DETAILED ACTION
Claims 16-30 are pending. Claims 16-23, 28-30 are amended.
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 .
Response to Amendment
This office action is responsive to the amendment filed on July 25, 2025. As directed by the amendment: claims 16-23, 28-30 have been amended. Thus, claims 16-30 are presently pending in this application.
Applicant’s amendment to the drawings has overcome the drawing objections.
Applicant’s amendment to the claims has overcome the 35 USC §102(a)(1) and §103 rejections, however all claims remain rejected under 35 USC §102(a)(1) or §103.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to the claims have been considered but are moot because the new ground of rejection does not rely on any reference applied in the prior rejection of record for any teaching or matter specifically challenged in the argument.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status.
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) 16-18, 20-30 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Nakano (EP 1186977).
Regarding claim 16, Nakano describes an electronic device (computer machine 7) that determines a classification of a current production output of one or more textile materials from one or more parts of a spinning mill, the electronic device being configured to:
determine the current production output of the one or more textile materials from the one or more parts of the spinning mill (display system for production of each machine, para. 0012);
determine a current configuration of the spinning mill (displays all of the different machines that are attached);
based on the current configuration, look up an expected production output of the one or more textile materials from the one or more parts of the spinning mill in a database (has a memory unit, para. 0024, and compares to theoretical production of each machine, para. 0035), the database having stored therein a plurality of configurations of the spinning mill and the respective expected production outputs of the one or more textile materials assigned thereto (memory for storing and accumulating gathered data, para. 0024, furthermore, the system anticipates including different numbers of machines, para. 0031 and thus the expected production would change depending on the number of machines, that is, the system would know the different theoretical production levels based on the number of machines attached); and
determine the classification (efficiency is displayed and thus classified as a percent of efficiency, para. 0035, production, abnormality rate, para. 0047) of the current production output of the one or more textile materials by evaluating the current production output with respect to the expected production output (actual production versus theoretical production is displayed, para. 0035, 0039) for the current configuration of the spinning mill.
Regarding claim 17, Nakano describes the electronic device of claim 16, further configured to determine a difference between the current production output (current output, para. 0040) of the one or more textile materials and the expected production output of the one or more textile materials (average value, para. 0040) and compare the difference to a threshold difference value (compares if it is deteriorating, and thus is comparing it compared to a positive or negative value, which is therefore a difference value, para. 0040).
Regarding claim 18, Nakano describes the electronic device of claim 16, further configured to provide on an operator device a visual display of a time series of the current production output of the one or more textile materials relative to the expected production output of the one or more textile materials (shows a graph indicating the change over a fixed period of time, para. 0040).
Regarding claim 20, Nakano describes the electronic device of claim 16, further configured to provide on an operator device a visual display (setting screen 3) of current and expected production outputs of a plurality of the one or more individual textile materials produced in the spinning mill (displays theoretical and actual production, para. 0035, 0039 can see individual or total of the machine).
Regarding claim 21, Nakano describes the electronic device of claim 16, further configured to provide on an operator device a visual display (setting screen 3) of current and expected production outputs of the one or more textile materials from a plurality of individual parts of the spinning mill (displays theoretical and actual production, para. 0035, 0039 can see individual or total of the machine by pressing details).
Regarding claim 22, Nakano describes the electronic device of claim 16, wherein the current and expected production outputs of the one or more textile materials relate to one or both of a produced quantity (quantity) and a quality of a plurality of the one or more textile materials produced in the spinning mill.
Regarding claim 23, Nakano describes the electronic device of claim 16, further configured to provide on an operator device a visual display (screen 3) of a difference between the current and expected production outputs of the one or more textile materials (displays between theoretical and current, paras. 0035, 0039).
Regarding claim 24, the electronic device of claim 16, further configured to initiate an alarm function (red arrow when below an average value, para. 0040) depending on the determined classification.
