DETAILED ACTION
Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status
The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
Priority
Receipt is acknowledged of certified copies of papers required by 37 CFR 1.55.
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statements (IDS) submitted on 13 November 2023 and 20 May 2024 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 because of the following:
Figures 3-40: Numbers, letters, and reference characters must be at least .32 cm (1/8 inch) in height. See 37 C.F.R. 1.84(p)(3).
Figure 38, step 111: The term – PREVIOUS – has been misspelled.
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:
Reference numeral “1”, as shown in Figure 3, does not appear within the specification with reference to the figure.
Reference numeral “123”, as shown in Figures 6-7, does not appear within the specification with reference to the figures.
Reference numeral “91”, as shown in Figure 17, does not appear within the specification with reference to the figure.
Reference numeral “372”, as shown in Figures 22-23, does not appear within the specification with reference to the figure.
Reference numeral “381”, as shown in Figure 23, does not appear within the specification with reference to the figure.
Reference numeral “243”, “244”, “245”, “246”, “247”, as shown in Figures 31-32, do not appear within the specification with reference to the figure.
Reference numeral “361”, as shown in Figure 32, does not appear within the specification with reference to the figure.
Reference numeral “223”, “224”, “225”, “226”, “227”, as shown in Figures 34-35, do not appear within the specification with reference to the figure.
Reference numeral “351”, as shown in Figure 35, does not appear within the specification with reference to the figure.
Reference numerals “372” and “397”, as shown in Figures 39-40, do not appear within the specification with reference to the figure.
Reference numeral “402”, as shown in Figure 40, does not appear within the specification with reference to the figure.
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:
Reference identifiers “X”, “N”, and “W” as well as their respective values, do not appear within Figure 8 as suggested by the disclosure on page 23, lines 16-18.
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. The figure or figure number of an amended drawing should not be labeled as “amended.” If a drawing figure is to be canceled, the appropriate figure must be removed from the replacement sheet, and where necessary, the remaining figures must be renumbered and appropriate changes made to the brief description of the several views of the drawings for consistency. Additional replacement sheets may be necessary to show the renumbering of the remaining figures. 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.
Specification
The lengthy specification has not been checked to the extent necessary to determine the presence of all possible minor errors. Applicant’s cooperation is requested in correcting any errors of which applicant may become aware in the specification.
The disclosure is objected to because of the following informalities:.
Page 18, lines 20-23: Some mention/reference to Figure 4 should be introduced so as to clearly tie the measurement waveform acquisition process (step 41) to the same step 41 that is first referenced with respect to Figure 4.
Page 19, lines 15-18: Some mention/reference to Figure 4 should be introduced so as to clearly tie the measurement waveform selection process (step 42) to the same step 42 that is first referenced with respect to Figure 4.
Page 19, line 19: The phrase – (step 123) – should be inserted after the term “inputs” as reference numeral 123, as shown in Figure 6, does not appear within the description of Figure 6.
Page 20, line 14: The phrase – (step 123) – should be inserted after the term “inputs” as reference numeral 123, as shown in Figure 7, does not appear within the description of Figure 7.
Page 33, line 4: The term – four – should replace the numeral as whole numbers less than ten should be spelled out.
Page 57, line 11: The numeral – 111 – should replace the designation “S3.”
Page 59, lines 4, 12, and 20: The term – previous – has been misspelled.
Appropriate correction is required.
Claim Objections
Claim 8 is objected to because of the following informalities:
Re claim 8, claim line 4: The term – previous – has been misspelled.
Appropriate correction is required.
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.
Claims 1, 3-7, and 13-14 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by WO 2020/095538 (Kamada et al.).
