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 .
The preliminary amendment of the claims filed on 12/6/2024 is noted. Claim(s) 1-13 are pending for examination. This action is Non-Final.
Priority
Receipt is acknowledged of certified copies of papers required by 37 CFR 1.55.
Claim Interpretation
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(f):
(f) Element in Claim for a Combination. – An element in a claim for a combination may be expressed as a means or step for performing a specified function without the recital of structure, material, or acts in support thereof, and such claim shall be construed to cover the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification and equivalents thereof.
The following is a quotation of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph:
An element in a claim for a combination may be expressed as a means or step for performing a specified function without the recital of structure, material, or acts in support thereof, and such claim shall be construed to cover the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification and equivalents thereof.
The claims in this application are given their broadest reasonable interpretation using the plain meaning of the claim language in light of the specification as it would be understood by one of ordinary skill in the art. The broadest reasonable interpretation of a claim element (also commonly referred to as a claim limitation) is limited by the description in the specification when 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is invoked.
As explained in MPEP § 2181, subsection I, claim limitations that meet the following three-prong test will be interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph:
(A) the claim limitation uses the term “means” or “step” or a term used as a substitute for “means” that is a generic placeholder (also called a nonce term or a non-structural term having no specific structural meaning) for performing the claimed function;
(B) the term “means” or “step” or the generic placeholder is modified by functional language, typically, but not always linked by the transition word “for” (e.g., “means for”) or another linking word or phrase, such as “configured to” or “so that”; and
(C) the term “means” or “step” or the generic placeholder is not modified by sufficient structure, material, or acts for performing the claimed function.
Use of the word “means” (or “step”) in a claim with functional language creates a rebuttable presumption that the claim limitation is to be treated in accordance with 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph. The presumption that the claim limitation is interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is rebutted when the claim limitation recites sufficient structure, material, or acts to entirely perform the recited function.
Absence of the word “means” (or “step”) in a claim creates a rebuttable presumption that the claim limitation is not to be treated in accordance with 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph. The presumption that the claim limitation is not interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is rebutted when the claim limitation recites function without reciting sufficient structure, material or acts to entirely perform the recited function.
Claim limitations in this application that use the word “means” (or “step”) are being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, except as otherwise indicated in an Office action. Conversely, claim limitations in this application that do not use the word “means” (or “step”) are not being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, except as otherwise indicated in an Office action.
This application includes one or more claim limitations that do not use the word “means,” but are nonetheless being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, because the claim limitation(s) uses a generic placeholder that is coupled with functional language without reciting sufficient structure to perform the recited function and the generic placeholder is not preceded by a structural modifier. Such claim limitation(s) is/are: a detection unit that acquires... in Claim 1 (see Applicant’s Specification ⁋[0015] for support); a controller [that generates... information] and [is configured to transmit] and/or [to specify] in claim(s) 1, 2 and 4-8 (see Applicant’s Specification ⁋[0021] for support)
Because this/these claim limitation(s) is/are being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, it/they is/are being interpreted to cover the corresponding structure described in the specification as performing the claimed function, and equivalents thereof.
If applicant does not intend to have this/these limitation(s) interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, applicant may: (1) amend the claim limitation(s) to avoid it/them being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph (e.g., by reciting sufficient structure to perform the claimed function); or (2) present a sufficient showing that the claim limitation(s) recite(s) sufficient structure to perform the claimed function so as to avoid it/them being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 101
35 U.S.C. 101 reads as follows:
Whoever invents or discovers any new and useful process, machine, manufacture, or composition of matter, or any new and useful improvement thereof, may obtain a patent therefor, subject to the conditions and requirements of this title.
Claim(s) 1-13 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 101 because the claimed invention is directed to abstract idea without significantly more.
Step 1: claim(s) 1-13 are directed to a machine and/or process. Therefore, the claims are directed to statutory subject matter under Step 1 (Step 1: YES). See MPEP 2106.03.
