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 .
Response to Arguments
2. The Amendment filed on October 31, 2025, has been entered. The examiner acknowledges the amendments to claims 1, 3, 6 and the cancellation of claims 2, 4-5.
Rejections under 35 U.S.C. § 101: Applicant argues that amendments satisfy eligibility requirements of 35 U.S.C. § 101. Examiner disagrees, noting that amendments do not remove abstract ideas from the claims, nor do the amended claim now describe a practical application or an enhancement to the performance of a computer or technology area. The identification of the defect appears to require the input of a worker as noted in FIG. 2, performing an inspection [0014], and that would be expected to require the worker to follow rules or procedures in the inspection process, and providing observation, evaluation, judgment, and opinion inputs to the system. Paragraph [0006] states that the output information can be used to determine a countermeasure against the defect in the cast product. It is unclear how this determination is made and executed. It is noted that the manufacturing process is changed as a result of the countermeasure, but the change mechanism is not specified, thus a potential practical application cannot be suggested in the current claims and specification.
In view of the above, the Examiner concludes that the eligibility requirements of 35 U.S.C. § 101 have not been satisfied and the request to withdraw the rejections under 35 U.S.C. § 101 is denied.
Rejections under 35 U.S.C. § 103: Applicant’s arguments in favor of claim 1 and supported with additional search are compelling. Rejections to claim 1 (amended) are withdrawn. Dependent claims 3, and 6-10 are not rejected based on their dependency on claim 1.
Claim Rejections – 35 U.S.C. § 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, 3, 6-10 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 101 because the claimed invention is
directed to non-statutory subject matter. The claims, 1, 3, 6-10 are directed to a judicial exception (i.e., law of nature, natural phenomenon, abstract idea) without providing significantly more.
Step 1
Step 1 of the subject matter eligibility analysis per MPEP § 2106.03, required the claims to be a process, machine, manufacture or a composition of matter. Claims 1, 3, 6-10 are directed to a machine (system), which is a statutory category of invention.
Step 2A
Claims 1, 3, 6-10 are directed to abstract ideas, as explained below.
Prong one of the Step 2A analysis requires identifying the specific limitation(s) in the claim under examination that the examiner believes recites an abstract idea, and determining whether the identified limitation(s) falls within at least one of the groupings of abstract ideas of mathematical concepts, mental processes, and certain methods of organizing human activity.
Step 2A-Prong 1
The claims recite the following limitations that are directed to abstract ideas, which can be summarized as being directed to a method, the abstract idea, of managing a casting process and correlating defects in the process using a time-series collection of process information and data.
Claim 1 discloses a method, acquiring information on a defect of an inspected cast product, (following rules or procedures, observation, evaluation, judgment, opinion), the information on the defect includes information on a position of the defect in the cast product and includes one or more of a photograph of the cast product a figure of the cast product, an image obtained from a two-dimensional model or a three-dimensional model of the cast product;
storing the information on the defect and information on a period when the cast product is manufactured in association with each other; (following rules or procedures, observation, evaluation, judgment, opinion), and
outputting a time-series transition of the information on the defect with reference to the data, (following rules or procedures, observation, evaluation, judgment, opinion), and an image including an appearance of the cast product and the position of the defect, the image includes a plurality of still images displayed in order based on the information on the period when the cast product is manufactured, each still image of the plurality of still images shows the position of the defect, (following rules or procedures, observation, evaluation, judgment, opinion), each still image includes one or more of a photograph of the cast product, a figure of the cast product, an image obtained from a two-dimensional model or a three-dimensional model of the cast product, the plurality of still images are continuously displayed as if to turn over the pages in chronological order based on the information on the period when the cast product is manufactured, and the positions of the plurality of defects corresponding to the plurality of still images are displayed to move on the cast product.
