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 .
DETAILED ACTION
Status of the Claims
Claims 1-12 are rejected under 35 USC §101 Rejection.
Claims 1-12 are rejected under 35 USC §103 Rejection.
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 1-12 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 101 because the claimed invention is directed to an abstract idea without significantly more as addressed below.
The new 2019 Revised Patent Subject Matter Eligibility Guidance published in the Federal Register (Vol. 84 No. 4, Jan 7, 2019 pp 50-57) has been applied and the claims are deemed as being patent ineligible.
The current 35 USC 101 analysis is based on the current guidance (Federal Register vol. 79, No. 241. pp. 74618-74633). The analysis follows several steps. Step 1 determines whether the claim belongs to a valid statutory class. Step 2A prong 1 identifies whether an abstract idea is claimed. Step 2A prong 2 determines whether an abstract idea is integrated into a practical application. If the abstract idea is integrated into a practical application the claim is patent eligible under 35 USC 101. Last, step 2B determines whether the claims contain something significantly more than the abstract idea. In most cases the existence of a practical application predicates the existence of an additional element that is significantly more.
Under Step 1 of the eligibility analysis, we determine whether the claims are to a statutory category by considering whether the claimed subject matter falls within the four statutory categories of patentable subject matter identified by 35 U.S.C.
101: Process, machine, manufacture, or composition of matter. The claim below is considered to be in a statutory category (process).
Under Step 1 of the analysis, claim 1 does belong to a statutory category, namely it is a process claim.
Under Step 2A Prong 1, the independent claim 1 includes abstract ideas as highlighted (using a bold font) below.
“1. A computer implemented method for bracket configuration for a user-selected piece of equipment used for sending or receiving electromagnetic radiation, wherein said piece of equipment is to be subjected to wind pressure, said method comprising:
obtaining a GPS position and an elevation for intended equipment placement by means of a user interacting with a graphical user interface a computer implemented map module;
obtaining equipment information indicative of the shape and size of the piece of equipment and calculating drag coefficients thereof;
obtaining GIS information associated with an area surrounding said GPS position and determining a set of first peak wind pressure factors therefrom;
determining peak wind pressure from each one of a plurality of directions at the chosen elevation at said GPS position based on said set of first peak wind pressure factors;
determining a predicted peak force which said piece of equipment is to be subjected to, based on said drag coefficients and said peak wind pressures from each one of said directions;
assigning a score to each one of a plurality of bracket configurations based on their structural properties in relation to the predicted peak force determined; and
generating, at an output, a signal indicative of a bracket configuration recommendation based on said score”.
The highlighted steps indicated as abstract ideas are considered to be equivalent to mathematical steps and fundamental aspect of mathematics or directed to mental processes performed in the human mind (including observation, evaluation and opinion).
Under Step 2A Prong 2, claim 1 is not directed to any particular practical application; the claim defines a field of use for calculation, but it is not tied to any particular machine and it does not carry out a real-world transformation.
The steps of “obtaining a GPS position and an elevation for intended equipment placement by means of a user interacting with a graphical user interface a computer implemented map module; obtaining equipment information indicative of the shape and size of the piece of equipment…; obtaining GIS information associated with an area surrounding said GPS position …” are just data gathering steps, which is insignificant extra solution activity, necessary to carry out the abstract idea. The step of “generating, at an output, a signal indicative of a bracket configuration recommendation based on said score” is just outputting in a generic manner the result of the calculations, which is also insignificant extra solution activity.
Under step 2B, claim 1 is not directed to significantly more than the abstract idea, for the same reasons given above under Prong 2. Claim 1 is therefore patent ineligible and is rejected under 35 U.S.C 101.
The dependent claims 2, 4, 5, 6, 7, and 8 merely extend the details of the abstract idea of mathematical concepts, more particularly mathematical calculations or mental steps as recited.
Claims 3, 4, 5, 6, 8, 9, and 10 additionally describe the details of data.
Claim 10 also comprises the step of presenting a visual representation of a graphical user interface of at least one parameter…for each one of said GPS positions, which is a generic use of computer processing components, so it is also an insignificant additional limitation.
