DETAILED ACTION
Response to Amendment/Arguments
Applicant’s response with respect to the objections to claims 1-2, 4-8, and 10-17 has been fully considered and is accepted. The objections to these claims have been withdrawn.
Applicant’s response with respect to the 35 U.S.C. 112(b) rejection of claims 3, 11, 13, and 15 has been fully considered and is accepted. The 35 U.S.C. 112(b) rejection of claims 3, 11, 13, and 15 has been withdrawn.
Applicant’s response with respect to the 35 U.S.C. 102/103 rejection of claims 5, subject matter from which has been partially incorporated into the independent claims, has been fully considered and but is not persuasive. Firstly, the applicant has provided no specific reasoning or evidence as to why the cited art does not read on the claims as originally presented or as amended. Secondly, the applicant has merely asserted that the combination of Yoda and Thiruvenkatanathan fails to disclose each and every feature of the pending claims, specifically that neither reference discloses "a monitoring part corresponding to the monitoring target where vibrations exceeding a threshold amplitude are detected during a predetermined period" as set forth in pending claims 1, 7, and 8. However, Yoda is seen to teach this feature as currently presented. Refer to [0065]-[0066] of Yoda, which teaches how utility poles are identified based on vibration amplitude exceeding a threshold. Also note fig. 2, which shows individual poles being identified. In view of this disclosure, Yoda is seen to teach identifying poles where vibrations exceeding a threshold amplitude are detected during a predetermined period, as this language is so broadly recited that the signal measurement interval reads on "a predetermined period." It is also noted that such defined periods are seen to necessarily be present in Yoda because otherwise it would not be possible to identify the locations of individual poles in the manner depicted in fig. 2. The claims still stand rejected under the combination of Yoda and Thiruvenkatanathan, as below.
Claim Advisements
Applicant is advised that should claim 3 or 16 be found allowable, corresponding claim 9 or 17 will be objected to under 37 CFR 1.75 as being a substantial duplicate thereof. When two claims in an application are duplicates or else are so close in content that they both cover the same thing, despite a slight difference in wording, it is proper after allowing one claim to object to the other as being a substantial duplicate of the allowed claim. See MPEP § 608.01(m).
Claim Objections
Claim 2 is objected to because of the following informalities. Appropriate correction is required.
Claim 2 recites "calculates sum" in line 3. This should be "calculates a sum."
It is requested that applicant review their application for other such obvious grammatical errors and file corrections as appropriate.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
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.
Claims 1-3 and 6-17 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over WO 2020/044648 to Yoda et al. (hereinafter referred to as Yoda; cited by applicant; US 2021/0172767 relied upon as a translation). in view of US 11,643,923 to Thiruvenkatanathan.
With regards to claim 1, Yoda teaches a monitoring system (see the system of fig. 1, 8, etc.) comprising:
at least one memory (memory 402/storage 403; fig. 8) configured to store instructions ([0090]); and
at least one processor (processor 401) configured to execute the instructions ([0090]) to
acquire a plurality of amplitudes of vibrations for points on an optical fiber cable (optical fiber cable 20) based on light propagating the optical fiber cable attached to a monitoring target (e.g., a utility pole) (see fig. 2 and the associated description, particularly [0061] and [0063]),
generate a vibration mode of the monitoring target based on the plurality of amplitudes (patterns, corresponding to the modes, are generated in the resulting data of fig. 2, see [0065-0067]), and
detect a point on the monitoring target corresponding to a point on the optical fiber based on the vibration mode (based on the patterns, the locations of utility poles is detected; [0065]-[0067]),
wherein the at least one processor
identifies a monitoring part corresponding to the monitoring target where vibrations exceeding a threshold amplitude are detected during a predetermined period based on the plurality of amplitudes of vibrations for points on the optical fiber (based on the amplitudes of vibration exceeding a threshold in defined ranges/periods (otherwise individual pole locations could not be identified), utility poles are identified along the optical fiber; [0065]-[0067]), and
generates the vibration mode of the monitoring target based on the vibrations for points on the monitoring part (a pattern, corresponding to this mode, is generated in the resulting data of fig. 2 based on vibrations of the utility pole, see [0065]).
However, Yoda does not expressly teach standardizing the vibrations for points on the monitoring parts, and by extension generating based on the standardized values (vibrations for points on the monitoring parts).