Regarding claim 25, the electronic device of claim 16, wherein the classification relates to a subset of parts of the spinning mill (relates to the different machines of the mills), the electronic device further configured to lookup the expected production output of the subset of parts in the database (has the theoretical and average values), wherein the database further includes configurations of subsets of parts of the spinning mill and the respective expected production outputs assigned thereto (when different machines are added, the configuration accounts for the various added machines).
Regarding claim 26, Nakano describes the electronic device of claim 16, further configured to determine a plurality of the classifications (determines efficiencies) and to enable switching between the plurality of classifications (efficiencies) upon detection of a manipulation of a user interface by an operator person (clicking on different buttons, for example, trend of past or spinning, will display different information, paras. 0046-0048).
Regarding claim 27, the electronic device of claim 16, further configured to update the database with information of the current configuration (number of machines can be large and thus indicates the number can change, para. 0031) and the current production output (current output is determined by actual output and thus would change with the number of machines in use).
Regarding claim 28, Nakano describes a method executed by an electronic device (7) for classifying a current production output of one or more textile materials from one or more parts of a spinning mill, the method comprising:
determining the current production output of the one or more textile materials from the one or more parts of the spinning mill (display system for production of each machine, para. 0012);
determining a current configuration of the spinning mill (M) (displays all of the different machines that are attached);
based on the current configuration, look up an expected production output of the one or more textile materials from the one or more parts of the spinning mill in a database (has a memory unit, para. 0024, and compares to theoretical production of each machine, para. 0035), the database having stored therein a plurality of configurations of the spinning mill and the respective expected production outputs of the one or more textile materials assigned thereto (memory for storing and accumulating gathered data, para. 0024, furthermore, the system anticipates including different numbers of machines, para. 0031 and thus the expected production would change depending on the number of machines, that is, the system would know the different theoretical production levels based on the number of machines attached); and
determining the classification (efficiency is displayed and thus classified as a percent of efficiency, para. 0035, production, abnormality rate, para. 0047) of the current production output of the one or more textile materials by evaluating the current production output with respect to the expected production output for the current configuration of the spinning mill (actual production versus theoretical production is displayed, para. 0035, 0039).
Regarding claim 29, Nakano describes the method of claim 28, wherein evaluating the current production output of the one or more textile materials with respect to the expected production output of the one or more textile materials includes determining a difference between the current production output (current output, para. 0040) and the expected production output and comparing the difference to a threshold difference value (compares if it is deteriorating, and thus is comparing it compared to a positive or negative value, which is therefore a difference value, para. 0040).
Regarding claim 30, Nakano describes the method of claim 28, wherein evaluating the current production output of the one or more textile materials with respect to the expected production output of the one or more textile materials includes enabling visualizing on an operator device a time series of the current production output relative to the expected production output (shows a graph indicating the change over a fixed period of time, para. 0040).
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status.
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.
Claim 19 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Nakano (EP 1186977) in view of Blaser et al. (EP 3654114).
Regarding claim 19, Nakano describes the electronic device of claim 16, but does not explicitly describe the device further configured to determine a trust level of the expected production output of the one or more textile materials, and to determine the classification of the current production output depending on the trust level.
In related art for systems of machine management, Blaser describes the device further configured to determine a trust level (algorithm uses different quality levels including trust worthiness, para. 0048) of the expected production output, and to determine the classification of the current production output depending on the trust level (determines quality of information based on trust levels, which impacts whether the information is qualified or unqualified, which then influences whether this information is used and thus impacts the output information, para. 0048).
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art prior to the time of filing the instant application to modify the device of Nakano to include a trustworthiness feature in order to control impacts of unqualified data into the parameters (para. 0048, Blaser).
Conclusion
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 extension fee 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 date of this final action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to PATRICK J LYNCH whose telephone number is (571)272-1145. The examiner can normally be reached on M-Th, Alt F: 8:00 AM-5:00 PM ET.
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, Clint Ostrup can be reached on 571-272-5559. 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.
/PATRICK J. LYNCH/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3732
Prosecution Insights