Prong 1, Step 2A: Regarding claim 1, and similar claim(s) 11-13, taken as representative, recites at least the following limitations that recite an abstract idea:
A management system comprising:
The above limitations, under their broadest reasonable interpretation, fall within the “Certain Methods of Organizing Human Activity” grouping of abstract ideas, enumerated in MPEP 2106.04(a)(2)(II), in that they recite "commercial interactions" or "legal interactions" include agreements in the form of contracts, legal obligations, advertising, marketing or sales activities or behaviors, and business relations. The broadest reasonable interpretation of these limitations for claim 1, and similar claim(s) 11-13 includes acquires detection data of a wind turbine generator; generates maintenance information related to maintenance for the wind turbine generator based on the detection data; and transmit the maintenance information, thus, claim 1, and similar claim(s) 11-13 falls within the “Certain Methods of Organizing Human Activity” grouping of abstract ideas as they recite “commercial interactions" or "legal interactions" in the form of business relations.
The above limitations, under their broadest reasonable interpretation, fall within the “Mental Processes” grouping of abstract ideas, enumerated in MPEP 2106.04(a)(2)(III), in that they recite as concepts performed in the human mind, including observations, evaluations, judgments, and opinions. That is, other than reciting for claim 1, and similar claim(s) 11-13, i.e., unit, controller, device and further I/O interfaces and processor; nothing in these claim element(s) precludes the step(s) from practically being performed in the mind. For example, the broadest reasonable interpretation of these limitations for claim 1, and similar claim(s) 11-13, includes acquires detection data of a wind turbine generator; generates maintenance information related to maintenance for the wind turbine generator based on the detection data; and transmit the maintenance information, which, encompass steps that a user can manually perform in the human mind or by a human using a pen and paper. If a claim limitation, under its broadest reasonable interpretation, covers performance of the limitation in the mind but for the recitation of generic computer components, then it falls within the “mental processes” grouping of abstract ideas.
Accordingly, these claims recite an abstract idea. (Prong 1, Step 2A: YES). The types of identified abstract ideas are considered together as a single abstract idea for analysis purposes.
Prong 2, Step 2A: Limitations that are not indicative of integration into a practical application include: (1) Adding the words “apply it” (or an equivalent) with the judicial exception, or mere instructions to implement an abstract idea on a computer, or merely uses a computer as a tool to perform an abstract idea (MPEP 2106.05(f)), (2) Adding insignificant extra-solution activity to the judicial exception (MPEP 2106.05(g)), (3) Generally linking the use of the judicial exception to a particular technological environment or field of use (MPEP 2106.05(h)). Claim 1, and similar claim(s) 11-13, recite i.e., unit, controller, device and further I/O interfaces and processor. These additional elements are described at a high level in Applicant’s specification without any meaningful detail about their structure or configuration. These elements in the steps are recited at a high-level of generality such that it amounts no more than mere instructions to apply the exception using a generic computer component and merely invoke such additional elements as a tool to perform the abstract idea. See MPEP 2106.05(f). Accordingly, these additional elements, even in combination, do not integrate the abstract idea into a practical application because it does not impose any meaningful limits on practicing the abstract idea. The claim is directed to an abstract idea.
As such, under Prong 2 of Step 2A, when considered both individually and as a whole, the limitations of claim 1, and for similar claim(s) 11-13 are not indicative of integration into a practical application (Prong 2, Step 2A: NO). See MPEP 2106.04(d).
Since claim 1, and similar claim(s) 11-13 recites an abstract idea and fails to integrate the abstract idea into a practical application, claim 1, and similar claim(s) 11-13 is “directed to” an abstract idea under Step 2A (Step 2A: YES). See MPEP 2106.04(d).
Step 2B: The recitation of the additional elements is acknowledged, as identified above with respect to Prong 2 of Step 2A. These additional elements do not add significantly more to the abstract idea for the same reasons as addressed above with respect to Prong 2 of Step 2A.
The claim does not include additional elements that are sufficient to amount to significantly more than the judicial exception because, when considered separately and as an ordered combination, they do not add significantly more to the exception. As discussed above with respect to integration of the abstract idea into a practical application, the additional elements of for claim 1, and for similar claim(s) 11-13, i.e., unit, controller, device and further I/O interfaces and processor; thus, amounts to no more than mere instructions to apply the exception using a generic computer component and do not add anything that is not already present when they are considered individually or in combination. Mere instructions to apply an exception using a generic computer component cannot provide an inventive concept. Therefore, under Step 2B, there are no meaningful limitations in claim 1, and similar claim(s) 11-13 that transform the judicial exception into a patent eligible application such that the claims amount to significantly more than the judicial exception itself (Step 2B: NO). See MPEP 2106.05.
