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. Status of the Application 2. Claim 1-10 have been examined in this application. This communication is the first action on the merits. Drawings 3. The drawings filed on 12/5 /23 are acceptable for examination proceedings. Claim Interpretation 4. The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(f): (f) Element in Claim for a Combination. – An element in a claim for a combination may be expressed as a means or step for performing a specified function without the recital of structure, material, or acts in support thereof, and such claim shall be construed to cover the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification and equivalents thereof. The following is a quotation of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph: An element in a claim for a combination may be expressed as a means or step for performing a specified function without the recital of structure, material, or acts in support thereof, and such claim shall be construed to cover the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification and equivalents thereof. This application includes one or more claim limitations that do not use the word “means,” but are nonetheless being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, because the claim limitation(s) uses a generic placeholder that is coupled with functional language without reciting sufficient structure to perform the recited function and the generic placeholder is not preceded by a structural modifier. Such claim limitation(s) is/are: a storage configured to store, an abnormality detecting unit configured to detect the abnormality; a data acquiring unit configured to acquire the abnormality specifying information; and a procedure acquiring unit configured to acquire in claim 1; an input receiving unit configured to receive an input in claim 2; the data acquiring unit is configured to acquire , the abnormality detecting unit in claim 3; a display control unit configured to cause a display device to display , the procedure acquiring unit in claim 4 ; data acquiring unit is configured to acquire , a possibility determining unit configured to determine , the abnormality detecting unit , a notification generating unit configured to generate notification data in claim 5 ; a communication control unit configured to transmit , the notification generating unit in claim 6 , the data acquiring unit, and the procedure acquiring unit, the abnormality detecting unit, the abnormality detecting unit in claim 9. Because this/these claim limitation(s) is/are being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, it/they is/are being interpreted to cover the corresponding structure described in the specification as performing the claimed function, and equivalents thereof. Also as noted, the specification disclosed “In the present embodiment, the processor 62 functions as a possibility determining unit 84 , a notification generating unit 86 , and a communication control unit 88 , in addition to the abnormality detecting unit 74 , the input receiving unit 76 , the data acquiring unit 78 , the procedure acquiring unit 80 , and the display control unit 82 described above.” (Para. [0072] of Pub: 2024/0280979) , also further disclose “However, the present invention is not limited thereto, and at least one of the components of the abnormality processing device 90 or 100 (i.e., the storage 64 , the abnormality detecting unit 74 , the input receiving unit 76 , the data acquiring unit 78 , the procedure acquiring unit 80 , the display control unit 82 , the possibility determining unit 84 , the notification generating unit 86 , and the communication control unit 88 ) may be installed in the controller 24 .” (Para. [0108] of Pub: 2024/0280979). Thus, the claimed different units are supported by the specification and are in accordance with MPEP. If applicant does not intend to have this/these limitation(s) interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, applicant may: (1) amend the claim limitation(s) to avoid it/them being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph (e.g., by reciting sufficient structure to perform the claimed function); or (2) present a sufficient showing that the claim limitation(s) recite(s) sufficient structure to perform the claimed function so as to avoid it/them being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph. 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. 5 . Claims 1 -1 0 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 101 because the claimed invention is directed to abstract idea without significantly more as fully discussed below . 6 . Regarding Independent claim 1, and 10 : Step 1: Yes Claim 1 is drawn to an abnormality processing device , claim 1 0 is drawn to a method , therefore claim 1 , and 1 0 falls under one of four categories of statutory subject matter (process/method, machines/products/apparatus, manufactures, and compositions of matter ). Step 2A, Prong 1: Yes Independent claim 1 , and 10 are directed to a judicially recognized exception of an abstract idea without significantly more. Claim 1 , and 10 recites claim limitation of “ detect the abnormality, based on operation condition data of the robot system ” that under their broadest reasonable interpretation, enumerates a mental concept. A human can mentally perform a abnormality detection using operation data by using pen and paper and comparing a operation data with threshold. Thus, these claimed functions are the judicial exceptions that are no