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 .
Claim Objections
2. Claims 23 and 29 are objected to because of the following informalities: a) In claim 23 line 2, please change : "g-value*(t_rev)A2 " to -- g-value*(t_rev)^2--. The term A2 appears to be a typo, where the "A" should instead be "^" to represent an exponent.
b) In claim 29 line 3, please change "vehicle centre of gravity" to --vehicle center of gravity--. Appropriate correction is required.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 101
3. 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 30 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 101 because the claimed invention is directed to non-statutory subject matter.
Regarding the terms "computer-readable storage medium" in claim 30, the broadest reasonable interpretation of a claim drawn to a computer-readable storage medium, as presented in the claim, covers both forms of non-transitory tangible media and transitory propagating signals per se in view of the ordinary and customary meaning of computer readable media, particularly when the specification is silent (see MPEP 2111.01). Because the broadest reasonable interpretation covers a signal per se, a rejection under 35 USC 101 is appropriate as covering non-statutory subject matter. See 1351 OG 212, Feb 23 2010.
The Examiner suggests that the Applicant replaces “computer-readable storage medium” in claim 30 with "non-transitory computer-readable storage medium."
4. The remaining independent claims (and associated dependent claims) are not further rejected under 35 U.S.C. 101, as they do not recite a computer-readable storage medium, and also because they recite a particular physical arrangement of an acceleration sensor (where "the impact signals being induced in acceleration data measured by an acceleration sensor mounted in the tire at a contact patch coming into contact with the road surface with each revolution of the tire") that amounts to applying a judicial exception with or by use of a particular machine (see MPEP 2106.05(b) beyond mere extrasolution data gathering).
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
5. The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(b):
(b) CONCLUSION.—The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph:
The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the applicant regards as his invention.
Claim 23 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor (or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the applicant), regards as the invention.
a) Claim 23 recites the limitations of "checking whether the generated time-related parameter is comparing the value of g-value*(t_rev)A2 to an expected error value range." There is insufficient antecedent basis or any definition for the term "g-value," as claim 16 (on which claim 23 depends from) has no recitation or teaching for any "g-value". Claim 22 does recite a definition for "g-value," but claim 23 does not depend from claim 22. Therefore, it is unclear what "g-value" represents. Although the claims are interpreted in light of the specification, limitations from the specification are not read into the claims (see In re Van Geuns, 988 F.2d 1181, 26 USPQ2d 1057 (Fed. Cir. 1993)).
Appropriate correction/clarification is requested.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
6. 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 (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) 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.
7. Claims 16, 30, and 31 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Suzuki et al. (US Pat. Pub. 2018/0222458, hereinafter "Suzuki").
In regards to claim 16, Suzuki at least teaches a method for measuring impact signals over a plurality of revolutions of a tire that rolls on a road surface (Suzuki Figs. 2-3 and abstract teach a method of extracting a detection signal (impact signal) of a vibration power generation element during a ground contact section from a rolling tire of a vehicle traveling on a surface), the impact signals being induced in acceleration data measured by an acceleration sensor mounted in the tire at a contact patch coming into contact with the road surface with each revolution of the tire (Suzuki paragraphs [0026] and [0029] teach vibration impact signals being induced in acceleration data measured by an acceleration sensor (as a vibration power generation element) in the tire at a contact patch coming into contact with the road surface with each revolution of the tire), the method comprising:
acquiring the acceleration data over a plurality of revolutions of the tire (Suzuki paragraph [0113] teaches acquiring acceleration data from the vibration power generation element for several past rotations of the tire including the present tire rotation);
processing the acceleration data to measure acceleration values for each impact signal and calculate an impact peak acceleration value (Suzuki paragraphs [0029], [0038]-[0039], and [0113] teach processing the acceleration data to measure acceleration vibration detection signals (as represented by an output voltage) and detecting a peak value representing a ground contact (impact) section);
calculating a running average of the impact peak acceleration value over the plurality of revolutions of the tire (Suzuki paragraph [0113] teaches calculating an average value of the peak values over a plurality of rotations of the tire);
measuring a start time and an end time of each impact signal by comparing acceleration values of the acceleration data to a dynamic threshold (Suzuki paragraphs [0007] and [0040]-[0041] teaches measuring a ground contact start time as a next maximum value of a pulse waveform indicated by the detection signal after the pulse waveform becomes larger than a first threshold, and a ground contact end time being defined as a next minimum value of the pulse waveform after the pulse waveform becomes smaller than a second threshold, where the first and second thresholds are dynamically adjusted such as depending on the traveling speed of the vehicle), wherein the dynamic threshold is adjusted dependent on the running average of the impact peak acceleration value (Suzuki paragraph [0113] teaches where the first and second thresholds are dynamically set dependent on the running average of the impact peak acceleration value (as represented by output voltage) over the several past rotations);
generating, from the measured start time and end time of each impact signal, a time-related parameter chosen from one or more of: a duration of an impact signal; a time period between two consecutive impact signals (t_rev); and a ratio between the duration and the time period (Suzuki Fig. 3 and paragraph [0007] teach generating one of a time period between the ground contact start time to a ground contact end time as a ground contact section (duration of an impact signal)); and
transmitting the time-related parameter to an external server (Suzuki paragraph [0043]-[0044] teaches transmitting the time-related parameter of the ground contact section as part of a road surface condition data using a transmitter 14, and paragraph [0074] teaches where the road surface condition is received by a controller area network (server))).
