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 .
Examiner notes
Examiner cites particular columns, paragraphs, figures and line numbers in the references as applied to the claims below for the convenience of the applicant. Although the specified citations are representative of the teachings in the art and are applied to the specific limitations within the individual claim, other passages and figures may apply as well. It is respectfully requested that, in preparing responses, the applicant fully consider the references in their entirety as potentially teaching all or part of the claimed invention, as well as the context of the passage as taught by the prior art or disclosed by the examiner. The entire reference is considered to provide disclosure relating to the claimed invention. The claims & only the claims form the metes & bounds of the invention. Office personnel are to give the claims their broadest reasonable interpretation in light of the supporting disclosure. Unclaimed limitations appearing in the specification are not read into the claim. Prior art was referenced using terminology familiar to one of ordinary skill in the art. Such an approach is broad in concept and can be either explicit or implicit in meaning. Examiner's Notes are provided with the cited references to assist the applicant to better understand how the examiner interprets the applied prior art. Such comments are entirely consistent with the intent & spirit of compact prosecution.
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 1-5, 8-12, and 15-19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Lukis et al., US 7,840,443 B2 (Lukis) in view of Pahwa et al., A Multi Agent Based Manufacturing Service Marketplace: Towards Intelligent Cloud Manufacturing Services (Pahwa).
Claim 1.
Lukis teaches A method comprising: by a computing system: constructing a digital material that is partially-defined based on input from a requestor entity of a digital material collaboration platform, wherein the digital material is for manufacture of a physical product and is partially-defined to include a physical material or product requirements for the physical product, but does not define process parameters of a manufacturing process to manufacture the physical product; (Lukis col 5 Lines 32- 37 ) “To begin the process, a customer provides a CAD file defining the surface profile for the part to be formed to the system. The system assesses the part surface profile (which could have any of a virtually infinite number of shapes) to consider certain cost-affecting parameters determined by the part surface profile.” (col 14 Lines 63- col 15 lines 6) “the program must assess one or more cost parameters which are indicative of the real costs which will be incurred to form the mold or machine the part. The most basic cost parameters preferably considered involve the machining actions which will be used. . . the quoting module 64 of at least one indicator of mold or part manufacture time. Automatic determination of machining actions and/or other material removal steps in the tool selection and tool path computation module 68 is further detailed below.” {Examiners note: The customer provided CAD file corresponds to the “partially defined digital material” it includes product requirements (geometry) but does not include machining/process parameters, which are later computed by the provider.}
providing access to the digital material partially-defined by the requestor entity on the digital material collaboration platform; (Lukis col 7 Lines 8-10) “The "web-centric" customer interface preferably includes a part submission page as part of the Customer Data Input module 30”.
receiving, from provider entities of the digital material collaboration platform, proposed versions for the digital material that specify process parameters for the manufacturing process; (Lukis Fig 13) “is a computer screen shot of a preferred customer interface for the quotation system, showing customer selection of one parameter.” (col 22 Lines 27-28) “If desired, a single parameter might be selected as the sliding variable.” {EXAMINERS NOTE: Proposed versions under BRI could be various versions of a single parameter. Ie. If the budget was the parameter, there could be multiple versions of reducing budget including reducing quantity, or switching to a different cheaper material.}
Lukis does not explicitly teach, but Pahwa teaches connecting the requestor entity with a selected provider entity of the provider entities of the digital material collaboration platform based on a particular proposed version for the digital material provided by the selected provider entity. (Pahwa Pg 1010 Paragraph 1) “The key decision for Platform Agent is to select a supplier among the suppliers which are willing to accept the order.”
Lukis and Pahwa are analogous to the claimed invention because they are from the same field of endeavor of Manufacturing Service Marketplaces.
Before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, having the teachings of Lukis and Pahwa before him or her, to modify the material collaboration platform of Lukis with the ability to select specific providers of the part of Pahwa to reduce “the amount of time and effort spent in sending digital data, clarifying technical specifications, and then negotiating with multiple service bureaus.” Pahwa pg. 1007 Introduction.
Claim 2.
Lukis modified with Pahwa teaches The method of claim 1, comprising constructing the digital material to comprise a public section and a private section, wherein the private section has increased access restrictions as compared to the public section of the digital material. (Pahwa Pg 1009 Paragraph 2) “After the Coordinating Agent of a supplier receives order attributes from the Platform Agent, it shares this information with all Machine Agents of the supplier.” Pahwa Pg 1009 Paragraph 1) “The Order Agent passes all the order attributes to the Platform Agent except the price upper bound.” {Examiners note: Demonstrating public and private information sections.}
Claim 3.
Lukis modified with Pahwa teaches The method of claim 2, wherein the proposed versions comprise provider- specific data specified by the provider entities in both the private and the public sections of the proposed versions of the digital material. (Pahwa Pg 1009 Paragraph 2) “After the Coordinating Agent of a supplier receives order attributes from the Platform Agent, it shares this information with all Machine Agents of the supplier.” Pahwa Pg 1009 Paragraph 1) “The Order Agent passes all the order attributes to the Platform Agent except the price upper bound.” {Examiners note: This shows order attributes (both public and private) being provided.}
Claim 4.
