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
Acknowledgment is made of applicant’s claim foreign priority based on application filed in the Federal Republic of Germany on 1/26/2023.
Claim Objections
Claim 37 objected to under 37 CFR 1.75(c) as being in improper form because a multiple dependent claims 1 to 17. See MPEP § 608.01(n). Accordingly, the claim 37 not been further treated on the merits.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 101
Claim 37 is rejected under 35 USC 101 since the claims are directed to non-statutory subject matter. Claim 37 recited “computer program containing computer readable instructions” in the claims which appear to cover both transitory and non-transitory embodiments. The United States Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO) is required to give claims their broadest reasonable interpretation consistent with the specification during proceedings before the USPTO. See In re Zletz, 893 F.2d 319 (Fed. Cir. 1989) (during patent examination the pending claims must be interpreted as broadly as their terms reasonably allow). The broadest reasonable interpretation of a claim drawn to a computer readable medium (also called machine readable medium and other such variations) typically covers forms of non-transitory tangible media and transitory propagating signals per se in view of the ordinary and customary meaning of computer readable media, particularly when the specification is silent. See MPEP 2111.01. When the broadest reasonable interpretation of a claim covers a signal per se, the claim must be rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 101 as covering non-statutory subject matter. See In re Nuijten, 500 F.3d 1346, 1356-57 (Fed. Cir. 2007) (transitory embodiments are not directed to statutory subject matter) and Interim Examination Instructions for Evaluating Subject Matter Eligibility Under 35 U.S.C. § 101, Aug. 24, 2009; p. 2.
The Examiner suggests that the Applicant add the limitation "non-transitory" to the [the type of medium recited in the claim(s)] as recited in the claim(s), and also changed the term comprising to embodied to positively tied the computer program product to a non-transitory computer readable medium this will render the claim(s) in statutory form in view of their broadest reasonable interpretation in light of the originally filed specification.
The Examiner also suggests that the specification may be amended [to include the term "non-transitory computer readable storage medium" (NOTE: when the specification is silent) OR to add the term "non-transitory" to the disclosed “a computer readable medium storing“ to avoid a potential objection to the specification for a lack of antecedent basis of the claimed terminology.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.+-------S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 103 which forms the basis for all obviousness rejections set forth in this Office action:
A patent for a claimed invention may not be obtained, notwithstanding that the claimed invention is not identically disclosed as set forth in section 102, if the differences between the claimed invention and the prior art are such that the claimed invention as a whole would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which the claimed invention pertains. Patentability shall not be negated by the manner in which the invention was made.
Claim(s) 20-38 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Bitzer et al (U.S. 2023/0229968) and further in view of SAID et al (U.S. 2014/0171069)
1. As per claims 20 and 37-38 Bitzer disclosed a method for an assessment of an operating state of a technical system, wherein the operating state is characterized by at least one aggregate variable whose value results through an interaction of a plurality of basic variables according to a configuration of the technical system [a domain from which an input variable of a Gaussian process is taken is divided into sub-domains and connected to an information-based selection of input variables from the area. By employing a covariance that can be differentiated via its parameters, gradient-based methods can be used for determining the parameters. Overall, due to the learning rate achieved for the regression with the Gaussian process on the one hand, with unchanged computing power] (Paragraph. 0004), the method comprising the following steps:
providing an impact function, which indicates a dependence of the aggregate variable on the basic variables [wherein the first Gaussian process is designed to map the first variable onto a first prediction for the second variable, and the second Gaussian process is designed to map the first variable onto a second prediction for the second variable, wherein sub-domains of a domain and/or a value range of the Gaussian process are determined depending on a numerical representation of a binary tree with leaves and nodes, wherein a first leaf of the leaves is assigned to the first Gaussian process, wherein each node is assigned a vector representing one of the sub-domains, wherein the nodes are each assigned a first weight that depends on the first variable and the vector assigned to the respective node, wherein the first weight function is determined depending on the first weights of the nodes] (Paragraph. 0007);
factorizing the impact function to form a product of multiple contributions, which depend on different subsets of the basic variables [a function of the Gaussian process, the parameter and the first data set, wherein the value of the first variable is determined, for which the measure is greater, as the measure of the other value of the first variable, wherein a value of the second variable is determined with the technical system or with a model of the technical system, wherein a second data set is determined, in which the thus determined value of the first variable and the thus determined value of the second variable are assigned to each other and wherein at least one of the parameters of the Gaussian process is determined depending on the values from the second data set] (Paragraph. 0015);
However, Bitzer did not explicitly disclose creating a graph, whose nodes correspond to the contributions and whose edges correspond to the basic variables, wherein from each node corresponding to a contribution, an edge extends in relation to each of the basic variables on which the contribution depends, and at least one edge that corresponds to a basic variable on which two or more of the contributions depend connects two nodes corresponding to the two of more contributions; ascertaining a Laplace matrix of the graph; and ascertaining an extremal eigenvalue of the Laplace matrix as the assessment of the operating state.
