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 .
Status of Claims
This is a final office action in response to the amendment filed 04 December 2025. Claims 1-4, 6, 8-13, and 20 have been amended. Claims 5, 7, and 14-19 have been canceled. Claims 1-4, 6, 8-13, and 20 remain pending and have been examined.
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on 16 October 2025 is in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statement has been considered by the examiner.
Response to Amendment
Applicant’s amendment to claims 1-4, 6, 8-13, and 20 has been entered.
Applicant’s amendment is sufficient to overcome the 35 U.S.C. 112(f) interpretation. The 35 U.S.C. 112(f) interpretation is respectfully withdrawn.
Applicant’s amendment is insufficient to overcome the pending 35 U.S.C. 101 rejection. The rejection remains pending and is updated below, as necessitated by amendment.
Applicant’s amendment is insufficient to overcome the 35 U.S.C. 103 rejection. The rejection remains pending and is updated below, as necessitated by amendment.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments regarding the 35 U.S.C. 103 rejection have been fully considered, but are moot in view of the new grounds of rejection necessitated by Applicant’s amendment to the claims because the arguments do not apply to the combination of references used in the current rejection detailed below.
Applicant’s arguments regarding the 35 U.S.C. 101 rejection have been fully considered, but are not persuasive. Applicant asserts that the claims recite a specific industrial data processing architecture and workflow for enabling secure remote defect interpretation while generating structured data to measure diagnostic inspection quality in a manner that integrates any alleged abstract idea into a practical application through use of a learning model that allows the system to assist in identifying defects in mew inspection images to improve quality control accuracy in manner that provides a technical solution to a technical problem. Applicant further asserts that the claimed features, when considered as a whole, amount to significantly more than any alleged abstract idea and are patent eligible. Examiner respectfully disagrees.
The presence of machine learning model as an additional element and computer processing limitations do not necessarily make the claim rooted in computer technology. The machine learning model and the computer processing limitation simply process the data through inputting and outputting data. As recited the claimed learning model does not improve the functioning of the computing device, it improves the determination of whether a weld defect is present and the type and position of the weld defect if present based on known data. The additional elements of the hardware processor, databases, and machine learning model for processing and comparing received data to automate a process that was traditionally performed manually by a quality control inspector, without an improvement to the underlying technology used to implement the abstract idea of collecting data, analyzing it, and displaying results of the collection and analysis. As a result, the 35 U.S.C. 101 rejection is maintained and updated below.
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 1-4, 6, 8-13, and 20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 101 because the claimed invention is directed to an abstract idea without significantly more. Independent claim 1 is directed to a non-destructive inspection judgement data management device and independent claim 11 is directed to a process for non-destructive inspection judgement data management. Independent claims 1 and 11 are directed to an abstract idea of collecting and storing data for user access, without significantly more. Independent claims 1 and 11 recite substantially similar limitations.
Taking independent claim 11 as representative, claim 11 recites at least the following limitations:
registering image data related to a non-destructive inspection of a weld point in a first database;
registering judge information on a judge undertaking a judgment task of judging whether a weld defect is present at the weld point based on the image data, in a second database;
receiving defect judgment data indicating a result of judgment of whether the weld defect is present at the weld point based on the image data related to the judgment task from the contractor via the Internet and registering the defect judgment data in a third database in association with the weld point;
allowing, based on contract information indicating that a contract for the judgment task has been established with the judge selected as a contractor of the judgment task among the judges registered in the second database, the contractor to access the image data related to the judgment task in the image data registered in the first database via Internet;
allowing a client of the judgment task to access the defect judgment data related to the judgment task in the defect judgment data registered in the third database via the Internet based on the contract information;
forming a learning data pair including the image data registered in the first database as input data and the defect judgment data registered in the third database for the image data as training data, and
inputting a plurality of the learning data pairs to a learning model to cause the learning model to learn a correlation between the input data and the training data by machine learning,
wherein in response to a pixel value of each pixel included in the image data being input to an input layer of the learning model, an output layer of the learning model outputs an inference result indicating one or more of presence or absence of the weld defect, a type of the weld defect, and a position of the weld defect as defect inference data; and
displaying the inference result obtained according to the defect inference data to be superimposed on the input image data.
Under Step 1, claim 11 recites at least one step or act including allowing the contractor to access the image data related to the judgment task.
Under Step 2A Prong One, the limitations recited in claim 11 for registering image data, registering judge information, receiving defect judgement data, allowing the contractor to access the image data, allowing a client of the judgement task to access the defect judgment data, forming a learning pair, imputing a plurality of the learning data pairs to a learning model, outputting an interference result, and displaying the interference results, as drafted, illustrates a process that, under its broadest reasonable interpretation covers performance of the limitation in the mind (collecting and providing access to data), because none of the additional elements preclude the steps from practically being performed in the human mind, or by a human using a pen and paper. Inputting data for processing, outputting the results of data processing, and displaying inference results is extra-solution activity because merely presenting the results of abstract processes of collecting and analyzing information, without more is abstract as an ancillary part of such collection and analysis. See MPEP 2106.05(g)). Therefore, the limitations fall into the mental processes grouping and accordingly the claims recite an abstract idea.
