DETAILED ACTION
This office action is in response to communication filed on June 1, 2026.
Response to Amendment
Amendments filed on June 1, 2026 have been entered.
The abstract of the disclosure has been amended.
The specification has been amended.
Claims 1-16 have been amended.
Claims 1-16 have been examined.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments, see Remarks (p. 26), filed on 06/01/2026, with respect to the objections to the specification have been fully considered. In view of the amendments to the specification addressing the informalities raised in the previous office action, the objections to the specification have been withdrawn.
Applicant’s arguments, see Remarks (p. 27), filed on 06/01/2026, with respect to the objections to the claims have been fully considered. In view of the amendments to the claims addressing the informalities raised in the previous office action, the objections to the claims have been withdrawn. However, upon further consideration, new objections to the claims are presented below.
Applicant’s arguments, see Remarks (p. 27-28), filed on 06/01/2026, with respect to the rejection of claims 1-16 under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, have been fully considered. In view of the amendments to the claims partially addressing the issues raised in the previous office action, the rejection of the claims have been partially withdrawn.
Applicant argues (p. 27) that In this application, “typically wide wavelength range” refers to the range used for gas spectral analysis as described in the specification, and is not a vague term.
In response, the examiner submits that the relative term “wide” is unclear as to what the scope of the claim language “wide spectral range” encompasses (e.g., what is considered a “wide” spectral range? Visible to infrared? Ultraviolet to infrared? Etc.). In addition, neither the dependent claims nor the specification provide details as to how this feature should be interpreted.
Furthermore, the examiner submits that as indicated in the MPEP: “Even if the specification uses the same term of degree as in the claim, a rejection is proper if the scope of the term is not understood when read in light of the specification. While, as a general proposition, broadening modifiers are standard tools in claim drafting in order to avoid reliance on the doctrine of equivalents in infringement actions, when the scope of the claim is unclear a rejection under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, second paragraph, is proper. See In re Wiggins, 488 F. 2d 538, 541, 179 USPQ 421, 423 (CCPA 1973)” (see MPEP 2173.05(b)).
The examiner suggests the applicant to remove the term “wide” from the language in order to clarify the subject matter for compliance under 35 U.S.C. 112.
Claim Objections
Claim 1 is objected to because of the following informalities:
Claim language should read:
“A method for measuring a concentration of a gas to be measured with an unknown gas, the method comprising
S1, injecting standard samples of m known gases into a measuring cell of a gas analyzer, scanning, by the spectrometer, in an spectral range to obtain an absorption spectrum of each standard sample, further obtaining a feature Di of each standard sample, and establishing, by the processor, a feature library D of the m known gases;
S2, injecting a gas mixture into the measuring cell of the gas analyzer, and scanning, by the spectrometer, in the a feature d of the gas mixture, where the gas mixture includes the m known gases and n unknown gases, and a feature of the n unknown gases is defined as Duj, wherein the d is configured to be input into [[the]]an iterative optimization algorithm to determine the concentration of the gas to be measured;
S3, defining and initializing, by the processor of the gas detection system, a known gas weight parameter w and an unknown gas weight parameter wu based on gas feature data extracted from the absorption spectrum measured by the spectrometer; and constructing, by the processor, a squared loss function and an objective function according to the feature Di of of each standard sample, the known gas weight parameter w, the feature Duj of the n unknown gases, the unknown gas weight parameter wu, and the feature d of the gas mixture;
S4, learning and training, by the processor of the gas detection system, each parameter in the squared loss function based on the gas feature data extracted from the absorption spectrum measured by the spectrometer, until a value of the objective function is less than a set value or a number of learning times reaches a target number, and obtaining a final unknown gas feature Duj corresponding to the measured gas sample;
S5, adding, by the processor, the final unknown gas feature Duj to the feature library D; and calculating, by the processor, the concentration of [[a]]the gas to be measured in the gas mixture through gas concentration inversion calculation” in order to clarify the recited language for compliance under 35 U.S.C. 112.
