DETAILED ACTION
Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status
The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
Claim 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 variation amount setting unit configured to receive, from an input machine, a variation amount related to a predetermined operating condition;
a predictor configured to receive the predetermined operating condition and the variation amount, and output a predicted characteristic value distribution of the product using a model in which an input is an operating condition and an output is a characteristic value of the product;
a target characteristic value setting unit configured to receive, from the input machine, a target characteristic value that is a target characteristic value of the product;
an objective function setting unit configured to set an objective function based on the predicted characteristic value distribution and the target characteristic value;
an explorer configured to explore the predetermined operating condition that reduces the objective function; and
an output unit configured to output the explored operating condition.
a training machine configured to generate a self-trained model by performing supervised learning using actual operating condition data and measured characteristic value data actually acquired from the manufacturing apparatus, wherein the predictor uses the self-trained model as the model.
the explorer explores a set temperature at a predetermined location of the manufacturing apparatus to reduce the objective function.
the explorer explores a set temperature that reduces the objective function for each of the predetermined operating conditions.
in claim 11-15.
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) 1-15 rejected under 35 U.S.C. 101 because the claimed invention is directed to an abstract idea without significantly more. The claims recite:
1. A method for providing an operating condition for a manufacturing apparatus that manufactures a product using an input device, an output device, a processor, and a memory, the method comprising:
a variation amount input step in which the input device inputs a variation amount related to a predetermined operating condition;
a model reading step in which the processor reads, from the memory, a model in which an input is the operating condition and an output is a characteristic value of the product;
a target characteristic value input step in which the input device inputs a target characteristic value of the product;
a predicted characteristic value distribution calculation step in which the processor calculates, using the model, a predicted characteristic value distribution reflecting the variation amount related to the predetermined operating condition;
an objective function calculation step in which the processor calculates an objective function based on the predicted characteristic value distribution and the target characteristic value;
an operating condition exploration step in which the processor explores the predetermined operating condition that reduces the objective function; and
an operating condition output step of outputting an operating condition that is a result of the exploration.
2. The method for providing an operating condition for a manufacturing apparatus according to claim 1, wherein
the manufacturing apparatus manufactures the product by modifying a raw material.
3. The method for providing an operating condition for a manufacturing apparatus according to claim 1, wherein
the predetermined operating condition is a set value of a predetermined physical quantity, and the variation amount is a variation amount from the set value of the predetermined physical quantity.
4. The method for providing an operating condition for a manufacturing apparatus according to claim 3, wherein
the predetermined operating condition is a set temperature at a predetermined location of the manufacturing apparatus, and the variation amount is a variation amount from the set temperature.
5. The method for providing an operating condition for a manufacturing apparatus according to claim 3, wherein
in the predicted characteristic value distribution calculation step, two points are calculated, that is, a lower variation limit predicted characteristic value g(Xn−Vpnm) and an upper variation limit predicted characteristic value g(Xn+Vpnp), and the two points are used as the predicted characteristic value distribution, where
the input of the model is an operating condition X, and the output of the model is a characteristic value g(X) of the product, and
Vpnp is an absolute value of a maximum positive variation value, and Vpnm is an absolute value of a maximum negative variation value of the variation amount based on the set value Xn of the predetermined physical quantity.
6. The method for providing an operating condition for a manufacturing apparatus according to claim 3, wherein
in the predicted characteristic value distribution calculation step, the characteristic value is calculated at an exploration point selected by a design-of-experiments method according to a specified number of explorations in a range from a lower variation limit predicted characteristic value g(Xn−Vpnm) to an upper variation limit predicted characteristic value g(Xn+Vpnp), and the calculated characteristic value is used as the predicted characteristic value distribution, where
the input of the model is the operating condition X, and the output of the model is the characteristic value g(X) of the product, and
Vpnp is an absolute value of a maximum positive variation value, and Vpnm is an absolute value of a maximum negative variation value of the variation amount based on the set value Xn of the predetermined physical quantity.
