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 .
DETAILED ACTION
1. Claim 1 is pending. Claim 1 is independent. File date on 10-28-2024.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
2. 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.
3. Claim 1 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor (or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the applicant), regards as the invention. For Claim 1, the term “it”, lines 22, is not clear as to what “it” refers to. Appropriate correction is required.
Double Patenting
4. The nonstatutory double patenting rejection is based on a judicially created doctrine grounded in public policy (a policy reflected in the statute) so as to prevent the unjustified or improper timewise extension of the "right to exclude" granted by a patent and to prevent possible harassment by multiple assignees. A nonstatutory obviousness-type double patenting rejection is appropriate where the conflicting claims are not identical, but at least one examined application claim is not patentably distinct from the reference claim(s) because the examined application claim is either anticipated by, or would have been obvious over, the reference claim(s). See, e.g., In re Berg, 140 F.3d 1428, 46 USPQ2d 1226 (Fed. Cir. 1998); In re Goodman, 11 F.3d 1046, 29 USPQ2d 2010 (Fed. Cir. 1993); In re Longi, 759 F.2d 887, 225 USPQ 645 (Fed. Cir. 1985); In re Van Omum, 686 F.2d 937, 214 USPQ 761 (CCPA 1982); In re Vogel, 422 F.2d 438, 164 USPQ 619 (CCPA 1970); and In re Thorington, 418 F.2d 528, 163 USPQ 644 (CCPA 1969).
A timely filed terminal disclaimer in compliance with 37 CFR 1.321(c) or 1.321(d) may be used to overcome an actual or provisional rejection based on a nonstatutory double patenting ground provided the conflicting application or patent either is shown to be commonly owned with this application, or claims an invention made as a result of activities undertaken within the scope of a joint research agreement.
Effective January 1, 1994, a registered attorney or agent of record may sign a terminal disclaimer. A terminal disclaimer signed by the assignee must fully comply with 37 CFR 3.73(b).
5. Initially it should be noted that the present application is a continuation application of application 16/525807 now patent 11,693,763. The entire disclosures of the instant application and the patent are identical.
Claims 1 - 20 are rejected under the judicially created doctrine of nonstatutory type double patenting as being unpatentable over Claims 1 - 20 of U.S. Patent No. 11,693,763. Although the conflicting claims are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other.
Claim 1 of the instant application (18/925780) are almost the same as Patent (11,693,763) Claims 1, 14, 17. Claim 1 of the 11,693,763 Patent as shown in the table below contains every element of Claim 1 of the instant application and as such the difference is not enough to distinguish the two claims. Claim 1 of the instant application therefore are not patently distinct from the earlier patent claims and as such are unpatentable over nonstatutory-type double patenting. A later patent/application claim is not patentably distinct from an earlier claim, if the later claim is unpatentable over the earlier claim.
Application 18/928780
Claim 1
Patent (11,693,763)
Claim 1
“a normal space data source storing, for each of the plurality of monitoring nodes, a series of normal monitoring node values over time that represent normal operation of the cyber-physical system”
“a normal space data source storing, for each of the plurality of monitoring nodes, a series of normal monitoring node values over time that represent normal operation of the cyber-physical system”
“a situational awareness module including an abnormal data generation platform, wherein the abnormal data generation platform is operative to generate abnormal data to represent abnormal operation of the cyber-physical system using values in the normal space data source and a generative model”
“a situational awareness module including an abnormal data generation platform, wherein the abnormal data generation platform is operative to generate abnormal data to represent abnormal operation of the cyber-physical system using values in the normal space data source and a generative model”
“a memory for storing program instructions” and “a situational awareness processor, coupled to the memory, and in communication with the situational awareness module and operative to execute the program instructions”
“a memory for storing program instructions; and a situational awareness processor, coupled to the memory, and in communication with the situational awareness module and operative to execute the program instructions”
“receive a data signal, wherein the received data signal is an aggregation of data signals received from one or more of the plurality of monitoring nodes, wherein the data signal includes at least one real-time stream of data source signal values that represent a current operation of the cyber-physical system”
“receive a data signal, wherein the received data signal is an aggregation of data signals received from one or more of the plurality of monitoring nodes, wherein the data signal includes at least one real-time stream of data source signal values that represent a current operation of the cyber-physical system”
“determine, via a trained classifier, whether the received data signal is a normal signal or an abnormal signal, wherein the trained classifier is trained with the generated abnormal data and normal data”
“determine, via a trained classifier, whether the received data signal is a normal signal or an abnormal signal, wherein the trained classifier is trained with the generated abnormal data and normal data”
“localize an origin of an anomaly when it is determined the received data signal is the abnormal signal;”
“localize an origin of an anomaly to identify at least one abnormal monitoring node of the plurality of monitoring nodes when it is determined the received data signal is the abnormal signal”
“receive the determination and localization at a resilient estimator
module”
“based on the determination, localization and identification of the at least one abnormal monitoring node, generate a state estimation indicating an operating condition of the cyber-physical system having the identified at least one abnormal monitoring node”
“execute the resilient estimator module to generate a state estimation for the cyber-physical system”
“based on the determination, localization and identification of the at least one abnormal monitoring node, generate a state estimation indicating an operating condition of the cyber-physical system having the identified at least one abnormal monitoring node”
Double Patenting
6. The nonstatutory double patenting rejection is based on a judicially created doctrine grounded in public policy (a policy reflected in the statute) so as to prevent the unjustified or improper timewise extension of the "right to exclude" granted by a patent and to prevent possible harassment by multiple assignees. A nonstatutory obviousness-type double patenting rejection is appropriate where the conflicting claims are not identical, but at least one examined application claim is not patentably distinct from the reference claim(s) because the examined application claim is either anticipated by, or would have been obvious over, the reference claim(s). See, e.g., In re Berg, 140 F.3d 1428, 46 USPQ2d 1226 (Fed. Cir. 1998); In re Goodman, 11 F.3d 1046, 29 USPQ2d 2010 (Fed. Cir. 1993); In re Longi, 759 F.2d 887, 225 USPQ 645 (Fed. Cir. 1985); In re Van Omum, 686 F.2d 937, 214 USPQ 761 (CCPA 1982); In re Vogel, 422 F.2d 438, 164 USPQ 619 (CCPA 1970); and In re Thorington, 418 F.2d 528, 163 USPQ 644 (CCPA 1969).