Under Step 2A Prong Two, claim 11 recites a processor, first, second, and third database for processing data, registering data, and providing access. These elements are recited at a high level of generality (i.e., as a generic data storage elements performing generic data storage functions) and amount to no more than mere instructions to apply the exception using generic computer components. See MPEP 2106.05(f). For example, Applicant’s specification at paragraph [0021] states: “The database device 3 is configured by a general-purpose or dedicated computer (see FIG. 6 described later), for example;” paragraph [0045] further states: “Each of the non-destructive inspection judgment data management device 2, the database device 3, the client's terminal 4, and the judge's terminal 5 is configured by a general-purpose or dedicated computer 900.” Adding generic computer components to perform generic functions, such as data gathering, performing calculations, and outputting a result would not transform the claim into eligible subject matter. See MPEP 2106.05(h). A quality control engineer can visually inspect a weld and mentally determine the presence or absence of a defect, a type of the weld defect, and a position of the weld defect based on past knowledge and experience. Moreover, the claim limitations include information from a human “judge” regarding whether a weld defect is present and storing the defect judgement data in a database are steps for receiving and storing data from the human performance of a task of making mental observations an judgements. Accordingly, the additional elements do not integrate the abstract idea into a practical application because they do not impose any meaningful limits on practicing the abstract idea.
The presence of machine learning algorithm as an additional element and data processing limitations do not necessarily make the claim rooted in computer technology. As recited the claimed learning model does not improve the functioning of the computing device, it improves the determination of whether a weld defect is present and the type and position of the weld defect if present based on known data. Training a learning model constitutes a mathematical concept, such as the concept of using known data to set and adjust coefficients and mathematical relationships of variables that represent some modeled characteristic or phenomenon. The MPEP expressly recognizes mathematical concepts including mathematical relationships as constituting an abstract idea. MPEP § 2106.04(a).
Under Step 2B, independent claim 11 does not include additional elements that are sufficient to amount to significantly more than the judicial exception. As discussed above with respect to the integration of the abstract idea into a practical application, the additional elements of a processor and storage device amount to no more than mere instructions to apply the exception using a generic computer component which cannot provide an inventive concept.
Dependent claims 2-4, 6, 8-10, 12-13, and 20 include the abstract ideas of the independent claims. The limitations of the dependent claims merely narrow the mental process for managing data by describing how the data is further accessed and analyzed to aid user decision making, without significantly more. The limitations of the dependent claims are not integrated into a practical application because none of the additional elements set forth any limitations that meaningfully limit the abstract idea implementation. There are no additional elements that transform the claim into a patent eligible idea by amounting to significantly more. The analysis above applies to all statutory categories of invention. Accordingly independent claim 1 and the claims that depend therefrom are rejected as ineligible for patenting under 35 U.S.C. 101 based upon the same analysis applied to claim 11 above. Therefore claims 1-4, 6, 8-13, and 20 are ineligible under 35 U.S.C. 101.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
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 (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) 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.
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.
The factual inquiries for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows:
1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art.
2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue.
3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art.
4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or non-obviousness.
Claims 1, 2, 4, 6, 8-12, and 20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Metala et al. (US 2009/0307628) in view of Messinger et al. (US 2014/0207875) in further view of Perron et al. (US 2022/0244194).
Regarding Amended Claim 1, Metala et al. discloses a non-destructive inspection judgment data management device, comprising: a hardware processor configured to: (… an exemplary system 40 including hardware and software is illustrated for performing non-destructive testing and evaluation … The industrial component 12 is inspected using one or more non-destructive evaluation methods. Metala et al. [para. 0033; Fig. 2]. … the data visualization and analysis application 50 integrates with the graphical user interface 66 and the processor 56 to enable an inspector to navigate the volumetric representation of a component under evaluation. … Although the visualization and analysis application 50 is described in general terms with reference to the various modules, other and/or additional modules may be provided depending upon the specific implementation. Metala et al. [para. 0060-0061]);
register image data related to a non-destructive inspection of a weld point in a first database; (To facilitate inspector interaction with non-destructive examination data, the framework includes a data visualization and analysis application 50. The data visualization and analysis application 50 may be configured to process data extracted from one or more data sources 70, e.g., one or more databases. Metala et al. [para. 0047-0048, 0063; Fig. 3]. … Exemplary discontinuities might comprise, for example, a crack from service stress, a through-crack, surface flaw, dimensional change, density change, detection of a foreign object, misalignment, missing part, void, corrosion, or other distinguishable features or flaws that would or could influence the service life of the component under evaluation. Metala et al. [para. 0070]);
