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 .
Response to Amendment
Receipt is acknowledged of the Amendment filed on September 1, 2025. Accordingly, claim 3 was previously cancelled; claims 1 and 2 are currently withdrawn from consideration; claims 4-24 and newly added claims 25-27 are currently pending in the application.
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.
Claims 4-22, 25 and 26 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Brant et al. (US 2018/0313877 A1) in view of Talwerdi et al. (US 7,850,077 B2).
Brant et al. teaches a system and method for detecting aging or degradation in electrical and/or electronic devices comprising:
PNG
media_image1.png
630
720
media_image1.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image2.png
782
776
media_image2.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image3.png
628
468
media_image3.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image4.png
414
462
media_image4.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image5.png
412
456
media_image5.png
Greyscale
With regard to claim 13, a method comprises steps of: analyzing a signature parameter (unintended and/or intended RF energy components) of an emission of an electromagnetic energy in a radio frequency (RF) spectrum (FIGS. 11A and 11B) from an electrical device (FIG. 3 in view of FIG. 1, DUT 320) being exposed to an irradiation and energized with a combination of a power signal (waveform emitted as power) and a clock signal (FIG. 5, clock signal from Clock/Clock Dist 570); and determining a condition (degree of device aging, degradation, condition, and/or Remaining Useful Life (RUL)) of the electrical device (FIG. 3 in view of FIG. 1, DUT 320) in a response to analyzed signature parameter (unintended and/or intended RF energy components) (For more details, please read: Abstract; and paragraphs: [0212], [0217], [0221], [0230]-[0241], [0247], [0252]-[0256], [0259]-[0270], [0274]-[0276], [0437] and [0468]; and claims 1-15).
Brant et al. teaches all that is claimed as discussed above including the electrical device (FIG. 1, DUT 110) is being exposed to electromagnetic irradiation by the emission 106 (by itself) and the unwanted emission 104, but it does not specifically teach the following feature:
The electrical device is being irradiated with at least one of an alpha radiation, a betta radiation, a gamma radiation, an ionic radiation, a neutron radiation, and a cosmic radiation.
Talwerdi et al. teaches an apparatus and method for secure identification of security features in value items comprising:
PNG
media_image6.png
628
692
media_image6.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image7.png
454
642
media_image7.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image8.png
572
470
media_image8.png
Greyscale
With regard to claim 13, the electrical device (FIGS. 2 and 3 in view of FIG. 1, substrate 20 such as a check, bank note, credit card or identification document) is being irradiated (FIGS. 2 and 3 in view of FIG. 1, source 30) with at least one of an alpha radiation, a betta radiation, a gamma radiation, an ionic radiation, a neutron radiation, and a cosmic radiation (illuminated with radiation including any type of electromagnetic radiation such as light or radio waves) (emphasis added) (For more details, please read: Abstract; column 1, lines 52-64; and from column 3, line 20 to column 4, line 37; claims 1 and 35).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the system and method for detecting aging or degradation in electrical and/or electronic devices of Brant et al. to use a scanner including a radiating stimulus or source taught by Talwerdi et al. since Talwerdi et al. teaches that such an arrangement is beneficial for illuminating an electrical device (security feature) for obtaining a security signature from a response of electromagnetic radiation reflected from the security feature to verify the authenticity of a value item printed on or comprised of the substrate as disclosed in the Abstract and claims 1 or 35.
With regard to claim 4, Brant et al. teaches analyzing the signature parameter (unintended and/or intended RF energy components) comprises energizing the electrical device (FIG. 3 in view of FIG. 1, DUT 320) and analyzing non-linear products (non-linear mixing products) arising from operation of the electrical device (FIG. 3 in view of FIG. 1, DUT 320) (Paragraph: [0251]) (For more details, please read: Abstract; and paragraphs: [0212], [0217], [0221], [0230]-[0241], [0247], [0252]-[0256], [0259]-[0270], [0274]-[0276], [0437] and [0468]; and claims 1-15).
