DETAILED ACTION
The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
Status of claims
Claims 1-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b).
Claims 11-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 101.
Claims 1-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103.
Claim Objections
Claims 2, 5, 10, 12, 15 and 20 are objected to because of the following informalities:
In line 1 of claim 2, “the active transmitter” should be changed to “the active transmitters”.
In last line of claims 5, “the specific applications” should be changed to
“
In line 1 of claim 10, “the first and second pillar” should be changed to “the first and second pillars”.
In line 1 of claim 12, “the active transmitter” should be changed to “the active transmitters”.
In last line of claims 15, “the specific applications” should be changed to
“specific applications”.
In line 1 of claim 20, “the first and second pillar” should be changed to “the first and second pillars”.
Appropriate correction is required.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
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.
Claims 1-20 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 pre-AIA the applicant regards as the invention.
Regarding claim 1, claim 1 recites
“a plurality of first sensors” in line 3,
“a plurality of second sensors” in line 4, and
“the plurality of sensors” in lines 4-5;
it is not clear which one of “a plurality of first sensors” in line 3 and “a plurality of second sensors” in line 4 that “the plurality of sensors” in lines 4-5 is referring to; and
it is not clear whether “the plurality of sensors” in lines 4-5 refer to both “a plurality of first sensors” in line 3 and “a plurality of second sensors” in line 4 or not.
Regarding claim 1, claim 1 recites
“a plurality of first sensors” in line 3,
“a plurality of second sensors” in line 4,
“the plurality of sensors” in lines 4-5,
“one or more inductive coil sensors” in line 10, and
“the sensors” in last two lines;
it is not clear which one of “a plurality of first sensors” in line 3, “a plurality of second sensors” in line 4, “the plurality of sensors” in lines 4-5, and “one or more inductive coil sensors” in line 10 that “the sensors” in last two lines is referring to; and
it is not clear whether “the sensors” in last two lines refer to all of “a plurality of first sensors” in line 3, “a plurality of second sensors” in line 4, “the plurality of sensors” in lines 4-5, and “one or more inductive coil sensors” in line 10 or not.
Regarding claims 6 and 16, in line 1 of each of claims 6 and 16 recites “the magnet array technology”. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. In addition, applicant’s specification and drawing does not provide definition of the term “the magnet array technology”, it is not clear what technology is classified as magnet array technology; for examination purpose “the magnet array technology” is interpreted as a technology that uses array of magnet materials.
Regarding claims 6-9, each of claims 6-9 recites “the sensors” and claims 6-9 are rejected for the same reason as rejected in claims 1 because it is not clear which one of “a plurality of first sensors” in line 3 of claim 1, “a plurality of second sensors” in line 4 of claim 1, “the plurality of sensors” in lines 4-5 of claim 1, and “one or more inductive coil sensors” in line 10 of claim 1 that “the sensors” is referring to; and
it is not clear whether “the sensors” refer to all of “a plurality of first sensors” in line 3 of claim 1, “a plurality of second sensors” in line 4 of claim 1, “the plurality of sensors” in lines 4-5 of claim 1, and “one or more inductive coil sensors” in line 10 of claim 1 or not.
Regarding claims 9 and 19, in last line of each of claims 9 and 19 recites “the components”. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. In addition, applicant’s specification and drawing does not provide what “the components” are referring to; it is not clear what components that “the components” are referring to.
Regarding claims 2-10, claims 2-10 are also rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) because claims 2-10 depend on all claim limitations of independent claim 1.
Regarding claim 11, claim 11 recites
“a plurality of first sensors” in line 3,
“a plurality of second sensors” in line 4, and
“the plurality of sensors” in lines 8-9;
it is not clear which one of “a plurality of first sensors” in line 3 and “a plurality of second sensors” in line 4 that “the plurality of sensors” in lines 8-9 is referring to; and
it is not clear whether “the plurality of sensors” in lines 8-9 refer to both “a plurality of first sensors” in line 3 and “a plurality of second sensors” in line 4 or not.
