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
Applicant’s amendments to overcome 35 U.S.C. 112 rejections set forth in the previous action have been fully considered and the 112 rejection withdrawn accordingly.
Applicant’s arguments with respect to claim(s) 1 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 § 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(s) 1-11 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Jentz (US-20200400050-A1), Thompson (US-20140182548-A1), and Fey (US-20220112831-A1) in view of Park (US-10316767-B2).
1. (currently amended) Jentz (US-20200400050-A1) discloses A method for diagnosing a crankcase[FIG.1; crankcase 28] system[0005] determining the fault condition includes determining if the comparison between the sampled pressure and the modeled pressure is outside a dynamic tolerance band, the method comprising:
determining of a *** of an intake pressure, via an intake pressure sensor, in an intake area of a crankcase[0029] a barometric pressure sensor (BP sensor) 57 may be coupled to intake passage 13, upstream of air filter 54, for providing an estimate of barometric pressure. In some embodiments, a pressure sensor (not shown) may be coupled in intake passage 13 downstream of air filter 54 and upstream of compressor 50 to provide an estimate of the compressor inlet pressure (CIP);
determining a *** of a second pressure, via a second pressure sensor, in an area of the crankcase downstream of the intake area[0029] A pressure sensor 63 may also be included in the crankcase 28;
***
indicates an improper condition of the crankcase system[0058] A fault threshold is indicated at 710 the fault threshold may indicate a threshold value for the integrated pressure sensor pressure. When the integrated pressure sensor pressure exceeds the fault threshold a ventilation line breach may be indicated.
Jentz lacks distinctly disclosing the following underlined limitations:
… signal waveform
… calculating a similarity between the signal waveform of the intake pressure and the signal waveform of the second pressure; and comparing the similarity to a similarity setpoint
PNG
media_image1.png
4
2
media_image1.png
Greyscale
range, wherein a deviation of the similarity from the similarity setpoint range indicates an improper condition of the crankcase system
Regarding the limitation; “…signal waveform”, Thompson (US-20140182548-A1) discloses in a similar invention field of endeavor, a consideration for engine monitoring comprising a [0004] crankcase and configured to monitor pressure with the system [0010, 0136] control module is configured to obtain pressure waveforms representative of the airflow pressures in the common airflow pathway as measured by the pressure sensor and to divide the pressure waveforms into waveform segments.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the time the instant application was effectively filed to adapt the modified system of Jentz to include signal waveforms with a reasonable expectation for success, as taught by Thompson, for the benefit of providing [0136] data signals from the pressure sensor which may be pressure waveforms representative of intake or exhaust pressures measured by the pressure sensor, for use in operational control systems.
Regarding the remaining limitation(s); Fey (US-20220112831-A1) discloses in a similar invention field of endeavor, a consideration for [0033] The vehicle 100 is preferably set up for carrying out a method 200 according to FIG. 2 and has a combustion engine 120…, for example in the form of injection pump(s), turbocharger(s), etc. or combinations thereof. [claim 8] A non-transitory, computer-readable medium containing instructions that when executed by a computer cause the computer to operate a combustion engine (120) …, wherein at least one first exhaust gas sensor (145) is arranged upstream of the exhaust gas catalytic converter (130) and at least one second exhaust gas sensor (147) is arranged downstream of the exhaust gas catalytic converter (130), by: … using a theoretical catalytic converter model in which at least one signal from the first exhaust gas sensor (145) as an input variable is input as a first signal, detecting (230) a signal from the second exhaust sensor (147) downstream of the exhaust gas catalytic converter (130) as a second signal, determining (240) a deviation of the second signal from a target signal, wherein the target signal corresponds to the signal which would be expected at the determined level in the catalytic converter…, so that the deviation between the first and the second signals is reduced.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the time the instant application was effectively filed to adapt the modified system of Jentz to include calculating a similarity between the signal waveform of the intake pressure and the signal waveform of the second pressure; and comparing the similarity to a similarity setpoint, wherein a deviation of the similarity from the similarity setpoint with a reasonable expectation for success, as taught by Fey, for the benefit of reducing a deviation within a component [0033].
