DETAILED ACTION
Claims 1 – 10 are pending in the present application.
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 .
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.
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 nonobviousness.
Claims 1-8 and 10 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Froggatt et al (US 20110317148; hereinafter Froggatt) in view of Lewis et al. (US 20170199075; hereinafter Lewis).
Regarding claim 1, Froggatt teaches a system (abstract; see fig. 22) comprising:
a data processing apparatus (“Data Processing” block; see fig. 22; see also system controller and processor 10) communicatively coupled with an optical frequency domain reflectometry (OFDR) system (see fig. 22 showing such coupling with “OFDR system”) that is configured to determine a spectrum of light that had been launched into an optical fiber (optical waveguide / Fiber Optic Sensor; see abstract and fig. 22) from a tunable laser source (12; [0067] “tunable light source 12, e.g., a tunable laser”) and then backscattered by refractive index variations within a segment of the optical fiber (see at least [0009] teaching that this is how OFDR functions; see also [0017]); and
memory communicatively coupled with the data processing apparatus ([0023] teaches that “a non-transitory, computer-readable storage medium”; [0019]; [0101] teaches that data is “retained in system memory (not shown)”; see also ), the memory encoding instructions that, when executed by the data processing apparatus, cause the system to perform operations (at least [0023] that the “non-transitory, computer-readable storage medium” … “stores a computer program comprising instructions that cause a computer-based OFDR system to perform” the tasks; see e.g. [0023-27]; see also fig. 11) comprising:
receiving, from the OFDR system, a respective timed sequence of backscattered-light spectra associated with each segment of the optical fiber ([0066-69] teaches regarding receiving “temporal (time) domain” measurement data [0068] and transforming the temporal data into the spectral domain; see [0101] “Measurement data (B) in the temporal domain is processed to select a segment or window of data.”; see fig. 22); and
determining, for each optical-fiber segment, a set of values of a temperature or a strain of the optical-fiber segment corresponding to the received timed sequence of the backscattered-light spectra by performing operations (see fig. 11; see [0084] “routine in FIG. 11 may be run along the length of a fiber to determine a measure of both strain verses length (spectral shift) and change in length of the waveguide (temporal shift).”; see [0087-89] giving an examples of segments) comprising:
selecting, for each backscattered-light spectrum of the timed sequence, a reference spectrum (reference data “A” is transformed into the spectral domain and indexed as segments in “E” and truncated into plural data ranges; [0101]; see fig. 22) from among two or more other backscattered-light spectra ([0101] “reference data is then truncated (F) in the spectral domain such that it covers the same optical frequency range as the measurement data.”; see also [0008] and fig. 22) as the one that, when paired with the backscattered-light spectrum, causes the pair's quality value to meet a predetermined criterion (see fig. 11 showing this iterative comparison of the segments of reference data/spectrum and measurement data/spectrum to find quality factors and then find the highest quality factor amongst the segments as a best match),
determining a spectral shift between the backscattered-light spectrum and the reference spectrum (abstract; [0101]; see fig. 7 showing this spectral shift between the reference and measurement scatter patterns; see also the Summary [0008-0027] teaching regarding this shift determination in great depth), and
determining a value of the temperature or the strain of the optical-fiber segment based on the spectral shift (see at least [0101] “This signal can be scaled to a continuous measure of strain along the length of the fiber (Q). The algorithm is then advanced along the length of the fiber incrementally (R) using the feedback values determined in the previous iteration (K, O) to maintain registration between the reference and the measurement data in the temporal and spectral domains.”; see also abstract teaching measuring a parameter which may be strain and [0011] teaching that “One non-limiting example application is temperature sensing.”).
Froggatt does not directly state that the reference spectra is/are specifically of the timed sequence.
However, Lewis teaches regarding distributed optical fiber sensing using backscattered radiation (abstract) from a laser source (102; see at least [0105]) where a quality metric is determined via comparison of separate processing channels of the backscattered radiation separated by time (abstract; [0010]; [0019]) and where the time separated channels of the time sequence are used in the determination ([0024] “In one embodiment the quality metric determines the similarity between the data from two channels by determining, for each channel, the degree of variation of current value from the average value for that channel. The metric may comprise multiplying the degree of variation from each channel together, i.e. the quality metric may comprise determining, for two channels, a first metric of the form M1 (A, B)=(A−<A>).Math.(B−<B>), where A and B are the current data values from the channel and <A> and <B> are the average values of the data from the channels.”; see generally [0022-26]).