Regarding claim 11, claim 11 recites
“a plurality of first sensors” in line 3,
“a plurality of second sensors” in line 4,
“the plurality of sensors” in lines 8-9,
“one or more inductive coil sensors” in line 12, and
“the sensors” in last two lines;
it is not clear which one of “a plurality of first sensors” in line 3, “a plurality of second sensors” in line 4, “the plurality of sensors” in lines 8-9, and “one or more inductive coil sensors” in line 12 that “the sensors” in last two lines is referring to; and
it is not clear whether “the sensors” in last two lines refer to all of “a plurality of first sensors” in line 3, “a plurality of second sensors” in line 4, “the plurality of sensors” in lines 8-9, and “one or more inductive coil sensors” in line 12 or not.
Regarding claims 16-19, each of claims 16-19 recites “the sensors” and claims 16-19 are rejected for the same reason as rejected in claims 11 because it is not clear which one of “a plurality of first sensors” in line 3 of claim 11, “a plurality of second sensors” in line 4 of claim 11, “the plurality of sensors” in lines 8-9 of claim 11, and “one or more inductive coil sensors” in line 12 of claim 11 that “the sensors” is referring to; and
it is not clear whether “the sensors” refer to all of “a plurality of first sensors” in line 3 of claim 11, “a plurality of second sensors” in line 4 of claim 11, “the plurality of sensors” in lines 8-9 of claim 11, and “one or more inductive coil sensors” in line 12 of claim 11 or not.
Regarding claims 12-20, claims 12-20 are also rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) because claims 12-20 depend on all claim limitations of independent claim 11.
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 11-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 101 because the claimed invention is directed to non-statutory subject matter.
Regarding claim 11:
11. A computer-implemented method for object detection, using a computer processor and a hybrid array-based multi-sensor gateway system, the method comprising the steps of:
providing a first pillar having a plurality of first sensors;
providing a second pillar having a plurality of second sensors;
providing an integrated camera on the first or second pillar;
providing a platform computer server and processor configured to receive data and process the data;
providing a printed circuit board (PCB) on the first or second pillar, configured to support the plurality of sensors;
providing one or more active transmitters and receivers on the first or second pillars configured to support acquisition parameters and to induce eddy currents to flow within conductive targets;
providing one or more inductive coil sensors on the first or second pillars; and
receiving data from the plurality of sensors;
analyzing the data using the acquisition parameters; and
transmitting the data to operations and security personnel;
wherein the active transmitters and receivers are optimized for data collection from the sensors.
Analysis Steps for claim 11:
Step 1: Is claim 11 claim to a process, machine, manufacture or composition of matter?
Yes, claim 11 recites a computer-implemented method which is within one of the 4 statutory categories the process, machine, manufacture or composition of matter.
Step 2a) Prong One: Does claim 11 recite an abstract idea, law of nature, or natural phenomenon?
Yes, claim 11 recites “analyzing the data using the acquisition parameters” may be done by human mental activity such that the human may mental analyze the data with the use of the acquisition parameters; therefore, human mental activity is abstract idea.
Step 2a) Prong Two: Does claim 11 recite additional element that integrate the Judicial Exception into a Practical Application?
No, claim 11 recites additional elements “providing a first pillar having a plurality of first sensors; providing a second pillar having a plurality of second sensors; providing an integrated camera on the first or second pillar” are pre-solution activities only used in data collections which does not integrate the Judicial Exception into a Practical Application because the additional elements do not impose any meaningful limits on practicing the abstract ideas.
No, claim 11 recites additional elements “providing a platform computer server and processor configured to receive data and process the data” the platform computer server and processor are only used as tools to receive and process data which does not integrate the Judicial Exception into a Practical Application because the additional elements do not impose any meaningful limits on practicing the abstract ideas.
No, claim 11 recites additional elements “providing a printed circuit board (PCB) on the first or second pillar, configured to support the plurality of sensors” the PCB is used as support for the plurality of sensors which does not integrate the Judicial Exception into a Practical Application because the additional elements do not impose any meaningful limits on practicing the abstract ideas.
