DETAILED ACTION
Claims 1-4 and 6-10 filed January 26th 2026 are pending in the current 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 arguments with respect to claim(s) 1-4, 6-10 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 (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 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) 1-4, 6, 9, and 10 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Nakatani et al. (US2012/0303324) in view of Unuma et al. (US11,397,655) in view of Cieri et al. (US4,872,136)
Consider claim 1, where Nakatani teaches a pulse width display system, comprising: an input-output device including a processor, (See Nakatani ¶39 where the internal circuit 13 comprises a processor and is provided with a diagnostic function for diagnosing abnormality of the connection condition of the control device 1 and the operating terminal 2 and/or the satisfactoriness of the operating condition of the operating terminal 2, from the diagnostic pulse signal that is fed back (i.e. the feedback signal) an output circuit to output a signal to an output device, and an input circuit to receive a signal from an input device; (See Nakatani ¶41-43 where there is a variable amplifier circuit 12 (output device) that generates a diagnostic pulse signal based on the diagnostic pulse data; additionally, there is a receiving circuit 16 (input device) that receives a signal from the terminal device)) a controller; and a terminal, wherein the processor of the input-output device includes an output determiner to perform an output failure diagnostic test to determine whether the output circuit has a failure based on an output diagnostic pulse being a test pulse output from the output circuit to the output device, and transmit output diagnosis result information indicating a result of the determination to the controller, (See Nakatani Figs 9A, 10A, and ¶98-114 where embodiments 4 and 5 determine the satisfactoriness of the transmission path of the diagnostic pulse and determination of a fault in the transmission line may be determined) an input determiner to perform an input failure diagnostic test to determine whether the input circuit has a failure based on an input diagnostic pulse being a test pulse input from the input device into the input circuit, and transmit input diagnosis result information indicating a result of the determination to the controller, (See Nakatani Figs. 6, 7, 8A and ¶82-97 if, for a negative voltage pulse, the diagnostic pulse signal, which ought not to be detectable in normal operation, in fact detected by the receiving circuit 16, in other words, if there is a signal line short-circuit or a fault of some kind, passage of this pulse by the receiving circuit 21 of the operating terminal 2 can be identified by the control device 1.) and a pulse width transmitter to detect a pulse width of the input diagnostic pulse or the output diagnostic pulse and transmit pulse width information indicating the detected pulse width to the controller, the controller transmits, to the terminal, the output diagnosis result information, the input diagnosis result information, and the pulse width information received from the processor, (See Nakatani claim 2 and Figs. 4A, 4B, 5A, 5B wherein said internal circuit receives said feedback signal and measures said rise time and said pulse width of said diagnostic pulse signal that is transmitted and comprises a correction table in which there are arranged in correspondence beforehand said pulse width of a measurement value in question and said corrected pulse data and a pulse crest value thereof; and said diagnostic pulse data is automatically corrected using said measured value of said feedback signal by referencing said correction table.)
Nakatani teaches a terminal, however Nakatani does not explicitly teach the terminal receives selection of a type of the test pulse, and displays a diagnosis result from the determination by the input determiner, a diagnosis result from the determination by the output determiner, and a time chart indicating a most recent change in the pulse width of the output diagnostic pulse or the input diagnostic pulse corresponding to the received type during the determination in association with each other, based on the output diagnostic result information, the input diagnosis result information, and the pulse width information received from the controller. However, in the analogous field of detecting anomalies in sensor data Unuma teaches the terminal receives selection of a type of the test pulse, and displays a diagnosis result from the determination by the input determiner, a diagnosis result from the determination by the output determiner, and a time chart indicating a most recent change in the pulse width of the output diagnostic pulse or the input diagnostic pulse corresponding to the received type during the determination in association with each other, based on the output diagnostic result information, the input diagnosis result information, and the pulse width information received from the controller. (See Unuma Fig. 4 and col 5 line 41- col 6 line 47 The optimal diagnosis processing search unit 1 is a unit to search an optimal diagnosis processing procedure and an algorithm and, as illustrated in FIG. 1, consists of a central control device 11, an input device 12, an output device 13, a communication device 14, a signal processing group storage unit 15, a signal processing execution unit 16, and an actual operation processing reconfiguration unit 17. These components may be realized using a personal computer, or may be manufactured as a dedicated device. In addition, as described below, some or all of the processing procedure and the algorithm may be configured using a reconfigurable electronic circuit or a CPU. Additionally, the visualization 45 of the processing result, drawing data is created on the basis of the processing result, and the drawing data is displayed in the output device 13 of the optimal diagnosis processing search unit 1. ) Therefore, it would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art that the data from the internal circuit of Nakatani could be interfaced with a personal computer terminal as taught by Unuma. The personal computer can be used to configure the settings and draw the time/voltage charts described by Nakatani (and presented in Nakatani Figs. 5A, 5B or 9B for example). One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to perform the modification for the advantage of/ benefit of presenting a user-friendly interface to allow a user to better visualize the testing being performed.
