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 Objections
Claim 1 is objected to because of the following informalities:
Regarding claim 1, the claim recites “wherein the crash test dummy is configured such that the sensor grid is posiitoned to the chest of the crash test dummy;”, it appears the term “positioned” is spelled incorrectly. Appropriate correction is required.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(b):
(b) CONCLUSION.—The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph:
The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the applicant regards as his invention.
Claims 1-12 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor (or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the applicant), regards as the invention.
Claim 1 recites the limitation "the pressure sensing garment" in line 5. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
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 1-6 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Xsensor “High Speed (HS) Impact System” https://www.systemaccess.com.tw/upload/web/Product/XSENSOR/647613e1185990c2bcb8994f_XSENSOR_Datasheet_HSImpactSystem_052023.pdf published 05/2023 (hereinafter “Xsensor”)
Regarding claim 1, Xsensor discloses a system (abstract) for determining pressure sensing data exerted on a crash test dummy during a crash test (See Pages 1-2), the system comprising:
in an environment where a vehicle is configured to be pulled into a collision with the crash test dummy strapped by a seatbelt across a chest of the crash test dummy (See page 1);
the pressure sensing garment (garment shown worn by test dummy in image of page 1) configured to measure pressure applied to a chest of the crash test dummy during a collision (detects impact data of seat belt worn by test dummy), wherein the crash test dummy is affixed to the pressure sensing garment and the seatbelt is positioned on top of the pressure sensing garment (See pages 1-2), the pressure sensing garment comprising:
a sensor grid (uses a plurality of thin, flexible sensors that covers various sizes grid ranges) including a plurality of sensors configured to measure pressure data (see pages 1-2), wherein the crash test dummy is configured such that the sensor grid is positioned to the chest of the crash test dummy (sensors positioned in seatbelts across the chest of the test dummy); and
a computer configured to: receive pressure data from the pressure sensing garment, and determine the position of the seatbelt based on the received pressure data (Sensors transmit data to data logger which performs pressure mapping and provides a visual real-time analysis).
Regarding claim 2, Xsensors discloses the pressure sensing garment is further configured to measure acceleration of the crash test dummy during the collision. (Sensors transmit data to data logger which performs high speed pressure and impact analysis of the crash test dummy during and after crash events).
Regarding claim 3, Xsensors discloses the pressure sensing garment is further configured to measure pressure applied to a back of the crash test dummy during the collision. (See pages 1-2 which discloses placing sensors in different areas such as the back of the seat and head area of the crash test dummy.)
Regarding claim 4, Xsensors discloses the pressure sensing garment is a flexible panel applied to the chest of the crash test dummy. (See pages 1-2 which discloses the garment could be a vest/shirt placed on the dummy.)
Regarding claim 5, Xsensors discloses the pressure sensing garment is a vest. (See pages 1-2 which discloses the garment could be a vest/shirt placed on the dummy.)
Regarding claim 6, Xsensors discloses the pressure sensing garment is a shirt. (See pages 1-2 which discloses the garment could be a vest/shirt placed on the dummy.)
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 7-8 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Xsensor “High Speed (HS) Impact System” https://www.systemaccess.com.tw/upload/web/Product/XSENSOR/647613e1185990c2bcb8994f_XSENSOR_Datasheet_HSImpactSystem_052023.pdf published 05/2023 (hereinafter “Xsensor”) in view of Reinbold et al US20030217582.
Regarding claim 7, Xsensor discloses the system according to claim 1.
However, Xsensor fails to disclose apply a set of filters to the pressure data to isolate pressure data. Reinbold discloses apply a set of filters to the pressure data to isolate pressure data (Paragraphs 0039-0040, 0043-0044, 0047).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to include the design of Reinbold into Xsensor for the purpose of increasing detection accuracy. The modification would allow for filtering out unwanted data that can cause measurement errors.
Regarding claim 8, Xsensor discloses the system according to claim 7.
However, Xsensor fails to disclose the set of filters includes a low pressure filter. Reinbold discloses the set of filters includes a low pressure filter. (Paragraphs 0039-0040, 0043-0044, 0047).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to include the design of Reinbold into Xsensor for the purpose of increasing detection accuracy. The modification would allow for filtering out unwanted data that can cause measurement errors.