7. The method for providing an operating condition for a manufacturing apparatus according to claim 3, wherein
in the predicted characteristic value distribution calculation step, data of a predetermined number of points is sampled from the variation amount related to the predetermined operating condition in a range from a lower variation limit predicted characteristic value g(Xn−Vpnm) to an upper variation limit predicted characteristic value g(Xn+Vpnp), the characteristic value is calculated based on the sampled data, and the calculated characteristic value is used as the predicted characteristic value distribution, where
the input of the model is the operating condition X, and the output of the model is the characteristic value g(X) of the product, and
Vpnp is an absolute value of a maximum positive variation value, and Vpnm is an absolute value of a maximum negative variation value of the variation amount based on the set value Xn of the predetermined physical quantity.
8. The method for providing an operating condition for a manufacturing apparatus according to claim 3, wherein
in the objective function calculation step, a mean squared error between each value in the predicted characteristic value distribution and the target characteristic value is used as the objective function.
9. The method for providing an operating condition for a manufacturing apparatus according to claim 3, wherein
in the objective function calculation step, a mean absolute error between each value in the predicted characteristic value distribution and the target characteristic value is used as the objective function.
10. The method for providing an operating condition for a manufacturing apparatus according to claim 3, wherein
a plurality of the predetermined operating conditions are provided for one manufacturing apparatus, and
the variation amount input step, the model reading step, the predicted characteristic value distribution calculation step, the objective function calculation step, the operating condition exploration step, and the operating condition output step are executed for each of the plurality of predetermined operating conditions.
11. A system for providing an operating condition for a manufacturing apparatus that manufactures a product from a raw material, the system comprising:
a variation amount setting unit configured to receive, from an input machine, a variation amount related to a predetermined operating condition;
a predictor configured to receive the predetermined operating condition and the variation amount, and output a predicted characteristic value distribution of the product using a model in which an input is an operating condition and an output is a characteristic value of the product;
a target characteristic value setting unit configured to receive, from the input machine, a target characteristic value that is a target characteristic value of the product;
an objective function setting unit configured to set an objective function based on the predicted characteristic value distribution and the target characteristic value;
an explorer configured to explore the predetermined operating condition that reduces the objective function; and
an output unit configured to output the explored operating condition.
12. The system for providing an operating condition for a manufacturing apparatus according to claim 11, further comprising:
a training machine configured to generate a self-trained model by performing supervised learning using actual operating condition data and measured characteristic value data actually acquired from the manufacturing apparatus, wherein
the predictor uses the self-trained model as the model.
13. The system for providing an operating condition for a manufacturing apparatus according to claim 11, wherein
the predetermined operating condition is a set temperature at a predetermined location of the manufacturing apparatus, and the variation amount is a variation amount from the set temperature.
14. The system for providing an operating condition for a manufacturing apparatus according to claim 13, wherein
the explorer explores a set temperature at a predetermined location of the manufacturing apparatus to reduce the objective function.
15. The system for providing an operating condition for a manufacturing apparatus according to claim 14, wherein
a plurality of the predetermined operating conditions are provided for one manufacturing apparatus,
the predetermined operating conditions are set temperatures at different locations of the manufacturing apparatus, and
the explorer explores a set temperature that reduces the objective function for each of the predetermined operating conditions.
The limitations above, as drafted, is a process or function that, under its broadest reasonable interpretation, covers performance of the limitation in the mind but for the recitation of generic computer components. That is, other than reciting by a processor/unit, nothing in the claim element precludes the step from practically being performed in the mind. For example, but for the processor/unit language, inputting an amount, reading a model, inputting a target, predicting distribution, calculating an objective function, exploring a condition, and outputting a condition, in the context of this claim encompasses a user thinking about or manually making calculations for inputting an amount, reading a model, inputting a target, predicting distribution, calculating an objective function, exploring a condition, and outputting a condition. 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, the claim recites an abstract idea.
This judicial exception is not integrated into a practical application. In particular, the claim only recites the additional element(s) – processor/unit. The processor/unit is recited at a high-level of generality (i.e., as a generic processor performing a generic computer function) such that it amounts no more than mere instructions to apply the exception using a generic computer component. Accordingly, this additional element does 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.