Accordingly, under the Subject Matter Eligibility test, claim 1, and similar claim(s) 11-13 is ineligible.
Regarding Claims 2-10, claims 2-10 further defines the abstract idea that is present in their respective independent claims and hence are abstract for at least the reasons presented above w/ respect to “Certain Methods of Organizing Human Activity” as the claims recite further "commercial interactions" or "legal interactions" include agreements in the form of contracts, legal obligations, advertising, marketing or sales activities or behaviors, and business relations i.e., further features related to maintenance “management” and/or further recite “Mental Processes” as the claims recite further concepts that can be performed in the human mind, including observations, evaluations, judgments, and opinions. These dependent claim does not include any additional elements that integrate the abstract idea into a practical application; as such elements are recited at a high level of generality such that it amounts not more than mere instructions to apply the exception using a generic computer component (i.e., claim 10 – display device displaying captured image by an imaging device). Even in combination, these additional elements do not integrate the abstract idea into a practical application and do no not amount to significantly more than the abstract idea itself. Thus, the aforementioned claims are not patent-eligible.
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) 1-7, 9, 11-13 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Son et al. (US 2017/0352010 A1).
Regarding Claim 1;
Son discloses a management system ([0011] - ...a wind farm supervision monitoring system... and [0013]) comprising:
a detection unit that acquires detection data of a wind turbine generator ([0013] - ...a data collection unit configured to collect data about the status monitoring of each wind turbine from at least one site server...);
a controller that generates maintenance information related to maintenance for the wind turbine generator based on the detection data ([0013] - ...a data collection unit configured to collect data about the status monitoring of each wind turbine from at least one site server... a supervision unit configured to manage a turbine operation status and operation and maintenance of each wind turbine and provide information for establishing an operation and maintenance plan for the detected abnormality status of the wind turbine); and
a first terminal device, wherein the controller is configured to transmit the maintenance information to the first terminal device ([0014] - The supervision unit may collect an early alarm, a weather forecast, and component and tool status information using the SCADA data and the CMS data provided from the at least one site server to establish an operation and maintenance plan, automatically issue a work ticket suggesting a work that the worker needs to perform based on the established maintenance plan, receive a registration of a work record depending on the work ticket, and perform a cooperative work for the customer request and answer of a helpdesk and [0064] and [0117]-[0119] - Further, for the mobile application menu, the supervision unit 240 may provide the supervision, operation and maintenance (O & M), and helpdesk function so that the mobile terminal may confirm the operation status of the wind turbine).
Regarding Claim 2;
Son discloses the management system according to claim 1.
Son further discloses wherein the controller is configured to specify a maintenance type of the wind turbine generator based on the detection data ([0064] - ... the supervision unit 240 may determine one of a run to failure that performs maintenance after the operation until a major part breaks, periodic maintenance that periodically performs maintenance for a predetermined period, and status based maintenance that acquires a facility status based on a facility diagnosis technology or a status monitoring technology to early detect a fault and tracks the progress to predict the next progress to thereby perform the operation and maintenance at a specific time, thereby establishing the operation and maintenance plan), and the maintenance information includes information indicating the maintenance type ([0014] - The supervision unit may collect an early alarm, a weather forecast, and component and tool status information using the SCADA data and the CMS data provided from the at least one site server to establish an operation and maintenance plan, automatically issue a work ticket suggesting a work that the worker needs to perform based on the established maintenance plan, receive a registration of a work record depending on the work ticket, and perform a cooperative work for the customer request and answer of a helpdesk and [0064] and [0117]-[0119] - Further, for the mobile application menu, the supervision unit 240 may provide the supervision, operation and maintenance (O & M), and helpdesk function so that the mobile terminal may confirm the operation status of the wind turbine and [0121] - Further, for the plan maintenance, the run to failure, and the prediction maintenance, the work history for each part may include the work plan function of inquiring and registering the work plan, the work record function of inquiring the work record input to the issued work ticket, and the equipment tool function of inquiring the equipment and tool used for work).
Regarding Claim 3;
Son discloses the management system according to claim 2.
Son further discloses, wherein the maintenance type includes at least one of a repair of a component of the wind turbine generator, a position adjustment of the component, and an inspection of the component ([0064] - ... the supervision unit 240 may determine one of a run to failure that performs maintenance after the operation until a major part breaks...)