In regards to claim 30, Suzuki teaches a computer-readable storage medium storing firmware code that, when executed on a data processor (Suzuki paragraph [0073] teaches a computer-readable storage ROM storing a program (code) for executing by a microcomputer having a CPU processor), directs the performance of operations for measuring impact signals over a plurality of revolutions of a tire that rolls on a road surface (Suzuki Figs. 2-3 and abstract teach carrying out operations for measuring a detection signal (impact signal) of a vibration power generation element during a ground contact section from a rolling tire of a vehicle traveling on a surface), the impact signals being induced in acceleration data measured by an acceleration sensor mounted in the tire at a contact patch coming into contact with the road surface with each revolution of the tire (Suzuki paragraphs [0026] and [0029] teach vibration impact signals being induced in acceleration data measured by an acceleration sensor (as a vibration power generation element) in the tire at a contact patch coming into contact with the road surface with each revolution of the tire), the operations comprising:
acquiring the acceleration data over a plurality of revolutions of the tire (Suzuki paragraph [0113] teaches acquiring acceleration data from the vibration power generation element for several past rotations of the tire including the present tire rotation);
processing the acceleration data to measure acceleration values for each impact signal and calculate an impact peak acceleration value (Suzuki paragraphs [0029], [0038]-[0039], and [0113] teach processing the acceleration data to measure acceleration vibration detection signals (as represented by an output voltage) and detecting a peak value representing a ground contact (impact) section);
calculating a running average of the impact peak acceleration value over the plurality of revolutions of the tire (Suzuki paragraph [0113] teaches calculating an average value of the peak values over a plurality of rotations of the tire);
measuring a start time and an end time of each impact signal by comparing acceleration values of the acceleration data to a dynamic threshold (Suzuki paragraphs [0007] and [0040]-[0041] teaches measuring a ground contact start time as a next maximum value of a pulse waveform indicated by the detection signal after the pulse waveform becomes larger than a first threshold, and a ground contact end time being defined as a next minimum value of the pulse waveform after the pulse waveform becomes smaller than a second threshold, where the first and second thresholds are dynamically adjusted such as depending on the traveling speed of the vehicle), wherein the dynamic threshold is adjusted dependent on the running average of the impact peak acceleration value (Suzuki paragraph [0113] teaches where the first and second thresholds are dynamically set dependent on the running average of the impact peak acceleration value (as represented by output voltage) over the several past rotations);
generating, from the measured start time and end time of each impact signal, a time-related parameter chosen from one or more of: a duration of an impact signal; a time period between two consecutive impact signals (t_rev); and a ratio between the duration and the time period (Suzuki Fig. 3 and paragraph [0007] teach generating one of a time period between the ground contact start time to a ground contact end time as a ground contact section (duration of an impact signal)); and
transmitting the time-related parameter to an external server (Suzuki paragraph [0043]-[0044] teaches transmitting the time-related parameter of the ground contact section as part of a road surface condition data using a transmitter 14, and paragraph [0074] teaches where the road surface condition is received by a controller area network (server))).
