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 .
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 1-8 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.
Claims 1-8 contain the trademark/trade name Autodesk Revit. Where a trademark or trade name is used in a claim as a limitation to identify or describe a particular material or product, the claim does not comply with the requirements of 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph. See Ex parte Simpson, 218 USPQ 1020 (Bd. App. 1982). The claim scope is uncertain since the trademark or trade name cannot be used properly to identify any particular material or product. A trademark or trade name is used to identify a source of goods, and not the goods themselves. Thus, a trademark or trade name does not identify or describe the goods associated with the trademark or trade name. In the present case, the trademark/trade name is used to identify/describe a product from the Autodesk company and, accordingly, the identification/description is indefinite.
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, 7, and 8 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Pathre (US 2022/0035352) (hereinafter Pathre) in view of Zhou et al., “The Research on Approach of BIM-Based 3D Design for Transmission Line Project” (hereinafter Zhou).
Regarding claims 1, 7, and 8, Pathre teaches a modeling method, device comprising a bus, a transceiver, a memory, a processor, and a computer program stored on the memory to perform the method (fig. 12, computer 1220), and nonvolatile computer-readable storage medium storing a computer program to perform the method (fig. 12, storage 1224), the method comprising:
step 1: acquiring preset attributes of a cable and a preset laying scenario of the cable (fig. 4, attributes of the cable 445-448; fig. 3 and ph. [0008], model 331 comprising a preset laying scenario for the cable having a collection of points representing the cable.);
step 2: determining a start point, an end point and a path point of the cable according to the preset laying scenario (fig. 4, start location 443a and stop location 443b; fig. 10A, 1011a collection of points of the path of the cable according the preset laying scenario);
step 3: inputting the preset attributes of the cable, the start point, the end point, and the path point into software to model the cable, thereby to obtain a cable simulation model (fig. 4, the parameters, start location, stop location and the cable default shape with resting posture and steps are input into user interface 440); and
step 4: laying the cable according to the cable simulation model (ph. [0088], “the positions and orientations of the cable ends are updated based on the locations determined during step 9 and the planned kinematic motion of the robotic manufacturing resource in preparation for the next time step of the simulation.”; ph. [0092], “At step 12, steps 8, 9, 10, and 11 are repeated for each time step of the duration of the entire manufacturing simulation as it progresses from start to finish.”).
Pathre does not explicitly teach the software is Autodesk Revit. However Zhou teaches modeling transmission line cable using Autodesk Revit (pg. 2, “In this paper, Revit 2018 software is used as the design platform to realize the three-dimensional path design of transmission lines through secondary development technology.”). One of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date would have been motivated to modify Pathre to use Revit as taught by Zhou in order to take advantage of Revit’s extensibility (Zhou, pg. 2, “Therefore, the Revit function is extended through secondary development to achieve Three-dimensional path design. In this paper, Microsoft Visual studio software and C# development language are used for Revit secondary development. By calling Revit API function, dynamic link library file is compiled. Then, Revit plug-in with transmission line design function can be realized.”).
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure:
Waki et al. (US 2022/0058307 and 2022/0237335) teaches creation of a 3D model of a cable.
Cote et al. (US Pat. 11,521,357) teaches aerial cable detection and 3D modeling from images.
Zhou (US 2021/0181056) teaches determining temperature-induced sag variation of a main cable.
Rousselle et al. (US 2012/0019622) teaches thermal powerline rating and clearance analysis using thermal imaging technology.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to BRIAN W WATHEN whose telephone number is (571)270-5570. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 9-5:30pm.
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, James Trujillo can be reached at 571-272-3677. 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.
BRIAN W. WATHEN
Primary Examiner
Art Unit 2151
/BRIAN W WATHEN/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2151
