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 .
Status of Claims
This action is in reply to the Application Number 18/492,057 filed on 10/23/2023.
Claims 1-13 are currently pending and have been examined.
This action is made NON-FINAL.
The examiner would like to note that this application is now being handled by examiner Jeffrey Chalhoub.
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statements (IDS) submitted on October 23rd, 2023 and March 18th, 2025 are in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statements are being considered by the examiner.
Drawings
The drawings are objected to as failing to comply with 37 CFR 1.84(p)(5) because they do not include the following reference sign(s) mentioned in the description:
“15”.
The drawings are objected to as failing to comply with 37 CFR 1.84(p)(5) because they include the following reference character(s) not mentioned in the description:
“1A”.
Corrected drawing sheets in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(d), or amendment to the specification to add the reference character(s) in the description in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(b) are required in reply to the Office action to avoid abandonment of the application. Any amended replacement drawing sheet should include all of the figures appearing on the immediate prior version of the sheet, even if only one figure is being amended. Each drawing sheet submitted after the filing date of an application must be labeled in the top margin as either “Replacement Sheet” or “New Sheet” pursuant to 37 CFR 1.121(d). If the changes are not accepted by the examiner, the applicant will be notified and informed of any required corrective action in the next Office action. The objection to the drawings will not be held in abeyance.
Claim Objections
Claim 13 is objected to because of the following informalities:
Claim 13 appears to be independent and should therefore include all limitations of claim 12 rather than simply referring to claim 12.
Appropriate correction is required.
Claim Interpretation
The claims in this application are given their broadest reasonable interpretation using the plain meaning of the claim language in light of the specification as it would be understood by one of ordinary skill in the art. The broadest reasonable interpretation of a claim element (also commonly referred to as a claim limitation) is limited by the description in the specification when 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is invoked.
As explained in MPEP § 2181, subsection I, claim limitations that meet the following three-prong test will be interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph:
(A) the claim limitation uses the term “means” or “step” or a term used as a substitute for “means” that is a generic placeholder (also called a nonce term or a non-structural term having no specific structural meaning) for performing the claimed function;
(B) the term “means” or “step” or the generic placeholder is modified by functional language, typically, but not always linked by the transition word “for” (e.g., “means for”) or another linking word or phrase, such as “configured to” or “so that”; and
(C) the term “means” or “step” or the generic placeholder is not modified by sufficient structure, material, or acts for performing the claimed function.
Use of the word “means” (or “step”) in a claim with functional language creates a rebuttable presumption that the claim limitation is to be treated in accordance with 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph. The presumption that the claim limitation is interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is rebutted when the claim limitation recites sufficient structure, material, or acts to entirely perform the recited function.
Absence of the word “means” (or “step”) in a claim creates a rebuttable presumption that the claim limitation is not to be treated in accordance with 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph. The presumption that the claim limitation is not interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is rebutted when the claim limitation recites function without reciting sufficient structure, material or acts to entirely perform the recited function.
Claim limitations in this application that use the word “means” (or “step”) are being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, except as otherwise indicated in an Office action. Conversely, claim limitations in this application that do not use the word “means” (or “step”) are not being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, except as otherwise indicated in an Office action.
This application includes one or more claim limitations that do not use the word “means,” but are nonetheless being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, because the claim limitation(s) uses a generic placeholder that is coupled with functional language without reciting sufficient structure to perform the recited function and the generic placeholder is not preceded by a structural modifier. Such claim limitation(s) is/are:
“a drive mechanism” in claims 1 and 11-12,
“Specifically, FIG. 2 is a diagram schematically illustrating the door 80 and the door drive mechanism 200 in a fully closed and locked state of the door 80. FIG. 3 is a diagram schematically illustrating the door 80 and the door drive mechanism 200 in a fully closed and unlocked state. FIG. 4 is a diagram schematically illustrating the door 80 and the door drive mechanism 200, during opening (immediately after the door 80 starts opening) or closing (just before the door 80 finishes closing). FIG. 5 is a diagram schematically illustrating the door 80 and the door drive mechanism 200, during opening (just before the door 80 finishes opening) or closing (immediately after the door 80 starts closing). FIG. 6 is a diagram schematically illustrating the door 80 in the fully opened state of the door drive mechanism 200.” (Detailed Description – 33rd paragraph, FIG. 2-6)
“The door drive mechanism 200 transmits the power of the motor 30 to the door 80 to open or close the door 80. The door drive mechanism 200 implements the locked state or the unlocked state of the door 80, in accordance with the movement of the locking device 50 (pin 51). The door drive mechanism 200 includes racks 210 and 220 and the lock pin 230.” (Detailed Description – 90th-91st paragraphs, FIG. 2-6)
“a fastening mechanism” in claims 1, 3-4, 6-7, and 11-12.