In regards to claim 31, Suzuki teaches a tire-mounted sensor system for measuring impact signals over a plurality of revolutions of a tire that rolls on a road surface (Suzuki Figs. 2-3 and abstract teach a tire-mounted sensor system for measuring a detection signal (impact signal) of a vibration power generation element during a ground contact section from a rolling tire of a vehicle traveling on a surface), the impact signals being induced in acceleration data measured by the tire-mounted sensor system mounted in the tire at a contact patch coming into contact with the road surface with each revolution of the tire (Suzuki paragraphs [0026] and [0029] teach vibration impact signals being induced in acceleration data measured by an acceleration sensor (as a vibration power generation element) in the tire at a contact patch coming into contact with the road surface with each revolution of the tire), the tire-mounted sensor system comprising:
an acceleration sensor configured to acquire the acceleration data over a plurality of revolutions of the tire (Suzuki paragraph [0029] teaches an acceleration sensor as a vibration power generation element, and paragraph [0113] teaches acquiring acceleration data from the vibration power generation element for several past rotations of the tire including the present tire rotation);
one or more processors (Suzuki paragraphs [0037] and [0073] teach a CPU processor) configured to:
process the acceleration data to measure acceleration values for each impact signal and calculate an impact peak acceleration value (Suzuki paragraphs [0029], [0038]-[0039], and [0113] teach processing the acceleration data to measure acceleration vibration detection signals (as represented by an output voltage) and detecting a peak value representing a ground contact (impact) section);
calculate a running average of the impact peak acceleration value over the plurality of revolutions of the tire (Suzuki paragraph [0113] teaches calculating an average value of the peak values over a plurality of rotations of the tire);
measure a start time and an end time of each impact signal by comparing acceleration values of the acceleration data to a dynamic threshold (Suzuki paragraphs [0007] and [0040]-[0041] teaches measuring a ground contact start time as a next maximum value of a pulse waveform indicated by the detection signal after the pulse waveform becomes larger than a first threshold, and a ground contact end time being defined as a next minimum value of the pulse waveform after the pulse waveform becomes smaller than a second threshold, where the first and second thresholds are dynamically adjusted such as depending on the traveling speed of the vehicle), wherein the dynamic threshold is adjusted dependent on the running average of the impact peak acceleration value (Suzuki paragraph [0113] teaches where the first and second thresholds are dynamically set dependent on the running average of the impact peak acceleration value (as represented by output voltage) over the several past rotations); and
generate, from the measured start time and end time of each impact signal, a time-related parameter chosen from one or more of: a duration of an impact signal; a time period between two consecutive impact signals; and a ratio between the duration and the time period (Suzuki Fig. 3 and paragraph [0007] teach generating one of a time period between the ground contact start time to a ground contact end time as a ground contact section (duration of an impact signal)); and
a transmitter configured to transmit the time-related parameter to an external server (Suzuki paragraph [0043]-[0044] teaches using a transmitter 14 for transmitting the time-related parameter of the ground contact section as part of a road surface condition data, and paragraph [0074] teaches where the road surface condition is received by a controller area network (server)).
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
8. 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.
The factual inquiries for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows:
1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art.
2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue.
3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art.
4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness.
9. Claims 29 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Suzuki et al. (US Pat. Pub. 2018/0222458) as applied to claim 16 above, and further in view of Nishiyama. (US Pat. Pub. 2021/0208029).
In regards to claim 29, Suzuki teaches the method further comprising: receiving the time-related parameter at the external server (Suzuki paragraph [0043]-[0044] teaches transmitting the time-related parameter of the ground contact section as part of a road surface condition data using a transmitter 14, and paragraph [0074] teaches where the road surface condition is received by a controller area network (external server))). Suzuki fails to expressly teach and using the time-related parameter to determine one or more of: (i) tire load; (ii) vehicle centre of gravity; and (iii) rotational speed of the tire. Nishiyama paragraphs [0033]-[0034] teach calculating a ground contact time ratio (CTR) from the ground contact time (duration of impact) Tt divided over a rotation time Tr, where the ground contact time ratio is used as a measure of load because the ratio is almost proportional to the load.
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to further combine the teachings of Nishiyama to perform further calculations to determine additional properties that are based on the time-related parameter, such as a tire load which has a known relationship to the time-related parameter of duration of impact. Therefore, it would be well within the level of ordinary skill to derive further properties related to the tire, such as the tire load, in order to more completely characterize the conditions of the tire.
Allowable Subject Matter
10. Claims 17-22, 24-28, and 32-25 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. Claim 23 would be allowable if rewritten to overcome the rejection(s) under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), 2nd paragraph, set forth in this Office action and to include all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
11. The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter: Claim 17 contains allowable subject matter because the closest prior art, Suzuki et al. (US Pat. Pub. 2018/0222458) fails to anticipate or render obvious the method further comprising: processing the acceleration data to measure acceleration values between impact signals and calculate an inter-impact peak acceleration value, in combination with the rest of the claim limitations as claimed and defined by the Applicant. While Suzuki generally measures acceleration-based voltage values including over a period covering both a ground contact section and before/afterwards (see Figs. 4a-4c and Figs. 5a-5b), Suzuki does not suggest or make obvious any teaching to further "process" the acceleration data between identified impact signals and further calculating an "inter-impact peak" acceleration value out of these intermediate acceleration signals.
