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 Objections
Claims 2-21 are objected to because of the following informalities:
In claim 2, on line 9, the claim recites “sensor data associated the at least one”. It appears that the word –with—should be inserted after the word “associated” in the claim. A similar amendment is suggested in claim 12. Claims 3-11 and 13-21 depend from independent claims 2 and 12, respectively and are objected for the same reason.
Appropriate correction is required.
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.
Claims 2-21 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 101 because the claimed invention is directed to an abstract idea without significantly more.
Per step 1 of the Subject Matter Eligibility Test (See MPEP 2106), claim 2 is directed to a system, which is a product and falls within a statutory category (See MPEP 2106.03).
Per step 2A, prong 1, claim 2 recites an artificial intelligence model that is configured to predict industrial machine failure modes of at least one industrial machine based on sensor data associated the at least one industrial machine, wherein the graphical user interface is configured to, process the data collected by the data routing and collection system with the artificial intelligence model, receive, from the artificial intelligence model, a prediction of an industrial machine failure mode based on the data collected by the data routing and collection system. The claim limitations require observation and judgment or opinions based on the data that can be performed in the human mind. Therefore, the claim limitations fall into the mental processes grouping (See MPEP 2106.04(a)(2), subsection III).
The additional elements are a graphical user interface comprising representations of a plurality of industrial machines of an industrial machine from an industrial environment in which a plurality of sensors is deployed and from which a data routing and collection system collects data for the system, wherein the graphical user interface enables interaction, and wherein at least one industrial machine of the plurality of industrial machines is selectable by a user of the graphical user interface; and, in response to the prediction of the industrial machine failure mode by the artificial intelligence model, present, to the user, a visual indication of the industrial machine failure mode predicted by the artificial intelligence model, and implement a data collection template for configuring the data routing and collection system, thereby configuring the data routing and collection system to automatically collect data from one or more sensors, of the plurality of sensors, associated with the at least one industrial machine to detect the industrial machine failure mode predicted by the artificial intelligence model.
Per step 2A, prong 2, The abstract idea is not integrated into a practical application. The graphical user interface representations and its function to present a visual indication of the industrial machine failure mode predicted both represent insignificant extra-solution activity (See MPEP 2106.05(g)). Providing representations is insignificant pre-solution activity, and providing a visual indication is insignificant post-solution activity. Further the graphical user interface having the capacity to process data suggests using the artificial intelligence model suggests that it includes a processor and that recitation amounts to instructions to implement the abstract idea on a computer (See MPEP 2106.05(f)). Further limitations to implement a data collection template are also insignificant extra solution activity since these limitations data collection in conjunction with the abstract idea. Implementing a data routing and collection system is recited at a high level of generality and only generally links the abstract idea to the field of use (See MPEP 2106.05(h)). When considered in combination, the additional elements do not amount to more than their individual functions.
Per step 2B, claim 2 does not include additional elements that are sufficient to amount to significantly more than the judicial exception for the same reasons. Further, the courts have recognized that data collection and presentation of the output in various manners is well-understood, routine and conventional (See MPEP 2106.05(d), subsection II).
Claims 3-11 depend from claim 2 and recite further details of the abstract idea. Claims 3-11 do not recite any further additional elements. Since there are no recited additional elements, claims 3-11 are not integrated into a practical application and does not amount to significantly more than the abstract idea.
Per step 1 of the Subject Matter Eligibility Test (See MPEP 2106), claim 12 is directed to a method, which is a process and falls within a statutory category (See MPEP 2106.03).
Claim 12 recites an abstract idea and additional elements similar to those recited in claim 2 and is rejected for the same reason.
Claims 13-21 depend from claim 12 and recite further details of the abstract idea. Claims 13-21 do not recite any further additional elements. Since there are no recited additional elements, claims 13-21 are not integrated into a practical application and does not amount to significantly more than the abstract idea.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
US Patent Application Publication 2014/0288912 to Inoue teaches a semiconductor simulator including extracting a list of sensors from a database of sensors (par. 337).
US Patent Application Publication 2006/0241907 to Armstrong et al. teaches monitoring data in a process plant including a graphical user interface.
US Patent Application Publication 2003/0158795 to Markham et al. teaches quality management in product manufacturing.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to MANUEL L BARBEE whose telephone number is (571)272-2212. The examiner can normally be reached M-F: 9-5:30..
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, Shelby A Turner can be reached at 571-272-6334. 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.
/MANUEL L BARBEE/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2857
Prosecution Insights