DETAILED ACTION
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 .
Priority
Receipt is acknowledged of certified copies of papers required by 37 CFR 1.55.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 17 March 2026 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
Applicant argues beginning on page 6 of the remarks that the Mupende reference fails to teach the claimed limitations, in particular, the specifics of determining a plurality of operating states experienced by the mechanical device within the predetermined time range based on the acquired load spectrum and the acquired lubricant state.” Additionally, line 2 on the same page states that the reference does not define the operating states as based on the combination of load values and lubricant contamination degree.” However, this is not considered to be part of the required claim language as the claim never requires the combining of the two values to determine the operating state. Rather, the claim only requires that the operating states are “based on” the load spectrum and the lubricant state which can be determined separately and would inherently affect the operating state as they change the operation of the system inherently. Page 7 of the remarks further states that the Mupende reference relates to individual parameters to determine actual state and remaining service life and not combined load-contamination states. Again, it is noted that the combination of the load and contamination is not required to meet the limitations of the claim in the broadest sense. Rather, the claim need only take into account each individually when determining the operating state. With regard to the Iwatsubo reference, Page 7 likewise argues against a combination of the contamination and load as joint parameters, however as Iwatsubo is relied upon for a separate teaching of contamination, it does not need to be combined in conjunction with the load values to arrive at the claimed language of claims 1 and 11.
Further, on page 8, Applicant argues that Mupende does not determine the remaining service life based on the operating states, but rather directly using the sensor information. While it is true that the sensor information is used in the determination, it must be as it is the sensor information itself that is input to the central unit for processing in order to determine the operating state and therefore the remaining life as disclosed in paragraphs 0045-0046. Therefore, while Applicant points to paragraph 0009 to indicate that the state is determined based on the sensor information, there are additional steps which are required by Mupende prior to the determination of the remaining service live that includes the determination of a state of the system beforehand.
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) 1-11 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Mupende et al. US 2022/0081880 and Iwatsubo et al. US 2007/0277613
Regarding claim 1, Mupende teaches a method for determining an estimated life of a mechanical device (construction machine) including the steps of acquiring a load spectrum (the sensor system records temperature of the lubricant or the housing part wall paragraph 0015-0016 or the drive loading over time, paragraph 0017, 0033) of the mechanical device within a predetermined time range (the values are monitored with a trend determination module which monitors them over a period of time, paragraph 0044-0045),
acquiring a lubricant state of the mechanical device within the predetermined time range (the lubricant properties are monitored, paragraph 0012),
and determining a plurality of operating states (the system records trend information to determine the state and transmits it to determine the current operation state, abstract, paragraph 0045), wherein each operating state corresponds to a particular range of load values (predetermined ranges, paragraph 0045). Mupende further teaches determining the estimated life of the mechanical device based on the plurality of operating states of the mechanical device within the predetermined time range (the central unit may determine the remaining service life, paragraph 0046), and monitoring the lubricant for damage due to thermal effects and for particle content (paragraph 0080), but does not explicitly disclose monitoring the degree of contamination of the lubricant.
Iwatsubo teaches a method for assessing residual service life of a roller bearing in which contamination of a lubricant and bearing load are used to determine the lubricant degradation and wear in a roller bearing (paragraph 0056). As the level of contaminants increases, the life of the device can be estimated as it relates to the state of wear in the system (paragraph 0157-0158). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of filing to have combined the teachings of Iwatsubo with those of Mupende in order to incorporate the degree of contamination of the lubricant into the determination of estimated life since a contaminated lubricant can cause additional wear and stress on the system during operation (Iwatsubo, abstract).
Regarding claim 2, in combination, the method of Mupende teaches comparing the measured data to threshold values (reference life) to determine the current state of the mechanical device and the estimated remaining life (paragraph 0048).
Regarding claim 3, in combination, Mupende teaches determining the corresponding reference life of the mechanical device for the plurality of operating states by determining the corresponding reference life (threshold values) for each of the operating states according to a predetermined criterion or methodology regarding the life of the mechanical device (paragraph 0048 and 0049).
Regarding claim 4, Mupende discloses in paragraph 0047, a step of weighting the state information using the central unit to determine the estimated life which would weight the trend changes corresponding to the operating states.
