DETAILED ACTION
The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
Status of claims
Claims 1-12 and 14-21 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 101.
Claim 13 is cancelled.
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 14-21 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 101 because the claimed invention is directed to non-statutory subject matter.
Independent claim 1:
1. (Original) A system comprising:
an electrical apparatus comprising:
a housing that defines an interior space;
an active portion in the interior space; and
insulation configured to electrically insulate at least part of the active portion; and
a monitoring apparatus configured to:
receive measured data from the electrical apparatus;
determine a load forecast for the electrical apparatus based on the measured data;
determine whether a pre-determined time interval has elapsed; and
after the pre-determined time interval has elapsed:
estimate an actual amount of life lost for the insulation during the pre-determined time interval that elapsed based on the measured data;
estimate a predicted amount of life lost for the insulation during one or more future time intervals based on the load forecast; and
estimate a remaining service life for the electrical apparatus based on the actual amount of life lost and the predicted amount of life lost.
Analysis Steps for claim 1:
Step 1: Is claim 1 claim to a process, machine, manufacture or composition of matter?
Yes, claim 1 recites a system which is within one of the 4 statutory categories the process, machine, manufacture or composition of matter.
Step 2a) Prong One: Does claim 1 recite an abstract idea, law of nature, or natural phenomenon?
Yes, claim 1 recites “determine a load forecast for the electrical apparatus based on the measured data” may be done by human mental process by determine the load forecast through calculation of the measured data; therefore, human mental process is abstract idea.
Yes, claim 1 recites “determine whether a pre-determined time interval has elapsed” may be done by human mental process by counting down the pre-determined time interval; therefore, human mental process is abstract idea.
Yes, claim 1 recites “estimate an actual amount of life lost for the insulation during the pre-determined time interval that elapsed based on the measured data; estimate a predicted amount of life lost for the insulation during one or more future time intervals based on the load forecast; and estimate a remaining service life for the electrical apparatus based on the actual amount of life lost and the predicted amount of life lost” may be done by mathematical calculations based on the measured data; therefore, mathematical calculations are abstract ideas.
Step 2a) Prong Two: Does claim 1 recite additional element that integrate the Judicial Exception into a Practical Application?
No, claim 1 recites additional elements “an electrical apparatus comprising: a housing that defines an interior space; an active portion in the interior space; and insulation configured to electrically insulate at least part of the active portion” which is a general transformer having general components which is being merely used in generating measurement data which does not integrate the Judicial Exception into a Practical Application because the additional elements do not impose any meaningful limits on practicing the abstract ideas.
No, claim 1 recites additional elements “a monitoring apparatus configured to receive measured data from the electrical apparatus” which may be a general computer is merely used in receive and process the measurement data which does not integrate the Judicial Exception into a Practical Application because the additional elements do not impose any meaningful limits on practicing the abstract ideas.
Step 2b): Does claim 1 recite additional elements that amount to significantly more than the Judicial Exception?
No, when considering claim 1 as a whole, the used of electrical apparatus to generate measurement data and the use of monitoring apparatus to receive and process measurement data not amount to significantly more than judicial exception.
Therefore, claim 1 is not eligible subject matter under 35 U.S.C. 101.
Regarding claims 2-3, claims 2-3 are analogously rejected as in claim 1 where they may be done through mental activities and thoughts, and mental activities and thoughts are abstract ideas.
Regarding claims 4-10, claims 4-10 are general pre-solution activities; therefore, they are analogously rejected as in claim 1 where they do not recite additional elements that integrate the claimed abstract ideas into a practical application.
Independent claim 11:
11. (Currently Amended) A system comprising:
an electrical apparatus comprising:
a housing that defines an interior space;
an active portion in the interior space; and
insulation configured to electrically insulate at least part of the active portion; and
a monitoring apparatus configured to:
access one or more desired load parameters related to future operation of the
electrical apparatus, wherein the one or more desired load parameters comprise one or
more desired load factors, wherein each desired load factor represents a ratio between a requested load of the electrical apparatus and a rated load of the electrical apparatus;
predict a hotspot temperature of the insulation based on each of the one or more desired load parameters; and
estimate an overload capability of the electrical apparatus based on the predicted
hotspot temperature, wherein the overload capability comprises at least one load factor
and a time duration during which the electrical apparatus is capable of being operated at the at least one load factor.
