CTFR 18/396,614 CTFR 82298 DETAILED ACTION Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status 07-03-aia AIA 15-10-aia 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 Response to Amendment The objections to claims 2, 13 are withdrawn. Response to Arguments Applicant’s arguments, see pages 14-19, filed 3/5/2026, with respect to independent claims 1, 12, & 23 and dependent claims thereof have been fully considered and are persuasive as the existing rejections do not address all of the limitations of the amended claims. The rejections of the claims are withdrawn. However, upon further consideration, new ground(s) of rejection are made in view of Woodworth (US 5699161) in view of Stettner (US 20160153768) in view of Sinram (US 20090251536). Applicant argues on page 16, #1 that Woodworth does not teach an upper bracket spanning the two vertical brackets with a sensor array Examiner’s position is that Woodworth Figure 1 element 16 is horizontal and extends between the two vertical beams, supporting cameras 70 at the ends. Applicant argues on page 16, #1 that Woodworth’s cameras are side laser triangulation, not a vertical light curtain. Examiner’s position is that the features upon which applicant relies (i.e., a vertical light curtain) are not recited in the rejected claim(s). Although the claims are interpreted in light of the specification, limitations from the specification are not read into the claims. See In re Van Geuns , 988 F.2d 1181, 26 USPQ2d 1057 (Fed. Cir. 1993). Applicant argues on page 16-17, #2 that Stettner’s single 3D camera is not comparable to a plurality of sensors separated by a distance. Examiner’s position is that Woodworth teaches the plurality of sensors on the upper bracket (Figure 1, sensors 70 are fixed to the ends of the top bracket), that are separated by the width of the bracket. The sensors of Stettner are brought in to teach a sensor that both transmits and receives a signal, as the cameras 70 of Woodworth do not transmit a signal – they pick up light that is emitted by the side lasers 30. Each of the cameras of Woodworth would be replaced by the sensors of Stettner, reading on the claimed plurality of sensors and the ‘both transmit and receive’ limitations. Applicant argues on page 17, #3 that the sensing reference value is used on the conveyor platform itself and not the removable surface of Sinram. Examiner’s position is that the claim language reads “reflected via the conveyor platform” and not the cited specification “reflected signal after contacting the horizontal surface”. As the definition of “via” as per the Cambridge Dictionary is “going through or stopping at a place on the way to another place”, examiner’s position is that the broadest reasonable interpretation of the term ‘via the conveyor platform’ comprises ‘reflecting off a surface that is in the same position as the conveyor’, and as Sinram Figure 13 teaches the calibration surface 129 is at a corresponding position to the conveyor, the teachings of Sinram are deemed to read on the claimed limitation. Applicant argues on page 17, #3 that Sinram must shut down to calibrate. Examiner’s position is that Sinram paragraph 0069 describes the calibration and teaches it is “automatically and periodic”, but does not mention stopping the system to do so. However, the claim limitation specifically mentions taking data “when the conveyor platform is stationary” indicating that the instant invention stops while obtaining reference values. Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112 07-30-02 AIA The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(b): (b) CONCLUSION.—The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention. The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA), second paragraph: The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the applicant regards as his invention. 07-34-01 Claims 1-2, 4-5, 7-13, 15-16, 18-24 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA), second paragraph, as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor (or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the applicant), regards as the invention. The terms “feedback type sensors” in claims 1, 12, 23, the term “through-beam type sensors” in claims 2, 13, 15, and the term “through-beam type sensing signals” in claims 2, 13, 15, render the claims and dependencies thereof indefinite. Both “feedback sensors” and “through-beam sensors” are known in the art, and the addition of the word “type” to an otherwise definite expression extends the scope of the expression so as to render it indefinite. See MPEP 2173.05(b)(III)(E), Ex parte Copenhaver, 109 USPQ 118 (Bd. Pat. App. & Inter. 1955). Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103 07-06 AIA 15-10-15 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. 07-103 AIA The text of those sections of Title 35, U.S. Code not included in this action can be found in a prior Office action. 