Therefore, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to modify the optical measurement system having determining a spectral shift between the backscattered-light spectrum and the reference spectrum for a quality factor of Froggatt with the specific knowledge of using the concept of making a quality metric determination based on a reference spectrum which is of the timed sequence of measurements as taught in Lewis. This is because such a reference data set from the measured data set allows for improving the signal to noise ratio (see [0014] and [0016] of Lewis). This is important in order to provide better measurement accuracy to an end user.
Regarding claim 2, Froggatt teaches that the operations further comprise: determining the quality value for the pair of the backscattered-light spectrum and the reference spectrum by calculating a correlation between the backscattered-light spectrum and the reference spectrum (S114; see fig. 11 and [0079]).
Regarding claim 3, Froggatt teaches that the reference spectrum is selected [from] backscattered-light spectrum and iterating through two or more earlier backscattered-light spectra (see iterative / looping algorithm for find quality factors as shown in fig. 11).
Froggatt does not directly state that the reference spectrum is specifically selected by starting with the previous spectrum from the timed sequence, until the pair's quality value meets a predetermined value.
However, Lewis teaches regarding distributed optical fiber sensing using backscattered radiation (abstract) from a laser source (102; see at least [0105]) where a quality metric is determined via comparison of separate processing channels of the backscattered radiation separated by time (abstract; [0010]; [0019]) and where the time separated channels of the time sequence are used in the determination ([0024]; see generally [0022-26]) and where the time-wise previous spectrum includes/is the previous spectrum ([0138] teaches using pulse pairs and “the previous pulse pair”) and the spectra are checked / scored against “a set threshold” ([0029]; see also [0034]; [0225] which teaches checking a combination of channels against a threshold).
Therefore, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to modify the optical measurement system having determining a spectral shift between the backscattered-light spectrum and the reference spectrum for a quality factor of Froggatt with the specific knowledge of using the concept of making a quality metric determination based on the previous spectrum as a reference which is of the timed sequence of measurements and compared against a threshold as taught in Lewis. This is because such a previous reference data set from the measured data set and a threshold allows for improving the signal to noise ratio (see [0014] and [0016] of Lewis). This is important in order to provide better measurement accuracy to an end user.
Regarding claim 4, Froggatt teaches that the reference spectrum is selected by: iterating through a plurality of the other backscattered-light spectra (see iterative / looping algorithm for find quality factors as shown in fig. 11), and selecting the backscattered-light spectrum from the plurality that has the highest pair's quality value (S116; see fig. 11 and [0084] “selecting the temporal and spectral shift combination that produces the highest quality factor, (step S116)”).
Regarding claim 5, Froggatt does not directly state that the plurality of the other backscattered-light spectra consists of all the other backscattered-light spectra.
However, Lewis teaches regarding distributed optical fiber sensing using backscattered radiation (abstract) from a laser source (102; see at least [0105]) where a quality metric is determined via comparison of separate processing channels of the backscattered radiation separated by time (abstract; [0010]; [0019]) and where the time separated channels of the time sequence are used in the determination ([0024]; see generally [0022-26]) and where “all results which are sufficiently similar to one another may be combined, which may in some circumstances include all channels” ([0029]).
Therefore, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to modify the optical measurement system having determining a spectral shift between the backscattered-light spectrum and the reference spectrum for a quality factor of Froggatt with the specific knowledge of using the concept of making a quality metric determination based on the previous spectrum as a reference which includes all channels / data / spectra as taught in Lewis. This is because such a comprehensive previous reference data set from the measured data set allows for improving the signal to noise ratio (see [0014] and [0016] of Lewis). This is important in order to provide better measurement accuracy to an end user.
Regarding claim 6, Froggatt teaches that the plurality of the other backscattered-light spectra consists of two or more earlier backscattered-light spectra (see [0101] and fig. 22 showing and teaching that the back scattered reference spectra has two or more spectra – see at least elements E/F and H/I; see also fig. 11).
Froggatt does not directly state that the reference spectra is/are specifically of the timed sequence.
