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 .
Priority
Receipt is acknowledged of papers submitted under 35 U.S.C. 119(a)-(d), which papers have been placed of record in the file.
Should applicant desire to obtain the benefit of foreign priority under 35 U.S.C. 119(a)-(d) prior to declaration of an interference, a certified English translation of the foreign application must be submitted in reply to this action. 37 CFR 41.154(b) and 41.202(e).
Failure to provide a certified translation may result in no benefit being accorded for the non-English application.
Oath/Declaration
The Oath/Declaration filed on 01/14/2025 is hereby acknowledged.
Drawings
The drawings were received on 01/14/2025. These drawings are acceptable.
Claim Objections
Claim 7 is objected to because of the following informalities: claim 7 recites the abbreviation “PID” in line 8, which should be fully spelt out as “parameter identifier (PID)” for first time occurrence. Appropriate correction is required.
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.
Claim 2-4 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.
Claim 2 recites “determining a fuzzy coefficient adjustment amount” in line 8. It is unclear if this “determining a fuzzy coefficient adjustment amount” is same or different from “determine a fuzzy coefficient adjustment amount” recited in lines 4-5 of claim 1, upon which claim 2 depends on.
Claim 4 recites the limitation "the defuzzification fuzzy coefficient adjustment amount" in line 6. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
Claim 4 recites the limitation "updating the coefficient parameters in the PID algorithm" in line 7-8. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
Claims 3 is rejected for at least its dependency on claim 2.
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 10 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 101 because the claimed invention is directed to non-statutory subject matter. The claim do not fall within at least one of the four categories of patent eligible subject matter because the claimed “A computer program product, wherein the computer program product comprises a computer program...” is not tangible and not claimed to be embodied in a non-transitory readable medium or is a computer program per se (often referred to as “software per se”). The Specification states, Para. [0130], [0132], “…the embodiments disclosed in the present application, the process described above with reference to the flowchart can be implemented as a computer software program. For example, the embodiments disclosed in the present application include a computer program product, the computer program product includes a computer program carried on a computer-readable medium, and the computer program includes a program code for implementing the method shown in the flowchart”, “More specific examples of computer-readable storage media may include, but are not limited to:” (Emphasis added). Thus, in broadest reasonable interpretation, the claimed “A computer program product, wherein the computer program product comprises a computer program...” encompasses a non-statutory embodiment, i.e., software per se and thus does not fall within any statutory category. See Microsoft Corp. v. AT&T Corp., 550 U.S. 437, 449, 82USPQ2d 1400, 1407 (2007); see also Benson, 409 U.S. 67, 175 USPQ2d.
A claim drawn to “a computer program product” that covers both transitory and non-transitory embodiments may be amended to overcome the rejection by changing “a computer program product” to “a non-transitory computer program product” thus excluding that portion of the scope covering the transitory signals that are non-statutory subject matter.
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.
The factual inquiries for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows:
1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art.
2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue.
3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art.
4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness.
Claims 1-3, 5 and 7-10 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Hwang et al. (NPL titled: “"A tuning algorithm for the PID controller utilizing fuzzy theory," IJCNN'99. International Joint Conference on Neural Networks. Proceedings (Cat. No.99CH36339), Washington, DC, USA, 1999, pp. 2210-2215 vol.4”) further in view of KOIKE (US 20100060800 A1).
Regarding Claim 1, Hwang et al. discloses;
A signal control method, comprising:
calculating an error value and an error change rate (Section 2. Parameter Tuning for PID controller: Equation (3) - calculates error, e(k) and change error rate, Δe(k)) between a detection value of a current output signal level and a preset detection value (Section 2. Parameter Tuning for PID controller: Equation (1) - calculates error, e(k) = e(t) and subsequently change error rate, Δe(k), is calculated between a detection value of a current output signal level, y(t), and a preset detection value/setpoint,
y
r
(t) (see Fig. 1))….”
