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 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 14 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 101 because the claimed invention is directed to non-statutory subject matter. The claim(s) does/do not fall within at least one of the four categories of patent eligible subject matter because “a computer program product” is merely an abstract idea.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
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.
Claims 3, 5, 6, 7, 8, and 15 are 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.
Claim 3 recites the phrase “in particular…”. The claim fails to make clear whether the phrase following “in particular…” is considered further limiting of the claim, or merely optional. One of ordinary skill in the art would not understand the claim scope. For the purpose of rejection, the claim will be considered optional. Additionally, claims 5, 6, 7, 8 and 15 each recite the phrase “in particular…” followed by another phrase which is unclear whether it is further limiting. Accordingly, these claims are rejected according to the same rationale as claim 3 above.
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.
(a)(2) the claimed invention was described in a patent issued under section 151, or in an application for patent published or deemed published under section 122(b), in which the patent or application, as the case may be, names another inventor and was effectively filed before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claims 1-15 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by PESCHMANN (US Pub # 2006/0098773).
Regarding claim 1, PESCHMANN discloses a method for detecting alarm objects in items of luggage by means of a primary detection system and a second detection system, comprising:
carrying out a primary detection method by means of the primary detection system to detect at least one alarm object (FIGURE 1 shows first stage 110 (CT unit) configured to carrying out a primary detection method; [0061]);
transferring at least one alarm object parameter (AP) to the secondary detection system in the event of an alarm object being detected in the primary detection method (first stage computer processing system 131 receives image data, analyzes data, generates object parameters (aka threat map including shape, size, location, etc.), and transmits parameters to S-I unit 115 including processing system 132; [0062]);
adapting at least one detection parameter (DP) of the secondary detection system on the basis of the alarm object parameter (S-I unit 115 interprets the threat map and image data, and moves probing beams into position best suited for sampling the threshold resolution information; [0063]);
carrying out a secondary detection method by means of the secondary detection system with adapted at least one detection parameter in order to check the alarm object detected in the primary detection method (S-I unit 115 samples determined best position for threats; [0063]); and
outputting an alarm signal in the event that the checking of the alarm object proves positive (based upon automatic threat resolution algorithm, S-I unit 115 provides data to an operation or automatically activates an alarm; [0063]).
PNG
media_image1.png
394
596
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Figure 1 of PESCHMANN
Regarding claim 2, PESCHMANN discloses wherein in the primary and secondary detection systems the items of luggage are scanned by means of EM radiation (CT and S-I units including generated x-ray data, x-ray diffraction and fluorescence spectra; [0061]).
Regarding claim 3, PESCHMANN discloses wherein different detection methods are used for the primary and second detection systems ([0061]).
Regarding claim 4, PESCHMANN discloses wherein the at least one alarm object parameter includes position, orientation, size, and geometry of the alarm object ([0062]).
Regarding claim 5, PESCHMANN discloses where the at least one detection parameter influences the statistical quality of the secondary detection method including belt speed of a conveyor belt conveying the item of luggage, or wherein the second detection method operates the x-ray source at a different intensity (first and second conveyors 121 and 122 are implied to operate at different speeds based on different processing time of scans [0138]; apertures are adjusted based on the alarm object location determined via the object parameter; [0086]; FIG 5).
Regarding claims 7 and 8, PESCHMANN discloses the at least detection parameter (DP) influences the detection and spatial resolution of the secondary detection method, including focusing, angle, and collimation ([0086]; FIG 5).
Regarding claim 9, PESCHMANN explains that when adapting the at least one detection parameter (DP) a lower limit and/or upper limit specific to the respective parameter is complied with (using an algorithm to evaluate regions of objects based upon a threshold level; [0022, 0127]).
Regarding claim 10, PESCHMANN discloses wherein for the secondary detection method, an energy resolving detection device is arranged in the secondary detection system to measure an energy spectrum (ES)(energy transmission spectrum is generated from the detection of diffracted dual energy beams. Alternatively transmission based-detection can generate a transmitted energy spectra of the ROI in the baggage; [0094-0100]).
Regarding claim 11, PESCHMANN discloses that when no alarm object is detected in the primary detection method further steps are omitted ([0020]).
Regarding claim 12, PESCHMANN discloses wherein the primary detection result of the primary detection method is taken into account when evaluating the secondary detection result of the secondary detection method (the threat detection map generated by the primary detection method is taken into account when evaluating the secondary detection result of the second detection method, to corroborate the position of the threat matches the secondary detection method; [0062, 0063, 0120, 0121]).
Regarding claim 13, PESCHMANN discloses wherein a position detection of the alarm object detected in the primary detection method is performed before the secondary detection method is carried out ([0062-0063, 0120-0121]).
Regarding claim 14, PESCHMANN discloses a computer program product comprising commands which when run by a computer cause it to carry out the steps of a method having the features of claim 1 (software, algorithms, etc.; [0067]).
Regarding claim 15, PESCHMANN discloses a detection device for detecting alarm objects in items of luggage, having a primary detection system for carrying out a primary detection method for detecting alarm objects and a second detection system for carrying out a secondary detection method for detecting alarm objects, further having a control unit with a transfer module for transferring at least one alarm object parameter (AP) to the secondary detection system in the event of an alarm object being detected in the primary detection method and an adaptation module for adapting at least one detecting parameter of the secondary detection system on the basis of the alarm object parameter (AP), wherein the transfer module and/or the adaption module are designed to carry out a method with steps of claim 1 ([0061-0063).
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to CASEY BRYANT whose telephone number is (571)270-7329. The examiner can normally be reached M-F // 7-3P EST.
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, UZMA ALAM can be reached at 571-272-3995. 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.
CASEY BRYANT
Primary Examiner
Art Unit 2884
/CASEY BRYANT/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2884