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 .
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.
DETAILED ACTION
Claims status
Claims 1-10 are pending as the applicant filed Preliminary Amendment on 11/06/2023.
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 1-10 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 101 because the claimed invention is directed to a judicial exception (i.e., a law of nature, a natural phenomenon, or an abstract idea) without significantly more.
Claim 1, Step 1 the claim is a process (or machine) (Yes),
Step 2A Prong One, does the claim recite an abstract idea? current claim related a sensor system for acquiring state information relating to a structural component;
an evaluation device for evaluating acquired state information and determining the actual state and/or the remaining service life by a comparison with predetermined damage characteristics; an active database device for storing the damage characteristics; a determination device for determining the damage characteristics from design data of the structural component appears is an abstract idea of mental process (MPEP 2106.04(a)) or data gathering equivalent to mathematical concept or mathematical manipulation function (MPEP 2106.04 (a) (2) (concept need not be expressed in mathematical symbols, because "[w]ords used in a claim operating on data to solve a problem can serve the same purpose as a formula), (OR Mathematical Concepts and Mental Processes) Step 2A Prong One: Yes.
Step 2A Prong Two, is the claim directed to an abstract idea? In other words, does claim recite additional elements that integrate the Judicial Exception into a practical application? the additional elements of an adjustment device for adjusting the predetermined damage characteristics on the basis of the state and/or the remaining service life information determined by the evaluation device are recited at a high level of generality and merely amount to a particular field of use (see MPEP 2106.05(h)) and/or insignificant post-solution activity (MPEP 2106.05(g)), this does not integrate the Judicial Exception into a practical application,
Step 2A Prong Two: NO.
Step 2B, Does the claim recite additional element that amount to significantly more than the Judicial exception? the additional element of wherein the adjustment device and the determination device are connected to the active database device appears to be field of use (See MPEP 2106.05(h) and MPEP 2106.05(f)) and/or merely amounts to insignificant extra-solution output of the results (see MPEP 2106.05(g)) and therefore fails to integrate the abstract idea into a practical application or amount to significantly more. Step 2B: No. claim 1 not eligible.
Claim 2 related to the determination device is configured to determine kinematic frequencies of the structural component from geometry data of the structural component to generate a damage frequency image for the structural component from the kinematic frequencies, this appears recite further data characterization and mathematical concepts that are part of the abstract idea, claim 2 not eligible.
Claim 3 related to an adjustment module configured to transform frequency patterns corresponding to different damage patterns and/or types into adapted frequency patterns corresponding to different damage patterns and/or types of the specific structural component based on the geometry data of the structural component, this appears recite further data characterization and mathematical concepts that are part of the abstract idea, claim 3 not eligible.
Claim 4 related to a structural analysis module for determining fundamental oscillation of the structural component and comprises a superimposition module for superimposing frequency patterns indicative of different damage patterns and/or types on the determined fundamental oscillation in order to generate synthetically generated damage characteristics adapted to the structural component by the superimposition, this appears recite further data characterization and mathematical concepts that are part of the abstract idea, claim 4 not eligible.
Claim 5 related to the evaluation device and/or the adjustment device are configured as a self-learning system and/or as part of a self-learning system which feeds back the sensorily detected state information and/or the actual states and/or remaining service lives derived therefrom to the database and/or integrates them into the damage characteristics stored by the database, this appears recite further data characterization and mathematical concepts that are part of the abstract idea, claim 5 not eligible.
Claim 6 related to a regression analysis module for determining the influence of determined damage patterns and/or determined actual states on damage characterizing parameters of the structural component such as structure-borne sound signal reference patterns, roll-over frequency patterns or tooth mesh frequency patterns of the structural component by regression analysis, this appears recite further data characterization and mathematical concepts that are part of the abstract idea, claim 6 not eligible.
Claim 7 related to a Kl-based estimation module for estimating correlations between acquired actual state information patterns and synthetically generated damage characteristics and/or between acquired actual state information patterns and a damage pattern or a remaining service life of the structural component, this appears recite further data characterization and mathematical concepts that are part of the abstract idea, claim 7 not eligible.
Claim 8 related to wherein a combination module for combining the synthetically generated damage characteristics and combinatorial damage characteristics is associated with the determination device, and wherein the evaluation device is configured to match the state information acquired by the sensor system with the combinatorial damage characteristics, this appears recite further data characterization and mathematical concepts that are part of the abstract idea, claim 8 not eligible.
Claim 9 related to a weighting module for weighting the damage characteristics on the basis of an occurrence probability of a damage event corresponding to the damage characteristic, and wherein the weighting module is associated with the determination device, this appears recite further data characterization and mathematical concepts that are part of the abstract idea, claim 9 not eligible.