With regard to claim 5, Brant et al. teaches analyzing the signature parameter (unintended and/or intended RF energy components) comprises energizing the electrical device (FIG. 3 in view of FIG. 1, DUT 320) and determining a presence of an unintended amplitude modulation in a waveform (FIG. 10; and paragraphs: [0138]-[0141]) (For more details, please read: Abstract; and paragraphs: [0212], [0217], [0221], [0230]-[0241], [0247], [0252]-[0256], [0259]-[0270], [0274]-[0276], [0437] and [0468]; and claims 1-15).
With regard to claim 6, Brant et al. teaches analyzing the signature parameter (unintended and/or intended RF energy components) comprises energizing the electrical device (FIG. 3 in view of FIG. 1, DUT 320) and determining a presence of an unintended frequency modulation in a waveform (FIG. 10; and paragraphs: [0138]-[0141]) (For more details, please read: Abstract; and paragraphs: [0212], [0217], [0221], [0230]-[0241], [0247], [0252]-[0256], [0259]-[0270], [0274]-[0276], [0437] and [0468]; and claims 1-15).
With regard to claim 7, Brant et al. teaches analyzing the signature parameter (unintended and/or intended RF energy components) comprises energizing the electrical device (FIG. 3 in view of FIG. 1, DUT 320) and measuring changes in cross modulated frequencies (FIG. 10; and paragraphs: [0138]-[0141], [0288] and [0322]) (For more details, please read: Abstract; and paragraphs: [0212], [0217], [0221], [0230]-[0241], [0247], [0252]-[0256], [0259]-[0270], [0274]-[0276], [0437] and [0468]; and claims 1-15).
With regard to claim 8, Brant et al. teaches analyzing the signature parameter (unintended and/or intended RF energy components) comprises energizing the electrical device (FIG. 3 in view of FIG. 1, DUT 320) and determining a presence of evenly spaced peaks in a waveform (FIG. 10; and paragraphs: [0217], [0243], [0293] and [0490]) (For more details, please read: Abstract; and paragraphs: [0212], [0217], [0221], [0230]-[0241], [0247], [0252]-[0256], [0259]-[0270], [0274]-[0276], [0437] and [0468]; and claims 1-15).
With regard to claim 9, Brant et al. teaches analyzing the signature parameter (unintended and/or intended RF energy components) comprises performing a harmonic analysis on a waveform (FIGS. 10, 11A and 11B; and paragraphs: [0142]-[0147], [0217], [0243], [0293] and [0490]) (For more details, please read: Abstract; and paragraphs: [0212], [0217], [0221], [0230]-[0241], [0247], [0252]-[0256], [0259]-[0270], [0274]-[0276], [0437] and [0468]; and claims 1-15).
With regard to claim 10, Brant et al. teaches analyzing the signature parameter (unintended and/or intended RF energy components) comprises performing a non-harmonic analysis on a waveform (FIGS. 10, 11A and 11B; and paragraphs: [0282], [0432] and [0433]) (For more details, please read: Abstract; and paragraphs: [0212], [0217], [0221], [0230]-[0241], [0247], [0252]-[0256], [0259]-[0270], [0274]-[0276], [0437] and [0468]; and claims 1-15).
With regard to claim 11, Brant et al. teaches analyzing a plurality of emissions and determining a drift (minute alterations, presence of the anomaly manifests in the emission signature in at least one of alteration of signature elements when compared with an associated exemplary device, scoring of the degree of degradation, and/or degree of anomaly, standard deviations from normal operation) in the signature parameter (unintended and/or intended RF energy components) (FIGS. 7-11; and paragraphs: [0208]-[0221], [0227] -[0232], and [0248]-[0251]) (For more details, please read: Abstract; and paragraphs: [0212], [0217], [0221], [0230]-[0241], [0247], [0252]-[0256], [0259]-[0270], [0274]-[0276], [0437] and [0468]; and claims 1-15).
With regard to claim 14, Brant et al. teaches energizing the electrical device (FIG. 3 in view of FIG. 1, DUT 320) in a test fixture with a combination of a power signal (waveform emitted as power) and a clock signal (FIG. 5, clock signal from Clock/Clock Dist 570) prior to analyzing the signature parameter (unintended and/or intended RF energy components) (For more details, please read: Abstract; and paragraphs: [0212], [0217], [0221], [0230]-[0241], [0247], [0252]-[0256], [0259]-[0270], [0274]-[0276], [0437] and [0468]; and claims 1-15).