“For example, as illustrated in FIG. 7, one fastening structure FS includes a fastening plates 80A1 and bolts BLT, and the other fastening structure FS includes a fastening plate 80B1 and bolts BLT. The fastening plate 80A1 is a flat plate that is provided so as to extend upward from an upper end of the door panel 80A. For example, the fastening plate 80A1 is coupled to a main body of the door panel 80A by welding or the like. The fastening plate 80A1 has two fastening holes that correspond to the respective bolts BLT. These fastening holes are provided through the fastening plate 80A1 in the width direction (left-right direction) of the train carriage 1. In a state where the rack 210 and the door panel 80A are appropriately coupled to each other, two fastening holes are provided in a lower portion of the connection portion 212 of the rack 210, so as to be approximately aligned with the respective two fastening holes of the fastening plate 80A1 in the front-and-back direction and the vertical direction. The two fastening holes of the connection portion 212 are provided so as to pass through the connection portion 212 in the width direction (left-right direction) of the train carriage 1. With this arrangement, the fastening plate 80A1 and the connection portion 212 overlap each other, such that a set of fastening holes of the fastening plate 80A1 is aligned with a set of fastening holes of the connection portion 212 in the front-and-back direction and the vertical direction, then each bolt BLT is inserted through corresponding different fastening holes, and finally is fastened by a nut on a backside of the bolt BLT. The fastening plate 80B1 is a flat plate that is provided so as to extend upward from an upper end of the door panel 80B. For example, the fastening plate 80B1 is coupled to a main body of the door panel 80B by welding or the like. The fastening plate 80B1 has two fastening holes that correspond to the respective bolts BLT. These fastening holes are provided through the fastening plate 80B1 in the width direction (left-right direction) of the train carriage 1. In a state where the rack 220 and the door panel 80B are appropriately coupled to each other, two fastening holes are provided in a lower portion of the connection portion 222 of the rack 220, so as to be approximately aligned with the respective two fastening holes of the fastening plate 80B1 in the front-and-back direction and the vertical direction. The two fastening holes of the connection portion 222 are provided so as to pass through the connection portion 222 in the width direction (left-right direction) of the train carriage 1. With this arrangement, the fastening plate 80B1 and the connection portion 222 overlap each other, such that a set of fastening holes of the fastening plate 80B1 is aligned with a set of fastening holes of the connection portion 222 in the front-and-back direction and the vertical direction, then each bolt BLT is inserted through corresponding different fastening holes, and finally is fastened by a nut on a backside of the bolt BLT.” (Detailed Description – 110th-114th paragraphs, FIG. 7)
“The fastening mechanism is, for example, the fastening structure FS.” (Detailed Description – 252nd paragraph, FIG. 7)
Because this/these claim limitation(s) is/are being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, it/they is/are being interpreted to cover the corresponding structure described in the specification as performing the claimed function, and equivalents thereof.
If applicant does not intend to have this/these limitation(s) interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, applicant may: (1) amend the claim limitation(s) to avoid it/them being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph (e.g., by reciting sufficient structure to perform the claimed function); or (2) present a sufficient showing that the claim limitation(s) recite(s) sufficient structure to perform the claimed function so as to avoid it/them being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph.
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 1-13 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 101 as being directed to non-statutory subject matter because the claimed invention is directed to an abstract idea without reciting significantly more. The claims are being rejected according to the 2019 Revised Patent Subject Matter Eligibility Guidance (Federal Register, Vol. 84, No. 5, p. 50-57 (January 7, 2019).
Step One: Does the Claim Fall Within a Statutory Category?
Yes. Claim 1 is directed towards a diagnostic apparatus (machine). Dependent claims 2-10 are also directed towards a diagnostic apparatus (machine). Claim 11 is directed towards a diagnostic system (machine). Finally, claim 12 is directed towards a diagnostic method (process). Dependent claim 13 is also directed towards a diagnostic method (process).
Step Two A, Prong One: Is a Judicial Exception Recited?
Yes. Taking into account claim 12 as one example, the claim recites acquiring first data related to an operation of a door during at least one of an opening operation or a closing operation and diagnosing, based on the acquired first data, an abnormality in a fastening mechanism configured to fasten a door panel to a drive mechanism that opens or closes the door panel. These limitations, as drafted, are simple processes that, under their broadest reasonable interpretation, cover performance of the limitations in the mind. That is, nothing in the claim elements precludes the steps from practically being performed in the mind. For example, the claim encompasses a mechanic inspecting a door of a vehicle, running a diagnosis by inputting the door’s specifications into a diagnosis display in order to determine a malfunction of the door, receiving a message on the display regarding a certain error, and alerting a driver of the vehicle about the door’s malfunction. Thus, the claim recites a mental process.
Step Two A, Prong Two: Is the Abstract Idea Integrated into a Practical Application?
No. Claims 1 and 11 recite three additional elements – a drive mechanism, a fastening mechanism, and circuitry. All three elements are recited at a high-level of generality (i.e., as means to transmit and receive data) such that they amount to no more than mere instructions to apply the exception using a generic drive mechanism, fastening mechanism, and circuitry. Accordingly, the additional elements do not integrate the abstract idea into a practical application because they do not impose any meaningful limits on practicing the abstract idea.
On the other hand, claims 1 and 11 recite the additional elements of a drive mechanism configured to open or close a door panel and a fastening mechanism configured to fasten the door panel to the drive mechanism.
The opening and fastening steps are recited at a high level of generality (i.e. as general means of transmitting and receiving data), and amount to mere data gathering, which is a form of insignificant pre-solution activity.
Claim 12 recites two additional elements – a fastening mechanism and a drive mechanism. Both elements are recited at a high-level of generality (i.e., as means to transmit and receive data) such that they amount to no more than mere instructions to apply the exception using a generic fastening mechanism and drive mechanism. Accordingly, the additional elements do not integrate the abstract idea into a practical application because they do not impose any meaningful limits on practicing the abstract idea.
This type of abstract idea recited in claims 1-13 is a mental process.
Step Two B: Does the Claim Provide an Inventive Concept
No. Regarding claims 1 and 11, the claims do not include additional elements that are sufficient to amount to significantly more than the judicial exception. As discussed above with respect to integration of the abstract idea into a practical application, the additional elements of using a drive mechanism, a fastening mechanism, and circuitry amount to no more than mere instructions to apply the exception using a generic drive mechanism, fastening mechanism, and circuitry. Mere instructions to apply an exception using a drive mechanism, a fastening mechanism, and circuitry cannot provide an inventive concept.
Regarding claim 12, the claim does not include additional elements that are sufficient to amount to significantly more than the judicial exception. As discussed above with respect to integration of the abstract idea into a practical application, the additional elements of using a fastening mechanism and a drive mechanism amount to no more than mere instructions to apply the exception using a generic fastening mechanism and drive mechanism. Mere instructions to apply an exception using a fastening mechanism and a drive mechanism cannot provide an inventive concept.
Dependent Claims
The dependent claims are merely further defining the abstract idea by providing field of use limitations on transmitting and receiving data and are not adding anything to the abstract idea set forth in the independent claims such that the invention will amount to significantly more than the abstract idea.