Regarding Claim 4;
Son discloses the management system according to claim 1.
Son further dislcoses wherein the controller is configured to specify a maintenance part of the wind turbine generator based on the detection data ([0064] - ... the supervision unit 240 may determine one of a run to failure that performs maintenance after the operation until a major part breaks...), and the maintenance information includes information indicating the maintenance part ([0014] - The supervision unit may collect an early alarm, a weather forecast, and component and tool status information using the SCADA data and the CMS data provided from the at least one site server to establish an operation and maintenance plan, automatically issue a work ticket suggesting a work that the worker needs to perform based on the established maintenance plan, receive a registration of a work record depending on the work ticket, and perform a cooperative work for the customer request and answer of a helpdesk and [0064] and [0117]-[0119] - Further, for the mobile application menu, the supervision unit 240 may provide the supervision, operation and maintenance (O & M), and helpdesk function so that the mobile terminal may confirm the operation status of the wind turbine and [0121] - Further, for the plan maintenance, the run to failure, and the prediction maintenance, the work history for each part may include the work plan function of inquiring and registering the work plan, the work record function of inquiring the work record input to the issued work ticket, and the equipment tool function of inquiring the equipment and tool used for work).
Regarding Claim 5;
Son discloses the management system according to claim 1.
Son further discloses wherein the controller is configured to specify a tool and a component necessary for maintenance for the wind turbine generator based on the detection data ([0014] - The supervision unit may collect an early alarm, a weather forecast, and component and tool status information using the SCADA data and the CMS data provided from the at least one site server to establish an operation and maintenance plan, automatically issue a work ticket suggesting a work that the worker needs to perform based on the established maintenance plan, receive a registration of a work record depending on the work ticket, and perform a cooperative work for the customer request and answer of a helpdesk [0121] - Further, for the plan maintenance, the run to failure, and the prediction maintenance, the work history for each part may include the work plan function of inquiring and registering the work plan, the work record function of inquiring the work record input to the issued work ticket, and the equipment tool function of inquiring the equipment and tool used for work), and the maintenance information includes information indicating the tool and the component ([0014] - The supervision unit may collect an early alarm, a weather forecast, and component and tool status information using the SCADA data and the CMS data provided from the at least one site server to establish an operation and maintenance plan, automatically issue a work ticket suggesting a work that the worker needs to perform based on the established maintenance plan, receive a registration of a work record depending on the work ticket, and perform a cooperative work for the customer request and answer of a helpdesk and [0064] and [0117]-[0119] - Further, for the mobile application menu, the supervision unit 240 may provide the supervision, operation and maintenance (O & M), and helpdesk function so that the mobile terminal may confirm the operation status of the wind turbine and [0121] - Further, for the plan maintenance, the run to failure, and the prediction maintenance, the work history for each part may include the work plan function of inquiring and registering the work plan, the work record function of inquiring the work record input to the issued work ticket, and the equipment tool function of inquiring the equipment and tool used for work).
Regarding Claim 6;
Son discloses the management system according to claim 1.
Son further discloses wherein the controller is configured to specify a maintenance timing for the wind turbine generator based on the detection data ([0064] - ... the supervision unit 240 may determine one of a run to failure that performs maintenance after the operation until a major part breaks, periodic maintenance that periodically performs maintenance for a predetermined period, and status based maintenance that acquires a facility status based on a facility diagnosis technology or a status monitoring technology to early detect a fault and tracks the progress to predict the next progress to thereby perform the operation and maintenance at a specific time, thereby establishing the operation and maintenance plan),, and the maintenance information includes information indicating the maintenance timing ([0014] - The supervision unit may collect an early alarm, a weather forecast, and component and tool status information using the SCADA data and the CMS data provided from the at least one site server to establish an operation and maintenance plan, automatically issue a work ticket suggesting a work that the worker needs to perform based on the established maintenance plan, receive a registration of a work record depending on the work ticket, and perform a cooperative work for the customer request and answer of a helpdesk and [0064] and [0117]-[0119] - Further, for the mobile application menu, the supervision unit 240 may provide the supervision, operation and maintenance (O & M), and helpdesk function so that the mobile terminal may confirm the operation status of the wind turbine and [0121] - Further, for the plan maintenance, the run to failure, and the prediction maintenance, the work history for each part may include the work plan function of inquiring and registering the work plan, the work record function of inquiring the work record input to the issued work ticket, and the equipment tool function of inquiring the equipment and tool used for work)..
