Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status
The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status.
DETAILED ACTION
Election/Restrictions
1. A response on 04/13/2026 a provisional election was made without traverse to prosecute the invention of claims 24-34. Claims 1-23 are withdrawn from further consideration by the examiner, 37 CFR 1.142(b), as being drawn to a non-elected invention.
Because these inventions are distinct for the reasons given on action dated 02/13/2026, restriction for examination purposes as indicated is proper.
The requirement is still deemed proper and is therefore made FINAL.
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 24-34 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 101 because the claimed invention is directed to a judicial exception (i.e., a law of nature, a natural phenomenon, or an abstract idea) without significantly more.
Claim 24, Step 1 the claim is a process (or machine) (Yes),
Step 2A Prong One, does the claim recite an abstract idea? current claim related to a method for determining a probability of damage to a powerline or power generation system from a given lightning strike, comprising the steps of:
(a) receiving detailed characteristics for the powerline or power generation system by a computer system; (b) receiving a detailed lightning strike classification for the given lightning strike by the computer system; and
(c) determining the probability of damage to the powerline or power generation system using the received detailed characteristics for the powerline or power generation system and the detailed lightning strike classification appears is an abstract idea of mental process (MPEP 2106.04(a)) or data gathering equivalent to mathematical concept or mathematical manipulation function (MPEP 2106.04 (a) (2) (concept need not be expressed in mathematical symbols, because "[w]ords used in a claim operating on data to solve a problem can serve the same purpose as a formula), (OR Mathematical Concepts and Mental Processes) Step 2A Prong One: Yes.
Step 2A Prong Two, is the claim directed to an abstract idea? In other words, does claim recite additional elements that integrate the Judicial Exception into a practical application? there is no more additional element.
Step 2A Prong Two: NO.
Step 2B, Does the claim recite additional element that amount to significantly more than the Judicial exception? there is no more additional element.
Step 2B: No. claim 24 not eligible.
Claim 31, Step 1 the claim is a process (or machine) (Yes),
Step 2A Prong One, does the claim recite an abstract idea? current claim related to a method for determining a probability of damage to a powerline or power generation system from a given lightning strike, comprising the steps of:
(a) detecting signals, by an electronic detection device, from an electric field created from a lightning strike at a geographical location associated with the powerline or power generation system; (b) receiving detailed characteristics for the powerline or power generation system by a computer system; (c) receiving a detailed lightning strike classification for the given lightning strike by the computer system; and (d) determining the probability of damage to the powerline or power generation system using the received detailed characteristics for the powerline or power generation system and the detailed lightning strike classification appears is an abstract idea of mental process (MPEP 2106.04(a)) or data gathering equivalent to mathematical concept or mathematical manipulation function (MPEP 2106.04 (a) (2) (concept need not be expressed in mathematical symbols, because "[w]ords used in a claim operating on data to solve a problem can serve the same purpose as a formula), (OR Mathematical Concepts and Mental Processes) Step 2A Prong One: Yes.
Step 2A Prong Two, is the claim directed to an abstract idea? In other words, does claim recite additional elements that integrate the Judicial Exception into a practical application? there is no more additional element.
Step 2A Prong Two: NO.
Step 2B, Does the claim recite additional element that amount to significantly more than the Judicial exception? there is no more additional element.
Step 2B: No. claim 31 not eligible.
Claim 25 related to wherein the detailed characteristics include voltage rating, insulation level, tower or installation geometry and type of grounding system, it recites further data characterization and mathematical concepts that are part of the abstract idea, claim 25 not eligible.
Claim 26 related to wherein the detailed lightning strike classification includes electric field profile, current duration and charge transfer, it recites further data characterization and mathematical concepts that are part of the abstract idea, claim 26 not eligible.
Claim 27 related to wherein the detailed lightning strike classification includes electric field profile, current duration and charge transfer, it recites further data characterization and mathematical concepts that are part of the abstract idea, claim 27 not eligible.
Claim 28 related to detecting signals, by an electronic detection device, from an electric field created from a lightning strike at a geographical location associated with the powerline or power generation system prior to step (a), it recites further data characterization and mathematical concepts that are part of the abstract idea, claim 28 not eligible.
Claim 29 related to the step of issuing an alert message or notification by a central processing server where it is determined that the given lightning strike has caused damage to the powerline or power generation system, it recites further data characterization and mathematical concepts that are part of the abstract idea, claim 29 not eligible.
Claim 30 related to comprising the step of calculating the presence of long-continuing-current (LCC) using the electric field waveshape, it recites further data characterization and mathematical concepts that are part of the abstract idea, claim 30 not eligible.
Claim 32 related to electric field profile, current duration and charge transfer and wherein the detailed lightning strike classification includes electric field profile, current duration and charge transfer, it recites further data characterization and mathematical concepts that are part of the abstract idea, claim 32 not eligible.
Claim 33 related to issuing an alert message or notification by a central processing server where it is determined that the given lightning strike has caused damage to the powerline or power generation system, it recites further data characterization and mathematical concepts that are part of the abstract idea, claim 33 not eligible.
