DETAILED ACTION
This is the final Office action and is responsive to the papers filed 02/23/2026. The amendments filed on 02/23/2026 have been entered and considered by the examiner. Claims 1-14 are currently pending and examined below. Claims 1-2, 6-8 and 12 have been amended. Claims 13-14 have been added.
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 .
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments, see page 7, filed 02/23/2026, with respect to claims 1, 3-4, 6 and 9-10 have been fully considered and are persuasive. The claim interpretation under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) of claims 1, 3-4, 6 and 9-10 has been removed.
Applicant’s arguments, see page 7, filed 02/23/2026, with respect to claims 1, 3-6 and 9-12 have been fully considered and are persuasive. The claim rejections under 35 U.S.C. 101 of claims 1, 3-6 and 9-12 have been withdrawn.
Applicant's arguments, see pages 7-9, filed 02/23/2026, with respect to claims 1-12 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive. The claim rejections under 35 U.S.C. 103 of claims 1-12 have not been withdrawn.
In particular, in pages 7-9 of the Applicant’s Argument, the Applicant argues that with respect to Claim 1 Owada fails to disclose the acquisition of two snapshot data. The Examiner respectfully disagrees. Snapshot data is simply time-series data of physical quantity monitored in a predetermined period. Owada discloses this in [0028]-[0029] and [0040] as he obtains state quantity at a specified increment for a period before the alarm and a period after the alarm, which is snapshot data for a period before the alarm and snapshot data for a period after the alarm.
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 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.
Claims 1-12 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Owada et al. (JP 2005180225 A; hereinafter Owada) in view of Genta (US 20120290261 A1).
Regarding claim 1, Owada discloses:
A failure diagnostic system (Fig. 2) for a work machine (hydraulic excavator 1; Fig. 1), comprising:
a component (target part; [0039] of attached English translation of Owada) mounted on a work machine;
a sensor (sensors T1/T2/T3/T4/T5/P1/P2; Fig. 2) that detects a predetermined physical quantity in order to monitor an operation status of the component (sensors T1/T2/T3/T4/T5/P1/P2 detect temperature and pressure; [0023]-[0024] of attached English translation of Owada);
a controller (engine monitoring device 13; Fig. 2) that acquires time-series data of the physical quantity detected in a predetermined period as snapshot data and determines whether the physical quantity detected by the sensor is in a normal range (engine monitor device 13 is inputted with detection signals from various sensors for detecting state quantities relating to the operating state of the cooling water system of the engine 11; [0018] of attached English translation of Owada); and
a storage unit (data recording device 40; Fig. 2) that stores information in which a deviation of the physical quantity from the normal range and a failure of the component that is a cause of the deviation are associated with each other (in the data recording device 40, the data D indicating the relationship between each state quantity data item, the use and determination content of the item, and the target portion of the item is read from, for example, an internal memory (not shown), and is collated with the state quantity data determined to be abnormal in step 50 to specify the target portion; [0037] of attached English translation of Owada), wherein
the controller:
acquires, as first snapshot data, the time-series data detected in a first period (obtains state quantity every one second for 5 minutes before warning signal; [0028]-[0029], [0040] of attached English translation of Owada),
acquires, as second snapshot data, the time-series data detected in a second period after the first period (obtains state quantity every one second for 1 minutes after warning signal; [0028]-[0029], [0040] of attached English translation of Owada),
determines whether the failure of the component can be identified based on the second snapshot data and the information stored in the storage unit (If the deviation is larger than the reference value t0; [0040] of attached English translation of Owada), and
generates an instruction signal for operating the work machine (while engine cooling water system is in operation on the construction machine to run engine cooling water system failure diagnosis; [0040] of attached English translation of Owada).
Owada does not specifically disclose:
identifies, when the failure of the component cannot be identified based on the second snapshot data and the information stored in the storage unit, the failure of the component based on the first snapshot data and the information stored in the storage unit.
However, Genta discloses:
identifies, when the failure of the component cannot be identified based on the second snapshot data and the information stored in the storage unit, the failure of the component based on the first snapshot data and the information stored in the storage unit ([0049] searching a current state of operation database based on a previous state of operation; [0048] determining from historical data of the retrieve past events whether the state of operation associated with the input signal is a deviation, malfunction or failure associated with a component).
