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 .
Drawings
The drawings were received on 11/29/2023.These drawings are accepted by the examiner.
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 1-7 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 being integrated into a practical application and do not include additional elements that amount to significantly more than the judicial exception.
Utilizing the two step process adopted by the Supreme Court (Alice Corp vs CLS Bank Int'l, US Supreme Court, 110 USPQ2d 1976 (2014) and the recent 101 guideline, Federal Register Vol. 84, No., Jan 2019)), determination of the subject matter eligibility under the 35 USC 101 is as follows: Specifically, the Step 1 requires claim belongs to one of the four statutory categories (process, machine, manufacture, or composition of matter). If Step 1 is satisfied, then in the first part of Step 2A (Prong one), identification of any judicial recognized exceptions in the claim is made. If any limitation in the claim is identified as judicial recognized exception, then proceeding to the second part of Step 2A (Prong two), determination is made whether the identified judicial exception is being integrated into practical application. If the identified judicial exception is not integrated into a practical application, then in Step 2B, the claim is further evaluated to see if the additional elements, individually and in combination, provide "inventive concept" that would amount to significantly more than the judicial exception. If the element and combination of elements do not amount to significantly more than the judicial recognized exception itself, then the claim is ineligible under the 35 USC 101.
Looking at the claims, the claims satisfy the first part of the test 1A, namely the claims are directed to one of the four statutory class, apparatus and method. In Step 2A Prong one, we next identify any judicial exceptions in the claims. In Claim 1 (as a representative claim), we recognize that the limitations " A method for indirectly measuring gravity, with instruments used comprising a precision inclinometer, a precision clock, a computer, and a positioning device; the method comprising: storing astronomical ephemeris in the computer; obtaining current time from the precision clock; obtaining position from the positioning device; calculating a celestial body's current position based on the astronomical ephemeris, current time and its position; measuring a direction of gravity θ.sub.1, θ.sub.2, . . . , θ.sub.k+1 with the precision inclinometer at time t.sub.1, t.sub.2, . . . , t.sub.k+1; obtaining a direction change of gravitational acceleration: Δθ.sub.i =θ.sub.i+1−θ.sub.i where i=1 . . . k; calculating acceleration vectors V.sub.1, V.sub.2, . . . , V.sub.k+1 generated by resultant gravitational forces of related celestial bodies at time t.sub.1, t.sub.2, . . . , t.sub.k+1 according to their coordinates [xyz] and positions; calculating the direction change of acceleration:….” as they are directed to a mathematical concept by reciting a mathematical formula or calculation that is used to calculate acceleration vectors V1, V2 ……Vk+1,….. Thus, the claim recites a mathematical relationship, formula and calculation to calculate acceleration vectors, the direction change of the acceleration, build equation to calculate the direction change of gravitational acceleration, etc…Thus, these limitations recite a concept that falls into “the mathematical concepts” group of abstract ideas.
Note that, in this example, the step of obtaining a direction of change of gravitational acceleration: Δθ.sub.i = θ.sub.i+1−θ.sub.i where i=1 . . . k; and calculating acceleration vectors V.sub.1, V.sub.2” are a mathematical concept. Similar rejections are made for other independent and dependent claims. With the identification of abstract ideas, we proceed to Step 2A, Prong two, where with additional elements and taken as a whole, we evaluate whether the identified abstract idea is being integrated into a practical application.
In Step 2A, Prong two, the claims additionally recite "building an equation system for calculating the direction change of gravitational acceleration as follows… " , deducing a gravity measurement at the position to be measured as follows: using its coordinates to calculate approximate value [gx0gy0gz0] of an acceleration vector generated by the Earth at the current position” show that they are mathematical concept supporting the abstract idea. As such, the abstract idea is not integrated into a practical application. Consequently, with the identified abstract idea not being integrated into a practical application, we proceed to Step 2B and evaluate whether the additional elements provide "inventive concept" that would amount to significantly more than the abstract idea.
In Step 2B, the claims additionally recite "taking the approximate value as an initial solution to calculate an estimated direction change of gravitational acceleration; utilizing observed direction change of gravitational acceleration and relevant equation system to iterate until an error converges to be less than an error limit, thereby getting a result of gravity measurement.," but said limitation, recited at high level of generality, merely is directed to data collection activity and general purpose computer that is well-understood, routine and conventional. As such, the claims do not provide additional elements that would amount to significantly more than the abstract idea.
In Summary, the claims recite abstract idea without being integrated into a practical application, and do not provide additional elements that would amount to significantly more than the abstract idea. As such, taken as a whole, the claims are ineligible under the 35 USC 101.
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 1-7 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.
Regarding claim 1, the term “assuming” recited in line 16 is not a positive limitation which renders the claim unclear, confusing and thereby renders the claim indefinite. Clarification and correction are required.
Claim 1 recites the limitation "the Earth’s gravitational force” in line 16. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
Claims 2-7 are also rejected as being dependent from a rejected base claim.
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
US Patent 5,924,056 discloses the present invention relates to a device and a method for observing gravitation.
US Patent 6,658,935 to Feinberg disclose a complemented absolute/relative full-tensor gravity gradiometer system utilizes an absolute gravity instrument and a relative gravity gradiometer to provide respective outputs corresponding to components of the gravity gradient tensor to verify the relative gravity gradiometer and effect correction/compensation thereof.
US Patent 8,266,959 to Lin discloses the present disclosure relates to identifying the axial orientation of a multi-axial accelerometer as it is mounted on a device to be analyzed. More particularly, the present disclosure relates to the use of indicia to identify the axial orientation of a multi-axial accelerometer as it is mounted on a device to be analyzed.
US Patent 10,330,820 to Meyer, discloses a system including a gravimeter for measuring the gravitational field of the Earth without an inertial reference. The system comprises a platform having an upper surface on which is disposed at least one pair of accelerometers. The sensitive axis of each accelerometer of the at least one pair of accelerometers is arranged on the platform to measure plumb gravity.
US Patent 10,436,934 to Hemminki discloses a method for generating an estimation of earth's gravity. The method includes: obtaining one or more acceleration data values and one or more orientation data values over a period of time; generating magnitude of orientation change from the orientation data values
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JACQUES M SAINT SURIN whose telephone number is (571)272-2206. The examiner can normally be reached Mon to Frid (Flex) 10:00 to 7:00.
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, JOHN BREENE can be reached at 571 272 4107. 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.
/JACQUES M SAINT SURIN/Examiner, Art Unit 2855