Regarding Claim 7;
Son discloses the management system according to claim 1.
Son further discloses wherein the controller is configured to specify an abnormal part in the wind turbine generator based on the detection data ([0055]-[0057] - The wind data management unit 230 may early detect a fault of each wind turbine or monitor performance of each wind turbine, based on the data about the status monitoring of each wind turbine provided from at least one site server 260 to 264 or the data about the abnormality status of each wind turbine detected by the abnormality status detection unit 220. The supervision unit 240 may manage a turbine operation status and operation and maintenance of each wind turbine and provide information for establishing an operation and maintenance plan for the detected abnormality status of the wind turbine and [0064] - ...status based maintenance that acquires a facility status based on a facility diagnosis technology or a status monitoring technology to early detect a fault and tracks the progress to predict the next progress to thereby perform the operation and maintenance at a specific time and [0144] - or the like when the operation and maintenance (O & M) for managing at least one wind farm is performed, acquiring the data from the plurality of wind farms based on the management control data acquisition (SCADA) and the status monitoring system (CMS) to early detect the failure of parts and prevent the critical accident, sharing the turbine operation status), and the maintenance information includes information indicating the abnormal part ([0014] - The supervision unit may collect an early alarm, a weather forecast, and component and tool status information using the SCADA data and the CMS data provided from the at least one site server to establish an operation and maintenance plan, automatically issue a work ticket suggesting a work that the worker needs to perform based on the established maintenance plan, receive a registration of a work record depending on the work ticket, and perform a cooperative work for the customer request and answer of a helpdesk and [0064] and [0117]-[0119] - Further, for the mobile application menu, the supervision unit 240 may provide the supervision, operation and maintenance (O & M), and helpdesk function so that the mobile terminal may confirm the operation status of the wind turbine and [0121] - Further, for the plan maintenance, the run to failure, and the prediction maintenance, the work history for each part may include the work plan function of inquiring and registering the work plan, the work record function of inquiring the work record input to the issued work ticket, and the equipment tool function of inquiring the equipment and tool used for work).
Regarding Claim 9;
Son discloses the management system according to claim 1.
Son further discloses wherein the first terminal device is a portable terminal device ([0037] - FIGS. 13(a) to 13(d) are diagrams illustrating an example of providing a turbine operation status within a wind farm to a mobile device, according to an embodiment of the present disclosure.)
Regarding Claim(s) 11; claim(s) 11 is/are directed to a/an controller associated with the system claimed in claim(s) 1. Claim(s) 11 is/are similar in scope to claim(s) 1, and is/are therefore rejected under similar rationale.
Regarding Claim(s) 12; claim(s) 12 is/are directed to a/an device associated with the system claimed in claim(s) 1. Claim(s) 12 is/are similar in scope to claim(s) 1, and is/are therefore rejected under similar rationale.
Regarding Claim(s) 13; claim(s) 13 is/are directed to a/an method associated with the system claimed in claim(s) 1. Claim(s) 13 is/are similar in scope to claim(s) 1, and is/are therefore rejected under similar rationale.
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.
Claim(s) 8 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Son et al. (US 2017/0352010 A1) in view of Ikeda et al. (US 2015/0116131 A1).
Regarding Claim 8;
Son discloses the management system according to claim 1.
Son fails to explicitly disclose further comprising a second terminal device, wherein the controller is configured to specify a degree of abnormality in the wind turbine generator based on the detection data, and the controller is configured to transmit the maintenance information to one of the first terminal device and the second terminal device according to the degree of abnormality.