While Metala et al. discloses multiple databases as sources of information Metala et al. fails to explicitly recite a step to register judge information on a judge undertaking a judgment task of judging whether a weld defect is present at the weld point based on the image data, in a second database. Messinger et al. discloses this limitation. (… certain techniques such as borescopic inspection, weld inspection, remote visual inspections, …, and the like, may be used to analyze and detect a variety of conditions. Messinger et al. [para. 0032]. … Results of the inspection (block 154), may then be analyzed (block 156), for example, by using the NDT device 12, by transmitting inspection data to the cloud 24,… The analysis (block 156) may then be reported (block 158), resulting in one or more reports 159, including reports created in or by using the cloud 24. Messinger et al. [para. 0051-0056]. …… the application may cross reference the data or type of data indicated to be shared at block 202 with a list of individuals. Messinger et al. [para. 0078-0083; Fig. 7] … the NDT collaboration system 270 may store information related to the NDT inspector 278 such as a profile that indicates his experience, technical specialties, certifications, and the like. Messinger et al. [para. 0097]). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art of data management before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the device of Metala et al. to include a step to register judge information on a judge undertaking a judgment task of judging whether a weld defect is present at the weld point based on the image data, in a second database disclosed by Messinger et al. for sharing NDT data with various parties (Messinger et al. [para. 0001]), in a manner that would have yielded predictable results to one of ordinary skill in the art of data management before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
receive defect judgment data indicating a result of judgment of whether the weld defect is present at the weld point based on the image data related to the judgment task from the contractor via the Internet and register the defect judgment data in a third database in association with the weld point; and allow, based on contract information indicating that a contract for the judgment task has been established with the judge selected as a contractor of the judgment task among the judges registered in the second database, the contractor to access the image data related to the judgment task in the image data registered in the first database via Internet. ( … the collected data can be preserved for subsequent processing. In this regard, non-destructive examination data may be collected over a period of time such that historical information may be considered in the structural integrity analysis performed by the inspector. Metala et al. [par. 0027, 0046]. … the acquisition module 84 may be configured to acquire non-destructive examination data that is collected with reference to an industrial component under evaluation. Metala et al. [para. 0051-0052]. … If data extracted from storage has already been manipulated, e.g., by the data visualization and analysis application 50 during a subsequent evaluation, the data may also include annotations, metadata, secondary data files, etc. to preserve data from earlier evaluations. As such, the display and inspection process may be built based upon historical reference data, collected on the actual part, as described more fully herein with reference to FIGS. 1-3. Metala et al. [para. 0063]. … the inspector may draw a box around, flag or otherwise annotate an indication of a discontinuity in the views provided on the display. … the analysis module 88 may allow the inspector to interact with the collected non-destructive examination data to manipulate 2-D or 3-D non-destructive examination data views. Metala et al. [para. 0058-0059, 0091, 0094, 0099]).
Messinger et al. additionally discloses allow, based on contract information indicating that a contract for the judgment task has been established with the judge selected as a contractor of the judgment task among the judges registered in the second database, the contractor to access the image data related to the judgment task in the image data registered in the first database via Internet. (… the application may receive one or more recipients for the data to be shared. Messinger et al. [para. 0073-0075]. … the application may cross reference the data or type of data indicated to be shared at block 202 with a list of individuals who may be associated with the NDT system 10. … the application may receive an indication or input that may designate one or more individuals or entities in the list of individuals or entities as recipients. Messinger et al. [para. 0078-0083; Fig. 7]. … the NDT collaboration system 270 may provide a connection to the database 272, which may include a knowledge base system that may include contextual information related to the NDT data, analysis of the NDT data, or the like. Messinger et al. [para. 0103-0109]. … the user workflow may also define one or more individuals (e.g., experts) or entities that may have access to the NDT data or may be requested to review and/or analyze the NDT data. Messinger et al. [para. 0159]). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art of quality control and data analysis before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the device of Metala et al. to include the access control module configured to allow, based on contract information indicating that a contract for the judgment task has been established with the judge selected as a contractor of the judgment task among the judges registered in the second database, the contractor to access the image data related to the judgment task in the image data registered in the first database via Internet disclosed by Messinger et al. for sharing NDT data with various parties (Messinger et al. [para. 0001]), in a manner that would have yielded predictable results to one of ordinary skill in the art of data management before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
wherein the hardware processor is configured to allow a client of the judgment task to access the defect judgment data related to the judgment task in the defect judgment data registered in the third database via the Internet based on the contract information; (… the collected data can be preserved for subsequent processing. In this regard, non-destructive examination data may be collected over a period of time such that historical information may be considered in the structural integrity analysis performed by the inspector. Metala et al. [par. 0027, 0046]. … the acquisition module 84 may be configured to acquire non-destructive examination data that is collected. Metala et al. [para. 0051-0052]. … the analysis module 88 may allow the inspector to interact with the collected non-destructive examination data to manipulate 2-D or 3-D non-destructive examination data views. Metala et al. [para. 0058-0059]. … If data extracted from storage has already been manipulated, e.g., by the data visualization and analysis application 50 during a subsequent evaluation, the data may also include annotations, metadata, secondary data files, etc. to preserve data from earlier evaluations. As such, the display and inspection process may be built based upon historical reference data, collected on the actual part, as described more fully herein with reference to FIGS. 1-3. Metala et al. [para. 0063]. … the remote processing device may be connected to the local processing device through a network such as a local area network (LAN) or a wide area network (WAN), or … through the Internet using an Internet Service Provider. Metala et al. [para. 0091, 0094, 0099]).