more than a mental abstract idea (See MPEP 2106.04(a)(2)(III)) . Step 2A, Prong 2: No Claim 1 , and 10 recites additional limitation of “ store a plurality of the procedures for …. ; “ acquire the abnormality specifying information; acquire the procedure corresponding to the abnormality specifying information” that fails to integrate the abstract idea into a practical application. The step of “storing” , and “acquiring” is a form of insignificant extra-solution activity, such that data gathering is necessary for the use of the judicial exception (e.g., data are needed to process the mental concept of process execution). The comb ination of these additional functions does not integrate the abstract idea into a practical application because they do not impose any meaningful limits on practicing the abstract idea ( See MPEP 2106.05(g)). Step 2B: No The additional functions that are a form of insignificant extra-solution activity, do not amount to significantly more than an abstract idea because the court decisions have determined that this additional element to be well-understood, routine, and conventional when claimed in a merely generic manner for data storing, collecting, receiving, transmitting, outputting, or displaying (See MPEP § 2106.05(d)(II)(i: Receiving or transmitting data over a network, e.g., using the Internet to gather data, Symantec, 838 F.3d at 1321, 120 USPQ2d at 1362 (utilizing an intermediary computer to forward information) or (iv: Storing and retrieving information, Versata Dev. Group, Inc. v. SAP Am., Inc., 793 F.3d 1306, 1334, 115 USPQ2d 1681, 1701 (Fed. Cir. 2015))) . As such, claim 1, and 1 0 are not patent eligible . 7 . Dependent claims 2- 7 : Step 1: Y es Claim 2- 6 are drawn to an abnormality processing device , and 7 drawn to a network system. T herefore claim 2- 7 are falls under one of four categories of statutory subject matter (process/method, machines/products/apparatus, manufactures, and compositions of matter). Nonetheless, dependent claims 2- 7 are also ineligible for the same reasons given with respect to claim 1. Step 2A, Prong 1: Yes Dependent claim 2- 7 are directed to a judicially recognized exception of an abstract idea without significantly more. Claim 5 recites the limitation of “ determine whether or not the abnormality detected by the abnormality detecting unit can be dealt with ” that under their broadest reasonable interpretation, enumerates a mental concept. A human can mentally perform specifies the pattern, evaluating and calculation function of the claimed limitation as discussed above. Thus, these claimed functions are the judicial exceptions that are no more than a mental abstract idea (See MPEP 2106.04(a)(2)(III)). Step 2A, Prong 2: No Claim 4 recites additional limitation of “ a display device to display the procedure acquired by the procedure acquiring unit, as an image ….. ” ; Claim 5 recites additional limitation of “ a notification generating unit configured to generate notification data for notifying ” . The functions of displaying , notifying is forms of insignificant input or output solution activities (i.e., extra solution), such that data outputting are necessary for the use of the judicial exception (See MPEP 2106.05(g)). The combination of these additional elements does not integrate the abstract idea into a practical application because they do not impose any meaningful limits on practicing the abstract idea. Claim 2 recites additional limitation of “ receive an input of the procedure and the abnormality specifying information, wherein the storage is configured to store the procedure and the abnormality specifying information ” ; Claim 3 recites additional limitation of “ acquire , as the abnormality specifying information, the abnormality identification code ” ; Claim 5 recites additional limitation of “ acquire possibility determination information for determining whether or not the abnormality can be dealt with ” ; Claim 6 recites additional limitation of “ transmit the notification data generated by the notification generating unit to an external device ” that fails to integrate the abstract idea into a practical application. The step of “storing” and “receiving” , “acquire” is a form of insignificant extra-solution activity , such that data gathering , and transmitting is necessary for the use of the judicial exception (e.g., data are needed to process the mental concept of process execution) . The combination of these additional functions does not integrate the abstract idea into a practical application because they do not impose any meaningful limits on practicing the abstract idea ( See MPEP 2106.05(g)). Step 2B: No The additional functions that are a form of insignificant extra-solution activity, do not amount to significantly more than an abstract idea because the court decisions have determined that this additional element to be well-understood, routine, and conventional when claimed in a merely generic manner for data storing , collecting, receiving, transmitting, outputting, or displaying (See MPEP § 2106.05(d)(II)(i: Receiving or transmitting data over a network, e.g., using the Internet to gather data, Symantec, 838 F.3d at 1321, 120 USPQ2d at 1362 (utilizing an intermediary computer to forward information) or (iv: Storing and retrieving information, Versata Dev. Group, Inc. v. SAP Am., Inc., 793 F.3d 1306, 1334, 115 USPQ2d 1681, 1701 (Fed. Cir. 2015))). As such, dependent claim 2- 7 are not patent eligible . Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102 8 . 