The claim does not include additional elements that are sufficient to amount to significantly more than the judicial exception. As discussed above with respect to integration of the abstract idea into a practical application, the additional element(s) of processor/unit amounts to no more than mere instructions to apply the exception using a generic computer component. Mere instructions to apply an exception using a generic computer component cannot provide an inventive concept. The claim is 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.
(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.
Claim(s) 1-4,8-15 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by U.S. Pub. No. 2011/0098989 to Wang.
1, 11, 2. A system for providing an operating condition for a manufacturing apparatus that manufactures a product from a raw material, and a method for providing an operating condition for a manufacturing apparatus that manufactures a product using an input device, an output device, a processor, and a memory (paragraph 26, claims 18-20), comprising:
a variation amount setting unit configured to receive, from an input machine, a variation amount related to a predetermined operating condition (Abstract, claims 1, 11, 18, Figs. 5-7, paragraph 32-42);
a predictor configured to receive the predetermined operating condition and the variation amount, and output a predicted characteristic value distribution of the product using a model in which an input is an operating condition and an output is a characteristic value of the product (Abstract, claims 1, 11, 18, paragraphs 15-41);
a target characteristic value setting unit configured to receive, from the input machine, a target characteristic value that is a target characteristic value of the product (Abstract, claims 1, 11, 18, paragraphs 15-41);
an objective function setting unit configured to set an objective function based on the predicted characteristic value distribution and the target characteristic value (Abstract, claims 1, 11, 18, paragraphs 22, 25, 32-36, “The calculated temperature profile at given locations is compared to actual experimental temperature curves. If there is a temperature difference, the HTC distribution at the boundaries is scaled up or down to reduce the difference. This procedure is repeated until the difference is within the acceptable tolerance, for example, less than 5° C. The tolerance can be selected based on the application, material, temperature, etc. Generally, the tolerance is less than about 20° C., or less than about 10° C., or less than about 5° C.”; “In block 225, the ABAQUS temperature results from block 220 are compared with the experimental temperature v. time curves from block 230. In block 235, the temperature difference and iteration number are compared to preset conditions, e.g., is the temperature difference greater than or equal to 5° C., and is the iteration number less than or equal to 10. The preset conditions can be set as desired. If the conditions are met, the process returns to block 210 and modifies the scale factor. If the conditions are not met, the process ends at block 240.”);
an explorer configured to explore the predetermined operating condition that reduces the objective function; and an output unit configured to output the explored operating condition (Abstract, claims 1, 11, 18, paragraphs 22, 25, 32-42, “In block 225, the ABAQUS temperature results from block 220 are compared with the experimental temperature v. time curves from block 230. In block 235, the temperature difference and iteration number are compared to preset conditions, e.g., is the temperature difference greater than or equal to 5° C., and is the iteration number less than or equal to 10. The preset conditions can be set as desired. If the conditions are met, the process returns to block 210 and modifies the scale factor. If the conditions are not met, the process ends at block 240.”; ).
3. The method for providing an operating condition for a manufacturing apparatus according to claim 1, wherein the predetermined operating condition is a set value of a predetermined physical quantity, and the variation amount is a variation amount from the set value of the predetermined physical quantity (Abstract, claims 1, 11, 18, Figs. 5-7, paragraph 32-42).
4, 13. The method for providing an operating condition for a manufacturing apparatus according to claim 3, wherein the predetermined operating condition is a set temperature at a predetermined location of the manufacturing apparatus, and the variation amount is a variation amount from the set temperature (Abstract, claims 1, 11, 18, Figs. 5-7, paragraph 32-42).
8. The method for providing an operating condition for a manufacturing apparatus according to claim 3, wherein in the objective function calculation step, a mean squared error between each value in the predicted characteristic value distribution and the target characteristic value is used as the objective function (Abstract, claims 1, 11, 18, paragraphs 22, 25, 32-42, “The calculated temperature profile at given locations is compared to actual experimental temperature curves. If there is a temperature difference, the HTC distribution at the boundaries is scaled up or down to reduce the difference. This procedure is repeated until the difference is within the acceptable tolerance, for example, less than 5° C. The tolerance can be selected based on the application, material, temperature, etc. Generally, the tolerance is less than about 20° C., or less than about 10° C., or less than about 5° C.”; “In block 225, the ABAQUS temperature results from block 220 are compared with the experimental temperature v. time curves from block 230. In block 235, the temperature difference and iteration number are compared to preset conditions, e.g., is the temperature difference greater than or equal to 5° C., and is the iteration number less than or equal to 10. The preset conditions can be set as desired. If the conditions are met, the process returns to block 210 and modifies the scale factor. If the conditions are not met, the process ends at block 240.”).
