the input port over a time period;
displaying the first dataset graphically on the display;
generating a second dataset indicating values of a derived characteristic of the signal over the time period; and
displaying the second dataset graphically on the display.
Claim 20 is copied below, with the limitations belonging to an abstract idea being underlined.
A method comprising:
generating a first dataset indicating voltages of a signal detected at an input port over a time period;
displaying the first dataset graphically on a display;
generating a second dataset indicating values of a derived characteristic of the signal over the time period; and
displaying the second dataset graphically on the display.
The limitations underlined can be considered to describe a mathematical concept, namely a series of calculations leading to one or more numerical results or answers, obtained by a sequence of mathematical operations on numbers and/or mental steps. The lack of a specific equation in the claim merely points out that the claim would monopolize all possible appropriate equations for accomplishing this purpose in all possible systems. These steps recited by the claim therefore amount to a series of mental and/or mathematical steps, making these limitations amount to an abstract idea.
In summary, the highlighted steps in the claim above therefore recite an abstract idea at Prong 1 of the 101 analysis.
The additional elements in the claim have been left in normal font.
The additional limitations in relation to the computer system, i.e. input port, display, one or more processor and the computer readable medium, does not offer a meaningful limitation beyond generally linking the use of the method to a computer (see ALICE CORP. v. CLS BANK INT’L 573 U. S. 208 (2014)). The claim does not recite a particular machine applying or being used by the abstract idea.
The additional limitations of obtaining displaying the first and second dataset on the display equates to extrasolution data activity, i.e. data reporting (see MPEP 2106.05(g)).
The claims do not integrate the abstract idea into a practical application. Various considerations are used to determine whether the additional elements are sufficient to integrate the abstract idea into a practical application. The claim does not recite a particular machine applying or being used by the abstract idea. The claim does not effect a real-world transformation or reduction of any particular article to a different state or thing. (Manipulating data from one form to another or obtaining a mathematical answer using input data does not qualify as a transformation in the sense of Prong 2.)
The claim does not contain additional elements which describe the functioning of a computer, or which describe a particular technology or technical field, being improved by the use of the abstract idea. (This is understood in the sense of the claimed invention from Diamond v Diehr, in which the claim as a whole recited a complete rubber-curing process including a rubber-molding press, a timer, a temperature sensor adjacent the mold cavity, and the steps of closing and opening the press, in which the recited use of a mathematical calculation served to improve that particular technology by providing a better estimate of the time when curing was complete. Here, the claim does not recite carrying out any comparable particular technological process.) In all of these respects, the claim fails to recite additional elements which might possibly integrate the claim into a particular practical application. Instead, based on the above considerations, the claim would tend to monopolize the abstract idea itself, rather than integrate the abstract idea into a practical application.
Step 2b of the 2019 Guidance requires the examiner to determine whether the additional elements cause the claim to amount to significantly more than the abstract idea itself. The considerations for this particular claim are essentially the same as the considerations for Prong 2 of Step 2a, and the same analysis leads to the conclusion that the claim does not amount to significantly more than the abstract idea.
Therefore, claims 1 and 20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 101 as directed to an abstract idea without significantly more.
Dependent claims 2, 4, 10-12, and 18-19 are similarly ineligible. The dependent claims merely add limitations which further detail the abstract idea, namely further mathematical/mental steps detailing how the data processing algorithm is implemented, i.e. additional software limitations, and/or add insignificant extra solution data activity in relation to what data is displayed. These do not help to integrate the claim into a practical application or make it significantly more than the abstract idea (which is recited in slightly more detail, but not in enough detail to be considered to narrow the claim to a particular practical application itself).
Dependent claims 3 and 5-9 are similarly ineligible. The dependent claims merely add limitations which further detail the abstract idea, namely further mathematical/mental steps detailing how the data processing algorithm is implemented, i.e. additional software limitations, add insignificant extra solution data activity in relation to what data is displayed and/or received, and/or add insignificant conventional computer limitations, i.e. a user interface. These do not help to integrate the claim into a practical application or make it significantly more than the abstract idea (which is recited in slightly more detail, but not in enough detail to be considered to narrow the claim to a particular practical application itself).