07-21-aia AIA Claim s 1-2, 4-5, 7-13, 15-16, 18-24 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Woodworth (United States Patent 5699161) in view of Stettner (United States Patent Application Publication 20160153768) in view of Sinram et al (United States Patent Application Publication 20090251536), the combination of which is hereafter referred to as “WSS” . As to claim 1, Woodworth teaches a volume measurement system (Abstract “A method and apparatus for measuring the length, width, and height of rectangular solid objects moving on a conveyor.”), comprising: a sensing gate (Figure 1, column 5:6-7 “A top bar 16 connects the two vertical risers 12, 14”), configured to sense a device under test to obtain a plurality of sensing data (column 2:38-59 outlines the data acquisition), wherein the sensing gate comprises: a first side bracket and a second side bracket, spaced apart parallel to a Y-axis and parallel to each other (Figure 1, column 5:6-7 “two vertical risers 12, 14”); an upper bracket, parallel to a Z-axis, spanning across top ends of the first side bracket and the second side bracket (Figure 1, column 5:6 “top bar 16”); and a plurality of feedback type sensors, arranged on the upper bracket for receiving reflected signals, wherein each of the feedback type sensors is separated by a second separation distance (Figure 1, Figure 1, column 5:20-23 “the first camera 70 is situated where the first vertical riser 12 and the top bar 16 meet, and a second camera 72 is situated where the second vertical riser 14 and the top bar 16 meet” and column 5:26-30 “The first camera 70 picks up light from the first laser light source 30 that reflects off of one side of the objects 60, and the second camera 72 picks up light from the second laser light source 32 that reflects off of an opposite side of the objects 60.”), a conveyor platform , disposed between the first side bracket and the second side bracket to drive the device under test to pass through the sensing gate parallel to an X-axis (Figure 1, column 5:1-3 “the system is mounted on a U-shaped frame 10 that traverses the width of the conveyor 20” with the conveyor movement indicated by the arrow); a pedometer , configured to generate a plurality of pulse signals (Figure 1, column 5:39-41 “The tachometer 80 measures the distance travelled of the conveyor 20, simply by counting revolutions (or fractions thereof) of "trundle wheel" 87”); and a processor , coupled to the sensing gate and the pedometer (Figure 1, column 5:10-13 “control electronics 40, in which is housed a digital computer (see FIG. 8) that computes the size of the objects 60 on the conveyor 20 based on raw measurement data fed to it”, see also Figure 8), and configured to: receive the pulse signals when the device under test starts passing through the sensing gate (the tachometer sends pulses that correspond to conveyor belt movement, see column 10:44-46 “Using a 360-pulse tachometer 80 with 12 inch circumference wheels, each pulse indicates that the conveyor 20 has moved 1/30 inches.” and Figure 13 that shows all signals go to the processor); record a plurality of X-axis values corresponding to a plurality of positions of the device under test in response to each of the pulse signals, and read the sensing data to calculate a Y- axis value and a Z-axis value corresponding to each of the X-axis values (Figure 14a shows data points for X-Z axis pairs, and column 10:34-37 teaches a height value “The RDY signal generates an interrupt, which stores the difference between the CLK count and the DATA count as the height of the object”); record a maximum X-axis value corresponding to a final position of the device under test in response to a final pulse signal among the pulse signals when the device under test finishes passing through the sensing gate (Figure 14a, points f and l, see column 12:41-42 “Identifying the cardinal points, which correspond to the first point (f), the last point (l)”, see also column 11:46-52 “As each object passes through the light curtain and laser range finder and triangulation circuit, the interrupt service routine LT-ISR inserts values for the left and right sides of the object into a respective left and right side capture buffer 1340a, 1340b, and the interrupt service routine RDY-ISR inserts values for the top of the object into a top side capture buffer 1340c.”); set a maximum of the Y-axis values corresponding to the X-axis values as a maximum Y- axis value, and set a maximum of the Z-axis values corresponding to the X-axis values as a maximum Z-axis value; value (column 9:61-62 “The light curtain used in the system according to the invention measures the highest point of the object 60”, and column 12:41 through column 13:36 teach calculations that provide the object sides & corners, see also column 13:64-14:4 “A linear least-squares fit is computed for all of the points, and a point on the linear least-squares fit closest to the first point f is determined to be one edge for side one of the object, and a point on the linear least-squares curve closet to the last point l is determined to be the other edge of side one of the object. As a result of this computation finding the corners of the object, the dimensions of the object can readily be determined, using step 4), described above.”, and all data is done by a central processor that combines the x-, y- & z- axis data, see Figure 8); calculate a volume of the device under test based on the maximum X-axis value, the maximum Y-axis value and the maximum Z- axis value (column 4:51-53 “From the height, length and width determinations, the volume of the object is determined by a multiplication of these three values.”). While Woodworth teaches a plurality of