9. The method for providing an operating condition for a manufacturing apparatus according to claim 3, wherein in the objective function calculation step, a mean absolute error between each value in the predicted characteristic value distribution and the target characteristic value is used as the objective function (Abstract, claims 1, 11, 18, paragraphs 22, 25, 32-42, “The calculated temperature profile at given locations is compared to actual experimental temperature curves. If there is a temperature difference, the HTC distribution at the boundaries is scaled up or down to reduce the difference. This procedure is repeated until the difference is within the acceptable tolerance, for example, less than 5° C. The tolerance can be selected based on the application, material, temperature, etc. Generally, the tolerance is less than about 20° C., or less than about 10° C., or less than about 5° C.”; “In block 225, the ABAQUS temperature results from block 220 are compared with the experimental temperature v. time curves from block 230. In block 235, the temperature difference and iteration number are compared to preset conditions, e.g., is the temperature difference greater than or equal to 5° C., and is the iteration number less than or equal to 10. The preset conditions can be set as desired. If the conditions are met, the process returns to block 210 and modifies the scale factor. If the conditions are not met, the process ends at block 240.”).
10. The method for providing an operating condition for a manufacturing apparatus according to claim 3, wherein a plurality of the predetermined operating conditions are provided for one manufacturing apparatus, and the variation amount input step, the model reading step, the predicted characteristic value distribution calculation step, the objective function calculation step, the operating condition exploration step, and the operating condition output step are executed for each of the plurality of predetermined operating conditions (Abstract, claims 1, 11, 18, paragraphs 22, 25, 32-42, “The calculated temperature profile at given locations is compared to actual experimental temperature curves. If there is a temperature difference, the HTC distribution at the boundaries is scaled up or down to reduce the difference. This procedure is repeated until the difference is within the acceptable tolerance, for example, less than 5° C. The tolerance can be selected based on the application, material, temperature, etc. Generally, the tolerance is less than about 20° C., or less than about 10° C., or less than about 5° C.”; “In block 225, the ABAQUS temperature results from block 220 are compared with the experimental temperature v. time curves from block 230. In block 235, the temperature difference and iteration number are compared to preset conditions, e.g., is the temperature difference greater than or equal to 5° C., and is the iteration number less than or equal to 10. The preset conditions can be set as desired. If the conditions are met, the process returns to block 210 and modifies the scale factor. If the conditions are not met, the process ends at block 240.”).
12. The system for providing an operating condition for a manufacturing apparatus according to claim 11, further comprising: a training machine configured to generate a self-trained model by performing supervised learning using actual operating condition data and measured characteristic value data actually acquired from the manufacturing apparatus, wherein the predictor uses the self-trained model as the model (paragraphs 22-41).
14. The system for providing an operating condition for a manufacturing apparatus according to claim 13, wherein the explorer explores a set temperature at a predetermined location of the manufacturing apparatus to reduce the objective function (Abstract, claims 1, 11, 18, paragraphs 22, 25, 32-42, “The calculated temperature profile at given locations is compared to actual experimental temperature curves. If there is a temperature difference, the HTC distribution at the boundaries is scaled up or down to reduce the difference. This procedure is repeated until the difference is within the acceptable tolerance, for example, less than 5° C. The tolerance can be selected based on the application, material, temperature, etc. Generally, the tolerance is less than about 20° C., or less than about 10° C., or less than about 5° C.”; “In block 225, the ABAQUS temperature results from block 220 are compared with the experimental temperature v. time curves from block 230. In block 235, the temperature difference and iteration number are compared to preset conditions, e.g., is the temperature difference greater than or equal to 5° C., and is the iteration number less than or equal to 10. The preset conditions can be set as desired. If the conditions are met, the process returns to block 210 and modifies the scale factor. If the conditions are not met, the process ends at block 240.”).