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. 9 . Claims 1, 10 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a) (1) as being anticipated by Jung (US PG Pub: 2013/0090760 ). 1 0 . Regarding claim 1 , Jung discloses: An abnormality processing device configured to provide a procedure for dealing with an abnormality which occurs in a robot system (e.g., A robot includes a robot application 10 and an apparatus 100 for managing the robot components. The robot application 10 includes a plurality of robot components 11, 12, and 13, each component has an identifier. The apparatus 100 includes a component monitoring unit 102, a breakdown decision unit 104, a recovery policy management unit 106, and a breakdown recovery unit 108) ( Para. [0031], Fig. 1-2) , the abnormality processing device comprising: a storage configured to store a plurality of the procedures for dealing with a plurality of types of the abnormalities respectively, in association with abnormality specifying information for specifying the abnormalities (e.g., The recovery policy management unit 106 serves to choose a recovery policy model necessary to recover the breakdown using the breakdown information provided from the breakdown decision unit 104. The recovery policy management unit 160 may include multiple recovery policy nodes configured to have a tree structure as illustrated in FIG. 2 ) ( Para. [0034], Fig. 2, also refer to [ 0049]-[0050] ) ; an abnormality detecting unit configured to detect the abnormality, based on operation condition data of the robot system (e.g., The breakdown decision unit 104 analyzes the monitoring results of the robot components 11, 12, and 13 provided form the component monitoring unit 102 to judge whether or not any the robot components 11, 12, and 13 are broken down in operation S102. When the breakdown decision unit 104 judges that any robot components 11, 12, and 13 are broken down, it generates breakdown information and provides the same to the recovery policy management unit 106 in operation S104. ) (Para. [00 47 ]) ; a data acquiring unit configured to acquire the abnormality specifying information on the abnormality detected by the abnormality detecting unit (e.g., The breakdown information includes, for example, a type of a breakdown, the importance of a breakdown, an identifier of a component which has caused a breakdown, and the like. ) (Para. [00 48 ]) ; and a procedure acquiring unit configured to acquire the procedure corresponding to the abnormality specifying information acquired by the data acquiring unit, from the plurality of procedures stored in the storage (e.g., The recovery policy management unit 106 serves to choose a recovery policy model necessary to recover the breakdown using the breakdown information provided from the breakdown decision unit 104. The recovery policy management unit 160 may include multiple recovery policy nodes configured to have a tree structure as illustrated in FIG. 2) (Para. [0034]) . 1 1 . Regarding claim 1 0 , Claim 1 0 recites a method that implement the device of claim 1, with substantially the same limitations, respectively. Therefore the rejection applied to claim 1 , also applies to claim 10, respectively . Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103 12 . The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 103 which forms the basis for all obviousness rejections set forth in this Office action: A patent for a claimed invention may not be obtained, notwithstanding that the claimed invention is not identically disclosed as set forth in section 102, if the differences between the claimed invention and the prior art are such that the claimed invention as a whole would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which the claimed invention pertains. Patentability shall not be negated by the manner in which the invention was made. 13 . Claim 2 , 4, 7- 9 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Jung in view of Tanaka (Pub: 2021/0 178615 ). 14 . Regarding claim 2 , Jung teaches the abnormality processing device according to claim 1, but does not specifically teach further comprising an input receiving unit configured to receive an input of the procedure and the abnormality specifying information, wherein the storage is configured to store the procedure and the abnormality specifying information received by the input receiving unit in association with each other. Tanaka teaches further comprising an input receiving unit configured to receive an input of the procedure and the abnormality specifying information, wherein the storage is configured to store the procedure and the abnormality specifying information received by the input receiving unit in association with each other (e.g., The user interface 103 includes the display 62 for displaying the various kinds of information, and a display control unit 61 for controlling a displaying state of the various kinds of information sent from the abnormality diagnosis device 102 . The user interface 103 further includes an input unit 63 on which the operator executes various kinds of operations. When the operator inputs maintenance data indicating that maintenance has been made for the robot 101 via the input unit 63 , the user interface 103 writes the input maintenance data to a maintenance history DB 32 (a maintenance history storage unit) described below. The user interface 103 may be a tablet terminal, for example) (Para. [0030], also refer to Para, [0034] Fig. 1 , Fig. 9 includes abnormality information and maintenance history as a specific procedure related to abnormality level) ) . Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, having teachings of Jung and Tanaka before him/her, to modify the teachings of Jung to include the input receiving unit teaching of Tanaka in order to receive the maintenance data and store in to maintenance history DB ) (Para. [00 30 ]). 1 5 . Regarding claim 4 , Jung teaches the abnormality processing device according to claim 1, but does not specifically teach further comprising a display control unit configured to cause a display device to display the procedure acquired by the procedure acquiring unit, as an image. Tanaka teaches further comprising a display control unit configured to cause a display device to display the procedure acquired by the procedure acquiring unit, as an image ( e.g., The display control unit 61 of the user interface 103 receives the display data of the abnormality diagnosis image 70 , and displays the abnormality diagnosis image 70 as illustrated in FIG. 9 on the display 62 . The operator, when seeing the image displayed on the display 62 , can recognize that the abnormality has been detected in the speed reducer 14 a in which the disturbance torque greatly fluctuates, and the probability is thus high that the speed reducer 14 b operated in association with the speed reducer 14 a has an abnormality ) (Para. [0086], Fig. 9 -10 includes abnormality information and maintenance history as a specific procedure related to abnormality level) . Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, having teachings of Jung and Tanaka before him/her, to modify the teachings of Jung to include the display control unit teaching of Tanaka in order to controlling a displaying state of the various kinds of information sent from the abnormality diagnosis device ) (Para. [00 30 ]). 1 6 . Regarding claim 7 , Jung teaches a network system comprising: a robot system including a robot [ and a controller configured to control the robot ] ; and the abnormality processing device according to claim 1 (Refer to Citation of claim 1) . Jung does not specifically teach and a controller configured to control the robot . Tanaka teaches and a controller configured to control the robot (e.g., The action control unit 15 causes the respective speed reducers 14 to operate according to an action program set by the teaching described above, and controls the respective robot arms and the joint shafts mounted on the robot 101 to perform necessary actions) (Para. [0026], Fig. 1). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, having teachings of Jung and Tanaka before him/her, to modify the teachings of Jung to include the teaching of Tanaka in order to c ontrols the respective robot arms and the joint shafts mounted on the robot 101 to perform necessary actions (Para. [00 26 ]) . 1 7 . Regarding claim 8 , the combination of Jung and Tanaka discloses the network system according to claim 7 , wherein Tanaka teaches comprising a preventive maintenance device communicably connected to the controller via a communication network (e.g., The communication unit 21 communicates with the communication unit 11 included in the robot 101 . The communication unit 21 receives the work data of the robot 101 sent from the robot 101 , and outputs the work data to the work history DB 35 . The communication unit 21 also receives the disturbance torque and the sensor data sent from the robot 101 , and outputs the received data to the sensor DB 31 ) (Para. [0037]) , and configured to acquire the operation condition data from the controller, wherein the abnormality processing device is installed in the preventive maintenance device (Refer to Fig. 1 the abnormality diagnosis device 102 is interpreted as predictive maintenance device which include element 22 as abnormality level determination unit as a claimed abnormality processing device and also include maintenance history database ) . Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, having teachings of Jung and Tanaka before him/her, to modify the teachings of Jung to include the teaching of Tanaka in order to c ontrols the respective robot arms and the joint shafts mounted on the robot 101 to perform necessary actions (Para. [00 26 ]) . 18 . Regarding claim 9 , the combination of Jung and Tanaka discloses the network system according to claim 7 , wherein Tanaka further comprising a preventive maintenance device communicably connected to the controller via a communication network, and configured to acquire the operation condition data from the controller (e.g., The communication unit 21 communicates with the communication unit 11 included in the robot 101 . The communication unit 21 receives the work data of the robot 101 sent from the robot 101 , and outputs the work data to the work history DB 35 . The communication unit 21 also receives the disturbance torque and the sensor data sent from the robot 101 , and outputs the received data to the sensor DB 31 ) (Para. [0037]) , wherein the storage, the data acquiring unit, and the procedure acquiring unit of the abnormality processing device are installed in the preventive maintenance device (Refer to Fig. 1 the abnormality diagnosis device 102 is interpreted as predictive maintenance device which include element 22 as abnormality level determination unit as a claimed abnormality processing device and also include maintenance history database) , while the abnormality detecting unit of the abnormality processing device is installed in the controller, and wherein the controller provides the abnormality specifying information of the abnormality detected by the abnormality detecting unit to the preventive maintenance device via the communication network (e.g., The communication unit 11 sends the work data of the robot 101, the disturbance torque calculated by the disturbance torque calculation unit 12, and various kinds of sensor data detected by the sensor 13 to the abnormality diagnosis device 102. The respective functions that the robot 101 has can be implemented in single or plural processing circuits. The respective processing circuits include a programmed processing device, such as a processing device including an electric circuit. The processing device includes an application- specific integrated circuit (ASIC) configured to execute the functions that the robot 101 has, and conventional circuit components) (Para. [0028]-[0029]) . Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, having teachings of Jung and Tanaka before him/her, to modify the teachings of Jung to include the teaching of Tanaka in order to c ontrols the respective robot arms and the joint shafts mounted on the robot 101 to perform necessary actions (Para. [00 26 ]) . 1 9 . Claim 3 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Jung in view of Hvass (Pub: 2021/0 237269 ). 20 . Regarding claim 3 , Jung teaches the abnormality processing device according to claim 1, but does not specifically teach wherein the abnormality specifying information includes abnormality identification codes individually assigned to the plurality of types of the abnormalities, and wherein the data acquiring unit is configured to acquire, as the abnormality specifying information, the abnormality identification code assigned to the abnormality detected by the abnormality detecting unit . Hvass teaches wherein the abnormality specifying information includes abnormality identification codes individually assigned to the plurality of types of the abnormalities, and wherein the data acquiring unit is configured to acquire, as the abnormality specifying information, the abnormality identification code assigned to the abnormality detected by the abnormality detecting unit (e.g . , Meanwhile, (i.e., concurrently and/or before/after) the robots/robotics systems may be performing the various tasks that are assigned to them. If the robots/robotics systems are unable to complete a task, they may generate an error code or intervention request. In some embodiments, error codes may be generated in accordance with a library of known errors/error codes . In other embodiment, error codes may be generated based on the type of error detected (i.e. errors in the vision system, picking system, singulation system, etc.). In one embodiment, once error codes are received 512 the process may apply 514 a translation that enables technicians at one or more client devices to triage the error associated with the error code and potentially resolve it ) (Para. [0098]). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, having teachings of Jung and Hvass before him/her, to modify the teachings of Jung to include the abnormality identification code teaching of Hvass in order to triage the error associated with the error code and potentially resolve it (Para. [00 98 ]). Allowable Subject Matter Claim 5 is objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims and when outstanding 35 U.S.C 101 abstract idea rejection is overcome. Claim 6 is objected due to its dependency over the claim 5. Pertinent Art Cited The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. HASHIGUCHI (Pub: 20 22/0072703 ) disclose A robot system includes a robot; a peripheral device disposed around the robot; a control unit configured to operate at least the robot based on a program; a suspension unit configured to suspend a plurality of sequential operations performed by the robot in conjunction with the peripheral device based on an operation program if an irregular state occurs in the peripheral device; and a simulator. The simulator is configured to generate a recovery program based at least on a robot state information of the robot at the time of suspending the operation due to an occurrence of the irregular state, in which the control unit is further configured to cause the robot to operate with respect to the peripheral device based on the recovery program so that an operation by the suspended operation program becomes resumable (Abstract). Sun (Pub: 2022/ 0024038 ) disclose robot diagnosis and more particularly, to a method for diagnosing a robot, device and server (Para. [0001]). Tanaka (Pub: 2021/0229282 ) disclose an abnormality determination device and an abnormality determination method of determining an abnormality caused in an apparatus such as a robot (Para. [0001]) . Kuno (Pub: 2018/0133901 ) disclose a failure diagnosis device applicable to a mechanical device provided with a motor as a source to drive a motion axis, and to a method thereof (Para. [0001]) Conclusion Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to FILLIN "Examiner name" \* MERGEFORMAT JIGNESHKUMAR C PATEL whose telephone number is FILLIN "Phone number" \* MERGEFORMAT (571)270-0698 . The examiner can normally be reached FILLIN "Work Schedule?" \* MERGEFORMAT Monday - Friday, 7:00 AM - 5:00 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, FILLIN "SPE Name?" \* MERGEFORMAT Kenneth M. Lo can be reached at FILLIN "SPE Phone?" \* MERGEFORMAT (571)272-9774 . 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. /JIGNESHKUMAR C PATEL/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2116