Appropriate correction is required.
Claim 2 is objected to because of the following informalities:
Claim language should read:
“The method for measuring the concentration of the gas to be measured with features of the unknown gas according to claim 1, wherein the squared loss function described in S3 is defined as follows:
θ
=
∑
i
=
1
m
w
i
*
D
i
+
∑
j
=
1
n
w
u
i
*
D
u
i
-
d
2
,
and the objective function is defined as min(θ) and constructed according to the squared loss function, wherein Duj corresponds to the feature of the n unknown gases” in order to clarify the recited language for compliance under 35 U.S.C. 112 (i.e., Duj refers to both the feature of the n unknown gases and the final unknown gas feature in claim 1).
Appropriate correction is required.
Claim 3 is objected to because of the following informalities:
Claim language should read:
“The method for measuring [[a]]the concentration of the gas to be measured with Duj of the n unknown gases in S2 is defined as follows:
a gas feature function base Φ and a gas feature function space are established, an unknown gas parameter Puj is defined and initialized, and the feature Duj of the n unknown gases is constructed according to the gas feature function base Φ and the unknown gas parameter Puj” in order to clarify the recited language for compliance under 35 U.S.C. 112.
Appropriate correction is required.
Claim 4 is objected to because of the following informalities:
Claim language should read:
“The method for measuring the concentration of the gas to be measured with Duj of the n unknown gases according to the gas feature function base Φ and the unknown gas parameter Puj is as follows: Duj = Puj *Φ” in order to clarify the recited language for compliance under 35 U.S.C. 112.
Appropriate correction is required.
Claim 5 is objected to because of the following informalities:
Claim language should read:
“The method for measuring the concentration of the gas to be measured with Duj described in S4, comprises
S41, using an iterative algorithm to learn and train the known gas weight parameter w, the unknown gas weight parameter wu and the unknown gas parameter Puj, and recording an iteration number K;
S42, determining whether a remainder of K divided by a given integer N is zero, performing S43 if yes, and performing S44 if not;
S43, constructing a function of a correlation Rj between the feature Duj of the n unknown gases and the D, initializing a correlation coefficient r, and determining whether Rj is greater than r; if yes, re-initializing the unknown gas Puj, and performing S41; if not, performing S44; and
S44, determining, as a first condition, whether the iteration number K reaches [[the]]a set maximum K_max or, as a second condition, whether the value of the objective function min(θ) is less than [[the]]a set value ε; when the first condition or the second condition is determined to be “yes”, stopping the iterative algorithm and calculating the final unknown gas feature Duj; and when neither the first condition nor the second condition is determined to be “yes”, performing S41 and continuing learning and training” in order to clarify the recited language for compliance under 35 U.S.C. 112.
Appropriate correction is required.
Claim 6 is objected to because of the following informalities:
Claim language should read:
“The method for measuring the concentration of the gas to be measured with .
Appropriate correction is required.
Claim 7 is objected to because of the following informalities:
Claim language should read:
“The method for measuring the concentration of the gas to be measured with Rj between the feature Duj of the n unknown gases and the feature library D is as follows:
r
e
s
=
D
u
j
*
D
*
D
*
D
-
1
*
D
-
D
u
j
,
R
j
=
1
-
r
e
s
*
r
e
s
D
u
j
*
D
u
j
” in order to clarify the recited language for compliance under 35 U.S.C. 112.
Appropriate correction is required.
Claim 8 is objected to because of the following informalities:
Claim language should read:
“The method for measuring the concentration of the gas to be measured with Duj is added to the feature library D, and the concentration of the gas to be measured in the gas mixture is obtained by the gas concentration inversion calculation according to [[the]]a least square method” in order to clarify the recited language for compliance under 35 U.S.C. 112.
Appropriate correction is required.
