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 .
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.
Claims 1-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Winant et al. (US 2017/0363504) in view of Syvret et al. (US 2014/0212637).
Regarding claims 1, 20, Winant discloses an impact detection system (risk in page 3, [0021]), the impact detection system comprising: a memory configured to store at least one property of a structure (page 5, [0072]), wherein the structure is an element of a barrier system, an element of a racking unit, machine guarding or a dock gate (machine in page 7, [0081]); a sensor unit configured to detect movement of the structure (sensor to detect movement of the structure in page 3, [0022]) and to generate movement data (page 3, [0022]); and a processor configured (fig. 1) to: receive the movement data from the sensor unit (page 3, [0022]); determine, based on the movement data, whether an impact to the structure has occurred (page 3, [0022]); and determine, wherein, based upon determining that the an impact has occurred, information about the impact based on the movement data and the at least one property of the structure (page 3, [0021-0022]).
Winant discloses all the limitations set forth above but fails to explicitly disclose wherein the at least one property of the structure comprises at least one of Young’s modulus and/or Yield strength.
However, Syvret discloses wherein the at least one property of the structure comprises at least one of Young’s modulus and/or Yield strength (young’s modulus and yield strength in page 2, [0033]).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was
first filed to incorporate the features of Syvret within the system of Winant in order to determine the
condition of a structure thereby improving the reliability of the system.
Regarding claim 2, Winant discloses wherein the information about the impact comprises at least one
of: a severity of the impact, a direction of the impact, a probability of damage to the structure, or an
estimated change in expected lifetime of the structure in response to the impact (page 2, [0016-0018]).
Regarding claim 3, Winant discloses wherein the sensor unit is further configured to detect at least one
of: acceleration of the sensor unit, a time of the movement, a temperature of the structure, a moment
of inertia of the sensor unit, a sound of the impact, and/or a magnetic change as the movement data
(page 4, [0037-0039]).
Regarding claim 4, Winant wherein the processor is further configured to: determine at least one of: a
velocity of the sensor system and/or a displacement of the sensor unit based on the movement data,
and determine a velocity of the impact, a position of the impact, an energy of the impact, a
displacement of the structure, and a number of impacts based on the movement data and the at least
one property of the structure (page 4, [0037-0039]).
Regarding claim 5, Winant and Syvret disclose all the limitations set forth in claim 1 and Syvret further discloses wherein the at least one property of the structure comprises at least of: Young's modulus, yield strength, or one or more dimensions of the structure (page 2, [0033]).
Regarding claim 6, Winant discloses wherein the sensor unit provided is in a housing, and wherein the
housing is attachable to the structure (fig. 1).
Regarding claim 7, Winant discloses wherein the sensor unit provided is in a housing and the housing is
configured to be formed integrally with the structure (fig. 1).
Regarding claim 8, Winant discloses wherein the sensor unit comprises at least one of: an
accelerometer, a thermometer, a proximity detector, a magnetometer, and a microphone (page 6,
[0076]).
Regarding claim 9, Winant discloses the structure (fig. 1).
Regarding claim 10, Winant and Kelley disclose all the limitations set forth in claim 1 and Kelley further
discloses wherein the structure is made from a polymer (housing that is environmentally sealed in page
3, [0027]).
Regarding claim 11, Winant discloses a plurality of the sensor units in communication with the
processor, wherein each of the sensor units is configured to detect movement of a respective structure,
wherein the processor is further configured to receive the movement data from the plurality of sensor
units and to determine, based on the movement data, whether the detected movement indicates an
impact to one or more of the structures (page 3, [0022]).
Regarding claim 12, Winant discloses wherein the memory and processor are provided on a server that
is remote to the plurality of sensor units (fig. 1).
Regarding claim 13, Winant discloses wherein the memory is configured to store network information,
wherein the network information includes comprises the number of structures and their relative
location and how the structures are connected (fig. 1).
Regarding claim 14, Winant discloses wherein the processor is further configured to determine, when
based upon detecting a movement of one or more of the structures is detected, the processor is
configured to determine which one or more of the structures is impacted, and which one or more of the
structures is deflected due to its connection to an impacted structure, based on the movement data and
the network information (page 3, [0022]).
Regarding claim 15, Winant discloses wherein the memory is further configured to store at least one
property of each of the plurality of structures (fig. 1).
Regarding claim 16, Winant discloses wherein the processor is further configured to determine
information about the impact from the movement data received from the plurality of sensor unis and
the at least one property of each of the plurality of structures, and wherein the processor is further
configured to determine the probability of damage to one or more of the structures using the network
information and the determined information about the impact (fig. 1; page 3, [0022-0029]).
Regarding claim 17, Winant discloses wherein the processor is further configured to update a database
of conditions of the structures according to the determined probability of damage (fig. 1, fig. 18; page 5,
[0072]).
Regarding claim 18, Winant discloses wherein the system is configured to generate an alert, when
based upon detecting the impact an impact is detected, the system is configured to generate an alert,
wherein the alert indicates at least one of a location of the impact, a severity of the impact, and/or a
probability of damage to one or more of the structures (page 2, [0016-0018]).
Regarding claim 19, Winant discloses wherein the alert is at least one of: a visual alert on one or more
of the structures, an audible alert on one or more of the structures, and or a visual alert on an a map of
the network, displayed on a user interface (page 6, [0075]).
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to claims 1-20 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.
For at least the above reason, the rejection of the claims is sustained.
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.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's
disclosure.
Clifford et al. (US 2021/0398683) discloses passive data prediction.
Jesmonth (US 2005/0165576) discloses system defect map.
Throngnumchai (US 2004/0233311) discloses image sensor.
Vock et al. (US 2003/0093248) discloses mobile methods.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner
should be directed to DANIEL PREVIL whose telephone number is (571)272-2971. The examiner can
normally be reached Monday-Friday from 9:30 AM -6:00 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,
Wang Quan-Zhen can be reached at 571 272 3114. 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.
DP
May 13, 2026
/DANIEL PREVIL/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2685
Prosecution Insights