Metala et al. and Messinger et al. combined fail to explicitly disclose steps to form a learning data pair including the image data registered in the first database as input data and the defect judgment data registered in the third database for the image data as training data, and input a plurality of the learning data pairs to a learning model to cause the learning model to learn a correlation between the input data and the training data by machine learning, wherein in response to a pixel value of each pixel included in the image data being input to an input layer of the learning model, an output layer of the learning model outputs an inference result indicating one or more of presence or absence of the weld defect, a type of the weld defect, and a position of the weld defect as defect inference data; and display the inference result obtained according to the defect inference data to be superimposed on the input image data. Perron et al. discloses these limitations. (The classification module 24 can optionally output a visual output 40 that is a visualization of the sequence of acquired images. The visual output 40 can allow a human user to visualize the sequence of acquired images and/or can be used for further determining whether a defect is present in the manufactured article captured in the sequence of acquired images. … the classification module 24 is trained by applying a machine learning algorithm to a training captured dataset that includes samples previously presented by the image acquisition device 8 … a trained feature set 48 is generated from the training of the classification module 24 from machine learning, and the feature set 48 is used, during deployment of the classification module 24, for classifying subsequently received sequences of acquired images Perron et al. [para. 0070-0080]. … , the convolutional neural network of the classification module 24 can have an architecture in which at least one of its convolution layers has at least one filter and/or parameter that is applied to two or more images of the sequence of acquired images. … the classification can include defining a positional attribute for each of a plurality of pixels and/or regions of interest of the plurality of images of the sequence of acquired images. Perron et al. [para. 0084-0086]. … database contains several samples of radiographic images including images of welding with porosity defects. Perron et al. [para. 0098-0100]. … FIG. 5E show the prediction results of the encoder-decoder model on a radiographic image. In order to cover the entire surface of the test image, a mask is generated in which the area where the weld is located is delimited manually. “Sliding window” is used to allow making pixel-by-pixel predictions in the selected area. Perron et al. [para. 0101-0104; Fig. 5E; 6B]). … Results are presented in three categories. The individual generated mask in a portion of the real image so a closeup view can be had. The production view shows the original image with an overlay of the defects detected by the network of experiment. Finally, some results obtained on an image that does not represent a weld are shown. That image, however, does contain indicators that can be classified as porosity. Perron et al. [para. 0111]. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art of quality control and data analysis before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the device of Metala et al. and Messinger et al. combined to include steps to form a learning data pair including the image data registered in the first database as input data and the defect judgment data registered in the third database for the image data as training data, and input a plurality of the learning data pairs to a learning model to cause the learning model to learn a correlation between the input data and the training data by machine learning, wherein in response to a pixel value of each pixel included in the image data being input to an input layer of the learning model, an output layer of the learning model outputs an inference result indicating one or more of presence or absence of the weld defect, a type of the weld defect, and a position of the weld defect as defect inference data; and display the inference result obtained according to the defect inference data to be superimposed on the input image data disclosed by Perron et al. for performing industrial inspection and/or non-destructive test (NDT) of a manufactured article (Perron et al. [para. 0002]), in a manner that would have yielded predictable results at the relevant time.
Regarding Amended Claim 2, Metala et al., Messinger et al., and Perron et al. combined disclose the non-destructive inspection judgment data management device, wherein hardware processor is configured to register, as the judge information, a judge profile including at least a holding qualification of the judge in the second database. Messinger et al. discloses this information. (… the NDT collaboration system 270 may store information related to the NDT inspector 278 such as a profile that indicates his experience, technical specialties, certifications, and the like. Messinger et al. [para. 0097]). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art of quality control and data analysis before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the device of Metala et al. and Perron et al. combined to include the hardware processor is configured to register, as the judge information, a judge profile including at least a holding qualification of the judge in the second database disclosed by Messinger et al. for sharing NDT data with various parties (Messinger et al. [para. 0001]), in a manner that would have yielded predictable results to one of ordinary skill in the art of data management before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
and receive a client's desired judge condition desired as the judge profile by a client of the judgment task and to extract the judge matching the client's desired judge condition among the judges registered in the second database. (The list of individuals may include one or more individuals or groups of individuals that may have relevant expertise in one or more areas of non-destructive testing procedures, techniques, results, or the like. … The list of individuals may be received separately from a server via the cloud 24 based on a database that may include a mapping of the data, the data type, the application, the application type, and the like and list of individuals. Messinger et al. [para. 0078]. … When initiating the field request for support, the NDT inspector 276 may search through a list of experts or NDT inspectors 278, who may be indicated as being available via the NDT collaboration system 270. Messinger et al. [para. 0098]). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art of quality control and data analysis before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the device of Metala et al. and Perron et al. combined to include the a judge extraction module configured to receive a client's desired judge condition desired as the judge profile by a client of the judgment task and to extract the judge matching the client's desired judge condition among the judges registered in the second database disclosed by Messinger et al. for sharing NDT data with various parties (Messinger et al. [para. 0001]), in a manner that would have yielded predictable results to one of ordinary skill in the art of data management before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Regarding Amended Claim 4, Metala et al., Messinger et al., and Perron et al. combined disclose the non-destructive inspection judgment data management device, wherein the hardware processor is configured to register a welding condition at the weld point in the first database in association with the weld point, (… the non-destructive examination data includes a plurality of measurands that are derived from at least one non-destructive examination method that measures conditions of the component under evaluation, which may include non-surface conditions thereof. Metala et al. [para. 0006]. …The framework may also facilitate immediate display of collected …, or the collected data can be preserved for subsequent processing. Metala et al. [para. 0027, 0046]. … An acquisition module 84 functionally acquires the data necessary to perform an inspection. … the acquisition module 84 may be configured to acquire non-destructive examination data …, wherein the non-destructive examination data is utilized to characterize the integrity of the industrial component including surface and internal conditions. Metala et al. [para. 0051-0052] . … the inspector may draw a box around, flag or otherwise annotate an indication of a discontinuity in the views provided on the display. Metala et al. [para. 0094]);
and allow the contractor to access the image data and the welding condition related to the judgement task in the image data and the welding condition registered in the first database via the Internet based on the contract information. (… the acquisition module 84 may be configured to acquire non-destructive examination data that is collected with reference to an industrial component under evaluation. Metala et al. [para. 0051-0052]. … the analysis module 88 may allow the inspector to interact with the collected non-destructive examination data to manipulate 2-D or 3-D non-destructive examination data views. Metala et al. [para. 0058-0059]. … Computer program code for carrying out operations of the present invention may execute entirely on a single processing device, partly on one or more different processing devices, … the remote processing device may be connected to the local processing device through a network such as a local area network (LAN) or a wide area network (WAN), or the connection may be made to an external processing device, for example, through the Internet using an Internet Service Provider. Metala et al. [para. 0091, 0094, 0099]).
