DETAILED ACTION
This final Office action is responsive to Applicant’s amendment filed February 24, 2026. Claims 1 and 3 have been amended. Claims 2, 4-5, and 7-12 are cancelled. Claims 1, 3, and 6 are presented for examination.
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 .
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed February 24, 2026 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
Applicant argues that the prior art references do not address the current claim amendments. The DeAngelis reference has been introduced into the rejections in order to help address the claim amendments.
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.
Claims 1, 3, and 6 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Lee (US 2019/0325180) in view of DeAngelis et al. (AU-2015203080-A1).
[Claim 1] Lee discloses a production control system for a vehicle (¶ 46), comprising:
a plurality of tag devices each attached to a corresponding one of a plurality of vehicles each having an identification code and moving along a production line together with the plurality of vehicles to identify positions of the plurality of vehicles, the plurality of tag devices each having a tag ID (fig. 2, ¶¶ 55-58 -- “[0055] The smart tag 10 may be attached to bodies of a first vehicle C1, a second vehicle C2, and a third vehicle C3 in order in which the first vehicle, the second vehicle, and the third vehicle are loaded on the conveyor of the production line on which the vehicles are assembled. [0056] The smart tag 10 may connect wireless communication with the server 30 via the antenna 21. [0057] The smart tag 10 may receive information of the vehicle to which it is attached from the server 30 via wireless communication and may store the received information. [0058] The smart tag 10 may be used as a unique identifier of the vehicle that identifies position of the vehicle after it is attached to the vehicle, and may transmit tag identification (ID) in order to connect wireless communication with a nearby antenna 21 during movement of the vehicle.”);
a tag reader disposed on the production line and configured to recognize the tag ID of the tag device (fig. 2, ¶¶ 55-58);
a code reader disposed on the production line and configured to recognize the identification code of a given vehicle from the plurality of vehicles (fig. 2, ¶¶ 52-54); and
a server configured to receive the identification code of the given vehicle from the code reader and receive the tag ID of the tag device from the tag reader and map the identification code and the tag ID (¶¶ 51, 77, 87-95).
Lee does not explicitly disclose wherein, upon consecutively receiving the identification codes for the vehicles but not consecutively receiving the tag IDs, the server is configured to generate a virtual tag associated with one of the vehicles for which no tag ID is received, the virtual tag having a virtual ID, map the virtual ID to the identification code of said one vehicle, and track the virtual tag along the production line, based on a position of the tag device adjacent to the virtual tag, to monitor a position of said one vehicle.
In the analogous art of tracking a game ball, such as a football (DeAngelis: ¶ 57), DeAngelis tracks the football (or other game ball) as it moves from player to player and from corresponding location to location (DeAngelis: ¶ 65). When tracking information of the game ball is lost or blocked, i.e., a next location is not determined after a previous location was determined, the game ball is temporarily associated with the previous detected location through use of an assigned virtual tag (DeAngelis: ¶¶ 66, 72-75, 79). Once the tracking information of the game ball is received again, thereby resolving the tracking issue, the normal tracking process of the game ball is resumed (DeAngelis: ¶¶ 86-88). The movement of a vehicle and its identifying tag ID along a production line is akin to DeAngelis’ movement of the game ball from player to player (each player and game ball being detected by a camera in a detection action, as seen in DeAngelis: ¶ 43).
The Examiner submits that it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of Applicant’s invention to modify Lee wherein, upon consecutively receiving the identification codes for the vehicles but not consecutively receiving the tag IDs, the server is configured to generate a virtual tag associated with one of the vehicles for which no tag ID is received, the virtual tag having a virtual ID, map the virtual ID to the identification code of said one vehicle, and track the virtual tag along the production line, based on a position of the tag device adjacent to the virtual tag, to monitor a position of said one vehicle in order to improve the reliability of tracking under various conditions, including a loss or blockage of signal (as suggested in ¶¶ 66, 74-75, 88 of DeAngelis), while minimizing human error in the process (as suggested in ¶¶ 34-35 of DeAngelis). Additionally, DeAngelis states, “Although football is used as an example in FIG. 1, system 100 may perform tracking tag assignment to other objects, such as athletes for other sports, vehicles, and so on.“ (DeAngelis: ¶ 26). Analogous to Lee’s tracking of multiple vehicles, a series of multiple objects (including multiple game balls associated with each game play) may be tracked (DeAngelis: ¶ 29 – “Assignment device 102 may assign tracking tags to many footballs that are used within a game, and although these footballs may be indistinguishable from each other, a tracking system (e.g., tracking system 400, FIG. 4) may use the assignment information to identify the football used for each game play.”). The substitution of DeAngelis’ tracked objects (such as game balls moving from location to location on a field) for Lee’s tracked objects (such as vehicles moving through an assembly line) would have been well within the technical capability of those skilled in the art prior to Applicant’s invention and such a substitution would have yielded predictable and expected results.