Claims 2-10 and 13 are merely field of use limitations which simply further limit the abstract idea set forth in claims 1 and 12, respectively. These claims do not contain further limitations that make them subject matter eligible.
For example, dependent claim 3 merely recites the well understood, routine and conventional computing functions of data transmission and gathering. These claims do not contain further limitations that make them subject matter eligible.
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 (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.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 103 which forms the basis for all obviousness rejections set forth in this Office action:
A patent for a claimed invention may not be obtained, notwithstanding that the claimed invention is not identically disclosed as set forth in section 102, if the differences between the claimed invention and the prior art are such that the claimed invention as a whole would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which the claimed invention pertains. Patentability shall not be negated by the manner in which the invention was made.
The factual inquiries for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows:
1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art.
2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue.
3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art.
4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness.
Claims 1, 4-5, and 11-13 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Umezawa (JP 6954486 B1) in view of Liang (CN 114067254 A).
Regarding Claim 1:
Umezawa teaches:
A diagnostic apparatus comprising:, (“A diagnostic unit for diagnosing an abnormality of the second control unit at the time of activation processing when the power of the control device is turned on is provided.” (Umezawa: Description, FIG. 1-4))
a drive mechanism configured to open or close a door panel;, (“The door drive mechanism 200 transmits the power of the motor 30 to the door 80 to open and close the door 80. Further, the door drive mechanism 200 realizes the locked state and the unlocked state of the door 80 in accordance with the operation of the locking device 50 (pin 51). The door drive mechanism 200 includes racks 210 and 220 and lock pins 230.” (Umezawa: Description, FIG. 1-4))
Umezawa does not teach but Liang teaches:
a fastening mechanism configured to fasten the door panel to the drive mechanism; and circuitry configured to: acquire first data related to an operation of a door of a train carriage during at least one of an opening operation or a closing operation of the door, and diagnose an abnormality in the fastening mechanism based on the acquired data., (“receiving a detection request, and acquiring high-definition video data of train doors; the train door comprises a middle door and a small door, the middle door comprises a door bolt and a middle door bolt, and the small door comprises a small door lock catch; transmitting the high-definition video data to back-end processing equipment through an RTMP protocol; in the back-end equipment, preprocessing the high-definition video data to obtain image data containing feature points; the characteristic points comprise the door bolt, the middle door bolt and the small door lock catch; inputting the image data containing the feature points into a preset deep learning model to obtain the recognition result of each feature point; integrating the recognition results of the characteristic points to obtain a vehicle door detection result; when the train door has safety abnormality, the door detection result at least comprises a carriage number and a corresponding abnormal characteristic point.” (Liang: Description))
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of filing, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to modify Umezawa with these above aforementioned teachings from Liang in order to create a safe diagnostic apparatus, system, and method. At the time the invention was filed, one of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to incorporate Umezawa’s control device and method with Liang’s safety state detection method and system for a train door in order to acquire data related to an operation of a door of a train carriage during an opening or a closing of the door and diagnose an abnormality in a fastening mechanism based on the acquired data. Combining Umezawa and Liang would thus provide “a safety state detection method and a safety state detection system for train doors, which can automatically identify the safety state of the train doors.” (Liang: Description)
Regarding Claim 4:
Umezawa in view of Liang, as shown in the rejection above, discloses the limitations of claim 3. Umezawa further teaches:
[…] and being acquired in the case where the fastening mechanism is in the normal state, […], (“The normal operation means that the door 80 is opened and closed according to the operation status of the railway vehicle 1.” (Umezawa: Description))
Umezawa does not teach but Liang teaches:
The diagnostic apparatus according to claim 3, wherein the third data includes a trained model in which the third data being related to the operation of doors,, (“receiving a detection request, and acquiring high-definition video data of train doors; the train door comprises a middle door and a small door, the middle door comprises a door bolt and a middle door bolt, and the small door comprises a small door lock catch; transmitting the high-definition video data to back-end processing equipment through an RTMP protocol; in the back-end equipment, preprocessing the high-definition video data to obtain image data containing feature points; the characteristic points comprise the door bolt, the middle door bolt and the small door lock catch; inputting the image data containing the feature points into a preset deep learning model to obtain the recognition result of each feature point; integrating the recognition results of the characteristic points to obtain a vehicle door detection result; when the train door has safety abnormality, the door detection result at least comprises a carriage number and a corresponding abnormal characteristic point.” (Liang: Description))
[…] is learned with supervised learning, and wherein the circuitry is configured to diagnose the abnormality, using the trained model to which the first data is input., (“S104: inputting the image data containing the feature points into a preset deep learning model to obtain the recognition result of each feature point; s105: integrating the recognition results of the characteristic points to obtain a vehicle door detection result; when the train door has safety abnormality, the door detection result at least comprises a carriage number and a corresponding abnormal characteristic point. According to the embodiment of the application, the preset deep learning model is called to carry out detection processing through the high-definition video data of the train door, the loading reinforcement state of the freight train door can be automatically identified, manual field inspection is not needed, the departure time is saved, and the driving safety of the freight train is effectively guaranteed.” (Liang: Description))
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of filing, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to modify Umezawa with these above aforementioned teachings from Liang in order to create a safe diagnostic apparatus, system, and method. At the time the invention was filed, one of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to incorporate Umezawa’s control device and method with Liang’s safety state detection method and system for a train door in order to acquire data related to an operation of a door of a train carriage during an opening or a closing of the door and diagnose an abnormality in a fastening mechanism based on the acquired data. Combining Umezawa and Liang would thus provide “a safety state detection method and a safety state detection system for train doors, which can automatically identify the safety state of the train doors.” (Liang: Description)
Regarding Claim 5:
Umezawa in view of Liang, as shown in the rejection above, discloses the limitations of claim 4. Umezawa does not teach but Liang teaches:
