DETAILED ACTION
This communication is a Non-Final Office Action rejection on the merits. Claims 1-18 are currently pending and have been addressed below.
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 .
Priority
Receipt is acknowledged of certified copies of papers required by 37 CFR 1.55.
Information Disclosure Statement (IDS)
The information disclosure statement(s) filed on 02/06/2025 comply with the provisions 37 CFR 1.97, 1.98, and MPEP 609 and is considered by the Examiner.
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.
The term "appropriate basic diagram" in claim 1 is a relative term which renders the claim indefinite. The term " appropriate" is not defined by the claim, the specification does not provide a standard for ascertaining the requisite degree, and one of ordinary skill in the art would not be reasonably apprised of the scope of the invention. In a train scheduling operation, selecting an appropriate basic diagram may be as simple as selecting a diagram that has at least one matching parameter (e.g., train type, day of the week, passenger demand, starting location, destination, etc.). For examination purposes the term “appropriate” has been construed to be selecting a diagram that matches at least the train type, the day of the operation, or the passenger demand.
Claims 2-18 are rejected for having the same deficiencies as those set forth with respect to the claims that they depend from, independent claim 1.
Claim Objections
Claim 14 is objected to because of the following informalities: Claim 14 is similar to claim 1, but Applicant recites a method instead of a system. For examination purposes, Examiner interprets claim 14 as an independent claim. However, Applicant’s claim 14 recites that the claim is dependent of claim 1 (see claim 14, according to claim 1). Appropriate correction is required.
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.
Claims 1-18 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 101 because the claimed invention is directed to a judicial exception (i.e., an abstract idea) without reciting significantly more.
Independent Claim 1
Step One - First, pursuant to step 1 in the January 2019 Revised Patent Subject Matter Eligibility Guidance (“2019 PEG”) on 84 Fed. Reg. 53, the claim 1 is directed to a method which is a statutory category.
Step 2A, Prong One - Claim 1 recites: A train operation adjustment apparatus, comprising: to generate an initial basic diagram comprising train schedule information, or generate a plurality of basic diagrams and transmit the plurality of basic diagrams; to receive and store data information of the initial basic diagram or the plurality of basic diagrams; a dispatcher sends an application instruction for reading the plurality of basic diagrams and transmits the application instruction, and the dispatcher further selects an appropriate basic diagram from the plurality of basic diagrams and performs an operation; and reads information data of the plurality of basic diagrams according to the application instruction and transmits the information data. These claim elements are considered to be abstract ideas because they are directed to “certain methods of organizing human activity” which include “managing personal behavior.” In this case, managing train operation adjustment by selecting a diagram/timetable according to the operation date or the passenger demand is a social activity. If a claim limitation, under its broadest reasonable interpretation, covers managing personal behavior, then it falls within the “certain methods of organizing human activity” grouping of abstract ideas. Accordingly, the claim recites an abstract idea.
Step 2A Prong 2 - The judicial exception is not integrated into a practical application. Claim 1 includes additional elements: a centralized traffic control (CTC); a transportation dispatching management system (TDMS) interface server; a transportation dispatching (TD) combined and shared intermediate database; a CTC system communication server; a running diagram platform; a TD combined interface server.
The CTC is merely a dispatching command system that integrates computer technology, network communication technology and modern control technology, adopts an intelligent decentralized self-discipline design principle, takes a train operation adjustment technology as a center and gives consideration to train and shunting operations (Page 1). The TDMS interface server is merely used to generate an initial basic diagram including train schedule information, or generate a plurality of different basic diagrams and transmit the basic diagrams to a TD combined and shared intermediate database (Page 1). The TD combined and shared intermediate database is merely used to receive and store data information of the initial basic diagram or the basic diagrams (Page 1). The CTC system communication server is merely used for the communication of the CTC system and is connected to a TD combined interface server and the running diagram platform (Pages 1-2). The running diagram platform is merely used to receive an application instruction for reading the basic diagrams (Page 2). The TD combined interface server is merely used to read information data of the plurality of basic diagrams from the TD combined and shared intermediate database according to the application instruction and to transmit the information data to the running diagram platform (Page 2). Merely stating that the step is performed by a computer component results in “apply it” on a computer (MPEP 2106.05f). These elements of “CTC,” “TDMS interface server,” “TD combined and shared intermediate database,” “CTC system communication server,” “running diagram platform,” and “TD combined interface server” 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 element. The interfaces and communication server are considered “field of use” since they’re just used to receive and provide information for selecting an appropriate basic diagram, but the technology is not improved (MPEP 2106.05h). Accordingly, alone and in combination, these additional elements do not integrate the abstract idea into a practical application because they do not impose any meaningful limits on practicing the abstract idea. Therefore, the claim is directed to an abstract idea.
Step 2B - The claim does not include additional elements that are sufficient to amount significantly more than the judicial exception. As discussed above with respect to integration of the abstract idea into a practical application, the claims describe how to generally “apply” the concept of selecting a diagram/timetable according to the operation date or the passenger demand. The specification shows that the CTC is merely a dispatching command system that integrates computer technology, network communication technology and modern control technology, adopts an intelligent decentralized self-discipline design principle, takes a train operation adjustment technology as a center and gives consideration to train and shunting operations (Page 1). The TDMS interface server is merely used to generate an initial basic diagram including train schedule information, or generate a plurality of different basic diagrams and transmit the basic diagrams to a TD combined and shared intermediate database (Page 1). The TD combined and shared intermediate database is merely used to receive and store data information of the initial basic diagram or the basic diagrams (Page 1). The CTC system communication server is merely used for the communication of the CTC system and is connected to a TD combined interface server and the running diagram platform (Pages 1-2). The running diagram platform is merely used to receive an application instruction for reading the basic diagrams (Page 2). The TD combined interface server is merely used to read information data of the plurality of basic diagrams from the TD combined and shared intermediate database according to the application instruction and to transmit the information data to the running diagram platform (Page 2). In this case, the step of “selecting an appropriate basic diagram/timetable from the plurality of basic diagrams/timetables according to the operation date or the passenger demand” is considered a well-understood, routine, and conventional function since it's just “performing repetitive calculations” and “receiving or transmitting data over a network” (MPEP 2106.05(d)). Thus, nothing in the claim adds significantly more to the abstract idea. The claim is ineligible.
Independent claim 14 is directed to a method at step 1, which is a statutory category. Claim 14 recites similar limitations as claim 1 and is rejected for the same reasons at step 2a, prong one; step 2a, prong 2; and step 2b. Thus, the claim is not patent eligible.
Dependent claims 2 and 16 are not directed to any additional claim elements. Rather, these claims offer further descriptive limitations of elements found in the independent claims and addressed above - such as wherein the initial basic diagram further generates a basic diagram in the TD combined and shared intermediate database. At Step 2A, Prong 2 - this is still considered “field of use” since it’s just used to receive and store a generated diagram, but the database is not improved (MPEP 2106.05h). At Step 2B – this is considered a conventional computer function of “receiving and transmitting over a network” and “storing information in a memory” (MPEP 2106.05d). Thus, nothing in the claim adds significantly more to the abstract idea. The claim is ineligible.