Claim 9 is objected to because of the following informalities:
Claim language should read:
“A system for measuring the concentration of the gas to be measured with the spectrometer, a storage module, a learning and training module, an initialization module, and an inversion module,
wherein the light source is sequentially connected to the measuring cell and the spectrometer, the gas to be measured is injected into the measuring cell, and light emitted by the light source passes through the measuring cell filled with the gas to be measured, is received by the spectrometer and converted into a digital signal and then inputted to the storage module and the learning and training module respectively;
the storage module is configured to store feature data of a variety of known gases;
the learning and training module is configured to construct a squared loss function model between unknown gas features and known gas features and perform learning and training;
the initialization module is connected to the learning and training module, and is configured to initialize parameter data in the squared loss function model;
final unknown gas feature data obtained by the learning and training is inputted into the storage module;
the inversion module is connected with the storage module and configured to calculate the concentration of the gas to be measured, and known gas feature data in the storage module and the final unknown gas feature data acquired by calculation are inputted into the inversion module for inversion calculation” in order to clarify the recited language for compliance under 35 U.S.C. 112.
Appropriate correction is required.
Claim 10 is objected to because of the following informalities:
Claim language should read:
“A system for measuring [[a]]the concentration of the gas to be measured with the spectrometer, a storage module, a learning and training module, an initialization module, and an inversion module,
wherein the light source is sequentially connected to the measuring cell and the spectrometer, the gas to be measured is injected into the measuring cell, and light emitted by the light source passes through the measuring cell filled with the gas to be measured, is received by the spectrometer and converted into a digital signal and then inputted to the storage module and the learning and training module respectively;
the storage module is configured to store feature data of a variety of known gases;
the learning and training module is configured to construct a squared loss function model between unknown gas features and known gas features and perform learning and training;
the initialization module is connected to the learning and training module, and is configured to initialize parameter data in the squared loss function model;
final unknown gas feature data obtained by the learning and training is inputted into the storage module;
the inversion module is connected with the storage module and configured to calculate the concentration of the gas to be measured, and known gas feature data in the storage module and the final unknown gas feature data acquired by calculation are inputted into the inversion module for inversion calculation” in order to clarify the recited language for compliance under 35 U.S.C. 112.
Appropriate correction is required.
Claim 11 is objected to because of the following informalities:
Claim language should read:
“A system for measuring the concentration of the gas to be measured with the spectrometer, a storage module, a learning and training module, an initialization module, and an inversion module,
wherein the light source is sequentially connected to the measuring cell and the spectrometer, the gas to be measured is injected into the measuring cell, and light emitted by the light source passes through the measuring cell filled with the gas to be measured, is received by the spectrometer and converted into a digital signal and then inputted to the storage module and the learning and training module respectively;
the storage module is configured to store feature data of a variety of known gases;
the learning and training module is configured to construct a squared loss function model between unknown gas features and known gas features and perform learning and training;
the initialization module is connected to the learning and training module, and is configured to initialize parameter data in the squared loss function model;
final unknown gas feature data obtained by the learning and training is inputted into the storage module;
the inversion module is connected with the storage module and configured to calculate the concentration of the gas to be measured, and known gas feature data in the storage module and the final unknown gas feature data acquired by calculation are inputted into the inversion module for inversion calculation” in order to clarify the recited language for compliance under 35 U.S.C. 112.
Appropriate correction is required.
Claim 12 is objected to because of the following informalities:
Claim language should read:
“A system for measuring the concentration of the gas to be measured with the spectrometer, a storage module, a learning and training module, an initialization module, and an inversion module,
wherein the light source is sequentially connected to the measuring cell and the spectrometer, the gas to be measured is injected into the measuring cell, and light emitted by the light source passes through the measuring cell filled with the gas to be measured, is received by the spectrometer and converted into a digital signal and then inputted to the storage module and the learning and training module respectively;
the storage module is configured to store feature data of a variety of known gases;
the learning and training module is configured to construct a squared loss function model between unknown gas features and known gas features and perform learning and training;
the initialization module is connected to the learning and training module, and is configured to initialize parameter data in the squared loss function model;
final unknown gas feature data obtained by the learning and training is inputted into the storage module;
the inversion module is connected with the storage module and configured to calculate the concentration of the gas to be measured, and known gas feature data in the storage module and the final unknown gas feature data acquired by calculation are inputted into the inversion module for inversion calculation” in order to clarify the recited language for compliance under 35 U.S.C. 112.
