DETAILED ACTION
Specification
The disclosure (specification) is objected to because the following paragraphs are unclear. Going forward with examination, the paragraphs are interpreted to be (Note that in applicant’s response, where a change is requested in the specification, an entire paragraph of the specification containing the change will be needed):
--[0032] <Initial Metal Powder and Long-Use Metal Powder>
Initial metal powder produced when the speed reducer 10 is first used is fine metal powder having a particle size of less than 10 μm (normally less than 2 μm). The [[Initial]] initial metal powder is generated in the initial phase of In the initial phase of use, the initial metal powder flows in the oil bath 22 with the lubricant 13 and a small amount of the initial metal powder may adhere to a surface of the detection unit cover 122 as a lower layer. The lubricant 30 remains as a non-conductive layer around the initial metal powder adhering to the detection unit cover 122. During the initial phase of the use of the speed reducer, the resistance detecting unit 210 detects an infinite resistance since the lubricant 13 is non-conductive. Since the attracting force of the initial metal powder is relatively weak, the amount of the initial metal powder collected between the first electrode 130a and the second electrode 130b (or the second electrode 120c) is also small.--
--[0041] On the other hand, metal (wear powder) and metal powder such as broken pieces (long-use metal powder particles) are generated by normal use of the speed reducer 10. The long-use metal powder particles have a large particle size, for example, 10 μm or more. Therefore, the long-use metal powder particles receive[[s]] a large attractive force from the permanent magnets 131. Since the long-use metal powder particles are subjected to a large attracting force, they push aside the non-conductive lubricant and come into contact with each other. When a large amount of the long-use metal powder particles mix into the lubricant 13, the long-use metal powder particles in the lubricant 13 are attracted by the plurality of permanent magnets 131 of the conductive particle detecting device 100. The long-use metal powder particles then adhere to the gap between the electrodes 130 on the outer surface of the detection unit cover 122. Since the long-use metal powder particles receive a large attracting force from the permanent magnet 131, they are securely attracted even from the upper side of the initial metal powder. Therefore, the long-use metal powder particles are inevitably deposited as an upper layer on top of the initial metal powder.--
--[0042] When the amount of the long-use metal powder particles adhering to the outer surface of the detection unit cover 122 increases beyond a certain amount, the resistance value between the adjacent permanent magnets 131 (resistance value detected by the resistance detecting unit 210) decreases below a specified value. In this way, it is possible for the control device 140 to inform an external user terminal or the like that the amount of the long-use metal powder in the speed reducer 10 has increased.--
--[0045] Even when the long-use metal powder particles adhere[[s]] to the conductive particle detecting device 100, the speed reducer 10 does not immediately fail. Specifically, as shown in the waveforms of channel 2 of FIGS. 5A and 5B, the resistance value does not immediately drop to 0Ω when the long-use metal powder particles adhere[[s]] to the device. The resistance value tends to decrease and increase several times, and may eventually converge to several tens of kΩ. This means, for example, that although the long-use metal powder particles once adhered to the outer surface of the detection unit cover 122, the flow of the lubricant 13 may peel off the adhered metal powder particles. However, the fact that the conductive particle detecting device 100 has detected the adhesion of the long-use metal powder particles means that the long-use metal powder articles are present in the oil bath 22.--
--[0049] <Informing of Warning and Failure>
In the embodiment, an “abnormality” includes a warning state indicating that the speed reducer is just before a failure and a failure state indicating that it has failed. The abnormality determining unit 602 determines abnormalities including the warning state and the failure state. For example, the abnormality determining unit 602 determines that the speed reducer is in the warning state when the resistance value of one of channels 1 and 2 acquired by the acquisition unit 601 falls below the threshold value (second threshold value) three times. In other words, the abnormality determining unit 602 determines that the speed reducer is in the warning state when the count reaches the reference count (three times). Whereas the abnormality determining unit 602 determines that the speed reducer is in the failure state when the resistance values of both channels 1 and 2 acquired by the acquisition unit 601 fall below the threshold value (second threshold value) simultaneously, regardless of the count.--
--[0050] Alternatively, when the count reaches the reference count (three times), the abnormality determining unit 602 may determine that the speed reducer is in the failure state instead of the warning state. However, even in this case, the speed reducer 10 can still be used for a while. Therefore, the user himself/herself is able to decide whether to continue or stop using the speed reducer 10.--
Appropriate correction is required.
