DETAILED ACTION
Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status
The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 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 1-6 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 101 because the claimed invention is directed to non-statutory subject matter.
Step 1:
According to the first part of the analysis, in the instant case, claims 1-5 are directed to a rotary machine diagnostic device, claim 6 is directed to a rotary machine diagnostic method. Thus, each of the claims falls within one of the four statutory categories (i.e. process, machine, manufacture, or composition of matter).
Regarding claim 6:
A rotary machine diagnostic method for specifying a failure occurrence place and inferring a failure cause, regarding an unbalance occurrence event that a rotating part undergoes during a period when a rotary machine is operating, the method comprising:
a first input step of receiving calculation condition data including reference data and an influence coefficient matrix;
a second input step of receiving a measured state value of the rotating part, the measured state value including vibration data, a rotation speed, and phase calculation data serving as a basis for phase calculation;
a calculation step of performing calculation operation of identifying a vibration mode serving as a basis for the specification of the failure occurrence place and the inference of the failure cause, based on the calculation condition data and the measured state value;
a storing step of loading the calculation condition data, the measured state value, and the vibration mode which is obtained in the calculation step; and
a displaying step of displaying the loaded contents.
Step 2A Prong 1:
“a first input step of receiving calculation condition data including reference data and an influence coefficient matrix” is directed to mental step of data gathering.
“a second input step of receiving a measured state value of the rotating part, the measured state value including vibration data, a rotation speed, and phase calculation data serving as a basis for phase calculation” is directed to mental step of data gathering.
“a calculation step of performing calculation operation of identifying a vibration mode serving as a basis for the specification of the failure occurrence place and the inference of the failure cause, based on the calculation condition data and the measured state value” is directed to math because identifying a vibration mode and using it to specify failure locations and causes relies on several mathematical frameworks. The “calculation operation” is the application of calculus, matrix algebra, and statistics to physical sensor data to translate “nois
Each limitation recites in the claim is a process that, under BRI covers performance of the limitation in the mind but for the recitation of a generic “rotating part and measurement” which is a mere indication of the field of use. Nothing in the claim elements precludes the steps from practically being performed in the mind. Thus, the claim recites a mental process.
Further, the claim recites the step of “a calculation step of performing calculation operation of identifying a vibration mode serving as a basis for the specification of the failure occurrence place and the inference of the failure cause, based on the calculation condition data and the measured state value” which as drafted, under BRI recites a mathematical calculation. The grouping of "mathematical concepts” in the 2019 PED includes "mathematical calculations" as an exemplar of an abstract idea. 2019 PEG Section |, 84 Fed. Reg. at 52. Thus, the recited limitation falls into the "mathematical concept" grouping of abstract ideas. This limitation also falls into the “mental process” group of abstract ideas, because the recited mathematical calculation is simple enough that it can be practically performed in the human mind, e.g., scientists and engineers have been solving the Arrhenius equation in their minds since it was first proposed in 1889.
Note that even if most humans would use a physical aid (e.g., pen and paper, a slide rule, or a calculator) to help them complete the recited calculation, the use of such physical aid does not negate the mental nature of this limitation. See October Update at Section I(C)(i) and (iii).
Additional Elements:
Step 2A Prong 2:
“A rotary machine diagnostic method for specifying a failure occurrence place and inferring a failure cause, regarding an unbalance occurrence event that a rotating part undergoes during a period when a rotary machine is operating” recited in the preamble does not integrate the judicial exception into a practical application. This additional element is merely using a computer as a tool to perform an abstract idea (see MPEP 2106.05(h)).
“a first input step of receiving calculation condition data including reference data and an influence coefficient matrix” does not integrate the judicial exception into a practical application. This additional element is merely using a computer as a tool to perform an abstract idea (see MPEP 2106.05(h)).
“a second input step of receiving a measured state value of the rotating part, the measured state value including vibration data, a rotation speed, and phase calculation data serving as a basis for phase calculation” does not integrate the judicial exception into a practical application. This additional element is merely using a computer as a tool to perform an abstract idea (see MPEP 2106.05(h)).
“a calculation step of performing calculation operation of identifying a vibration mode serving as a basis for the specification of the failure occurrence place and the inference of the failure cause, based on the calculation condition data and the measured state value” does not integrate the judicial exception into a practical application. This additional element is merely using a computer as a tool to perform an abstract idea (see MPEP 2106.05(h)).
