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 .
Priority
Receipt is acknowledged of certified copies of papers required by 37 CFR 1.55.
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on 8/26/2024 and 5/13/2026 are in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statement is being considered by the examiner.
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 17-32 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 101 because the claimed invention is directed to an abstract idea without significantly more.
Step 1: Is the claim to a Process, Machine, Manufacture or Composition of Matter?
Claim 17-32 recites a method for determining a lead torque of an elevator system. Thus, these claims are to a process, which is one of the statutory categories of invention.
Step 2A: Prong One: Does the claim recite an Abstract idea?
Representative claim 1 recites:
A method for determining a lead torque of an elevator system…, the method comprising the steps of: generating control commands…. Receiving current measurement data…. Calculating at least one parameter of a calibration function…calculating a first weight difference…. Calculating a second weight difference…. Determining a lead torque for applying to the electric motor.
The examiner finds that the foregoing underlined elements recite a mathematical relationship of data gathering and data processing and therefore are abstract ideas.
Step 2A: Prong Two: Does the claim recite additional elements that integrate the Abstract idea into a practical application?
Claim 1 additionally recite the elements of an elevator shaft; an elevator car; a counterweight via suspension means and an electric motor with a traction sheave.
The examiner finds that each of the following additional elements does no more than generally link the use of the abstract idea to a particular technological environment or field of use because they are merely a token addition to the claim that does not alter or affect how the process of applying a lead torque is performed. Furthermore, the step of determining a lead torque for applying to the electric motor is merely instructions used by a generic processor to perform the abstract idea.
Thus, taken alone, the additional elements do not integrate the abstract idea into a practical application. Looking at the limitations as an ordered combination adds nothing that is not already present when looking at the elements taken individually. For example, there is no indication that the combination of elements improves the elevator technology.
Step 2B: Does the claim recite additional elements that amount to significantly more than the abstract idea?
The examiner finds that the additional elements are well-known, routine and conventional and do not amount to significantly more than the abstract idea for the same reasons discussed above.
This abstract idea analysis for claim 1, applies similarly to claims 2-32 as well.
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)(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.
Claim(s) 17-32 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) as being anticipated by Sakai (US Patent Application No. 2013/0018639).
Regarding claim 17, SAKAI discloses a method for determining a lead torque of an elevator system. Specifically, SAKAI teaches the preamble of a method for determining a lead torque of an elevator system (see figure 1); the elevator system including an elevator shaft, an elevator car (11) movable along the elevator shaft between a first position and a second position (i.e. floors); the elevator car being coupled to a counterweight (12) via suspension means (10); and an electric motor (7) with a traction sheave (9) that drives the suspension means thereby moving the elevator car and the counterweight in the elevator shaft. See paragraph 0021.
SAKAI discloses the limitation of "generating control commands that control the electric motor such that the elevator car performs a first test run, a second test run, a third test run and a fourth test run". Specifically, SAKAI disclosure that "First in Step S1, a rope unbalanced amount is identified... Next in Step S2, the elevator is controlled to travel at a 0%-load, namely in a state in which the car is empty... Next in Step S3, the elevator is controlled to travel carrying a test weight in the car at a 50%-load" (see pars. 0033-0036) and further teaches controlling the elevator to travel at a 0%-load (empty car) upward and downward, and carrying a test weight at a 50%-load upward and downward (see pars. [0035], [0036]).
SAKAI discloses the limitation of "wherein the elevator car moves from the first position to the second position during each of the first test run and the third test run; and the elevator car moves from the second position to the first position during each of the second test run and the fourth test run". Specifically, SAKAI teaches moving the car from the highest floor to the lowest floor (downward travel) and from the lowest floor to the highest floor (upward travel) ([0034], [0035]). SAKAI's teaches also that "FIG. 3 shows the car speed (upper row), and the torque current (lower row) when the car is controlled to travel from the highest floor to the lowest floor while the car is empty" ([0034]) and "the acquisition can be carried out for the upward travel and the downward travel for the same carrying load" ([0034]).