Claims 9-12 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Xsensor “High Speed (HS) Impact System” https://www.systemaccess.com.tw/upload/web/Product/XSENSOR/647613e1185990c2bcb8994f_XSENSOR_Datasheet_HSImpactSystem_052023.pdf published 05/2023 (hereinafter “Xsensor”) in view of Albertelli et al US7068856 (hereinafter “Albertelli”).
Regarding claim 9, Xsensor discloses the system according to claim 1.
However, Xsensor fails to disclose the computer is configured to compute a center of pressure (COP) of the pressure data. Albertelli discloses the computer (system-100) is configured to compute a center of pressure (COP) (centroid-35) of the pressure data. (See Figs 2, Col 3 line 9-40, Col 5 line 38- Col 6 line 50)
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to include the design of Albertelli into Xsensor for the purpose of increasing detection accuracy. The modification would allow more accurately determining the angle of the seatbelt.
Regarding claim 10, Xsensor discloses the system according to claim 9.
However, Xsensor fails to disclose the computer is configured to compute an angle of the seatbelt based on the COP of the pressure data. Albertelli discloses the computer is configured to compute an angle (orientation angle- 55, 60) of the seatbelt based on the COP of the pressure data. (See Figs 2, Col 3 line 9-40, Col 5 line 38- Col 6 line 50)
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to include the design of Albertelli into Xsensor for the purpose of increasing detection accuracy. The modification would allow more accurately determining the angle of the seatbelt.
Regarding claim 11, Xsensor discloses the system according to claim 10.
However, Xsensor fails to disclose the computer is configured to compute a centerline of the seatbelt based on the COP of the pressure data and the angle of the seatbelt. Albertelli discloses the computer is configured to compute a centerline of the seatbelt based on the COP of the pressure data and the angle of the object in the image. (See Figs 2, Col 3 line 9-40, Col 5 line 38- Col 6 line 50)
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to include the design of Albertelli into Xsensor for the purpose of increasing detection accuracy. The modification would allow more accurately determining the angle of the seatbelt.
Regarding claim 12, Xsensor discloses the system according to claim 11.
However, Xsensor fails to disclose the computer is configured to compute the centerline of the seatbelt using a convolution neural network (CNN). Albertelli discloses the computer (system-100) is configured to compute the centerline of the seatbelt using a convolution neural network (CNN). (Col 6 line 27- Col 7 line 42)
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to include the design of Albertelli into Xsensor for the purpose of increasing detection accuracy. The modification would allow more accurately determining the angle of the seatbelt.
Claims 13-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Xsensor “High Speed (HS) Impact System” https://www.systemaccess.com.tw/upload/web/Product/XSENSOR/647613e1185990c2bcb8994f_XSENSOR_Datasheet_HSImpactSystem_052023.pdf published 05/2023 (hereinafter “Xsensor”) in view of Reinbold et al US20030217582 in further view of Albertelli et al US7068856 (hereinafter “Albertelli”).
Regarding claim 13, Xsensor discloses a method (system shown implements the method) of determining a seatbelt using a pressure sensing garment (uses vest/shirt), the method comprising:
receiving pressure data from a pressure sensing garment affixed to a crash test dummy (See image on page 1),
wherein the pressure sensing garment is configured to measure pressure applied to a chest of the crash test dummy during a collision (detects and maps pressure data),
wherein the pressure sensing garment comprises a sensor grid including a plurality of sensors configured to measure pressure data (garment can include various size grids of sensors), and
wherein the crash test dummy is strapped, by a seatbelt, into a vehicle configured to be pulled into a collision (see pages 1-2).
However, Xsensor fails to disclose applying a set of filters to the pressure data to isolate pressure data caused by the seatbelt. Reinbold discloses applying a set of filters to the pressure data to isolate pressure data caused by the seatbelt. (Paragraphs 0039-0040, 0043-0044, 0047).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to include the design of Reinbold into Xsensor for the purpose of increasing detection accuracy. The modification would allow for filtering out unwanted data that can cause measurement errors.
