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 § 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.
Claim(s) 1-5, 8-12, and 15-19 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Weiner et al. (U.S. Pub. No. 2022/0009535), hereinafter “Weiner”.
Regarding claim 1, Weiner teaches:
A system (See the Abstract.) comprising:
one or more imaging devices configured to capture images (See mobile communication device 106 in Fig. 1, camera 218 in Fig. 2.) of a passing railcar (See [0077]-[0078]: “During operation, a railway asset 506 enters the railyard 502 via main track 600…While on the track(s), individual(s) 514 inspect the railcars 542 using virtual reality device(s) 508. Individual(s) 514 can include, but is(are) not limited to, individual(s) 104 of FIG. 1. The virtual reality device(s) 508 can comprise MCD 106 of FIG. 1.”);
one or more computing devices in communication with the one or more imaging devices, the one or more computing devices being configured to (See mobile communication device 106 in Fig. 1.):
receive one or more images from the one or more imaging devices, the one or more images illustrating at least a region of the passing railcar (See step 400 in Fig. 4A: “Capture an image of a railway asset using a mobile Communication Device”.);
execute one or more computer vision algorithms on the one or more images to identify one or more identifying features of the passing railcar (See [0035]: “In some scenarios, the captured image is processed by the MCD 106 to at least (i) detect the mark within the captured image and (ii) generate an electronic and editable image of a mark (e.g., a railcar mark) on a railway asset (e.g., a railcar) based on the detected mark (e.g., a string of letters, numbers and/or symbols) within the captured image. Operation (i) can be achieved using any known or to be known Optical Character Recognition (OCR) algorithm.”); and
determine a railcar identity of the passing railcar based at least in part on the one or more identifying features of the passing railcar (See [0035]: “The OCR algorithm may also be used to obtain other railcar information about the railcar 102 from the captured image. This other railcar information can include, but is not limited to, tare weight(s), maximum weight(s), certification reference number(s), certification date(s), data collected from sensors installed on the railcar (e.g., commodity temperature sensor data, hatch status data, bearing temperature data, and/or load status data), railcar/locomotive component data (e.g., make, model, serial number, wheel size, etc.), and/or maintenance information (e.g., date/time of last maintenance and/or type of maintenance performed).”).
Regarding claim 2, Weiner teaches:
The system of claim 1, wherein: the one or more identifying features comprises text; and executing the one or more computer vision algorithms comprises executing an optical character recognition (OCR) algorithm to identify the text (See [0035]: “In some scenarios, the captured image is processed by the MCD 106 to at least (i) detect the mark within the captured image and (ii) generate an electronic and editable image of a mark (e.g., a railcar mark) on a railway asset (e.g., a railcar) based on the detected mark (e.g., a string of letters, numbers and/or symbols) within the captured image. Operation (i) can be achieved using any known or to be known Optical Character Recognition (OCR) algorithm.”).
Regarding claim 3, Weiner teaches:
The system of claim 1, wherein one or more identifying features comprises graffiti and/or illustrations (See [0062]: “The electronic editable mark can include one or more letters, number, graphics and/or symbols.”).
Regarding claim 4, Weiner teaches:
The system of claim 1, wherein the one or more computing devices are further configured to convert the one or more images into a particular format (See [0046]: “In a transmit mode, the controller 210 also provides information to the transmit circuit 206 for encoding and modulating information into wireless signals.”).
Regarding claim 5, Weiner teaches:
The system of claim 4, wherein converting the one or more images into the particular format comprises compressing the one or more images (See [0046]: “In a transmit mode, the controller 210 also provides information to the transmit circuit 206 for encoding and modulating information into wireless signals.”).
Weiner teaches the method of claim 8 for the reasons given in the treatment of claim 1.
Weiner teaches claim 9 for the reasons given in the treatment of claim 2.
Weiner teaches claim 10 for the reasons given in the treatment of claim 3.
Weiner teaches claim 11 for the reasons given in the treatment of claim 4.
Weiner teaches claim 12 for the reasons given in the treatment of claim 5.
Weiner teaches the non-transitory, computer readable medium of claim 15 for the reasons given in the treatment of claim 1.
