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 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.
Claims 1-20 are 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.
Claims 1, 11, and 18 recite the limitation "labeled corrosion segments" in line 10, in line 6, and in line 11, respectively. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. It is unclear whether "labeled corrosion segments" in line 10, line 6, and line 11 refers back to the “label corrosion segments” introduced in line 9, line 5, and line 10 or if it introduces a new, separate group of segments. For the purpose of examination, the Examiner will interpret the "labeled corrosion segments" as “the labeled corrosion segments”.
Dependent claims 2-10, 12-17, and 19-20 are also rejected based on their dependency of the defective parent claims 1, 11, and 18 above.
The prior art does not appear to teach or make obvious the subject matter of the claims.
However, the 35 U.S.C. 112(b) rejection must be overcome.
Allowable Subject Matter
The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter:
The prior art made of record and considered pertinent to the applicant's disclosure, taken individually or in combination, does not teach the claimed invention having the following limitations, in combination with the remaining claimed limitations.
Regarding independent claims 1, 11, and 18, the closest prior art does not teach or suggest the claimed invention having “optimizing a red-green-blue (RGB) color channel-based classifier executing on one or more computing devices, wherein the optimizing selects one or more color indices for pixels and determines one or more bounds for each of the selected color indices that indicate a pixel is a corrosion pixel or non-corrosion pixel; applying the optimized RGB color channel-based classifier to the plurality of images to label corrosion segments in the images and produce a labeled training dataset with labeled corrosion segments; training a semantic deep learning model executing on the one or more computing devices using the labeled training dataset to enable the semantic deep learning model to detect corrosion segments applying the trained semantic deep learning model to an input dataset that includes one or more images of infrastructure that include at least some surface corrosion to label corrosion segments in the images of the input dataset and produce an output dataset with labeled corrosion segments; and displaying in a user interface or storing to a memory/storage of the one or more computing devices indications of the labeled corrosion segments of the output dataset”, and a combination of other limitations thereof as recited in the claims.
Regarding dependent claims 2-10, 12-17, and 19-20, the claims have been found allowable due to their dependencies to claims 1, 11, and 18 above.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to VAN D HUYNH whose telephone number is (571)270-1937. The examiner can normally be reached 8AM-6PM.
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, Stephen R Koziol can be reached at (408) 918-7630. 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.
/VAN D HUYNH/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2665
Prosecution Insights