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 1, 6-11, and 20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Barthel (US 20200341033) in view of in view of Ashton (US 20120112774).
Regarding claim 1, Barthel discloses an instrument (see Fig. 1 and paragraph 0046: measurement apparatus 1) comprising:
an input port (see Fig. 1 and paragraph 0046: measurement device 11 includes a number of one or more input terminals);
a display (see Fig. 1 and paragraph 0045: display 13);
one or more processors (see paragraphs 0021 and 0045: processing device 12 includes one or more processors); and
a computer readable medium storing instructions that, when executed by the one or more processors, cause the instrument to perform functions (see paragraph 0021: memory for providing instruction which may be executed by a processor to perform desired operations) comprising:
generating a first dataset indicating an amplitude of a signal detected at the input port over a time period (see Fig. 3 and paragraphs 0018, 0049, and 0056: measurement signal over of a period of time);
displaying the first dataset graphically on the display (see Fig. 3 and paragraph 0056 and 0058);
generating a second dataset indicating values derived from the signal over the time period (see Fig. 3 and paragraph 0058: displays a further measurement signal, possible to derive a further signal based on the acquired measurement signal); and
displaying the second dataset graphically on the display (see Fig. 3 and paragraph 0058: display further measurement signal 111 as a representation generated by measurement apparatus 1).
Barthel does not expressly disclose an oscilloscope wherein the signal is a voltage signal, i.e. first dataset indicates voltages of a signal; and
wherein the second signal is a derived characteristic of the signal over the time period.
Ashton discloses an oscilloscope (see paragraph 0020: oscilloscope) wherein the signal is a voltage signal, i.e. first dataset indicates voltages of a signal (see paragraphs 0027 and 0035: voltage signal); and
wherein the second signal is a derived characteristic of the signal over the time period (see Fig. 3 and paragraph 0028: derivative signal determined by computing the derivative of the applied voltage with respect to time, derivative is a characteristic with respect to the rate of change of the signal).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the invention of Barthel with the teachings of Ashton, i.e. using the oscilloscope to monitor a voltage signal as well as determining a derivative of the voltage signal, for the advantageous benefit of providing the oscilloscope with basic function for evaluating a device under test. The modifications equate to providing the oscilloscope of Barthel with basic functionality that is well understood, routine, and conventional in the art.
Regarding claim 6, Barthel, previously modified, discloses a user interface, the functions further comprising: receiving, via the user interface, a selection of a part of the first dataset, wherein generating the second dataset comprises generating the second dataset in response to receiving the selection (see paragraph 0026: rotary knob or any other kind of input device for receiving a user selection, i.e. a user interface for receiving a command; and see Fig. 3 and paragraphs 0057 and 0060: display shows a generated second data 121 set corresponding to a zoom selection of the first dataset, i.e. a selection of a part of the first dataset).
Regarding claim 7, Barthel, previously modified, discloses a user interface, the functions further comprising receiving, via the user interface, a selection of a first portion of the second dataset; and displaying a second portion of the first dataset on the display in response to receiving the selection, wherein the second portion of the first dataset and the first portion of the second dataset correspond to a common portion of the time period (see paragraph 0026: rotary knob or any other kind of input device for receiving a user selection, i.e. a user interface for receiving a command; and see Fig. 3 and paragraphs 0057 and 0060: display shows a generated second data 121 set corresponding to a zoom selection of the first dataset, i.e. a selection of a part of the first dataset, and a generated first dataset 120 with a common portion of the time period).