Claim 11 includes a non-transitory computer-readable storage medium storing one or more programs configured to be executed by one or more processors to implement an abstract idea on a computer, which merely uses a computer or part of a computer and program running on the computer, as a tool to perform an abstract idea -see MPEP 2106.05(f).
Thus, the claims do not include additional elements that are sufficient to amount to significantly more than the judicial exception, and the claims are ineligible under 35 USC 101.
Therefore, claims 2-12 are similarly rejected under 35 U.S.C. 101.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
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 Bothma, et.al., (WO2057966A2), hereinafter Bothma in view Dixon et al., (WO2016210432A2), hereinafter Dixon and Frank et al., (US Pub.20100302127A1), hereinafter Frank.
Regarding Claim 1, Bothma discloses a computer implemented method for bracket configuration for a user-selected piece of equipment used for sending or receiving electromagnetic radiation (page 2, Introduction, where invention lies in the field of construction or structural fabrication, that is the framing, devising, specifying and assembly of structures, in particular tower structures, An example of a field of applications the field of communication towers, e.g., communication towers receiving electromagnetic radiation see below GSM brackets, which is convert electrical energy into electromagnetic (radio) waves by transmission and reception),
(page 10, lines 11-20, where After this input the program computes the suitable optimized tower and the prices applicable, as follows: - [GSm Brackets]…[Microwave Brackets]); ( Page 10, lines 25-30, Figure 4 shows that screen 4 allows inputting the type and number of antennae required at 9);
wherein said piece of equipment is to be subjected to wind pressure (Page 3, lines 1-4, where the method provides for service criteria to be inputted to include not only tower height and operative parts and accessories to be carried but also … statistical information on wind speed patterns for the geographical location concerned), said method comprising:
obtaining a GPS position (page 3, lines 1-4, for geographical location concerned, page 9, lines 23-25, Figure 3 that screen 3 allows inputting regional information namely, height above sea level 6 and site information, the height above surrounding ground 7 and distance from a rise in height 8) and an elevation (page 9, lines 16-17, Figure 1, shows that screen 1 allows inputting the required tower height of 36 meters at 1);
obtaining equipment information indicative of the shape and size of the piece of equipment (Page 9, lines 27-29, Figure 4 shows that screen 4 allows inputting the type and number of antennae required at 9, panel type, parabolic type, omni-directional type and others. Again illustrations assist understanding) and calculating drag coefficients thereof (page 5, lines 14, the drag coefficient for a given antenna is calculated);
obtaining GIS information associated with an area surrounding said GPS position and determining a set of first peak wind pressure factors therefrom (page 5, lines 5-6, kz is a wind speed multiplier derived from the type of terrain and buildings around the tower);
determining peak wind pressure at the chosen elevation at said GPS position based on said set of first peak wind pressure factors (page 4, line 32- page 5, line 6, where the free air stream velocity pressures derive from the relationship q=1/2.p.kr.kz.R^2 where p is the density of the air, kr is taken as equal to 1 for a 50 year return period, and kz is a wind speed multiplier derived from the type of terrain and buildings around the tower);
determining a predicted peak force which said piece of equipment is to be subjected to, based on said drag coefficients and said peak wind pressures (Page 4, line 27 to page 5, line 10: F is the wind force on the antenna …the well-known general relationship: F=1/2.p.A.Cd.V^2)
assigning a score based on their structural properties in relation to the predicted peak force determined (page 8, lines 8-9, where program then calculates the pressure at the top of the tower and from this the possible towers that could be used …the program then calculates the lightest and/or most effective tower that can be used with these inputs); and
generating, at an output, a signal indicative of a bracket configuration recommendation (Page 10, lines 12-20 where after this input the program computes the suitable optimized tower and the prices applicable, as follows: …GSM Brackets… Microwave Brackets).
Bothma does not disclose a GPS position for intended equipment placement by means of a user interacting with a graphical user interface of a computer implemented map module;
a score for each one of a plurality of bracket configurations; and
wind pressure from each one of a plurality of directions.