Dependent claims 3 and 5 are not directed to any additional claim elements. Rather, these claims offer further descriptive limitations of the abstract idea mentioned above - such as: wherein the plurality of basic diagrams comprise the train schedule information, a basic diagram name, a train identity document (ID), a dispatch console name, a train number, a running direction, a train type, an in flag, an out flag, a from station name, a to station name, and running role information; wherein the running role information comprises operation date information; the running role information is in weeks; when operation date is a day from Friday to Monday, the basic diagram is a first basic diagram; when the operation date is a day from Tuesday to Thursday, the basic diagram is a second basic diagram; and train shifts in the first basic diagram are more than train shifts in the second basic diagram. These processes are similar to the abstract idea noted in the independent claim because they further the limitations of the independent claim which are directed to certain methods of organizing human activity which include managing personal behavior. In addition, there are no additional elements to consider at Step 2A Prong 2 and Step 2B. Therefore, the claims still recite an abstract idea that can be grouped into certain methods of organizing human activity.
Dependent claim 4 is not directed to any additional claim elements. Rather, these claims offer further descriptive limitations of elements found in the independent claims and addressed above - such as: wherein the application instruction comprises dispatch console name information or train type information. At Step 2A, Prong 2 - this is still considered “field of use” since it’s just used to receive dispatch information for selecting a diagram/timetable, but the technology is not improved (MPEP 2106.05h). At Step 2B – this is considered a conventional computer function of “receiving and transmitting over a network” (MPEP 2106.05d). Thus, nothing in the claim adds significantly more to the abstract idea. The claim is ineligible.
Dependent claims 6 and 17 are not directed to any additional claim elements. Rather, these claims offer further descriptive functions of elements found in the independent claims and addressed above - such as: wherein the TD combined interface server converts the information data of the first basic diagram and the second basic diagram into an XML format and sends the information data to the running diagram platform. In this case, “transforming/converting data” is not considered an eligible transformation (MPEP 2106.05(c)). Thus, nothing in the claim adds significantly more to the abstract idea. The claim is ineligible.
Dependent claims 7-9 and 18 are not directed to any additional claim elements. Rather, these claims offer further descriptive limitations of elements found in the independent claims and addressed above - such as: wherein the running diagram platform is allowed for selecting one of the first basic diagram and the second basic diagram according to the operation date of the basic diagram to perform an operation task; wherein the running diagram platform is further allowed for adjusting the basic diagram according to a passenger demand; when the operation date is the day from Tuesday to Thursday and the passenger demand increases, the running diagram platform allowed for selecting the first basic diagram to perform the operation task; when the operation date is the day from Friday to Monday and the passenger demand decreases, the running diagram platform is allowed for selecting the second basic diagram to perform the operation task; and wherein the running diagram platform is further allowed for corresponding adjusted basic diagrams to actual operation dates and storing the adjusted basic diagrams into the CTC system. At Step 2A, Prong 2 - this is still considered “field of use” since it’s just used to receive additional parameters for selecting a diagram, but the platform is not improved (MPEP 2106.05h). At Step 2B – this is considered a conventional computer function of “receiving and transmitting over a network” and “storing information in a memory” (MPEP 2106.05d). Thus, nothing in the claim adds significantly more to the abstract idea. The claim is ineligible.
Dependent claims 10-12 are not directed to any additional claim elements. Rather, these claims offer further descriptive limitations of elements found in the independent claims and addressed above - such as: wherein the running diagram platform is further allowed for corresponding adjusted basic diagrams to actual operation dates and storing the adjusted basic diagrams into the CTC system; wherein the CTC system displays, queries, and archives the plurality of basic diagrams by means of the running diagram platform; wherein the CTC system is allowed for superposing the first basic diagram and the second basic diagram to form a basic general diagram; and wherein the CTC system is further allowed for performing a comparison operation on the plurality of basic diagrams or the basic general diagram; and the CTC system compares the plurality of basic diagrams or the basic general diagram by means of running line data and operation rule information, wherein the running line data comprises time points, entrance and exit, a station track, and information about whether to be open or not. At Step 2A, Prong 2 - this is still considered “field of use” since it’s just used to receive additional parameters for selecting and storing a diagram, but the platform is not improved (MPEP 2106.05h). At Step 2B – this is considered a conventional computer function of “receiving and transmitting over a network” and “storing information in a memory” (MPEP 2106.05d). Thus, nothing in the claim adds significantly more to the abstract idea. The claim is ineligible.
Dependent claims 13 and 15 are directed to additional elements such as: a CTC system side MQ; and a TDMS side MQ. The CTC system side MQ and TDMS side MQ are merely used to adopt a message queue mode when data exchange is received in real-time (Page 6). At Step 2A, Prong 2 - this is considered “insignificant extra-solution activity” (MPEP 2106.05g) since it’s just “mere data gathering” (MPEP 2106.05g) to use it for selecting a diagram. Also, at Step 2B, those elements are considered a conventional computer function of “receiving or transmitting data over a network” (MPEP 2106.05d). Thus, nothing in the claim adds significantly more to the abstract idea. The claim is ineligible.
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.
(a)(2) the claimed invention was described in a patent issued under section 151, or in an application for patent published or deemed published under section 122(b), in which the patent or application, as the case may be, names another inventor and was effectively filed before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claims 1-5, 7-12, and 14-18 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Minakawa et al. (US 2022/0188725 A1).
Regarding claim 1, Minakawa et al. discloses a centralized traffic control (CTC)-based train operation adjustment apparatus, comprising (Paragraph 0041, An automatic train control system in this embodiment holds a train timetable serving as a target in train control (target timetable) and updates this target timetable based on information obtained from various sensors, such as running histories, so that a train operation service can be provided to passengers with a quality closer than otherwise to a reference service quality even when the situation changes):
a transportation dispatching management system (TDMS) interface server, configured to generate an initial basic diagram comprising train schedule information, or generate a plurality of basic diagrams and transmit the plurality of basic diagrams to a transportation dispatching (TD) combined and shared intermediate database (Paragraph 0003, To maintain passenger comfort in public transportation as represented by a railroad transport service, it is necessary to keep track of the passenger demand (when, from where to where, and how many people are trying to travel). This is because an occupancy rate (congestion rate) of trains derived from the passenger demand and a train timetable (while the term “timetable” in the field of railroads represents a train operation plan and a train operation diagram illustrating it in the form of a diagram, “timetable” herein is used to represent the former, i.e., the train operation plan) affects the passenger comfort; Paragraph 0054, Further, as illustrated in FIG. 2, the target timetable creation apparatus 100 stores the data of the data for operation prediction 210, the predicted timetable 230, the data for congestion rate prediction 250, the passenger demand data 270, a timetable change pattern database 290, the target timetable 310, candidate timetables 330, and a best candidate timetable 350; Paragraph 0118, the reference evaluation index vector is an evaluation index vector in a predetermined reference time period. On each day, at the time of starting the train operation, the target timetable creation apparatus 100 generates this reference evaluation index vector based on the train timetable at this time point and the passenger demand data estimated when this train timetable was planned, and stores it in the storage unit 103; Examiner interprets the diagrams/timetables stored in the database for each pattern as the plurality of basic diagrams, wherein each pattern may be associated with a time of the week and a passenger demand);