The diagnostic apparatus according to claim 4, wherein the circuitry is configured to: generate image data based on the acquired first data, and diagnose the abnormality using the trained model to which the image data is input., (“receiving a detection request, and acquiring high-definition video data of train doors; the train door comprises a middle door and a small door, the middle door comprises a door bolt and a middle door bolt, and the small door comprises a small door lock catch; transmitting the high-definition video data to back-end processing equipment through an RTMP protocol; in the back-end equipment, preprocessing the high-definition video data to obtain image data containing feature points; the characteristic points comprise the door bolt, the middle door bolt and the small door lock catch; inputting the image data containing the feature points into a preset deep learning model to obtain the recognition result of each feature point; integrating the recognition results of the characteristic points to obtain a vehicle door detection result; when the train door has safety abnormality, the door detection result at least comprises a carriage number and a corresponding abnormal characteristic point.” (Liang: Description))
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of filing, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to modify Umezawa with these above aforementioned teachings from Liang in order to create a safe diagnostic apparatus, system, and method. At the time the invention was filed, one of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to incorporate Umezawa’s control device and method with Liang’s safety state detection method and system for a train door in order to acquire data related to an operation of a door of a train carriage during an opening or a closing of the door and diagnose an abnormality in a fastening mechanism based on the acquired data. Combining Umezawa and Liang would thus provide “a safety state detection method and a safety state detection system for train doors, which can automatically identify the safety state of the train doors.” (Liang: Description)
Regarding Claim 11:
Umezawa teaches:
A diagnostic system comprising:, (“A diagnostic unit for diagnosing an abnormality of the second control unit at the time of activation processing when the power of the control device is turned on is provided.” (Umezawa: Description, FIG. 1-4))
a drive mechanism configured to open or close a door panel;, (“The door drive mechanism 200 transmits the power of the motor 30 to the door 80 to open and close the door 80. Further, the door drive mechanism 200 realizes the locked state and the unlocked state of the door 80 in accordance with the operation of the locking device 50 (pin 51). The door drive mechanism 200 includes racks 210 and 220 and lock pins 230.” (Umezawa: Description, FIG. 1-4))
Umezawa does not teach but Liang teaches:
a fastening mechanism configured to fasten the door panel to the drive mechanism; and circuitry configured to: perform at least one of an opening operation or a closing operation of a door of a train carriage, acquire first data related to an operation of the door during the at least one of the opening operation or the closing operation, and diagnose an abnormality in the fastening mechanism based on the acquired first data., (“receiving a detection request, and acquiring high-definition video data of train doors; the train door comprises a middle door and a small door, the middle door comprises a door bolt and a middle door bolt, and the small door comprises a small door lock catch; transmitting the high-definition video data to back-end processing equipment through an RTMP protocol; in the back-end equipment, preprocessing the high-definition video data to obtain image data containing feature points; the characteristic points comprise the door bolt, the middle door bolt and the small door lock catch; inputting the image data containing the feature points into a preset deep learning model to obtain the recognition result of each feature point; integrating the recognition results of the characteristic points to obtain a vehicle door detection result; when the train door has safety abnormality, the door detection result at least comprises a carriage number and a corresponding abnormal characteristic point.” (Liang: Description))
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of filing, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to modify Umezawa with these above aforementioned teachings from Liang in order to create a safe diagnostic apparatus, system, and method. At the time the invention was filed, one of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to incorporate Umezawa’s control device and method with Liang’s safety state detection method and system for a train door in order to acquire data related to an operation of a door of a train carriage during an opening or a closing of the door and diagnose an abnormality in a fastening mechanism based on the acquired data. Combining Umezawa and Liang would thus provide “a safety state detection method and a safety state detection system for train doors, which can automatically identify the safety state of the train doors.” (Liang: Description)
Regarding Claim 12:
Umezawa teaches:
A diagnostic method executed by a computer, the diagnostic method comprising:, (“A diagnostic step for diagnosing an abnormality of the second control unit at the time of activation processing associated with power-on of the control device is included.” (Umezawa: Description, FIG. 1-4))
a drive mechanism that opens or closes the door panel., (“The door drive mechanism 200 transmits the power of the motor 30 to the door 80 to open and close the door 80. Further, the door drive mechanism 200 realizes the locked state and the unlocked state of the door 80 in accordance with the operation of the locking device 50 (pin 51). The door drive mechanism 200 includes racks 210 and 220 and lock pins 230.” (Umezawa: Description, FIG. 1-4))
Umezawa does not teach but Liang teaches:
acquiring first data related to an operation of a door during at least one of an opening operation or a closing operation; and diagnosing, based on the acquired first data, an abnormality in a fastening mechanism configured to fasten a door panel to, (“receiving a detection request, and acquiring high-definition video data of train doors; the train door comprises a middle door and a small door, the middle door comprises a door bolt and a middle door bolt, and the small door comprises a small door lock catch; transmitting the high-definition video data to back-end processing equipment through an RTMP protocol; in the back-end equipment, preprocessing the high-definition video data to obtain image data containing feature points; the characteristic points comprise the door bolt, the middle door bolt and the small door lock catch; inputting the image data containing the feature points into a preset deep learning model to obtain the recognition result of each feature point; integrating the recognition results of the characteristic points to obtain a vehicle door detection result; when the train door has safety abnormality, the door detection result at least comprises a carriage number and a corresponding abnormal characteristic point.” (Liang: Description))
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of filing, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to modify Umezawa with these above aforementioned teachings from Liang in order to create a safe diagnostic apparatus, system, and method. At the time the invention was filed, one of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to incorporate Umezawa’s control device and method with Liang’s safety state detection method and system for a train door in order to acquire data related to an operation of a door of a train carriage during an opening or a closing of the door and diagnose an abnormality in a fastening mechanism based on the acquired data. Combining Umezawa and Liang would thus provide “a safety state detection method and a safety state detection system for train doors, which can automatically identify the safety state of the train doors.” (Liang: Description)
Regarding Claim 13:
Umezawa in view of Liang, as shown in the rejection above, discloses the limitations of claim 12. Umezawa further teaches:
A non-transitory computer readable medium storing a program for causing a computer to execute the diagnostic method of claim 12., (“A diagnostic step for diagnosing an abnormality of the second control unit at the time of activation processing associated with power-on of the control device is included.” (Umezawa: Description, FIG. 1-4) Umezawa further states “The function of the door control device 100 is realized by any hardware or a combination of any hardware and software. The door control device 100 includes, for example, a memory device such as a CPU (Central Processing Unit) and a RAM (Random Access Memory), an auxiliary storage device such as a ROM (Read Only Memory), and an interface device for input / output to / from the outside. It is mainly composed of a computer.” (Umezawa: Description))
Claims 2-3, 6, and 10 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Umezawa (JP 6954486 B1) in view of Liang (CN 114067254 A) in further view of Atsushi (JP 2012197144 A).