15. The system for providing an operating condition for a manufacturing apparatus according to claim 14, wherein a plurality of the predetermined operating conditions are provided for one manufacturing apparatus, the predetermined operating conditions are set temperatures at different locations of the manufacturing apparatus, and the explorer explores a set temperature that reduces the objective function for each of the predetermined operating conditions (Abstract, claims 1, 11, 18, paragraphs 22, 25, 32-42, “The calculated temperature profile at given locations is compared to actual experimental temperature curves. If there is a temperature difference, the HTC distribution at the boundaries is scaled up or down to reduce the difference. This procedure is repeated until the difference is within the acceptable tolerance, for example, less than 5° C. The tolerance can be selected based on the application, material, temperature, etc. Generally, the tolerance is less than about 20° C., or less than about 10° C., or less than about 5° C.”; “In block 225, the ABAQUS temperature results from block 220 are compared with the experimental temperature v. time curves from block 230. In block 235, the temperature difference and iteration number are compared to preset conditions, e.g., is the temperature difference greater than or equal to 5° C., and is the iteration number less than or equal to 10. The preset conditions can be set as desired. If the conditions are met, the process returns to block 210 and modifies the scale factor. If the conditions are not met, the process ends at block 240.”).
Allowable Subject Matter
Claim5-7 would be allowable if rewritten to overcome the rejection(s) under 35 U.S.C. 101, set forth in this Office action and to include all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims. The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter:
Wang fails to disclose all the claimed features of applicant’s instant invention, specifically including:
5. The method for providing an operating condition for a manufacturing apparatus according to claim 3, wherein in the predicted characteristic value distribution calculation step, two points are calculated, that is, a lower variation limit predicted characteristic value g(Xn−Vpnm) and an upper variation limit predicted characteristic value g(Xn+Vpnp), and the two points are used as the predicted characteristic value distribution, where the input of the model is an operating condition X, and the output of the model is a characteristic value g(X) of the product, and Vpnp is an absolute value of a maximum positive variation value, and Vpnm is an absolute value of a maximum negative variation value of the variation amount based on the set value Xn of the predetermined physical quantity.
6. The method for providing an operating condition for a manufacturing apparatus according to claim 3, wherein in the predicted characteristic value distribution calculation step, the characteristic value is calculated at an exploration point selected by a design-of-experiments method according to a specified number of explorations in a range from a lower variation limit predicted characteristic value g(Xn−Vpnm) to an upper variation limit predicted characteristic value g(Xn+Vpnp), and the calculated characteristic value is used as the predicted characteristic value distribution, where the input of the model is the operating condition X, and the output of the model is the characteristic value g(X) of the product, and Vpnp is an absolute value of a maximum positive variation value, and Vpnm is an absolute value of a maximum negative variation value of the variation amount based on the set value Xn of the predetermined physical quantity.
7. The method for providing an operating condition for a manufacturing apparatus according to claim 3, wherein in the predicted characteristic value distribution calculation step, data of a predetermined number of points is sampled from the variation amount related to the predetermined operating condition in a range from a lower variation limit predicted characteristic value g(Xn−Vpnm) to an upper variation limit predicted characteristic value g(Xn+Vpnp), the characteristic value is calculated based on the sampled data, and the calculated characteristic value is used as the predicted characteristic value distribution, where the input of the model is the operating condition X, and the output of the model is the characteristic value g(X) of the product, and Vpnp is an absolute value of a maximum positive variation value, and Vpnm is an absolute value of a maximum negative variation value of the variation amount based on the set value Xn of the predetermined physical quantity.
It is for these reasons that applicant’s invention defines over the prior art of record.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to SEAN P SHECHTMAN whose telephone number is (571)272-3754. The examiner can normally be reached 9:30am-6:00pm, M-F.
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, William Kraig can be reached at 571-272-8660. 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.
/Sean Shechtman/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2896
Prosecution Insights