DETAILED ACTION
This is a non-final Office Action in response to communications received on 08/20/2024. The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
Priority or Provisional
Priority to 02/22/2022 is recognized.
Drawings
The drawings filed on 08/20/2024 are acknowledged.
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, 8-9, 14 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 over Kipping (EP 0918009) in view of Otake, Design of Railway Wheel Detector Insusceptible to Electromagnetic Noise.
Regarding claim 1, Kipping discloses the limitations of claim 1 as follows:
An axle counting method for rail-mounted vehicles, having the following method steps: producing an electromagnetic transmission signal with a frequency, by a frequency source; (Kipping, Paras. [0008]-[0024], teaches a rail contact and axle counting device for rail vehicles, and an AC voltage source (i.e., a frequency source) supplying the transmitting coils SS1 and SS2).
transmitting the electromagnetic transmission signal by a transmission device of an electromagnetic rail contact element; (Kipping, Paras. [0008]-[0023], teaches that SS1 and SS2 are transmitting coils of the rail contact).
transmitting the reception signals; (Kipping, Paras. [0008]-[0023], teaches transmitting the reception signals from the receiving coils to an evaluation circuit/signal processing unit (AS) for generation of an evaluation signal (e.g., counting pulses). Therefore, teaches transmitting the reception signals).
generating an evaluation signal within a signal processing unit; (Kipping, Paras. [0008]-[0023], teaches that the evaluation circuit AS generates counting pulses).
Kipping does not explicitly disclose:
detecting the electromagnetic transmission signal as a first reception signal and a second reception signal by two spaced-apart receiving units of the rail contact element;
wherein to generate the transmission signal, a single transmission unit is used,
in that the reception signals received by the two receiving units originate from the same transmission signal.
However, Otake discloses:
detecting the electromagnetic transmission signal as a first reception signal and a second reception signal by two spaced-apart receiving units of the rail contact element; (Otake, Section III. INVESTIGATED MODEL AND ANALYSIS RESULTS, “The MR wheel detector is made up of a transmitting coil and two receiving coils”, (i.e., two receiving units). “The magnetic field from a transmitting coil induces the voltage in the receiving coils”. Therefore, teaches that each receiving coil produces its own induced voltage (i.e., first reception signal). The second receiving coil likewise produces its own voltage from the same transmitted magnetic field (i.e., second reception signal)).
wherein to generate the transmission signal, a single transmission unit is used, and in that the reception signals received by the two receiving units originate from the same transmission signal. (Otake, Section III. INVESTIGATED MODEL AND ANALYSIS RESULTS, “The MR wheel detector is made up of a transmitting coil and two receiving coils”, and “The magnetic field from a transmitting coil induces the voltage in the receiving coils”.
Therefore, teaches that the transmitting coil generates the electromagnetic field (i.e., generate the transmission signal) using the single transmitting coil (i.e., a single transmission unit). And both induced voltages originate from the electromagnetic field generated by the same transmitting coil (i.e., two reception signals …)).
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the invention to modify the axle counting system of Kipping to employ the single transmitting coil and two spaced-apart receiving coils as taught by Otake, in order to improve the reliability and accuracy of the generated evaluation signal.
Regarding claim 8, Kipping and Otake disclose the limitations of claim1. Kipping discloses:
The method according to claim 1, wherein a comparison with a fixed threshold value takes place in the signal processing unit. (Kipping, Paras. [0008]-[0024], teaches a threshold value SW is provided below where a counting pulse is triggered. And further teaches that the comparator KOMP and evaluation circuit AS perform the signal evaluation and generate the counting pulse within the signal processing unit (i.e., comparison with a fixed threshold value)).