Regarding claim 8, Barthel, previously modified, discloses wherein receiving the selection comprises receiving a command to move a cursor within the display such that the cursor is aligned with the first portion of the second dataset (see Fig. 3 and paragraphs 0026, 0051, 0057 and 0060: cursor aligned with the first portion of the second dataset with respect to the zoom selection as shown on the display, cursor may be positioned in a desired position using knob or touchscreen, i.e. command moves the cursor).
Regarding claim 9, Barthel, previously modified, discloses wherein receiving the selection comprises receiving a touchscreen gesture at a position within the display at which the first portion of the second dataset is displayed (see Fig. 3 and paragraphs 0026, 0051, 0057 and 0060: possible to specify a desired position of the cursor (and the corresponding zoom window) by means of a touch display, the touch command is a basic touch gesture as touch gestures include simple touches/taps as well as more complex movements).
Regarding claim 10, Barthel does not expressly disclose wherein the voltages are instantaneous voltages of the signal.
Ashton discloses wherein the voltages are instantaneous voltages of the signal (see paragraphs 0022 and 0035: instantaneous voltage).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the invention of Barthel with the teachings of Ashton, i.e. allowing the oscilloscope to monitor and display instantaneous voltage values, for the advantageous benefit of allowing a user to view voltage values in real time on the display.
Regarding claim 11, Barthel, previously modified, discloses wherein displaying the second dataset comprises displaying the second dataset simultaneously with displaying the first dataset (see Fig. 3 and paragraphs 0024 and 0058: visual representation displayed by the display shows both the first dataset and the second dataset on the same image, i.e. at the same time).
Regarding claim 20, Barthel discloses a method (see paragraph 0006: measurement method) comprising:
generating a first dataset indicating an amplitude of a signal detected at an input port over a time period (see Fig. 3 and paragraphs 0018, 0049, and 0056: measurement signal over of a period of time; and see Fig. 1 and paragraph 0046: measurement device 11 includes a number of one or more input terminals);
displaying the first dataset graphically on a display (see Fig. 3 and paragraph 0056 and 0058);
generating a second dataset indicating values derived from the signal over the time period (see Fig. 3 and paragraph 0058: displays a further measurement signal, possible to derive a further signal based on the acquired measurement signal); and
displaying the second dataset graphically on the display (see Fig. 3 and paragraph 0058: display further measurement signal 111 as a representation generated by measurement apparatus 1).
Barthel does not expressly disclose a measurement method wherein the signal is a voltage signal, i.e. first dataset indicates voltages of a signal; and
wherein the second signal is a derived characteristic of the signal over the time period.
Ashton discloses an oscilloscope measurement method (see Abstract and paragraph 0020: oscilloscope/device and method) wherein the signal is a voltage signal, i.e. first dataset indicates voltages of a signal (see paragraphs 0027 and 0035: voltage signal); and
wherein the second signal is a derived characteristic of the signal over the time period (see Fig. 3 and paragraph 0028: derivative signal determined by computing the derivative of the applied voltage with respect to time, derivative is a characteristic with respect to the rate of change of the signal).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the invention of Barthel with the teachings of Ashton, i.e. monitoring a voltage signal as well as determining a derivative of the voltage signal, for the advantageous benefit of providing the oscilloscope with basic function for evaluating a device under test. The modifications equate to providing the oscilloscope of Barthel with basic functionality that is well understood, routine, and conventional in the art.
Claims 2 and 4 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Barthel (US 20200341033) in view of Ashton (US 20120112774) and Wurth (US 7699142).
Regarding claim 2, Barthel discloses wherein displaying the first dataset comprises displaying a first part of the first dataset corresponding to a first portion of the time period (see Fig. 3).
Barthel and Ashton do not expressly disclose wherein displaying the first dataset comprises replacing the first part within the display with a second part of the first dataset corresponding to a second portion of the time period that follows the first portion.