Regarding Claim 2:
Umezawa in view of Liang, as shown in the rejection above, discloses the limitations of claim 1. Umezawa in view of Liang does not teach but Atsushi teaches:
The diagnostic apparatus according to claim 1, wherein the acquired first data includes second data related to at least one of an accelerated state or a decelerated state of the door, and wherein the circuitry is configured to diagnose the abnormality based on the second data., (“In order to achieve the above object, one aspect of the present invention is an elevator door opening / closing control device for controlling opening / closing of an elevator door, wherein the motor driving unit drives a motor for opening / closing the door; A motor drive control unit that controls driving; a motor drive state detection unit that detects a drive state of the motor by the motor drive unit; and a door opening and closing speed that detects an opening and closing speed of the door that is driven and opened by the motor. A deterioration determining unit that determines deterioration of the door opening / closing mechanism based on the opening / closing speed of the door, and the motor drive control unit is configured to detect the deterioration of the elevator based on the detected opening / closing speed of the door. Controlling the motor drive unit so that the door is opened and closed by a gentler acceleration than the acceleration at the time of opening and closing the door in normal operation, and the deterioration determining unit Characterized by determining the degradation of the door opening and closing mechanism on the basis of the detection result of the driving state of the motor when the motor driving portion is controlled such that the door is opened and closed by the moderate acceleration. Thereby, in the abnormality detection of an elevator door, it becomes possible to reduce an operator's burden and to enable highly accurate abnormality detection.” (Atsushi: Description) Atsushi further mentions “In the door opening / closing control in the test mode, the drive device control means 13 controls the torque command means 10 to output a torque command value of an ultra-slow acceleration torque that rotates the door drive motor 2 by very gentle acceleration. . In this case as well, the monitor means 11 detects the torque command value of the super slow acceleration torque and the door speed detection means 12 is opened and closed by the super slow acceleration torque in the same manner as the normal elevator door 6 opening / closing control. The opening / closing speed of the elevator door 6 is detected. Then, the driving device control means 13 outputs to the torque command means 10 so that the opening / closing speed of the elevator door 6 detected by the door speed detection means 12 is a speed change corresponding to a predetermined ultra-slow acceleration torque. The torque command value to be controlled is feedback controlled. The door opening / closing mechanism monitoring unit 14 monitors the torque command value detected by the monitoring unit 11 in the test mode, and determines whether the output transition of the torque command value is within a predetermined range. (S205). In the determination of S205, when the output transition of the torque command value changes according to the ultra-slow acceleration of the door opening / closing speed as shown in FIG. 3 (S205 / NO), the door opening / closing mechanism monitoring means 14 It is determined that both the bearing and the belt tension are normal (S206), and the process ends. In the determination of S205, when the output transition of the torque command value is increasing at a rate higher than a predetermined speed than the ultra-slow acceleration of the door opening / closing speed as shown in FIG. 4 (S205 / YES), the door opening / closing mechanism monitoring means 14 determines that the door opening / closing mechanism has deteriorated, and notifies the door motor bearing monitoring means 15 of the abnormality of the door opening / closing mechanism.” (Atsushi: Description))
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of filing, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to modify Umezawa in view of Liang with these above aforementioned teachings from Atsushi in order to create an effective diagnostic apparatus, system, and method. At the time the invention was filed, one of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to incorporate Umezawa’s control device and method with Atsushi’s elevator door control device, method, and program in order to compare acquired first data related to an operation of a door of a train carriage during a timing at which the door starts operating with third data different than the first data and related to an operation of the door, wherein the first data includes data related to a speed of the door. Combining Umezawa and Atsushi would thus provide “an elevator door opening / closing control device and elevator door opening / closing control that reduce the burden on the operator and enable high-precision abnormality detection.” (Atsushi: Description)
Regarding Claim 3:
Umezawa in view of Liang, as shown in the rejection above, discloses the limitations of claim 1. Umezawa in view of Liang does not teach but Atsushi teaches:
The diagnostic apparatus according to claim 1, wherein the circuitry is configured to: directly or indirectly compare the acquired first data or processed data that is obtained by processing the first data, with third data, the third data being related to an operation of at least one door,, (“Further, the deterioration determination unit can determine deterioration of the door opening / closing mechanism based on a comparison result between the movement amount of the door as a result of being driven to be opened and closed intermittently and a predetermined threshold. When the opening / closing speed of the belt is not extremely low, it is possible to determine the deterioration of the belt tension. Thereby, it is possible to automatically and accurately determine the deterioration of the door opening / closing mechanism and the belt tension. In addition, the deterioration determination unit can determine the presence of foreign matter in the elevator sill based on a comparison result between the amount of movement of the door as a result of being driven to be opened and closed intermittently and a predetermined threshold value. . As a result, it is possible to automatically and accurately determine the presence of foreign matter in the door sill.” (Atsushi: Description))
[…] and being acquired in a case where the fastening mechanism is in a normal state, and diagnose the abnormality based on a result of comparison., (“In order to achieve the above object, one aspect of the present invention is an elevator door opening / closing control device for controlling opening / closing of an elevator door, wherein the motor driving unit drives a motor for opening / closing the door; A motor drive control unit that controls driving; a motor drive state detection unit that detects a drive state of the motor by the motor drive unit; and a door opening and closing speed that detects an opening and closing speed of the door that is driven and opened by the motor. A deterioration determining unit that determines deterioration of the door opening / closing mechanism based on the opening / closing speed of the door, and the motor drive control unit is configured to detect the deterioration of the elevator based on the detected opening / closing speed of the door. Controlling the motor drive unit so that the door is opened and closed by a gentler acceleration than the acceleration at the time of opening and closing the door in normal operation, and the deterioration determining unit Characterized by determining the degradation of the door opening and closing mechanism on the basis of the detection result of the driving state of the motor when the motor driving portion is controlled such that the door is opened and closed by the moderate acceleration. Thereby, in the abnormality detection of an elevator door, it becomes possible to reduce an operator's burden and to enable highly accurate abnormality detection.” (Atsushi: Description))