[Claim 3] Lee discloses a production control system for a vehicle (¶ 46), comprising:
a plurality of tag devices each attached to a corresponding one of a plurality of vehicles, each vehicle having an identification code and moving along a production line together with the plurality of vehicles to identify positions of the plurality of vehicles, the plurality of tag devices each having a tag ID (fig. 2, ¶¶ 55-58);
a first tag reader disposed on the production line and configured to recognize the tag ID of the tag device (fig. 2, ¶¶ 55-58);
a second tag reader disposed on the production line and configured to recognize the tag ID of the tag device that has been recognized by the first tag reader (fig. 2, ¶¶ 55-58, 95);
a code reader disposed on the production line and configured to recognize the identification code of a given vehicle from the plurality of vehicles recognized by the first tag reader (fig. 2, ¶¶ 52-54); and
a server configured to receive the identification code of the given vehicle from the code reader and receive the tag ID of the tag device from the first tag reader and map the identification code and the tag ID (¶¶ 51, 77, 87-95).
Lee does not explicitly disclose:
wherein, when a tag device of a preceding one of the vehicles is recognized by the second tag reader but a tag device of a following one of the vehicles is not recognized by the second tag reader within a predetermined time or is poorly recognized by the second tag reader, the server determines that a misrecognition has occurred and, in response, generates a virtual tag associated with the following vehicle, the virtual tag having a virtual ID, maps the virtual ID to the identification code of the following vehicle, and tracks the virtual tag along the production line, based on a position of the tag device adjacent to the virtual tag, to monitor a position of the following vehicle.
In the analogous art of tracking a game ball, such as a football (DeAngelis: ¶ 57), DeAngelis tracks the football (or other game ball) as it moves from player to player and from corresponding location to location (DeAngelis: ¶ 65). When tracking information of the game ball is lost or blocked, i.e., a next location is not determined after a previous location was determined, the game ball is temporarily associated with the previous detected location through use of an assigned virtual tag (DeAngelis: ¶¶ 66, 72-75, 79). Once the tracking information of the game ball is received again, thereby resolving the tracking issue, the normal tracking process of the game ball is resumed (DeAngelis: ¶¶ 86-88). The movement of a vehicle and its identifying tag ID along a production line is akin to DeAngelis’ movement of the game ball from player to player (each player and game ball being detected by a camera in a detection action, as seen in DeAngelis: ¶ 43).
DeAngelis shows that the loss or blockage of the signal of any object (including an object within a series of tracked objects) may be tracked using a virtual tag correlated to proximate locations at the time of the loss or blockage of the signal. The Examiner submits that it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of Applicant’s invention to modify Lee wherein, when a tag device of a preceding one of the vehicles is recognized by the second tag reader but a tag device of a following one of the vehicles is not recognized by the second tag reader within a predetermined time or is poorly recognized by the second tag reader, the server determines that a misrecognition has occurred and, in response, generates a virtual tag associated with the following vehicle, the virtual tag having a virtual ID, maps the virtual ID to the identification code of the following vehicle, and tracks the virtual tag along the production line, based on a position of the tag device adjacent to the virtual tag, to monitor a position of the following vehicle in order to improve the reliability of tracking under various conditions, including a loss or blockage of signal (as suggested in ¶¶ 66, 74-75, 88 of DeAngelis), while minimizing human error in the process (as suggested in ¶¶ 34-35 of DeAngelis). Additionally, DeAngelis states, “Although football is used as an example in FIG. 1, system 100 may perform tracking tag assignment to other objects, such as athletes for other sports, vehicles, and so on.“ (DeAngelis: ¶ 26). Analogous to Lee’s tracking of multiple vehicles, a series of multiple objects (including multiple game balls associated with each game play) may be tracked (DeAngelis: ¶ 29 – “Assignment device 102 may assign tracking tags to many footballs that are used within a game, and although these footballs may be indistinguishable from each other, a tracking system (e.g., tracking system 400, FIG. 4) may use the assignment information to identify the football used for each game play.”). The substitution of DeAngelis’ tracked objects (such as game balls moving from location to location on a field) for Lee’s tracked objects (such as vehicles moving through an assembly line) would have been well within the technical capability of those skilled in the art prior to Applicant’s invention and such a substitution would have yielded predictable and expected results.
