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 .
Priority
Current application, US Application No. 18/710,573 filed on 05/15/2024, is a National Stage entry of PCT/CN2022/133311, International Filing Date: 11/21/2022, which claims foreign priority to CN 202111399961.0 filed on 11/19/2021.
Examiner acknowledges that the certified copy of foreign priority document has been received. However, the certified English translation copy of the original foreign document, which is not written in English, has not been received. There is no requirement to submit certified English translation copy at this stage according to 37 CFR 1.55(g)(3). However, should the need of certified English translated copy arise according to the cases mentioned in 37 CFR 1.55(g)(3), submission may be requested in the future.
DETAILED ACTION
This office action is responsive to the application filed on 05/15/2024. Claims 1-5 are currently pending.
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.
Claims 1-5 are rejected as failing to define the invention in the manner required by 35 U.S.C. 112(b). As per claims 1 and 3, claims are narrative in form and replete with indefinite language. Each claim must be in one sentence form only. (see MPEP 2175 Form Paragraph 7.34.15)
As per claims 2-5, claims are also rejected because base claim 1 is rejected.
Claims 1-5 are also rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention. As per claim 1, claim recites “the mileage information” in “Calculating a position of the pipeline defect signal in the pipeline section in each state according to a running speed, the three-axis attitude signal, and the mileage information of the pipeline detection equipment in the pipeline section in the corresponding state”. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
As per claims 2-5, claims are also rejected because base claim 1 is rejected.
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.
Claims 1-5 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 101 because the claimed invention is directed to nonstatutory subject matter. The claimed invention is directed to a judicial exception (i.e., a law of nature, a natural phenomenon, or an abstract idea) without significantly more.
Specifically, representative claim 1 recites:
“A pipeline defect positioning method based on multi-sensor information fusion, (1.A) comprising the following steps:
Performing state segmentation processing on a pipeline according to a pipeline defect detection signal and/or a three-axis attitude signal of a pipeline detection equipment in the pipeline, (1.B.1) and positioning a pipeline defect signal in the pipeline defect detection signal to a pipeline section in a corresponding state. (1.B.2)
Calculating a position of the pipeline defect signal in the pipeline section in each state according to a running speed, the three-axis attitude signal, and the mileage information of the pipeline detection equipment in the pipeline section in the corresponding state.(1.C.1)
Wherein the state segmentation processing includes establishing a weld seam discrimination model and/or a bend discrimination model. (1.C.2)
The weld seam discrimination model determines whether the pipeline is in a weld seam section according to changes in a maximum principal component signal in the pipeline defect detection signal, and/or determines whether the pipeline is in the weld seam section according to changes in a z-axis acceleration signal in the three-axis attitude signal. (1.C.2.1)
The weld seam discrimination model performs weighted fusion processing on the maximum principal component signal and the z-axis acceleration signal to obtain a first fusion feature signal X(t), and performs anomaly detection processing on the first fusion feature signal to obtain a weld seam feature signal. (1.C.2.2)
And wherein the bend discrimination model determines whether the pipeline is in a bend section according to changes in a yaw angle signal in the three-axis attitude signal. (1.C.2.3)
The determining whether the pipeline is in a bend section according to changes in a yaw angle signal in the three-axis attitude signal specifically includes:
Performing standard deviation processing and differential processing on the yaw angle signal to obtain a standard deviation signal and a differential signal. (1.C.2.3.1)
Performing multiplication fusion processing on the standard deviation signal and the differential signal to obtain a second fusion feature signal. (1.C.2.3.2)
Performing anomaly detection processing on the second fusion feature signal to obtain a bend feature signal. (1.C.2.3.3)
A calculation formula for performing multiplication fusion processing on the standard deviation signal and the differential signal is:
S
t
=
arctan
s
t
d
r
o
l
l
*
tanh
(
d
i
f
f
r
o
l
l
)
Wherein
S
t
represents the second feature fusion signal,
s
t
d
r
o
l
l
represents a rolling standard deviation signal,
d
i
f
f
r
o
l
l
represents a rolling differential signal. (1.C.2.3.2.1)”.
The claim limitations in the abstract idea have been highlighted in bold above; the remaining limitations are “additional elements”.
Under the Step 1 of the eligibility analysis, we determine whether the claims are to a statutory category by considering whether the claimed subject matter falls within the four statutory categories of patentable subject matter identified by 35 U.S.C. 101: Process, machine, manufacture, or composition of matter. The above claim is considered to be in a statutory category (Process - Method).
Under the Step 2A, Prong One, we consider whether the claim recites a judicial exception (abstract idea). In the above claim, the highlighted portion constitutes an abstract idea because, under a broadest reasonable interpretation, it recites limitations that fall into/recite an abstract idea exception. Specifically, under the 2019 Revised Patent Subject Matter Eligibility Guidance, it falls into the grouping of subject matter when recited as such in a claim limitation, that covers mathematical concepts (mathematical relationships, mathematical formulas or equations, mathematical calculations), and mental processes (concepts performed in the human mind including an observation, evaluation, judgement, and/or opinion).