No, claim 11 recites additional elements “providing one or more active transmitters and receivers on the first or second pillars configured to support acquisition parameters and to induce eddy currents to flow within conductive targets; providing one or more inductive coil sensors on the first or second pillars; and receiving data from the plurality of sensors;” are pre-solution activities only used in data collections which does not integrate the Judicial Exception into a Practical Application because the additional elements do not impose any meaningful limits on practicing the abstract ideas.
No, claim 11 recites additional elements “providing one or more active transmitters and receivers on the first or second pillars configured to support acquisition parameters and to induce eddy currents to flow within conductive targets; providing one or more inductive coil sensors on the first or second pillars; and receiving data from the plurality of sensors;” are pre-solution activities only used in data collections which does not integrate the Judicial Exception into a Practical Application because the additional elements do not impose any meaningful limits on practicing the abstract ideas.
No, claim 11 recites additional elements “transmitting the data to operations and security personnel” is post-solution activity only used in making the data available for operations and security personnel which does not integrate the Judicial Exception into a Practical Application because the additional elements do not impose any meaningful limits on practicing the abstract ideas.
No, claim 11 recites additional elements “wherein the active transmitters and receivers are optimized for data collection from the sensors” is pre-solution activityonly used in data collections from the sensors which does not integrate the Judicial Exception into a Practical Application because the additional elements do not impose any meaningful limits on practicing the abstract ideas.
Step 2b): Does claim 11 recite additional elements that amount to significantly more than the Judicial Exception?
No, all the first sensors, second sensors, camera, transmitters, receivers, and induction coil sensors are insignificantly elements that only used in enabling data collections and the insignificant computer server and processors only used as tool in receiving and processing data; when considering claim 11 as a whole, they do not amount to significantly more than judicial exception. There are no additional elements recited in the claim beyond the abstract ideas.
Therefore, claim 11 is not eligible subject matter under 35 U.S.C. 101.
PNG
media_image1.png
949
690
media_image1.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image2.png
690
768
media_image2.png
Greyscale
Regarding claims 12-19, claims 12-19 are analogously rejected as in claim 11, the elements recited in claims 12-19 are only used in enabling data collections which are general pre-solution activities which does not integrate the Judicial Exception into a Practical Application because the additional elements do not impose any meaningful limits on practicing the abstract ideas; and when considering each of corresponding claims 12-19 as a whole, it does not amount to significantly more than judicial exception. There are no additional elements recited in the claim beyond the abstract ideas.
Regarding claim 20, claim 20 is analogously rejected as in claim 11, claim 20 recites “wherein the first and second pillar are configured as planter boxes or bollard posts” which only makes the first and second pillars into particular shape and form which does not integrate the Judicial Exception into a Practical Application because the additional elements do not impose any meaningful limits on practicing the abstract ideas; and when considering claims 20 as a whole, it does not amount to significantly more than judicial exception. There are no additional elements recited in the claim beyond the abstract ideas.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
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.
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 of this title, if the differences between the claimed invention and the prior art are such that the claimed invention as a whole would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which the claimed invention pertains. Patentability shall not be negated by the manner in which the invention was made.
Claims 1-5 and 11-15 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Manneschi (US 2021/0293988), and further in view of Xu (CN 115480314 A).