[Claim 6] Lee does not explicitly disclose wherein the server is configured to display positions of the tag device and the virtual tag. DeAngelis explains that the tracking information may be stored in a database implemented within a server (DeAngelis: ¶ 54) and DeAngelis displays all of the object tracking information throughout a game (DeAngelis: ¶¶ 102-103). As discussed above, DeAngelis also uses virtual tags to record object locations temporarily when an object’s location information has been lost or blocked (DeAngelis: ¶¶ 66, 72-75, 79). The Examiner submits that it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of Applicant’s invention to modify Lee wherein the server is configured to display positions of the tag device and the virtual tag in order to improve the reliability of tracking under various conditions, including a loss or blockage of signal (as suggested in ¶¶ 66, 74-75, 88 of DeAngelis), while minimizing human error in the process (as suggested in ¶¶ 34-35 of DeAngelis). Additionally, DeAngelis states, “Although football is used as an example in FIG. 1, system 100 may perform tracking tag assignment to other objects, such as athletes for other sports, vehicles, and so on.“ (DeAngelis: ¶ 26). Analogous to Lee’s tracking of multiple vehicles, a series of multiple objects (including multiple game balls associated with each game play) may be tracked (DeAngelis: ¶ 29 – “Assignment device 102 may assign tracking tags to many footballs that are used within a game, and although these footballs may be indistinguishable from each other, a tracking system (e.g., tracking system 400, FIG. 4) may use the assignment information to identify the football used for each game play.”). The substitution of DeAngelis’ tracked objects (such as game balls moving from location to location on a field) for Lee’s tracked objects (such as vehicles moving through an assembly line) would have been well within the technical capability of those skilled in the art prior to Applicant’s invention and such a substitution would have yielded predictable and expected results. Additionally, the ability to display positions of the tag device and the virtual tag would have helped Lee evaluate vehicle movement and operations in hindsight by making a thorough record of the vehicle activity for future review (as suggested in ¶ 103 of DeAngelis).
Furthermore, Lee displays information (Lee: ¶¶ 23, 95). It is noted that the content of the displayed information recited in claim 6 (e.g., positions of the tag device and the virtual tag) is non-functional descriptive material. Any manipulative steps of the invention would be performed the same regardless of the specific data. Further, any structural elements remain the same regardless of the specific data. Thus, this descriptive material will not distinguish the claimed invention from the prior art in terms of patentability as the claimed invention fails to present a new and unobvious functional relationship between the descriptive material and the substrate, see In re Gulack, 703 F.2d 1381, 1385, 217 USPQ 401, 404 (Fed. Cir. 1983); In re Lowry, 32 F.3d 1579, 32 USPQ2d 1031 (Fed. Cir. 1994); In re Ngai, 367 F.3d 1336, 1336, 70 USPQ2d 1862, 1863-64 (Fed. Cir. 2004). Another indication of the existence of non-functional descriptive material is that the content of the material is merely “directed towards conveying a message or meaning to a human reader independent of the supporting product.” Please see MPEP § 2111.05(I)(B).
Conclusion
Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a). Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a).
A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of the advisory action. In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the mailing date of this final action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to SUSANNA M DIAZ whose telephone number is (571)272-6733. The examiner can normally be reached M-F, 8 am-4:30 pm.
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, Brian Epstein can be reached at (571) 270-5389. 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.
/SUSANNA M. DIAZ/
Primary Examiner
Art Unit 3625A
Prosecution Insights