wherein the TD combined and shared intermediate database is in a communication connection with the TDMS-interface server and configured to receive and store data information of the initial basic diagram or the plurality of basic diagrams (Paragraph 0042, FIG. 1 is a diagram explaining an example of the configuration of an automatic train control system 1 according to the first embodiment. The automatic train control system 1 includes a traffic management system 200, a passenger demand prediction system 300, and a target timetable creation apparatus 100. The target timetable creation apparatus 100 appropriately corrects a train timetable obtained from the traffic management system 200 and used as a control target in train control (target timetable) based on information obtained from the passenger demand prediction system 300 and indicating a passenger demand including a predicted future passenger demand (e.g., when, from where to where, and how many people are and will be traveling), and transmits the result to the traffic management system 200. The target timetable creation apparatus 100, the traffic management system 200, and the passenger demand prediction system 300 are coupled to one another in a communicable manner by a wired or wireless communication network 5, such as a LAN (Local Area Network), a WAN (Wide Area Network), the Internet, or dedicated lines, for example; see Figure 2 and related text in Paragraph 0054, Further, as illustrated in FIG. 2, the target timetable creation apparatus 100 stores the data of the data for operation prediction 210, the predicted timetable 230, the data for congestion rate prediction 250, the passenger demand data 270, a timetable change pattern database 290, the target timetable 310, candidate timetables 330, and a best candidate timetable 350);
a CTC system, comprising a CTC system communication server and a running diagram platform, wherein the CTC system communication server is configured for communication of the CTC system and is connected to a TD combined interface server and the running diagram platform, a dispatcher sends an application instruction for reading the plurality of basic diagrams by means of the running diagram platform and transmits the application instruction to the TD combined interface server by means of the CTC system communication server, and the dispatcher further selects an appropriate basic diagram from the plurality of basic diagrams by means of the running diagram platform and performs an operation (Paragraph 0042, FIG. 1 is a diagram explaining an example of the configuration of an automatic train control system 1 according to the first embodiment. The automatic train control system 1 includes a traffic management system 200, a passenger demand prediction system 300, and a target timetable creation apparatus 100. The target timetable creation apparatus 100 appropriately corrects a train timetable obtained from the traffic management system 200 and used as a control target in train control (target timetable) based on information obtained from the passenger demand prediction system 300 and indicating a passenger demand including a predicted future passenger demand (e.g., when, from where to where, and how many people are and will be traveling), and transmits the result to the traffic management system 200. The target timetable creation apparatus 100, the traffic management system 200, and the passenger demand prediction system 300 are coupled to one another in a communicable manner by a wired or wireless communication network 5, such as a LAN (Local Area Network), a WAN (Wide Area Network), the Internet, or dedicated lines, for example; see Figure 2 and related text in Paragraph 0054, Further, as illustrated in FIG. 2, the target timetable creation apparatus 100 stores the data of the data for operation prediction 210, the predicted timetable 230, the data for congestion rate prediction 250, the passenger demand data 270, a timetable change pattern database 290, the target timetable 310, candidate timetables 330, and a best candidate timetable 350; Paragraph 0064, The best candidate timetable 350 is created in the timetable update process executed by the target timetable creation apparatus 100, and is a train timetable determined as the most appropriate for a predicted passenger demand among the candidate timetables; Examiner interprets the best timetable as the appropriate diagram platform. Also, Examiner interprets the creation of the timetable update as the operation);
and the TD combined interface server, wherein the TD combined interface server is in the communication connection with the TD combined and shared intermediate database, wherein the TD combined interface server reads information data of the plurality of basic diagrams from the TD combined and shared intermediate database according to the application instruction and transmits the information data to the running diagram platform (Paragraph 0042, FIG. 1 is a diagram explaining an example of the configuration of an automatic train control system 1 according to the first embodiment. The automatic train control system 1 includes a traffic management system 200, a passenger demand prediction system 300, and a target timetable creation apparatus 100. The target timetable creation apparatus 100 appropriately corrects a train timetable obtained from the traffic management system 200 and used as a control target in train control (target timetable) based on information obtained from the passenger demand prediction system 300 and indicating a passenger demand including a predicted future passenger demand (e.g., when, from where to where, and how many people are and will be traveling), and transmits the result to the traffic management system 200. The target timetable creation apparatus 100, the traffic management system 200, and the passenger demand prediction system 300 are coupled to one another in a communicable manner by a wired or wireless communication network 5, such as a LAN (Local Area Network), a WAN (Wide Area Network), the Internet, or dedicated lines, for example; see Figure 2 and related text in Paragraph 0054, Further, as illustrated in FIG. 2, the target timetable creation apparatus 100 stores the data of the data for operation prediction 210, the predicted timetable 230, the data for congestion rate prediction 250, the passenger demand data 270, a timetable change pattern database 290, the target timetable 310, candidate timetables 330, and a best candidate timetable 350; Paragraph 0064, The best candidate timetable 350 is created in the timetable update process executed by the target timetable creation apparatus 100, and is a train timetable determined as the most appropriate for a predicted passenger demand among the candidate timetables).
Regarding claim 2, which is dependent of claim 1, Minakawa et al. discloses all the limitations in claim 1. Minakawa et al. further discloses wherein the initial basic diagram further generates a basic diagram in the TD combined and shared intermediate database (see Figure 2 and related text in Paragraph 0054, Further, as illustrated in FIG. 2, the target timetable creation apparatus 100 stores the data of the data for operation prediction 210, the predicted timetable 230, the data for congestion rate prediction 250, the passenger demand data 270, a timetable change pattern database 290, the target timetable 310, candidate timetables 330, and a best candidate timetable 350; Paragraph 0064, The best candidate timetable 350 is created in the timetable update process executed by the target timetable creation apparatus 100, and is a train timetable determined as the most appropriate for a predicted passenger demand among the candidate timetables).
Regarding claim 3, which is dependent of claim 1, Minakawa et al. discloses all the limitations in claim 1. Minakawa et al. further discloses wherein the plurality of basic diagrams comprise the train schedule information, a basic diagram name, a train identity document (ID), a dispatch console name, a train number, a running direction, a train type, an in flag, an out flag, a from station name, a to station name, and running role information (Paragraph 0043, The traffic management system 200 manages the train timetable (target timetable), the train location of each train, and the like, and controls the running of each train 25 in an operation management area based on the information of the target timetable; Paragraph 0055, The data for operation prediction 210 is data to be used by the predicted timetable generation unit 111 and contains information on the stations and track equipment (e.g., information on the order of the stations of each railroad line and the track layout, information on usable platforms at each station, the running time of each train type between adjacent stations, the minimum headway and junction margin being the minimum times to be ensured between a preceding train and a subsequent train, etc.), the running history of each train, and so on; Paragraph 0060, Each timetable change pattern 291 contains, for example, information on combination elements such as an increase/decrease in the number of trains and the running order of trains, and information for setting the headway adjustment target range. In this way, it is possible to define the contents of timetable changes corresponding, for example, to train operation rescheduling actions such as adding an extra train, suspending the train operation in the entire section or in some section, changing the destination of a train (including extension of operation, change of the course, temporary evacuation to a sidetrack, etc.), and adjusting the operation headways of trains, and to combinations of two or more of these train operation rescheduling actions; Paragraph 0157, Here, it is to be noted that each train timetable 1500 is a type of train timetable called a pattern timetable, and since the train “TR001” and the train “TR020” are equivalent to each other, the timetable change pattern 291 exemplarily illustrated above can associate “PTR001” being the reference train in the timetable change pattern 291 not only with the train “TR001” in the train timetable 1500 but also with the train “TR020” therein; Figure 3, item 902, train ID; Paragraph 0185, If a feasible solution is found in step s119, the target timetable creation apparatus 100, before terminating the headway adjustment process, reflects the derived value of each decision variable, i.e., the arrival time ARV(TRi, STj) of each train TRi at each station STj after the headway adjustment and the departure time DPT(TRi, STj) of each train TRi at each station STj after the headway adjustment, in the candidate timetable to be created; Paragraph 0206, As illustrated in FIG. 25, the first and second railroad lines share the same equipment such as the tracks and platforms from the station ST11 through the station ST12 to the point past the station ST13 at which they separate from each other. Also, the same vehicle is arranged to be capable of running in both the first and second railroad lines. The vehicles to be used in these railroad lines share the same depot (Depot) which trains enter and exit via a track LN6).