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of filing, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to modify Umezawa in view of Liang with these above aforementioned teachings from Atsushi in order to create an effective diagnostic apparatus, system, and method. At the time the invention was filed, one of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to incorporate Umezawa’s control device and method with Atsushi’s elevator door control device, method, and program in order to compare acquired first data related to an operation of a door of a train carriage during a timing at which the door starts operating with third data different than the first data and related to an operation of the door, wherein the first data includes data related to a speed of the door. Combining Umezawa and Atsushi would thus provide “an elevator door opening / closing control device and elevator door opening / closing control that reduce the burden on the operator and enable high-precision abnormality detection.” (Atsushi: Description)
Regarding Claim 6:
Umezawa in view of Liang, as shown in the rejection above, discloses the limitations of claim 3. Umezawa in view of Liang does not teach but Atsushi teaches:
The diagnostic apparatus according to claim 3, wherein the third data includes operation-related data of one or more doors, (“Further, the deterioration determination unit can determine deterioration of the door opening / closing mechanism based on a comparison result between the movement amount of the door as a result of being driven to be opened and closed intermittently and a predetermined threshold. When the opening / closing speed of the belt is not extremely low, it is possible to determine the deterioration of the belt tension. Thereby, it is possible to automatically and accurately determine the deterioration of the door opening / closing mechanism and the belt tension. In addition, the deterioration determination unit can determine the presence of foreign matter in the elevator sill based on a comparison result between the amount of movement of the door as a result of being driven to be opened and closed intermittently and a predetermined threshold value. . As a result, it is possible to automatically and accurately determine the presence of foreign matter in the door sill.” (Atsushi: Description))
[…] in a case where the fastening mechanism is under a normal condition, the operation-related data being acquired at at least one of a timing at which the door starts operating or a timing that is immediately after maintenance of the door is performed., (“In order to achieve the above object, one aspect of the present invention is an elevator door opening / closing control device for controlling opening / closing of an elevator door, wherein the motor driving unit drives a motor for opening / closing the door; A motor drive control unit that controls driving; a motor drive state detection unit that detects a drive state of the motor by the motor drive unit; and a door opening and closing speed that detects an opening and closing speed of the door that is driven and opened by the motor. A deterioration determining unit that determines deterioration of the door opening / closing mechanism based on the opening / closing speed of the door, and the motor drive control unit is configured to detect the deterioration of the elevator based on the detected opening / closing speed of the door. Controlling the motor drive unit so that the door is opened and closed by a gentler acceleration than the acceleration at the time of opening and closing the door in normal operation, and the deterioration determining unit Characterized by determining the degradation of the door opening and closing mechanism on the basis of the detection result of the driving state of the motor when the motor driving portion is controlled such that the door is opened and closed by the moderate acceleration. Thereby, in the abnormality detection of an elevator door, it becomes possible to reduce an operator's burden and to enable highly accurate abnormality detection.” (Atsushi: Description) Atsushi further mentions “Here, the driving device control means 13 executes the test using the above-described ultra-slow acceleration torque, and determines whether it is time to monitor the door opening / closing mechanism (S202). In S202, the drive control unit 13 executes the test because the count value that has been started after the previous test has been completed has reached a predetermined threshold value, or a predetermined date and time condition has passed. It is determined that it is time to perform. As a result of the determination in S202, if it is not the timing to execute the test (S202 / NO), the drive device control means 13 executes normal door opening / closing control (S203) and ends the process. On the other hand, as a result of the determination in S202, when it is time to execute the test (S202 / YES), the driving device control means 13 enters a test mode in which the torque command means 10 outputs an ultra-slow acceleration torque and The door is opened and closed (S204).” (Atsushi: Description))
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of filing, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to modify Umezawa in view of Liang with these above aforementioned teachings from Atsushi in order to create an effective diagnostic apparatus, system, and method. At the time the invention was filed, one of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to incorporate Umezawa’s control device and method with Atsushi’s elevator door control device, method, and program in order to compare acquired first data related to an operation of a door of a train carriage during a timing at which the door starts operating with third data different than the first data and related to an operation of the door, wherein the first data includes data related to a speed of the door. Combining Umezawa and Atsushi would thus provide “an elevator door opening / closing control device and elevator door opening / closing control that reduce the burden on the operator and enable high-precision abnormality detection.” (Atsushi: Description)
Regarding Claim 10:
Umezawa in view of Liang, as shown in the rejection above, discloses the limitations of claim 1. Umezawa in view of Liang does not teach but Atsushi teaches:
The diagnostic apparatus according to claim 1, wherein the first data includes data relating to a speed of the door, a current in a motor configured to drive the door, sound of the door, or vibration of the door., (“In order to achieve the above object, one aspect of the present invention is an elevator door opening / closing control device for controlling opening / closing of an elevator door, wherein the motor driving unit drives a motor for opening / closing the door; A motor drive control unit that controls driving; a motor drive state detection unit that detects a drive state of the motor by the motor drive unit; and a door opening and closing speed that detects an opening and closing speed of the door that is driven and opened by the motor.” (Atsushi: Description))
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of filing, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to modify Umezawa in view of Liang with these above aforementioned teachings from Atsushi in order to create an effective diagnostic apparatus, system, and method. At the time the invention was filed, one of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to incorporate Umezawa’s control device and method with Atsushi’s elevator door control device, method, and program in order to compare acquired first data related to an operation of a door of a train carriage during a timing at which the door starts operating with third data different than the first data and related to an operation of the door, wherein the first data includes data related to a speed of the door. Combining Umezawa and Atsushi would thus provide “an elevator door opening / closing control device and elevator door opening / closing control that reduce the burden on the operator and enable high-precision abnormality detection.” (Atsushi: Description)
Claims 7-9 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Umezawa (JP 6954486 B1) in view of Liang (CN 114067254 A) in further view of Yoshinobu (JP 2012240470 A).