Analysis Steps for claim 11:
Step 1: Is claim 11 claim to a process, machine, manufacture or composition of matter?
Yes, claim 11 recites a system which is within one of the 4 statutory categories the process, machine, manufacture or composition of matter.
Step 2a) Prong One: Does claim 11 recite an abstract idea, law of nature, or natural phenomenon?
Yes, claim 11 recites “, wherein the one or more desired load parameters comprise one or more desired load factors, wherein each desired load factor represents a ratio between a requested load of the electrical apparatus and a rated load of the electrical apparatus” may be done by human mental calculation process through paper and pen by determine the ratio through calculation of the requested load and rated load; therefore, human mental calculation process is abstract idea.
Yes, claim 11 recites “predict a hotspot temperature of the insulation based on each of the one or more desired load parameters” may be done by human mental process by predicting the hotspot temperature using mathematical correlation of the ratio of the load parameters previously determined; therefore, human mental process is abstract idea.
Yes, claim 11 recites “estimate an overload capability of the electrical apparatus based on the predicted hotspot temperature, wherein the overload capability comprises at least one load factor and a time duration during which the electrical apparatus is capable of being operated at the at least one load factor” may be done by mathematical calculations based on previous calculated load factor; therefore, mathematical calculations are abstract ideas.
Step 2a) Prong Two: Does claim 11 recite additional element that integrate the Judicial Exception into a Practical Application?
No, claim 11 recites additional elements “an electrical apparatus comprising: a housing that defines an interior space; an active portion in the interior space; and insulation configured to electrically insulate at least part of the active portion” which is a general transformer having general components which is being merely used in generating measurement data which does not integrate the Judicial Exception into a Practical Application because the additional elements do not impose any meaningful limits on practicing the abstract ideas.
No, claim 11 recites additional elements “a monitoring apparatus configured to: access one or more desired load parameters related to future operation of the electrical apparatus” which may be a general computer is merely used in receive and process the measurement data which does not integrate the Judicial Exception into a Practical Application because the additional elements do not impose any meaningful limits on practicing the abstract ideas.
Step 2b): Does claim 11 recite additional elements that amount to significantly more than the Judicial Exception?
No, when considering claim 1 as a whole, the used of electrical apparatus to generate measurement data and the use of monitoring apparatus to receive and process measurement data not amount to significantly more than judicial exception.
Therefore, claim 11 is not eligible subject matter under 35 U.S.C. 101.
Regarding claims 12 and 15, claims 12 and 15 are general pre-solution activities; therefore, they are analogously rejected as in claim 11 where they do not recite additional elements that integrate the claimed abstract ideas into a practical application.
Regarding claim 14, claims 14 is analogously rejected as in claim 11 where it may be done through mental activities and thoughts, and mental activities and thoughts to perform mathematical calculation processes which are abstract ideas.
Independent claim 16:
16. (Previously Presented) A monitoring apparatus for estimating a remaining service life of an electrical apparatus that comprises insulation in an interior region, the monitoring apparatus comprising:
an interface configured to: receive measured data from the electrical apparatus, the measured data comprising measured values of operating properties of the electrical apparatus;
an electronic processing module; and
an electronic storage coupled to the electronic processing module, the electronic storage comprising machine-readable instructions that, when executed, cause the electronic processing module to:
determine a load forecast based on the measured data;
determine whether a pre-determined time interval has elapsed; and
if the pre-determined time interval has elapsed:
estimate an actual amount of life lost for the insulation during the pre-
determined time interval that elapsed based on the measured data;
estimate a predicted amount of life lost for the insulation during one or
more future time intervals based on the load forecast; and
estimate a remaining service life for the electrical apparatus based on the
actual amount of life lost and the predicted amount of life lost.
Analysis Steps for claim 16:
Step 1: Is claim 16 claim to a process, machine, manufacture or composition of matter?
Yes, claim 16 recites a monitoring apparatus which is within one of the 4 statutory categories the process, machine, manufacture or composition of matter.
Step 2a) Prong One: Does claim 16 recite an abstract idea, law of nature, or natural phenomenon?
Yes, claim 16 recites “determine a load forecast based on the measured data;
determine whether a pre-determined time interval has elapsed” may be done by human mentally prediction and determine a load forecast by mentally analyze the measure data, and mentally check to determine if a pre-determined time interval has elapsed or not, as a result; therefore, activities performed by human mentally are abstract idea.