However, while Fey discloses a deviation of a signal from a setpoint discussed above, Fey is silent as to distinctly disclosing “…setpoint range”;
Regarding the limitation underlined above; Park (US-10316767-B2) discloses in a similar invention field of endeavor, a consideration for [claim.7] An apparatus for diagnosing …comprising: an intake pressure detector configured to measure an intake pressure of an intake manifold; …; and a controller configured to detect the amount of variation of intake pressure in each intake manifold cylinder from the intake pressure detector and compare the detected amount of variation with a predetermined range of values to determine whether the intake valve is stuck closed or stuck open, ...
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the time the instant application was effectively filed to adapt the modified system of Jentz to include a deviation of the similarity from the similarity setpoint range with a reasonable expectation for success, as taught by the combination of Fey and Park, for the benefit of providing a range of values associated with operational conditions, allowing a system to operate between predetermined values.
2. (currently amended) Jentz (US-20200400050-A1) lacks The method according to claim 1, wherein the calculation comprises at least a calculation of a correlation or a calculation of a covariance and/or linear regression between the signal waveform of the intake pressure and the signal waveform of the second pressure.
Regarding the limitation; “…signal waveform”, Thompson (US-20140182548-A1) discloses in a similar invention field of endeavor, a consideration for engine monitoring comprising a [0004] crankcase and configured to monitor pressure with the system [0010, 0136] control module is configured to obtain pressure waveforms representative of the airflow pressures in the common airflow pathway as measured by the pressure sensor and to divide the pressure waveforms into waveform segments.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the time the instant application was effectively filed to adapt the modified system of Jentz to include signal waveforms with a reasonable expectation for success, as taught by Thompson, for the benefit of providing [0136] data signals from the pressure sensor which may be pressure waveforms representative of intake or exhaust pressures measured by the pressure sensor, for use in operational control systems.
Regarding the limitation; “…a calculation of a correlation or the calculation of a covariance // linear regression between the signal waveform of the intake pressure and the signal waveform of the second pressure” Gumaste (US-20220112822-A1) discloses in a similar invention field of endeavor, a consideration for a crankcase ventilation system [FIG.1] comprising [0003] processor can determine that the pair of pressure differences falls within a predefined clustering region, and detect a malfunctioning in the CCV system based on the pair of pressure differences falling within the predefined clustering region comprising [0022] The CCV system 102 can include a first pressure sensor 116 arranged at the first tube 108, a second pressure sensor 118 arranged at the CCV tube 110, and a third pressure sensor 120 arranged at the draft tube 112… [0037] the pressure sensors can take pressure measurements and send them to the controller 104 every fraction of a second, every second, or every few seconds. In some implementations, the pressure sensors can be synchronized to obtain and send pressure measurements to the controller 104 simultaneously or at predefined time instances further disclosing; a calculation of a correlation between the signal waveform of the intake pressure [FIG.1; 116] and the signal waveform of the second pressure [FIG.1; 118, 120]; and comparing the similarity to a similarity setpoint range, wherein a deviation of the similarity from the similarity setpoint range indicates an improper condition of the crankcase system [0048] a first pressure difference between the CCP measurement and the CCV pressure measurement, and a second pressure difference between the CCP measurement and the CIP measurement (STEP 404). The method 400 further includes determining whether the pair of first and second pressure differences falls within a predefined clustering region or satisfy one or more predefined conditions… and detecting a malfunctioning or defect (e.g., hole or crack) in the CCV system if the counter T reaches or exceeds the predefined threshold (STEP 412).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the time the instant application was effectively filed to adapt the modified system of Jentz to include a calculation of a correlation between intake pressure and the second pressure with a reasonable expectation for success, as taught by Gumaste, for the benefit of providing a system [0017] equipped with a system capable of detecting a CCV system malfunction (e.g., of a hose that transports crankcase gases).
