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) 1-3, 7-10, 14-17 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a1) as being anticipated by Tanaka (US PG Pub No. 2022/0155138) now as referenced by (US PG Pub No. 2022/0155138)
Regarding claim 1, Tanaka teaches
A sensing system comprising:
an optical fiber installed in a predetermined region; (12 figure 1)
at least one memory storing instructions, and
at least one processor configured to execute the instructions to;
input pulsed light to the optical fiber, and receive backscattered light with respect to the pulsed light from the optical fiber; and (paragraph 22 exploration device 11 optical fiber 12 measures light S1 figure 7)
identify a normal state of the predetermined region based on vibration information included in the backscattered light, the vibration information indicating a vibration intensity or a vibration frequency per unit time at each position on the optical fiber. (S7 no defects figure 7 paragraph 40)
Regarding claim 2, Tanaka teaches
wherein the at least one processor is further configured to execute the instructions to
identify a current state of the predetermined region based on the vibration information, and (S4 figure 7 paragraph 34)
detect an abnormality in the predetermined region by comparing the current state of the predetermined region with the normal state. (S5 figure 7 paragraph 40).
Regarding claim 3, Tanaka teaches
wherein the at least one processor is further configured to execute the instructions to
set a threshold corresponding to the normal state of the predetermined region, (S5 figure 7)
identify a current state of the predetermined region based on the vibration information, and (S2 to S4 figure 7)
detect an abnormality in the predetermined region by comparing the current state of the predetermined region with the threshold. (S5 figure 7).
Regarding claim 7, Tanaka teaches wherein the at least one processor is further configured to execute the instructions to to notify a predetermined notification destination that an abnormality has occurred in the predetermined region in a case where it is determined that the abnormality has occurred in the predetermined region. (S6 figure 6)
Regarding claim 8-10 and 14, see the rejection of claim 1-3 and 7 as the limitations are substantially similar.
Regarding claims 15-17, see the rejection of claim 1-3 as the limitations are substantially similar.
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.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 4-6, 11-13, 18-20 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.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to GEORGE C. JIN whose telephone number is (571)272-9898. The examiner can normally be reached 9AM-6PM.
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, Lindsay Low can be reached at (571) 272-1196. 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.
/GEORGE C JIN/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3747
Prosecution Insights