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 .
Objection to Drawings
The drawings are objected to under 37 CFR 1.83(a). The drawings must show every feature of the invention specified in the claims. Therefore, the control bandwidth (see claims 1-14) must be shown or the feature(s) canceled from the claim(s). Applicant’s spec. states (see spec. Page 16, lines 1-29, control bandwidth is a frequency ωsc =Kvp/J, wherein Kvp is the gain and calculates the threshold based on the resonance frequency D3 of the drive machine 3). There is no bandwidth of frequency shown in applicant’s figs.1-16. No new matter should be entered.
Corrected drawing sheets in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(d) are required in reply to the Office action to avoid abandonment of the application. Any amended replacement drawing sheet should include all of the figures appearing on the immediate prior version of the sheet, even if only one figure is being amended. The figure or figure number of an amended drawing should not be labeled as “amended.” If a drawing figure is to be canceled, the appropriate figure must be removed from the replacement sheet, and where necessary, the remaining figures must be renumbered and appropriate changes made to the brief description of the several views of the drawings for consistency. Additional replacement sheets may be necessary to show the renumbering of the remaining figures. Each drawing sheet submitted after the filing date of an application must be labeled in the top margin as either “Replacement Sheet” or “New Sheet” pursuant to 37 CFR 1.121(d). If the changes are not accepted by the examiner, the applicant will be notified and informed of any required corrective action in the next Office action. The objection to the drawings will not be held in abeyance.
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 1-14 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.
As to claims 1 and 12, the phrase, “switching selected time-series data by selecting data from time-series data indicating a state of the motor or the drive machine, based on a result of a comparison between a control bandwidth determined from the control gain and a threshold determined from the drive machine” is not clear as to the switching selected time-series data to where is not stated? And also not clear as to the control bandwidth as applicant’s spec. teaches (see pec. Page 16, lines 1-29, control bandwidth is a frequency ωsc =Kvp/J, wherein Kvp is the gain and calculates the threshold based on the resonance frequency D3 of the drive machine 3). These underlined limitations are missing in the claim. There is no bandwidth of frequency shown in applicant’s figs.1-16. Dependent claims 2-11, 14 and 13 are rejected as they depend from respective rejected independent claims 1 and 12.
Appropriate clarifications and corrections are required.
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.
Claim(s) 1, 8, 10, 11, 12 and 14 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over YOSHIURA (Pub.No.: US 2017/0242076 A1) in view of KUMAIDO et al. (Patent. No.: US 7,559,405 B2 and KUMAIDO hereinafter).
As to claim 1, (Currently Amended) An anomaly diagnosis apparatus, comprising: a processor; and a memory to store a program which, when executed by the processor, performs processes of: generating a command value to specify an operation of a motor or a drive machine driven by the motor;
performing feedback control on the motor based on a control gain so that the operation of the motor or the drive machine follows the command value;
switching selected time-series data by selecting data from time-series data indicating a state of the motor or the drive machine, based on a result of a comparison between a control bandwidth determined from the control gain and a threshold determined from the drive machine; and
determining an anomalous state of the motor or the drive machine, based on the selected time-series data.
(As to claim 1, YOSHIURA teaches (figs.1-24, para’s [0003], [0035]) an anomaly diagnosis apparatus 100, comprising: a processor [CPU] (para. [0100]); and a memory [storing function via host controller 3, see para. [0038], FIG.1 or via SETUP PC 5) to store a program (see para’s [0012]-[0013], figs.5-6, para’s [0100] thru [0124]) which, when executed by the processor [CPU], performs processes of: generating a command value [POSITION COMMAND] (FIGS.1-2, para’s [0035], [0036], [0037],[0038]) to specify an operation of a motor 12 or a drive machine 13 driven by the motor 12;
performing feedback control (position, speed, feedback, see figs.1-2, 23-24, para’s [0044]-[0046]) on the motor 12 based on a control gain (control gain characteristics, see figs.18, 20, para’s [0025], [0027], [0139]) so that the operation of the motor 12 or the drive machine 13 follows the command value [position command] (see para. [0037]);
YOSHIURA teaches (Host controller 3, fig.1) inputs and outputs selected time-series data [torque and speed] (see fig.1, para. [0038], [0040]; [0015], fig.8; [0016], fig. 9; [0018], fig.11; [0019], fig.12; [0022], fig.15; [0023], fig.16; [0025], fig.18; [0027], fig.20; [0058]) by selecting data [torque and output speed] (via amplifier 2) from time-series data [time-series observing data] (see fig.6, step 110, para’s [0113]; GROUP OF TIME-SERIES OBERVING DATA, SEE FIG.6, S115) indicating a state [abnormality detection/mechanical abnormality determination] (aging deterioration, see para. [0121], fig.6) of the motor 12 or the drive machine 13 (see fig.6, para. [0111]), based on a result of a comparison between a control bandwidth (frequency bandwidth [0-3500 Hz], see figs.18, 20) determined from the control gain [dB] (see control gain relative to frequency, see FIGS.18, 20, para. [0139]) and a threshold [threshold or predetermined value] (figs.6, 13-14) determined from the drive machine 13 (of driven mechanism 1, see fig.1, and fig.6, steps S120, S135 para’s [0120]-[0121]; see fig.5, S15, S25, para’s [0124]; see fig.7 and para. [0132]); and determining an anomalous state [mechanical abnormality determination] (aging deterioration, see fig.6, para’s [0120]-[0121] & [0124]) of the motor 12 or the drive machine 13, based on the selected time-series data [steps S110-S115] (see fig.6).