3. Jentz (US-20200400050-A1) lacks The method according to claim 1, wherein the calculation comprises at least one calculation of a linear function whose curve essentially corresponds to the signal waveform of the intake pressure and the signal waveform of the second pressure or comprises carrying out a regression analysis.
Regarding the limitation; Thompson (US-20140182548-A1) discloses in a similar invention field of endeavor, a consideration for one calculation of a linear function [0069] These points are extrapolated with a linear line to make up the waveform. whose curve essentially corresponds to the signal waveform of the intake pressure and the signal waveform of the second pressure [0090-95; FIG.40-41] FIG. 40 is a schematic example of pressure waveforms 1100 for an engine… represent exhaust or intake pressures that are measured for an engine during operation.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the time the instant application was effectively filed to adapt the modified system of Jentz to include at least one calculation of a linear function whose curve essentially corresponds to the signal waveform of the intake pressure and the signal waveform of the second pressure with a reasonable expectation for success, as taught by Thompson, for the benefit of providing a method for collecting and comparing data measured during the course of operation, enhancing monitoring capabilities and data analysis.
4. (currently amended) Jentz (US-20200400050-A1) discloses The method according to claim 1, wherein the determination of the *** intake pressure in the intake area is carried out in at least one intake manifold [0026] a MAP or manifold vacuum (ManVac) sensor 87 may be located in intake manifold 42 downstream of a throttle or upstream of the throttle [FIG.1; throttle 44, pressure sensor 58,59,87].
Regarding the limitation; “…signal waveform”, Thompson (US-20140182548-A1) discloses in a similar invention field of endeavor, a consideration for engine monitoring comprising a [0004] crankcase and configured to monitor pressure with the system [0010, 0136] control module is configured to obtain pressure waveforms representative of the airflow pressures in the common airflow pathway as measured by the pressure sensor and to divide the pressure waveforms into waveform segments.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the time the instant application was effectively filed to adapt the modified system of Jentz to include signal waveforms with a reasonable expectation for success, as taught by Thompson, for the benefit of providing [0136] data signals from the pressure sensor which may be pressure waveforms representative of intake or exhaust pressures measured by the pressure sensor, for use in operational control systems.
5. (currently amended) Jentz (US-20200400050-A1) discloses The method according to claim 1, wherein the determination of *** the second pressure in the area located downstream of the intake area is carried out at least in a bleed line of the crankcase, in a crankcase block of the crankcase [0029; FIF.1] A pressure sensor 63 may also be included in the crankcase 28 or in a ventilation line of the crankcase.
Regarding the limitation; “…signal waveform”, Thompson (US-20140182548-A1) discloses in a similar invention field of endeavor, a consideration for engine monitoring comprising a [0004] crankcase and configured to monitor pressure with the system [0010, 0136] control module is configured to obtain pressure waveforms representative of the airflow pressures in the common airflow pathway as measured by the pressure sensor and to divide the pressure waveforms into waveform segments.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the time the instant application was effectively filed to adapt the modified system of Jentz to include signal waveforms with a reasonable expectation for success, as taught by Thompson, for the benefit of providing [0136] data signals from the pressure sensor which may be pressure waveforms representative of intake or exhaust pressures measured by the pressure sensor, for use in operational control systems.
6. (currently amended) Jentz (US-20200400050-A1) discloses ***, when an internal combustion engine having the crankcase system is in operation and during a boost pressure build-up, a boost pressure maintenance or a boost pressure reduction [0017] The diagnostic method may include monitoring the sensor while, for example, the engine is boosted via a compressor and a PCV valve is metering flow to the crankcase.
Jentz lacks distinctly disclosing the following underlined limitations:
… wherein at least the calculation of the similarity takes place when a calculation condition is fulfilled at least for the intake pressure or the second pressure, or when the signal waveform of at least the intake pressure or the second pressure comprises only values within a predetermined value range
Regarding the lacking limitation(s); The limitations of claim 6 are similar in scope to those disclosed in the method of claim 1 and are therefore rejected under the same premise. For more information, please see the rejections in re claim 1.
