DETAILED ACTION
This is the first office action on the merits of the instant application subsequent to a request for continued examination, filed December 15, 2025, including a submission wherein claims 1, 8 and 15 are amended. Claims 1-20 remain in the application.
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 .
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 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.
Continued Examination Under 37 CFR 1.114
A request for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, including the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e), was filed in this application after final rejection. Since this application is eligible for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114. Applicant's submission filed on December 15, 2025 has been entered.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to independent claims 1, 8 and 15 have been considered but are moot because the new ground of rejection does not rely on any reference applied in the prior rejection of record for any teaching or matter specifically challenged in the argument. Applicant presented no argument with regard to dependent claims 2-7, 9-14 and 16-20, save for their dependence from the independent claims.
Applicant's arguments filed May 27, 2025 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive. Applicant’s argument is limited to the assertion that Subramanian et al. does not teach “causing, based on the message, the construction implement to execute the one or more construction tasks.” Applicant’s asserts that Subramanian et al., particularly the section cited in the office action, only goes to determining availability of the equipment to perform the assigned task. However, as Applicant is fully aware, the references applied should be considered in their entirety. Nonetheless, even the section cited in the office action does anticipate the claim limitation of “causing, based on the message, the construction implement to execute the one or more construction tasks”: “…For example, a worksite management system may be configured to assist with developing and/or executing a worksite plan that may be used to guide operation of one or more machines at the worksite…” (Subramanian et al., para. [0073]). The claim language does not require that the message is a command, per se, directly to the implement, nor does it exclude the intervention or involvement of human operators. In any event, Subramanian et al. anticipates the communication leading to the accomplishment of the work, whether the implement is manually operated or partially or fully autonomous. Applicant’s argument is therefore unpersuasive, in that Subramanian et al. appears to anticipate Applicant’s invention, according to independent claim 1. Independent claims 8 and 15 fall for the same reason. No substantive argument was presented for the dependent claims, save for their dependence from claims 1, 8 and 15, respectively. Accordingly, the rejection of claims 1-20, as presented in the previous office action, and repeated below, is maintained.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
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 1-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Subramanian et al. (US 2021/0125123 A1) in view of Umeda (US 2024/0035257 A1).
Subramanian et al. teaches, according to claim 1, a method comprising:
receiving, by a computing device, one or more user inputs (Subramanian et al., at least para. [0047], “…For example, as shown in FIG. 2, the worksite management system 102 may include a user input device 204 (e.g., a keyboard, a voice-entry device, etc.), and a person, such as, for example, a worksite manager and/or other personnel associated with the worksite 100, may cause entry of at least a portion of a worksite plan via the user input device 204…”);
determining, based on the one or more user inputs, one or more construction activities (Subramanian et al., at least para. [0047], “…one or more signals associated with the worksite plan may be communicated to the worksite controller 120…”);
determining, based on the one or more construction activities, one or more construction tasks associated with at least one construction activity of the one or more construction activities (Subramanian et al., at least para. [0047], “…The one or more worksite controller processors 200 may be configured to identify one or more machines and/or one or more tasks to be performed by the respective one or more machines…”);
determining, based on the one or more construction tasks, one or more construction implements (Subramanian et al., at least para. [0047], “…The one or more worksite controller processors 200 may be configured to identify one or more machines and/or one or more tasks to be performed by the respective one or more machines…”);
sending to a construction implement of the one or more construction implements, a message (Subramanian et al., at least para. [0073], “…For example, a worksite management system may be configured to assist with developing and/or executing a worksite plan that may be used to guide operation of one or more machines at the worksite. In some examples, the worksite management system may provide an interface for a human manager to select a machine for performing a selected task associated with the worksite, for example, according to the worksite plan. The machine may be manually controlled, semi-autonomous, fully-autonomous, and/or remotely controlled. In some examples, the worksite may be remotely located from the human manager. For example, the human manager may be operating from a non-line-of-site (NLOS) location, as described herein. The signal indicative of a task to be performed by a machine may be communicated via a communication system to a mobile device located at the worksite and may be used to by a person at the worksite to validate the availability of the machine to perform the assigned task, for example, as described herein.”); and
causing, based on the message, the construction implement to execute the one or more construction tasks (Subramanian et al., at least para. [0073], “…For example, a worksite management system may be configured to assist with developing and/or executing a worksite plan that may be used to guide operation of one or more machines at the worksite. In some examples, the worksite management system may provide an interface for a human manager to select a machine for performing a selected task associated with the worksite, for example, according to the worksite plan. The machine may be manually controlled, semi-autonomous, fully-autonomous, and/or remotely controlled. In some examples, the worksite may be remotely located from the human manager. For example, the human manager may be operating from a non-line-of-site (NLOS) location, as described herein. The signal indicative of a task to be performed by a machine may be communicated via a communication system to a mobile device located at the worksite and may be used to by a person at the worksite to validate the availability of the machine to perform the assigned task, for example, as described herein.”).
