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 .
Claim Objections
Claims are objected to because of the following informalities:
Claim 1, line 4, “the testing datasets”, should read, “the one or more non-destructive testing datasets”.
Claim 6, line 8, “the testing datasets”, should read, “the one or more non-destructive testing datasets”.
Appropriate correction is required.
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 1-10 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 and 6 both recite a limitation “the sensitivity of instruments”. Claims 1 and 6 do not have a previous recitation of “the sensitivity of instruments” and as a result, lacks proper antecedent basis. For example, a lack of clarity could arise where a claim refers to “said lever” or “the lever”, where the claim contains no earlier recitation or limitation of lever and as a result, it would be unclear as to what element the limitation was making reference to (MPEP 2173.05(e) [R-07.2015]).
Regarding claims 2 and 7, the phrase "such as" renders the claim indefinite because it is unclear whether the limitations following the phrase are part of the claimed invention. See MPEP § 2173.05(d).
Regarding claims 3 and 8, the phrase "such as" renders the claim indefinite because it is unclear whether the limitations following the phrase are part of the claimed invention. See MPEP § 2173.05(d).
Regarding claims 4 and 9, the phrase "parameters like" renders the claim indefinite because it is unclear whether the limitations following the phrase are part of the claimed invention. See MPEP § 2173.05(d).
Regarding Claim 9, please note that claim 9 currently depends on claim 6 and recites, “wherein randomizing of the critical statistical parameters is performed based on flow parameters…”. However, claim 6 does not have any step of randomizing of the critical statistical parameter as a result, it lacks proper antecedent basis. It appears that claim 8 recite this step and claim 9 should depend on claim 8.
Regarding Claims 5 and 10, the phrase “one or more datasets similar to the input non-destructive” renders the claim indefinite because the term “similar” is a relative term. The term “similar” is not defined by the claim, the specification does not provide a standard for ascertaining the requisite degree, and one of ordinary skill in the art would not be reasonably apprised of the scope of the invention.
Claims 5 and 10 both recite a limitation “the DCGAN structure”. Claims 1, 6, 5 and 10 do not have a previous recitation of “the DCGAN structure” and as a result, lacks proper antecedent basis. For example, a lack of clarity could arise where a claim refers to “said lever” or “the lever”, where the claim contains no earlier recitation or limitation of lever and as a result, it would be unclear as to what element the limitation was making reference to (MPEP 2173.05(e) [R-07.2015]).
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 1-10 would be allowable if rewritten or amended to overcome the rejection(s) under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), 2nd paragraph, set forth in this Office action. Note: Any change in the scope of the claim may necessitate new grounds of rejections.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Meredith et al. (US 2010/0250148 A1).
Soni et al. (US 2020/0134446 A1).
Struke (US 2020/0051229 A1).
Walters et al. (US 2020/0012902 A1).
Jack et al. (US 2021/0302385 A1).
Dominguez et al. (US 2014/0047934 A1).
Grellou et al. (US 2014/0278292 A1).
Jauriqui et al. (US 2021/0382016 A1).
Howard et al. (US 2021/0107539 A1).
Rowell et al. (US 11,257,272 B2).
Cinnamon et al. (US 10,210,631 B1).
Shrnivasamurthy et al. (US 2020/0371512 A1).
Soni et al. (US 11,984,201 B2).
X. Dong, C. J. Taylor and T. F. Cootes, "Defect Detection and Classification by Training a Generic Convolutional Neural Network Encoder," in IEEE Transactions on Signal Processing, vol. 68, pp. 6055-6069, 2020, doi: 10.1109/TSP.2020.3031188.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to YOGESH PALIWAL whose telephone number is (571)270-1807. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 9:00AM-5:00PM.
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, Amir Mehrmanesh can be reached at (571)270-3351. 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.
/YOGESH PALIWAL/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2435