However, the combination of Xsensor and Reinbold fails to disclose computing a center of pressure (COP) of the filtered pressure data; computing an angle of the seatbelt based on the COP; and computing a centerline of the seatbelt based on the COP and angle of the seatbelt. Albertelli discloses computing a center of pressure (COP) (centroid-35) of the filtered pressure data (See Figs 2, Col 3 line 9-40, Col 5 line 38- Col 6 line 50); computing an angle of the seatbelt based on the COP (orientation angle- 55, 60) (See Figs 2, Col 3 line 9-40, Col 5 line 38- Col 6 line 50); and computing a centerline of the image based on the COP and angle of the image. (See Figs 2, Col 3 line 9-40, Col 5 line 38- Col 6 line 50)
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to include the design of Albertelli into Xsensor for the purpose of increasing detection accuracy. The modification would allow more accurately determining the angle of the seatbelt.
Regarding claim 14, the combination of Xsensor in view of Reinbold in further view of Albertelli discloses the method according to claim 13.
Furthermore, Xsensor discloses the pressure sensing garment is further configured to measure acceleration of the crash test dummy during the collision. (Sensors transmit data to data logger which performs high speed pressure and impact analysis of the crash test dummy during and after crash events).
Regarding claim 15, the combination of Xsensor in view of Reinbold in further view of Albertelli discloses the method according to claim 13.
Furthermore, Xsensor discloses the pressure sensing garment is further configured to measure pressure applied to a back of the crash test dummy during the collision. (See pages 1-2 which discloses placing sensors in different areas such as the back of the seat and head area of the crash test dummy.)
Regarding claim 16, the combination of Xsensor in view of Reinbold in further view of Albertelli discloses the method according to claim 13.
Furthermore, Xsensor discloses the pressure sensing garment is a flexible panel applied to the chest of the crash test dummy. . (See pages 1-2 which discloses the garment could be a vest/shirt placed on the dummy.)
Regarding claim 17, the combination of Xsensor in view of Reinbold in further view of Albertelli discloses the method according to claim 13.
Furthermore, Xsensor discloses the pressure sensing garment is a vest. (See pages 1-2 which discloses the garment could be a vest/shirt placed on the dummy.)
Regarding claim 18, the combination of Xsensor in view of Reinbold in further view of Albertelli discloses the method according to claim 13.
Furthermore, Xsensor discloses the pressure sensing garment is a shirt. (See pages 1-2 which discloses the garment could be a vest/shirt placed on the dummy.)
Regarding claim 19, the combination of Xsensor in view of Reinbold in further view of Albertelli discloses the method according to claim 13.
However, the combination of Xsensor and Reinbold fails to disclose the computer is configured to compute the centerline of the seatbelt using a convolution neural network (CNN). Albertelli discloses the computer (system-100) is configured to compute the centerline of the seatbelt using a convolution neural network (CNN). (Col 6 line 27- Col 7 line 42)
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to include the design of Albertelli into Xsensor for the purpose of increasing detection accuracy. The modification would allow more accurately determining the angle of the seatbelt.
Regarding claim 20, the combination of Xsensor in view of Reinbold in further view of Albertelli discloses the method according to claim 13.
However, the combination of Xsensor and Albertelli fails to disclose applying a set of filters to the pressure data to isolate pressure data caused by the seatbelt comprises applying a low pressure filter to the pressure data. Reinbold discloses applying a set of filters to the pressure data to isolate pressure data caused by the seatbelt comprises applying a low pressure filter to the pressure data. (Paragraphs 0039-0040, 0043-0044, 0047).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to include the design of Reinbold into Xsensor for the purpose of increasing detection accuracy. The modification would allow for filtering out unwanted data that can cause measurement errors.
Conclusion
The prior art as cited on the PTO-892 is made of record and not relied upon but considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to NIGEL H PLUMB whose telephone number is (571)272-8886. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 7am-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, John Breene can be reached at 571-272-4107. 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 (USA or CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
/NIGEL H PLUMB/Examiner, Art Unit 2855
/Eric S. McCall/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2855
Prosecution Insights