“a storing step of loading the calculation condition data, the measured state value, and the vibration mode which is obtained in the calculation step” is directed to insignificant activity and does not integrate the judicial exception into a practical application. See MPEP 2106.05(g).
“a storing step of loading the calculation condition data, the measured state value, and the vibration mode which is obtained in the calculation step” is directed to insignificant activity and does not integrate the judicial exception into a practical application. See MPEP 2106.05(g).
“a displaying step of displaying the loaded contents” is directed to insignificant activity and does not integrate the judicial exception into a practical application. See MPEP 2106.05(g).
The claim is merely collecting data, manipulating or analyzing the data using math and mental process, and displaying the results.
This is similar to electric power: MPEP 2106.05(h) vi. Limiting the abstract idea of collecting information, analyzing it, and displaying certain results of the collection and analysis to data related to the electric power grid, because limiting application of the abstract idea to power-grid monitoring is simply an attempt to limit the use of the abstract idea to a particular technological environment, Electric Power Group, LLC v. Alstom S.A., 830 F.3d 1350, 1354, 119 USPQ2d 1739, 1742 (Fed. Cir. 2016).
Whether the claim invokes computers or other machinery merely as a tool to perform an existing process. Use of a computer or other machinery in its ordinary capacity for economic or other tasks (e.g., to receive, store, or transmit data) or simply adding a general purpose computer or computer components after the fact to an abstract idea (e.g., a fundamental economic practice or mathematical equation) does not integrate a judicial exception into a practical application or provide significantly more. See Affinity Labs v. DirecTV, 838 F.3d 1253, 1262, 120 USPQ2d 1201, 1207 (Fed. Cir. 2016) (cellular telephone); TLI Communications LLC v. AV Auto, LLC, 823 F.3d 607, 613, 118 USPQ2d 1744, 1748 (Fed. Cir. 2016) (computer server and telephone unit). Similarly, "claiming the improved speed or efficiency inherent with applying the abstract idea on a computer" does not integrate a judicial exception into a practical application or provide an inventive concept. Intellectual Ventures I LLC v. Capital One Bank (USA), 792 F.3d 1363, 1367, 115 USPQ2d 1636, 1639 (Fed. Cir. 2015). In contrast, a claim that purports to improve computer capabilities or to improve an existing technology may integrate a judicial exception into a practical application or provide significantly more. McRO, Inc. v. Bandai Namco Games Am. Inc., 837 F.3d 1299, 1314-15, 120 USPQ2d 1091, 1101-02 (Fed. Cir. 2016); Enfish, LLC v. Microsoft Corp., 822 F.3d 1327, 1335-36, 118 USPQ2d 1684, 1688-89 (Fed. Cir. 2016). See MPEP §§ 2106.04(d)(1) and 2106.05(a) for a discussion of improvements to the functioning of a computer or to another technology or technical field.
The claim as a whole does not meet any of the following criteria to integrate the judicial exception into a practical application:
An additional element reflects an improvement in the functioning of a computer, or an improvement to other technology or technical field;
an additional element that applies or uses a judicial exception to effect a particular treatment or prophylaxis for a disease or medical condition;
an additional element implements a judicial exception with, or uses a judicial exception in conjunction with, a particular machine or manufacture that is integral to the claim;
an additional element effects a transformation or reduction of a particular article to a different state or thing; and
an additional element applies or uses the judicial exception in some other meaningful way beyond generally linking the use of the judicial exception to a particular technological environment, such that the claim as a whole is more than a drafting effort designed to monopolize the exception.
Step 2B:
“A non-transitory computer-readable medium having stored thereon computer-readable instructions that when executed by a computing device cause the computing device to:” recited in the preamble does not amount to significantly more than the judicial exception in the claim. This additional element is merely using a computer as a tool to perform an abstract idea (see MPEP 2106.05(h)).
“a first input step of receiving calculation condition data including reference data and an influence coefficient matrix” does not amount to significantly more than the judicial exception in the claim. This additional element is merely using a computer as a tool to perform an abstract idea (see MPEP 2106.05(h)).
“a second input step of receiving a measured state value of the rotating part, the measured state value including vibration data, a rotation speed, and phase calculation data serving as a basis for phase calculation” does not amount to significantly more than the judicial exception in the claim. This additional element is merely using a computer as a tool to perform an abstract idea (see MPEP 2106.05(h)).