Appropriate correction is required.
Claim 13 is objected to because of the following informalities:
Claim language should read:
“A system for measuring the concentration of the gas to be measured with the spectrometer, a storage module, a learning and training module, an initialization module, and an inversion module,
wherein the light source is sequentially connected to the measuring cell and the spectrometer, the gas to be measured is injected into the measuring cell, and light emitted by the light source passes through the measuring cell filled with the gas to be measured, is received by the spectrometer and converted into a digital signal and then inputted to the storage module and the learning and training module respectively;
the storage module is configured to store feature data of a variety of known gases;
the learning and training module is configured to construct a squared loss function model between unknown gas features and known gas features and perform learning and training;
the initialization module is connected to the learning and training module, and is configured to initialize parameter data in the squared loss function model;
final unknown gas feature data obtained by the learning and training is inputted into the storage module;
the inversion module is connected with the storage module and configured to calculate the concentration of the gas to be measured, and known gas feature data in the storage module and the final unknown gas feature data acquired by calculation are inputted into the inversion module for inversion calculation” in order to clarify the recited language for compliance under 35 U.S.C. 112.
Appropriate correction is required.
Claim 14 is objected to because of the following informalities:
Claim language should read:
“A system for measuring the concentration of the gas to be measured with the spectrometer, a storage module, a learning and training module, an initialization module, and an inversion module,
wherein the light source is sequentially connected to the measuring cell and the spectrometer, the gas to be measured is injected into the measuring cell, and light emitted by the light source passes through the measuring cell filled with the gas to be measured, is received by the spectrometer and converted into a digital signal and then inputted to the storage module and the learning and training module respectively;
the storage module is configured to store feature data of a variety of known gases;
the learning and training module is configured to construct a squared loss function model between unknown gas features and known gas features and perform learning and training;
the initialization module is connected to the learning and training module, and is configured to initialize parameter data in the squared loss function model;
final unknown gas feature data obtained by the learning and training is inputted into the storage module;
the inversion module is connected with the storage module and configured to calculate the concentration of the gas to be measured, and known gas feature data in the storage module and the final unknown gas feature data acquired by calculation are inputted into the inversion module for inversion calculation” in order to clarify the recited language for compliance under 35 U.S.C. 112.
Appropriate correction is required.
Claim 15 is objected to because of the following informalities:
Claim language should read:
“A system for measuring the concentration of the gas to be measured with the spectrometer, a storage module, a learning and training module, an initialization module, and an inversion module,
wherein the light source is sequentially connected to the measuring cell and the spectrometer, the gas to be measured is injected into the measuring cell, and light emitted by the light source passes through the measuring cell filled with the gas to be measured, is received by the spectrometer and converted into a digital signal and then inputted to the storage module and the learning and training module respectively;
the storage module is configured to store feature data of a variety of known gases;
the learning and training module is configured to construct a squared loss function model between unknown gas features and known gas features and perform learning and training;
the initialization module is connected to the learning and training module, and is configured to initialize parameter data in the squared loss function model;
final unknown gas feature data obtained by the learning and training is inputted into the storage module;
the inversion module is connected with the storage module and configured to calculate the concentration of the gas to be measured, and known gas feature data in the storage module and the final unknown gas feature data acquired by calculation are inputted into the inversion module for inversion calculation” in order to clarify the recited language for compliance under 35 U.S.C. 112.
Appropriate correction is required.