Regarding claim 9, Kipping and Otake disclose the limitations of claim1. Kipping and Otake disclose:
An axle counting system for carrying out the method according to claim 1, wherein the axle counting system comprises: the electromagnetic rail contact element having the transmission device and the two spaced-apart electromagnetic receiving units; the frequency source for generating the transmission signal for the electromagnetic transmission device, wherein the frequency source is electrically connected to the transmission device of the rail contact element; an evaluation circuit configured for determining an axle passage having the signal processing unit configured for generating the evaluation signal from the two reception signals; and wherein the transmission device has the single transmission unit. Kipping teaches am electromagnetic rail contact element, comprising transmitting coils SS1 and SS2 receiving circuitry, and Otake teaches a wheel detector comprising a transmitting coil and two receiving coils, therefore, teaching the claimed transmission device and two spaced-apart electromagnetic receiving unit, as discussed in the rejection of claim 1.
(Kipping, Paras. [0008]-[0024], teaches the frequency source for generating the transmission signal by providing an AC voltage source supplying the transmitting coils, and an evaluation circuit configured for determining an axle passage, where the evaluation circuit (AS) receives the reception signals and generates an evaluation signal (e.g., counting pulses) from the reception signals. And further teaches that the signal processing unit configured for generating the evaluation signal from the two reception signals, as discussed in the rejection of claim 1).
(Otake, Section III. INVESTIGATED MODEL AND ANALYSIS RESULTS, teaches the transmission device has the single transmission unit, since the MR wheel detector comprises a single transmitting coil and two receiving coils, where the magnetic field generated by the transmitting coil induces a first reception signal in a first receiving coil and a second reception signal in a second receiving coil. Therefore, teaches that the two reception signals originate from the same transmitted signal generated by the single transmission unit).
The same motivation to combine utilized in claim 1 is equally applicable in the instant claim.
Regarding claim 14, Kipping and Otake disclose the limitations of claim 9. Kipping discloses:
The axle counting system according to claim 9, wherein the signal evaluation device comprises a comparator. (Kipping, Pars. [0008]-[0024], teaches using comparator KOMP which compares the waveform of the received voltage with a stored reference waveform as part of the signal evaluation process. Therefore, teaches a signal evaluation device comprising a comparator).
Claims 2-7, 10-12, 15 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 over Kipping (EP 0918009) in view of Otake, Design of Railway Wheel Detector Insusceptible to Electromagnetic Noise, and further in view of Franke (US 4,723,739).
Regarding claim 2, Kipping and Otake disclose the limitations of claim1. Franke discloses:
The method according to claim 1, wherein the reception signals are evaluated in a phase-inverted manner. (Franke, Col. 5, ll. 65-67, Col. 6, ll. 1-40, Col. 7, ll. 11-29, 52-67, Col. 8, ll. 33-56, teaches transmitting signals with predetermined phase offsets (including 180 degree), evaluating received signals according to their relative phase using synchronous rectification and polarity-sensitive detection, including discrimination of 180 degree phase-inverted signals).
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the invention to modify the evaluation circuit of Kipping-Otake to employ the phase-sensitive evaluation technique as taught by Franke, in order to improve immunity to interference and prevents false detections.
Regarding claim 3, Kipping and Otake disclose the limitations of claim1. Franke disclose:
The method according to claim 2, wherein an inversion of the phase of one of the reception signals is generated before the transmission of the reception signals. (Franke, Col. 5, ll. 65-67, Col. 6, ll. 1-40, Col. 7, ll. 11-29, 52-67, Col. 8, ll. 33-56, teaches transmitting signals with predetermined phase relationships including 180 degree phase-displaced signals before transmission).
The same motivation to combine utilized in claim 2 is equally applicable in the instant claim.
Regarding claim 4, Kipping and Otake disclose the limitations of claim1. Kipping and Franke disclose:
The method according to claim 3, wherein the phase inversion takes place before the transmission of the reception signals by connecting the receiving units in opposite polarity. (Franke, Col. 5, ll. 65-67, Col. 6, ll. 1-40, Col. 7, ll. 11-29, 52-67, Col. 8, ll. 33-56, teaches employing phase relationship including 180 degree phase-displaced signals, for phase sensitive detection). (Kipping, Pars. [0008]-[0023], teaches partial receiving voltages of opposing polarity generated from the receiving circuit).
