DETAILED ACTION
The following is a non-final office action upon examination of application number 18/540452.
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 .
Continued Examination Under 37 CFR 1.114
A request for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, including the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e), was filed in this application after final rejection. Since this application is eligible for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114. Applicant's submission filed on 6/1/2026 has been entered.
Response to Amendment
Claims 1, 2, 4, 6-13, 15, and 17-20 are pending in the application and have been examined on the merits discussed below.
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, 2, 4, 6-13, 15, and 17-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 101 because the claimed invention is directed to a judicial exception (i.e., a law of nature, a natural phenomenon, or an abstract idea) without significantly more.
(Step 1) Claims 1, 2, 4, and 6-11 are directed to a non-transitory computer-readable medium, which is a manufacture, and this a statutory category of invention. Claims 12, 13, 15, and 17-19 are directed to a system comprising at least one processor; thus the system comprises a device or set of devices, and therefore, is directed to a machine which is a statutory category of invention. Claim 20 is directed to a method; thus this claim is directed to a process, which is one of the statutory categories of invention.
(Step 2A) The claims recite an abstract idea instructing how to display subcomponent health indicators and mange work orders which is described by claim limitations reciting:
receiving first sensor data of a first time period …, the first sensor data from… the gearbox subcomponents and the generator subcomponents;
determining health indicators for the gearbox subcomponents, the health indicators corresponding to alerts for current or predicted problems of the gearbox subcomponents with varying lead time, the alerts including a low severity risk alert, a medium severity risk alert, and a high severity risk alert, the alerts being generated by one or more … models trained on second sensor data of a second time period … the gearbox subcomponents of at least some of the multiple wind turbines;
determining health indicators for the generator subcomponents, the health indicators corresponding to alerts for current or predicted problems of the generator subcomponents with varying lead time, the alerts including a low severity risk alert, a medium severity risk alert, and a high severity risk alert, the alerts being generated by one or more ... models trained on third sensor data of a third time period, from … the generator subcomponents of at least some of the multiple wind turbines;
displaying a list of at least some of the multiple wind turbines, the health indicators for the gearbox subcomponents and the health indicators for the generator subcomponents, the list being sortable by the health indicators for the gearbox subcomponents and/or by the health indicators for the generator subcomponents, and the list being filterable by alerts for the gearbox subcomponents and/or alerts for the generator subcomponents;
receiving a selection of a wind turbine, the wind turbine having a health indicator for a gearbox subcomponent or a generator subcomponent corresponding to either a low severity risk alert, a medium severity risk alert, or a high severity risk alert;
receiving alert status and date information for the gearbox subcomponent or the generator subcomponent of the wind turbine;
displaying the health indicator, the alert status and the date information for the gearbox subcomponent or the generator subcomponent of the wind turbine;
receiving a request to initiate a work order for the gearbox subcomponent or the generator subcomponent of the wind turbine, the work order for a condition of the gearbox subcomponent or the generator subcomponent of the wind turbine;
receiving fourth sensor data of a fourth time period from the wind turbine, the fourth sensor data from … the gearbox subcomponent or the generator subcomponent of the wind turbine;
determining, based at least in part on the fourth sensor data, that the condition has normalized; and
… closing or causing to be closed the work order.
The identified limitations in the claims describing generating and displaying health information for wind turbines (i.e., the abstract idea) fall within the “Certain Methods of Organizing Human Activity” grouping of abstract ideas, which covers fundamental economic practices. Dependent claims 2, 4, 6, 7, 9, 10, 11, 13, 15, 17, 18, and 19, recite limitations that further narrow the abstract idea (i.e., generating and displaying health information for wind turbines); therefore, these claims are also found to recite an abstract idea.
This judicial exception is not integrated into a practical application because additional elements such as the non-transitory computer readable medium comprising executable instructions, the executable instructions being executable by one or more processors in claim 1, and the at least one processor; and memory containing instructions, the instructions being executable by the at least one processor in claim 12, do not add a meaningful limitation to the abstract idea since these elements are only broadly applied to the abstract ideas at a high level of generality; thus, none of recited hardware offers a meaningful limitation beyond generally linking the abstract idea to a particular technological environment, in this case, implementation via a computer/processor. Additionally, reciting that certain steps are performed “automatically” only adds computer implementation of the abstract idea.