inputting the error value and the error change rate into a preset fuzzy algorithm (Section 2. Parameter Tuning for PID controller, Fig. 2: preset Fuzzy Tuner algorithm, FIS, receiving inputs error, e(k) and change error rate, Δe(k)) to determine a fuzzy coefficient adjustment amount corresponding to the error value and the error change rate (Section 2. Parameter Tuning for PID controller, Fig. 2: determines a fuzzy coefficient adjustment amount,
K
C
(k), using Equation (4) corresponding to the error, e(k) and change error rate, Δe(k)); and
updating a parameter of a coefficient in a parameter identifier (PID) algorithm based on the fuzzy coefficient adjustment amount (Section 2. Parameter Tuning for PID controller: Equation (1) – parameter identifier (PID) algorithm, updates parameter of a coefficient,
u
c
, based on the fuzzy coefficient adjustment amount,
K
C
), and adjusting a gain value based on the updated PID algorithm to achieve signal control ( Section 1: Introduction, Fig. 1: “adjusting the gain, integral time constant, and derivative time constant settings) for each control system in order to get the desired control performance”; Section 3.1: Fuzzy Rule: Equation (5) – adjusting gain, new proportional gain(Kp) based on the updated PID algorithm - Equation (1)).
Hwang et al. does not teach that the calculation is performed;
“in response to a preset trigger condition.”
On the other, in similar field of endeavor (Abstract: “a variable gain section configured to amplify or attenuate an input signal input”) KOIKE teaches (Para. [0021]: controlling a gain of a variable gain amplifier);
“in response to a preset trigger condition (Abstract:, Fig. 1, Para. [0027]: “when an input signal input to the respective receivers is greater than a predetermined signal level, i.e. input signal meets a preset trigger condition” for activating/implementing adjusting/controlling a gain variable-gain amplifier 52).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention that the “PID tuning algorithm by the fuzzy set theory” for “adjusting the gain” of the input signal y(t) in Hwang et al. invention can be initiated when the input signal meets a preset/predetermined trigger/signal condition/level as taught by KOIKE where doing so would aid in (KOIKE, Para. [0002]) “reducing distortion of an intermediate frequency signal.”
Regarding Claim 2, Hwang et al. in view of KOIKE discloses all as applied to claim 1 above, where Hwang et al. further teaches;
wherein the inputting the error value and the error change rate into the preset fuzzy algorithm to determine the fuzzy coefficient adjustment amount corresponding to the error value and the error change rate comprises:
inputting the error value and the error change rate into the preset fuzzy algorithm to obtain a membership value corresponding to the error value and the error change rate respectively (Section 3.2: The membership function of the premise, Fig. 3 – “The membership function [value – N or Z OR P] of the premise of the error e(k) and the change of the error e(k) are defined in the triangle type in Fig.3 (a) and (b)”);
determining a fuzzy set to which the error value and the error change rate belong based on the membership value (Section 3.3 The parameter of the consequence: Table 2 defines a fuzzy set (N, Z, P) which the error, e(k) and change error rate, Δe(k) belong based the membership function [value – N or Z or P]); and
determining a fuzzy coefficient adjustment amount (Section 3.3 The parameter of the consequence: “The control rules of the consequence of Kc [fuzzy coefficient adjustment amount]…”) corresponding to the error value and the error change rate based on the fuzzy set (Fig. 4: ) and a preset fuzzy rule table (Section 3.1 Fuzzy Rules: Equation (5): “The fuzzy rules to determine Kc(k)" corresponding to the error, e(k) and change error rate, Δe(k) and (3.3 The parameter of the consequence) a preset fuzzy rule table – Table 2).
Regarding Claim 3, Hwang et al. in view of KOIKE discloses all as applied to claim 2 above, where Hwang et al. further teaches;
wherein the fuzzy coefficient adjustment amount characterizes a change range of the gain value (Section 3.3 The parameter of the consequence, Fig. 4: “The control rules of the consequence of Kc…Increase the Kc(k) for the increased the output…Decrease the Kc(k) for the decreased the output…Decrease the Kc(k) for the decreased the output…Increase the for Kc(k) the increased the out”).