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the invention to connect the receiving units with opposite polarity, as suggested by the opposing-polarity signal processing of Kipping and the phase processing as taught by Franke to obtain the desired phase inversion rather than using additional inversion circuitry, in order to reduce circuit complexity.
Regarding claim 5, Kipping and Otake disclose the limitations of claim1. Franke discloses:
The method according to claim 1, wherein the phase inversion is removed after the transmission of the reception signals by phase-synchronous rectification to the same transmission signal. (Franke, Col. 5, ll. 65-67, Col. 6, ll. 1-40, Col. 7, ll. 11-29, 52-67, Col. 8, ll. 33-56, teaches supplying the recovered reception signals to a synchronous rectifier with a reference signal corresponding to the transmitted code signal, and performing the phase-synchronous rectification of the received signal. Therefore, teaches removing the phase inversion after transmission by phase-synchronous rectification using the same transmitted reference signal).
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the invention to modify the system of Kipping-Otake to employ the phase-synchronous rectification as taught by Franke, in order to improve phase-sensitive detection.
Regarding claim 6, Kipping and Otake disclose the limitations of claim1. Franke discloses:
The method according to claim 5, wherein phase-inverted synchronization signals, being square-wave signals phase-shifted by 180°, are generated and used for the synchronous rectification. (Franke, Col. 4, ll. 54-65, Col. 5, ll. 65-67, Col. 6, ll. 1-40, Col. 7, ll. 11-29, 52-67, Col. 8, ll. 33-56, teaches generating square-wave code signals having 0 and 180 degree phase relationships, where the 180 degree code signal is supplied as a reference input to a synchronous rectifier for phase sensitive rectification of the receive signals. Therefore, teaches that the synchronous signals being square- wave signals phase shifted by 180 degree).
The same motivation to combine utilized in claim 5 is equally applicable in the instant claim.
Regarding claim 7, Kipping and Otake disclose the limitations of claim1. Kipping and Franke disclose:
The method according to claim 2, wherein a difference signal of the two synchronized reception signals is formed as an evaluation signal in the signal processing unit. (Kipping, Pars. [0008]-[0024], teaches forming an evaluation signal within the signal processing unit by comparing the received signal waveform with a stored reference waveform using comparator KOMP. The evaluation circuit AS, then generates the counting pulse (evaluation signal) based on the comparison).
(Franke, Col. 5, ll. 65-67, Col. 6, ll. 1-40, Col. 7, ll. 11-29, 52-67, Col. 8, ll. 33-56, teaches synchronizing received signals by synchronous rectification using transmitted reference signals).
The same motivation to combine utilized in claim 2 is equally applicable in the instant claim.
Regarding claim 10, Kipping and Otake disclose the limitations of claim 9. Franke discloses:
The axle counting system according to claim 9, wherein the receiving units of the rail contact element are connected to the evaluation circuit with different polarity. (Franke, Col. 5, ll. 65-67, Col. 6, ll. 1-40, Col. 7, ll. 11-29, 52-67, Col. 8, ll. 33-56, teaches processing received signals with opposite polarity by supplying one receiver channel with 0 degree refence signal and another channel with 180 degree signal to respective synchronous rectifiers, and therefore, providing opposite polarity processing of the received signals).
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the invention to connect the receiving units to the evaluation circuit with different polarity to facilitate differential signal evaluation, in order to improve rejection of common mode interference.
Regarding claim 11, Kipping and Otake disclose the limitations of claim 9. Franke disclose:
The axle counting system according to claim 9, wherein a synchronization device configured for removing the specified phase shift of the reception signals is present, and is electrically connected between the receiving units and the signal processing unit. (Franke, Col. 5, ll. 65-67, Col. 6, ll. 1-40, Col. 7, ll. 11-31, 52-67, Col. 8, ll. 24-56, teaches a synchronous rectifier SR1 and SR2 for each receiver channel where each rectifier receives a reference signal 0 or 180 degree, and removes the phase information and produces a rectified output for processing).
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the invention to connect the receiving units to the evaluation circuit with different polarity to facilitate differential signal evaluation, in order to improve rejection of common mode interference.