Claim Objections
Claims 1-4 and 9-10 are objected to because they are unclear due to antecedent and/or editorial errors. Going forward with examination, the claims are interpreted to be:
--1. An abnormality determination device, comprising:
an acquisition unit acquiring an electrical resistance value between electrodes in a non-conductive lubricant used for lubrication of a mechanical device, the electrodes being spaced apart from each other in the lubricant;
an abnormality determining unit determining whether there is an abnormality in the mechanical device based on a number of times the electrical resistance value acquired by the acquisition unit falls below a threshold; and
an output unit outputting a result of [[the]] a determination by the abnormality determining unit,
wherein the acquisition unit acquires the electrical resistance value between the electrodes that varies depending on conductive particles collected by magnetic force in the lubricant.--
--2. The abnormality determination device of claim 1, wherein the acquisition unit acquires electrical resistance values between two or more pairs of electrodes in different combinations, and wherein the abnormality determining unit determines whether there is an abnormality in the mechanical device based on the number of times the electrical resistance values have fallen below the threshold.--
--3. The abnormality determination device of claim 2, wherein the abnormality determining unit determines whether there is an abnormality in the mechanical device based on a sum of the number of times each of the electrical resistance values has fallen below the threshold.--
--4. The abnormality determination device of claim 1, wherein the abnormality determining unit determines a state of the abnormality including a failure state indicating a failure of the mechanical device and a warning state before the failure state, and wherein the output unit outputs information indicating either the failure state or the warning state.--
--9. A conductive particle detecting device, comprising:
electrodes in a non-conductive lubricant used for lubrication of a mechanical device, the electrodes being spaced apart from each other in the lubricant;
an acquisition unit acquiring an electrical resistance value between the electrodes that varies depending on conductive particles collected by magnetic force in the lubricant;
an abnormality determining unit determining whether there is an abnormality in the mechanical device based on a number of times the electrical resistance value acquired by the acquisition unit falls below a threshold; and
an output unit outputting a result of [[the]] a determination by the abnormality determining unit.--
10. (Please see the 101 rejections below.)
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.
Claim 10 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 101 because the claim is directed to a judicial exception (an abstract idea) without significantly more.
The claim recites an abnormality determination method performed by a computer used for an abnormality determination device, the method comprising steps which all together appear to be a process practice-able mentally but not physically. Those steps all together are not integrated into any of the physical statutory patentable categories: process, machine, manufacture, or composition of matter. One would not be able to physically practice the claimed invention. Note that, although the claim recites additional elements like “a computer,” those additional elements do not amount to significantly more than the judicial exception, but appear to be just an attempt to convey an abstract idea per se (MPEP 2106).
Going forward with examination, the claim is interpreted to be:
--10. An abnormality determination method performed by a computer used to control an abnormality determination device, the method comprising:
controlling an acquisition unit of the device to acquire an electrical resistance value between electrodes in a non-conductive lubricant used for lubrication of a mechanical device, the electrodes being spaced apart from each other in the lubricant;
controlling a determination unit of the device to determine whether there is an abnormality in the mechanical device based on a number of times the electrical resistance value acquired by the acquisition unit falls below a threshold; and
controlling an output unit of the device to output a result of [[the]] a determination made by the determination unit,
wherein the acquisition unit acquires the electrical resistance value between the electrodes that varies depending on conductive particles collected by magnetic force in the lubricant.--
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
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.
