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 .
In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status.
DETAILED ACTION
Claims status
Claims 1-10 are pending as the applicant filed Preliminary Amendment on 08/14/2023.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
2. 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.
Regarding claim 1-10, the terms “abnormality candidate” “a type of a second wiring cable” “failure diagnosis” are vague and a relative term that renders the claim indefinite. The terms “abnormality candidate” “a type of a second wiring cable” “failure diagnosis” are 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 appraised of the scope of the invention. An artisan doing measuring and testing would not know at what point “abnormality candidate” “a type of a second wiring cable” “failure diagnosis” within the scope of the claim had been accomplished because nothing within the disclosure establishes when a sufficient “abnormality candidate” “a type of a second wiring cable” “failure diagnosis” occur.
Note: In view of the PTO compact prosecution, the Examiner notes that due to the indefiniteness issues described above all consideration of the merits of the claims in view of prior art is as best understood.
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 1-10 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, Step 1 the claim is a process (or machine) (Yes),
Step 2A Prong One, does the claim recite an abstract idea? current claim related to a diagnosis support system for a work machine, the diagnosis support system comprising: a display apparatus; and a controller that specifies a diagnosed portion in the work machine based on candidate information of an abnormality candidate in the work machine, specifies a first sensor connection position of a diagnosis sensor for diagnosis of the diagnosed portion, and controls the display apparatus to display position information of the first sensor connection position which is an abstract idea of mental process (MPEP 2106.04(a)) or data gathering equivalent to mathematical concept or mathematical manipulation function (MPEP 2106.04 (a) (2) (concept need not be expressed in mathematical symbols, because "[w]ords used in a claim operating on data to solve a problem can serve the same purpose as a formula), (OR Mathematical Concepts and Mental Processes)
Step 2A Prong One: Yes.
Step 2A Prong Two, is the claim directed to an abstract idea? In other words, does claim recite additional elements that integrate the Judicial Exception into a practical application? there is no more additional elements.
Step 2A Prong Two: NO.
Step 2B, Does the claim recite additional element that amount to significantly more than the Judicial exception? there is no more additional elements.
Step 2B: No. claim 1 not eligible.
Claim 9, Step 1 the claim is a process (or machine) (Yes),
Step 2A Prong One, does the claim recite an abstract idea? current claim related to a diagnosis support method for a work machine having a display apparatus, the diagnosis support method comprising: specifying a diagnosed portion in the work machine based on candidate information of an abnormality candidate in the work machine; specifying a first sensor connection position of a diagnosis sensor for diagnosis of the diagnosed portion; and controlling the display apparatus to display position information of the first sensor connection position which is an abstract idea of mental process (MPEP 2106.04(a)) or data gathering equivalent to mathematical concept or mathematical manipulation function (MPEP 2106.04 (a) (2) (concept need not be expressed in mathematical symbols, because "[w]ords used in a claim operating on data to solve a problem can serve the same purpose as a formula), (OR Mathematical Concepts and Mental Processes)
Step 2A Prong One: Yes.
Step 2A Prong Two, is the claim directed to an abstract idea? In other words, does claim recite additional elements that integrate the Judicial Exception into a practical application? there is no more additional elements.
Step 2A Prong Two: NO.
Step 2B, Does the claim recite additional element that amount to significantly more than the Judicial exception? there is no more additional elements.
Step 2B: No. claim 9 not eligible.
The depend claims:
Regarding claim 2, the controller controls the display apparatus to display information on a work procedure for connecting the diagnosis sensor to the first sensor connection position.
Regarding claim 3, a monitoring sensor connected to a second sensor connection position of the work machine, wherein the controller determines whether or not the first sensor connection position is different from the second sensor connection position.
Regarding claim 4, wherein when the controller has determined that the first sensor connection position is different from the second sensor connection position, the controller determines whether or not reconnection of the monitoring sensor from the second sensor connection position to the first sensor connection position is possible.
Regarding claim 5, wherein in the determination on whether or not reconnection of the monitoring sensor from the second sensor connection position to the first sensor connection position is possible, the controller determines whether or not a type of a first wiring cable for the first sensor connection position matches a type of a second wiring cable for the second sensor connection position.
Regarding claim 6, wherein when the controller has determined that reconnection of the monitoring sensor from the second sensor connection position to the first sensor connection position is possible, the controller controls the display apparatus to give an instruction on reconnection of the monitoring sensor from the second sensor connection position to the first sensor connection position.