Claim 16 is objected to because of the following informalities:
Claim language should read:
“A system for measuring the concentration of the gas to be measured with the spectrometer, a storage module, a learning and training module, an initialization module, and an inversion module,
wherein the light source is sequentially connected to the measuring cell and the spectrometer, the gas to be measured is injected into the measuring cell, and light emitted by the light source passes through the measuring cell filled with the gas to be measured, is received by the spectrometer and converted into a digital signal and then inputted to the storage module and the learning and training module respectively;
the storage module is configured to store feature data of a variety of known gases;
the learning and training module is configured to construct a squared loss function model between unknown gas features and known gas features and perform learning and training;
the initialization module is connected to the learning and training module, and is configured to initialize parameter data in the squared loss function model;
final unknown gas feature data obtained by the learning and training is inputted into the storage module;
the inversion module is connected with the storage module and configured to calculate the concentration of the gas to be measured, and known gas feature data in the storage module and the final unknown gas feature data acquired by calculation are inputted into the inversion module for inversion calculation” in order to clarify the recited language for compliance under 35 U.S.C. 112.
Appropriate correction is required.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(b):
(b) CONCLUSION.—The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph:
The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the applicant regards as his invention.
Claims 1-16 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor (or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the applicant), regards as the invention.
Claim 1 recites “wide spectral range” which is unclear as to what the scope of ‘wide’ encompasses (e.g., what is considered a wide spectral range? Visible to infrared? Ultraviolet to infrared? Etc.). The dependent claims do not clarify the recited language and the specification does not provide details as to how this feature should be interpreted (i.e., same language is described in [0006]-[0007], [0039]-[0040], [0069]-[0070] and [0086]-[0087]).
For examination purposes, language is interpreted as “spectral range” (see also Claim Objections section).
Examiner’s Note
Claims 1-16 were evaluated for patent eligibility under 35 U.S.C. 101 using the SUBJECT MATTER ELIGIBILITY TEST FOR PRODUCTS AND PROCESSES described in the 2024 Guidance Update on Patent Subject Matter Eligibility, Including on Artificial Intelligence (see also 2019 Revised Patent Subject Matter Eligibility Guidance) to determine patent eligibility under 35 U.S.C. 101.
Regarding claim 1, the examiner submits that under Step 1 of the test for evaluating claims for eligibility under 35 U.S.C. 101, the claim is to a process, which is one of the statutory categories of invention.
Continuing with the analysis, under Step 2A - Prong One of the test:
the limitation “S3, defining and initializing, by the processor of the gas detection system, a known gas weight parameter w and an unknown gas weight parameter wu based on gas feature data extracted from the absorption spectrum measured by the spectrometer; and constructing, by the processor, a squared loss function and an objective function according to the gas feature Di of the unknown gases, the known gas weight parameter w, the feature Duj of unknown gases, the unknown gas weight parameter wu, and the feature d of the gas mixture” is a process that, under its broadest reasonable interpretation in light of the specification, covers performance of the limitation using mental processes and/or mathematical concepts (e.g., defining variables for setting a mathematical function, see specification at [0011]-[0012]; see also claim 2). Except for the recitation of the extra-solution activities (i.e., source/type of data being evaluated), the field of use and the generic computer elements (i.e., processor of the gas detection system), the limitation in the context of this claim mainly refers to performing mental evaluations and/or applying mathematical concepts to set variables for a mathematical equation.
the limitation “S4, learning and training, by the processor of the gas detection system, each parameter in the squared loss function based on gas feature data extracted from the absorption spectrum measured by the spectrometer, until a value of the objective function is less than a set value or a number of learning times reaches a target number, and obtaining a final unknown gas feature Duj corresponding to the measured gas sample” is a process that, under its broadest reasonable interpretation in light of the specification, covers performance of the limitation using mental processes and/or mathematical concepts (e.g., , see specification at [0018]-[0026]; see also claims 5 and 7) to obtain additional information (i.e., a final unknown gas feature Duj). Except for the recitation of the extra-solution activities (i.e., source/type of data being evaluated) the field of use and the generic computer elements (i.e., processor of the gas detection system), the limitation in the context of this claim mainly refers to performing mental evaluations and/or applying mathematical concepts to manipulate data and obtain a result.