With regard to claim 15, Brant et al. teaches analyzing the signature parameter (unintended and/or intended RF energy components) comprises using a receiver (FIG. 5, receiver 502) designed with a sensitivity of about −170 dBm (Paragraphs: [0230] and [0274]) (For more details, please read: Abstract; and paragraphs: [0212], [0217], [0221], [0230]-[0241], [0247], [0252]-[0256], [0259]-[0270], [0274]-[0276], [0437] and [0468]; and claims 1-15).
With regard to claim 16, Brant et al. teaches analyzing the signature parameter (unintended and/or intended RF energy components) comprises using a Low Noise Amplifier (LNA) (FIG. 5, LNA 508) with a noise figure of under 2 dB (Paragraphs: [0265], [0274] and [0332]) (For more details, please read: Abstract; and paragraphs: [0212], [0217], [0221], [0230]-[0241], [0247], [0252]-[0256], [0259]-[0270], [0274]-[0276], [0437] and [0468]; and claims 1-15).
With regard to claim 17, Brant et al. teaches analyzing the signature parameter (unintended and/or intended RF energy components) comprises setting a resolution bandwidth of at least 0.1 Hz (“[A]ppropriate frequency resolution may be used”) (Paragraph: [0317]) (For more details, please read: Abstract; and paragraphs: [0212], [0217], [0221], [0230]-[0241], [0247], [0252]-[0256], [0259]-[0270], [0274]-[0276], [0437] and [0468]; and claims 1-15).
With regard to claim 18, Brant et al. teaches analyzing the signature parameter (unintended and/or intended RF energy components) comprises executing, with a signal processing unit, a curve fit algorithm (Paragraphs: [0212], [0239], [0282]-[0284] and [0410]-[0416]) (For more details, please read: Abstract; and paragraphs: [0212], [0217], [0221], [0230]-[0241], [0247], [0252]-[0256], [0259]-[0270], [0274]-[0276], [0437] and [0468]; and claims 1-15).
With regard to claim 19, Brant et al. teaches determining the condition (degree of device aging, degradation, condition, and/or Remaining Useful Life (RUL)) comprises determining a remaining useful life (RUL) under extrapolated irradiation levels (Paragraphs: [0223]-[0225] and [0332]) (For more details, please read: Abstract; and paragraphs: [0212], [0217], [0221], [0230]-[0241], [0247], [0252]-[0256], [0259]-[0270], [0274]-[0276], [0437] and [0468]; and claims 1-15).
With regard to claim 22, Brant et al. teaches determining the condition (degree of device aging, degradation, condition, and/or Remaining Useful Life (RUL)) comprises generating a probability density function (PDF) (probability distribution over time) (Paragraph: [0491]) (For more details, please read: Abstract; and paragraphs: [0212], [0217], [0221], [0230]-[0241], [0247], [0252]-[0256], [0259]-[0270], [0274]-[0276], [0437] and [0468]; and claims 1-15).
Brant et al. in view of Talwerdi et al. teaches all that is claimed as discussed in the rejections of claims 4-11, 13-19 and 22 above including determining a remaining useful life (RUL) reported as a probability distribution over time, and/or is reported as a single value (Paragraph: [0491]), but it does not specifically teach the following features:
Using an equation as recited in claim 12.
Using a kernel estimator.
Using a Bayes' theorem.
It is noted that
With regard to claim 12, it is noted that the equation is obtained by the probability calculation determined by using a modified Bayes’ equation expressing uncertainty in function coefficients and measurement values. Thus, no inventive step can be acknowledged for such an equation. The recitation of equations within a claim requires the terms to be defined if they are to be given patentable weight and some dedicated claim language that indicates how the claimed equation is to be treated in the applicant's invention (sometimes true, always obeyed, seldom fulfilled, etc.). No new matter should be introduced. For examination purposes, the equations are not given patentable weight.