Regarding claim 4, which is dependent of claim 3, Minakawa et al. discloses all the limitations in claim 3. Minakawa et al. further discloses wherein the application instruction comprises dispatch console name information or train type information (see Figure 2 and related text in Paragraph 0054, Further, as illustrated in FIG. 2, the target timetable creation apparatus 100 stores the data of the data for operation prediction 210, the predicted timetable 230, the data for congestion rate prediction 250, the passenger demand data 270, a timetable change pattern database 290, the target timetable 310, candidate timetables 330, and a best candidate timetable 350; Paragraph 0064, The best candidate timetable 350 is created in the timetable update process executed by the target timetable creation apparatus 100, and is a train timetable determined as the most appropriate for a predicted passenger demand among the candidate timetables; Paragraph 0157, Here, it is to be noted that each train timetable 1500 is a type of train timetable called a pattern timetable, and since the train “TR001” and the train “TR020” are equivalent to each other, the timetable change pattern 291 exemplarily illustrated above can associate “PTR001” being the reference train in the timetable change pattern 291 not only with the train “TR001” in the train timetable 1500 but also with the train “TR020” therein; Figure 3, item 902, train ID; Paragraph 0185, If a feasible solution is found in step s119, the target timetable creation apparatus 100, before terminating the headway adjustment process, reflects the derived value of each decision variable, i.e., the arrival time ARV(TRi, STj) of each train TRi at each station STj after the headway adjustment and the departure time DPT(TRi, STj) of each train TRi at each station STj after the headway adjustment, in the candidate timetable to be created; Paragraph 0206, As illustrated in FIG. 25, the first and second railroad lines share the same equipment such as the tracks and platforms from the station ST11 through the station ST12 to the point past the station ST13 at which they separate from each other. Also, the same vehicle is arranged to be capable of running in both the first and second railroad lines. The vehicles to be used in these railroad lines share the same depot (Depot) which trains enter and exit via a track LN6; Examiner interprets the depot as the dispatch console name information).
Regarding claim 5, which is dependent of claim 3, Minakawa et al. discloses all the limitations in claim 3. Minakawa et al. further discloses wherein the running role information comprises operation date information; the running role information is in weeks; when operation date is a day from Friday to Monday, the basic diagram is a first basic diagram; when the operation date is a day from Tuesday to Thursday, the basic diagram is a second basic diagram; and train shifts in the first basic diagram are more than train shifts in the second basic diagram (Paragraph 0118, The target timetable creation apparatus 100 determines whether the evaluation index vector calculated in s35 is within a tolerable range when compared with a later-described reference evaluation index vector (s37). Specifically, the target timetable creation apparatus 100, for example, compares the index value of each constituent element of the evaluation index vector and that of the reference evaluation index vector with each other and determines whether there is a deviation of a predetermined value or greater. Note that the reference evaluation index vector is an evaluation index vector in a predetermined reference time period. On each day, at the time of starting the train operation, the target timetable creation apparatus 100 generates this reference evaluation index vector based on the train timetable at this time point and the passenger demand data estimated when this train timetable was planned, and stores it in the storage unit 103. Alternatively, the train timetable to be used on each day may be given its identifier, and a reference evaluation index vector calculated in advance may be stored in association with this identifier. Note that data necessary for the generation of the reference evaluation index vector are stored in the storage unit 103 in advance (illustration thereof is omitted); Paragraph 0234, Also, in the above-described embodiments, the configuration is such that, as the predetermined reference value for identifying the best candidate timetable among the plurality of candidate timetables, an evaluation index value is used which is calculated based on a train timetable planned on the same day before execution of correction and the passenger demand estimated at the time of creating this train timetable; Examiner notes that each day has a different diagram/timetable).
Regarding claim 7, which is dependent of claim 5, Minakawa et al. discloses all the limitations in claim 5. Minakawa et al. further discloses wherein the running diagram platform is allowed for selecting one of the first basic diagram and the second basic diagram according to the operation date of the basic diagram to perform an operation task (Paragraph 0118, The target timetable creation apparatus 100 determines whether the evaluation index vector calculated in s35 is within a tolerable range when compared with a later-described reference evaluation index vector (s37). Specifically, the target timetable creation apparatus 100, for example, compares the index value of each constituent element of the evaluation index vector and that of the reference evaluation index vector with each other and determines whether there is a deviation of a predetermined value or greater. Note that the reference evaluation index vector is an evaluation index vector in a predetermined reference time period. On each day, at the time of starting the train operation, the target timetable creation apparatus 100 generates this reference evaluation index vector based on the train timetable at this time point and the passenger demand data estimated when this train timetable was planned, and stores it in the storage unit 103. Alternatively, the train timetable to be used on each day may be given its identifier, and a reference evaluation index vector calculated in advance may be stored in association with this identifier. Note that data necessary for the generation of the reference evaluation index vector are stored in the storage unit 103 in advance (illustration thereof is omitted); Paragraph 0234, Also, in the above-described embodiments, the configuration is such that, as the predetermined reference value for identifying the best candidate timetable among the plurality of candidate timetables, an evaluation index value is used which is calculated based on a train timetable planned on the same day before execution of correction and the passenger demand estimated at the time of creating this train timetable; Examiner notes that each day has a different diagram/timetable).
Regarding claim 8, which is dependent of claim 7, Minakawa et al. discloses all the limitations in claim 7. Minakawa et al. further discloses wherein the running diagram platform is further allowed for adjusting the basic diagram according to a passenger demand; when the operation date is the day from Tuesday to Thursday and the passenger demand increases, the running diagram platform allowed for selecting the first basic diagram to perform the operation task; and when the operation date is the day from Friday to Monday and the passenger demand decreases, the running diagram platform is allowed for selecting the second basic diagram to perform the operation task (Paragraph 0118, The target timetable creation apparatus 100 determines whether the evaluation index vector calculated in s35 is within a tolerable range when compared with a later-described reference evaluation index vector (s37). Specifically, the target timetable creation apparatus 100, for example, compares the index value of each constituent element of the evaluation index vector and that of the reference evaluation index vector with each other and determines whether there is a deviation of a predetermined value or greater. Note that the reference evaluation index vector is an evaluation index vector in a predetermined reference time period. On each day, at the time of starting the train operation, the target timetable creation apparatus 100 generates this reference evaluation index vector based on the train timetable at this time point and the passenger demand data estimated when this train timetable was planned, and stores it in the storage unit 103. Alternatively, the train timetable to be used on each day may be given its identifier, and a reference evaluation index vector calculated in advance may be stored in association with this identifier. Note that data necessary for the generation of the reference evaluation index vector are stored in the storage unit 103 in advance (illustration thereof is omitted); Paragraph 0234, Also, in the above-described embodiments, the configuration is such that, as the predetermined reference value for identifying the best candidate timetable among the plurality of candidate timetables, an evaluation index value is used which is calculated based on a train timetable planned on the same day before execution of correction and the passenger demand estimated at the time of creating this train timetable; Examiner notes that each day has a different diagram/timetable, wherein each diagram/timetable may be further adjusted based on the estimated passenger demand).