Regarding claim 12, Kipping and Otake disclose the limitations of claim 9. Franke disclose:
The axle counting system according to claim 11, wherein the frequency source is configured to generate two phase-shifted synchronization signals, and is connected by signaling connection to the synchronization device. (Franke, Col. 5, ll. 65-67, Col. 6, ll. 1-40, Col. 7, ll. 11-31, 52-67, Col. 8, ll. 24-56, teaches code source CP which generates 0 and 180 degree refence signals that are supplied to synchronous rectifiers SR1 and SR2. Therefore, teaches a frequency source generating two phase shifted synchronization signals that are connected to the synchronization device).
The same motivation to combine utilized in claim 11 is equally applicable in the instant claim.
Regarding claim 15, Kipping and Otake disclose the limitations of claim 9. Franke discloses:
The axle counting system according to claim 9, wherein the synchronization device comprises rectifiers. (Franke, Col. 5, ll. 65-67, Col. 6, ll. 1-40, Col. 7, ll. 11-31, 52-67, Col. 8, ll. 24-56, teaches SR1 and SR2 where the rectifiers receive the recovered reception signals together with the reference synchronization signals and perform synchronous rectification before evaluation).
The same motivation to combine utilized in claim 11 is equally applicable in the instant claim.
Claims 13, and 16 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 over Kipping (EP 0918009) in view of Otake, Design of Railway Wheel Detector Insusceptible to Electromagnetic Noise, and further in view of Blanyer (US 3,721,821).
Regarding claim 13, Kipping and Otake disclose the limitations of claim 9. Blanyer discloses:
The axle counting system according to claim 9, wherein the signal evaluation device comprises a difference signal device. (Blanyer, Col. 3, ll. 18-67, Col. 5, ll. 25-64, Col. 6, ll. 1-5, teaches that the detector unit includes independent synchronous detector circuits, the detector develops two output ideas, one output rises while the other falls, and vice versa, providing an indication of wheel movement (i.e., difference signal)).
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the invention to incorporate the differential signal processing as taught by Blanyer into the axle counting system of Kipping-Otake, in order to improve noise immunity and the reliability.
Regarding claim 16, Kipping and Otake disclose the limitations of claim 9. Blanyer disclose:
The axle counting system according to claim 9, wherein low-pass filters are present between the synchronization device and the signal processing unit. (Blanyer, Col. 3, ll. 18-67, Col. 5, ll. 25-64, Col. 6, ll. 1-5, Col. 9, ll. 20-53, Col. 10, ll. 40-63, Claims 2 and 3, teaches providing resistance capacitance (RC) low-pass filters between synchronous detector circuits and a differential amplifier, where the filtered signals are supplied to the signal processing circuit. Therefore, teaches low-pass filters disposed between the synchronization device and the signal processing unit).
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the invention to incorporate the RC low-pass filters as taught by Blanyer into the system of Kipping-Otake, in order to improve the accuracy and reliability of the axel detection.
References Considered But Not Relied Upon
Oldewurtel (US 7,530,534) teaches at least one receiving voltage tapped from the receiving head of the rail contact being superposed by at least one adjustment voltage to produce the output voltage.
Jean (US 2018/0266969) teaches a sensor system components including a bandpass filter, low noise input amplifier, frequency shifting mixer, radio frequency (RF) amplifier, intermediate frequency (IF) band limiting filter, IF amplifier, detector circuit, low frequency amplifier, lowpass filter, synchronous detector circuit, lowpass filter or integrating circuit, and an analog-to-digital converter.
Conclusion
Accordingly, claims 1-16 are rejected.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to PEGAH BARZEGAR whose telephone number is (703)756-4755.
The examiner can normally be reached M-F, 9:00 - 5:00. Examiner interviews are available via telephone 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, Samuel Morano can be reached on 571-272-6684. 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/patentcenter 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.
/P.B./Examiner, Art Unit 3615
/S. Joseph Morano/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3615
Prosecution Insights