Subramanian et al. does not expressly teach, where Umeda teaches wherein determining the one or more construction tasks comprises processing a design drawing to generate one or more command codes associated with one or more survey stations along a route determining, based on the one or more construction tasks, one or more construction implements; sending to a construction implement of the one or more construction implements, a message, wherein the message comprises a command code of the one or more command codes; and causing, based on the message, the construction implement to automatically execute the one or more construction tasks based on a proximity between the construction implement and a survey station of the one or more survey stations, without requiring human validation of availability of the construction implement (Umeda, at least para. [0235], “The construction planning part 95 generates the operation signal based on construction plan data and transmits the generated operation signal to one or more autonomous construction machines (autonomous shovels). In the illustrated example, the construction plan data is data related to the construction procedure.”; and para. [0236], “Specifically, the construction planning part 95 transmits the operation signal generated based on the construction plan data to the shovel 100a as an autonomous shovel (unmanned shovel). The shovel 100a operates in response to the operation signal generated by the construction planning part 95 of the controller 90, rather than the operation signal generated by the operation signal generating part 82 of the remote controller 80 installed in the remote control room RCa.”). It would have been obvious to incorporate the teaching of Umeda into the system of Subramanian et al. for the purpose of expediting current construction plans directly to the autonomous construction vehicle using established reference points on the construction site, and as a combination of prior art elements in a known manner with an expectation of predictable results. 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.
Regarding claim 2, the one or more construction activities comprise at least one of painting highway lines, laying asphalt, laying pavement, or grooving pavement rumble strips, raised pavement markers, shoulder widening, applying herbicide, grass seeding, installing one or more guard rails, reclamation of existing asphalt, cold planing (milling), grading/scraping, ditching, tilling, mowing, or grubbing/clearing (Subramanian et al., at least para. [0023], “As shown in FIG. 1, the example worksite 100 may include one or more machines 106, 108, 110, 112, or 114 operating at the worksite 100 to perform various tasks associated with the worksite 100. For example, the worksite 100 may include one or more digging machines 106, one or more loading machines 108, one or more compacting machines 110, one or more hauling machines 112, one or more grading machines 114, and/or any other types of machines used, for example, for construction, mining, paving, excavation, and/or other operations at the worksite 100…”).
Regarding claim 3, the one or more construction implements comprise at least one of earth moving equipment, materials moving equipment, materials dispensing equipment, demolitions equipment, digging equipment, or excavating equipment (Subramanian et al., at least para. [0023], “As shown in FIG. 1, the example worksite 100 may include one or more machines 106, 108, 110, 112, or 114 operating at the worksite 100 to perform various tasks associated with the worksite 100. For example, the worksite 100 may include one or more digging machines 106, one or more loading machines 108, one or more compacting machines 110, one or more hauling machines 112, one or more grading machines 114, and/or any other types of machines used, for example, for construction, mining, paving, excavation, and/or other operations at the worksite 100…”).