Thiruvenkatanathan teaches the feature of standardizing (e.g., normalizing) data after collection to correct for variability in measured data (col. 9, ll. 38-43). It would have been obvious to someone of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to similarly adopt such data standardization in the system of Yoda, and thereby have the vibration modes be based on based on standardized vibration data. One of ordinary skill in the art would be motivated to do so in order to compensate for fiber sensitivity or signal strength.
With regards to claim 2, the combination of Yoda and Thiruvenkatanathan teaches the monitoring system according to claim 1. Yoda further teaches the at least one processor
calculating sum of the plurality of amplitudes on each of intervals on the optical fiber (a sum of the number of times vibration is greater to a threshold in given intervals; [0065]); and
generating a graph indicating a first correspondence relationship between the sums of the intervals and the intervals (the graph of fig. 2, showing where utility poles are identified the evaluated intervals along the y-axis).
With regards to claims 3 and 9, the combination of Yoda and Thiruvenkatanathan teaches the monitoring system according to claim 2. Yoda further teaches the at least one processor,
acquiring the plurality of amplitudes of vibrations over a plurality of times (amplitudes are acquired multiple times, shown using the x-axis in fig. 2; [0061]), and
generating a graph indicating a second correspondence relationship between each of the times and the first correspondence relationship (see fig. 2).
With regards to claim 6, the combination of Yoda and Thiruvenkatanathan teaches the monitoring system according to claim 1. Yoda further teaches the at least one processor detecting which point of the vibration mode is a point of the monitoring target (based on, e.g., vibration amplitude as per [0065]-[0067]).
With regards to claim 7, Yoda teaches a monitoring method (employed in the system of fig. 1, 2, etc.) comprising:
acquiring a plurality of amplitudes of vibrations for points on an optical fiber (optical fiber cable 20) based on light propagating the optical fiber attached to a monitoring target (e.g., a utility pole) (see fig. 2 and the associated description, particularly [0061] and [0063]);
generating a vibration mode of the monitoring target based on the plurality of amplitudes (patterns, corresponding to the modes, are generated in the resulting data of fig. 2, see [0065]-[0067]); and
detecting a point on the monitoring target corresponding to a point on the optical fiber based on the vibration mode (based on the patterns, the locations of utility poles is detected; [0065]-[0067]),
wherein the monitoring method comprises:
identifying a monitoring part corresponding to the monitoring target where vibrations exceeding a threshold amplitude are detected during a predetermined period based on the plurality of amplitudes of vibrations for points on the optical fiber (based on the amplitudes of vibration exceeding a threshold in defined ranges/periods (otherwise individual pole locations could not be identified), utility poles are identified along the optical fiber; [0065]-[0067]), and
generating the vibration mode of the monitoring target based on the vibrations for points on the monitoring part (a pattern, corresponding to this mode, is generated in the resulting data of fig. 2 based on vibrations of the utility pole, see [0065]).
However, Yoda does not expressly teach standardizing the vibrations for points on the monitoring parts, and by extension generating based on the standardized values (vibrations for points on the monitoring parts).
Thiruvenkatanathan teaches the feature of standardizing (e.g., normalizing) data after collection to correct for variability in measured data (col. 9, ll. 38-43). It would have been obvious to someone of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to similarly adopt such data standardization in the method of Yoda, and thereby have the vibration modes be based on based on standardized vibration data. One of ordinary skill in the art would be motivated to do so in order to compensate for fiber sensitivity or signal strength.
With regards to claim 8, Yoda teaches (Currently amended) a non-transitory computer-readable storage medium (memory 402/storage 403; fig. 8) that stores a program ([0090]) for causing a computer (computer 40; fig. 8) to execute:
acquiring a plurality of amplitudes of vibrations for points on an optical fiber (optical fiber cable 20) based on light propagating the optical fiber attached to a monitoring target (e.g., a utility pole) (see fig. 2 and the associated description, particularly [0061] and [0063]);
generating a vibration mode of the monitoring target based on the plurality of amplitudes (patterns, corresponding to the modes, are generated in the resulting data of fig. 2, see [0065]-[0067]); and
detecting a point on the monitoring target corresponding to a point on the optical fiber based on the vibration mode (based on the patterns, the locations of utility poles is detected; [0065]-[0067]),
wherein the program causes the computer to execute:
identifying a monitoring part corresponding to the monitoring target where vibrations exceeding a threshold amplitude are detected during a predetermined period based on the plurality of amplitudes of vibrations for points on the optical fiber (based on the amplitudes of vibration exceeding a threshold in defined ranges/periods (otherwise individual pole locations could not be identified), utility poles are identified along the optical fiber; [0065]-[0067]), and
generating the vibration mode of the monitoring target based on the vibrations for points on the monitoring part (a pattern, corresponding to this mode, is generated in the resulting data of fig. 2 based on vibrations of the utility pole, see [0065]).