receivers on the upper bracket (Figure 1, elements 70, 72), Woodworth does not teach those elements also emit an electromagnetic signal and receiving a reflection of those signals. However, it is known in the art as taught by Stettner. Stettner teaches an object inspection system (Abstract “A dimensioning system that determines the dimensions and volume of an object by using a three-dimensional camera”) that uses a camera looking down on an object on a conveyor belt (Figure 1) where the camera has both a detector (Figure 1, paragraph 0027 “3-D camera 5”) and a light source (Figure 1, paragraph 0027 “pulsed light source 4a”) and detects the emitted light (paragraph 0033 “The pulsed light strikes the object 3 at many points on its surface, is reflected from the object 3, is collected by the lens 7, and focused on the focal plane 8.”). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before applicant’s effective filing date to use a camera of Stettner in the place of each of the cameras of Woodworth to provide a plurality of feedback type sensors, arranged on the upper bracket for emitting a plurality of electromagnetic signals, in order to ensure that the light is directed to the same location as the camera’s field of view. Woodworth as modified by Stettner above teaches the feedback type sensors of the sensing gate are further configured to emit the electromagnetic signals and receive the reflected signals of the electromagnetic signals (the sensors of Stettner emit and receive reflected light, see Stettner paragraphs 0027 & 0033). Woodworth as modified by Stettner above does not teach the sensors emit light that is reflected via the conveyor platform to obtain a sensing reference value of each of the feedback type sensors. However, it is known in the art as taught by Sinram. Sinram teaches conveyor belt (Abstract “The system includes a conveyor belt and an identification unit”, see Figure 2) and reflecting light on an object from above (Abstract “The identification unit includes at least one projector for projecting a beam of light downwardly towards the conveying surface, at a given height above the conveying surface, and onto a given material to be identified, so that a portion of projected light may be reflected back from the given material and upwardly towards the identification unit.”), and teaches receiving electromagnetic signals reflected via the conveyor platform to obtain a sensing reference value of each of the feedback type sensors (paragraph 0069 “a calibration device 127 having a calibrating surface 129 removably positionable below the at one projector 111, and more particularly, about the intersecting area 125 of light when positioned close to the conveying surface 105, so that a portion of reflected light may be reflected back from the calibration surface 129 and upwardly towards the at least one lens 117”). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before applicant’s effective filing date to have the sensors emit light that is reflected via the conveyor platform to obtain a sensing reference value of each of the feedback type sensors, in order to batter calibrate the identification unit. Woodworth as modified by Stettner and Sinram above does not explicitly teach taking data when the conveyor platform is stationary. However, Sinram teaches “calibrate the identification unit 109, in a manner well known in the art” (paragraph 0069) and it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before applicant’s effective filing date that part of calibrating a system is taking measurements when the system is not operating, in order to obtain a better calibration and more reliable measurements when the system is in operation. As to claim 2, WSS teaches everything claimed, as applied above in claim 1, in addition Woodworth teaches the sensing gate further comprises: a plurality of transmitters, arranged on the first side bracket for transmitting a plurality of through-beam type sensing signals, wherein each of the transmitters is separated by a first separation distance; and a plurality of receivers, arranged on the second side bracket and aligned in sequence with each of the transmitters for receiving each of the through-beam type sensing signals transmitted by each of the transmitters, wherein each of the receivers is separated by the first separation distance (Figure 6, column 9:67-10:7 “The light curtain 600 includes two arrays of photodevices: the beam- array emitter 602 and the beam-array receiver 604. The emitter 602 has many photo-transmitters spaced apart at predetermined distances from each other, such as 1/4 inch apart. The receiver 604 has just as many photoreceivers configured to receive light from a respective one of the photo-transmitters, and so they are spaced apart at the same predetermined distances as the photo-transmitters.”). As to claim 4, WSS teaches everything claimed, as applied above in claim 2, in addition Woodworth teaches when the device under test is passing through the sensing gate, part of the through-beam type sensing signals is blocked by the device under test (Figure 6, column 10:20-25 “The CLK signal cycles each time that an emitter-receiver pair are enabled. The DATA signal cycles each time that the enabled receiver is illuminated by the enabled transmitter (and therefore is not blocked by an