Owada and Genta are considered to be analogous to the claimed invention because they are in the same field of fault analysis. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Owada’s fault analysis that detects faulty equipment to further incorporate Genta’s fault analysis for the advantage of backtracking to previous state and providing remedial actions which results in prevention in causal factors, new deviations, malfunctions and/or failures (Genta’s [0010]).
Regarding claim 2, Owada discloses:
wherein the controller:
acquires time-series data of the physical quantity as the first snapshot data after the instruction signal is generated (obtains state quantity every one second for 5 minutes before warning signal; [0028]-[0029], [0040] of attached English translation of Owada), the time-series data being detected in the first period going back from a time point when it is first determined that the physical quantity deviates from the normal range (The engine monitoring device 13 obtains a deviation between the atmospheric temperature from the atmospheric temperature sensor T5 and the radiator inlet temperature input from the radiator inlet temperature sensor T2 every unit time (for example, every second), and the reference value t0 Compare, engine cooling water system state quantity data in a predetermined time range (for example, 5 minutes) that has been constantly updated, and at a predetermined time range (for example, 1 minute) from the time when the alarm signal is input; [0040] of attached English translation of Owada).
Regarding claim 3, Owada discloses:
wherein the controller stores the first snapshot data in the storage unit (The engine cooling water system state quantity is recorded and saved as snapshot data together with the saved state quantity data; [0040] of attached English translation of Owada).
Regarding claim 4, Owada does not specifically disclose:
wherein
the information stored in the storage unit includes information in which the failure of the component and the at least one countermeasure against the failure are associated with each other, and
the controller outputs the at least one countermeasure against the failure identified based on the information stored in the storage unit.
However, Genta discloses:
wherein
the information stored in the storage unit includes information in which the failure of the component ([0049] searching a current state of operation database based on a previous state of operation; [0048] determining from historical data of the retrieve past events whether the state of operation associated with the input signal is a deviation, malfunction or failure associated with a component) and the at least one countermeasure against the failure are associated with each other ([0025] The fault analysis system produces a fault analysis report in a readable text file for access by the user. As part of the report, the system provides a list of effective remedial actions including replacement, repair, protection or removal of component parts), and
the controller outputs the at least one countermeasure against the failure identified based on the information stored in the storage unit ([0025] The fault analysis system produces a fault analysis report in a readable text file for access by the user. As part of the report, the system provides a list of effective remedial actions including replacement, repair, protection or removal of component parts).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Owada’s fault analysis that detects faulty equipment to further incorporate Genta’s fault analysis for the advantage of providing remedial actions which results in prevention in causal factors, new deviations, malfunctions and/or failures (Genta’s [0010]).
Regarding claim 5, Owada does not specifically disclose:
wherein when there is a plurality of countermeasures against the failure, the controller gives priority to the countermeasures and outputs the countermeasures.
However, Genta discloses:
wherein when there is a plurality of countermeasures against the failure, the controller gives priority to the countermeasures and outputs the countermeasures ([0310] TABLE X shows how the inputs DI002, DI004 and AI001 are associated to the variables “X”—valve position; “C”—close command; and “V”—power supply voltage and were found within a suspected state of malfunction with a priority index of 99 out of 100 and compliance indexes of 99%, 99% and 70% respectively; [0025] The fault analysis system produces a fault analysis report in a readable text file for access by the user. As part of the report, the system provides a list of effective remedial actions including replacement, repair, protection or removal of component parts).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Owada’s fault analysis that detects faulty equipment to further incorporate Genta’s fault analysis for the advantage of providing remedial actions which results in prevention in causal factors, new deviations, malfunctions and/or failures (Genta’s [0010]).