Yes, claim 16 recites “if the pre-determined time interval has elapsed:
estimate an actual amount of life lost for the insulation during the pre-
determined time interval that elapsed based on the measured data;
estimate a predicted amount of life lost for the insulation during one or
more future time intervals based on the load forecast; and
estimate a remaining service life for the electrical apparatus based on the
actual amount of life lost and the predicted amount of life lost” may be done by mathematical calculation, when interpreting these limitations in view of paragraphs [0061]-[0098] where mathematical Equaitons (1)-(19) are used in estimate the actual amount of life, predicted amount of life, and the remaining service life; therefore, performing mathematical calculations by using mathematical Equaitons are abstract idea.
Step 2a) Prong Two: Does claim 16 recite additional element that integrate the Judicial Exception into a Practical Application?
No, claim 16 recites additional elements “A monitoring apparatus” which does not integrate the Judicial Exception into a Practical Application because the additional elements do not impose any meaningful limits on practicing the abstract ideas.
When interpreting claim 16 in view of Fig. 2 and paragraphs [0048]-[0049] of applicant’s publish application, “the monitoring apparatus comprising: an electronic processing module; and an electronic storage coupled to the electronic processing module, the electronic storage comprising machine-readable instructions” may be interpreted as a general purpose computer having a general purpose central processing unit (CPU) 252 and electronic storage 254 storing computer instructions.
Using the CPU of a general purpose computer (the monitoring apparatus) to process the collected data stored in the electronic storage (e.g. computer storage/memory) to compute and estimate which does not integrate such abstract ideas (the mathematical calculations) into a practical application.
No, claim 16 recites additional elements “an interface configured to: receive measured data from the electrical apparatus, the measured data comprising measured values of operating properties of the electrical apparatus” which is a pre-solution activity merely using this electrical apparatus (recited at high level, basically any sensor capable of performing data mesurement) in collecting measurement data which does not integrate the Judicial Exception into a Practical Application because the additional elements do not impose any meaningful limits on practicing the abstract ideas.
Step 2b): Does claim 16 recite additional elements that amount to significantly more than the Judicial Exception?
No, when considering claim 16 as a whole, the use of monitoring apparatus (general computer) to process measurement data to perform estimation calculation process does not amount to significantly more than judicial exception.
Therefore, claim 16 is not eligible subject matter under 35 U.S.C. 101.
Regarding claims 17 and 18, claims 17 and 18 are general pre-solution activities; therefore, they are analogously rejected as in claim 16 where they do not recite additional elements that integrate the claimed abstract ideas into a practical application.
Regarding claim 19, it is pre-solution activities; therefore, it is analogously rejected as in in claim 16 where they do not recite additional elements that integrate the claimed abstract ideas into a practical application.
Regarding claims 20-21, they are post-solution activities; therefore, they are analogously rejected as in in claim 16 where they do not recite additional elements that integrate the claimed abstract ideas into a practical application.
PNG
media_image1.png
949
690
media_image1.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image2.png
690
768
media_image2.png
Greyscale
Prior Art of Record
The prior art made of record is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. Hyde et al. (US 2011/0012616) teaches “insulator 300 having three insulator disks or sheds 302-306. Insulator 300 includes surface reconditioner components 230A-230D and sensor 240 incorporated in portions of the insulator body” (e.g. [0064] and fig. 3).
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to HAIDONG ZHANG whose telephone number is (571)270-5815. The examiner can normally be reached on M-F 8:00 AM - 5:00 PM.
Examiner interviews are available via telephone, in-person, and video conferencing using a USPTO supplied web-based collaboration tool. To schedule an interview, applicant is encouraged to use the USPTO Automated Interview Request (AIR) at http://www.uspto.gov/interviewpractice.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Huy Phan can be reached on (571) 272-7924. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300.
Information regarding the status of an application may be obtained from the Patent Application Information Retrieval (PAIR) system. Status information for published applications may be obtained from either Private PAIR or Public PAIR. Status information for unpublished applications is available through Private PAIR only. For more information about the PAIR system, see http://pair-direct.uspto.gov. Should you have questions on access to the Private PAIR system, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative or access to the automated information system, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
/HAIDONG ZHANG/Examiner, Art Unit 2858
/HUY Q PHAN/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2858
Prosecution Insights