Claims 1, 4 and 9-10 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Best (US 2019/0162687 A1. Best was a “X, D1” reference cited by the European Patent Office, and listed in an IDS filed on 9/17/2025). Best teaches:
1. An abnormality determination device (30), comprising (See fig. 2, reproduced below):
an acquisition unit (being part of a data module 34) acquiring an electrical resistance value between electrodes (32a, 32b) in a non-conductive lubricant (within a flow path 46) used for lubrication of a mechanical device (which may be a gear box 24 of an engine 10; Fig. 1), the electrodes (32a, 32b) being spaced apart from each other in the lubricant (as shown at least in fig. 2);
an abnormality determining unit (being part of the data module 34) determining whether there is an abnormality in the mechanical device (24) based on a number of times the electrical resistance value acquired by the acquisition unit (34) falls below a threshold (Pars. 0020-0022, 0025-0026, 0034-0035); and
an output unit (being part of the abnormality determination device 30; Par. 0030) outputting a result of a determination by the abnormality determining unit 34 (Pars. 0020-0022, 0025-0026, 0034-0035),
wherein the acquisition unit (34) acquires the electrical resistance value between the electrodes (32a, 32b) that varies depending on conductive particles collected by magnetic force in the lubricant (Pars. 0020-0022, 0025-0026, 0034-0035. See Note below).
PNG
media_image1.png
446
516
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Note: Aligning with the present invention, Best essentially teaches that conductive particles in the lubricant may momentarily get trapped by magnetic force of a magnetic particle collector 32’ (Fig. 3) so that they bridge the gap 44 between the two electrodes 32a, 32b, thereby closing a circuit 38. Those particles do not remain trapped/attached to a magnetic collector 32′. Those particles may be dislodged by, for instance, a flow of the lubricant circulating in the flow path 46 around those particles. Those particles, which are momentarily trapped by the magnetic force, induce fluctuations of at least one characteristic of the signal (electrical resistance) discussed herein above. Therefore, although the gap 44 might not be bridged at a time of inspection for example, the gap 44 was bridged at some point. Hence, the fact that the gap 44 was bridged at some point might offer advanced warning that the gap 44 is close to be bridged, or an impending failure of the gear box 24 exists (Pars. 0020-0022, 0025-0026, 0034-00350025-0026).
Evidently, aligning with the present invention, the number of times the electrical resistance value acquired by the acquisition unit (34) falls below the threshold would indicate a degree of deterioration, or an impending failure of the gear box 24 (because said number of times would be proportional to a number of the particles present in the lubricant, as the particles are continuously produced by mechanical wear in the gear box 24). Therefore, Best teaches that the acquisition unit (34) acquires the electrical resistance value between the electrodes (32a, 32b) that varies depending on conductive particles collected by magnetic force in the lubricant, as claimed (Pars. 0020-0022, 0025-0026, 0034-0035).
4. The abnormality determination device of claim 1, wherein the abnormality determining unit (34) determines a state of the abnormality including a failure state indicating a failure of the mechanical device (24) and a warning state before the failure state, and wherein the output unit outputs information indicating either the failure state or the warning state (as is evident from the discussion above in claim 1; Pars. 0020-0022, 0025-0026, 0034-0035).
9 (essentially equivalent to claim 1).
A conductive particle detecting device (30), comprising:
electrodes (3a, 32b) in a non-conductive lubricant (within a flow path 46) used for lubrication of a mechanical device (24), the electrodes (32a, 32b) being spaced apart from each other in the lubricant (as shown at least in fig. 2);
an acquisition unit (being part of a data module 34) acquiring an electrical resistance value between the electrodes (32a, 32b) that varies depending on conductive particles collected by magnetic force in the lubricant (Pars. 0020-0022, 0025-0026, 0034-0035);
an abnormality determining unit (being part of the data module 34) determining whether there is an abnormality in the mechanical device (24) based on a number of times the electrical resistance value acquired by the acquisition unit (34) falls below a threshold (Pars. 0020-0022, 0025-0026, 0034-0035); and
an output unit (being part of the abnormality determination device 30; Par, 0030) outputting a result of a determination by the abnormality determining unit (Pars. 0020-0022, 0025-0026, 0034-0035).