YOSHIURA does not mention switching selected.
KUMAIDO teaches selection switch 10-4 (of a processing unit 10), see fig.7/15) that controls a motor 108 that drives a machine [power steering device], see figs.1, 7-14) select torque data [substitute torque value] (from sampled time series torque values T, see figs.13-14, (col.7, lines 50-67) & (col.8, lines 1-4), (col.9, lines 14-67, (col.10 ,lines 1-67) and fig.15, (col.11, lines 34-67) & (col.12, lines 1-37)).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skilled in the art before the effective filing date of the claim invention to have a selection switch of KUMAIDO in the system of YOSHIURA because secure a safety of the control of a power steering device (see, KUMAIDO, (col.1, lines 6-11), and (col.12, lines 13-53)).
As to claim 8, The anomaly diagnosis apparatus according to claim 1, wherein the threshold is a value proportional to a frequency calculated from speed information on the motor.
(As to claim 8, YOSHIURA teaches (figs.1-24, para’s [0003], [0035]) an anomaly diagnosis apparatus 100 (fig.1-2), wherein the threshold is a value [predetermined value] proportional to a frequency calculated (see fig.6, step S135, para’s [0111] thru [0121])) from speed information (see fig.13, para. [0112]-[0113]) on the motor 12.
As to claim 10, (Currently Amended) The anomaly diagnosis apparatus according to claim 1, wherein the time-series data includes at least one of first data acquired by observing the state of the motor or the drive machine, second data generated in the feedback control, and third data generated in the generating the command value.
(As to claim 10, YOSHIURA teaches (figs.1-24, para’s [0003], [0035]) an anomaly diagnosis apparatus 100 (fig.1-2), wherein the time-series data (fig.1) includes at least one of first data [torque and speed] (figs.1, 7-17) acquired by observing the state (see fig.6) of the motor 12 or the drive machine 13).
As to claim 11, The anomaly diagnosis apparatus according to claim 10, wherein the time-series data includes data obtained by performing at least one of four arithmetic operations, an integration operation, differential processing, and filtering on at least one of the first data, the second data, and the third data.
(As to claim 11, YOSHIURA teaches (figs.1-24, para’s [0003], [0035]) an anomaly diagnosis apparatus 100 (fig.1-2), wherein the time-series data (fig.1) includes data [torque and speed] (figs.1, 7-17) obtained by performing at least PID control based on position deviation and speed deviation (see fig.2, para. [0044]) on at least one of the first data [torque], the second data [speed] (see fig.3)).
As to claim 12, (Currently Amended) an anomaly diagnosis method by an anomaly diagnosis apparatus to perform diagnosis on an operation of a motor or a drive machine driven by the motor, comprising:
generating, a command value to specify the operation of the motor or the drive machine;
performing feedback control on the motor based on a control gain so that the operation of the motor or the drive machine follows the command value;
switching selected time-series data by selecting data from time-series data indicating a state of the motor or the drive machine, based on a result of a comparison between a control bandwidth determined from the control gain and a threshold determined from the drive machine; and
determining an anomalous state of the motor or the drive machine, based on the selected time-series data.
(As to claim 12, YOSHIURA teaches (figs.1-24, para’s [0003], [0035]) an anomaly diagnosis method (figs.5-6) by an abnormality diagnosis apparatus 100, to perform diagnosis on an operation of a motor 12 or a drive machine 13 driven by the motor 12 (see fig.1, comprising:
generating (via controller 3) a command value [POSITION COMMAND] (FIGS.1-2, para’s [0035], [0036], [0037],[0038]) to specify an operation of a motor 12 or a drive machine 13 driven by the motor 12;
performing feedback control (position, speed, feedback, see figs.1-2, 23-24, para’s [0044]-[0046]) on the motor 12 based on a control gain (control gain characteristics, see figs.18, 20, para’s [0025], [0027], [0139]) so that the operation of the motor 12 or the drive machine 13 follows the command value [position command] (see para. [0037]);
YOSHIURA teaches (controller 3, fig.1) inputs and outputs selected time-series data [torque and speed] (see fig.1, para. [0038], [0040]; [0015], fig.8; [0016], fig. 9; [0018], fig.11; [0019], fig.12; [0022], fig.15; [0023], fig.16; [0025], fig.18; [0027], fig.20; [0058]) by selecting data [torque and output speed] (via amplifier 2) from time-series data [time-series observing data] (see fig.6, step 110, para’s [0113]; GROUP OF TIME-SERIES OBERVING DATA, SEE FIG.6, S115) indicating a state [abnormality detection/mechanical abnormality determination] (aging deterioration, see para. [0121], fig.6) of the motor 12 or the drive machine 13 (see fig.6, para. [0111]), based on a result of a comparison between a control bandwidth (frequency bandwidth [0-3500 Hz], see figs.18, 20) determined from the control gain [dB] (see control gain relative to frequency, see FIGS.18, 20, para. [0139]) and a threshold [threshold or predetermined value] (figs.6, 13-14) determined from the drive machine 13 (of driven mechanism 1, see fig.1, and fig.6, steps S120, S135 para’s [0120]-[0121]; see fig.5, S15, S25, para’s [0124]; see fig.7 and para. [0132]); and
determining an anomalous state [abnormality detection/mechanical abnormality determination] (aging deterioration, see fig.6, para’s [0120]-[0121] & [0124]) of the motor 12 or the drive machine 13, based on the selected time-series data [steps S110-S115] (see fig.6).