Unuma teaches selecting a desired diagnosis processing procedure using a screen image editor displayed in the output device 13 such as a liquid crystal display. (See Unuma col 7 lines 33-52) However, Unuma does not explicitly teach a type of the test pulse to be displayed. However, in an analogous field of endeavor Cieri teaches a type of the test pulse to be displayed (Cieri col 2 line 52-col 3 line 2 and col 6 line 5-20 where the user of a programmable controller is therefore required to select input and output functions separately that module to be monitored and controlled and provides a display of diagnostic information pertaining to the module.) Therefore it would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art that the selected diagnosis processing procedure of Unuma would select for input and output types a taught by Cieri. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to perform the modification for the advantage of/ benefit of using existing types to yield predictable results.
Consider claim 2, where Nakatani in view of Unuma in view of Cieri teaches the pulse width display system according to claim 1, wherein the input-output device includes an abnormality cause estimator to estimate, upon the output determiner or the input determiner determining a presence of an abnormality, a cause of the abnormality based on pattern data about a pulse width of the output diagnostic pulse or the input diagnostic pulse when the abnormality occurs. (See Nakatani Figs. 6, 7, 8A and ¶82-97 if, for a negative voltage pulse, the diagnostic pulse signal, which ought not to be detectable in normal operation, in fact detected by the receiving circuit 16, in other words, if there is a signal line short-circuit or a fault of some kind, passage of this pulse by the receiving circuit 21 of the operating terminal 2 can be identified by the control device 1. For instance the pattern presented in Figs. 8B1, 8B2, 8B3 show a short circuit pattern).
Consider claim 3, where Nakatani in view of Unuma in view of Cieri teaches the pulse width display system according to claim 2, wherein the pattern data is updated with machine learning. (See Unuma Fig. 4 and col 5 line 41- col 6 line 47 in FIG. 4, as illustrated in a processing block 44, as a specific method of the abnormality diagnosis, there are prepared a threshold processing, a trend analysis, a statistics analysis, a method of using AI, and a method of using machine learning. The diagnosis processing may be performed using the diagnosis algorithm. ) Therefore, it would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art that the data from the internal circuit of Nakatani could be analyzed using machine learning as taught by Unuma. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to perform the modification for the advantage of/ benefit of using known methods of analysis to yield the intended analysis.
Consider claim 4, where Nakatani in view of Unuma in view of Cieri teaches the pulse width display system according to claim 1, wherein the pulse width transmitter averages a plurality of sets of the pulse width information and transmits average pulse width information resulting from the averaging to the controller, and the pulse width transmitter receives a user instruction as to whether to average the plurality of sets of pulse width information. (See Unuma Fig. 4 and col 5 line 41- col 6 line 47 The feature extraction processing S5 is a process of extracting a feature effective to the extraction of a machine abnormality. In FIG. 4, as illustrated in a processing block 43, an effective value processing, an average value processing) Therefore, it would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art that the data from the internal circuit of Nakatani could be analyzed using averages as taught by Unuma. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to perform the modification for the advantage of/ benefit of using known methods of analysis to yield the intended analysis.
Consider claim 6, where Nakatani teaches a pulse width display method, comprising: determining whether an input circuit or an output circuit has an abnormality based on a diagnostic pulse being a test pulse output from the output circuit to an output device or a test pulse input from an input device into the input circuit; (See Nakatani ¶41-43 where there is a variable amplifier circuit 12 (output device) that generates a diagnostic pulse signal based on the diagnostic pulse data; additionally, there is a receiving circuit 16 (input device) that receives a signal from the terminal device)) detecting a pulse width of the diagnostic pulse; receiving selection of a type of the test pulse;(See Nakatani claim 2 and Figs. 4A, 4B, 5A, 5B wherein said internal circuit receives said feedback signal and measures said rise time and said pulse width of said diagnostic pulse signal that is transmitted and comprises a correction table in which there are arranged in correspondence beforehand said pulse width of a measurement value in question and said corrected pulse data and a pulse crest value thereof; and said diagnostic pulse data is automatically corrected using said measured value of said feedback signal by referencing said correction table.)