Regarding claim 6, Owada discloses:
A failure diagnostic method for a work machine (hydraulic excavator 1; Fig. 1), the work machine including a component (target part; [0039] of attached English translation of Owada), and a sensor (sensors T1/T2/T3/T4/T5/P1/P2; Fig. 2) that detects a predetermined physical quantity in order to monitor an operation status of the component (sensors T1/T2/T3/T4/T5/P1/P2 detect temperature and pressure; [0023]-[0024] of attached English translation of Owada), wherein information in which a deviation of the physical quantity detected by the sensor from a normal range and a failure of the component that is a cause of the deviation are associated with each other is stored in a storage unit (data recording device 40; Fig. 2)(in the data recording device 40, the data D indicating the relationship between each state quantity data item, the use and determination content of the item, and the target portion of the item is read from, for example, an internal memory (not shown), and is collated with the state quantity data determined to be abnormal in step 50 to specify the target portion; [0037] of attached English translation of Owada), the failure diagnostic method including:
acquiring, as first snapshot data, time-series data of the physical quantity detected in a first period (obtains state quantity every one second for 5 minutes before warning signal; [0028]-[0029], [0040] of attached English translation of Owada);
acquiring, as second snapshot data, the time-series data of the physical quantity detected in a second period after the first period (obtains state quantity every one second for 1 minutes after warning signal; [0028]-[0029], [0040] of attached English translation of Owada);
determining whether the failure of the component can be identified based on the second snapshot data and the information stored in the storage unit (If the deviation is larger than the reference value t0; [0040] of attached English translation of Owada), and
generating an instruction signal for operating the work machine (while engine cooling water system is in operation on the construction machine to run engine cooling water system failure diagnosis; [0040] of attached English translation of Owada).
Owada does not specifically disclose:
identifying, when the failure of the component cannot be identified based on the second snapshot data and the information stored in the storage unit, the failure of the component based on the first snapshot data and the information stored in the storage unit.
However, Genta discloses:
identifying, when the failure of the component cannot be identified based on the second snapshot data and the information stored in the storage unit, the failure of the component based on the first snapshot data and the information stored in the storage unit ([0049] searching a current state of operation database based on a previous state of operation; [0048] determining from historical data of the retrieve past events whether the state of operation associated with the input signal is a deviation, malfunction or failure associated with a component).
Owada and Genta are considered to be analogous to the claimed invention because they are in the same field of fault analysis. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Owada’s fault analysis that detects faulty equipment to further incorporate Genta’s fault analysis for the advantage of backtracking to previous state and providing remedial actions which results in prevention in causal factors, new deviations, malfunctions and/or failures (Genta’s [0010]).
Regarding claim 7, Owada discloses:
wherein the controller:
acquires time-series data of the physical quantity detected while the first period elapses from the time point when it is first determined that the physical quantity deviates from the normal range as the first snapshot data (The engine monitoring device 13 obtains a deviation between the atmospheric temperature from the atmospheric temperature sensor T5 and the radiator inlet temperature input from the radiator inlet temperature sensor T2 every unit time (for example, every second), and the reference value t0 Compare, engine cooling water system state quantity data in a predetermined time range (for example, 5 minutes) that has been constantly updated, and at a predetermined time range (for example, 1 minute) from the time when the alarm signal is input; [0040] of attached English translation of Owada).
Regarding claim 8, Owada discloses:
wherein the controller:
acquires time-series data of the physical quantity detected in the first period including the time point when it is first determined that the physical quantity deviates from the normal range as the first snapshot data (The engine monitoring device 13 obtains a deviation between the atmospheric temperature from the atmospheric temperature sensor T5 and the radiator inlet temperature input from the radiator inlet temperature sensor T2 every unit time (for example, every second), and the reference value t0 Compare, engine cooling water system state quantity data in a predetermined time range (for example, 5 minutes) that has been constantly updated, and at a predetermined time range (for example, 1 minute) from the time when the alarm signal is input; [0040] of attached English translation of Owada).
Regarding claim 9, Owada discloses:
wherein
the information stored in the storage unit includes a plurality of third snapshot data corresponding to various failures of the component (obtains state quantity every 1 minute; [0028]-[0029], [0040] of attached English translation of Owada), and
the controller identifies the third snapshot data similar to the second snapshot data from the plurality of third snapshot data (the data recording device 40 compares the stored snapshot data with the reference value ranges R0 to R5, and determines whether each state quantity data is within the corresponding reference value ranges R0 to R5, [0040] of attached English translation of Owada).
Regarding claim 10, Owada discloses:
wherein
the information stored in the storage unit includes a plurality of third snapshot data corresponding to various failures of the component (obtains state quantity every 1 minute; [0028]-[0029], [0040] of attached English translation of Owada), and
the controller identifies the third snapshot data similar to the first snapshot data from the plurality of third snapshot data (the data recording device 40 compares the stored snapshot data with the reference value ranges R0 to R5, and determines whether each state quantity data is within the corresponding reference value ranges R0 to R5, [0040] of attached English translation of Owada).