Lukis modified with Pahwa teaches The method of claim 3, further comprising allowing the requestor entity to review the public portions but not the private portions of the proposed versions of the digital material. (Pahwa 1011 Paragraph 3) “If the job order’s price is less than the order agent’s bid the order is placed. Otherwise, negotiation initiates between Order and Platform Agent.” {EXAMINERS NOTE: Suppliers bids are part of the Public portion} (1009 paragraph 2) “The machine agents check their capability such as material availability, design dimensions to identify if they have the capability to complete the job order. If the capabilities permit, Machine Agents contact their respective Schedule Agents to determine if the job can be finished and delivered by the due date. The Machine Agents responds to the Coordinating Agent with the decision to accept or reject the job. After the Coordinating Agent receives the response from all Machine Agents, it chooses the Machine for order allocation if the order is won by the supplier. It also determines the price to quote to the Platform Agent based on factors such as average machine utilization and demand forecast.”{Examiners note: The private information such as machine utilization, demand forecast, interval schedule, and acceptance/rejection rational is not passed back to requester (private portion)}
Claim 5.
Lukis teaches The method of claim 3, wherein connecting the requestor entity with the selected provider entity comprises providing access, to the requestor entity, to the private section of the particular proposed version for the digital material provided by the selected provider entity. (Lukis col 13 Lines 52-56) “A drawing from the proposed modification CAD file 58 is shown as FIG. 12. The proposed modification CAD file 58 highlights the closest approximations 60, 62, relative to remaining unaltered portions of the cam design part surface profile 10 which pass all acceptability criteria” (col 14 Lines 11-15) “The proposed modification CAD communication module 56 then automatically transmits the proposed modification CAD file 58 to the customer, so the customer can view the changes required for inexpensive manufacture of the part and/or mold.” {Examiners note: The “changes” include provider specific process decisions (machining actions, tool path etc.) This constitutes the private section of the providers proposed version, the customer previously did not have these details, they are only given after the system has evaluated the parameters. (after selection/connection)}
Claim 8
Lukis teaches A system comprising: a digital material collaboration engine configured to: constructing a digital material that is partially-defined based on input from a requestor entity of a digital material collaboration platform, wherein the digital material is for manufacture of a physical product and is partially-defined to include a physical material or product requirements for the physical product, but does not define process parameters of a manufacturing process to manufacture the physical product; (Lukis col 5 Lines 30-31) “The present invention is a method and system of automated” (Lukis col 5 Lines 32- 37 ) “To begin the process, a customer provides a CAD file defining the surface profile for the part to be formed to the system. The system assesses the part surface profile (which could have any of a virtually infinite number of shapes) to consider certain cost-affecting parameters determined by the part surface profile.” (col 14 Lines 63- col 15 lines 6) “the program must assess one or more cost parameters which are indicative of the real costs which will be incurred to form the mold or machine the part. The most basic cost parameters preferably considered involve the machining actions which will be used. . . the quoting module 64 of at least one indicator of mold or part manufacture time. Automatic determination of machining actions and/or other material removal steps in the tool selection and tool path computation module 68 is further detailed below.” {Examiners note: The customer provided CAD file corresponds to the “partially defined digital material” it includes product requirements (geometry) but does not include machining/process parameters, which are later computed by the provider. }
providing access to the digital material partially-defined by the requestor entity on the digital material collaboration platform; (Lukis col 7 Lines 8-10) “The "web-centric" customer interface preferably include a part submission page as part of the Customer Data Input module 30”
receiving, from provider entities of the digital material collaboration platform, proposed versions for the digital material that specify process parameters for the manufacturing process; (Lukis Fig 13) “is a computer screen shot of a preferred customer interface for the quotation system, showing customer selection of one parameter.” (col 22 Lines 27-28) “If desired, a single parameter might be selected as the sliding variable.”
Lukis does not explicitly teach, but Pahwa teaches and connecting the requestor entity with a selected provider entity of the provider entities of the digital material collaboration platform based on a particular proposed version for the digital material provided by the selected provider entity. (Pahwa Pg 1010 Paragraph 1) “The key decision for Platform Agent is to select a supplier among the suppliers which are willing to accept the order.”
Lukis and Pahwa are analogous to the claimed invention because they are from the same field of endeavor of Manufacturing Service Marketplaces.
Before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, having the teachings of Lukis and Pahwa before him or her, to modify the material collaboration platform of Lukis with the ability to select specific providers of the part of Pahwa to reduce “the amount of time and effort spent in sending digital data, clarifying technical specifications, and then negotiating with multiple service bureaus.” Pahwa pg. 1007 Introduction.