Weiner teaches claim 16 for the reasons given in the treatment of claim 2.
Weiner teaches claim 17 for the reasons given in the treatment of claim 3.
Weiner teaches claim 18 for the reasons given in the treatment of claim 4.
Weiner teaches claim 19 for the reasons given in the treatment of claim 5.
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.
The factual inquiries for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows:
1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art.
2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue.
3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art.
4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness.
Claim(s) 6, 7, 13, 14, 20, and 21 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Weiner (U.S. Pub. No. 2022/0009535) in view of Gong et al. (A New Automatic Train Identification System Based on RFID, 2011, WISE 2010 Workshops, Pages 463-473), hereinafter “Gong”.
Claim 6 is met by the combination of Weiner and Gong, wherein
Weiner teaches:
The system of claim 1, wherein: the one or more computing devices are further configured to
Weiner does not explicitly disclose the following; however, Gong discloses:
receive scanner data from an emitter of the passing railcar via one or more signal scanning devices, the scanner data comprising a received railcar identifier associated with the passing railcar; and determining the railcar identity of the passing railcar further comprises: comparing the received railcar identifier with a plurality of stored railcar identifiers; and identifying a stored railcar identifier of the plurality of stored railcar identifiers that matches the received railcar identifier (See Fig. 6 and page 469, section 4.1, 2nd paragraph: “In the existing ATIS, when linking systems and databases, the whole system can share resources together…Use the transmission system to transfer the information, which includes the Station Control and Car Number Processing System, This system is an element in the whole system, (see Fig, 6,), while it is in the ground readout between the host hand the ATIS system, just like a bridge sending information to ATIS and managing multiple ground equipments. This tag is used only through transportation progress and includes the name of the goods, quantity, and dispatch and vehicle information. According to the characteristics of the database, with the same field name, it can be associated and be searched.”).
Weiner and Gong together disclose the limitations of claim 6. Gong is directed to a similar field of art (a train identification system). Therefore, Weiner and Gong are combinable. Modifying the system and method of Weiner by adding the capability to receive scanner data from an emitter of the passing railcar, including an identifier, and determining the railcar identify by comparing/matching the identifier with stored railcar identifiers, as disclosed by Gong, would yield the expected and predictable result of a backup, automatic way to identify passing railcars in the case that the vision-based system fails. Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine Weiner and Gong in this way.
Claim 7 is met by the combination of Weiner and Gong, wherein
The combination of Weiner and Gong discloses:
The system of claim 6, wherein the one or more computing devices are further configured to:
And Weiner further discloses:
determine that at least one of the one or more identifying features is not associated with the passing railcar (See [0081]: “For example, the virtual reality device(s) 508 may be used to verify that tank capacities match loading tickets, verify product quantities, verify product qualities, ensure place cards and identification numbers are legible and correct, verify special permit numbers are marked on railway assets, verify that proper shipping names are marked on railway assets, verify that inhalation hazards are marked on railway assets, and/or verify certain decals are present on railway assets.” Instances of determining improper markings (“not associated with the passing railcar”) are implied.); and store an indication of the at least one of the one or more identifying features in association with the passing railcar in a memory device accessible by the one or more computing devices (See [0096]: “The updated information can be stored in a datastore (e.g., datastore 112 of FIG. 1, memory 212 of FIG. 2, memory 312 of FIG. 3 and/or datastore 532 of FIG. 5).”).
Claim 13 is met by the combination of Weiner and Gong for the reasons given in the treatment of claim 6.
Claim 14 is met by the combination of Weiner and Gong for the reasons given in the treatment of claim 7.
Claim 20 is met by the combination of Weiner and Gong for the reasons given in the treatment of claim 6.
Claim 21 is met by the combination of Weiner and Gong for the reasons given in the treatment of claim 7.
Contact
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JONATHAN S LEE whose telephone number is (571)272-1981. The examiner can normally be reached 11:30 AM - 7:30 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, Andrew Bee can be reached at (571)270-5183. 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.
/Jonathan S Lee/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2677
Prosecution Insights