Regarding claim 11, Owada does not specifically disclose:
wherein the controller outputs at least one countermeasure against the failure identified via a display.
However, Genta discloses:
wherein the controller outputs at least one countermeasure against the failure identified via a display ([0025] The fault analysis system produces a fault analysis report in a readable text file for access by the user. As part of the report, the system provides a list of effective remedial actions including replacement, repair, protection or removal of component parts).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Owada’s fault analysis that detects faulty equipment to further incorporate Genta’s fault analysis for the advantage of providing remedial actions which results in prevention in causal factors, new deviations, malfunctions and/or failures (Genta’s [0010]).
Regarding claim 12, Owada does not specifically disclose:
further comprising:
outputting, via a display, at least one countermeasure against the failure identified.
However, Genta discloses:
further comprising:
outputting, via a display, at least one countermeasure against the failure identified ([0025] The fault analysis system produces a fault analysis report in a readable text file for access by the user. As part of the report, the system provides a list of effective remedial actions including replacement, repair, protection or removal of component parts).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Owada’s fault analysis that detects faulty equipment to further incorporate Genta’s fault analysis for the advantage of providing remedial actions which results in prevention in causal factors, new deviations, malfunctions and/or failures (Genta’s [0010]).
Claims 13-14 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Owada, in view of Genta and in view of Mesde et al. (US20230315717A1; hereinafter Mesde).
Regarding claim 13, Owada further discloses:
wherein the first period includes the time point when it is first determined that the physical quantity deviates from the normal range (The engine monitoring device 13 obtains a deviation between the atmospheric temperature from the atmospheric temperature sensor T5 and the radiator inlet temperature input from the radiator inlet temperature sensor T2 every unit time (for example, every second), and the reference value t0 Compare, engine cooling water system state quantity data in a predetermined time range (for example, 5 minutes) that has been constantly updated, and at a predetermined time range (for example, 1 minute) from the time when the alarm signal is input; [0040] of attached English translation of Owada).
Owada does not specifically disclose:
the second period includes the time point when the controller receives the input of the signal instructing to acquire the second snapshot data.
However, Mesde discloses:
the second period includes the time point when the controller receives the input of the signal instructing to acquire the second snapshot data ([0026] acquires snapshots at a rate).
Mesde is analogous to the claimed invention because it pertains to the same field of data acquisition. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Owada’s data acquisition to further incorporate Mesde’s data acquisition for the advantage of segmenting snapshot data at a particular rate in extracting of more pertinent data which results data acquisition flexibility and efficiency (Mesde’s [0001]).
Regarding claim 14, Owada further discloses:
wherein the first period includes the time point when it is first determined that the physical quantity deviates from the normal range (The engine monitoring device 13 obtains a deviation between the atmospheric temperature from the atmospheric temperature sensor T5 and the radiator inlet temperature input from the radiator inlet temperature sensor T2 every unit time (for example, every second), and the reference value t0 Compare, engine cooling water system state quantity data in a predetermined time range (for example, 5 minutes) that has been constantly updated, and at a predetermined time range (for example, 1 minute) from the time when the alarm signal is input; [0040] of attached English translation of Owada).
Owada does not specifically disclose:
the second period includes the time point when the controller receives the input of the signal instructing to acquire the second snapshot data.
However, Mesde discloses:
the second period includes the time point when the controller receives the input of the signal instructing to acquire the second snapshot data ([0026] acquires snapshots at a rate).
Mesde is analogous to the claimed invention because it pertains to the same field of data acquisition. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Owada’s data acquisition to further incorporate Mesde’s data acquisition for the advantage of segmenting snapshot data at a particular rate in extracting of more pertinent data which results data acquisition flexibility and efficiency (Mesde’s [0001]).
Conclusion
THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. 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 PAYSUN WU whose telephone number is (571)272-1528. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 8AM-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, Hunter Lonsberry can be reached at (571)272-7298. 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.
/PAYSUN WU/Examiner, Art Unit 3665
/DONALD J WALLACE/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3665
Prosecution Insights