Regarding Claim 5, Hwang et al. in view of KOIKE discloses all as applied to claim 1 above, where Hwang et al. further teaches;
wherein before the calculating the error value and the error change rate between the detection value of the current output signal level and the preset detection value in response to the preset trigger condition, the method further comprises:
defining a fuzzy set of the error value and the error change rate (Section 3.3 The parameter of the consequence: Table 2 defining a fuzzy set (N, Z, P) of the error, e(k) and change error rate, Δe(k));
determining a number of fuzzy rules based on a number of fuzzy sets (Section 3.1 Fuzzy Rules: Equation (5): “The fuzzy rules to determine Kc(k)" corresponding to the error, e(k) and change error rate, Δe(k) “where i(i=l, . .. ,9) is the number of rules” that determines a 3x3 [a number of fuzzy sets]= 9 rules);
determining a type of fuzzy coefficient adjustment amount (Section 3.3 The parameter of the consequence: “The control rules of the consequence of Kc [a type of fuzzy coefficient adjustment amount]…Increase…Decrease ” or ) based on the number of fuzzy rules (Section 3.1 Fuzzy Rules: based on Equation (5): determines a 3x3 [a number of fuzzy sets]= 9 rules); and
establishing a preset fuzzy rule table (Section 3.3 The parameter of the consequence: Table 2) based on a type of the fuzzy set and the fuzzy coefficient adjustment amount (Section 3.3 The parameter of the consequence: Table 2 constructed for a type of the fuzzy set (N, Z, P) and Kc).
Regarding Claim 7, Hwang et al. discloses;
A signal control device (Fig. 1), comprising:
a response module (Section 2. Parameter Tuning for PID controller: a PID controller implementing Equation (1) - e(t) =
y
r
(t) - y(t)) for calculating an error value and an error change rate (Section 2. Parameter Tuning for PID controller: Equation (3) - calculates error, e(k) and change error rate, Δe(k)) between a detection value of a current output signal level and a preset detection value (Section 2. Parameter Tuning for PID controller: Equation (1) - calculates error, e(k) = e(t) and subsequently change error rate, Δe(k), is calculated between a detection value of a current output signal level, y(t), and a preset detection value/setpoint,
y
r
(t) (see Fig. 1))…;
a determining module (Section 3. Fuzzy auto tuning, Fig. 2: Structure of Fuzzy Tuner) for inputting the error value and the error change rate into a preset fuzzy algorithm (Section 2. Parameter Tuning for PID controller, Fig. 2: preset Fuzzy Tuner algorithm, FIS, receiving inputs error, e(k) and change error rate, Δe(k)) to determine a fuzzy coefficient adjustment amount corresponding to the error value and the error change rate (Section 2. Parameter Tuning for PID controller, Fig. 2: determines a fuzzy coefficient adjustment amount,
K
C
(k), using Equation (4) corresponding to the error, e(k) and change error rate, Δe(k) ); and
an updating module (Section 2. Parameter Tuning for PID controller: Equation (1) – calculation of
u
c
by the PID controller) for updating a parameter of a coefficient in a parameter identifier (PID) algorithm based on the fuzzy coefficient adjustment amount (Section 2. Parameter Tuning for PID controller: Equation (1) – parameter identifier (PID) algorithm, updates parameter of a coefficient,
u
c
, based on the fuzzy coefficient adjustment amount,
K
C
), and adjusting a gain value based on the updated PID algorithm to achieve signal control ( Section 1: Introduction, Fig. 1: “adjusting the gain, integral time constant, and derivative time constant settings) for each control system in order to get the desired control performance”; Section 3.1: Fuzzy Rule: Equation (5) – adjusting gain, new proportional gain(Kp) based on the updated PID algorithm - Equation (1)).
Hwang et al. does not teach that the calculation is performed;
“in response to a preset trigger condition.”