Additional limitations provide information on showing the appearance of the cast product (following rules or instructions, observation, evaluation, judgement, opinion – claim 3), storing information on when the cast product is changed, content of the change, specification of the cast product and position of the defect, providing information on the period when the manufacturing process of the product is changed, the content of the change, information on the specification of the product with a time-series transition of the position of the defect, (following rules or instructions, observation, evaluation, judgement, opinion – claim 6), storing information on a period when the manufacturing process is changed, the content of the change, information on the defect, and information on the period when the manufacturing is changed and information on the content of the change and the time-series transition of the information on the defect, (following rules or instructions, observation, evaluation, judgement, opinion – claim 7), including changing the manufacturing system by a countermeasure against the defect of the cast product, (following rules or instructions, observation, evaluation, judgement, opinion – claim 8), including information that the product does not include a defect, a repairable defect or a non-repairable defect, (following rules or instructions, observation, evaluation, judgement, opinion – claim 9), storing information on the defect, on the period when the product was manufactured, the specification of the product and providing information on a specification of the product along with time-series transition of the information on the defect, product (following rules or instructions, observation, evaluation, judgement, opinion – claim 10).
Each of these claimed limitations employ mental processes involving organizing human activity, following rules or instruction and observation, evaluation, judgment, and opinion.
Thus, the concepts set forth in claims 1, 3, 6-10 recite abstract ideas.
Step 2A-Prong 2
As per MPEP § 2106.04, while the claims 1, 3, 6-10 recite additional limitations which are hardware or software elements such as, a cast product management system, an acquisition unit, an input terminal, a database, an output unit, and a terminal display unit,
these limitations are not sufficient to qualify as a practical application being recited in the claims along with the abstract ideas since these elements are invoked as tools to apply the instructions of the abstract ideas in a specific technological environment. The mere application of an abstract idea in a particular technological environment and merely limiting the use of an abstract idea to a particular technological field do not integrate an abstract idea into a practical application (MPEP § 2106.05 (f) & (h)).
Evaluated individually, the additional elements do not integrate the identified abstract ideas into a practical application. Evaluating the limitations as an ordered combination adds nothing that is not already present when looking at the elements taken individually.
The claims do not amount to a “practical application” of the abstract idea because they neither (1) recite any improvements to another technology or technical field; (2) recite any improvements to the functioning of the computer itself; (3) apply the judicial exception with, or by use of, a particular machine; (4) effect a transformation or reduction of a particular article to a different state or thing; (5) provide other meaningful limitations beyond generally linking the use of the judicial exception to a particular technological environment.
Accordingly, claims 1, 3, 6-10 are directed to abstract ideas.
Step 2B
Claims 1, 3, 6-10 do not include additional elements that are sufficient to amount to significantly more than the judicial exception because the additional elements when considered both individually and as an ordered combination, do not amount to significantly more than the abstract idea.
The analysis above describes how the claims recite the additional elements beyond those identified above as being directed to an abstract idea, as well as why identified judicial exception(s) are not integrated into a practical application. These findings are hereby incorporated into the analysis of the additional elements when considered both individually and in combination.
For the reasons provided in the analysis in Step 2A, Prong 1, evaluated individually, the additional elements do not amount to significantly more than a judicial exception. Thus, taken alone, the additional elements do not amount to significantly more than a judicial exception.
Evaluating the claim limitations as an ordered combination adds nothing that is not already present when looking at the elements taken individually. In addition to the factors discussed regarding Step 2A, prong two, there is no indication that the combination of elements improves the functioning of a computer or improves any other technology. Their collective functions merely amount to instructions to implement the identified abstract ideas on a computer.
Therefore, since there are no limitations in the claims 1, 3, 6-10 that transform the exception into a patent eligible application such that the claims amount to significantly more than the exception itself, the claims are directed to non-statutory subject matter and are rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 101.
Conclusion
THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. 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.
Claim 1 is not rejected by prior art under 35 U.S.C. § 103. Dependent claims 3, 6-
10 are not rejected because of their inherent dependency on claim 1.