“a calculation step of performing calculation operation of identifying a vibration mode serving as a basis for the specification of the failure occurrence place and the inference of the failure cause, based on the calculation condition data and the measured state value” does not amount to significantly more than the judicial exception in the claim. This additional element is merely using a computer as a tool to perform an abstract idea (see MPEP 2106.05(h)).
“a storing step of loading the calculation condition data, the measured state value, and the vibration mode which is obtained in the calculation step” is directed to insignificant activity and does not amount to significantly more than the judicial exception in the claim. See MPEP 2106.05(g) and 2106.05(d)(ii), third list, (iv).
“a displaying step of displaying the loaded contents” is directed to insignificant activity and does not amount to significantly more than the judicial exception in the claim. See MPEP 2106.05(g) and 2106.05(d)(ii), third list, (iv).
The claim is therefore ineligible under 35 USC 101.
Claim 1 is similar to claim 6 but recites a rotary machine diagnostic device to implement a method. These additional elements fail to integrate the abstract idea into a practical application. These limitations are recited at a high level of generality and do not add significantly more to the judicial exception. These elements are generic computing devices that perform generic functions. Using generic computer elements to perform an abstract idea does not integrate an abstract idea into a practical application. See 2019 Guidance, 84 Fed. Reg. at 55. Moreover, “the mere recitation of a generic computer cannot transform a patent-ineligible abstract idea into a patent-eligible invention.” Alice, 573 U.S. at 223; see also FairWarninglP, LLCv. latric SysInc., 839 F.3d 1089, 1096 (Fed. Cir. 2016) (citation omitted) (“[T]he use of generic computer elements like a microprocessor or user interface do not alone transform an otherwise abstract idea into patent-eligible subject matter”).
On the record before us, we are not persuaded that the hardware of claim 1 integrates the abstract idea into a practical application. Nor are we persuaded that the additional elements are anything more than well-understood, routine, and conventional so as to impart subject matter eligibility to claim 1.
Regarding claim 2, “wherein the calculation unit includes: a vibration vector generator that generates a vibration vector based on the vibration data; a difference vector calculator that calculates a vibration vector difference from the vibration vector; an unbalance calculator that calculates unbalance distribution of the rotating part based on the vibration vector and the influence coefficient matrix; and a failure cause inferring part that infers the failure cause based on the calculation result stored in the storage unit” is directed to math. It does not integrate the judicial exception into a practical application. It does not amount to significantly more than the judicial exception in the claim. This additional element is merely using a computer as a tool to perform an abstract idea (see MPEP 2106.05(h)).
Regarding claim 3, “wherein the calculation unit further includes: a phase calculator that calculates a phase of the rotating part based on the phase calculation data; and a polar diagram data generator that creates polar diagram data, using the phase calculated by the phase calculator and the vibration vector, and wherein the failure cause inferring part identifies the vibration mode and infers the failure cause based on the polar diagram data” is directed to math. It does not integrate the judicial exception into a practical application. It does not amount to significantly more than the judicial exception in the claim. This additional element is merely using a computer as a tool to perform an abstract idea (see MPEP 2106.05(h)).
Regarding claim 4, “wherein a moving speed, a movement acceleration, and a direction change rate of the vibration vector are used for the identification of the vibration mode and the inference of the failure cause” does not amount to significantly more than the judicial exception in the claim. This additional element is merely using a computer as a tool to perform an abstract idea (see MPEP 2106.05(h)).
Regarding claim 5, “wherein the period when the rotary machine is operating is a period when the rotary machine is operating when a rotation speed of the rotary machine passes a critical speed” does not integrate the judicial exception into a practical application. It does not amount to significantly more than the judicial exception in the claim. This additional element is merely using a computer as a tool to perform an abstract idea (see MPEP 2106.05(h)).
Hence the claims 1-19 are treated as ineligible subject matter under 35 U.S.C. § 101.
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) 1-6 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Shimada (JP 03279836 A).