Regarding Claim 7:
Umezawa in view of Liang, as shown in the rejection above, discloses the limitations of claim 1. Umezawa does not teach but Liang teaches:
The diagnostic apparatus according to claim 1, wherein the acquired first data includes data related to a movement operation of the door in a normal operating mode, of the fastening mechanism,, (“receiving a detection request, and acquiring high-definition video data of train doors; the train door comprises a middle door and a small door, the middle door comprises a door bolt and a middle door bolt, and the small door comprises a small door lock catch; transmitting the high-definition video data to back-end processing equipment through an RTMP protocol; in the back-end equipment, preprocessing the high-definition video data to obtain image data containing feature points; the characteristic points comprise the door bolt, the middle door bolt and the small door lock catch; inputting the image data containing the feature points into a preset deep learning model to obtain the recognition result of each feature point; integrating the recognition results of the characteristic points to obtain a vehicle door detection result; when the train door has safety abnormality, the door detection result at least comprises a carriage number and a corresponding abnormal characteristic point.” (Liang: Description))
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of filing, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to modify Umezawa with these above aforementioned teachings from Liang in order to create a safe diagnostic apparatus, system, and method. At the time the invention was filed, one of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to incorporate Umezawa’s control device and method with Liang’s safety state detection method and system for a train door in order to acquire data related to an operation of a door of a train carriage during an opening or a closing of the door and diagnose an abnormality in a fastening mechanism based on the acquired data. Combining Umezawa and Liang would thus provide “a safety state detection method and a safety state detection system for train doors, which can automatically identify the safety state of the train doors.” (Liang: Description)
Umezawa in view of Liang does not teach but Yoshinobu teaches:
[…] in which a passenger is to get on and off the train carriage., (“The railway vehicle 10 transmits and controls information related to the operation state of the driver's cab 11 and various devices mounted on the vehicle 10, and also performs the vehicle information processing apparatus 12 that executes an abnormality monitoring operation of FIGS. 4 and 5 to be described later. And a hub 13 that is connected to the vehicle information processing device 12 and constitutes a network such as Ethernet (registered trademark), and an auxiliary device that supplies control power to various devices other than the main motor (not shown) in the vehicle 10. A power supply device 14, a main motor drive device 15 such as an inverter for controlling the main motor, a door drive device 16 for controlling opening and closing of an electric door for passengers to get on and off, an air conditioner 17 for cooling and heating in the vehicle, and air blowing And a lighting device 18 for in-vehicle lighting and a wheel 19. The control power for the main motor driving device 15 is supplied by appropriately converting the power for the main motor. Reference numeral 21 denotes a communication cable between devices in the vehicle 10, and 22 denotes a communication cable for connecting the hubs 13 of adjacent vehicles.” (Yoshinobu: Description))
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of filing, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to modify Umezawa in view of Liang with these above aforementioned teachings from Yoshinobu in order to create a user-friendly diagnostic apparatus, system, and method. At the time the invention was filed, one of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to incorporate Umezawa’s control device and method with Yoshinobu’s monitoring system for a railroad vehicle in order to diagnose an abnormality of an operation of a door of a train carriage during an opening or a closing of the door based on processed data indicating a result of frequency analysis that is performed on acquired first data of the operation of the door. Combining Umezawa and Yoshinobu would thus provide “a railway vehicle monitoring system with improved safety, reliability and convenience.” (Yoshinobu: Description)
Regarding Claim 8:
Umezawa in view of Liang, as shown in the rejection above, discloses the limitations of claim 1. Umezawa further teaches:
[…] the diagnostic operating mode being different from a normal operating mode […], (“The self-diagnosis process is a process in which the main system control unit 110 and the standby system control unit 120 make a diagnosis regarding their own abnormality, and may be arbitrarily executed in a form in which a known method is used. The diagnosis regarding an abnormality includes a diagnosis of the presence or absence of an abnormality, a diagnosis of the degree of the abnormality when the abnormality exists, a diagnosis of the specific content of the abnormality, and the like. In the self-diagnosis process, among the various functions of the main system control unit 110 and the standby system control unit 120, the diagnosis regarding the abnormality of the function related to the opening / closing operation and the locking of the door 80 is performed. Specifically, for example, the main system control unit 110 mainly performs a diagnosis related to the opening / closing operation of the door 80 and the control function related to locking as a self-diagnosis process, and the motor drive unit 116, the lock / unlock drive unit 117, It may be a mode in which a diagnosis regarding an abnormality in the function of the communication unit 112 or the like is performed separately. Similarly, the standby system control unit 120 mainly performs diagnosis related to the opening / closing operation of the door 80 and the control function related to locking as a self-diagnosis process, and performs the motor drive unit 126, the lock / unlock drive unit 127, and the communication unit. It may be a mode in which a diagnosis regarding a functional abnormality such as 122 is separately performed.” (Umezawa: Description) Umezawa further mentions “The normal operation means that the door 80 is opened and closed according to the operation status of the railway vehicle 1.” (Umezawa: Description))
Umezawa does not teach but Liang teaches:
The diagnostic apparatus according to claim 1, wherein the acquired first data includes data related to a movement operation of the door in a diagnostic operating mode,, (“receiving a detection request, and acquiring high-definition video data of train doors; the train door comprises a middle door and a small door, the middle door comprises a door bolt and a middle door bolt, and the small door comprises a small door lock catch; transmitting the high-definition video data to back-end processing equipment through an RTMP protocol; in the back-end equipment, preprocessing the high-definition video data to obtain image data containing feature points; the characteristic points comprise the door bolt, the middle door bolt and the small door lock catch; inputting the image data containing the feature points into a preset deep learning model to obtain the recognition result of each feature point; integrating the recognition results of the characteristic points to obtain a vehicle door detection result; when the train door has safety abnormality, the door detection result at least comprises a carriage number and a corresponding abnormal characteristic point.” (Liang: Description))