In the same field of endeavor SAID disclosed, “generating a graph signal based on a graph parameter set; obtaining a graph-based transform matrix based on the graph signal, wherein the graph-based transform matrix includes an eigenvector; obtaining a prediction vector using an optimal transform vector calculated through an optimization function” (Paragraph. 0023). The present invention provides an apparatus for decoding a video signal based on a graph-based prediction including an entropy decoding unit for receiving the video signal including a graph parameter set and a residual signal; an inverse transform unit for obtaining a graph-based transform matrix including an eigenvector based on the graph parameter set; a prediction unit for obtaining a prediction vector using an optimal transform vector calculated through an optimization function and generating a prediction signal using the prediction vector; and a reconstruction unit for reconstructing the video signal by adding up the prediction signal and the residual signal, where the optimization function has a context signal, an eigenvalue of a graph Laplacian matrix and the eigenvector as a variable (Paragraph. 0032).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date was made to have incorporated generating a graph signal based on a graph parameter set; obtaining a graph-based transform matrix based on the graph signal, wherein the graph-based transform matrix includes an eigenvector; obtaining a prediction vector using an optimal transform vector calculated through an optimization function” (Paragraph. 0023). The present invention provides an apparatus for decoding a video signal based on a graph-based prediction including an entropy decoding unit for receiving the video signal including a graph parameter set and a residual signal; an inverse transform unit for obtaining a graph-based transform matrix including an eigenvector based on the graph parameter set; a prediction unit for obtaining a prediction vector using an optimal transform vector calculated through an optimization function and generating a prediction signal using the prediction vector; and a reconstruction unit for reconstructing the video signal by adding up the prediction signal and the residual signal, where the optimization function has a context signal, an eigenvalue of a graph Laplacian matrix and the eigenvector as a variable as taught by Said in the method and system of Bitzer to optimize the method using of the graph characteristics.
2. As per claim 21 Bitzer-Said disclosed wherein: a plurality of candidate configurations of the technical system are set up, which differ in values of the basic variables and/or in an interaction of the basic variables resulting in the aggregate variable; and a resulting operating state is assessed for each of the candidate configurations (Bitzer, Paragraph. 0014).
3. As per claim 22 Bitzer-Said disclosed wherein at least one value of a basic variable, and/or an interaction of at least two basic variables, is optimized with an aim of improving the assessment of the operating state resulting from a changed configuration of the technical system (Bitzer, Paragraph. 0107).
4. As per claim 23 Bitzer-Said disclosed wherein at least one new configuration of the technical system is generated by at least one component of the technical system being: replaced by another component, and/or placed at a location, and/or controlled differently (Bitzer, Paragraph. 0015).
5. As per claim 24 Bitzer-Said disclosed wherein a candidate configuration with a best assessment of the resulting operating state, and/or an optimal configuration found during the optimization, is implemented in hardware of the technical system (Bitzer, Paragraph. 0107).
6. As per claim 25 Bitzer-Said disclosed wherein the aggregate variable is a measure of:(i) at least one heat flow to be transported within the technical system or out of the technical system, and/or (ii) of at least one temperature at a specified location within the technical system (Bitzer, Paragraph. 0015).
7. As per claim 26 Bitzer-Said disclosed wherein at least one of the basic variables represents a heat flow from a heat source, and/or a heat flow into a heat sink, and/or a measure of a thermal conductivity, and/or a transport capacity for a heat flow within the technical system (Bitzer, Paragraph. 0015).
8. As per claim 27 Bitzer-Said disclosed wherein the aggregate variable is a measure of a probability with which at least one undesirable event occurs in the technical system (Bitzer, Paragraph. 0018).
9. As per claim 28 Bitzer-Said disclosed wherein the basic variables include basic probabilities of basic events which, individually or in combination, can cause the undesirable event to occur in the technical system (Bitzer, Paragraph. 0120).
10. As per claim 29 Bitzer-Said disclosed wherein at least one of the basic probabilities is defined as a membership function of at least one state variable of the technical system and/or its environment and/or as a function of at least one other of the basic probabilities (Bitzer, Paragraph. 0120).
11. As per claim 30 Bitzer-Said disclosed wherein redundant basic events are selected (Bitzer, Paragraph. 0131).
12. As per claim 31 Bitzer-Said disclosed wherein a redundancy of basic events in the technical system is implemented in that multiple components or assemblies, which can complement or replace one another, are used to provide a specific functionality (Bitzer, Paragraph. 0006).
13. As per claim 32 Bitzer-Said disclosed wherein the redundancy in the technical system is realized as: hot redundancy to the extent that the multiple components or assemblies that provide one and the same functionality are always active at the same time (Bitzer, Paragraph. 0004-005), and/or cold redundancy to the extent that another component or assembly only becomes active as needed in the event of failure or malfunction of an active component or assembly (Bitzer, Paragraph. 0119).
14. As per claim 33 Bitzer-Said disclosed wherein a redundancy of basic events in the technical system is implemented in that one and the same component or one and the same assembly is relevant at multiple stages of a causal chain leading to an undesirable event (Bitzer, Paragraph. 0119).
15. As per claim 34 Bitzer-Said disclosed, wherein the technical system is a control unit for a vehicle (Bitzer, Paragraph. 0138).
16. As per claim 35 Bitzer-Said disclosed wherein the control unit is configured to control at least partially automated driving functions of the vehicle (Bitzer, Paragraph. 0138).
17. As per claim 36 Bitzer-Said disclosed wherein: an impact tree is provided, whose nodes correspond to the basic variables and whose connections between nodes correspond to logical operations of the basic variables in a framework of an interaction resulting in the aggregate variable, wherein the aggregate variable is at a root of the impact tree, and the impact function is ascertained using this impact tree (Bitzer, Paragraph. 0007).
Conclusion
18. Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communication from the
examiner should be directed to Adnan Mirza whose telephone number is (571)-272-3885.
19. The examiner can normally be reached on Monday to Friday during normal
business hours. If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the
examiner’s supervisor, Faris Almatrahi can be reached on (313)-446-4821.
20. Information regarding the status of an application may be obtained from the
Patent Application Information Retrieval (PAIR) system. Status information for published
applications may be obtained from either Private PAIR or Public PAIR. Status
information for un published applications is available through Private PAIR only. For
more information about the PAIR system, see http://pair-direct.uspto.gov. Should you
have questions on access to the Private PAIR system, contact the Electronic Business
Center (EBC) at (866)-217-9197 (toll-free).
/ADNAN M MIRZA/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3667