With respect to the limitations of claim 1, Kamada et al. disclose a data processing device that determines whether a fluid leaks from a pipeline network of the fluid based on a waveform of a vibration intensity measured from the pipeline network, the data processing device comprising:
a memory configured to store a software program (D1: although not explicitly disclosed in D1, in order to acquire the vibrational data and to carry out the various calculations that the system 40 is configured to carry out via a computer program (see fig. 4 in connection with pars. [0023-0040] and par. [0061] "Further, each of the above-described configurations, functions, and processing units may be realized by software by causing a processor to interpret and execute a program that realizes each function, or for example, by an integrated circuit."), it is implicit that the system 40 of D1 comprises some sort of a memory); and
a processor configured to execute the software program (D1: Fig. 3 "water leak detection system" comprising a "monitoring system" 40 having a "calculation unit' 42 as well as par. [0061] "Further, each of the above-described configurations, functions, and processing units may be realized by software by causing a processor to interpret and execute a program that realizes each function, or for example, by an integrated circuit.") configured to execute the software, wherein the processor is configured to:
acquire a plurality of pieces of waveform data of vibration intensities measured at different times from the pipeline network (vibration waveform is measured at a time designated by a calculation unit (41); and this measurement is repeated a predetermined number of times - steps (101) and (105) of Figure 4 and paragraphs [0027] and [0030-0031]),
calculate an evaluation value for evaluating how suitable or unsuitable the plurality of pieces of waveform data are for determining a presence or absence of a fluid leakage (autocorrelation coefficients are calculated; and those with less noise are selected - paragraph [0034]),
select waveform data to be used for determining a presence or absence of a fluid leakage from the plurality of pieces of waveform data based on the evaluation value (peak position sets are extracted and peak position sets are compared with each other – paragraph [0034]),
extract a periodic characteristic from an autocorrelation coefficient of a vibration intensity of the selected waveform data (Steps (S102, S103, S104) of Figures 4-5 and paragraphs [0028-0030]), and
determine whether the fluid leaks from the pipeline network based on a relationship between periodic characteristics of the selected waveform data (Steps (S106, S107) of Figures 4-8 and paragraphs [0032-0038] and [0040]).
With respect to the limitations of claim 3, Kamada et al. disclose that the processor is configured to select a predetermined selection number of pieces of the waveform data to be used for determining a presence or absence of a fluid leakage from the plurality of pieces of measured waveform data (paragraphs [0031], [0034], Figure 6 (Item 4.2)).
With respect to the limitations of claim 4, Kamada et al. disclose that the processor is configured to divide the selected waveform data into a plurality of pieces of waveform data on a time axis, calculate an autocorrelation function of a vibration intensity for each of the plurality of pieces of waveform data obtained by dividing, and extract a periodic characteristic from the autocorrelation function (paragraphs [0031], [0034], Figure 6 (Item 4.2)).
With respect to the limitations of claim 5, Kamada et al. disclose a time point at which the waveform data is measured is different from day to day (paragraphs [0031], [0034], Figure 6 (Item 4.2)).
With respect to the limitations of claim 6, Kamada et al. disclose That the relationship between the periodic characteristics of the waveform data is an index based on a matching degree of temporal positions of peaks of vibration intensities indicated in the waveform data (paragraphs [0032-0038] and Figures 7-8).
With respect to the limitations of claim 7, Kamada et al. disclose that the processor is configured to create a graph network by setting data on a periodic characteristic of an autocorrelation coefficient of a vibration intensity of the waveform data as a point and connecting points having a matching degree exceeding a predetermined threshold with a side, and determine whether the fluid leaks from the pipeline network using the graph network (paragraphs [0032-0038] and Figures 7-8).
With respect to the limitations of claim 13, Kamada et al. disclose a data processing method that determines whether a fluid leaks from a pipeline network of the fluid based on a waveform of a vibration intensity measured from the pipeline network, the data processing method comprising:
by a data processing device that includes a memory and a processor, acquiring a plurality of pieces of waveform data of vibration intensities measured at different times from the pipeline network (vibration waveform is measured at a time designated by a calculation unit (41); and this measurement is repeated a predetermined number of times - steps (101) and (105) of Figure 4 and paragraphs [0027] and [0030-0031]);
calculating an evaluation value for evaluating how suitable or unsuitable the plurality of pieces of waveform data are for determining a presence or absence of a fluid leakage (autocorrelation coefficients are calculated; and those with less noise are selected - paragraph [0034]);
selecting waveform data to be used for determining a presence or absence of a fluid leakage from the plurality of pieces of waveform data based on the evaluation value (peak position sets are extracted and peak position sets are compared with each other – paragraph [0034]);
extracting a periodic characteristic from an autocorrelation coefficient of a vibration intensity of the selected waveform data (Steps (S102, S103, S104) of Figures 4-5 and paragraphs [0028-0030]); and
determining whether the fluid leaks from the pipeline network based on a relationship between periodic characteristics of the selected waveform data (Steps (S106, S107) of Figures 4-8 and paragraphs [0032-0038] and [0040]).
