DETAILED ACTIONAcknowledgment is made of applicant’s amendment filed 12/31/25. 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 . Claim Objections
Claim 1 is objected to because of the following informality: On line 9, “the correlation matrix” lacks antecedent basis. Appropriate correction is required.
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 - 11 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 101 because the claimed
invention is directed to a judicial exception (i.e., a law of nature, a natural phenomenon, or an abstract idea) without significantly more. Claim 1 is directed to the abstract idea of receiving strain measurements froma network of optical sensors, calculating total strain energy using the received strain measurements, detecting a heavy load on a structure, computing a speed of each event of heavy load detection, resampling strain profiles for all events to have a same speed and amplitude, classifying resampled strain profiles of a correlation matrix and determining whether the heavy load results from a superload vehicle or the environmental event based on the classification.
The steps of the claims describe the concept of receiving strain measurements using optical sensors, detecting a heavy load on a structure using a module, and calculating total strain energy using the received strain measurements, computing a speed of each event of heavy load detection, resampling strain profiles for all events to have a same speed and amplitude, classifying resampled strain profiles of a correlation matrix and determining whether the heavy load results from a superload vehicle or the environmental event based on the classification using a processor which are considered abstract ideas.
The claim limitations are similar to those previously found by the courts to be
abstract such as organizing and manipulating information through mathematical
correlations in Digitech Image Techs., LLC v. Electronics for Imaging, Inc. 758 F. 3d 1344,
1350, 111 USPQ2d 1717, 1721 (Fed. Cir. 2014) and collecting information, analyzing
it, and displaying certain results of the collection and analysis in Electric Power Group,
LLC v. Alstom, S.A., 830 F. 3d 1350, 119 USPQ2d 1739 (Fed. Cir. 2016). All of these
concepts relate to tracking, organizing or analyzing information. The concepts
described in the claims are not meaningfully different than concepts of gathering data
found by the courts to be abstract ideas. As such, the descriptions in the claims of
receiving, calculating, detecting, computing, resampling, classifying, and determining is an abstract idea.
The claims do not include additional elements that are sufficient to amount to
significantly more than the judicial exception because the additional elements are
generic controller elements claimed to perform their basic functions of receiving, calculating, detecting, computing, resampling, classifying, and determining. The recitation of the controller limitations amounts to mere instructions to implement the abstract idea. Taking the elements both individually and as a combination, the components at each step of the process perform purely generic computer functions. The claims as a whole do not amount to significantly more than the abstract idea itself because they would be routine in any computer implementation. With respect to Digitech, the courts found that claims drawn to organizing and
manipulating data through mathematical correlations using a controller was an
abstract idea. The present invention relates to calculating total strain energy using received strain measurements. Taking the courts' opinion in Digitech into consideration in view of the claimed subject matter of the instant application, the controller performs generic computer functions routinely used in computer applications. Generic computer components recited as performing generic computer functions that are understood, routine and conventional activities amount to no more than implementing the abstract idea with a computerized system (See Yan et al., 12,352,643, “Traffic Monitoring Using Optical Sensors”).
With respect to Electric Power Group, the courts found that claims drawn to
collecting data, analyzing data, and displaying certain results of the collection and
analysis was an abstract idea. The present invention relates to receiving strain measurements, processing the strain measurements, detecting a heavy load, computing the speed of the heavy loads, and organizing strain profiles to determine heavy load criteria based on the strain profiles. Taking the courts' opinion in Electric Power Group into consideration in view of the claimed subject matter of the instant application, simply outputting the results of an analysis is considered to be abstract. Furthermore, there is no indication that the
receiving and determining steps are performed by any specific structure and in view of
Electric Power Group is an extension of the abstract idea presented in Digitech. Thus,
generic computer components recited as performing generic computer functions that
are understood, routine and conventional activities amount to no more than
implementing the abstract idea with a computerized system (See Yan et al., 12,352,643, “Traffic Monitoring Using Optical Sensors”).
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 12 – 22 are allowed.
The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter: The primary reasons for indicating allowable subject matter is that the prior art does not anticipate or make obvious the provisions of “compute a speed of each event of heavy load detection; resample strain profiles for all events to have a same speed and amplitude; classify resampled strain profiles of the correlation matrix as corresponding to superload vehicles, environmental events, non-superload vehicles, and non- environmental events; and determine whether the heavy load results from a superload vehicle or the environmental event based on the classification” in combination with the other limitations presented in claim 12. Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments, on Pg. 1, Para. 4, with respect to these claims have been considered but are moot because the new ground of rejection does not rely on any reference applied in the prior rejection of record for any teaching or matter specifically challenged in the argument.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.9. Yan et al. (12,352,643) disclose traffic monitoring using optical sensors. Pan (CN105788251) discloses based on beidou car network truck overload real-time monitoring system and method. Kim (KR20060086134) discloses a method and system for controlling overloaded vehicle.10. Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to OCTAVIA HOLLINGTON whose telephone number is (571)272-2176. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 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, John Breene can be reached at 5712724107. 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.
/OCTAVIA HOLLINGTON/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2855 4/3/26