Dixon discloses a GPS position for intended equipment placement by means of a user interacting with a graphical user interface of a computer implemented mapgeographic background map, etc.), and
wind pressure from each one of a plurality of directions (page 61, lines 8-12, where GUI will be able to display more than one unmanned vehicle 6404 and how each flight path 6404 may be used to determine wind direction and intensity as shown by the imaging of wind vectors 6201-1 and 6202-2 on the map) (the wind factor comprises wind speed and direction).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the applicants' invention was made to determine wind in plurality of directions, as taught by Dixon into Bothma in order to understand wind patterns and effects which is vital for safety, efficiency, and sustainability, and to use a GUI for entering data as taught by Dixon into Bothma in order to input data into the computational device in a convenient way.
Frank discloses a plurality of bracket configurations (para [0024] - [0042]), which have different purposes and advantages.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the applicants' invention was made to provide scores for a plurality of bracket configurations, as taught by Frank into the method of Bothma and Dixon, in order to determine an appropriate bracket to keep the structure optimally secure.
Regarding Claim 2, Bothma and Dixon and Frank disclose the method claim 1, further Bothma disclose wherein the drag coefficients (page 5, lines 14, the drag coefficient for a given antenna is calculated) are calculated for a plurality of different equipment orientations.
It is well-known that the drag coefficient depends on the orientation of the equipment in view of wind.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the applicants' invention was made to calculate drag coefficients as taught by Bothma for plurality of different equipment orientation in order to performance optimization, energy savings, cost reduction, and safer, more efficient systems.
Regarding Claim 3, Bothma and Dixon and Frank disclose the method claim 1, further Bothma disclose wherein said GIS information is indicative of an orography of an area surrounding said GPS position (page 3, lines 1-5, where method provides for service criteria to be inputted to include…surrounding terrain and site conditions).
Regarding Claim 4, Bothma and Dixon and Frank disclose the method claim 1, further Bothma disclose wherein said method further comprises distance, and wherein said peak wind pressure is further determined based on said set of second peak wind pressure factors (Page 5, lines 5, where kz is a wind speed multiplier derived from the type of terrain and buildings around the tower).
It is well-known that proximity to the sea has an impact on wind; hence it would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art to take this into account when determining expected wind conditions.
Regarding Claim 5, Bothma and Dixon and Shigetaka disclose the method claim 1, Bothma further discloses wherein said method further comprises obtaining the location and extension of any urbanized areas surrounding said GPS position from said directions (Page 9, lines 19-21, where figure 2 shows that screen 2 allows inputting terrain information is … high rise buildings) and determining a set of third peak wind pressure factors therefrom, and wherein said peak wind pressure is further determined based on said set of third peak wind pressure factors (page 5, line 5, where kz is a wind speed multiplier derived from the type of terrain and buildings around the tower).
Regarding Claim 6, Bothma and Dixon and Frank the method claim 1, further Bothma discloses wherein said equipment information is indicative of an equipment weight, and wherein assigning a score to each one of a plurality of bracket configurations is done based on their structural properties in relation to the predicted peak force determined in combination with said equipment weight (page 8, lines 6-9, where the program then calculates the lightest …tower that can be used with these inputs).
Regarding Claim 7, Bothma and Dixon and Frank the method claim 1, further but do not disclose comprising determining offset pole dimensions based on said equipment information, and wherein said offset pole dimensions is used in assigning a score to each one of said bracket configurations.
Bothma discloses claim 1, where inputting service criteria for the tower into a computer, inputting several alternative and /or additive available stock components, sub-components and/or accessories for a tower … applying an algorithm to the inputted data to select an optimum combination of components, sub-components and/or accessories, e.g., the select optimum components and sub-components, but does not specifically disclose the assigning a score to each one of said bracket configurations for offset pole with dimensions.
Frank discloses an [offset pole] antenna with bracket 40 dimensions is used in assigning a score (para [0040], [0041], where example, a first antenna system may be larger in size (e.g., longer) than a second antenna system. When using the bracket 40 with the second antenna system, a user may locate and select a score 56 that corresponds to the size of the second antenna system and break the bottom flange 46 at the selected score 56, for example, by bending back and forth on the selected score 56. The score 56 may be used to tailor the size of the bracket 40 to individual antenna systems 30; The post opening 58 may be sized and/or shaped to receive an antenna system post).