Nakatani teaches a determination. However, Nakatani does not explicitly teach displaying a diagnosis result from the determination in the determining and a time chart indicating a most recent change in the pulse width of the diagnostic pulse during the determination detected by the detecting in association with each other, the diagnostic pulse corresponding to the type received by the receiving. However, in the analogous field of detecting anomalies in sensor data Unuma teaches displaying a diagnosis result from the determination in the determining and a time chart indicating a most recent change in the pulse width of the diagnostic pulse during the determination detected by the detecting in association with each other, the diagnostic pulse corresponding to the type received by the receiving. . (See Unuma Fig. 4 and col 5 line 41- col 6 line 47 The optimal diagnosis processing search unit 1 is a unit to search an optimal diagnosis processing procedure and an algorithm and, as illustrated in FIG. 1, consists of a central control device 11, an input device 12, an output device 13, a communication device 14, a signal processing group storage unit 15, a signal processing execution unit 16, and an actual operation processing reconfiguration unit 17. These components may be realized using a personal computer, or may be manufactured as a dedicated device. In addition, as described below, some or all of the processing procedure and the algorithm may be configured using a reconfigurable electronic circuit or a CPU. Additionally, the visualization 45 of the processing result, drawing data is created on the basis of the processing result, and the drawing data is displayed in the output device 13 of the optimal diagnosis processing search unit 1. ) Therefore, it would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art that the data from the internal circuit of Nakatani could be interfaced with a personal computer terminal as taught by Unuma. The personal computer can be used to configure the settings and draw the time/voltage charts described by Nakatani (and presented in Nakatani Figs. 5A, 5B, or 9B for example). One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to perform the modification for the advantage of/ benefit of presenting a user-friendly interface to allow a user to better visualize the testing being performed.
Unuma teaches selecting a desired diagnosis processing procedure using a screen image editor displayed in the output device 13 such as a liquid crystal display. (See Unuma col 7 lines 33-52) However, Unuma does not explicitly teach a type of the test pulse to be displayed. However, in an analogous field of endeavor Cieri teaches a type of the test pulse to be displayed (Cieri col 2 line 52-col 3 line 2 and col 6 line 5-20 where the user of a programmable controller is therefore required to select input and output functions separately that module to be monitored and controlled and provides a display of diagnostic information pertaining to the module.) Therefore it would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art that the selected diagnosis processing procedure of Unuma would select for input and output types a taught by Cieri. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to perform the modification for the advantage of/ benefit of using existing types to yield predictable results.
Consider claim 9, where Nakatani in view of Unuma in view of Cieri teaches the pulse width display system according to claim 1, wherein the diagnosis result is displayed in real time. (See Unuma col 6 line 63- col 7 line 10 where the analog signal processing can be performed in real time)
Consider claim 10, where Nakatani in view of Unuma in view of Cieri teaches the pulse width display system according to claim 1, wherein the diagnosis result is displayed in real time. (See Unuma col 6 line 63- col 7 line 10 where the analog signal processing can be performed in real time)
Claim(s) 7, 8 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Nakatani in view of Unuma in view of Cieri as applied to claim 1 above, in further view of Bhattacharyya et al. (US2020/0285997)
Consider claim 7 where Nakatani in view of Unuma in view of Cieri teaches the pulse width display system according to claim 1, wherein the pulse width information includes a time period, (See Nakatani ¶38 where a control period is determined) however they do not explicitly teach date and time of detection of the pulse width. However, in an analogous field of endeavor Bhattacharyya teaches date and time of detection of the pulse width. (See Bhattacharyya Figs. 1, 2, and ¶348-350 where timestamps are mapped with the sensor data where the graphs include dates and time series) Therefore, it would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art that the control period would include timestamp data as taught by Bhattacharyya. One of ordinary skill in the art would have used known methods of representing periods of time.
Consider claim 8, where Nakatani in view of Unuma in view of Cieri teaches the pulse width display method according to claim 6, wherein the pulse width information includes a time period, (See Nakatani ¶38 where a control period is determined) however they do not explicitly teach date and time of detection of the pulse width. However, in an analogous field of endeavor Bhattacharyya teaches date and time of detection of the pulse width. (See Bhattacharyya Figs. 1, 2, and ¶348-350 where timestamps are mapped with the sensor data where the graphs include dates and time series) Therefore, it would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art that the control period would include timestamp data as taught by Bhattacharyya. One of ordinary skill in the art would have used known methods of representing periods of time.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Peck (US2017/0103007) teaches a multi-channel input-output diagnostic channels.
Tomar et al. (US2013/0345924) teaches pause pulse diagnostic checks.
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 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.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to WILLIAM LU whose telephone number is (571)270-1809. The examiner can normally be reached 10am-6:30pm.
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, Matthew Eason can be reached at 571-270-7230. 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.
WILLIAM LU
Primary Examiner
Art Unit 2624
/WILLIAM LU/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2624