object). The RDY signal pulses every time the beam array has scanned to the end of the array and is starting at the beginning again.”), the processor is further configured to: determining part of the through-beam type sensing signals and calculating corresponding quantity of part of the through-beam type sensors when the device under test is located at each of the positions; and calculating the Y-axis value when the device under test is located at each of the positions according to the quantity of part of the through-beam type sensors (column 10:33-39 “ The DATA ITC channel counts the number of emitter-receiver pairs not blocked by an object passing across the light curtain. The RDY signal generates an interrupt, which stores the difference between the CLK count and the DATA count as the height of the object in units of 1/4 inches, and then zeros the two counters for the next height measurement.”). As to claim 5, WSS teaches everything claimed, as applied above in claim 4, in addition Woodworth teaches the transmitters comprise: a first transmitter, disposed on the first side bracket and located at a first height above a horizontal plane of the conveyor platform; and remaining transmitters, arranged vertically in an ascending sequence on the first side bracket, starting from a position vertically above a first separation distance from the first transmitter, in a direction away from the horizontal plane of the conveyor platform (Figure 6, column 9:67-10:7 “The emitter 602 has many photo-transmitters spaced apart at predetermined distances from each other, such as 1/4 inch apart. The receiver 604 has just as many photoreceivers configured to receive light from a respective one of the photo-transmitters, and so they are spaced apart at the same predetermined distances as the photo-transmitters.” where the lowest photo-transmitter would be the claimed ‘first transmitter’ and higher ones would be the claimed ‘remaining transmitters’); wherein the processor calculates the Y-axis value corresponding to each of the X-axis values when the device under test is passing through the sensing gate and is located at each of the positions: Yi=Y1+(a-1)×Yr,a=1~m; wherein, Yi is the Y-axis value corresponding to the X-axis value when the device under test is located at an ith position, Y1 is the first height, a is quantity of part of the through-beam type sensors blocked by the device under test, Yr is the first separation distance, and m is total quantity of the transmitters (column 10:30-38 “The RDY signal, the CLK signal and the DATA signal are fed into respective ITC channels on the TPU 810, as shown in FIG. 8. The CLK ITC channel counts the number of emitter-receiver pairs sampled. The DATA ITC channel counts the number of emitter-receiver pairs not blocked by an object passing across the light curtain. The RDY signal generates an interrupt, which stores the difference between the CLK count and the DATA count as the height of the object in units of 1/4 inches, and then zeros the two counters for the next height measurement.”). As to claim 7, WSS teaches everything claimed, as applied above in claim 1, in addition Woodworth teaches the feedback type sensors receive the reflected signals of the electromagnetic signals to obtain sensing feedback value of each of the feedback sensors when the conveyor platform is operating (column 5:23-32 “The first and second cameras 70, 72 are positioned such that the center of their respective coverage zones is the center of the conveyor 20. The first camera 70 picks up light from the first laser light source 30 that reflects off of one side of the objects 60, and the second camera 72 picks up light from the second laser light source 32 that reflects off of an opposite side of the objects 60. Each camera 70, 72 has a field of view which encompasses the entire width of the conveyor 20, as seen in FIG. 2.” and Figure 1, the conveyor is moving as indicated by the arrow). As to claim 8, WSS teaches everything claimed, as applied above in claim 7, in addition Woodworth teaches calculating the Z-axis value when the device under test is located at each of the positions according to quantity of part of the feedback type sensors (column 4:42-45 “As an object passes through these "measuring planes", the digital computer collects three profiles: one for the top of the object, and one for each side of the conveyor.”, also column 11:46-52 “As each object passes through the light curtain and laser range finder and triangulation circuit, the interrupt service routine LT-ISR inserts values for the left and right sides of the object into a respective left and right side capture buffer 1340a, 1340b, and the interrupt service routine RDY-ISR inserts values for the top of the object into a top side capture buffer 1340c.”). WSS does not explicitly teach the processor is further configured to: determining whether the sensing feedback value of each of the feedback type sensors is equal to the sensing reference value when the conveyor platform is operating; determining that the device under test is passing through the sensing gate when the sensing feedback value corresponding to part of the feedback type sensors is not equal to the corresponding sensing reference value; and calculating the Z-axis value when the device under test is located at each of the positions