Frank discloses a plurality of bracket configurations (para [0024] - [0042]), which have different purposes and advantages, for holding antenna structures. Offset poles are well-known components for supporting the devices (antenna, cameras), and the dimensions of the offset poles would clearly affect the optimal choice of bracket configuration.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the applicants' invention was made to determine offset pole dimensions and use these to assign scores to different bracket configurations, as taught by Frank into the method of Bothma and Dixon, in order to determine an appropriate bracket to keep the structure optimally secure.
Regarding Claim 8, Bothma and Dixon and Frank the method claim 1, further Bothma discloses wherein said method further comprises obtaining weather information indicative of past weather conditions at said GPS position and determining a set of fourth peak wind pressure factors therefrom and wherein said peak wind pressure is further determined based on said set of fourth peak wind pressure factors (page 3, lines 1-6, where the method provides for service criteria to be inputted to include … statistical information on wind speed patterns for the geographical location concerned).
Regarding Claim 9, Bothma and Dixon and Frank disclose the method claim 1, Bothma and Frank do not disclose wherein said GPS position is continuously obtained through user interaction with a graphical user interface or user input device.
Dixon discloses GPS position (page 25, lines 14-17, 33-page 26, lines 1-3 where the safety management system may receive location data from one or more registered unmanned vehicles and update their locations on a map-based graphical user interface in real-time… FIG. 4B shows the initial real-time locations of the unmanned vehicles 406 as it may be seen in the graphical user interface 201. FIG. 4C displays the low-level radar locations of any unmanned vehicles that may or may not be registered 406 and 407 in the same graphical user interface 201) is continuously obtained through user interaction with a graphical user interface or user input device (page 9, lines 23-33, where GUI includes a map of the UAV, the UAV's flight path, and wind vectors. The details of the flight may be seen in a web browser or other computer window. The background of the GUI may be a map displaying the general area of where the UAV takes off, where the UAV lands, and places in between as shown by the flight path. The map may change as the flight path changes and may be interactive through scrolling, or it may automatically follow the UAVs through tracking. The GUI may display more than one UAV and how each flight path is used to determine wind direction and intensity as shown by the imaging of wind vectors on the map, e.g., the update their locations (vehicle) on a map-based graphical user interface in real-time same as continuously updated GPS position); (Page 63, lines 5-12, where wind factor comprises wind speed and direction, which are mapped into a wind map displayed on a Graphic user interface (GUI). The GUI may be displayed as an interactive map accessible through a web browser Besides the wind map, the GUI may also comprises other layers of information, such as the UAV and its flight path, geographic background map, etc.).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the applicants' invention was made to provide GPS position is continuously obtained through user interaction with a graphical user interface or user input device, as taught by Dixon in combination of Bothma and Frank in order to improves forecasting, supports safety, optimizes resources, and aids environmental protection.
Regarding Claim 10, Bothma and Dixon and Frank disclose the method claim 1, further Bothma discloses comprising obtaining GPS position for potential equipment placement (page 3, lines 1-4, for geographical location concerned, page 9, lines 23-25, Figure 3 that screen 3 allows inputting regional information namely, height above sea level 6 and site information, the height above surrounding ground 7 and distance from a rise in height 8) and generating a bracket configuration recommendation for each one of said GPS positions (page 10, lines 11-20, where After this input the program computes the suitable optimized tower and the prices applicable, as follows: - [GSm Brackets] … [Microwave Brackets]), and
wherein said method further comprises of at least one parameter of said bracket configuration recommendation for each one of said GPS position (page 10, lines 11-20, where After this input the program computes the suitable optimized tower and the prices applicable, as follows: - [GSm Brackets] … [Microwave Brackets])).
Bothma and Frank do not disclose a plurality of GPS positions; and
a visual representation on a graphical user interface.
Dixon discloses a plurality of GPS positions (page 11, lines 32-34, where overlaying real-time locations of unmanned vehicles with a low level radar map);
presenting a visual representation on a graphical user interface (Page 63, lines 5-12, where wind factor comprises wind speed and direction, which are mapped into a wind map displayed on a Graphic user interface (GUI). The GUI may be displayed as an interactive map accessible through a web browser Besides the wind map, the GUI may also comprises other layers of information, such as the UAV and its flight path, geographic background map, etc.).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the applicants' invention was made to provide GPS positions and present a visual representation on a graphical user interface, as taught by Dixon into Bothma in order to improve forecasting, support safety, optimize resources, and aid environmental protection.