With regard to claim 20, a kernel estimator is well-known to one having ordinary skill in the art as a nonparametric statistical method that estimates an unknown function or probability distribution based on a finite set of data points. Instead of assuming a specific mathematical formula, it “smooths” the data by placing a “kernel” (a symmetrical weighting function, such as a bell curve) over every individual data point.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to further modify the system and method for detecting aging or degradation in electrical and/or electronic devices of Brant et al. to use a kernel estimator since such an arrangement is beneficial for both creating smooth continuous distribution curves to interpret raw datasets visually and learning the underlying distribution of a dataset in order to generate new synthetic data points that mirror the original patterns.
With regard to claim 21, a Bayes’ theorem is well-known to one having ordinary skill in the art as a fundamental mathematical rule used to calculate the probability of an event based on prior knowledge and new evidence. It allows to “flip” conditional probabilities and enables to find the likelihood of a cause given its observed effect.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the system and method for detecting aging or degradation in electrical and/or electronic devices of Brant et al. to use Bayes’ theorem to determine a remaining useful life (RUL) since such an arrangement is beneficial for preventing users from ignoring baseline rates when new evidence arises.
With regard to claim 25, Talwerdi et al. teaches irradiating the electrical device (FIGS. 2 and 3 in view of FIG. 1, substrate 20 such as a check, bank note, credit card or identification document) with a radiation beam (illuminating with radiation including any type of electromagnetic radiation such as light or radio waves) from an irradiation head (FIGS. 2 and 3 in view of FIG. 1, source 30) prior to the step of analyzing the signature parameter (emphasis added) (For more details, please read: Abstract; column 1, lines 52-64; and from column 3, line 20 to column 4, line 37; claims 1 and 35).
With regard to claim 26, Talwerdi et al. teaches prior to the step of analyzing the signature parameter (security signature), irradiating the electrical device (FIGS. 2 and 3 in view of FIG. 1, substrate 20 such as a check, bank note, credit card or identification document) with a radiation beam (illuminating with radiation including any type of electromagnetic radiation such as light or radio waves) from an irradiation head (FIGS. 2 and 3 in view of FIG. 1, source 30); and placing the irradiated device (the credit card or identification document with security feature 60 such as an EMV chip) into a socket of a fixture mounted within an enclosure (From column 4, line 56 to column 5, line 13). It is noted that the feature “a socket of a fixture mounted within an enclosure” as recited is given its broadest reasonable interpretation, which is common and consistent with the interpretation that those skilled in the art would reach. That is, the “security feature 60 on or embedded in a substrate 20, which is placed in the scanner 10” reads on this limitation.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 23 and 24 are objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
Claim 27 is allowed.
The following is an examiner’s statement of reasons for allowance:
With regard to claim 27, the prior art does not teach, suggest or render obvious the claimed method in combination as claimed including:
Irradiating the electrical device with a radiation dose in a radiation type;
Measuring a second value of the signature parameter in a second emission of the electromagnetic energy in the RF spectrum emitted from energized and irradiated electrical device;
Measuring a difference between the first value and the second value; and
Determining a condition of the electrical device based on a measured difference.
Any comments considered necessary by applicant must be submitted no later than the payment of the issue fee and, to avoid processing delays, should preferably accompany the issue fee. Such submissions should be clearly labeled “Comments on Statement of Reasons for Allowance.”
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments, see Remarks, filed September 1, 2026, with respect to the rejections of claims 4-11, 13-19 and 22 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102 (a)(1) have been fully considered and are persuasive. Therefore, the rejection has been withdrawn. However, upon further consideration, a new ground(s) of rejection is made in view of Talwerdi et al.
Conclusion
Applicants’ 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.
CONTACT INFORMATION
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to HOAI-AN D. NGUYEN whose telephone number is (571) 272-2170. The examiner can normally be reached MON-THURS (7:00 AM - 5:00 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, LEE E. RODAK can be reached at 571-270-5628. 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.
HOAI-AN D. NGUYEN
Primary Examiner
Art Unit 2858
/HOAI-AN D. NGUYEN/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2858
Prosecution Insights