SAKAI discloses the limitation of "wherein the elevator car is loaded with a predetermined weight during the third test run and the fourth test run and is not loaded with the weight during the first test run and second test run". Specifically, SAKAI teaches conducting test runs with an empty car (0%-load) and carrying a test weight (50%-load) ([0035], [0036]). By isolating mass-dependent components using loaded and unloaded runs, SAKAI supports that "the elevator is controlled to travel at a 0%-load, namely in a state in which the car is empty... Next in Step S3, the elevator is controlled to travel carrying a test weight in the car at a 50%-load" ([0035], [0036]).
SAKAI furthermore discloses the limitation of "receiving current measurement data indicating an electric current that flows through the electric motor and is measured by a current measuring device during the movement of the elevator car in each of the test runs; and receiving height measurement data indicating a height of the elevator car relative to the first position and/or second position and measured by a height measuring device in a plurality of successive time steps during the movement of the elevator car in each of the test runs". Specifically, SAKAI teaches detecting motor current with a current detector (6) see figure 3 and detecting speed/position with a position/speed detector (8) ([0021]). SAKAI's sensor feedback receives real-time current and height data in successive time steps. It is noted that the disclosure supports that "the current control is carried out by using the speed and magnetic pole positions of the motor (7) detected by the position/speed detector (8) and a motor current detected by the current detector (6).
SAKAI discloses the limitation of "calculating at least one parameter of a calibration function that defines a relationship between the current, the height and the weight; using the current measurement data and the height measurement data received during the test runs, to obtain at least one calibration value". Specifically, SAKAI teaches identifying system parameters by solving mathematical equations that model the relationship between motor current, car position, and load (see pars. [0037-0041]). SAKAI's discloses that "Next in Step S4, the system parameters of the elevator are identified by using the torque currents acquired in Steps S2 and S3, and the rope unbalance amount acquired in Step S1" ([0037]) and "There are three unknown system parameters, HO, ηρ, and ηΓ in Equations 5, 6, and 7... can thus be acquired" ([0041]).
SAKAI discloses the limitation of "calculating a first weight difference representative of a weight difference between a first mass of the elevator system on one side of the traction sheave of the electric motor and a second mass of the elevator system on an opposite side of the traction sheave when the elevator car is in the first position". SAKAI teaches identifying a rope unbalance amount representing a weight difference between the car side and balance weight side (see par. 0033). The disclosure states that "First in Step S1, a rope unbalance amount is identified. The rope unbalance amount is a weight difference between a weight on the car side and a weight on the balance weight side of the rope 10 hung on the sheave 9, and changes depending on the position of the car”.
SAKAI discloses the limitation of "calculating a second weight difference representative of a weight difference between a third mass of the elevator system on the one side of the traction sheave and a fourth mass of the elevator system on the opposite side of the traction sheave when the elevator car is in the second position". Again, SAKAI teaches identifying the rope unbalance amount when the car is at the lowest floor (see par. 0033). SAKAI's isolates the weight distribution at the opposite travel limit. For example, when the car is at the lowest floor, almost all the rope load is applied as the rope unbalanced amount on the car side.
SAKAI discloses the limitation of "calculating the first weight difference and the second weight difference using the calibration function and the at least one calibration value". SAKAI teaches identifying the rope unbalance depending on the car position using model equations and identified system parameters ([0033]). SAKAI's model evaluates the calibration function at the heights corresponding to the first and second positions. The disclosure suggest that "The system parameters are identified by using Equations 3 and 4 according to this embodiment, but Equations 3 and 4 are models not containing (eliminating) influence of the rope unbalance amount. Thus, the rope unbalance amount depending on the car position is identified in order to remove the rope unbalance amount in this step”.
SAKAI moreover discloses the limitation of "determining a lead torque for applying to the electric motor before the elevator car is moved in response to the first weight difference and the second weight difference". SAKAI teaches identifying system parameters and rope unbalance values to optimize motor start control and manage torque currents (see pars. [0020] and [0033]). SAKAI's start control optimization establishes the technical basis for calculating and applying a holding torque to prevent movement upon brake release. This identifies and stores the rope unbalance depending on the car’s position to remove its influence from control calculations.