Regarding claim 9, which is dependent of claim 8, Minakawa et al. discloses all the limitations in claim 8. Minakawa et al. further discloses wherein the running diagram platform is further allowed for corresponding adjusted basic diagrams to actual operation dates and storing the adjusted basic diagrams into the CTC system (see Figure 2 and related text in Paragraph 0054, Further, as illustrated in FIG. 2, the target timetable creation apparatus 100 stores the data of the data for operation prediction 210, the predicted timetable 230, the data for congestion rate prediction 250, the passenger demand data 270, a timetable change pattern database 290, the target timetable 310, candidate timetables 330, and a best candidate timetable 350; Paragraph 0064, The best candidate timetable 350 is created in the timetable update process executed by the target timetable creation apparatus 100, and is a train timetable determined as the most appropriate for a predicted passenger demand among the candidate timetables; Paragraph 0118, The target timetable creation apparatus 100 determines whether the evaluation index vector calculated in s35 is within a tolerable range when compared with a later-described reference evaluation index vector (s37). Specifically, the target timetable creation apparatus 100, for example, compares the index value of each constituent element of the evaluation index vector and that of the reference evaluation index vector with each other and determines whether there is a deviation of a predetermined value or greater. Note that the reference evaluation index vector is an evaluation index vector in a predetermined reference time period. On each day, at the time of starting the train operation, the target timetable creation apparatus 100 generates this reference evaluation index vector based on the train timetable at this time point and the passenger demand data estimated when this train timetable was planned, and stores it in the storage unit 103. Alternatively, the train timetable to be used on each day may be given its identifier, and a reference evaluation index vector calculated in advance may be stored in association with this identifier. Note that data necessary for the generation of the reference evaluation index vector are stored in the storage unit 103 in advance (illustration thereof is omitted); Paragraph 0234, Also, in the above-described embodiments, the configuration is such that, as the predetermined reference value for identifying the best candidate timetable among the plurality of candidate timetables, an evaluation index value is used which is calculated based on a train timetable planned on the same day before execution of correction and the passenger demand estimated at the time of creating this train timetable; Examiner notes that each day has a different diagram/timetable, wherein each diagram/timetable with different patterns is stored in a database).
Regarding claim 10, which is dependent of claim 9, Minakawa et al. discloses all the limitations in claim 9. Minakawa et al. further discloses wherein the CTC system displays, queries, and archives the plurality of basic diagrams by means of the running diagram platform (Paragraph 0045, FIG. 2 is a diagram explaining an example of the configuration of the target timetable creation apparatus 100. The target timetable creation apparatus 100 includes, as its hardware: a processor 101, such as a CPU (Central Processing Unit); a storage device 103, such as a RAM (Random Access Memory) and a ROM (Read Only Memory) or the like, and an HDD (Hard Disk Drive) or an SSD (Solid State Drive); an input device 104 including a keyboard, a mouse, a touchscreen, and/or the like; an output device 105 including a monitor (display) or the like; and a communication device 106 that communicates with apparatuses; Paragraph 0054, Further, as illustrated in FIG. 2, the target timetable creation apparatus 100 stores the data of the data for operation prediction 210, the predicted timetable 230, the data for congestion rate prediction 250, the passenger demand data 270, a timetable change pattern database 290, the target timetable 310, candidate timetables 330, and a best candidate timetable 350; Paragraph 0104, The timetable update process is a process that obtains a target timetable currently used in train control from the traffic management system 200, corrects the target timetable as necessary, and transmits it to the traffic management system 200. In response to receiving the target timetable transmitted from the target timetable creation apparatus 100, the traffic management system 200 updates the target timetable held therein so as to use the target timetable in the train control).
Regarding claim 11, which is dependent of claim 8, Minakawa et al. discloses all the limitations in claim 8. Minakawa et al. further discloses wherein the CTC system is allowed for superposing the first basic diagram and the second basic diagram to form a basic general diagram (Paragraph 0054, Further, as illustrated in FIG. 2, the target timetable creation apparatus 100 stores the data of the data for operation prediction 210, the predicted timetable 230, the data for congestion rate prediction 250, the passenger demand data 270, a timetable change pattern database 290, the target timetable 310, candidate timetables 330, and a best candidate timetable 350; Paragraph 0118, The target timetable creation apparatus 100 determines whether the evaluation index vector calculated in s35 is within a tolerable range when compared with a later-described reference evaluation index vector (s37). Specifically, the target timetable creation apparatus 100, for example, compares the index value of each constituent element of the evaluation index vector and that of the reference evaluation index vector with each other and determines whether there is a deviation of a predetermined value or greater. Note that the reference evaluation index vector is an evaluation index vector in a predetermined reference time period. On each day, at the time of starting the train operation, the target timetable creation apparatus 100 generates this reference evaluation index vector based on the train timetable at this time point and the passenger demand data estimated when this train timetable was planned, and stores it in the storage unit 103. Alternatively, the train timetable to be used on each day may be given its identifier, and a reference evaluation index vector calculated in advance may be stored in association with this identifier. Note that data necessary for the generation of the reference evaluation index vector are stored in the storage unit 103 in advance (illustration thereof is omitted); Paragraph 0234, Also, in the above-described embodiments, the configuration is such that, as the predetermined reference value for identifying the best candidate timetable among the plurality of candidate timetables, an evaluation index value is used which is calculated based on a train timetable planned on the same day before execution of correction and the passenger demand estimated at the time of creating this train timetable; Examiner notes that Minakawa et al. uses different diagrams/timetables to create different scenarios/patterns for each day).
Regarding claim 12, which is dependent of claim 11, Minakawa et al. discloses all the limitations in claim 11. Minakawa et al. further discloses wherein the CTC system is further allowed for performing a comparison operation on the plurality of basic diagrams or the basic general diagram; and the CTC system compares the plurality of basic diagrams or the basic general diagram by means of running line data and operation rule information, wherein the running line data comprises time points, entrance and exit, a station track, and information about whether to be open or not (Paragraph 0043, The traffic management system 200 manages the train timetable (target timetable), the train location of each train, and the like, and controls the running of each train 25 in an operation management area based on the information of the target timetable; Paragraph 0055, The data for operation prediction 210 is data to be used by the predicted timetable generation unit 111 and contains information on the stations and track equipment (e.g., information on the order of the stations of each railroad line and the track layout, information on usable platforms at each station, the running time of each train type between adjacent stations, the minimum headway and junction margin being the minimum times to be ensured between a preceding train and a subsequent train, etc.), the running history of each train, and so on; Paragraph 0060, Each timetable change pattern 291 contains, for example, information on combination elements such as an increase/decrease in the number of trains and the running order of trains, and information for setting the headway adjustment target range. In this way, it is possible to define the contents of timetable changes corresponding, for example, to train operation rescheduling actions such as adding an extra train, suspending the train operation in the entire section or in some section, changing the destination of a train (including extension of operation, change of the course, temporary evacuation to a sidetrack, etc.), and adjusting the operation headways of trains, and to combinations of two or more of these train operation rescheduling actions; Paragraph 0157, Here, it is to be noted that each train timetable 1500 is a type of train timetable called a pattern timetable, and since the train “TR001” and the train “TR020” are equivalent to each other, the timetable change pattern 291 exemplarily illustrated above can associate “PTR001” being the reference train in the timetable change pattern 291 not only with the train “TR001” in the train timetable 1500 but also with the train “TR020” therein; Figure 3, item 902, train ID; Paragraph 0185, If a feasible solution is found in step s119, the target timetable creation apparatus 100, before terminating the headway adjustment process, reflects the derived value of each decision variable, i.e., the arrival time ARV(TRi, STj) of each train TRi at each station STj after the headway adjustment and the departure time DPT(TRi, STj) of each train TRi at each station STj after the headway adjustment, in the candidate timetable to be created; Paragraph 0206, As illustrated in FIG. 25, the first and second railroad lines share the same equipment such as the tracks and platforms from the station ST11 through the station ST12 to the point past the station ST13 at which they separate from each other. Also, the same vehicle is arranged to be capable of running in both the first and second railroad lines. The vehicles to be used in these railroad lines share the same depot (Depot) which trains enter and exit via a track LN6)).