The closest prior art to the invention includes Luo, (CN 115846607 A), “An Intelligent Production System Of Full-casting Workshop” and Takaaki, (JP 2006082134 A), “Method for Preparing Data on Quality Control in Diecast Molding, Method for Producing the Molding and Control Device for Diecasting Machine for Producing the Molding.”
None of the prior art alone or in combination teach the claimed invention as recited in this claim wherein the novelty is in the combination of all the limitations and not in a single limitation.
Regarding claim 1, A cast product management system, Luo teaches, (an intelligent production system of full-continuous casting workshop, relating to the technical field of steel-making, [Abstract]), comprising:
an acquisition unit configured to acquire, from an input terminal, information on a defect of an inspected cast product; Luo teaches, (the full-continuous casting module type information system is used for increasing monitoring continuous casting of each flow, sensor for continuous casting each flow, and encoder module and temperature measuring system, performing data collection analysis, pre-judging occurrence of event, and recording the data, [p. 2]),
the information on the defect includes information on a position of the defect in the cast product and includes one or more of a photograph of the cast product, a figure of the cast product, an image obtained from a two-dimensional model or a three-dimensional model of the cast product; Prior art did teach defect analysis and information collection, some including thermal or binary imaging, Cornyn, (US 4484081 A), “Defect Analysis System,” but none teaching photograph or figure renditions as claimed.
a database configured to store the information on the defect acquired by the acquisition unit and information on a period when the cast product is manufactured in association with each other; Luo teaches, (automation degree reaches the purpose of full-casting workshop intelligent production, and records the data, is technology, management personnel provides data base, which is convenient for improving management efficiency [p.4]), the pre-judging analysis module is built-in data standard threshold value, and the pre-judging analysis module is accessed to the internet, obtaining the abnormal data of various abnormal events, the pre judging analysis module is connected to the data collecting module, comparing and analyzing the real time data, judging the abnormal production number, and pre-judging the occurrence of the event. [p.5]), the recording module is connected to the monitoring point module, recording each monitoring point data, and generating data report, providing data analysis base to the production, technical management personnel, Luo [p.3] and
an output unit configured to output a time-series transition of the information on the defect with reference to the database, Luo teaches (the monitoring point module, [ ] recording each monitoring point data, and generating data report, providing data analysis base to the production, technical management personnel, (the monitoring point module, recording each monitoring point data, and generating data report, providing data analysis base to the production, technical management personnel, [p.3]). Luo does not teach, Takaaki teaches, (data from the third means is sampled at predetermined time intervals and the sampled data is stored in a memory as time-series data; Takaaki, [p.4-5], but this fails to teach the time series of the manufacturing process itself.
wherein the output unit is configured to output an image including an appearance of the cast product and the position of the defect, the image includes a plurality of still images displayed in order based on the information on the period when the cast product is manufactured, each still image of the plurality of still images shows the position of the defect, each still image includes one or more of a photograph of the cast product, a figure of the cast product, an image obtained from a two-dimensional model or a three-dimensional model of the cast product, the plurality of still images are continuously displayed as if to tum over the pages in chronological order based on the information on the period when the cast product is manufactured, and the positions of the plurality of defects corresponding to the plurality of still images are displayed to move on the cast product. Again, prior art did not teach the plurality of photographs producing the claimed effect of detected defects appearing movement on the cast product. Binocular stereo vision systems to obtain on-site images for navigation, recognition and measurement were discovered, Wang, (AU 2019101624-A4), “Dual-Arm Robot for Sampling and Detecting Casting,” but fell short of the features of the claimed invention. Finally, Ota, (CN 113466237 A), “Display Control Device and Recording Medium,” used photographic images for detecting defects in products by analyzing the molds used to produce the products. None of these alone or in combination teach the claimed invention.
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to
applicant's disclosure or directed to the state of the art is listed on the enclosed PTO-892.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the
examiner should be directed to MICHAEL BOROWSKI whose telephone number is (703)756-1822. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 7:30 - 4:00.
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, Jerry O'Connor can be reached on (571)272-6787. 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.
/MB/
Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3624
/MEHMET YESILDAG/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3624