Regarding independent claim 1, Manneschi teaches a hybrid multi-sensor gateway apparatus (e.g. figs. 1-2, [0039]-[0040] a combined detector 1 having left and right vertical supports 12 each with magnetostatic sensors 22) configured for multi-property array-based object detection (e.g. figs. 1-2, [0010], the combined detector 1 detects metallic objects), the gateway apparatus comprising:
a first pillar having a plurality of first sensors (e.g. figs. 1-2, [0039]-[0040], left vertical support 12 having magnetostatic sensors 22);
a second pillar having a plurality of second sensors (e.g. figs. 1-2, [0039]-[0040], right vertical support 12 having magnetostatic sensors 22);
a printed circuit board (PCB) on the first or second pillar, configured to support the plurality of sensors (e.g. [0056], each magnetostatic sensor 22 fixed on electronic board 23 this is on left or right vertical supports 12);
a processor configured to receive data and process the data (e.g. fig. 1, [0025] and [0048], central processing unit 2 configured to receive and process signals from magnetostatic sensors); and
one or more active transmitters and receivers on the first or second pillars (e.g. figs. 1-2, [0031] and [0048], transmitter and receiver coils of an active detection system) configured to support acquisition parameters and to induce eddy currents to flow within conductive targets (e.g. fig. 2, [0091] and [0093], receiver coils 15 detects disturbance in magnetic field induced by a passage of a person and transmitter coil 14 generates alternating magnetic field which induce eddy currents to flow within metallic elements carried by the person);
one or more inductive coil sensors on the first or second pillars (e.g. figs. 1-2, [0039] and [0045], coils 14 on left vertical support 12 and coils 15 on right vertical support 12); and
wherein the active transmitters and receivers are optimized for data collection from the sensors (e.g. [0045] and [0058], alternately form transmitter coil 14 and receiver coil 15 which optimized for receiving signals from both coils 14, 15 and magnetostatic sensors 22).
PNG
media_image3.png
786
557
media_image3.png
Greyscale
However, Manneschi is silent with regard to a platform computer server.
Xu teaches a platform computer server configured to receive data and process the data (e.g. figs. 1 and 4, paragraph 13 of Specific implementation examples, server 61 receives and process data from monitoring module 64 via data receiving module 63).
It would produce a predictive result of having a platform computer server configured to receive data and process the data, for the purpose of improving data processing efficacy and capacity and/or making processed data ready and available for later use.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the invention of Manneschi by applying the teaching of Xu to explicitly have a platform computer server configured to receive data and process the data, for the purpose of improving data processing efficacy and capacity and/or making processed data ready and available for later use.
Regarding claim 2, combination of Manneschi and Xu teaches wherein the active transmitter further comprising active transmitter loops or transmitter coils (e.g. Manneschi, fig. 1, [0047], transmitter coils 14 and receiver coils 15).
Regarding claim 3, Manneschi is silent with regard to further comprising an integrated camera on the first or second pillar.
Xu teaches an integrated camera integrated onto a box (e.g. fig. 2, e.g. figs. 1 and 4, paragraph 13 of Specific implementation examples, monitoring module is a camera integrated onto box 3).
It would produce a predictive result of integrate a camera on the left vertical support 12 and/or right vertical support 12 to view a detection object from different angles, for the purpose of obtaining more detail information about the detection object.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the invention of Manneschi by applying the teaching of Xu to explicitly have further comprising an integrated camera on the first or second pillar, for the purpose of obtaining more detail information about a detection object.
Regarding claim 4, combination of Manneschi and Xu teaches further comprising a Wi-Fi® module on the first pillar configured for the pillars to communicate over the Wi-Fi® protocol (e.g. Manneschi, fig. 1, [0061], each of left and right vertical supports 12 has a Wi-Fi communication interface in order to communication with central processing unit via Wi-Fi).
Regarding claim 5, combination of Manneschi and Xu teaches wherein the acquisition parameters is selected from a list consisting of transmitter pulse base frequency, waveform shape, ramp-time and peak current (e.g. Manneschi, figs. 5-6, different waveform shapes correspond to different objects being detected), whereby the acquisition parameters can be modified and tuned to the specific applications and expected targets (e.g. Manneschi, figs. 5-6, waveform shapes are being modified to expected objects of a miniaturized phone and an elbow element made of aluminum).