Regarding claim 14, Minakawa et al. discloses a CTC-based train operation adjustment method, suitable for the CTC-based train operation adjustment apparatus according to claim 1, comprising the following processes (Paragraph 0001, The present invention relates to a timetable creation apparatus, a timetable creation method, and an automatic train control system; Paragraph 0041, An automatic train control system in this embodiment holds a train timetable serving as a target in train control (target timetable) and updates this target timetable based on information obtained from various sensors, such as running histories, so that a train operation service can be provided to passengers with a quality closer than otherwise to a reference service quality even when the situation changes):
step 1: allowing the TD combined interface server to be in the communication connection with the CTC system communication server, the TDMS-interface server, and the TD combined and shared intermediate database, respectively (Paragraph 0042, FIG. 1 is a diagram explaining an example of the configuration of an automatic train control system 1 according to the first embodiment. The automatic train control system 1 includes a traffic management system 200, a passenger demand prediction system 300, and a target timetable creation apparatus 100. The target timetable creation apparatus 100 appropriately corrects a train timetable obtained from the traffic management system 200 and used as a control target in train control (target timetable) based on information obtained from the passenger demand prediction system 300 and indicating a passenger demand including a predicted future passenger demand (e.g., when, from where to where, and how many people are and will be traveling), and transmits the result to the traffic management system 200. The target timetable creation apparatus 100, the traffic management system 200, and the passenger demand prediction system 300 are coupled to one another in a communicable manner by a wired or wireless communication network 5, such as a LAN (Local Area Network), a WAN (Wide Area Network), the Internet, or dedicated lines, for example; see Figure 2 and related text in Paragraph 0054, Further, as illustrated in FIG. 2, the target timetable creation apparatus 100 stores the data of the data for operation prediction 210, the predicted timetable 230, the data for congestion rate prediction 250, the passenger demand data 270, a timetable change pattern database 290, the target timetable 310, candidate timetables 330, and a best candidate timetable 350);
step 2: sending, by the CTC system, the application instruction for reading plurality of basic diagrams by means of the running diagram platform, and transmitting, by the CTC system communication server, the application instruction to the TD combined interface server (Paragraph 0042, FIG. 1 is a diagram explaining an example of the configuration of an automatic train control system 1 according to the first embodiment. The automatic train control system 1 includes a traffic management system 200, a passenger demand prediction system 300, and a target timetable creation apparatus 100. The target timetable creation apparatus 100 appropriately corrects a train timetable obtained from the traffic management system 200 and used as a control target in train control (target timetable) based on information obtained from the passenger demand prediction system 300 and indicating a passenger demand including a predicted future passenger demand (e.g., when, from where to where, and how many people are and will be traveling), and transmits the result to the traffic management system 200. The target timetable creation apparatus 100, the traffic management system 200, and the passenger demand prediction system 300 are coupled to one another in a communicable manner by a wired or wireless communication network 5, such as a LAN (Local Area Network), a WAN (Wide Area Network), the Internet, or dedicated lines, for example; see Figure 2 and related text in Paragraph 0054, Further, as illustrated in FIG. 2, the target timetable creation apparatus 100 stores the data of the data for operation prediction 210, the predicted timetable 230, the data for congestion rate prediction 250, the passenger demand data 270, a timetable change pattern database 290, the target timetable 310, candidate timetables 330, and a best candidate timetable 350; Paragraph 0118, the reference evaluation index vector is an evaluation index vector in a predetermined reference time period. On each day, at the time of starting the train operation, the target timetable creation apparatus 100 generates this reference evaluation index vector based on the train timetable at this time point and the passenger demand data estimated when this train timetable was planned, and stores it in the storage unit 103; Examiner interprets the diagrams/timetables stored in the database for each pattern as the plurality of basic diagrams, wherein each pattern may be associated with a time of the week and a passenger demand;
step 3: reading, by the TD combined interface server, the information data of a first basic diagram and a second basic diagram from the TD combined and shared intermediate database according to the application instruction, and transmitting, by the CTC system, the information data to a CTC running diagram (Paragraph 0042, FIG. 1 is a diagram explaining an example of the configuration of an automatic train control system 1 according to the first embodiment. The automatic train control system 1 includes a traffic management system 200, a passenger demand prediction system 300, and a target timetable creation apparatus 100. The target timetable creation apparatus 100 appropriately corrects a train timetable obtained from the traffic management system 200 and used as a control target in train control (target timetable) based on information obtained from the passenger demand prediction system 300 and indicating a passenger demand including a predicted future passenger demand (e.g., when, from where to where, and how many people are and will be traveling), and transmits the result to the traffic management system 200. The target timetable creation apparatus 100, the traffic management system 200, and the passenger demand prediction system 300 are coupled to one another in a communicable manner by a wired or wireless communication network 5, such as a LAN (Local Area Network), a WAN (Wide Area Network), the Internet, or dedicated lines, for example; see Figure 2 and related text in Paragraph 0054, Further, as illustrated in FIG. 2, the target timetable creation apparatus 100 stores the data of the data for operation prediction 210, the predicted timetable 230, the data for congestion rate prediction 250, the passenger demand data 270, a timetable change pattern database 290, the target timetable 310, candidate timetables 330, and a best candidate timetable 350; Paragraph 0064, The best candidate timetable 350 is created in the timetable update process executed by the target timetable creation apparatus 100, and is a train timetable determined as the most appropriate for a predicted passenger demand among the candidate timetables);
and step 4: selecting, by the CTC system, the first basic diagram or the second basic diagram to perform an operation task (Paragraph 0042, FIG. 1 is a diagram explaining an example of the configuration of an automatic train control system 1 according to the first embodiment. The automatic train control system 1 includes a traffic management system 200, a passenger demand prediction system 300, and a target timetable creation apparatus 100. The target timetable creation apparatus 100 appropriately corrects a train timetable obtained from the traffic management system 200 and used as a control target in train control (target timetable) based on information obtained from the passenger demand prediction system 300 and indicating a passenger demand including a predicted future passenger demand (e.g., when, from where to where, and how many people are and will be traveling), and transmits the result to the traffic management system 200. The target timetable creation apparatus 100, the traffic management system 200, and the passenger demand prediction system 300 are coupled to one another in a communicable manner by a wired or wireless communication network 5, such as a LAN (Local Area Network), a WAN (Wide Area Network), the Internet, or dedicated lines, for example; see Figure 2 and related text in Paragraph 0054, Further, as illustrated in FIG. 2, the target timetable creation apparatus 100 stores the data of the data for operation prediction 210, the predicted timetable 230, the data for congestion rate prediction 250, the passenger demand data 270, a timetable change pattern database 290, the target timetable 310, candidate timetables 330, and a best candidate timetable 350; Paragraph 0064, The best candidate timetable 350 is created in the timetable update process executed by the target timetable creation apparatus 100, and is a train timetable determined as the most appropriate for a predicted passenger demand among the candidate timetables; Examiner interprets the best timetable as the appropriate diagram platform. Also, Examiner interprets the creation of the timetable update as the operation task).