For example, highlighted limitations/steps (1.B.1)– (1.C.2.3.2.1) are treated by the Examiner as belonging to Mathematical Concept grouping or a combination of Mathematical Concept and Mental Process groupings as the limitations include Mathematical Calculations/Algorithms, or show Mathematical Relationship combined with optional Mental evaluations/judgements.
Next, under the Step 2A, Prong Two, we consider whether the claim that recites a judicial exception is integrated into a practical application.
In this step, we evaluate whether the claim recites additional elements that integrate the exception into a practical application of that exception.
The above claims comprise the following additional elements: (Side Note: duplicated elements are not repeated)
In Claim 1: “A pipeline defect positioning method based on multi-sensor information fusion”:
As per claim 1, the additional element in the preamble “A pipeline defect positioning method based on multi-sensor information fusion” is not a meaningful limitation because the preamble simply links the method with an abstract idea, i.e. pipeline defect positioning based multi-sensor information fusion.
In conclusion, the above additional elements, considered individually and in combination with the other claim elements as a whole do not reflect an improvement to the computer technology or other technology or technical field, and, therefore, do not integrate the judicial exception into a practical application. No particular machine or real-world transformation are claimed. Therefore, the claims are directed to a judicial exception and require further analysis under the Step 2B.
Under Step 2B analysis, the above claims fail to include additional elements that are sufficient to amount to significantly more than the judicial exception as shown in the prior art of record.
The limitations/elements listed as additional elements above are well understood, routine and conventional steps/elements in the art according to the prior art of record. (See Chen, Hou, Wang, Xiong and others in the list of prior art cited below)
Claims 1-5, therefore, are not patent eligible.
Notes with regard to Prior Art
The prior arts made of record are provided as references relevant to the current claims.
Chen (CN 111536437 A) discloses monitoring water pipeline working conditions using a multi-sensor fusion intelligent tool to locate the leakage point of the pipeline [ (a multi-sensor fusion intelligent water affair terminal, pipeline, pipeline working condition, rea-time monitoring pipeline [abs], transmission time difference of the negative pressure wave, locate the leakage point of the pipeline [claim 10]).
Hou (CN 106287239 A) discloses using pressure and sound vibration sensor to realize multi-sensor fusion detection for a pipeline and determine whether leakage occurs, then combine the inertial navigation system and radio frequency label combination positioning to locate the leakage point (by means of a sound sensor, a pressure sensor and a vibration sensor in the device, whether leakage happens to the water supply pipeline or not is detected based on a multisensory fusion method; and a leakage point is precisely located through the inertial navigation and RFID combination locating manner, According to the intelligent in-pipe detection ball device and the method, leakage detection and locating can be carried out in the water supply pipeline, and the reliability and accuracy of leakage detection of the water supply network are effectively improved [abs]).
Wang (CN 207074053 U) discloses muti-sensor to obtain defect signals,3-axis attitude signals and prefabricated pipe sections in locating automatic measuring device (a micro-electro-mechanical system ‘Micro Electro-Mechanical System’, mainly comprising a three-axis accelerometer, a three-axis gyroscope, a three-axis magnetic meter and electronic compass, of signals measured by the sensor can obtain the sling system by processing the space gesture [pg. 5 line 35-38], 5 data source the space posture of the gravity, geomagnetism, a gyroscope, an accelerometer, an electronic compass. wherein the first two from "geographic" coordinate, three from the "vector" coordinate system [pg. 5 line 38-41], bolt hole 8 is for connecting the prefabricated pipe section, an ideal state and overlapped holes [pg. 7 line 7-13]) for a prefabricate integrated pipeline gallery hoisting locating automatic measuring device [title, abs]).
Xiong (CN 115640635 A) discloses judging stress of the welding seam formula ([claim 17] and judging formula whether the section anti-bending strength of steel beam satisfy structure beam requirement ([claim 7]).
Fu (M. Fu, J. Liu, H. Zhang and S. Lu, "Multisensor Fusion for Magnetic Flux Leakage Defect Characterization Under Information Incompletion," in IEEE Transactions on Industrial Electronics, vol. 68, no. 5, pp. 4382-4392, May 2021) discloses a multi-sensor fusion framework under information incompletion for MFL ‘Magnetic Flus Leakage’ defect characterization. First, a space-vector-based information fusion method in ARC ‘axial-radial-circumferential’ space was introduced to combine three orthogonal components of MFL vector field. Then, icGAN ‘improved conditional Generative Adversarial Network’ is introduced to reconstruct multisensory information for improving defect characterization accuracy (see [pg. 4390 right col conclusion]).
Contact Information
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to DOUGLAS KAY, whose telephone number is (408) 918-7569. The examiner can normally be reached on M, Th & F 8-5, T 2-7, and W 8-1.
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 M Vazquez can be reached on 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 an application may be obtained from the Patent Application Information Retrieval (PAIR) system. Status information for published applications may be obtained from either Private PAIR or Public PAIR. Status information for unpublished applications is available through Private PAIR only. For more information about the PAIR system, see https://ppair-my.uspto.gov/pair/PrivatePair. Should you have questions on access to the Private PAIR system, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative or access to the automated information system, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
/DOUGLAS KAY/
Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2857
Prosecution Insights