Therefore, the claim recites a judicial exception under Step 2A - Prong One of the test.
Furthermore, under Step 2A - Prong Two of the test, the claim recites:
“A method for measuring a concentration of a gas to be measured with improved accuracy and anti-interference capability in mixed gas environments, using a gas detection system comprising a spectrometer and a processor, by identifying features of unknown gas” which generally links the use of the judicial exception to a particular technological environment or field of use (see MPEP 2106.05(h));
“S1, injecting standard samples of m known gases into a measuring cell of a gas analyzer, scanning, by the spectrometer, in a wide spectral range to obtain an absorption spectrum of each sample, further obtaining a feature Di of each standard sample, and establishing, by the processor, a feature library D of the known gases” which adds extra-solution activities (e.g., mere data gathering, source/type of data to be manipulated) using elements recited at a high level of generality (i.e., a measuring cell of a gas analyzer) (see MPEP 2106.05(g)), as well as generic computer functions (e.g., store data) (see MPEP 2106.05(f));
“S2, injecting a gas mixture into the measurement cell of the gas analyzer, and scanning, by the spectrometer, in the wide spectral range to obtain the feature d of the gas mixture, where the gas mixture includes m known gases and n unknown gases, and features of the unknown gases are defined as Duj, wherein the obtained feature d is configured to be input into the iterative optimization algorithm to determine the concentration of the gas to be measured” which adds extra-solution activities (e.g., mere data gathering, source/type of data to be manipulated) using elements recited at a high level of generality (i.e., the measurement cell of the gas analyzer) (see MPEP 2106.05(g)); and
“S5, adding, by the processor, the final unknown gas feature Duj to the feature library D; and calculating, by the processor, the concentration of a gas to be measured in the gas mixture through gas concentration inversion calculation” which, besides adding generic computer functions (e.g., store data) (see MPEP 2106.05(f)), integrates the judicial exception into a practical application, when considering the claim as a whole, by reflecting an improvement to other technology or technical field (i.e., obtaining the concentration of a gas to be measured in the gas mixture, see specification at [0004], [0044], [0100]) (see MPEP 2106.05(a)).
Therefore, these additional elements, when considered individually and in combination, integrate the judicial exception into a practical application. The claim, when considered as a whole, is eligible at Prong Two of the Revised Step 2A (see 2019 Revised Patent Subject Matter Eligibility Guidance – Revised Step 2A, see also MPEP 2106.04(d)).
Regarding the dependent claims 2-16, they were also found to be patent eligible under 35 U.S.C. 101 by incorporating the eligible subject matter of their corresponding independent claim.
Subject Matter Not Rejected Over Prior Art
Claims 1-16 are distinguished over the prior art of record for the following reasons:
Regarding claim 1.
Zhou (CN 108287141 A, IDS reference, see translation) discloses/teaches:
A method for measuring a concentration of a gas to be measured with improved accuracy and anti-interference capability in mixed gas environments, using a gas detection system comprising a spectrometer and a processor (abstract, p. 2: a multi-component gas concentration method based on spectroscopy analysis and least square method is presented), the method comprising the following steps:
S1, injecting standard samples of m known gases into a measuring cell of a gas analyzer, scanning, by the spectrometer, in wide spectral range to obtain an absorption spectrum of each sample, further obtaining a feature Di of each standard sample, and establishing, by the processor, a feature library D of the known gases (p. 2, S2: standard sample absorption response (feature) is obtained using an spectrum analyzer (see p. 3 regarding using a standard infrared spectrum library for peak comparison));
S2, injecting a gas mixture into the measurement cell of the gas analyzer, and scanning, by the spectrometer, in the wide spectral range to obtain the feature d of the gas mixture, where the gas mixture includes m known gases and n unknown gases, and features of the unknown gases are defined as Duj (p. 2, S1-S3: absorption response of mixed gas, which implies a gas mixture having different known and unknown gases, is obtained by measuring background absorption response and standard sample absorption response).