Claim 22 contains allowable subject matter because the closest prior art, Suzuki et al. (US Pat. Pub. 2018/0222458) fails to anticipate or render obvious the method further comprising: processing the acceleration data to measure acceleration values between impact signals and calculate an average acceleration value between impact signals as a g-value, in combination with the rest of the claim limitations as claimed and defined by the Applicant. While Suzuki generally measures acceleration-based voltage values including over a period covering both a ground contact section and before/afterwards (see Figs. 4a-4c and Figs. 5a-5b), Suzuki does not suggest or make obvious any teaching to further "process" the acceleration data between identified impact signals and further calculating a singular "g-value" from an "average acceleration value between impact signals" out of these intermediate acceleration signals.
Claim 23 contains allowable subject matter because the closest prior art, Suzuki et al. (US Pat. Pub. 2018/0222458) fails to anticipate or render obvious the method further comprising: checking whether the generated time-related parameter is valid by comparing the value of g-value*(t_rev)A2 to an expected error value range, in combination with the rest of the claim limitations as claimed and defined by the Applicant. There is no teaching or suggestion in Suzuki for calculating a "g-value," let alone further comparing the value of g-value*(t_rev)^2 to an expected error range to validate the time-related parameter.
Claim 24 contains allowable subject matter because the closest prior art, Suzuki et al. (US Pat. Pub. 2018/0222458) fails to anticipate or render obvious the method further comprising: measuring a zero-g value for the tire by processing the acceleration data to measure acceleration values when the tire is not moving; and processing the acceleration data, for each impact signal, to measure a zero offset in the acceleration values, which is calculated as the difference between the running average of the peak acceleration value and the zero-g value, in combination with the rest of the claim limitations as claimed and defined by the Applicant. There is no teaching or suggestion in Suzuki for calculating a zero-g value for a tire at rest and using that value to further measure a zero-offset in the acceleration values for each impact signal.
Claim 32 contains allowable subject matter because the closest prior art, Suzuki et al. (US Pat. Pub. 2018/0222458) fails to anticipate or render obvious the system wherein the one or more processors are configured to process the acceleration data to measure acceleration values between impact signals and calculate an inter-impact peak acceleration value, in combination with the rest of the claim limitations as claimed and defined by the Applicant. While Suzuki generally measures acceleration-based voltage values including over a period covering both a ground contact section and before/afterwards (see Figs. 4a-4c and Figs. 5a-5b), Suzuki does not suggest or make obvious any teaching to further "process" the acceleration data between identified impact signals and further calculating an "inter-impact peak" acceleration value out of these intermediate acceleration signals.
12. Dependent claims 18-21 and 25-28 depend from claim 17 and contain allowable subject matter for at least the same reasons as given for claim 17. Dependent claims 33-35 depend from claim 32 and contain allowable subject matter for at least the same reasons as given for claim 32.
Pertinent Art
13. Applicants are directed to consider additional pertinent prior art included on the Notice of References Cited (PTOL 892) attached herewith. The Examiner has pointed out particular references contained in the prior art of record within the body of this action for the convenience of the Applicant. Although the specified citations are representative of the teachings in the art and are applied to the specific limitations within the individual claim, other passages and figures may apply. Applicant, in preparing the response, should consider fully the entire reference as potentially teaching all or part of the claimed invention, as well as the context of the of the passage as taught by the prior art or disclosed by the Examiner. The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
A. Matsuda et al. (U Pat. No. 7,673,504) discloses an Apparatus and Method for Detecting Internal Mechanical Failure Occurring in a Tire. B. Masago et al. (US Pat. No. 10,585,113) discloses a Method for Determining Detachment of Acceleration Sensor and Apparatus for Determining Detachment of Acceleration Sensor.
C. Steiner (US Pat. No. 10,875,539) discloses Tire Load Estimation.
D. Tang et al. (US Pat. No. 11,458,784) discloses Methods and Apparatus to Determine Tire Tread Depth.
E. Wilson (US Pat. Pub. 2003/0058118) discloses Vehicle and Vehicle Tire Monitoring System, Apparatus and Method.
F. Pannek (US Pat. Pub. 2010/0057295) discloses Method and Device for Detecting Acceleration Peaks in Tires.
G. Saito (US Pat. Pub. 2019/0184773) discloses Tire-Mounted Sensor.
H. Takedomi (US Pat. Pub. 2020/0173872) discloses Tire Load Estimation Method and Tire Load Estimation Device.
Conclusion
14. Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to PAUL D LEE whose telephone number is (571)270-1598. The examiner can normally be reached M to F, 9:30 am to 6 pm.
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, Arleen Vazquez can be reached at (571)272-2619. 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.
PAUL D. LEE
Examiner
Art Unit 2857
/PAUL D LEE/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2857 8/6/2026
Prosecution Insights