according to quantity of part of the feedback type sensors. However, Woodworth teaches the use of thresholds (column 9:21-22 “predetermined threshold value”) and their use in triggering the taking of data (column 9:11-13 “Analog discriminators 100 (shown in FIGS. 8 and 10) are set by adjusting the trimming potentiometers POT1, POT2 to fire only on those pixels illuminated by the laser spot 7.” where this VID-L signal is used to initiate transfer of data to the capture buffers, see Figure 13 and column 9:45-46 “When the VID-L signal trips the ITC function, the then-current MCLK count is stored in a data buffer.” and column 11:46-52 “As each object passes through the light curtain and laser range finder and triangulation circuit, the interrupt service routine LT-ISR inserts values for the left and right sides of the object into a respective left and right side capture buffer 1340a, 1340b, and the interrupt service routine RDY-ISR inserts values for the top of the object into a top side capture buffer 1340c.”) and it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before applicant’s effective filing date to know that an object has arrived when the sensed value either exceeds a threshold or is not equal to the calibrated value of the conveyor belt, and to be more efficient by only taking data when there’s an object to be seen. As to claim 9, WSS teaches everything claimed, as applied above in claim 8, in addition Woodworth teaches the processor calculates the Z-axis value corresponding to each of the X-axis values when the processor determines that the device under test is passing through the sensing gate (column 10:34-38 “The RDY signal generates an interrupt, which stores the difference between the CLK count and the DATA count as the height of the object in units of 1/4 inches, and then zeros the two counters for the next height measurement.”) and while the claimed equation is not explicitly taught, Woodworth teaches sensors at known intervals and calculating a height from that information, and it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before applicant’s effective filing date to have this teaching read on the claimed limitation. As to claim 10, WSS teaches everything claimed, as applied above in claim 1, in addition Woodworth teaches a pedometer axle, coupled to the pedometer and the conveyor platform, configured to operate synchronously with the conveyor platform (column 5:37-41 “This trundle wheel 87 is urged against the belt by tachometer mounting apparatus 85. The tachometer 80 measures the distance travelled of the conveyor 20, simply by counting revolutions (or fractions thereof) of "trundle wheel"” and it is obvious that a rotating wheel would have an axle), the conveyor platform drives the device under test for a distance of one unit distance value when the pedometer axle completes one rotation (column 5:41-45 “In the presently preferred embodiment, the trundle wheel is twelve inches in circumference, and hence each full revolution of the wheel indicates another foot of linear travel by the conveyor 20.”), and a quantity of the pulse signals generated by the pedometer is a unit pulse number (column 10:48-53 “A first clock signal A and a second clock signal B correspond to the movement of the wheel of the tachometer 80. The count signal COUNT outputs a pulse for each rising and falling edge of the first and second clock signals A, B. Each pulse of the count signal corresponds to a 1/30 inch movement of the conveyor 60.”); wherein the processor is further configured to: reset an accumulated pulse number counted in response to each of the pulse signals to an initial pulse number (column 11:30-32 “Each time that a camera or beam array completes a scan of all of the sensors, an interrupt service routine inserts the data into capture buffers 1340a, 1340b, 1340c.” and while not explicitly taught, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before applicant’s effective filing date to reset a counter to zero when you’re done taking data, in order to have the next count be accurate); receive the pulse signals when the device under test is passing through the sensing gate, count the accumulated pulse number in response to each of the pulse signals and record the X-axis value corresponding to each of the positions of the device under test (column 11:46-57 “As each object passes through the light curtain and laser range finder and triangulation circuit, the interrupt service routine LT-ISR inserts values for the left and right sides of the object into a respective left and right side capture buffer 1340a, 1340b, and the interrupt service routine RDY-ISR inserts values for the top of the object into a top side capture buffer 1340c. Thus, three arrays of values corresponding to the left-side, right-side and top of the object 60 are stored in their respective capture buffers 1340a, 1340b, 1340c. Each measurement in the arrays contains the raw size measurement and the tachometer count at the time the measurement was taken.”); and set the accumulated pulse number as a total pulse number when the device under test is located at the final position (column 11:58-63 “The RDY-ISR interrupt service routine also detects the trailing edge of the object leaving the array. When this trailing edge detection occurs, the RDY-ISR interrupt service routine