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of filing, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to modify Umezawa with these above aforementioned teachings from Liang in order to create a safe diagnostic apparatus, system, and method. At the time the invention was filed, one of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to incorporate Umezawa’s control device and method with Liang’s safety state detection method and system for a train door in order to acquire data related to an operation of a door of a train carriage during an opening or a closing of the door and diagnose an abnormality in a fastening mechanism based on the acquired data. Combining Umezawa and Liang would thus provide “a safety state detection method and a safety state detection system for train doors, which can automatically identify the safety state of the train doors.” (Liang: Description)
Umezawa in view of Liang does not teach but Yoshinobu teaches:
[…] in which a passenger is to get on and off the train carriage., (“The railway vehicle 10 transmits and controls information related to the operation state of the driver's cab 11 and various devices mounted on the vehicle 10, and also performs the vehicle information processing apparatus 12 that executes an abnormality monitoring operation of FIGS. 4 and 5 to be described later. And a hub 13 that is connected to the vehicle information processing device 12 and constitutes a network such as Ethernet (registered trademark), and an auxiliary device that supplies control power to various devices other than the main motor (not shown) in the vehicle 10. A power supply device 14, a main motor drive device 15 such as an inverter for controlling the main motor, a door drive device 16 for controlling opening and closing of an electric door for passengers to get on and off, an air conditioner 17 for cooling and heating in the vehicle, and air blowing And a lighting device 18 for in-vehicle lighting and a wheel 19. The control power for the main motor driving device 15 is supplied by appropriately converting the power for the main motor. Reference numeral 21 denotes a communication cable between devices in the vehicle 10, and 22 denotes a communication cable for connecting the hubs 13 of adjacent vehicles.” (Yoshinobu: Description))
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of filing, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to modify Umezawa in view of Liang with these above aforementioned teachings from Yoshinobu in order to create a user-friendly diagnostic apparatus, system, and method. At the time the invention was filed, one of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to incorporate Umezawa’s control device and method with Yoshinobu’s monitoring system for a railroad vehicle in order to diagnose an abnormality of an operation of a door of a train carriage during an opening or a closing of the door based on processed data indicating a result of frequency analysis that is performed on acquired first data of the operation of the door. Combining Umezawa and Yoshinobu would thus provide “a railway vehicle monitoring system with improved safety, reliability and convenience.” (Yoshinobu: Description)
Regarding Claim 9:
Umezawa in view of Liang, as shown in the rejection above, discloses the limitations of claim 1. Umezawa in view of Liang does not teach but Yoshinobu teaches:
The diagnostic apparatus according to claim 1, wherein the circuitry is configured to diagnose the abnormality based on processed data indicating a result of frequency analysis that is performed on the first data., (“In order to solve the above-mentioned problems, an invention according to claim 1 is directed to an auxiliary power supply for supplying control power to various devices in a vehicle excluding at least a main motor for driving a vehicle, and opening / closing control of an electric door for getting on and off. And a vehicle information processing device that processes and transmits information on the state of various devices in the vehicle including at least the auxiliary power device and the door drive device, The vehicle information processing apparatus has a state in which an input voltage of the door driving device is within a normal range and an input current of the door driving device is equal to or more than a determination value during the door opening / closing operation by the door driving device. When it occurs more than the set number of times, it has a function of determining that an abnormality has occurred in the door driving device and generating an alarm. According to a second aspect of the present invention, there is provided an auxiliary power supply device that supplies control power to various devices in a vehicle excluding at least a main motor for driving a vehicle, a door drive device that controls opening and closing of an electric door for getting on and off, A vehicle information processing device that processes and transmits information on the state of various devices in the vehicle including at least an auxiliary power supply device and a door drive device; The vehicle information processing apparatus has a state in which an input voltage of the door driving device is out of a normal range and an input current of the door driving device is equal to or less than a determination value during the door opening / closing operation by the door driving device. When it occurs more than the set number of times, it has a function of determining that an abnormality has occurred in the auxiliary power supply device and generating an alarm.” (Yoshinobu: Description))
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of filing, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to modify Umezawa in view of Liang with these above aforementioned teachings from Yoshinobu in order to create a user-friendly diagnostic apparatus, system, and method. At the time the invention was filed, one of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to incorporate Umezawa’s control device and method with Yoshinobu’s monitoring system for a railroad vehicle in order to diagnose an abnormality of an operation of a door of a train carriage during an opening or a closing of the door based on processed data indicating a result of frequency analysis that is performed on acquired first data of the operation of the door. Combining Umezawa and Yoshinobu would thus provide “a railway vehicle monitoring system with improved safety, reliability and convenience.” (Yoshinobu: Description)
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Jeffrey Chalhoub whose telephone number is (571) 272-9754. The examiner can normally be reached Mon-Fri 8:30-5:30.
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, Angela Ortiz can be reached on (571) 272-1206. 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.R.C./Examiner, Art Unit 3663
/ANGELA Y ORTIZ/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3663
Prosecution Insights