Claim 10 related to at least one sensor from the group of sensors consisting of: oscillation sensors, temperature sensors,lubricant sensors, structure-borne sound sensors, acceleration sensors, displacement sensors and speed sensors; and wherein the adjustment device is configured to adjust the damage characteristics stored by the active database device depending on at least one signal from the at least one sensor,
this appears recite further data characterization and mathematical concepts that are part of the abstract idea, claim 10 not eligible.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
The following is a quotation of the appropriate paragraphs of 35 U.S.C. 102 that form the basis for the rejections under this section made in this Office action:
A person shall be entitled to a patent unless –
(a)(1) the claimed invention was patented, described in a printed publication, or in public use, on sale, or otherwise available to the public before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claim(s) 1, 2, 3, 4, 9, and 10 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102 (a) (1) as being anticipated by LEFEBVRE, CN 101346268 B, DATE PUBLISHED: 2012-04-25, CPC B61L 15/0072.
Regarding claim 1:
LEFEBVRE described an apparatus for determining an actual state (page 2, any damage?) and/or a remaining service life of structural components comprising large-diameter rolling bearings of a work machine, wherein the work machine comprises a construction machine, a material-handling machine (0007, roll on train track, 0017, train wheel) and/or a conveyor machine, comprising:
a sensor system for acquiring state information relating to a structural component (0021, the plurality of sensor, fig. 1-3);
an evaluation device for evaluating acquired state information and determining the actual state and/or the remaining service life by a comparison with predetermined damage characteristics (0059, recognition damage of the bearing);
an active database device for storing the damage characteristics (page 14, active state to scan the sensing data,);
a determination device for determining the damage characteristics from design data of the structural component (page 9, damage of the bearingis/ wheel); and
an adjustment device for adjusting the predetermined damage characteristics on the basis of the state and/or the remaining service life information determined by the evaluation device (page 11, adjusting if the desired measurement pad does not arrive);
wherein the adjustment device and the determination device are connected to the active database device (page 12, adjustment for reporting and collecting data).
Regarding claim 2, LEFEBVRE further described determine kinematic frequencies of the structural component from geometry data of the structural component to generate a damage frequency image for the structural component from the kinematic frequencies (page 8, rail lines in frequency determined by wheel frame geometry and rotational wheel speeds).
Regarding claim 3, LEFEBVRE further described an adjustment module configured to transform frequency patterns corresponding to different damage patterns (page 8, rail lines in frequency determined by wheel frame geometry and rotational wheel speeds, page 11, adjusting if the desired measurement pad does not arrive in a reasonable time frame,) and/or types into adapted frequency patterns corresponding to different damage patterns and/or types of the specific structural component based on the geometry data of the structural component.
Regarding claim 4, LEFEBVRE further described a structural analysis module for determining fundamental oscillation of the structural component and comprises a superimposition module for superimposing frequency patterns indicative of different damage patterns (page 9, wheel bracket to swing-mounted load sensors in measurement to detect longitudinal, lateral and yawing force, fast change of the monitoring indicator shaft or wheel frame swinging load) and/or types on the determined fundamental oscillation in order to generate synthetically generated damage characteristics adapted to the structural component by the superimposition.
Regarding claim 9, LEFEBVRE further described a weighting module for weighting the damage characteristics on the basis of an occurrence probability of a damage event corresponding to the damage characteristic, and wherein the weighting module is associated with the determination (page 9, threshold level).
Regarding claim 10, LEFEBVRE further described at least one sensor from the group of sensors consisting of: oscillation sensors, temperature sensors (page 9, temperature sensor), lubricant sensors, structure-borne sound sensors, acceleration sensors, displacement sensors and speed sensors; and wherein the adjustment device is configured to adjust the damage characteristics stored by the active database device depending on at least one signal from the at least one sensor.
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) 5 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over LEFEBVRE, CN 101346268 B, DATE PUBLISHED: 2012-04-25, CPC B61L 15/0072, in view of LONG, CN 106794107 A, DATE PUBLISHED: 2017-05-31, CPC A 63 B 22/0076.
Regarding claim 5, LEFEBVRE further described the adjustment device are configured as a system and/or as part of a system which feeds back the sensorily detected state information (page 9, amplitude loads sensitivity) and/or the actual states and/or remaining service lives derived therefrom to the database and/or integrates them into the damage characteristics stored
LEFEBVRE further did not described self-learning.
LONG described self-learning (page 57, learn walking correctly) for the benefit of function correctly (page 57).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was made to modify LEFEBVRE to have self-learning for the benefit of function correctly.
Contact information
5. Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Tung Lau whose telephone number is (571)272-2274, email is Tungs.lau@uspto.gov. The examiner can normally be reached on Tuesday-Friday 7:00 AM-5:00 PM EST.
Examiner interviews are available via telephone, in-person, and video conferencing using a USPTO supplied web-based collaboration tool. To schedule an interview, applicant is encouraged to use the USPTO Automated Interview Request (AIR) at http://www.uspto.gov/interviewpractice.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, TURNER SHELBY, can be reached on 571-272-6334. 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 https://ppair-my.uspto.gov/pair/PrivatePair. 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.
/TUNG S LAU/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2857
Technology Center 2800
March 10, 2026