copies the three object profiles from the capture buffers 1340a, 1340b, 1340c to the work buffers 1350a, 1350b, 1350c.”). Woodworth as modified by Stettner and Sinram above does not explicitly teach wherein the X-axis value of the device under test at each of the positions is: Xi=(Ei-E0)×(EM/EC),i=0~l; wherein, Xi is the X-axis value of the device under test recorded in response to an ith pulse signal, E0 is the initial pulse number, Ei is the accumulated pulse number counted in response to ith pulse signal, EM is the unit distance value, EC is the unit pulse number, and l is the total pulse number. However, Woodworth teaches determining the X-axis position based on the rotation of a wheel (Figure 1, column 10:44-53 “Using a 360-pulse tachometer 80 with 12 inch circumference wheels, each pulse indicates that the conveyor 20 has moved 1/30 inches. FIG. 12 shows the signals utilized by the pulse tachometer 80. A first clock signal A and a second clock signal B correspond to the movement of the wheel of the tachometer 80. The count signal COUNT outputs a pulse for each rising and falling edge of the first and second clock signals A, B. Each pulse of the count signal corresponds to a 1/30 inch movement of the conveyor 60.”) and it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before applicant’s effective filing date to calculate the object length based on a number of pulses by using any appropriate mathematics, in order to accurately determine its volume. As to claim 11, WSS teaches everything claimed, as applied above in claim 1, in addition Woodworth teaches everything claimed, as applied above in claim 1, in addition the processor further establishes two-dimensional point cloud data related to each of the X-axis values according to the Y-axis value and the Z-axis value corresponding to each of the X-axis values, and establish a point cloud diagram related to the device under test according to a plurality of the two-dimensional point cloud data corresponding to the X-axis values (see Figures 14a-b, 15a-b, also column 11:46-57 “As each object passes through the light curtain and laser range finder and triangulation circuit, the interrupt service routine LT-ISR inserts values for the left and right sides of the object into a respective left and right side capture buffer 1340a, 1340b, and the interrupt service routine RDY-ISR inserts values for the top of the object into a top side capture buffer 1340c. Thus, three arrays of values corresponding to the left-side, right-side and top of the object 60 are stored in their respective capture buffers 1340a, 1340b, 1340c. Each measurement in the arrays contains the raw size measurement and the tachometer count at the time the measurement was taken.”). As to claim 12, the method would flow from claim 1. While Woodworth does not explicitly teach the claimed calculations, Woodworth teaches taking data in the same manner as the instant invention (i.e. conveyor belt data, height data from sensors above the object, width data from horizontal sensors), using the data to account for object skew on the conveyer belt (i.e. compute the location of the sides based on horizontal measurements), and produce the same result (i.e. calculate the volume of the object). As such, the invention of Woodworth is deemed to read on the claimed limitations. As to claims 13, the method would flow from claim 2. As to claims 15-16, the method would flow from claim claims 4-5, respectively. As to claims 18-22, the method would flow from claims 7-11, respectively. As to claim 23, Woodworth teaches a volume measurement system, comprising: a sensing gate (Figure 1, column 5:6-7 “A top bar 16 connects the two vertical risers 12, 14”), configured to sense a device under test to obtain a plurality of sensing data (column 2:38-59 outlines the data acquisition), wherein the sensing gate comprises: a first side bracket and a second side bracket, spaced apart parallel to a Y-axis and parallel to each other (Figure 1, column 5:6-7 “two vertical risers 12, 14”); an upper bracket, parallel to a Z-axis, spanning across top ends of the first side bracket and the second side bracket (Figure 1, column 5:6 “A top bar 16”); a plurality sets of through-beam type sensors, comprising: a plurality of transmitters, arranged on the first side bracket for transmitting a plurality of through-beam type sensing signals, wherein each of the transmitters is separated by a first separation distance; and a plurality of receivers, arranged on the second side bracket and aligned in sequence with each of the transmitters for receiving each of the through-beam type sensing signals transmitted by each of the transmitters, wherein each of the receivers is separated by the first separation distance (Figure 6, column 9:67-10:7 “The light curtain 600 includes two arrays of photodevices: the beam-array emitter 602 and the beam-array receiver 604. The emitter 602 has many photo- transmitters spaced apart at predetermined distances from each other, such as 1/4 inch apart. The receiver 604 has just as many photoreceivers configured to receive light from a respective one of the photo-transmitters, and so they are spaced apart at the same predetermined distances as the photo-transmitters.”); and a plurality of feedback type sensors, arranged on the upper bracket for receiving reflected