Regarding Claim 5, [CANCELED].
Regarding Amended Claim 6, Metala et al., Messinger et al., and Perron et al. combined disclose the non-destructive inspection judgment data management device, wherein the hardware processor is configured to register judge identification information for identifying the judge as the contractor who has judged whether the weld defect is present at the weld point in the third database in association with the weld point. Messinger et al. discloses this limitation. (The application may cross reference the data or type of data indicated to be shared at block 202 with a list of individuals who may be associated with the NDT system 10. … the list of individuals may also chronicle each individual's experience and knowledge with various types of equipment. Messinger et al. [para. 0078; Fig. 8]. … The status may indicate the availability, expertise, or other relevant information with regard to the NDT inspector 278. In certain embodiments, the NDT collaboration system 270 may store information related to the NDT inspector 278 such as a profile that indicates his experience, technical specialties, certifications, and the like. Messinger et al. [para. 0097]). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art of quality control and data analysis before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the device of Metala et al. and Perron et al. to include the hardware processor is configured to register judge identification information for identifying the judge as the contractor who has judged whether the weld defect is present at the weld point in the third database in association with the weld point disclosed by Messinger et al. for sharing NDT data with various parties (Messinger et al. [para. 0001]), in a manner that would have yielded predictable results at the relevant time.
and analyze, based on the judge identification information and the defect judgment data registered in the third database, a defect judgment tendency indicating a tendency at a time when the judge has judged whether the weld defect is present, with respect to the judge as an analysis axis. (…, the categorized data and/or metadata may be stored in the database 272 or the like. …the NDT inspector 276, the NDT inspector 278, the expert, or the like may analyze data that corresponds to its respective asset with respect to data in various categories. … the cloud application may analyze the categorized data and/or metadata to determine trends, operational life, maximum and minimum parameters, and various other types of details with regard to each category of data. The cloud application may also generate a report that may summarize the analysis performed by the cloud application. Messinger et al. [para. 0149-0152]). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art of quality control and data analysis before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the device of Metala et al. and Perron et al. combined to include a defect judgment analysis module configured to analyze, based on the judge identification information and the defect judgment data registered in the third database, a defect judgment tendency indicating a tendency at a time when the judge has judged whether the weld defect is present, with respect to the judge as an analysis axis disclosed by Messinger et al. for sharing NDT data with various parties (Messinger et al. [para. 0001]), in a manner that would have yielded predictable results at the relevant time.
Regarding Claim 7, [CANCELED].
Regarding Amended Claim 8, Metala et al., Messinger et al., and Ge et al. combined disclose the non-destructive inspection judgment data management device, wherein the hardware processor is further configured to infer whether the weld defect is present at the weld point as an inference target by inputting the image data of the weld point to the learning model as the input data. Perron et al. discloses this limitation. (… he classification module 24 is trained by applying a machine learning algorithm to a training captured dataset that includes samples previously presented by the image acquisition device. … Within the example embodiment for supervised learning of the classification module 24, prior to deployment, each sample of the training dataset can be annotated to indicate whether that sample is indicative of a presence of a manufacturing defect or not indicative of a presence of a manufacturing defect. Perron et al. [para. 0070-0078; Fig. 1]. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art of quality control and data analysis before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the device of Metala et al. and Messinger et al. combined to include steps to infer whether the weld defect is present at the weld point as an inference target by inputting the image data of the weld point to the learning model as the input data disclosed by Perron et al. for performing industrial inspection and/or non-destructive test (NDT) of a manufactured article (Perron et al. [para. 0002]), in a manner that would have yielded predictable results at the relevant time.