Additional elements such as receiving first sensor data … from multiple wind turbines in one or more wind turbine farms in one or more geographies, the first sensor data from first sensors…; data of a second time period from sensors monitoring…; sending the work order to a work order system; and receiving fourth sensor data …, the fourth sensor data from one or more fourth sensors monitoring… do not yield an improvement in the functioning of the computer itself, nor do they yield improvements to a technical field or technology; further, these additional elements only add insignificant extra-solution activities (data gathering). Additional elements reciting a wind turbine including a gearbox and a generator, the gearbox including a first gearbox bearing subcomponent, a gear set subcomponent, and a second gearbox bearing subcomponent, and the generator including a first generator bearing subcomponent, a rotor subcomponent, and a second generator bearing subcomponent do not provide an improvement and only add machinery in its ordinary capacity to apply the abstract idea.
Additional elements reciting determining … by applying the machine learning model trained … and … alerts being generated by a machine learning model… do not improve the computer or technology; these additional elements are recited at a high level of generality and only generally link the abstract idea to a technological environment (machine learning). Additional elements in claim 8 related to a zoomable and scrollable map only generally link the abstract idea to a technological environment and fail to provide an improvement to the computer or technology. Accordingly, these additional element do not integrate the abstract idea into a practical application because they do not impose any meaningful limits on practicing the abstract idea.
(Step 2B) The claims do not include additional elements that are sufficient to amount to significantly more than the judicial exception because as discussed above with respect to integration of the abstract idea into a practical application, the hardware additional elements amount to no more than mere instructions to apply the exception using a generic computer component (see Spec. [0053][0207][0223]. Mere instructions to apply an exception using a generic computer component cannot provide an inventive concept. Additional elements such as receiving first sensor data … from multiple wind turbines in one or more wind turbine farms in one or more geographies, the first sensor data from first sensors…; data of a second time period from sensors monitoring…; sending the work order to a work order system; and receiving fourth sensor data …, the fourth sensor data from one or more fourth sensors monitoring… do not yield an improvement in the functioning of the computer itself, nor do they yield improvements to a technical field or technology; further, these additional elements only add insignificant extra-solution activities (data gathering). Additional elements reciting a wind turbine including a gearbox and a generator, the gearbox including a first gearbox bearing subcomponent, a gear set subcomponent, and a second gearbox bearing subcomponent, and the generator including a first generator bearing subcomponent, a rotor subcomponent, and a second generator bearing subcomponent do not provide an improvement and only add machinery in its ordinary capacity to apply the abstract idea. Additional elements reciting determining … by applying the machine learning model trained … and … alerts being generated by a machine learning model… do not improve the computer or technology; these additional elements are recited at a high level of generality and only generally link the abstract idea to a technological environment. Additional elements in claim 8 related to a zoomable and scrollable map only generally link the abstract idea to a technological environment and fail to provide an improvement to the computer or technology. Additionally, with respect to data gathering/transmission limitations, the courts have recognized the use of computers to receive and transmit data as a well-understood, routine, and conventional, OIP Techs., Inc., v. Amazon.com, Inc., 788 F.3d 1359, 1363, 115 USPQ2d 1090, 1093 (Fed. Cir. 2015) (sending messages over a network); buySAFE, Inc. v. Google, Inc., 765 F.3d 1350, 1355, 112 USPQ2d 1093, 1096 (Fed. Cir. 2014) (computer receives and sends information over a network). In addition, when taken as an ordered combination, the ordered combination adds nothing that is not already present as when the elements are taken individually. There is no indication that the combination of elements improves the functioning of a computer or improves any other technology.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 6/1/2026 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
With respect to the rejection under 35 USC 101, Applicant argues that the claims do not recite an abstract idea.