signals, wherein each of the feedback type sensors is separated by a second separation distance (Figure 1, Figure 1, column 5:20-23 “the first camera 70 is situated where the first vertical riser 12 and the top bar 16 meet, and a second camera 72 is situated where the second vertical riser 14 and the top bar 16 meet” and column 5:26-30 “The first camera 70 picks up light from the first laser light source 30 that reflects off of one side of the objects 60, and the second camera 72 picks up light from the second laser light source 32 that reflects off of an opposite side of the objects 60.”), a conveyor platform, disposed between the first side bracket and the second side bracket to drive the device under test to pass through the sensing gate parallel to an X- axis (Figure 1, column 5:1-3 “the system is mounted on a U-shaped frame 10 that traverses the width of the conveyor 20” with the conveyor movement indicated by the arrow); a pedometer, configured to generate a plurality of pulse signals (Figure 1, column 5:39-41 “The tachometer 80 measures the distance travelled of the conveyor 20, simply by counting revolutions (or fractions thereof) of "trundle wheel" 87”); and a processor, coupled to the sensing gate and the pedometer (Figure 1, column 5:10-13 “control electronics 40, in which is housed a digital computer (see FIG. 8) that computes the size of the objects 60 on the conveyor 20 based on raw measurement data fed to it”, see also Figure 8), and configured to receive the pulse signals when the device under test starts passing through the sensing gate (the tachometer sends pulses that correspond to conveyor belt movement, see column 10:44-46 “Using a 360-pulse tachometer 80 with 12 inch circumference wheels, each pulse indicates that the conveyor 20 has moved 1/30 inches.” and Figure 13 that shows all signals go to the processor); wherein the feedback type sensors of the sensing gate are further configured to emit the electromagnetic signals and receive the reflected signals of the electromagnetic signals reflected via the conveyor platform to obtain a sensing reference value of each of the feedback type sensors when the conveyor platform is stationary. While Woodworth teaches a plurality of receivers on the upper bracket (Figure 1, elements 70, 72), Woodworth does not teach those elements also emit an electromagnetic signal and receiving a reflection of those signals. However, it is known in the art as taught by Stettner. Stettner teaches an object inspection system (Abstract “A dimensioning system that determines the dimensions and volume of an object by using a three-dimensional camera”) that uses a camera looking down on an object on a conveyor belt (Figure 1) where the camera has both a detector (Figure 1, paragraph 0027 “3-D camera 5”) and a light source (Figure 1, paragraph 0027 “pulsed light source 4a”) and detects the emitted light (paragraph 0033 “The pulsed light strikes the object 3 at many points on its surface, is reflected from the object 3, is collected by the lens 7, and focused on the focal plane 8.”). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before applicant’s effective filing date to use a camera of Stettner in the place of each of the cameras of Woodworth to provide a plurality of feedback type sensors, arranged on the upper bracket for emitting a plurality of electromagnetic signals, in order to ensure that the light is directed to the same location as the camera’s field of view. Woodworth as modified by Stettner above teaches the feedback type sensors of the sensing gate are further configured to emit the electromagnetic signals and receive the reflected signals of the electromagnetic signals (the sensors of Stettner emit and receive reflected light, see Stettner paragraphs 0027 & 0033). Woodworth as modified by Stettner above does not teach the sensors emit light that is reflected via the conveyor platform to obtain a sensing reference value of each of the feedback type sensors. However, it is known in the art as taught by Sinram. Sinram teaches conveyor belt (Abstract “The system includes a conveyor belt and an identification unit”, see Figure 2) and reflecting light on an object from above (Abstract “The identification unit includes at least one projector for projecting a beam of light downwardly towards the conveying surface, at a given height above the conveying surface, and onto a given material to be identified, so that a portion of projected light may be reflected back from the given material and upwardly towards the identification unit.”), and teaches receiving electromagnetic signals reflected via the conveyor platform to obtain a sensing reference value of each of the feedback type sensors (paragraph 0069 “a calibration device 127 having a calibrating surface 129 removably positionable below the at one projector 111, and more particularly, about the intersecting area 125 of light when positioned close to the conveying surface 105, so that a portion of reflected light may be reflected back from the calibration surface 129 and upwardly towards the at least one lens 117”). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before applicant’s effective filing date to have the sensors emit light that is reflected via the conveyor platform to obtain a sensing reference value of each of the feedback type sensors, in order to batter calibrate the identification unit. Woodworth as modified by Stettner and Sinram above does not explicitly teach taking data when the conveyor platform is stationary. However, Sinram teaches “calibrate the identification unit 109, in a manner well known in the art” (paragraph 0069) and it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before applicant’s effective filing date that part of calibrating a system is taking measurements when the system is not operating, in order to obtain a better calibration and more reliable measurements when the system is in operation. As to claim 24, WSS teaches everything claimed, as applied above in claim 23, in addition Woorworth teaches the sensing gate and the pedometer record a plurality of X-axis values corresponding to a plurality of positions of the device under test in response to each of the pulse signals , and read the sensing data to calculate a Y-axis value and a Z-axis value corresponding to each of the X-axis values (Figure 14a shows data points for X-Z axis pairs, and column 10:34-37 teaches a height value “The RDY signal generates an interrupt, which stores the difference between the CLK count and the DATA count as the height of the object”); record a maximum X-axis value corresponding to a final position of the device under test in response to a final pulse signal among the pulse signals when the device under test finishes passing through the sensing gate (Figure 14a, points f and l, see column 12:41-42 “Identifying the cardinal points, which correspond to the first point (f), the last point (l)”, see also column 11:46-52 “As each object passes through the light curtain and laser range finder and triangulation circuit, the interrupt service routine LT-ISR inserts values for the left and right sides of the object into a respective left and right side capture buffer 1340a, 1340b, and the interrupt service routine RDY-ISR inserts values for the top of the object into a top side capture buffer 1340c.”); set a maximum of the Y-axis values corresponding to the X-axis values as a maximum Y-axis value, and set a maximum of the Z-axis values corresponding to the X-axis values as a maximum Z-axis value (column 9:61-62 “The light curtain used in the system according to the invention measures the highest point of the object 60”, and column 12:41 through column 13:36 teach calculations that provide the object sides & corners, see also column 13:64-14:4 “A linear least-squares fit is computed for all of the points, and a point on the linear least-squares fit closest to the first point f is determined to be one edge for side one of the object, and a point on the linear least-squares curve closet to the last point l is determined to be the other edge of side one of the object. As a result of this computation finding the corners of the object, the dimensions of the object can readily be determined, using step 4), described above.”, and all data is done by a central processor that combines the x-, y- & z- axis data, see Figure 8); and calculate a volume of the device under test based on the maximum X-axis value, the maximum Y-axis value and the maximum Z- axis value (column 4:51-53 “From the height, length and width determinations, the volume of the object is determined by a multiplication of these three values.”). Conclusion 07-40 AIA 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 JARREAS UNDERWOOD whose telephone number is (571)272-1536. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 0600-1400 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, Michelle Iacoletti can be reached at (571) 2705789. 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. /J.C.U/Examiner, Art Unit 2877 /MICHELLE M IACOLETTI/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2877 Application/Control Number: 18/396,614 Page 2 Art Unit: 2877 Application/Control Number: 18/396,614 Page 3 Art Unit: 2877 Application/Control Number: 18/396,614 Page 4 Art Unit: 2877 Application/Control Number: 18/396,614 Page 5 Art Unit: 2877 Application/Control Number: 18/396,614 Page 6 Art Unit: 2877 Application/Control Number: 18/396,614 Page 7 Art Unit: 2877 Application/Control Number: 18/396,614 Page 8 Art Unit: 2877 Application/Control Number: 18/396,614 Page 9 Art Unit: 2877 Application/Control Number: 18/396,614 Page 10 Art Unit: 2877 Application/Control Number: 18/396,614 Page 11 Art Unit: 2877 Application/Control Number: 18/396,614 Page 12 Art Unit: 2877 Application/Control Number: 18/396,614 Page 13 Art Unit: 2877 Application/Control Number: 18/396,614 Page 14 Art Unit: 2877 Application/Control Number: 18/396,614 Page 15 Art Unit: 2877 Application/Control Number: 18/396,614 Page 16 Art Unit: 2877 Application/Control Number: 18/396,614 Page 17 Art Unit: 2877 Application/Control Number: 18/396,614 Page 18 Art Unit: 2877 Application/Control Number: 18/396,614 Page 19 Art Unit: 2877 Application/Control Number: 18/396,614 Page 20 Art Unit: 2877 Application/Control Number: 18/396,614 Page 21 Art Unit: 2877 Application/Control Number: 18/396,614 Page 22 Art Unit: 2877 Application/Control Number: 18/396,614 Page 23 Art Unit: 2877 Application/Control Number: 18/396,614 Page 24 Art Unit: 2877 Application/Control Number: 18/396,614 Page 25 Art Unit: 2877 Application/Control Number: 18/396,614 Page 26 Art Unit: 2877
Prosecution Insights