Regarding independent claim 11, Manneschi teaches a computer-implemented method for object detection (e.g. figs. 1-2, [0010] and [0060], central processing unit 2 is part of a computer which implement functionals steps in metallic objects detection), using a computer processor (e.g. figs. 1-2, [0010] and [0060], central processing unit 2) and a hybrid array-based multi-sensor gateway system (e.g. figs. 1-2, [0039]-[0040] a combined detector 1 having left and right vertical supports 12 each with magnetostatic sensors 22), the method comprising the steps of:
providing a first pillar having a plurality of first sensors (e.g. figs. 1-2, [0039]-[0040], proving left vertical support 12 having magnetostatic sensors 22);
providing a second pillar having a plurality of second sensors (e.g. figs. 1-2, [0039]-[0040], providing right vertical support 12 having magnetostatic sensors 22);
providing a processor configured to receive data and process the data (e.g. fig. 1, [0025] and [0048], providing central processing unit 2 configured to receive and process signals from magnetostatic sensors 22);
providing a printed circuit board (PCB) on the first or second pillar, configured to support the plurality of sensors (e.g. [0056], each magnetostatic sensor 22 fixed on electronic board 23 that is provided on left or right vertical supports 12);
providing one or more active transmitters and receivers on the first or second pillars (e.g. figs. 1-2, [0031] and [0048], providing transmitter and receiver coils of an active detection system) configured to support acquisition parameters and to induce eddy currents to flow within conductive targets (e.g. fig. 2, [0091] and [0093], receiver coils 15 detects disturbance in magnetic field induced by a passage of a person and transmitter coil 14 generates alternating magnetic field which induce eddy currents to flow within metallic elements carried by the person);
providing one or more inductive coil sensors on the first or second pillars (e.g. figs. 1-2, [0039] and [0045], providing coils 14 on left vertical support 12 and coils 15 on right vertical support 12); and
receiving data from the plurality of sensors (e.g. fig. 1, central processing unit 2 configured to receive signals from magnetostatic sensors 22 and receiver coils 15);
analyzing the data using the acquisition parameters (e.g. figs. 1 and 8, [0048],analyzing the signals from magnetostatic sensors 22 and receiver coils 15 to generate corresponding geometry of detected objects and an alarm instruction); and
transmitting the data to operations and security personnel (e.g. figs. 1 and 8, [0081] and [0087], transmitted data to an operator via Human Machine Interface 4);
wherein the active transmitters and receivers are optimized for data collection from the sensors (e.g. [0045] and [0058], alternately form transmitter coil 14 and receiver coil 15 which optimized for receiving signals from both coils 14, 15 and magnetostatic sensors 22).
PNG
media_image3.png
786
557
media_image3.png
Greyscale
However, Manneschi is silent with regard to a platform computer server; and providing an integrated camera on the first or second pillar.
Xu teaches a platform computer server configured to receive data and process the data (e.g. figs. 1 and 4, paragraph 13 of Specific implementation examples, server 61 receives and process data from monitoring module 64 via data receiving module 63).
It would produce a predictive result of having a platform computer server configured to receive data and process the data, for the purpose of improving data processing efficacy and capacity and/or making processed data ready and available for later use.
Xu also teaches an integrated camera integrated onto a box (e.g. fig. 2, e.g. figs. 1 and 4, paragraph 13 of Specific implementation examples, monitoring module is a camera integrated onto box 3).
It would produce a predictive result of integrate a camera on the left vertical support 12 and/or right vertical support 12 to view a detection object from different angles, for the purpose of obtaining more detail information about the detection object.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the invention of Manneschi by applying the teaching of Xu to explicitly have a platform computer server configured to receive data and process the data; and providing an integrated camera on the first or second pillar, for the purpose of improving data processing efficacy and capacity and/or making processed data ready and available for later use, and obtaining more detail information about a detection object.
Regarding claim 12, combination of Manneschi and Xu teaches wherein the active transmitter further comprising active transmitter loops or transmitter coils (e.g. Manneschi, fig. 1, [0047], transmitter coils 14 and receiver coils 15).
Regarding claim 13, Manneschi is silent with regard to further comprising an integrated camera on the first or second pillar.
Xu teaches an integrated camera integrated onto a box (e.g. fig. 2, e.g. figs. 1 and 4, paragraph 13 of Specific implementation examples, monitoring module is a camera integrated onto box 3).