Regarding Amended Claim 9, Metala et al., Messinger et al., and Perron et al. combined disclose the non-destructive inspection judgment data management device, wherein the hardware processor is configured to register defect inference data indicating a result of inference of whether the weld defect is present at the weld point in the first database in association with the weld point, ( … the collected data can be preserved for subsequent processing. In this regard, non-destructive examination data may be collected over a period of time such that historical information may be considered in the structural integrity analysis performed by the inspector. Metala et al. [par. 0027, 0046]. … If data extracted from storage has already been manipulated, e.g., by the data visualization and analysis application 50 during a subsequent evaluation, the data may also include annotations, metadata, secondary data files, etc. to preserve data from earlier evaluations. As such, the display and inspection process may be built based upon historical reference data, collected on the actual part, as described more fully herein with reference to FIGS. 1-3. Metala et al. [para. 0063]. … the inspector may draw a box around, flag or otherwise annotate an indication of a discontinuity in the views provided on the display. Metala et al. [para. 0091, 0094]).
allow the contractor to access the image data and the defect inference data related to the judgment task in the image data and the defect inference data registered in the first database via the Internet based on the contract information. (… the acquisition module 84 may be configured to acquire non-destructive examination data that is collected with reference to an industrial component under evaluation. Metala et al. [para. 0051-0052]. … the analysis module 88 may allow the inspector to interact with the collected non-destructive examination data to manipulate 2-D or 3-D non-destructive examination data views. Metala et al. [para. 0058-0059]. … , the remote processing device may be connected to the local processing device through a network … the connection may be made to an external processing device, for example, through the Internet using an Internet Service Provider. Metala et al. [para. 0099]).
Regarding Amended Claim 10, Metala et al., Messinger et al., and Perron et al. combined disclose the non-destructive inspection judgment data management device, wherein the hardware processor is configured to register defect inference data indicating a result of inference of whether the weld defect is present at the weld point in the first database in association with the weld point, ( … the collected data can be preserved for subsequent processing. In this regard, non-destructive examination data may be collected over a period of time such that historical information may be considered in the structural integrity analysis performed by the inspector. Metala et al. [par. 0027, 0046]. … If data extracted from storage has already been manipulated, e.g., by the data visualization and analysis application 50 during a subsequent evaluation, the data may also include annotations, metadata, secondary data files, etc. to preserve data from earlier evaluations. As such, the display and inspection process may be built based upon historical reference data, collected on the actual part, as described more fully herein with reference to FIGS. 1-3. Metala et al. [para. 0063]. … the inspector may draw a box around, flag or otherwise annotate an indication of a discontinuity in the views provided on the display. Metala et al. [para. 0091, 0094]).
register judge identification information for identifying the judge as the contractor who has judged whether the weld defect is present at the weld point in the third database in association with the weld point. Messinger et al. discloses this limitation. (The application may cross reference the data or type of data indicated to be shared at block 202 with a list of individuals who may be associated with the NDT system 10. … the list of individuals may also chronicle each individual's experience and knowledge with various types of equipment. Messinger et al. [para. 0078; Fig. 8]. … The status may indicate the availability, expertise, or other relevant information with regard to the NDT inspector 278. In certain embodiments, the NDT collaboration system 270 may store information related to the NDT inspector 278 such as a profile that indicates his experience, technical specialties, certifications, and the like. Messinger et al. [para. 0097]). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art of quality control and data analysis before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the device of Metala et al. and Perron et al. combined to include a step to register judge identification information for identifying the judge as the contractor who has judged whether the weld defect is present at the weld point in the third database in association with the weld point disclosed by Messinger et al. for sharing NDT data with various parties (Messinger et al. [para. 0001]), in a manner that would have yielded predictable results at the relevant time.
and analyze, based on the defect inference data registered in the first database and the judge identification information and the defect judgment data registered in the third database, a judgment match tendency indicating a tendency of match between the defect inference data and the defect judgment data with respect to the judge as an analysis axis. (…, the categorized data and/or metadata may be stored in the database 272 or the like. …the NDT inspector 276, the NDT inspector 278, the expert, or the like may analyze data that corresponds to its respective asset with respect to data in various categories. … the cloud application may analyze the categorized data and/or metadata to determine trends, operational life, maximum and minimum parameters, and various other types of details with regard to each category of data. The cloud application may also generate a report that may summarize the analysis performed by the cloud application. Messinger et al. [para. 0149-0152]). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art of quality control and data analysis before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the device of Metala et al. and Perron et al. combined to include a step to analyze, based on the defect inference data registered in the first database and the judge identification information and the defect judgment data registered in the third database, a judgment match tendency indicating a tendency of match between the defect inference data and the defect judgment data with respect to the judge as an analysis axis disclosed by Messinger et al. for sharing NDT data with various parties (Messinger et al. [para. 0001]), in a manner that would have yielded predictable results at the relevant time.
Regarding Amended Claim 11, claim 11 recites substantially similar limitations to those of claim 1 and is therefore rejected based upon the same prior art combination, reasoning, and rationale. Claim 11 is directed to a non-destructive inspection judgement data management method, which is disclosed by Metala et al. [para. 0006]: systems, methods and/or computer program products are provided for assessing and interpreting non-destructive examination data collected with regard to a component under evaluation.
