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 model providing unit that provides a pre-trained model”; “a communication module that receives captured images . . .”; and “a processing module functionally connected to the model providing unit and the . . .” in claim 1, and “an output module that outputs a guidance message . . .” in claim 6.
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 § 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.
Claims 1-3, 6-9 and 12 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by CN 114332020 A to Ling (Please refer to the attached USPTO translation version)
Regarding claim 1, Ling discloses a device for detecting a defect of a solar panel (Page 2, Para 3, wherein the present invention provides a photovoltaic panel positioning and defect detection method and system based on visible light image), the device comprising: a model providing unit that provides a pre-trained model (Page 4, Para 6, wherein constructing SEFPN semantic segmentation network, comprising: forming the VGG16 basic network by 13 convolution layers, outputting the feature map to the feature pyramid network with channel attention mechanism); a communication module that receives captured images of a solar panel from an image sensor (Page 4, Para 1, wherein using the unmanned aerial vehicle carrying the visible light camera to collect the image of the photovoltaic panel;); and a processing module functionally connected to the model providing unit and the communication module (Page 2, Para 7, wherein step S3: inputting the photovoltaic panel edge mask pattern into the outline filter module, obtaining the candidate position frame of the photovoltaic panel), wherein the processing module is configured to collect the captured images of the solar panel, generate an attention map by applying the captured images to the pre-trained model (Page 2, Para 6-7, wherein photovoltaic panel edge mask pattern, wherein the SEFPN semantic segmentation network is composed of a VGG16 base network, a feature pyramid network with channel attention mechanism and a feature fusion layer; step S3: inputting the photovoltaic panel edge mask pattern into the outline filter module, obtaining the candidate position frame of the photovoltaic panel), and determine whether there is a defect in the solar panel depending on whether the attention map is abnormal (Page 2, Para 8, wherein step S5: orderly passing the test set through the SEFPN semantic segmentation network, the outline filter module and the YOLOv5 detection network, obtaining the position and defect type of the photovoltaic panel).
Regarding claim 2, Ling discloses wherein the processing module applies an attention mechanism that includes convolutional neural network training on a large-scale public data set (Page 4, Para 6, wherein constructing SEFPN semantic segmentation network, comprising: forming the VGG16 basic network by 13 convolution layers, outputting the feature map to the feature pyramid network with channel attention mechanism).
Regarding claim 3, Ling discloses wherein the processing module is configured to extract at least one statistical feature from the attention map, detect a correlation between the extracted statistical feature and a label value indicating a defective solar panel, and determine whether the solar panel is defective based on a degree of the correlation (Page 6, para 5 and 6, wherein step S42: based on the photovoltaic plate marked as defect in step S21, labelling the defect type of the photovoltaic panel rectangular frame, the defect type comprises: bird droppings, crushing, dust and shielding; based on the step S21 is marked as a defective photovoltaic panel, using CVAT marking tool, according to the defect type to mark).
Regarding claim 6, Ling discloses of claim 1, further comprising: an output module that outputs a guidance message indicating whether the solar panel is defective (Page 6, para 6, wherein based on the step S21 is marked as a defective photovoltaic panel, using CVAT marking tool, according to the defect type to mark.).
Regarding method claims 7-9 and 12, please refer to the corresponding device claims above for further teachings.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 4-5 and 10-11 are objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims. The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter: the prior art or the prior art of record specifically, Ling and CN 112233101 A to Zhong et al, does not disclose:
. . . wherein the processing module is configured to extract a standard deviation of a surface flatness of the solar panel from the attention map, and detect a correlation between a standard deviation of a surface flatness of the defective solar panel and the standard deviation of the surface flatness extracted from the attention map, of claim 4 combined with other features and elements of the claim;
Claim 5 depend from an allowable base claim and is thus allowable itself;
. . . . wherein extracting the statistical feature includes extracting a surface flatness of the solar panel from the attention map, and detecting the correlation includes detecting a correlation between a surface flatness of the defective solar panel and the surface flatness extracted from the attention map, of claim 10 combined with other features and elements of the claim;
Claim 11 depend from an allowable base claim and is thus allowable itself.
Contact Information
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to SHERVIN K NAKHJAVAN whose telephone number is (571)272-5731. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 9:00-12:00 PST.
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, Sue Lefkowitz can be reached at (571)272-3638. 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.
/SHERVIN K NAKHJAVAN/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2672
Prosecution Insights