Regarding Claim 11, Bothma and Dixon and Frank disclose the method claim 1, a non-transitory computer-readable storage medium storing one or more programs further Bothma is configured to be executed by one or more processors of a control unit, the one or more programs comprising instructions for performing the method according to the method claim 1 (see Fig. 1A, where computer # 70).
Regarding Claim 12, Bothma disclose a system comprising a communication unit configured to send and receive signals, and a control unit configured to: obtain a GPS position and an elevation for intended equipment placement (page 3, lines 1-4, for geographical location concerned, page 9, lines 23-25, Figure 3 that screen 3 allows inputting regional information namely, height above sea level 6 and site information, the height above surrounding ground 7 and distance from a rise in height 8);
obtain equipment information indicative of the shape and size of the piece of equipment (Page 9, lines 27-29, Figure 4 shows that screen 4 allows inputting the type and number of antennae required at 9, panel type, parabolic type, omni-directional type and others. Again illustrations assist understanding) and calculating drag coefficients thereof (page 5, lines 14, the drag coefficient for a given antenna is calculated);
obtain GIS information associated with an area surrounding said GPS position and determine a set of first peak wind pressure factors therefrom (page 5, lines 5-6, kg is a wind speed multiplier derived from the type of terrain and buildings around the tower);
determine peak wind pressure at the chosen elevation at said GPS position based on said set of first peak wind pressure factors (page 4, line 32- page 5, line 6, where the free air stream velocity pressures derive from the relationship q = 1/2.p.kr.kz.R^2 where p is the density of the air kr is taken as equal to 1 for a 50 year return period and kz is a wind speed multiplier derived from the type of terrain and buildings around the tower);
determine a predicted peak force which said piece of equipment is to be subjected to, based on said drag coefficients and said peak wind pressures (Page 4, line 27 to page 5, line 10: F is the wind force on the antenna …the well-known general relationship: F=1/2.p.A.Cd.V^2);
assign a score to each one of a plurality of bracket configurations based on their structural properties in relation to the predicted peak force determined (page 8, lines 8-9, where program then calculates the pressure at the top of the tower and from this the possible towers that could be used …the program then calculates the lightest and/or most effective tower that can be used with these inputs); and
generate, at an output, a signal indicative of a bracket configuration recommendation (Page 10, lines 12-20 where after this input the program computes the suitable optimized tower and the prices applicable, as follows: … GSM Brackets … Microwave Brackets).
Bothma does not disclose:
a score for each one of a plurality of bracket configurations; and
wind pressure from each one of a plurality of directions.
Dixon discloses wind pressure from each one of a plurality of directions (page 61, lines 8-12, where GUI will be able to display more than one unmanned vehicle 6404 and how each flight path 6404 may be used to determine wind direction and intensity as shown by the imaging of wind vectors 6201-1 and 6202-2 on the map)( the wind factor comprises wind speed and direction).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the applicants' invention was made to determining wind in plurality of directions, as taught by Dixon into Bothma in order to understand large-scale atmospheric circulation, climate patterns, the effects of natural events like hurricanes and vital for safety, efficiency, and sustainability.
Frank discloses a plurality of bracket configurations (para [0024] - [0042]), which have different purposes and advantages.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the applicants' invention was made to provide scores for a plurality of bracket configurations, as taught by Frank into the method of Bothma and Dixon, in order to determine an appropriate bracket to keep the structure optimally secure.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
J. Duhovnik et al., " A comparative criteria method for telecommunications towers with different topological designs".
Dominic Savio Ruben Gregory et al., “Design of Next Generation Antenna Mounts in Telecommunication Towers With Low Effective Projected Area”.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to KALERIA KNOX whose telephone number is (571)270-5971. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 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, Andrew Schechter can be reached at (571)2722302. 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.
/KALERIA KNOX/
Examiner, Art Unit 2857
/ANDREW SCHECHTER/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2857
Prosecution Insights