In re claim 7. The limitations of claim 7 are similar in scope to those disclosed in the method of claim 1 and are therefore rejected under the same premise. For more information, please see the rejections in re claim 1.
In re claim 8 (currently amended). The limitations of claim 8 are similar in scope to those disclosed in the method of claim 1 and are therefore rejected under the same premise. For more information, please see the rejections in re claim 1.
9. Jentz (US-20200400050-A1) discloses A vehicle [FIG.1] automotive vehicle 150 comprising at least one crankcase [FIG.1] crankcase 28 system according to claim 7.
10. (currently amended) Jentz (US-20200400050-A1) discloses non-transitory computer readable medium storing a computer program thereon that when executed by a processor of a crankcase system, causes the processor to execute the method according to claim 1 [0033] Controller 12 is shown in FIG. 1 as a microcomputer, including microprocessor unit 108, input/output ports 110, an electronic storage medium for executable programs and… Storage medium read-only memory 112 can be programmed with computer readable data representing instructions executable by processor 108 for performing the methods described.
11. (new) Jentz (US-20200400050-A1) lacks The method according to claim 1, further comprising triggering an action upon detection of the deviation.
Regarding the limitation; Fey (US-20220112831-A1) discloses in a similar invention field of endeavor, a consideration for [claim.1] determining (240) a deviation of the second signal from a target signal, ... reinitializing … regulating … correcting… determined as a function of the deviation between the first and second signals, so that the deviation between the first and the second signals is reduced
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the time the instant application was effectively filed to adapt the modified system of Jentz to include triggering an action with a reasonable expectation for success, as taught by Fey, for the benefit of reducing a deviation within a component [0033].
Claim(s) 12 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Jentz (US-20200400050-A1), Thompson (US-20140182548-A1), Fey (US-20220112831-A1), and Park (US-10316767-B2), as applied to dependent claim 1 and further in view of Knoop (US-20130218400-A1).
12. (new) Jentz (US-20200400050-A1) lacks The method according to claim 1, wherein the action includes at least one of switching off an internal combustion engine that has the crankcase system, alerting a user to switch off the internal combustion engine, preventing charging of a turbocharger, reducing a speed, a torque or an output of the internal combustion engine, reducing a remaining driving time or transmitting information regarding the improper condition to a vehicle manufacturer or repair shop.
Regarding the limitation;”… wherein the action includes … transmitting information regarding the improper condition to a vehicle manufacturer or repair shop”, Knoop (US-20130218400-A1) discloses in a similar invention field of endeavor, a consideration for [0010] The present invention thus, in particular, includes the idea of transmitting or transferring, preferably wirelessly, state information, here in particular the status message, from the vehicle component, which may, for example, be included in a vehicle system in which a functional restriction is foreseeable or has already occurred, via suitable communication to the vehicle-external server; the vehicle-external server may belong to a vehicle manufacturer, a supplier of the vehicle system or the vehicle component, and/or to a repair shop. The receiver of the status message, i.e., in particular the vehicle manufacturer, the supplier of the system, or the repair shop, analyses the malfunction, i.e...
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the time the instant application was effectively filed to adapt the modified system of Jentz to include wherein an action includes transmitting information regarding the improper condition to a vehicle manufacturer or repair shop with a reasonable expectation for success, as taught by Knoop, for the benefit of reducing unexpected failures of vehicle components, so that failures of the vehicle may thus also be advantageously reduced [0010].
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.
Contact
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to MATTHEW JOHN MOSCOLA whose telephone number is (571)272-6944. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 7:30-5:30.
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, Abby Flynn can be reached on (571) 272-9855. 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.
/M.J.M./Examiner, Art Unit 3663
/JAMES M MCPHERSON/Examiner, Art Unit 3663