Regarding claim 4, determining the one or more construction tasks comprises: determining an identifier associated with the at least one construction activity; and sending, to a database, a query, wherein the query comprises the identifier associated with the at least one construction activity (Subramanian et al., at least para. [0056], “As shown in FIG. 3, the machine status prompt 220 may also include a task field 304 configured to display an image representative information related to the task assigned to the machine 230. For example, the task field 304 may include information, such as a machine identifier 306 associated with the machine 230 (e.g., a code associated with the machine 230 (“MACHINE: M0001”)), a worksite identifier 308 associated with the worksite 100 (e.g., a code associated with the worksite (“WORKSITE: WS0001”)), and/or a task identifier 310 (e.g., a code associated with the task assigned to the machine 230 (“TASK: T0001”)).”; and para. [0057], “As shown in FIG. 3, the machine status prompt 220 may also include a query field 312 configured to provide the person 214 with an ability to indicate whether the machine 230 is in use and is unavailable to perform the assigned task. The example query field 312 shown in FIG. 3 displays a query 314 (e.g., “MACHINE IN USE?”) and a response field 316 (e.g., “YES” or “NO”) configured to provide the person 214 with the ability to respond to the query 314. In the example shown, the response field 316 includes boxes 318 for the person to select in response to the query 314. For example, the mobile device display 218 may be or include a touch-sensitive screen facilitating entry of the person's 214 response (e.g., by tapping the touch-sensitive screen at the appropriate box 318). In some examples, the UI 300 may also include a description field 320 configured to provide the person 214 with an ability to report any information related to the current use of the machine 230, which may be useful for a person assisting with management of the worksite 100. In the example shown, the description field 320 may provide a description prompt 322 (e.g., “IF YES, ENTER DESCRIPTION:”) and a text-entry field 324, which, in some examples, when tapped by the person 214, causes a keyboard display to appear and facilitate text entry of the description by the person 214. In some examples, upon selection of “YES” in the response field 316, the description field 322 may automatically be displayed. Other forms of the machine status prompt 220 are contemplated, such as, for example, an audio prompt, and other types of mobile device 208 are contemplated. Other modes of entry of responses to the machine status prompt 220 are contemplated in response to the machine status prompt 220, such as, for example, a voice-entry mode.”; and para. [0062], “As shown in FIG. 5, similar in some examples to the example UIs 300 and 400 shown in FIGS. 3 and 4, the machine condition prompt 224 may include a task field 504 configured to display an image representative information related to the task assigned to the machine 230. For example, the task field 504 may include information, such as a machine identifier 506 associated with the machine 230 (e.g., a code associated with the machine 230 (“MACHINE: M0001”)), a worksite identifier 508 associated with the worksite 100 (e.g., a code associated with the worksite (“WORKSITE: WS0001”)), and/or a task identifier 510 (e.g., a code associated with the task assigned to the machine 230 (“TASK: T0001”)).”).
Regarding claim 5, determining the one or more construction implements comprises: determining an identifier associated with the one or more construction tasks; sending, to a database, a query, wherein the query comprises the identifier associated with the one or more construction tasks; and determining, based on the query, an association between the identifier associated with the one or more construction tasks and an identifier associated with at least one construction implement of the one or more construction implements (Subramanian et al., at least para. [0056], “As shown in FIG. 3, the machine status prompt 220 may also include a task field 304 configured to display an image representative information related to the task assigned to the machine 230. For example, the task field 304 may include information, such as a machine identifier 306 associated with the machine 230 (e.g., a code associated with the machine 230 (“MACHINE: M0001”)), a worksite identifier 308 associated with the worksite 100 (e.g., a code associated with the worksite (“WORKSITE: WS0001”)), and/or a task identifier 310 (e.g., a code associated with the task assigned to the machine 230 (“TASK: T0001”)).”; and para. [0057], “As shown in FIG. 3, the machine status prompt 220 may also include a query field 312 configured to provide the person 214 with an ability to indicate whether the machine 230 is in use and is unavailable to perform the assigned task. The example query field 312 shown in FIG. 3 displays a query 314 (e.g., “MACHINE IN USE?”) and a response field 316 (e.g., “YES” or “NO”) configured to provide the person 214 with the ability to respond to the query 314. In the example shown, the response field 316 includes boxes 318 for the person to select in response to the query 314. For example, the mobile device display 218 may be or include a touch-sensitive screen facilitating entry of the person's 214 response (e.g., by tapping the touch-sensitive screen at the appropriate box 318). In some examples, the UI 300 may also include a description field 320 configured to provide the person 214 with an ability to report any information related to the current use of the machine 230, which may be useful for a person assisting with management of the worksite 100. In the example shown, the description field 320 may provide a description prompt 322 (e.g., “IF YES, ENTER DESCRIPTION:”) and a text-entry field 324, which, in some examples, when tapped by the person 214, causes a keyboard display to appear and facilitate text entry of the description by the person 214. In some examples, upon selection of “YES” in the response field 316, the description field 322 may automatically be displayed. Other forms of the machine status prompt 220 are contemplated, such as, for example, an audio prompt, and other types of mobile device 208 are contemplated. Other modes of entry of responses to the machine status prompt 220 are contemplated in response to the machine status prompt 220, such as, for example, a voice-entry mode.”; and para. [0062], “As shown in FIG. 5, similar in some examples to the example UIs 300 and 400 shown in FIGS. 3 and 4, the machine condition prompt 224 may include a task field 504 configured to display an image representative information related to the task assigned to the machine 230. For example, the task field 504 may include information, such as a machine identifier 506 associated with the machine 230 (e.g., a code associated with the machine 230 (“MACHINE: M0001”)), a worksite identifier 508 associated with the worksite 100 (e.g., a code associated with the worksite (“WORKSITE: WS0001”)), and/or a task identifier 510 (e.g., a code associated with the task assigned to the machine 230 (“TASK: T0001”)).”).