Wurth discloses an oscilloscope that displays a dataset wherein displaying the dataset comprises displaying a first part of the dataset corresponding to a first portion of the time period and replacing the first part within the display with a second part of the dataset corresponding to a second portion of the time period that follows the first portion (see column 6 lines 22-44: In one embodiment of the diagnostic system 10, the oscilloscope display 50 includes a display of data on a real-time basis, updates the display with new information, i.e. new information corresponds to a portion of the time period that follows the first portion as it naturally occurs later in time).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the invention of Barthel with the teachings of Wurth, i.e. updating the display to show data in real-time, for the advantageous benefit of providing the oscilloscope with basic function for viewing the measured data in real-time. The modifications equate to providing the oscilloscope of Barthel with basic functionality of traditional oscilloscopes that is well understood, routine, and conventional in the art.
Once modified, providing Barthel with the functionality to update the display to display the first data set of Barthel in real time, the modification would meet the limitations of replacing the first part within the display with a second part of the first dataset corresponding to a second portion of the time period that follows the first portion.
Regarding claim 4, Barthel discloses wherein displaying the second dataset comprises displaying a first part of the second dataset corresponding to a first portion of the time period (see Fig. 3).
Barthel and Ashton do not expressly disclose replacing the first part within the display with a second part of the second dataset corresponding to a second portion of the time period that follows the first portion.
Wurth discloses an oscilloscope that displays a dataset wherein displaying the dataset comprises displaying a first part of the dataset corresponding to a first portion of the time period and replacing the first part within the display with a second part of the dataset corresponding to a second portion of the time period that follows the first portion (see column 6 lines 22-44: In one embodiment of the diagnostic system 10, the oscilloscope display 50 includes a display of data on a real-time basis, updates the display with new information, i.e. new information corresponds to a portion of the time period that follows the first portion as it naturally occurs later in time).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the invention of Barthel with the teachings of Wurth, i.e. updating the display to view data in real-time, for the advantageous benefit of providing the oscilloscope with basic function for viewing the measured data in real-time. The modifications equate to providing the oscilloscope of Barthel with basic functionality of traditional oscilloscopes that is well understood, routine, and conventional in the art.
Once modified, providing Barthel with the functionality to update the display to display the second data set of Barthel in real time, the modification would meet the limitations of replacing the first part within the display with a second part of the second dataset corresponding to a second portion of the time period that follows the first portion.
Claims 3 and 5 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Barthel (US 20200341033) in view of Ashton (US 20120112774), Wurth (US 7699142), and Frankovitch (US 5923161).
Regarding claim 3, Barthel discloses a user interface, the functions further comprising receiving a command via the user interface (see paragraph 0026: rotary knob or any other kind of input device for receiving a user selection, i.e. a user interface for receiving a command).
Barthel, Ashton, and Wurth do not expressly disclose causing the replacing the first part within the display to stop in response to receiving the command.
Frankovitch discloses a measuring device/oscilloscope wherein receiving a command via a user interface causing the display to freeze, i.e. causing the previously discussed replacing the first part within the display to stop, in response to receiving the command (see column 5 line 64 to column 6 line 9: freeze/run button 22 stops the movement of waveforms on the display 12 and displays the waveform currently on the display as a still frame until the freeze button is pressed again).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the invention of Barthel with the teachings of Frankovitch, i.e. enabling the user interface to work with a stop/freeze command, for the advantageous benefit allowing a user to pause the display so one has ample time to examine a still waveform if so desired.
Regarding claim 5, Barthel discloses a user interface, the functions further comprising receiving a command via the user interface (see paragraph 0026: rotary knob or any other kind of input device for receiving a user selection, i.e. a user interface for receiving a command).
Barthel, Ashton, and Wurth do not expressly disclose causing the replacing the first part within the display to stop in response to receiving the command.
Frankovitch discloses a measuring device/oscilloscope wherein receiving a command via a user interface causing the display to freeze, i.e. causing the previously discussed replacing the first part within the display to stop, in response to receiving the command (see column 5 line 64 to column 6 line 9: freeze/run button 22 stops the movement of waveforms on the display 12 and displays the waveform currently on the display as a still frame until the freeze button is pressed again).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the invention of Barthel with the teachings of Frankovitch, i.e. enabling the user interface to accept a stop/freeze command, for the advantageous benefit allowing a user to pause the display so one has ample time to examine a still waveform if so desired.