It would produce a predictive result of integrate a camera on the left vertical support 12 and/or right vertical support 12 to view a detection object from different angles, for the purpose of obtaining more detail information about the detection object.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the invention of Manneschi by applying the teaching of Xu to explicitly have further comprising an integrated camera on the first or second pillar, for the purpose of obtaining more detail information about a detection object.
Regarding claim 14, combination of Manneschi and Xu teaches further comprising a Wi-Fi® module on the first pillar configured for the pillars to communicate over the Wi-Fi® protocol (e.g. Manneschi, fig. 1, [0061], each of left and right vertical supports 12 has a Wi-Fi communication interface in order to communication with central processing unit via Wi-Fi).
Regarding claim 15, combination of Manneschi and Xu teaches 15. The method of Claim 11 wherein the acquisition parameters is selected from a list consisting of transmitter pulse base frequency, waveform shape, ramp-time and peak current (e.g. Manneschi, figs. 5-6, different waveform shapes correspond to different objects being detected), whereby the acquisition parameters can be modified and tuned to the specific applications and expected targets (e.g. Manneschi, figs. 5-6, waveform shapes are being modified to expected objects of a miniaturized phone and an elbow element made of aluminum).
Claims 6 and 16 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Manneschi (US 2021/0293988) in view of Xu (CN 115480314 A), and further in view of Ohta et al. (US 2011/0025320) and Hokstad (US 2022/0187227).
Regarding claims 6 and 16, combination of Manneschi and Xu is silent with regard to wherein the magnet array technology is configured to simultaneously record information on all three properties including electrical conductivity, induced magnetization and remnant magnetization.
Ohta teaches a magnetic sensor having magnet array technology (e.g. fig. 1, [0041], magnetic sensor having magnetoresistive array elements 1-4) is configured to record information on magnetization (e.g. [0041], magnetic sensor detects magnetic field).
It would produce a predictive of using magnet array technology to construct magnetic sensor to record information on magnetization, for the purpose of improving accuracy in detection of magnetic field (e.g. Ohta, [0018]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the invention of Manneschi and Xu by applying the teaching of Ohta to explicitly have wherein the magnet array technology is configured to record information on magnetization, for the purpose of improving accuracy in detection of magnetic field (e.g. Ohta, [0018]).
However, combination of Manneschi, Xu and Ohta is silent with regard to simultaneously record information on all three properties including electrical conductivity, induced magnetization and remnant magnetization.
Hokstad teaches a magnetometer configured to measure electric and magnetic fields (e.g. [0046]), and using measured electric and magnetic fields to determine parameters including electrical conductivity, induced magnetization and remnant magnetization (e.g. [0014] and [0017], electrical conductivity determined form electromagnetic data, and total magnetization including both induced and remnant magnetization determined from magnetic data).
It would produce a predictive result of using measured electric and magnetic fields to determine information on all three properties including electrical conductivity, induced magnetization and remnant magnetization for obtaining detail information on object detection and simultaneously record the information for later use.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the invention of Manneschi, Xu and Ohta by applying the teaching of Hokstad to simultaneously record information on all three properties including electrical conductivity, induced magnetization and remnant magnetization, for the purpose of obtaining detail information on object detection for later use.
Claims 7 and 17 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Manneschi (US 2021/0293988) in view of Xu (CN 115480314 A), and further in view of Kawano et al. (US 2018/0284310).
Regarding claims 7 and 17, combination of Manneschi and Xu is silent with regard to wherein the sensors are tuned or enabled not to interfere with each other.
Kawano teaches sensors are tuned or enabled not to interfere with each other (e.g. fig. 12, [0015], at least two maneto-resistive bodies are not to interfere with each other magnetically).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the invention of Manneschi and Xu by applying the teaching of Kawano to have wherein the sensors are tuned or enabled not to interfere with each other, for the purpose of enabling reliable detection of objects carried by the person passing through the gateway (e.g. Kawano, [0013]).
