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 .
Specification
The disclosure is objected to because of the following informalities:
In paragraph [0046], line 6, “S36” should be replaced with --S37--.
Appropriate correction is required.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
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 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)(1) the claimed invention was patented, described in a printed publication, or in public use, on sale, or otherwise available to the public before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claims 1, 7, and 8 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Kimoto (US 9,302,397).
Regarding claims 1 and 8, Kimoto discloses a disconnection detection device (element 1, Fig. 2) that detects disconnection of a plurality of strands (elements 401, 402, Fig. 2) constituting a conductor of a cable (element 40, Fig. 2) wired in a device (element 10, Fig. 2) that is caused by motion of the device, the disconnection detection device comprising: a data acquisition processing unit (i.e., as part of prediction system 50, Fig. 5) that acquires resistance value data which is data of a resistance value of the conductor that changes in time series due to the motion of the device (see col. 7, lines 40-52); an analytical processing unit (i.e., as part of prediction system 50, Fig. 5) that generates motion information data, which is data showing changes over time in information about motion of the device, from the resistance value data, analyzes the resistance value data based on the motion information data and obtains an index value (i.e., stress) to detect strand disconnection (see col. 2, line 62 through col. 3, line 19); and a disconnection detection processing unit (i.e., as part of prediction system 50, Fig. 5) that detects the strand disconnection based on the index value obtained by the analytical processing unit (see col. 3, lines 20-48). Further, the device of Kimoto can be assumed to inherently perform the claimed method. Under the principles of inherency, if a prior art device, in its normal and usual operation, would necessarily perform the method claimed, then the method claimed will be considered to be anticipated by the prior art device. When the prior art device is the same as a device described in the specification for carrying out the claimed method, it can be assumed the device will inherently perform the claimed process (see MPEP § 2112.02).
Regarding claim 7, Kimoto discloses a disconnection detection device (element 1, Fig. 2) that detects disconnection of a plurality of strands (elements 401, 402, Fig. 2) constituting a conductor of a cable (element 40, Fig. 2) wired in a device (element 10, Fig. 2) that is caused by motion of the device, the disconnection detection device comprising: a data acquisition processing unit (i.e., as part of prediction system 50, Fig. 5) that acquires motion information data, which is data showing changes over time in information about motion of the device, and resistance value data, which is data of a resistance value of the conductor that changes in time series due to the motion of the device (see col. 7, lines 40-52); an analytical processing unit (i.e., as part of prediction system 50, Fig. 5) that analyzes the resistance value data based on the motion information data acquired by the data acquisition processing unit and obtains an index value (i.e., stress) to detect strand disconnection (see col. 2, line 62 through col. 3, line 19); and a disconnection detection processing unit (i.e., as part of prediction system 50, Fig. 5) that detects the strand disconnection based on the index value obtained by the analytical processing unit (see col. 3, lines 20-48).
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 6 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kimoto (US 9,302,397) in view of Nonen et al. (US 2023/0090896, IDS filed 11/21/2025).
Regarding claim 6, although Kimoto does not appear to disclose using a trained model created by performing learning in advance with use of training data including the index value when there is no strand disconnection, the strand disconnection is detected based on the index value as a target subject to disconnection detection, Nonen et al. discloses that using a learned model in advance based on the operating data acquired to predict the life of a cable is well known in the art (see par. [0145]). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one with ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to apply a known technique to a known device ready for improvement to yield predictable results, such as improved prediction accuracy.
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Tanno et al. (US 2019/0129381) discloses a life prediction apparatus configured to accurately predict a life of a cable wired at a joint part of a robot. Kato (US 5,083,284) discloses an apparatus for predicting the lifetime of cables for movable portions of an industrial robot.
Allowable Subject Matter
No art has been found for a prior art rejection of claims 2-5 at this time.
Contact Information
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to MILTON GONZALEZ whose telephone number is (571)270-7914. The examiner can normally be reached 8:00 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, WALTER LINDSAY can be reached at (571) 272-1674. 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.
/WALTER L LINDSAY JR/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2852
/M.G/Examiner, Art Unit 2852
2/24/2026