Claims 9-14
Claims 9-14 are rejected for being substantially similar to claims 2-5, albeit for being a system.
Claim 15
Lukis teaches A non-transitory machine-readable medium comprising instructions that, when executed by a processor, cause a computing system to: constructing a digital material that is partially-defined based on input from a requestor entity of a digital material collaboration platform, wherein the digital material is for manufacture of a physical product and is partially-defined to include a physical material or product requirements for the physical product, but does not define process parameters of a manufacturing process to manufacture the physical product; (Lukis col 5 Lines 32- 37 ) “To begin the process, a customer provides a CAD file defining the surface profile for the part to be formed to the system. The system assesses the part surface profile (which could have any of a virtually infinite number of shapes) to consider certain cost-affecting parameters determined by the part surface profile.” (col 14 Lines 63- col 15 lines 6) “the program must assess one or more cost parameters which are indicative of the real costs which will be incurred to form the mold or machine the part. The most basic cost parameters preferably considered involve the machining actions which will be used. . . the quoting module 64 of at least one indicator of mold or part manufacture time. Automatic determination of machining actions and/or other material removal steps in the tool selection and tool path computation module 68 is further detailed below.” {Examiners note: The customer provided CAD file corresponds to the “partially defined digital material” it includes product requirements (geometry) but does not include machining/process parameters, which are later computed by the provider. Lukis inherently teaches a non-transitory machine-readable medium}
providing access to the digital material partially-defined by the requestor entity on the digital material collaboration platform; (Lukis col 7 Lines 8-10) “The "web-centric" customer interface preferably include a part submission page as part of the Customer Data Input module 30”
receiving, from provider entities of the digital material collaboration platform, proposed versions for the digital material that specify process parameters for the manufacturing process; (Lukis Fig 13) “is a computer screen shot of a preferred customer interface for the quotation system, showing customer selection of one parameter.” (col 22 Lines 27-28) “If desired, a single parameter might be selected as the sliding variable.”
Lukis does not explicitly teach, but Pahwa teaches and connecting the requestor entity with a selected provider entity of the provider entities of the digital material collaboration platform based on a particular proposed version for the digital material provided by the selected provider entity. (Pahwa Pg 1010 Paragraph 1) “The key decision for Platform Agent is to select a supplier among the suppliers which are willing to accept the order.”
Lukis and Pahwa are analogous to the claimed invention because they are from the same field of endeavor of Manufacturing Service Marketplaces.
Before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, having the teachings of Lukis and Pahwa before him or her, to modify the material collaboration platform of Lukis with the ability to select specific providers of the part of Pahwa to reduce “the amount of time and effort spent in sending digital data, clarifying technical specifications, and then negotiating with multiple service bureaus.” Pahwa pg. 1007 Introduction.
Claims 16-19
Claims 16-19 are rejected for being substantially similar to claims 2-5, albeit for being a non-transitory machine-readable medium.
Claims 6, 7, 13, 14, and 20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Lukis et al., US 7,840,443 B2 (Lukis) in view of Pahwa et al., A Multi Agent Based Manufacturing Service Marketplace: Towards Intelligent Cloud Manufacturing Services (Pahwa) in further view of Helm et al., Materials modelling market place for increased industrial innovation (Helm)
Claim 6.
Lukis and Pahwa do not explicitly teach, but Helm teaches The method of claim 1, comprising constructing the digital material in a format supported for direct consumption by a manufacturing simulation of the digital material. (Helm pg. 6) “seamless integration of existing materials modelling solutions, open simulation platforms (OSP) and materials data from disparate databases into advanced materials modelling workflows”
Lukis, Pahwa, and Helm are analogous to the claimed invention because they are from the same field of endeavor of Manufacturing Service Marketplaces.
Before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, having the teachings of Lukis, Pahwa, and Helm before him or her, to modify the material collaboration platform of Lukis with the ability to select specific providers of the part of Pahwa with the knowledge graph and the format of direct to consumption of Helm to reduce the effort of finding knowledge as suggest in Helm. (Pg 2 The situation)
Claim 7.
Modified Lukis and Pahwa with Helm teaches The method of claim 1, comprising constructing the digital material as a knowledge graph. (Helm pg. 13) “The MarketPlace knowledge service is an ontology based web application for registering and linking resources to one another.” (pg. 10) “OSP-core: enables the user to perform CRUD operations Create, Read, Update and Delete) on ontology-based representation of data” {Examiners note: Ontology schemas are by definition knowledge graphs.} Claims 13, 14, and 20
Claims 13, 14, and 20 are rejected for being substantially similar to claims 6, and 7, albeit for being a system, and non-transitory machine-readable medium respectively.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JOHN DAVID HAGLER whose telephone number is (703)756-1339. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday 10am- 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, Rehana Perveen can be reached at 5712723676. 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.
/JOHN DAVID HAGLER/ Examiner, Art Unit 2189
/REHANA PERVEEN/ Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2189