Regarding claims 1 and 6, Shimada discloses a rotary machine diagnostic device (and method) for specifying a failure occurrence place and inferring a failure cause, regarding an unbalance occurrence event that a rotating part undergoes during a period when a rotary machine is operating (page 3: The present invention relates to the imbalanced monitoring diagnostic equipment of early detection of the unusual signs of the operational status of the high velocity revolution machine in a steam turbine, a generator plant, etc., and the rotary machine which performs the diagnosis based on the detection value of the shaft vibration of a rotary machine, Figures 1-8), the device comprising an input unit that receives calculation condition data and a measured state value of the rotating part (pages 2, 7), the calculating condition data including reference data and an influence coefficient matrix (page 7: use of both reference data and influence coefficient method/matrix"), and the measured state value including vibration data, a rotation speed, and phase calculation data serving as a basis for phase calculation (pages 4-7: vibration data, rotor rotations speed, phase calculation data are each sensed/recorded), a calculation unit that performs a calculation operation of identifying a vibration mode serving as a basis for the specification of the failure occurrence place and the inference of the
failure cause, based on the calculation condition data and the measured state value which are received by the input unit (pages 6-8: calculations are carried out for identifying a vibration mode which serves as the basis for the failure occurrence place and cause), a storage unit in which the calculation condition data, the measured state value, and the vibration mode which is obtained by the
calculation unit are loaded (page 4: the history data and the diagnostic result store in memory 23), and an output unit that outputs and displays the contents loaded in the storage unit (page 4: the display 25 display the diagnostic result store in memory 23).
Regarding claim 2, Shimada discloses wherein the calculation unit includes: a vibration vector generator that generates a vibration vector based on the vibration data; a difference vector calculator that calculates a vibration vector difference from the vibration vector (pages 2, 6); an unbalance calculator that calculates unbalance distribution of the rotating part based on the vibration vector and the influence coefficient matrix (pages 6-7); and a failure cause inferring part that infers the failure cause based on the calculation result stored in the storage unit (page 5: detecting means for detecting that unbalance has occurred due to a defect of a part of a rotor of the rotary machine, unbalance has occurred due to a fracture of a part of the rotor, page 4: The respective outputs of the various sensor groups 9, the abnormality sign detection device 21, and the frequency analyzer 22 and the past history data stored in the memory 23 are input to the diagnosis unit 24, and the cause of the abnormality sign is diagnosed).
Regarding claim 3, Shimada discloses wherein the calculation unit further includes: a phase calculator that calculates a phase of the rotating part based on the phase calculation data (page 7: it is estimated that the unbalance due to the defect of the member is generated, and the unbalance generation position, the change amount of the unbalance amount and the phase of the vibration vector are calculated by the unbalance calculation means 32) ; and a polar diagram data generator that creates polar diagram data, using the phase calculated by the phase calculator and the vibration vector, and wherein the failure cause inferring part identifies the vibration mode and infers the failure cause based on the polar diagram data (e.g. page 9: The vibration data before the detection of the vector change amount and the vibration data after the detection of the vector erosion amount are displayed so that the relation between the unbalance occurrence position and the vibration can be easily grasped. Further, on the upper right of the screen, the variation of the unbalance amount and the variation cp of the phase are displayed as symbols on the polar coordinates).
Regarding claim 4, Shimada discloses wherein a moving speed, a movement acceleration, and a direction change rate of the vibration vector are used for the identification of the vibration mode and the inference of the failure cause (page 3: In particular, in a steam turbine, a power generation unit, or the like for a power generation plant, a rotor having a weight of several tens to several hundreds of tons is rotated at a high speed, and minute vibration may lead to a serious accident).
Regarding claim 5, Shimada discloses wherein the period when the rotary machine is operating is a period when the rotary machine is operating when a rotation speed of the rotary machine passes a critical speed (page 3: In particular, in a steam turbine, a power generation unit, or the like for a power generation plant, a rotor having a weight of several tens to several hundreds of tons is rotated at a high speed, and minute vibration may lead to a serious accident, page 6: The monitoring and diagnosing of an abnormality by the unbalance monitoring and diagnosing device 30 is performed…. data at n points in the past including data at the present time are stored at intervals of time ΔT).
Claim(s) 1 and 6 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Shiraishi (JP6906985 B2).