On the other, in similar field of endeavor (Abstract: “a variable gain section configured to amplify or attenuate an input signal input”) KOIKE teaches (Para. [0021]: controlling a gain of a variable gain amplifier);
“in response to a preset trigger condition (Abstract:, Fig. 1, Para. [0027]: “when an input signal input to the respective receivers is greater than a predetermined signal level, i.e. input signal meets a preset trigger condition” for activating/implementing adjusting/controlling a gain variable-gain amplifier 52).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention that the “PID tuning algorithm by the fuzzy set theory” for “adjusting the gain” of the input signal y(t) in Hwang et al. invention can be initiated when the input signal meets a preset/predetermined trigger/signal condition/level as taught by KOIKE where doing so would aid in (KOIKE, Para. [0002]) “reducing distortion of an intermediate frequency signal.”
Regarding Claim 8, Hwang et al. in view of KOIKE discloses all as applied to claim 1 above, where KOIKE further teaches;
A signal control apparatus (Fig. 16: a tuner ), comprising: a memory (Fig. 16: memory section 908), a processor (Fig. 16: CPU 901), and a computer program stored in the memory and executable on the processor (Fig. 16, Para. [0160]: “the CPU 901 loads the program stored in the memory section 908”), and the computer program is configured to realize the signal control method according to claim 1 (Para. [0160]: “the CPU 901 loads the program stored in the memory section 908 into the RAM 903 through the input-output interface 905 and the Bus 904 and executes the program, the above-mentioned series of processing is performed.” That is, the method of claim 1 as taught by Hwang et al. in view of KOIKE can be implemented as taught by KOIKE).
Regarding Claim 9, Hwang et al. in view of KOIKE discloses all as applied to claim 1 above, where KOIKE further teaches;
A non-transitory computer-readable storage medium (Fig. 16: memory section 908), wherein a computer program is stored in the non-transitory computer-readable storage medium (Fig. 16, Para. [0160]: “the program stored in the memory section 908”), and when the computer program is implemented by a processor (Fig. 16, Para. [0160]: “the CPU 901 loads the program stored in the memory section 908”), the signal control method according to claim 1 is implemented (Para. [0160]: “the CPU 901 loads the program stored in the memory section 908 into the RAM 903 through the input-output interface 905 and the Bus 904 and executes the program, the above-mentioned series of processing is performed.” That is, the method of claim 1 as taught by Hwang et al. in view of KOIKE can be implemented as taught by KOIKE).
Regarding Claim 10, Hwang et al. in view of KOIKE discloses all as applied to claim 1 above, where KOIKE further teaches;
A computer program product (Para. [0161]: “removable medium 911, which is a package medium such as a magnetic disk (for example, a flexible disk), an optical disk (a CD-ROM (Compact Disc-Read Only Memory) or DVD (Digital Versatile Disc)), a magnet-optical disk, or a semiconductor memory and so forth”), wherein the computer program product comprises a computer program (Para. [0161]: “the program [computer program]…is stored in the removable medium 911”), and when the computer program is implemented by a processor (Para. [0161]: “the program executed by the computer (CPU 901) is stored in the removable medium 911”), the signal control method according to claim 1 is implemented (Para. [0160]: “the CPU 901 loads the program stored in the memory section 908 into the RAM 903 through the input-output interface 905 and the Bus 904 and executes the program, the above-mentioned series of processing is performed.” That is, the method of claim 1 as taught by Hwang et al. in view of KOIKE can be implemented as taught by KOIKE).
Allowable Subject Matter
Claim 4 would be allowable if rewritten to overcome the rejection(s) under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), 2nd paragraph, set forth in this Office action and to include all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
Claim 6 is 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.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to AMNEET SINGH whose telephone number is (571)272-2414. The examiner can normally be reached 9:30am to 5:30pm.
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, Sam K Ahn can be reached at 5712723044. 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.
/AMNEET SINGH/Examiner, Art Unit 2633 /SAM K AHN/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2633
Prosecution Insights