Claim 34 related to the step of calculating the presence of long-continuing-current (LCC) using the electric field waveshape, it recites further data characterization and mathematical concepts that are part of the abstract idea, claim 34 not eligible.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
The following is a quotation of the appropriate paragraphs of 35 U.S.C. 102 that form the basis for the rejections under this section made in this Office action:
A person shall be entitled to a patent unless –
(a)(1) the claimed invention was patented, described in a printed publication, or in public use, on sale, or otherwise available to the public before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claim(s) 24-28, 30-32 and 34 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102 (a) (1) as being anticipated by Tang, CN 108629078 A, DATE PUBLISHED: 2018-10-09, CPC G06Q 50/06.
Regarding claim 24:
Tang described a method for determining a probability of damage to a powerline or power generation system from a given lightning strike (page 4, lightning strike affects the whole power system transmission network system), comprising the steps of:
(a) receiving detailed characteristics for the powerline or power generation system by a computer system (page 5, detected ground lightning density γ);
(b) receiving a detailed lightning strike classification for the given lightning strike by the computer system (page 1, complex transmission failure calculation due to lightning strike disaster, page 5, lightning influence degree classification); and
(c) determining the probability of damage to the powerline or power generation system using the received detailed characteristics for the powerline or power generation system (page 3, lightning current negative polar probability, g is generated by impact of the substation equipment failure rate is a rate, λ g, P α is the shielding failure rate. is generated by the shielding failure rate) and the detailed lightning strike classification (page 5, lightning influence degree classification).
Regarding claim 31:
Tang described a method for determining a probability of damage to a powerline or power generation system from a given lightning strike (page 4, lightning strike affects the whole power system transmission network system), comprising the steps of:
(a) detecting signals, by an electronic detection device, from an electric field created from a lightning strike at a geographical location associated with the powerline or power generation system (page 5, detected ground lightning density γ, according to the geographic information);
(b) receiving detailed characteristics for the powerline or power generation system by a computer system;
(c) receiving a detailed lightning strike classification for the given lightning strike by the computer system page 1, complex transmission failure calculation due to lightning strike disaster), page 5, lightning influence degree classification; and
(d) determining the probability of damage to the powerline or power generation system using the received detailed characteristics for the powerline or power generation system (page 3, lightning current negative polar probability, g is generated by impact of the substation equipment failure rate is a rate, λ g, P α is the shielding failure rate. is generated by the shielding failure rate) and the detailed lightning strike classification (page 5, lightning influence degree classification).
Regarding claim 25, Tang further described include voltage rating (page 6, voltage UW), insulation level (page 6, PT insulating discharge), tower or installation geometry (page 6, insulation discharge amplitude) and type of grounding system (page 5, ground lightning density γ).
Regarding claim 26, Tang further described electric field profile (page 4, electrical grid), current duration (page 10, current amplitude) and charge transfer (page 10, discharge voltage).
Regarding claim 27, Tang further described electric field profile (page 4, electrical grid), current duration (page 5, ground
Lightning density γ (times/(days)]) and charge transfer (page 10, discharge voltage).
Regarding claim 28, Tang further described the step of detecting signals, by an electronic detection device, from an electric field created from a lightning strike at a geographical location associated with the powerline or power generation system prior to step (a) (page 9, detect modeling ready before any lighting strike data).
Regarding claim 30, Tang further described the step of calculating the presence of long-continuing-current (LCC) using the electric field waveshape (page 10, impact by 183%, lightning current amplitude).
Regarding claim 32, Tang further described electric field profile, current duration and charge transfer (page 10, impact by 183%, lightning current amplitude) and wherein the detailed lightning strike classification includes electric field profile, current duration (page 3, current negative polar probability) and charge transfer (page 10, discharge voltage).
.
Regarding claim 34, Tang further described calculating the presence of long-continuing-current (LCC) using the electric field waveshape (page 10, impact by 183%, lightning current amplitude).
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.
Claim(s) 29 and 33 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Tang, CN 108629078 A, DATE PUBLISHED: 2018-10-09, CPC G06Q 50/06 in view of Smith (US 20030004780 A1, Date Published: 003-01-02).
The above references are relevant for 103 as both references are from the same technological field (detect lighting strike).
Regarding claim 29 and 33, Tang further described comprising the step of by a central processing server where it is determined that the given lightning strike has caused damage to the powerline or power generation system (page 4, lightning strike disaster to the power system or electrical grid).
Tang does not described issuing an alert message or notification.
Smith described an alert message (0021, advanced warning) for the purpose of allow effective decision can be made (0021).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was made to modify Tang to have the alert message taught by Smith for the purpose of allow effective decision can be made.
Contact information
5. Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Tung Lau whose telephone number is (571)272-2274, email is Tungs.lau@uspto.gov. The examiner can normally be reached on Tuesday-Friday 7:00 AM-5:00 PM EST.
Examiner interviews are available via telephone, in-person, and video conferencing using a USPTO supplied web-based collaboration tool. To schedule an interview, applicant is encouraged to use the USPTO Automated Interview Request (AIR) at http://www.uspto.gov/interviewpractice.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, TURNER SHELBY, can be reached on 571-272-6334. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300.
Information regarding the status of an application may be obtained from the Patent Application Information Retrieval (PAIR) system. Status information for published applications may be obtained from either Private PAIR or Public PAIR. Status information for unpublished applications is available through Private PAIR only. For more information about the PAIR system, see https://ppair-my.uspto.gov/pair/PrivatePair. Should you have questions on access to the Private PAIR system, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll- free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative or access to the automated information system, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272- 1000.
/TUNG S LAU/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2857
Technology Center 2800
May 6, 2026
Prosecution Insights