Regarding claim 18, which is dependent of claim 14, Minakawa et al. discloses all the limitations in claim 14. Minakawa et al. further discloses wherein the step 4 further comprises: selecting, by the running diagram platform, the plurality of basic diagrams according to an operation date or a passenger demand (Paragraph 0118, The target timetable creation apparatus 100 determines whether the evaluation index vector calculated in s35 is within a tolerable range when compared with a later-described reference evaluation index vector (s37). Specifically, the target timetable creation apparatus 100, for example, compares the index value of each constituent element of the evaluation index vector and that of the reference evaluation index vector with each other and determines whether there is a deviation of a predetermined value or greater. Note that the reference evaluation index vector is an evaluation index vector in a predetermined reference time period. On each day, at the time of starting the train operation, the target timetable creation apparatus 100 generates this reference evaluation index vector based on the train timetable at this time point and the passenger demand data estimated when this train timetable was planned, and stores it in the storage unit 103. Alternatively, the train timetable to be used on each day may be given its identifier, and a reference evaluation index vector calculated in advance may be stored in association with this identifier. Note that data necessary for the generation of the reference evaluation index vector are stored in the storage unit 103 in advance (illustration thereof is omitted); Paragraph 0234, Also, in the above-described embodiments, the configuration is such that, as the predetermined reference value for identifying the best candidate timetable among the plurality of candidate timetables, an evaluation index value is used which is calculated based on a train timetable planned on the same day before execution of correction and the passenger demand estimated at the time of creating this train timetable; Examiner notes that each day has a different diagram/timetable).
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 set forth in Graham v. John Deere Co., 383 U.S. 1, 148 USPQ 459 (1966), that are applied 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.
Claims 6 and 17 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Minakawa et al. (US 2022/0188725 A1), in view of Wei (CN 108596454 A).
Regarding claims 6 and 17, which are dependent of claims 5 and 14, Minakawa et al. discloses all the limitations in claims 5 and 14. Minakawa et al. further discloses wherein the TD combined interface server [receives] the information data of the first basic diagram and the second basic diagram … and sends the information data to the running diagram platform (Paragraph 0042, FIG. 1 is a diagram explaining an example of the configuration of an automatic train control system 1 according to the first embodiment. The automatic train control system 1 includes a traffic management system 200, a passenger demand prediction system 300, and a target timetable creation apparatus 100. The target timetable creation apparatus 100 appropriately corrects a train timetable obtained from the traffic management system 200 and used as a control target in train control (target timetable) based on information obtained from the passenger demand prediction system 300 and indicating a passenger demand including a predicted future passenger demand (e.g., when, from where to where, and how many people are and will be traveling), and transmits the result to the traffic management system 200. The target timetable creation apparatus 100, the traffic management system 200, and the passenger demand prediction system 300 are coupled to one another in a communicable manner by a wired or wireless communication network 5, such as a LAN (Local Area Network), a WAN (Wide Area Network), the Internet, or dedicated lines, for example; see Figure 2 and related text in Paragraph 0054, Further, as illustrated in FIG. 2, the target timetable creation apparatus 100 stores the data of the data for operation prediction 210, the predicted timetable 230, the data for congestion rate prediction 250, the passenger demand data 270, a timetable change pattern database 290, the target timetable 310, candidate timetables 330, and a best candidate timetable 350; Paragraph 0064, The best candidate timetable 350 is created in the timetable update process executed by the target timetable creation apparatus 100, and is a train timetable determined as the most appropriate for a predicted passenger demand among the candidate timetables).
Although Minawaka et al. discloses wherein the TD combined interface server receives and sends information data of the first diagram and the second diagram to a database, Minawaka et al. does not specifically disclose wherein format of the information data is an XML format.
However, Wei discloses wherein the TD combined interface server converts the information data of the first basic diagram and the second basic diagram into an XML format and sends the information data to the running diagram platform (Page 3, Paragraph 0018, Specifically, if the second predetermined operation instruction is obtained train operation plan instruction, then the second processing can be the train operation plan obtained as formal train operation plan or give. if the second predetermined operation instruction is a train operation plan update instruction, the second processing may be the obtained train operation plan as to substitute the original train operation plan, so as to update the train operation plan. The train operation plan data can be visualization data file, such as excel files, xml document etc. By institute It states train operation plan data and is set as the readability that visualization data file is conducive to improve data, convenient in subsequent step It was found that train operation plan is when something goes wrong, dispatcher has found and solves the problems, such as in time).
It would have been obvious to one ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to modify the centralized traffic control (CTC)-based train operation adjustment apparatus, wherein a transportation dispatching (TD) interface is used to receive and send information data of the first diagram and the second diagram of the invention of Minawaka et al. to further specify wherein the information data is converted into an XML format of the invention of Wei because doing so would allow the apparatus to provide the train operation plan in an xml document (see Wei, Paragraph 0017). Further, the claimed invention is merely a combination of old elements, and in combination each element would have performed the same function as it did separately, and one of ordinary skill in the art would have recognized that the results of the combination were predictable.
Claims 13 and 15-16 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Minakawa et al. (US 2022/0188725 A1), in view of Han (CN 113467912 A).
Regarding claim 13, which is dependent of claim 1, Minakawa et al. discloses all the limitations in claim 1. Minakawa et al. further discloses comprising …, wherein the TD combined interface server is in the communication connection with the TDMS interface server … (Paragraph 0042, FIG. 1 is a diagram explaining an example of the configuration of an automatic train control system 1 according to the first embodiment. The automatic train control system 1 includes a traffic management system 200, a passenger demand prediction system 300, and a target timetable creation apparatus 100. The target timetable creation apparatus 100 appropriately corrects a train timetable obtained from the traffic management system 200 and used as a control target in train control (target timetable) based on information obtained from the passenger demand prediction system 300 and indicating a passenger demand including a predicted future passenger demand (e.g., when, from where to where, and how many people are and will be traveling), and transmits the result to the traffic management system 200. The target timetable creation apparatus 100, the traffic management system 200, and the passenger demand prediction system 300 are coupled to one another in a communicable manner by a wired or wireless communication network 5, such as a LAN (Local Area Network), a WAN (Wide Area Network), the Internet, or dedicated lines, for example; see Figure 2 and related text in Paragraph 0054, Further, as illustrated in FIG. 2, the target timetable creation apparatus 100 stores the data of the data for operation prediction 210, the predicted timetable 230, the data for congestion rate prediction 250, the passenger demand data 270, a timetable change pattern database 290, the target timetable 310, candidate timetables 330, and a best candidate timetable 350; Paragraph 0064, The best candidate timetable 350 is created in the timetable update process executed by the target timetable creation apparatus 100, and is a train timetable determined as the most appropriate for a predicted passenger demand among the candidate timetables).