As to claims 18 and 22-28, it is expressed that simply calculating a known mathematical formula using known variables (i.e. height, weight, current and position) as already taught by SAKAI only involves routine skill in the art to achieve predictable optimization, in particular if looking for calibration values, mean values, or actual balance factor which relates to optimization.
Regarding claim 19, SAKAI further discloses the limitation of "determining a first average function that defines a first relationship between the current and the height, while assuming ideal frictional conditions; using the current measurement data and the height measurement data received during the first test run and second test run". SAKAI teaches acquiring measurement data during upward and downward empty car test runs to determine system parameters under conditions that eliminate rope unbalance (see pars. [0033], [0035]). SAKAI's empty run processing discloses it because it isolates the current-to-height relationship under ideal friction conditions. SAKAI's states that "Next in Step S2, the elevator is controlled to travel at a 0%-load, namely in a state in which the car is empty, and time-series data of the torque current value is acquired. This data acquisition is carried out in two ways, during the upward travel (regeneration) and during the downward travel (power running travel)" ([0035]). Furthermore, SAKAI discloses the limitation of "determining a second average function that defines a second relationship between the current and the height, while assuming ideal frictional conditions; using the current measurement data and the height measurement data received during the third test run and fourth test run". SAKAI teaches utilizing data from a loaded test run (50% load) to identify system parameters (see pars. [0036], [0037]). SAKAI's loaded run processing discloses this because it defines the relationship between current and height for the loaded state. SAKAI's teaches that "Next in Step S3, the elevator is controlled to travel carrying a test weight in the car at a 50%-load, namely in a state in which the car and the balance weight are balanced, and the torque current on this occasion is acquired" ([0036]).
Moreover, SAKAI discloses the limitation of "calculating the at least one parameter of the calibration function using the first average function and/or the second average function". SAKAI teaches the mathematical calculation of elevator system parameters using the data and relationships established during the empty and loaded test runs (see par. [0040]). SAKAI's parameter calculation teaches this because it solves equations incorporating the torque current data from different load states. SAKAI's cites that "Then, the system parameters are identified by using Equations 3 and 4... by assigning the torque current for each of the loads acquired as described above, the corresponding load value" ([0040]).
Regarding claim 20, SAKAI further discloses the limitation of "determining, for each of the test runs, an output function defining a linear relationship between the current and the height; by processing the current measurement data and the height measurement data that were received in different time steps during the test run". SAKAI teaches acquiring time-series torque current data during upward and downward test runs and modeling the relationship between motor current and elevator parameters using equations (see pars. [0030], [0035]). SAKAI's modeling teaches this because it defines the relationship between motor torque current and elevator load/height parameters. SAKAI's disclosure cites that "relationships of denominators to the torque components (torque currents) of the motor current during the power running travel and the regeneration travel can be represented by the following equations" (see par. [0030]). Furthemore, SAKAI discloses the limitation of "calculating at least one parameter of the first average function by forming a mean value from a parameter of the output function for the first test run and a parameter of the output function for the second test run". SAKAI teaches averaging torque current data from the upward and downward travel test runs to find an average current value (iqpO) (see par. [0039]). SAKAI's averaging reads because it averages the parameters of the upward and downward unloaded runs to cancel out directional friction. SAKAI's cites "Then, the same processing as of that for the upward travel is carried out for the torque current for the downward travel acquired in Step S2, and a value acquired as a result of the removal of the current component corresponding to the rope unbalance amount for the downward travel and the averaging is denoted by iqpO" ([0039]).