Regarding Amended Claim 12, Metala et al., Messinger et al., and Perron et al. combined disclose non-destructive inspection judgment data management device, wherein the hardware processor is configured to register a welding condition at the weld point in the first database in association with the weld point, ( … the non-destructive examination data includes a plurality of measurands that are derived from at least one non-destructive examination method that measures conditions of the component under evaluation, which may include non-surface conditions thereof. Metala et al. [para. 0006]. … the collected data can be preserved for subsequent processing. In this regard, non-destructive examination data may be collected over a period of time such that historical information may be considered in the structural integrity analysis performed by the inspector. Metala et al. [par. 0027, 0046]. … If data extracted from storage has already been manipulated, e.g., by the data visualization and analysis application 50 during a subsequent evaluation, the data may also include annotations, metadata, secondary data files, etc. to preserve data from earlier evaluations. As such, the display and inspection process may be built based upon historical reference data, collected on the actual part, as described more fully herein with reference to FIGS. 1-3. Metala et al. [para. 0063]. … the inspector may draw a box around, flag or otherwise annotate an indication of a discontinuity in the views provided on the display. Metala et al. [para. 0091, 0094]);
and allow the contractor to access the image data and the welding condition related to the judgment task in the image data and the welding condition registered in the first database via the Internet based on the contract information. (… the acquisition module 84 may be configured to acquire non-destructive examination data that is collected with reference to an industrial component under evaluation. Metala et al. [para. 0051-0052]. … the analysis module 88 may allow the inspector to interact with the collected non-destructive examination data to manipulate 2-D or 3-D non-destructive examination data views. Metala et al. [para. 0058-0059]. … , the remote processing device may be connected to the local processing device through a network … the connection may be made to an external processing device, for example, through the Internet using an Internet Service Provider. Metala et al. [para. 0099]).
Regarding Claim 14, [CANCELED].
Regarding Claim 15, [CANCELED].
Regarding Claim 16, [CANCELED].
Regarding Claim 17, [CANCELED].
Regarding Claim 18, [CANCELED].
Regarding Claim 19, [CANCELED].
Regarding Claim 20, Metala et al., Messinger et al., and Perron et al. combined disclose the non-destructive inspection judgment data management device, wherein hardware processor is configured to: register defect inference data indicating a result of inference of whether the weld defect is present at the weld point in the first database in association with the weld point, ( … the collected data can be preserved for subsequent processing. In this regard, non-destructive examination data may be collected over a period of time such that historical information may be considered in the structural integrity analysis performed by the inspector. Metala et al. [par. 0027, 0046]. … If data extracted from storage has already been manipulated, e.g., by the data visualization and analysis application 50 during a subsequent evaluation, the data may also include annotations, metadata, secondary data files, etc. to preserve data from earlier evaluations. As such, the display and inspection process may be built based upon historical reference data, collected on the actual part, as described more fully herein with reference to FIGS. 1-3. Metala et al. [para. 0063]. … the inspector may draw a box around, flag or otherwise annotate an indication of a discontinuity in the views provided on the display. Metala et al. [para. 0091, 0094]).
register judge identification information for identifying the judge as the contractor who has judged whether the weld defect is present at the weld point in the third database in association with the weld point. Messinger et al. discloses this limitation. (The application may cross reference the data or type of data indicated to be shared at block 202 with a list of individuals who may be associated with the NDT system 10. … the list of individuals may also chronicle each individual's experience and knowledge with various types of equipment. Messinger et al. [para. 0078; Fig. 8]. … The status may indicate the availability, expertise, or other relevant information with regard to the NDT inspector 278. In certain embodiments, the NDT collaboration system 270 may store information related to the NDT inspector 278 such as a profile that indicates his experience, technical specialties, certifications, and the like. Messinger et al. [para. 0097]). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art of quality control and data analysis before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the device of Metala et al. and Perron et al. combined to include the third database registration module is configured to register judge identification information for identifying the judge as the contractor who has judged whether the weld defect is present at the weld point in the third database in association with the weld point disclosed by Messinger et al. for sharing NDT data with various parties (Messinger et al. [para. 0001]), in a manner that would have yielded predictable results at the relevant time.
and analyze, based on the defect inference data registered in the first database and the judge identification information and the defect judgment data registered in the third database, a judgment match tendency indicating a tendency of match between the defect inference data and the defect judgment data with respect to the judge as an analysis axis. (…, the categorized data and/or metadata may be stored in the database 272 or the like. …the NDT inspector 276, the NDT inspector 278, the expert, or the like may analyze data that corresponds to its respective asset with respect to data in various categories. … the cloud application may analyze the categorized data and/or metadata to determine trends, operational life, maximum and minimum parameters, and various other types of details with regard to each category of data. The cloud application may also generate a report that may summarize the analysis performed by the cloud application. Messinger et al. [para. 0149-0152]). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art of quality control and data analysis before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the device of Metala et al. and Perron et al. combined to include a judgment match analysis module configured to analyze, based on the defect inference data registered in the first database and the judge identification information and the defect judgment data registered in the third database, a judgment match tendency indicating a tendency of match between the defect inference data and the defect judgment data with respect to the judge as an analysis axis disclosed by Messinger et al. for sharing NDT data with various parties (Messinger et al. [para. 0001]), in a manner that would have yielded predictable results at the relevant time.
Claim 3 and 13 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Metala et al. (US 2009/0307628) in view of Messinger et al. (US 2014/0207875), in further view of Perron et al. (US 2022/0244194), and in further view of Kim (US 2021/0365867).