With respect to the limitations of claim 14, Kamada et al. disclose a data processing program that determines whether a fluid leaks from a pipeline network of the fluid based on a waveform of a vibration intensity measured from the pipeline network, the data processing program causing a data processing device including a memory and a processor to:
acquire a plurality of pieces of waveform data of vibration intensities measured at different times from the pipeline network (vibration waveform is measured at a time designated by a calculation unit (41); and this measurement is repeated a predetermined number of times - steps (101) and (105) of Figure 4 and paragraphs [0027] and [0030-0031]);
calculate an evaluation value for evaluating how suitable or unsuitable the plurality of pieces of waveform data are for determining a presence or absence of a fluid leakage (autocorrelation coefficients are calculated; and those with less noise are selected - paragraph [0034]);
select waveform data to be used for determining a presence or absence of a fluid leakage from the plurality of pieces of waveform data based on the evaluation value (peak position sets are extracted and peak position sets are compared with each other – paragraph [0034]);
extract a periodic characteristic from an autocorrelation coefficient of a vibration intensity of the selected waveform data (Steps (S102, S103, S104) of Figures 4-5 and paragraphs [0028-0030]); and
determine whether the fluid leaks from the pipeline network based on a relationship between periodic characteristics of the selected waveform data (Steps (S106, S107) of Figures 4-8 and paragraphs [0032-0038] and [0040]).
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.
Claims 2, 8-9, and 12 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over WO 2020/095538 (Kamada et al.).
With respect to the limitations of claim 2, Kamada et al. disclose that the processor is configured to create a list in which the plurality of pieces of measured waveform data are rearranged in an ascending order or a descending order of the evaluation value, and select the waveform data to be used for determining a presence or absence of a fluid leakage preferentially from a top of the list (the list appears to be nothing more than a means of visually indicating the ranking of the waveform data - in D1, in order to select the 6 autocorrelation coefficients (from 16) having less noise (par. [0034]) the skilled person would naturally consider displaying / ranking them in this manner. Thus, the subject matter of claim 2 does not appear to be inventive over D1 and the knowledge of the skilled person (see also Item 4.1).
With respect to the limitations of claim 8, Kamada et al. disclose that the processor is configured to determine, based on a pervious determination result on a presence or absence of a fluid leakage, whether to select waveform data to be used for determination of the presence or absence of the fluid leakage from a plurality of pieces of acquired waveform data or to use all of the plurality of pieces of acquired waveform data for the determination of the presence or absence of the fluid leakage.
With respect to the limitations of claim 9, Kamada et al. disclose that the processor displays a temporal transition of the evaluation value in a graph (has a display unit (see par. [0040]). As the system of D1 is monitoring for leaks over time it would be an obvious consideration for the skilled person to display any relevant parameters regarding the analysis on the display unit, to provide the user with a continuous visual update. Thus, the subject matter of claim 9 does not appear to be inventive over D1 and the knowledge of the skilled person (see also Item 4.4).
Allowable Subject Matter
The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter:
Prior art was not relied upon to reject claims 10-11 because the prior art of record fails to teach and/or make obvious that the evaluation value is a value calculated based on at least one of a maximum amplitude of a vibration intensity, a vibration intensity in a specific frequency band, an integrated value of vibration intensities, and a time differential of vibration intensities in combination with all of the limitations of the base claim.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
The prior art disclose various vibration base leakage detection apparatus for detection fluid leakage from a pipeline.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to DANIEL SEAN LARKIN whose telephone number is 571-272-2198. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 9:00 AM - 5:30 PM.
Examiner interviews are available via telephone, in-person, and video conferencing using a USPTO supplied web-based collaboration tool. To schedule an interview, applicant is encouraged to use the USPTO Automated Interview Request (AIR) at http://www.uspto.gov/interviewpractice.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Laura Martin can be reached at 571-272-2160. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300.
Information regarding the status of published or unpublished applications may be obtained from Patent Center. Unpublished application information in Patent Center is available to registered users. To file and manage patent submissions in Patent Center, visit: https://patentcenter.uspto.gov. Visit https://www.uspto.gov/patents/apply/patent-center for more information about Patent Center and https://www.uspto.gov/patents/docx for information about filing in DOCX format. For additional questions, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
/DANIEL S LARKIN/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2855