However, Lewis teaches regarding distributed optical fiber sensing using backscattered radiation (abstract) from a laser source (102; see at least [0105]) where a quality metric is determined via comparison of separate processing channels of the backscattered radiation separated by time (abstract; [0010]; [0019]) and where the time separated channels of the time sequence are used in the determination ([0024] “In one embodiment the quality metric determines the similarity between the data from two channels by determining, for each channel, the degree of variation of current value from the average value for that channel. The metric may comprise multiplying the degree of variation from each channel together, i.e. the quality metric may comprise determining, for two channels, a first metric of the form M1 (A, B)=(A−<A>).Math.(B−<B>), where A and B are the current data values from the channel and <A> and <B> are the average values of the data from the channels.”; see generally [0022-26]).
Therefore, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to modify the optical measurement system having determining a spectral shift between the backscattered-light spectrum and the reference spectrum for a quality factor of Froggatt with the specific knowledge of using the concept of making a quality metric determination based on a reference spectrum which is of the timed sequence of measurements as taught in Lewis. This is because such a reference data set from the measured data set allows for improving the signal to noise ratio (see [0014] and [0016] of Lewis). This is important in order to provide better measurement accuracy to an end user.
Regarding claim 7, Froggatt does not directly state that the two or more earlier backscattered-light spectra from the timed sequence consists of all the earlier backscattered-light spectra.
However, Lewis teaches regarding distributed optical fiber sensing using backscattered radiation (abstract) from a laser source (102; see at least [0105]) where a quality metric is determined via comparison of separate processing channels of the backscattered radiation separated by time (abstract; [0010]; [0019]) and where the time separated channels of the time sequence are used in the determination ([0024]; see generally [0022-26]) and where “all results which are sufficiently similar to one another may be combined, which may in some circumstances include all channels” ([0029]).
Therefore, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to modify the optical measurement system having determining a spectral shift between the backscattered-light spectrum and the reference spectrum for a quality factor of Froggatt with the specific knowledge of using the concept of making a quality metric determination based on the previous spectrum as a reference which includes all channels / data / spectra as taught in Lewis. This is because such a comprehensive previous reference data set from the measured data set allows for improving the signal to noise ratio (see [0014] and [0016] of Lewis). This is important in order to provide better measurement accuracy to an end user.
Regarding claim 8, Froggatt teaches that the operation of determining the spectral shift comprises calculating a shift of the backscattered-light spectrum relative to the reference spectrum (see at least [0101-102] teaching this calculation of shift relative to the reference; see also abstract).
Regarding claim 10, Froggatt teaches that the data processing apparatus is implemented as one of a microprocessor, an FPGA, or an ASIC ([0055] teaches a DSP, ASIC, FPGA and other known hardware for hardware implementation).
Claim 9 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Froggatt et al (US 20110317148; hereinafter Froggatt) as modified by Lewis et al. (US 20170199075; hereinafter Lewis) as applied to claim 1 above and further in view of Sang et al. (“One Centimeter Spatial Resolution Temperature Measurements in a Nuclear Reactor using Rayleigh Scatter in Optical Fiber” IEEE Sensors Journal, 8(7):1375–1380, 2008; all citation is to the copy of record 11/15/2023 in the file wrapper and referenced in the IDS also of 11/15/2023; hereinafter Sang).
Regarding claim 9, Froggatt as modified by Lewis lacks teaching that the optical fiber is disposed in a harsh environment that comprises neutron irradiation.
However, Sang teaches distributed fiber-optic temperature measurement (abstract) in a nuclear reactor (abstract) where an optical fiber sensor is disposed in a challenging / harsh environment with “high neutron fluxes” (1. Introduction; first ¶, final sentence; see also fig. 4).
Therefore, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to further modify the optical measurement system of Froggatt as modified by Lewis with the specific knowledge of using the optical measurement system disposed in a harsh environment that comprises neutron irradiation of Sang. This is because the “presence of ionizing radiation fields in nuclear facilities is a major challenge” in the field of “photonic equipment and sensors” (1. Introduction; second ¶ of Sang) and the “Nuclear Regulatory Commission” concluded that “fiber optic sensors have unique advantages in nuclear power plant monitoring and control applications” (1. Introduction; second ¶ of Sang). This is important in order to avoid electromagnetic interference and increase accuracy of measurements (1. Introduction; second ¶ of Sang).
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. See PTO-892.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to PHILIP COTEY whose telephone number is (571)270-1029. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 9-5.
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, Laura Martin can be reached at 571-272-2160. 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.
/PHILIP L COTEY/ Examiner, Art Unit 2855
/LAURA MARTIN/ SPE, Art Unit 2855