Examiner respectfully disagrees. The courts have used the phrases "fundamental economic practices" or "fundamental economic principles" to describe concepts relating to the economy and commerce. The term "fundamental" is not used in the sense of necessarily being "old" or "well-known." See, e.g., OIP Techs., Inc. v. Amazon.com, Inc., 788 F.3d 1359, 1364, 115 U.S.P.Q.2d 1090, 1092 (Fed Cir. 2015) (a new method of price optimization was found to be a fundamental economic concept); In re Smith, 815 F.3d 816, 818-19, 118 USPQ2d 1245, 1247 (Fed. Cir. 2016) (describing a new set of rules for conducting a wagering game as a "fundamental economic practice"); In re Greenstein, 774 Fed. Appx. 661, 664, 2019 USPQ2d 212400 (Fed Cir. 2019) (non-precedential) (claims to a new method of allocating returns to different investors in an investment fund was a fundamental economic concept). Examiner maintains that the present claims describing managing risk of failure and scheduling work orders is a concept related to commerce.
With respect to the rejection under 35 USC 101, Applicant argues that the claims recite additional elements that integrate the abstract idea into a practical application.
Examiner respectfully disagrees. The generation of alerts related to subcomponent health and initiation of work orders does not provide a practical application. Additional elements such as receiving first sensor data … from multiple wind turbines in one or more wind turbine farms in one or more geographies, the first sensor data from first sensors…; data of a second time period from sensors monitoring…; sending the work order to a work order system; and receiving fourth sensor data …, the fourth sensor data from one or more fourth sensors monitoring… do not yield an improvement in the functioning of the computer itself, nor do they yield improvements to a technical field or technology; further, these additional elements only add insignificant extra-solution activities (data gathering). Additionally, reciting that certain steps are performed “automatically” only adds computer implementation of the abstract idea.
With respect to the rejection under 35 USC 101, Applicant argues that the claims recite additional elements that amount to significantly more.
Examiner respectfully disagrees. Additional elements such as receiving first sensor data … from multiple wind turbines in one or more wind turbine farms in one or more geographies, the first sensor data from first sensors…; data of a second time period from sensors monitoring…; sending the work order to a work order system; and receiving fourth sensor data …, the fourth sensor data from one or more fourth sensors monitoring… do not yield an improvement in the functioning of the computer itself, nor do they yield improvements to a technical field or technology; further, these additional elements only add insignificant extra-solution activities (data gathering). Additional elements reciting a wind turbine including a gearbox and a generator, the gearbox including a first gearbox bearing subcomponent, a gear set subcomponent, and a second gearbox bearing subcomponent, and the generator including a first generator bearing subcomponent, a rotor subcomponent, and a second generator bearing subcomponent do not provide an improvement and only add machinery in its ordinary capacity to apply the abstract idea. Additional elements reciting determining … by applying the machine learning model trained … and … alerts being generated by a machine learning model… do not improve the computer or technology; these additional elements are recited at a high level of generality and only generally link the abstract idea to a technological environment. Additional elements in claim 8 related to a zoomable and scrollable map only generally link the abstract idea to a technological environment and fail to provide an improvement to the computer or technology. Additionally, with respect to data gathering/transmission limitations, the courts have recognized the use of computers to receive and transmit data as a well-understood, routine, and conventional, OIP Techs., Inc., v. Amazon.com, Inc., 788 F.3d 1359, 1363, 115 USPQ2d 1090, 1093 (Fed. Cir. 2015) (sending messages over a network); buySAFE, Inc. v. Google, Inc., 765 F.3d 1350, 1355, 112 USPQ2d 1093, 1096 (Fed. Cir. 2014) (computer receives and sends information over a network). In addition, when taken as an ordered combination, the ordered combination adds nothing that is not already present as when the elements are taken individually.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
US 2011/0137586 (Jiang) – discloses the monitoring of wind turbine health.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ALAN TORRICO-LOPEZ whose telephone number is (571)272-3247. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 10AM-5PM.
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, Beth Boswell can be reached at (571)272-6737. 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.
/ALAN TORRICO-LOPEZ/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3625
Prosecution Insights