10 (essentially equivalent to claim 1).
An abnormality determination method (Pars. 0001, 0005, 0019: “Method”) performed by a computer (Par. 19: “computer”) used to control an abnormality determination device (30), the method comprising:
controlling an acquisition unit (being part of a data module 34) of the device (30) to acquire an electrical resistance value between electrodes (32a, 32b) in a non-conductive lubricant (within a flow path 46) used for lubrication of a mechanical device (24), the electrodes (32a, 32b) being spaced apart from each other in the lubricant (as shown at least in fig. 2);
controlling a determination unit (being part of a data module 34) of the device (30) to determine whether there is an abnormality in the mechanical device (24) based on a number of times the electrical resistance value acquired by the acquisition unit falls below a threshold; and
controlling an output unit (being part of the abnormality determination device 30; Par. 0030) of the device (30) to output a result of a determination made by a determination unit;
wherein the acquisition unit (34) acquires the electrical resistance value between the electrodes (32a, 32b) that varies depending on conductive particles collected by magnetic force in the lubricant (Pars. 0020-0022, 0025-0026, 0034-0035).
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 5-7 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Best.
5. Best teaches the abnormality determination device of claim 1, wherein the threshold is a value that can be changed/set (Par. 0030: “…the sensor 32 is configurable to set the predetermined threshold of the resistance…”).
Best is silent about: wherein the threshold is a value that can be changed/set depending on a size of the mechanical device 24 (as recited in claim 5), depending on at least one of viscosity or insulation properties of the lubricant (as recited in claim 6), and/or the number of times being a value that can be changed/set depending on a size of the mechanical device (as recited in claim 7).
However, it has been held that optimization within prior art conditions or through routine experimentation is an obvious variation of a known structure, thus uninventive and unpatentable. In re Aller, 220 F.2d 454, 456, 105 USPQ 233, 235 (CCPA 1955). As for the present case, it appears that one may perform routine experimentation to determine the most suitable threshold and/or number of times depending on operating conditions and/or parameters of elements involved, including but not limited to operating temperature or pressure of the mechanical device (24), size of the mechanical device (24), viscosity or insulation properties of the lubricant, etc.
It would have been obvious to one ordinarily skilled in the art before the effective filing date of the present application to perform routine experimentation to determine the most suitable threshold and/or number of times, wherein the threshold is a value that can be changed/set depending on a size of the mechanical device (24), and/or depending on at least one of viscosity or insulation properties of the lubricant, and/or the number of times being a value that can be changed/set depending on a size of the mechanical device.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 2-3 are 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. The following is a statement for indication of an allowable subject matter:
With respect to claim 2, prior art of record doesn’t teach, suggest, or render obvious the total combination of the recited features, including the following allowable subject matter: “wherein the acquisition unit acquires electrical resistance values between two or more pairs of electrodes (130a, 130b, 130c, 130d) in different combinations, and wherein the abnormality determining unit determines whether there is an abnormality in the mechanical device based on the number of times the electrical resistance values have fallen below the threshold.”
(Claim 3 is dependent on claim 2.)
Note: In Best, it appears that one may provide two or more pairs of electrodes (32a, 32b) in the lubricant of the mechanical device (24). The two or more pairs of electrodes could serve as back-up redundant pairs of electrodes to ensure robustness/safety of the device (30) and/or to provide redundant checking of a result of a determination. However, there appears neither a reason nor motivation from prior art to have the acquisition unit (34) acquire electrical resistance values between the two or more pairs of electrodes in different combinations (as recited in claim 2).
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Nguyen (Wyn) Q. Ha whose telephone number is (571) 272-2863, email: nguyenq.ha@uspto.gov. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday 8 am - 4:30 pm (Eastern Time).
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, Stephen Meier can be reached at (571) 272-2149. 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.
/Nguyen Q. Ha/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2853 February 8, 2026