Regarding claim 5, Mupende teaches weighting the values, but does not explicitly disclose using a weighted harmonic mean, arithmetic mean or a weighted geometric mean as claimed, however it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was made to have calculated the mean by any known method such as harmonic, arithmetic or geometric depending on how accurately it needs to be determined, since it has been held that choosing from a finite number of identified, predictable solutions, with a reasonable expectation of success is obvious. KSR International Co. v. Teleflex Inc. (KSR), 550 U.S. 398, 82 USPQ2d 1385 (2007)
Regarding claim 6, Mupende teaches acquiring a discrete lubricant state (via a lubricant sensor, paragraph 0012) within the predetermined time range (during operation the sensor would record all data during the predetermined time range) and deriving a continuous lubricant state within the predetermined time range (via the trend determination module, paragraph 0044) and can reset when an oil change is carried out (paragraph 0052) which would appear in the trend.
Regarding claim 7, paragraph 0058 of Iwatsubo teaches monitoring the lubricant for a degree of contamination which would be in a lightly contaminated (normal degree of degradation), a moderate degree of degradation (initial stages of degradation, paragraph 0059) or heavily contamination state (late stage of degradation, paragraph 0060).
Regarding claim 8, paragraph 0045 of Mupende teaches using predetermined ranges and range limits to determine maximum values for each sub-range within the range and if a sub-range has been exceeded. Since the trend determination module monitors the load values of the system, it would determine the maximum range of the load values as the ranges.
Regarding claim 9, the method of Mupende teaches determining an estimated life using the method of claim 1, and determining the time of the mechanical device has been in use (actual state, abstract) and determining the remaining useful life of the mechanical device based on the estimated life and time the device has been in use (the remaining service life would be estimated useful life remaining as described in paragraph 0009).
Regarding claim 10, the method of Mupende teaches determining an estimated life using the method of claim 5, and determining the time of the mechanical device has been in use (actual state, abstract) and determining the remaining useful life of the mechanical device based on the estimated life and time the device has been in use (the remaining service life would be estimated useful life remaining as described in paragraph 0009).
Regarding claim 11, Mupende teaches an equipment for determining an estimated life of a mechanical device (construction machine) the equipment comprising: a first acquisition unit for acquiring a load spectrum (the sensor system records temperature of the lubricant or the housing part wall paragraph 0015-0016 or the drive loading, paragraph 0017) of the mechanical device within a predetermined time range (the values are monitored with a trend determination module which monitors them over a period of time, paragraph 0044-0045),
a second acquisition unit for acquiring a lubricant state of the mechanical device within the predetermined time range (the lubricant properties are monitored via sensors, paragraph 0012),
an operating state determination unit that is connected to the first and second acquisition units and acquires the load spectrum and lubricant state and determines a plurality of operating states experienced by the mechanical device (the system records trend information via an analysis module 20 and trend determination device 21 to determine the state and transmits it to determine the current operation state, abstract, paragraph 0045), wherein each operating state corresponds to a particular range of load values (predetermined ranges, paragraph 0045). Mupende further teaches an estimated life determination unit that is connected to the operating state determination unit and determines an estimated life of the mechanical device based on the plurality of operating states of the mechanical device within the predetermined time range (the central unit may determine the remaining service life, paragraph 0046). Mupende further teaches monitoring the lubricant for damage due to thermal effects and for particle content (paragraph 0080) but does not explicitly disclose monitoring the degree of contamination of the lubricant.
Iwatsubo teaches a system for assessing residual service life of a roller bearing in which contamination of a lubricant and bearing load are used to determine the lubricant degradation and wear in a roller bearing (paragraph 0056). As the level of contaminants increases, the life of the device can be estimated as it relates to the state of wear in the system (paragraph 0157-0158). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of filing to have combined the teachings of Iwatsubo with those of Mupende in order to incorporate the degree of contamination of the lubricant into the determination of estimated life since a contaminated lubricant can cause additional wear and stress on the system during operation (Iwatsubo, abstract).
Conclusion
THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a).
A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of the advisory action. In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the mailing date of this final action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Mark A. Shabman whose telephone number is (571)272-8589. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 8:00-4:30 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, 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.
/MARK A SHABMAN/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2855
Prosecution Insights