A timely filed terminal disclaimer in compliance with 37 CFR 1.321(c) or 1.321(d) may be used to overcome an actual or provisional rejection based on a nonstatutory double patenting ground provided the conflicting application or patent either is shown to be commonly owned with this application, or claims an invention made as a result of activities undertaken within the scope of a joint research agreement.
Effective January 1, 1994, a registered attorney or agent of record may sign a terminal disclaimer. A terminal disclaimer signed by the assignee must fully comply with 37 CFR 3.73(b).
7. Initially it should be noted that the present application is a continuation application of application 18/321,545, now patent 12,141,052. The entire disclosures of the instant application and the patent are identical.
Claims 1 - 20 are rejected under the judicially created doctrine of nonstatutory type double patenting as being unpatentable over Claims 1 - 20 of U.S. Patent No. 12,141,052. Although the conflicting claims are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other.
Claim 1 of the instant application (18/928780) are almost the same as Patent (12,141,052) Claims 1, 14, 17. Claim 1 of the 12,141,052 Patent as shown in the table below contains every element of Claim 1 of the instant application and as such the difference is not enough to distinguish the two claims. Claim 1 of the instant application therefore are not patently distinct from the earlier patent claims and as such are unpatentable over nonstatutory-type double patenting. A later patent/application claim is not patentably distinct from an earlier claim, if the later claim is unpatentable over the earlier claim.
Application 18/928780
Claim 1
Patent (12,141,052)
Claim 1
“a normal space data source storing, for each of the plurality of monitoring nodes, a series of normal monitoring node values over time that represent normal operation of the cyber-physical system”
“a normal space data source storing, for each of the plurality of monitoring nodes, a series of normal monitoring node values over time that represent normal operation of the cyber-physical system”
“a situational awareness module including an abnormal data generation platform, wherein the abnormal data generation platform is operative to generate abnormal data to represent abnormal operation of the cyber-physical system using values in the normal space data source and a generative model”
“a situational awareness module including an abnormal data generation platform, wherein the abnormal data generation platform is operative to generate abnormal data to represent abnormal operation of the cyber-physical system using values in the normal space data source and a generative modell”
“a memory for storing program instructions” and “a situational awareness processor, coupled to the memory, and in communication with the situational awareness module and operative to execute the program instructions”
“a memory for storing program instructions; and a situational awareness processor, coupled to the memory, and in communication with the situational awareness module and operative to execute the program instructions”
“receive a data signal, wherein the received data signal is an aggregation of data signals received from one or more of the plurality of monitoring nodes, wherein the data signal includes at least one real-time stream of data source signal values that represent a current operation of the cyber-physical system”
“receive a data signal, wherein the received data signal is an aggregation of data signals received from one or more of the plurality of monitoring nodes, wherein the data signal includes at least one real-time stream of data source signal values that represent a current operation of the cyber-physical system”
“determine, via a trained classifier, whether the received data signal is a normal signal or an abnormal signal, wherein the trained classifier is trained with the generated abnormal data and normal data”
“determine, via a trained classifier, whether the received data signal is a normal signal or an abnormal signal, wherein the trained classifier is trained with the generated abnormal data and data stored in the normal space data source”
“localize an origin of an anomaly when it is determined the received data signal is the abnormal signal;”
“localize an origin of an anomaly when it is determined the received data signal is the abnormal signal;”
“receive the determination and localization at a resilient estimator
module”
“receive the determination and the origin of the anomaly at a resilient estimator module;”
“execute the resilient estimator module to generate a state estimation for the cyber-physical system”
“execute the resilient estimator module to generate a state estimation for the cyber-physical system”
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Kyung H Shin whose telephone number is (571) 272-3920. The examiner can normally be reached M - F: 12pm - 8pm.
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, Joon H Hwang can be reached at 571-272-4036. 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.
/KYUNG H SHIN/ 4-6-2026Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2447
Prosecution Insights