Claim 12 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Barthel (US 20200341033) in view of Ashton (US 20120112774) and Villa (US 5804970).
Regarding claim 12, Barthel and Ashton do not expressly disclose wherein the derived characteristic is a duty cycle of the signal, a pulse width of the signal, a period of the signal, an average value of the signal, a DC voltage of the signal, a root mean square (RMS) value of the signal, or a frequency of the signal.
Villa discloses wherein the derived characteristic is a duty cycle of the signal, a pulse width of the signal, a period of the signal, an average value of the signal, a DC voltage of the signal, a root mean square (RMS) value of the signal, or a frequency of the signal (see Fig. 12 and column 7 lines 12-19: pulse width of the signal over time).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the invention of Barthel with the teachings of Villa, i.e. analyzing the pulse width of a signal over time, for the advantageous benefit of allow a user to visually view any variations in pulse width of a signal over time.
Claims 18-19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Barthel (US 20200341033) in view of Ashton (US 20120112774) and Amano (DE-69634242), see attached English Translation.
Regarding claim 18, Barthel and Ashton do not expressly disclose further comprising the functions further comprising: generating a third dataset indicating second values of a second derived characteristic of the signal over the time period; and displaying the third dataset graphically on the display.
Amano discloses an oscilloscope with functions comprising generating a third dataset indicating second values of a second derived characteristic of the signal over the time period and displaying the third dataset graphically on the display (see Figs 14 (a)(b)(c), page 3 second paragraph, and page 4 third paragraph: oscilloscope 204 For example, three types of plethysmogram waveform graphics are displayed: the plethysmogram waveform and the first and second derivative waveforms).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the invention of Barthel with the teachings of Amano, i.e. allowing an oscilloscope to determine and display both a first and second characteristic, for the advantageous benefit of allowing a user to visually view the original signal in addition to a plurality of various characteristics of the signal over time.
Regarding claim 19, Barthel previously discussed simultaneous displaying a plurality of signals (see Fig. 3 and paragraphs 0024 and 0058: visual representation displayed by the display shows both the first dataset and the second dataset on the same image, i.e. at the same time).
Barthel and Ashton do not expressly disclose further wherein displaying the third dataset comprises displaying the third dataset simultaneously with displaying the first dataset.
Amano discloses an oscilloscope with functions comprising wherein displaying the third dataset comprises displaying the third dataset with displaying the first dataset (see Figs 14 (a)(b)(c), page 3 second paragraph, and page 4 third paragraph: oscilloscope 204 For example, three types of plethysmogram waveform graphics are displayed: the plethysmogram waveform and the first and second derivative waveforms).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the invention of Barthel with the teachings of Amano, i.e. allowing an oscilloscope to determine and display both a first and second characteristic, for the advantageous benefit of allowing a user to visually view the original signal as well as various characteristics of the signal over time. Once modified the modification teaches displaying the third and first datasets simultaneous as Barthel previously expressed displaying multiple data sets simultaneously.
Relevant Prior Art
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Gauland (US 6571185) discloses an oscilloscope configured to display a variety of waveforms simultaneously.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to MICHAEL J DALBO whose telephone number is (571)270-3727. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 9AM - 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, Andrew Schechter can be reached at (571) 272-2302. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300.
Information regarding the status of published or unpublished applications may be obtained from Patent Center. Unpublished application information in Patent Center is available to registered users. To file and manage patent submissions in Patent Center, visit: https://patentcenter.uspto.gov. Visit https://www.uspto.gov/patents/apply/patent-center for more information about Patent Center and https://www.uspto.gov/patents/docx for information about filing in DOCX format. For additional questions, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
/MICHAEL J DALBO/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2857