However, in an analogous art, Ikdea further teaches further comprising a second terminal device (FIG. 1 – Monitoring Terminals (multiple depicted)) and wherein the controller is configured to specify a degree of abnormality in the wind turbine generator based on the detection data ([0073] - Monitoring terminal 340 transmits the designated diagnostic operation conditions to data server 330 (step S13), which then causes the diagnostic operation conditions to be stored in data server 330 (step S14) and [0075] - The learning period refers to a period for generating a threshold value for determining the condition of each apparatus of wind turbine 10, after the passage of the above-described basic data collection period, which is needed to determine the diagnostic operation conditions of wind turbine 10 and [0083] - . Where the measurement data exceeds threshold value WN, monitoring terminal 340 displays a sign such as "WARNING", for example, indicating that the corresponding apparatus is in a condition with a higher degree of abnormality), and the controller is configured to transmit the maintenance information to one of the first terminal device and the second terminal device according to the degree of abnormality (FIG. 1 and [0083]).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinarily skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the teachings of Ikeda to the system of Son to include further comprising a second terminal device, wherein the controller is configured to specify a degree of abnormality in the wind turbine generator based on the detection data, and the controller is configured to transmit the maintenance information to one of the first terminal device and the second terminal device according to the degree of abnormality.
One would have been motivated to combine the teachings of Ikeda to Son to do so as it provides / allows a condition monitoring system capable of correctly diagnosing an abnormality of an apparatus included in a wind turbine (Ikeda, [0008]).
Claim(s) 10 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Son et al. (US 2017/0352010 A1) in view of Thronicke (US 2021/0374945 A1).
Regarding Claim 10;
Son discloses the management system according to claim 9.
Son fails to explicitly disclose wherein the first terminal device includes an imaging device that captures an image of the wind turbine generator, a display device that shows a captured image captured by the imaging device, and a display controller, wherein the display controller displays the captured image of a maintenance part in the wind turbine generator in a manner different from a manner of display of the captured image of each of other parts in the wind turbine generator.
However, in an analogous art, Thronicke wherein the first terminal device includes an imaging device that captures an image of the wind turbine generator ([0027] - The system 1 can e.g. be part of a mobile apparatus. The system can e.g. be part of a vehicle or a drone which can be used for the purpose of the detection of errors associated with the object 2. However, the system 1 may be also part of an immobile apparatus, e.g. a stationary surveillance system and [0031] and [0036] - Optionally, the system 1 may also comprise a communication module 7. The communication module 1 can be designed to transmit information about detected errors and/or the captured input data to a controlling station for further examination and [0037]), a display device that shows a captured image captured by the imaging device, and a display controller, wherein the display controller displays the captured image of a maintenance part in the wind turbine generator in a manner different from a manner of display of the captured image of each of other parts in the wind turbine generator ([0031] and [0036] - Optionally, the system 1 may also comprise a communication module 7. The communication module 1 can be designed to transmit information about detected errors and/or the captured input data to a controlling station for further examination and [0039] - In a first method step 11 of the method 9 the at least one parameter is monitored. The specified range of the parameter defines the context within which a result of a recognition of at least parts of the object is expected.)
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinarily skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the teachings of Thronicke to the system of Son to include wherein the first terminal device includes an imaging device that captures an image of the wind turbine generator, a display device that shows a captured image captured by the imaging device, and a display controller, wherein the display controller displays the captured image of a maintenance part in the wind turbine generator in a manner different from a manner of display of the captured image of each of other parts in the wind turbine generator.
One would have been motivated to combine the teachings of Thronicke to Son to do so as it provides / allows a, improved method for examining an object for errors (Thronicke, [0004]).
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Hayashi et al. (US 2019/0226943 A1) discusses A facility condition monitoring device includes an abnormality-degree-calculation-model construction part which constructs an abnormality-degree-calculation model for calculating an abnormality degree of a monitoring feature group of a monitoring target facility, based on a normal feature group extracted from a state-quantity fluctuation data of the monitoring target facility, an abnormality degree calculation part which calculates the abnormality degree of the monitoring feature group with the abnormality-degree-calculation model, an abnormality determination part which determines whether the monitoring target facility is abnormal, based on the abnormality degree, an abnormality-contribution-rate calculation part which obtains a contribution rate of each feature constituting the monitoring feature group used for calculating the abnormality degree determined as abnormal by the abnormality determination part, and an abnormality cause identification part which identifies an abnormality cause of the monitoring target facility, based on the contribution rate and a cause-and-effect matrix representing a relationship between the abnormality cause and the features (Abstract).
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ASFAND M SHEIKH whose telephone number is (571)272-1466. The examiner can normally be reached Mon-Fri: 7a-3p (MDT).
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, JESSICA LEMIEUX can be reached at (571)270-3445. 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.
/ASFAND M SHEIKH/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3626