However, Yoda does not expressly teach standardizing the vibrations for points on the monitoring parts, and by extension generating based on the standardized values (vibrations for points on the monitoring parts).
Thiruvenkatanathan teaches the feature of standardizing (e.g., normalizing) data after collection to correct for variability in measured data (col. 9, ll. 38-43). It would have been obvious to someone of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to similarly adopt such data standardization in the program of Yoda, and thereby have the vibration modes be based on based on standardized vibration data. One of ordinary skill in the art would be motivated to do so in order to compensate for fiber sensitivity or signal strength.
With regards to claim 10, the combination of Yoda and Thiruvenkatanathan teaches the monitoring system according to claim 2. Yoda further teaches wherein the at least one processor
identifying a monitoring part corresponding to the monitoring target based on the plurality of amplitudes of vibrations for points on the optical fiber (based on the amplitude patterns, utility poles are identified; [0065]-[0067]), and
generating the vibration mode of the monitoring target based on the vibrations for points on the monitoring part (a pattern, corresponding to this mode, is generated in the resulting data of fig. 2 based on vibrations of the utility pole, see [0065]).
With regards to claim 11, the combination of Yoda and Thiruvenkatanathan teaches the monitoring system according to claim 3. Yoda further teaches wherein the at least one processor
identifying a monitoring part corresponding to the monitoring target based on the plurality of amplitudes of vibrations for points on the optical fiber (based on the amplitude patterns, utility poles are identified; [0065]-[0067]), and
generating the vibration mode of the monitoring target based on the vibrations for points on the monitoring part (a pattern, corresponding to this mode, is generated in the resulting data of fig. 2 based on vibrations of the utility pole, see [0065]).
With regards to claim 12, Yoda teaches the monitoring system according to claim 10. This combination further teaches the at least one processor
identifying monitoring parts corresponding to the monitoring targets based on the plurality of amplitudes of vibrations for points on the optical fiber (based on the amplitude patterns/amplitudes, utility poles are identified; [0065]-[0067] and fig. 2), and
standardizing the vibrations for points on the monitoring parts and generates the vibration modes of the monitoring targets based on the standardized vibrations for points on the monitoring parts (as per Thiruvenkatanathan in the independent claim above in order to compensate for fiber sensitivity or signal strength).
With regards to claim 13, Yoda teaches the monitoring system according to claim 11. This combination further teaches the at least one processor
identifying monitoring parts corresponding to the monitoring targets based on the plurality of amplitudes of vibrations for points on the optical fiber (based on the amplitude patterns/amplitudes, utility poles are identified; [0065]-[0067] and fig. 2), and
standardizing the vibrations for points on the monitoring parts and generates the vibration modes of the monitoring targets based on the standardized vibrations for points on the monitoring parts (as per Thiruvenkatanathan in the independent claim above in order to compensate for fiber sensitivity or signal strength).
With regards to claim 14, the combination of Yoda and Thiruvenkatanathan teaches the monitoring system according to claim 2. Yoda further discloses the at least one processor detecting which point of the vibration mode is a point of the monitoring target (based on amplitude magnitude as per [0066]-[0067] and shown in fig. 2).
With regards to claim 15, the combination of Yoda and Thiruvenkatanathan teaches the monitoring system according to claim 3. Yoda further discloses the at least one processor detecting which point of the vibration mode is a point of the monitoring target (based on amplitude magnitude as per [0066]-[0067] and shown in fig. 2).
With regards to claim 16 and 17, the combination of Yoda and Thiruvenkatanathan teaches the monitoring system according to claim 1. Yoda further discloses the at least one processor detecting which point of the vibration mode is a point of the monitoring target (based on amplitude magnitude as per [0066]-[0067] and shown in fig. 2).
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 nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) 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 mailing date of this final action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to James Split whose telephone number is (571)270-1524. The examiner can normally be reached Monday to Friday, 9:00 to 3:30.
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, Judy Nguyen can be reached at (571)272-2258. 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.
/JS/Examiner, Art Unit 2858
/JUDY NGUYEN/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2858
Prosecution Insights