Regarding Amended Claim 3, Metala et al., Messinger et al., and Perron et al. combined fail to explicitly disclose the non-destructive inspection judgment data management device, wherein the hardware processor is configured to register a judge's desired contract term desired as a term of the contract by the judge in the second database as the judge information, and receive a client's desired contract term desired as a term of the contract by the client and to extract the judge matching the client's desired contract term among the judges registered in the second database. Kim discloses this limitation. (… registering the specialist; obtaining specialist information of the registered specialist; calculating career information of the specialist based on the obtained specialist information; matching a project corresponding to the specialist based on career information of the specialist. Kim [para. 0015-0016, 0034, 0044-0047 (defines specialist); Fig. 2]. … server 100 may perform steps of obtaining job information for finding freelancers, extracting a freelance specialist matching to job information from specialists stored in a database, obtaining a work performance history and work schedule of a freelance specialist, obtaining an expected work schedule of the freelance specialist by comparing the obtained work performance history and work schedule information of the freelance specialist and a request schedule included in the job information. Kim [para. 0376]. … determining a correlation between the one or more specialists based on the obtained information on collaboration items, and determining whether the joint contract of the specialist group is adhered based on the correlation determination result. Kim [para. 0428]). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art of human resource management before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the expert assignment steps of Metala et al., Messinger et al., and Perron et al. combined to include the hardware processor is configured to register a judge's desired contract term desired as a term of the contract by the judge in the second database as the judge information, and receive a client's desired contract term desired as a term of the contract by the client and to extract the judge matching the client's desired contract term among the judges registered in the second database as disclosed by Kim to perform a process of evaluating the first project information and the specialty of the first specialist or obtaining career information according to whether the verification was successful, and use the process for matching between the specialist and the project information (Kim [para. 0126], in manner that would have yielded predictable results to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Regarding Amended Claim 13, Metala et al., Messinger et al., Perron et al., and Kim combined disclose the non-destructive inspection judgment data management device, wherein the hardware processor is configured to register a welding condition at the weld point in the first database in association with the weld point, (… the non-destructive examination data includes a plurality of measurands that are derived from at least one non-destructive examination method that measures conditions of the component under evaluation, which may include non-surface conditions thereof. Metala et al. [para. 0006]. … the collected data can be preserved for subsequent processing. In this regard, non-destructive examination data may be collected over a period of time such that historical information may be considered in the structural integrity analysis performed by the inspector. Metala et al. [par. 0027, 0046]. … If data extracted from storage has already been manipulated, e.g., by the data visualization and analysis application 50 during a subsequent evaluation, the data may also include annotations, metadata, secondary data files, etc. to preserve data from earlier evaluations. As such, the display and inspection process may be built based upon historical reference data, collected on the actual part, as described more fully herein with reference to FIGS. 1-3. Metala et al. [para. 0063]. … the inspector may draw a box around, flag or otherwise annotate an indication of a discontinuity in the views provided on the display. Metala et al. [para. 0091, 0094]);
and allow the contractor to access the image data and the welding condition related to the judgment task in the image data and the welding condition registered in the first database via the Internet based on the contract information. (… the acquisition module 84 may be configured to acquire non-destructive examination data that is collected with reference to an industrial component under evaluation. Metala et al. [para. 0051-0052]. … the analysis module 88 may allow the inspector to interact with the collected non-destructive examination data to manipulate 2-D or 3-D non-destructive examination data views. Metala et al. [para. 0058-0059]. … , the remote processing device may be connected to the local processing device through a network … the connection may be made to an external processing device, for example, through the Internet using an Internet Service Provider. Metala et al. [para. 0099]).
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure:
Kitchen et al. (US 12,399,487) - method and system for performing inspection of a manufactured article includes acquiring a sequence of images using an image acquisition device of the article under inspection. The classification may include determining an indication, of a presence of a manufacturing defect in the article, and may include identifying a type of manufacturing defect. The extracting and the classifying can be performed by a computer-implemented classification module, which may be trained by machine learning techniques.
Hsu et al. (2017/0032281) - A weld production knowledge system for processing welding data collected from one of a plurality of welding systems, the weld production knowledge system comprising a communication interface communicatively coupled with a plurality of welding systems situated at one or more physical locations. The communication interface may be configured to receive, from one of said plurality of welding systems, welding data associated with a weld. The analytics computing platform may employ a weld production knowledge machine learning algorithm to analyze the welding data vis-à-vis the weld data store to identify a defect in said weld.
Santamaria-Pang et al. (US 11,301,977) - processor is configured to receive at least one sample image of a first component, wherein the at least one sample image of the first component does not include defects, store, in the memory, the at least one sample image, and receive an input image of a second component. The at least one processor is also configured to generate an encoded array based on the input image of the second component, perform a stochastic data sampling process on the encoded array, generate a decoded array, and generate a reconstructed image of the second component, derived from the stochastic data sampling process and the decoded array. The at least one processor is further configured to produce a residual image, and identify defects in the second component.
Fulton et al. (WO 2020/205998 A1) - apparatus and method for non-destructive evaluation of resistance spot welds uses a line laser triangulation sensor, a linear encoder, and a device for moving the welds relative to the sensor to measure the three-dimensional shape of one or both surfaces of the weld. The shape data is analyzed by an artificially intelligent system that predicts weld quality based upon the shape data. The gradient normal of points on the weld surface that are high are indicative of high slope attributable to electrode degradation which can be correlated to weld quality in making the prediction.
Applicant’s amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a). Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a).
A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of the advisory action. In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the mailing date of this final action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to LETORIA G KNIGHT whose telephone number is (571)270-0485. 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, Rutao WU can be reached at 571-272-6045. 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.
/L.G.K/Examiner, Art Unit 3623 /RUTAO WU/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3623