Claims 8 and 18 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Manneschi (US 2021/0293988) in view of Xu (CN 115480314 A), and further in view of Zhang (CN 214540081 U).
Regarding claims 8 and 18, combination of Manneschi and Xu teaches measure frequency passive response as magnetized objects pass through the gateway (e.g. Manneschi, figs. 1-2, [0040]-[0041], detecting miniaturized phones using passive detection system 20).
However, combination of Manneschi and Xu is silent with regard to wherein the sensors are tuned to a lower frequency in the range of 0.3-30Hz frequency range which is needed to measure the low frequency passive response.
Zhang teaches a magnetic sensor uses a lower frequency in the range of 0.3-30Hz frequency range (e.g. last two paragraphs of Specific implementation examples, low-frequency magnetic sensor uses ultra-low frequency observation frequency range of 0.01 ~ 20 Hz)
It is obvious to optimize the range to be between 0.01Hz and 0.3Hz for the minimum frequency of the frequency range because this optimized range might be characterized as routine experimentation; therefore, using this optimized range would achieve optimal results.
It would produce a predictive result of tuning the sensors to use a lower frequency in the range of 0.3-30Hz frequency range to measure the low frequency passive response, for the purpose of improving sensitivity of the sensors more effectively (e.g. Zhang, last two paragraphs of Specific implementation examples).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the invention of Manneschi and Xu by applying the teaching of Zhang to have wherein the sensors are tuned to a lower frequency in the range of 0.3-30Hz frequency range which is needed to measure the low frequency passive response, for the purpose of improving sensitivity of the sensors more effectively (e.g. Zhang, last two paragraphs of Specific implementation examples).
Claims 9 and 19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Manneschi (US 2021/0293988) in view of Xu (CN 115480314 A), and further in view of Jenkins (US 2023/0138314).
Regarding claims 9 and 19, combination of Manneschi and Xu is silent with regard to comprising hardware filters and non-overlapping frequency ranges of the components to retrieve data from the sensors.
Jenkins teaches filters and non-overlapping frequency ranges of the components to retrieve data (e.g. fig. 15, [0490] and [0501], frequency filters and band-pass filters with different non-overlapping frequency ranges are applied to obtain filtered signals).
It would produce a predicted result of implementing the filters and non-overlapping frequency ranges of the components to retrieve data as taught by Jenkins by using hardware filters with non-overlapping frequency ranges to filter signals from the sensors to obtain filtered signals, for the purpose of removing unwanted frequency components to improve detection accuracy.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the invention of Manneschi and Xu by applying the teaching of Jenkins to have comprising hardware filters and non-overlapping frequency ranges of the components to retrieve data from the sensors, for the purpose of removing unwanted frequency components to improve detection accuracy.
Claims 10 and 20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Manneschi (US 2021/0293988) in view of Xu (CN 115480314 A), and further in view of Manneschi_692 (US 10,859,692).
Regarding claims 10 and 20, combination of Manneschi and Xu is silent with regard to wherein the first and second pillar are configured as planter boxes or bollard posts.
However, Manneschi_692 teaches a first and second pillar are configured as posts (e.g. abstract, figs. 1-2, posts 10 and 20).
It would produce a predictive result of making the first and second pillars into shape of planter boxes or bollard posts, for the purpose of making the first and second pillars more appealing and/or matching the first and second pillars with their surrounding environments.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the invention of Manneschi and Xu by applying the teaching of Manneschi_692 to have wherein the first and second pillar are configured as planter boxes or bollard posts, for the purpose of making the first and second pillars more appealing and/or matching the first and second pillars with their surrounding environments.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to HAIDONG ZHANG whose telephone number is (571)270-5815. The examiner can normally be reached on M-F 8:00 AM - 5:00 PM.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Huy Phan can be reached on (571) 272-7924. 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 http://pair-direct.uspto.gov. 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.
/HAIDONG ZHANG/Examiner, Art Unit 2858
/HUY Q PHAN/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2858