Regarding claims 1 and 6, Shiraishi discloses a rotary machine diagnostic device (and method) for specifying a failure occurrence place and inferring a failure cause, regarding an unbalance occurrence event that a rotating part undergoes during a period when a rotary machine is operating (page 1: a system for diagnosing the vibration of equipment such as turbines, there is a system that measures the vibration of the equipment to be diagnosed and predicts and diagnoses abnormalities from the magnitude of vibration, outstanding frequency components, changes in vibration waveform over time), the device comprising
an input unit that receives calculation condition data and a measured state value of the rotating part (page 2: The vibration diagnostic device 10 acquires the vibration data (time history region data of the vibration waveform) measured by the vibration sensors 4A and 4B, and estimates the vibration state of the turbine 1 by system identification. The vibration diagnostic apparatus 10 diagnoses the vibration state of the turbine 1 in real time online based on the estimated vibration state.), the calculating condition data including reference data and an influence coefficient matrix (pages 5-6: the analysis model optimization unit 17A compares the vibration data (graph 100C) simulated by the analysis model with the vibration data (graph 100B) measured by the vibration sensors 4A and 4B in the actual turbine 1. , Determine whether the two are similar by a predetermined method. For example, the analysis model optimization unit 17A may calculate the correlation coefficient of the two waveform data and determine whether or not they are similar), and the measured state value including vibration data, a rotation speed (page 7: First, the actual machine simulation unit 17B simulates the vibration when the model 100A is operated at a predetermined rotation speed , and the optimized analysis model is the time history region data of the vibration in that case, the natural frequency, the damping constant, and so on, page 9: the data analysis unit 12 identifies the system based on the natural frequency, damping constant, and vibration mode calculated from the vibration data measured during the rotation speed change of the turbine 1), and phase calculation data serving as a basis for phase calculation ( page 10: the phase obtained from the vibration data when the turbine 1 is rotating at a certain rotation speed R while the rotation speed of the turbine 1 is increasing. The lower left graph is a graph showing the relationship between the frequency (horizontal axis) obtained from the vibration data when rotating at a certain rotation speed R and compliance. The graph on the right is a graph showing the relationship between the phase and the amplitude obtained from the vibration data when rotating at a certain rotation speed R.), a calculation unit that performs a calculation operation of identifying a vibration mode serving as a basis for the specification of the failure occurrence place and the inference of the failure cause, based on the calculation condition data and the measured state value which are received by the input unit, a storage unit in which the calculation condition data, the measured state value, and the vibration mode which is obtained by the calculation unit are loaded (By the way, the turbine 1 should vibrate with a large amplitude at a rotation speed corresponding to its natural frequency. Utilizing this property, the vibration characteristic estimation unit 18A estimates the natural frequency, damping constant, and vibration mode based on the vibration data measured by the actual machine while the rotation speed is increasing. The vibration characteristic estimation unit 18A records the estimated vibration characteristics (natural frequency, damping constant, vibration mode) in the storage unit 14.), and an output unit that outputs and displays the contents loaded in the storage unit (When the diagnosis result is not normal (step S14; No), the vibration state diagnosis unit 13 outputs the damage information to the input / output unit 15 together with the abnormality detection information (step S15'). The input / output unit 15 display, for example, information notifying the occurrence of an abnormality and information on damage that may have occurred at present corresponding to the abnormality on a display).
Other Prior Art
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure:
Takahama et al. (JP 2010048588 A) disclose an unbalance amount calculation method of a rotating body for calculating an unbalance amount of the rotating body based on vibration data of the rotating body and an influence coefficient indicating an influence of the unbalance amount of the rotating body on vibration, the unbalance amount calculation method comprising: obtaining an influence coefficient F (N) for each rotation speed in a rotation speed region of a predetermined range; detecting a rotation angle and vibration of a rotating body and calculating vibration data V(N) for each number of rotations; calculating an unbalance amount U (N) for each rotation speed based on vibration data V(N) for each rotation speed and an influence coefficient F (N) corresponding to each rotation speed; averaging the obtained unbalance amounts U (N) for the respective rotation numbers to calculate the unbalance amount U of the rotating body of vibration having the same frequency component as the frequency of the rotating body with respect to the reference position of the rotation angle, and is calculated for each number of rotations N.
Contact Information
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JOHN H LE whose telephone number is (571)272-2275. The examiner can normally be reached on Monday-Friday from 7:00am – 3:30pm Eastern Time.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Shelby A. Turner 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 http://pair-direct.uspto.gov. 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.
/JOHN H LE/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2857