Regarding claim 6, sending the message comprises:
determining one or more command codes associated with at least one construction task of the one or more construction tasks (Subramanian et al., at least para. [0056], “As shown in FIG. 3, the machine status prompt 220 may also include a task field 304 configured to display an image representative information related to the task assigned to the machine 230. For example, the task field 304 may include information, such as a machine identifier 306 associated with the machine 230 (e.g., a code associated with the machine 230 (“MACHINE: M0001”)), a worksite identifier 308 associated with the worksite 100 (e.g., a code associated with the worksite (“WORKSITE: WS0001”)), and/or a task identifier 310 (e.g., a code associated with the task assigned to the machine 230 (“TASK: T0001”)).”); and
sending at least one command code of the one or more command codes via a local area network, to the construction implement (Subramanian et al., at least para. [0036], “The one or more networks 124, communication electronic devices 126, and/or other components of a wireless communication system may implement or utilize any desired system or protocol, including any of numerous communications standards. The protocols may permit communication between the worksite controller 120, the electronic devices 126, one or more of the communication devices associated with the machines, and/or any other desired machines or components of the worksite management system 102. Examples of wireless communications systems or protocols that may be used by the worksite management system 102 described herein may include a wireless personal area network, such as, for example, Bluetooth®. (e.g., IEEE 802.15), a local area network, such as, for example, IEEE 802.11b and/or 802.11g, a cellular network, and/or any other system or protocol for data transfer.”).
Regarding claim 7, the method further comprises receiving, by the computing device, a second user input wherein the second user input is configured to at least one of cause the construction implement to cease to execute the one or more construction tasks or change a parameter of the one or more construction tasks (Subramanian et al., at least para. [0041], “The one or more machines may be operated semi- and/or fully-autonomously. As used herein, the term “autonomous” may be understood broadly and may refer to any operation that is completely automatic or substantially automatic, for example, without significant human involvement in the machine operation. An autonomous vehicle (e.g., the machines 106, 108, 110, 112, and/or 114) may be generally be unmanned (e.g., un-piloted). In some examples, an autonomous vehicle may be maneuvered or otherwise operated automatically and may have one or more human passengers. Similarly, as used herein, the term “semi-autonomous” may be understood broadly and may refer to any operation that is at least partially automatic and/or at least partially brought about by human involvement in the operation, for example, with at least some human involvement in the operation.”).
Claims 8-14, drawn to an apparatus, replicate the elements of method claims 1-7, respectively, and are rejected on the same grounds as claims 1-7. Claims 15-20, drawn to a system comprising a computing device, replicate the elements of method claims 1-5 and 7, respectively, and are rejected on the same grounds.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to DONALD J. WALLACE whose telephone number is
(313) 446-4915. The examiner can normally be reached on Monday-Friday, 8 a.m. to 5 p.m.
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, Hunter Lonsberry can be reached on (571) 272-7298. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is (571) 273-8300.
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 unpublished 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). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative or access to the automated information system, call (800) 786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or (571) 272-1000.
/DONALD J WALLACE/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3665