Regarding claim 7, wherein the controller recognizes the monitoring sensor as the diagnosis sensor connected to the first sensor connection position, based on a signal indicating that reconnection of the monitoring sensor from the second sensor connection position to the first sensor connection position is completed.
Regarding claim 8, the failure diagnosis system comprising: the diagnosis support system for a work machine according to the diagnosis sensor connected to the first sensor connection position, wherein the controller analyzes an operating characteristic of the work machine based on a detection signal from the diagnosis sensor.
Regarding claim 10, analyzing, after the diagnosis support method for a work machine an operating characteristic of the work machine based on a detection signal from the diagnosis sensor connected to the first sensor connection position.
The above dependent claims similar claims analysis for claim 1 and 9 as the dependent claims merely recite further data characterization and mathematical concepts that are part of the abstract idea, claims 2-8 and 10 not eligible as well.
-
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.
Claim(s) 1-10 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102 (2) (1) as being anticipated by HUANG, CN 109519368 A, DATE PUBLISHED: 2019-03-26, CPC G06Q 10/20.
Regarding claim 1:
HUANG described diagnosis support system for a work machine, the diagnosis support system comprising (abstract, man machine): a display apparatus (page 3, display); and a controller that specifies a diagnosed portion in the work machine based on candidate information of an abnormality candidate in the work machine (page 3, sensor abnormality judgment?), specifies a first sensor connection position of a diagnosis sensor for diagnosis of the diagnosed portion (page 3, impact sensor mounting position), and controls the display apparatus to display position information of the first sensor connection position (page 5, to display?).
Regarding claim 9:
HUANG described a diagnosis support method for a work machine having a display apparatus (abstract, man machine), the diagnosis support method comprising: specifying a diagnosed portion in the work machine based on candidate information of an abnormality candidate in the work machine (page 3, sensor abnormality judgment?); specifying a first sensor connection position of a diagnosis sensor for diagnosis of the diagnosed portion (page 3, impact sensor mounting position); and controlling the display apparatus to display position information of the first sensor connection position (page 5, to display?).
Regarding claim 2, HUANG further described wherein the controller controls the display apparatus to display information on a work procedure for connecting the diagnosis sensor to the first sensor connection position (page 3, impact sensor mounting position, sensor abnormality judgment?).
Regarding claim 3, HUANG further described a monitoring sensor connected to a second sensor connection position of the work machine, wherein the controller determines whether or not the first sensor connection position is different from the second sensor connection position (page 5, mounting position is not reasonable?).
Regarding claim 4, HUANG further described wherein when the controller has determined that the first sensor connection position is different from the second sensor connection position, the controller determines whether or not reconnection of the monitoring sensor from the second sensor connection position to the first sensor connection position is possible (page 5, mounting position is not reasonable?).
Regarding claim 5, HUANG further described wherein in the determination on whether or not reconnection of the monitoring sensor from the second sensor connection position to the first sensor connection position is possible, the controller determines whether or not a type of a first wiring cable for the first sensor connection position matches a type of a second wiring cable for the second sensor connection position (page 5, Impact sensor wire from loosing?).
Regarding claim 6, HUANG further described wherein when the controller has determined that reconnection of the monitoring sensor from the second sensor connection position to the first sensor connection position is possible (page 2,
state monitoring), the controller controls the display apparatus (page 3 display) to give an instruction on reconnection of the monitoring sensor from the second sensor connection position to the first sensor connection position (page 2, starting diagnosis rule).
Regarding claim 7, HUANG further described wherein the controller recognizes the monitoring sensor as the diagnosis sensor connected to the first sensor connection position, based on a signal indicating that reconnection of the monitoring sensor from the second sensor connection position to the first sensor connection position is completed (page 5, different position reasonable?).
Regarding claim 8, HUANG further described e diagnosis sensor connected to the first sensor connection position, wherein the controller analyzes an operating characteristic of the work machine based on a detection signal from the diagnosis sensor (page 5, Impact sensor wire from loosing?).
Regarding claim 10, HUANG further described, an operating characteristic of the work machine based on a detection signal from the diagnosis sensor connected to the first sensor connection position (page 3, after detecting some failure, then set diagnosis).
Contact information
5. Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Tung Lau whose telephone number is (571)272-2274, email is Tungs.lau@uspto.gov. The examiner can normally be reached on Tuesday-Friday 7:00 AM-5:00 PM EST.
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, TURNER SHELBY, can be reached on 571-272-6334. 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 https://ppair-my.uspto.gov/pair/PrivatePair. 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.
/TUNG S LAU/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2857
Technology Center 2800
November 3, 2025
.