YOSHIURA does not mention switching selected.
KUMAIDO teaches selection switch 10-4 (of a processing unit 10), see fig.7/15) that controls a motor 108 that drives a machine [power steering device], see figs.1, 7-14) select torque data [substitute torque value] (from sampled time series torque values T, see figs.13-14, (col.7, lines 50-67) & (col.8, lines 1-4), (col.9, lines 14-67, (col.10 ,lines 1-67) and fig.15, (col.11, lines 34-67) & (col.12, lines 1-37)).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skilled in the art before the effective filing date of the claim invention to have a selection switch of KUMAIDO in the system of YOSHIURA because secure a safety of the control of a power steering device (see, KUMAIDO, (col.1, lines 6-11), and (col.12, lines 13-53)).
As to claim 14, The anomaly diagnosis apparatus according to claim 1, wherein the processor determines the anomalous state of the motor or the drive machine, using unsupervised learning, supervised learning, or reinforcement learning.
(As to claim 14, YOSHIURA teaches (figs.1-24, para’s [0003], [0035]) an anomaly diagnosis apparatus 100 (fig.1-2), wherein the processor [CPU] (FIG.6, para. [0111], [0123]) determines the abnormal state (fig.6) of the motor 12 or the drive machine 13 (of driven mechanism 1, fig.1), using unsupervised learning, supervised learning (see machine learning with and without teacher, para. [0152]; para’s [0050], [0051], [0052], [0100],[0110]-[0111], [0123]).
Allowable Subject-Matter
Claims 2, 3-7, 9 and 13 are objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim 6 & 7, but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
Claims 2, 3-7, 9 and 13 would be allowable if rewritten or amended 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.
The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter: As to claim 2, YOSHIURA AND KUMAIDO fails to teach processor selects the selected time-series data from a first data group of the time-series data when the control bandwidth is higher than the threshold, and selects the selected time-series data from a second data group of the time-series data when the control bandwidth is lower than the threshold. Claim 9 depends on allowable claim 2.
As to claim 3, YOSHIURA AND KUMAIDO fails to teach the processor determines whether or not the time-series data corresponds to an acceleration section or a deceleration section of the motor or the drive machine, based on the command value, and outputs a determination result as operation information, wherein the processor selects, from the time-series data, data including at least one of the acceleration section and the deceleration section of the selected time-series data, based on the operation information.
As to claim 4, YOSHIURA AND KUMAIDO fails to teach the processor determines whether or not the time-series data corresponds to a constant speed section of the motor or the drive machine, based on the command value, and sets a determination result as operation information, wherein the processor selects, from the time-series data, data including the constant speed section of the selected time-series data, based on the operation information.
As to claim 5, YOSHIURA AND KUMAIDO fails to teach the processor determines whether or not the time-series data corresponds to a stop section of the motor or the drive machine, based on the command value, wherein selects, from the time-series data, data including the stop section of the selected time-series data, based on the operation information.
As to claim 6, YOSHIURA AND KUMAIDO fails to teach the threshold is a value calculated based on a resonance frequency of the drive machine.
As to claim 7, YOSHIURA AND KUMAIDO fails to teach when the drive machine includes mechanical parts to transmit power using meshing of teeth, the threshold is a value calculated based on a mesh frequency that is calculated using speed information on the motor and the number of teeth on the mechanical parts.
As to claim 13, YOSHIURA AND KUMAIDO fails to teach in the data switching, the selected time- series data to be output is selected from a first data group of the time-series data when the control bandwidth is higher than the threshold, and selects the selected time-series data to be output is selected from a second data group of the time-series data when the control bandwidth is lower than the threshold.
However, formal requirements outstanding (Objection to drawings, 35 USC 112 rejection) needs to be corrected and clarified.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ANTONY M PAUL whose telephone number is (571)270-1608. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 8 am to 4 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, Mr. Eduardo Colon Santana can be reached at 571-272-2060. 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.
/ANTONY M PAUL/
Primary Examiner of Art Unit 2846