Zhang (CN 113916810 A, IDS reference, see translation) discloses:
“The invention claims a multi-component gas concentration analysis method, comprising the following steps: (A1) for the possible gas component, establishing the function relation Ai=S (C) between the absorption spectrum and the concentration, i is the spectrum pixel point number, C is the concentration, A represents the absorbance; obtaining absorption spectrum database Aij=S (Cj), j is gas component sequence number; (A2) obtaining the absorption spectrum A’i of the sample gas, using the matching algorithm to obtain the main gas component in the sample gas, the component sequence number is j= 1: K; so as to obtain the sample gas in each gas component of the estimated concentration C’j and light absorption spectrum A’ij; (A3) constructing combined absorption spectrum L is iteration times, λ is the spectrum pixel wavelength; (A4) combining the loss function to construct a target function; (A5) using an iterative algorithm to adjust the estimated concentration C’j and a1, so as to iteratively optimize the target function, when the target function is the minimum estimated concentration C’j as the concentration of each gas component in the sample gas” (Abstract: a multi-component gas concentration method based on absorption vs. concentration relationship obtains the absorption spectrum of a sample gas and matches it with information in a database, adjusting the concentration information based on the measured absorption spectrum).
Zhu (CN 102435567 A, IDS reference, see translation) discloses:
“This invention relates to an inversion calculation method for measuring the gas component concentration. The inversion calculation method for measuring the gas component concentration based on the differential absorption spectrum establishes a mathematical model, using the least square method to solve, it is capable of real time recording the content of all kinds of pollutants in the smoke gas, and the gas is unknown” (Abstract: an inversion calculation method for measuring gas component concentration based on differential absorption spectrum technology and least square fit (see p. 4)).
The closest prior art of record, taken individually or in combination, fail to teach or suggest (see italic text):
“A method for measuring a concentration of a gas to be measured by identifying features of an unknown gas, the method comprising the following steps:
S2, wherein the obtained feature d is configured to be input into the iterative optimization algorithm to determine the concentration of the gas to be measured;
S3, defining and initializing, by the processor of the gas detection system, a known gas weight parameter w and an unknown gas weight parameter wu based on gas feature data extracted from the absorption spectrum measured by the spectrometer; and constructing, by the processor, a squared loss function and an objective function according to the feature Di of unknown gases, the known gas weight parameter w, the feature Duj of unknown gases, the unknown gas weight parameter wu, and the feature d of the gas mixture;
S4, learning and training, by the processor of the gas detection system, each parameter in the squared loss function based on gas feature data extracted from the absorption spectrum measured by the spectrometer, until a value of the objective function is less than a set value or a number of learning times reaches a target number, and obtaining a final unknown gas feature Duj corresponding to the measured gas sample;
S5, adding, by the processor, the final unknown gas feature Duj to the feature library D; and calculating, by the processor, the concentration of a gas to be measured in the gas mixture through gas concentration inversion calculation”
in combination with all other limitations within the claim, as claimed and defined by the applicant.
Regarding claims 2-16.
They are also distinguished over the prior art of record due for their dependency.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Zhang; Huajun et al., US 20170059537 A1, Method for Analyzing Mixture Components
Reference discloses analyzing mixture components using chromatographic technology and entropy minimum algorithm to create a reconstructed pure spectrum and a corresponding pseudo concentration.
Applicant’s amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a). Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a).
A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of the advisory action. In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the mailing date of this final action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to LINA CORDERO whose telephone number is (571)272-9969. The examiner can normally be reached 9:30 am - 6:00 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, ANDREW SCHECHTER can be reached at 571-272-2302. 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.
/LINA CORDERO/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2857
Prosecution Insights