As to claim 21, SAKAI further discloses the limitation of "calculating a first current value by inputting a height reference value into the first average function; calculating a second current value by inputting the height reference value into the second average function". SAKAI teaches calculating first and second sets of current values (iqp0, iqp50, and iqr0) utilizing Equations 5, 6, and 7 (see par. 0040). SAKAI's current calculation references the limitation since it evaluates the average functions at a height reference value. SAKAI's disclosure of the equations: "iqp0=Kix{L(̀0-γ̀+H0)/(6120 ηρ)} Equation 5: iqp50=Kix{L(̀0.5-γ̀+H0)/(6120 ηρ)} Equation 6: iqr0=Kix{L(̀0-γ̀-H0)/(6120 ητ)} Equation 7" would support this (see par. 0040). Moreover, SAKAI discloses the limitation of "calculating the at least one parameter of the calibration function using the first current value and/or the second current value". SAKAI teaches that three unknown system parameters (H0, ηρ, and ητ) are acquired by solving simultaneous equations that incorporate the calculated current values (see par. 0041). SAKAI's parameter acquisition teaches this because it solves system parameters using the calculated current values.
Regarding claim 24, SAKAI further discloses the limitation of "obtaining the weight calibration value by dividing a difference between the first current value and the second current value by a weight value indicating a current mass of the weight". SAKAI teaches obtaining torque current values under different loading conditions to resolve system parameters (see pars. 0037-0038). SAKAI's parameter identification teaches this because it uses a functionally equivalent parameter identification methodology to resolve the weight calibration value. SAKAI's disclosure cites removing the rope unbalance component and extracting a current for travel at constant speed (see par. 0038). Furthermore, SAKAI discloses the limitation of "obtaining the current calibration value by subtracting a product of the height calibration value and the height reference value from the first current value; subtracting the product from the weight calibration value multiplied by a mass of the actual weight at the first test run". SAKAI teaches solving simultaneous equations to isolate system parameters and removing unbalanced components from torque currents (see pars. 0040-0041). SAKAI's algebraic manipulation teaches this because it performs functionally equivalent mathematical adjustments based on load factors. SAKAI's disclosure cites that "the system parameters, HO, ηρ, and ηΓ can thus be acquired from the above-mentioned equations" ([0041]).
Regarding claim 29, SAKAI discloses a control device for an elevator system. SAKAI teaches a control device for an elevator system; the elevator system including an elevator shaft, an elevator car movable along the elevator shaft between a first position and a second position; the elevator car being coupled to a counterweight via suspension means; an electric motor with a traction sheave that drives the suspension means thereby moving the elevator car and the counterweight in the elevator shaft; the control device comprising a processor and apply the lead torque to the electric motor. SAKAI's disclosure cites that "An elevator and a control device therefor according to this embodiment include parameter identification means (1), a parameter storage unit (2), a speed command calculation device (3), a motor control device 4... [0020]" and "The parameter identification means (1), the speed command calculation device (3), and the motor control device (4) can be realized by a microcomputer on which a control program is implemented, or the like" (see par. 0022).
Regarding claim 30, SAKAI teaches in his disclosure of an elevator system with a car, motor, rope, balance weight, and associated control devices as disclosing the claimed preamble since it comprises the necessary structural and operational elements. SAKAI's disclosure cites that "An elevator and a control device therefor according to this embodiment include parameter identification means (1), a parameter storage unit (2), a speed command calculation device (3), a motor control device (4), an electric power convertor (5), a current detector (6), a motor (7), a position/speed detector (8), a sheave (9), a rope (10), a car (11), a balance weight (12), and a load detector (13)" (see par. 0020). SAKAI further teaches a control device realized via a microcomputer running implemented software/control programs (see par. 0021-0022).
Regarding claims 31-32, SAKAI discloses a computer program. SAKAI's disclosure teaches that an elevator control program is implemented on a microcomputer which executes commands to perform automatic parameter adjustments and calculate speed commands. SAKAI's further states that "The parameter identification means (1), the speed command calculation device (3), and the motor control device (4) can be realized by a microcomputer on which a control program is implemented, or the like" [see par. 0022]. Moreover, SAKAI teaches "The control device includes: the travel model used for calculating the speed command value for the elevator; and means for automatically adjusting the parameter of the travel model" (see par. 0010).
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure to show the relevant state of the art.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to EDUARDO COLON SANTANA whose telephone number is (571)272-2060. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 9am-5pm.
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, Andrea Wellington can be reached at 571-272-4483. 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.
/EDUARDO COLON SANTANA/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2837
Prosecution Insights