Although Minawaka et al. discloses wherein the TD combined interface server receives and sends information data of the first diagram and the second diagram to a database (e.g., based on a predicted demand/pattern), Minawaka et al. does not specifically disclose wherein the interface is connected to a CTC system side MQ and a TDMS side MQ.
However, Han discloses comprising a CTC system side message queue (MQ) and a TDMS side MQ, wherein the TD combined interface server is in the communication connection with the TDMS interface server by means of the CTC system side MQ and the TDM side MQ (Page 5, Paragraph 0013, Optionally, the AL carries the micro-service of the actual service of the train scheduling management system. the micro-service is called through REST interface; for real-time response and control related service communication, realized by the message queue. AL through API gateway open service, at the same time providing push service, satisfying the monitoring function of the train dispatching system; Examiner interprets the real-time response communication message queue as the CTC system side message queue since it can queue communication provided in real-time. Also, the control related service communication message queue as the TDMS side message queue since it can queue control related service such as dispatching).
It would have been obvious to one ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to modify the centralized traffic control (CTC)-based train operation adjustment apparatus, wherein a transportation dispatching (TD) interface is used to receive and send information data of the first diagram and the second diagram of the invention of Minawaka et al. to further specify wherein the apparatus comprises a CTC system side message queue (MQ) and a TDMS side MQ of the invention of Han because doing so would allow the apparatus to include a REST interface for real-time response and control related service communication, realized by the message queue (see Han, Page 5, Paragraph 0013). Further, the claimed invention is merely a combination of old elements, and in combination each element would have performed the same function as it did separately, and one of ordinary skill in the art would have recognized that the results of the combination were predictable.
Regarding claim 15, which is dependent of claim 14, Minakawa et al. discloses all the limitations in claim 14. Minakawa et al. further discloses wherein the step 2 further comprises: transmitting, by the TD combined interface server, the application instruction to the TDMS-interface server by means of a CTC system …; and transmitting, by the TDMS interface server, the initial basic diagram or the plurality of basic diagrams to the TD combined and shared intermediate database (Paragraph 0042, FIG. 1 is a diagram explaining an example of the configuration of an automatic train control system 1 according to the first embodiment. The automatic train control system 1 includes a traffic management system 200, a passenger demand prediction system 300, and a target timetable creation apparatus 100. The target timetable creation apparatus 100 appropriately corrects a train timetable obtained from the traffic management system 200 and used as a control target in train control (target timetable) based on information obtained from the passenger demand prediction system 300 and indicating a passenger demand including a predicted future passenger demand (e.g., when, from where to where, and how many people are and will be traveling), and transmits the result to the traffic management system 200. The target timetable creation apparatus 100, the traffic management system 200, and the passenger demand prediction system 300 are coupled to one another in a communicable manner by a wired or wireless communication network 5, such as a LAN (Local Area Network), a WAN (Wide Area Network), the Internet, or dedicated lines, for example; see Figure 2 and related text in Paragraph 0054, Further, as illustrated in FIG. 2, the target timetable creation apparatus 100 stores the data of the data for operation prediction 210, the predicted timetable 230, the data for congestion rate prediction 250, the passenger demand data 270, a timetable change pattern database 290, the target timetable 310, candidate timetables 330, and a best candidate timetable 350; Paragraph 0064, The best candidate timetable 350 is created in the timetable update process executed by the target timetable creation apparatus 100, and is a train timetable determined as the most appropriate for a predicted passenger demand among the candidate timetables).
Although Minawaka et al. further discloses transmitting the initial basic diagram or the plurality of basic diagrams to the TD combined and shared intermediate database (e.g., based on a predicted demand/pattern), Minawaka et al. does not specifically disclose wherein the interface is connected to a CTC system side MQ and a TDMS side MQ.
However, Han discloses wherein the step 2 further comprises: transmitting, by the TD combined interface server, the application instruction to the TDMS-interface server by means of a CTC system …; … (Page 5, Paragraph 0013, Optionally, the AL carries the micro-service of the actual service of the train scheduling management system. the micro-service is called through REST interface; for real-time response and control related service communication, realized by the message queue. AL through API gateway open service, at the same time providing push service, satisfying the monitoring function of the train dispatching system; Examiner interprets the real-time response communication message queue as the CTC system side message queue since it can queue communication provided in real-time. Also, the control related service communication message queue as the TDMS side message queue since it can queue control related service such as dispatching).
It would have been obvious to one ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to modify the centralized traffic control (CTC)-based train operation adjustment apparatus, wherein a transportation dispatching (TD) interface is used to receive and send information data of the first diagram and the second diagram of the invention of Minawaka et al. to further specify wherein the apparatus comprises a CTC system side message queue (MQ) and a TDMS side MQ of the invention of Han because doing so would allow the apparatus to include a REST interface for real-time response and control related service communication, realized by the message queue (see Han, Page 5, Paragraph 0013). Further, the claimed invention is merely a combination of old elements, and in combination each element would have performed the same function as it did separately, and one of ordinary skill in the art would have recognized that the results of the combination were predictable.
Regarding claim 16, which is dependent of claim 15, the combination of Minakawa et al. and Han discloses all the limitations in claim 15. Minakawa et al. further discloses wherein the step 2 further comprises: allowing the initial basic diagram to further generate a basic diagram in the TD combined and shared intermediate database (see Figure 2 and related text in Paragraph 0054, Further, as illustrated in FIG. 2, the target timetable creation apparatus 100 stores the data of the data for operation prediction 210, the predicted timetable 230, the data for congestion rate prediction 250, the passenger demand data 270, a timetable change pattern database 290, the target timetable 310, candidate timetables 330, and a best candidate timetable 350; Paragraph 0064, The best candidate timetable 350 is created in the timetable update process executed by the target timetable creation apparatus 100, and is a train timetable determined as the most appropriate for a predicted passenger demand among the candidate timetables).
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant’s disclosure.
Dobler (US 4023753 A) – discloses to handle the normal peak demand, scheduled service is used, also in combination with express service. Demand peaks occurring at short notice can also be handled by extra movements. The scheduled service is based on long-term observations of demand. From these observations, a basic schedule is derived which takes into account the time of the year, the day of the week and the time of the day (see at least Column 5, lines 65-68).
Tanaka (JP H06171512 A) – discloses A train schedule creation device with a built-in computer etc. is used. In this train schedule creation device, the schedule creation database is previously stored in the schedule creation database such as the name of each station on the route, the minimum stop time of each station, the status of the evacuation line at each station, the distance between each station, and the operating speed for each train type. Stores various information related to creation. Then, the creator uses, for example, a keyboard to specify the starting station name and ending station name of each train. When the timetable creation information such as train type and departure time at the starting station is input, for example, as shown in FIG. 6, the diamonds (diagrams) R1, R2, R3, ... For each row are displayed on the display mask of the CRT display device. Now, for example, when a train schedule for one day or a certain time period is created by the above-mentioned procedure, it is an important condition to adjust the transportation amount according to each time and place, that is, to increase or decrease the number of trains. Therefore, theoretically, it is possible to arbitrarily assign the schedules R1 to R4 of each train if this condition is satisfied. However, as important as these conditions is the overall balance of the train schedule (see at least Paragraph 0070).
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to MARJORIE PUJOLS-CRUZ whose telephone number is (571)272-4668. The examiner can normally be reached Mon-Thru 7:30 AM - 5:00 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, Patricia H Munson can be reached at (571)270-5396. 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.
/MARJORIE PUJOLS-CRUZ/Examiner, Art Unit 3624