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 .
Status of Claims
Due to communications filed 8/13/25, the following is a final office action. Claims 1 is amended. Claims 9-16 are cancelled. 1-8 and 17-26 are pending in this application and are rejected as follows. The previous rejection has been modified to reflect claim amendments.
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-AlA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AlA) 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.
Claim(s) 1-2, 4-8, 17-23, 26 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Binding (US 7378960 B11), and further in view of MOAKLEY (US 2016/0379165 A1).
As per claim 1, Binding discloses:
a first wireless device configured to include a local area communication device, (see “vessel base station 120 is in communication with container nodes 121, 122, 123, 124, 125, 126, and 127 through a first WPAN 160” in col. 4, Il. 57-67; Abstract: “a base station configured to establish and manage a pre-configured WPAN having a hybrid tree-mesh network topology and a plurality of electronic tracking devices each being provided with a WPAN-enabled radio receiver/transmitter and routing capabilities. The base station is configured to communicate with the control station through a local area network on the vessel. Each tracking device is configured to be joined to a respective container of the plurality of containers and to connect to the WPAN upon being activated”.
[Here, the first wireless device of the present invention is analogous to the tracking device associated with the first WPAN of Binding, and the local area communication device of the present invention is analogous to the vessel base station of Binding].
a wide area communication device (see “WPAN system 100 includes a vessel control station 110 in communication with a number of vessel base stations 120...through a vessel local area network (LAN) 150...LAN 10 can consist of a vessel control station 190 that monitors and exercises control over WPAN system 100 and one or more vessel base stations linked to the vessel control station” in col. 4, Il., 33-56”; “Each tracking device can use its radio transmitter to transmit the GPS-recorded position data to the base station for the particular WPAN of which it is a member, and the particular WPAN can in turn transmit the container position data to vessel control station 110.”; Examiner notes container node 121 accesses the wide area communication device through vessel base station 120 as illustrated in Fig. 1.),
a global position determination device (see “Each container node has joined thereto an active electronic tracking device” in col. 5, Il. 1-15; “when a new container is loaded onto the vessel, a tracking device can be joined to the new container to form a new container node, and the device’s GPS unit can begin recording the container node position data.” In col. 5, Il. 16-27),
and a battery, (see “In exemplary embodiments, once a vessel is leaving harbor, the vessel's WPAN system can be configured so that the tracking node of each container node is put into in a low-power sleep, stand- by, or hibernate mode to prolong battery life.” in col. 8, Il. 54-67).
wherein the first wireless device is attached to a first shipment component of the consolidated shipment, such that the first wireless device moves with the first shipment component, wherein he consolidated shipment includes multiple independently movable shipment components that are collectively shipped together, (Abstract: “Each tracking device is configured to be joined to a respective container of the plurality of containers and to connect to the WPAN upon being activated. “; see “vessel base station 120 is in communication with container nodes 121, 122, 123, 124,125, 126, and 127 through a first WPAN 160” in col. 4, lines 57-67; “tracking device 122a is joined to container 122” as shown in col. 5, Il. 1-15; first WPAN 160” in col. 4, Il. 57-67; Col. 7, lines 16-33; “each tracking device has WPAN routing capabilities, and the container nodes constitute the actual network to perform routing and configuration functionalities...Each container node needs only to transmit as far as the next neighboring container node” in col. 7, Il. 11-47; Examiner notes container node 121 encompasses the claimed first wireless device as illustrated in Fig. 1 and is structurally the same as container node 122, as mapped; Claim 1 of Binding: “a plurality of electronic tracking devices each being provided with a WPAN-enabled radio receiver/transmitter and routing capabilities, each tracking device being configured to be joined to a respective container of the plurality of containers and to connect to the WPAN upon being activated,”);
(Here, Examiner interprets that the shipping component of the present invention is analogous to the container of Binding)
a second wireless device configured to include a local area communication device and a battery, wherein the second wireless device is attached to a second shipment component of the consolidated shipment, (Abstract: “Each tracking device is configured to be joined to a respective container of the plurality of containers and to connect to the WPAN upon being activated. “; see “vessel base station 120 is in communication with container nodes 121, 122, 123, 124,125, 126, and 127 through a first WPAN 160” in col. 4, Il. 57-67; “each tracking device has WPAN routing capabilities, and the container nodes constitute the actual network to perform routing and configuration functionalities...Each container node needs only to transmit as far as the next neighboring container node” in col. 7, Il. 11-47; Examiner notes container node 122 encompasses the claimed second wireless device as illustrated in Fig. 1 and is structurally the same as container node 121 as mapped above; Claim 1 of Binding: “a plurality of electronic tracking devices each being provided with a WPAN-enabled radio receiver/transmitter and routing capabilities, each tracking device being configured to be joined to a respective container of the plurality of containers and to connect to the WPAN upon being activated,”); );
Use of BLE:
B. Field Verification Tests During Actual Transportation
3) The Battery Capacity is Insufficient. It is necessary to Improve the Power Consumption for at Least Three Days to Meet Usage in the Real World:
Since we use the BLE polling method to read the sensed value, we can only supply the judgment circuit for approximately 20 hours in terms of power endurance. In addition to actively looking for small and large batteries, we will also improve the BLE transmission protocol in the future or try to replace different communication protocols.
wherein the second wireless device is configured for bi-directional communication with the first wireless device through the local area communication devices of the first and second wireless devices, (see “each tracking device has WPAN routing capabilities, and the container nodes constitute the actual network to perform routing and configuration functionalities...Each container node needs only to transmit as far as the next neighboring container node” in col. 7, Il. 11-47).
wherein the first wireless device and the second wireless device are associated with a same broadcast address, (see “newly arriving container nodes attempt to connect to one of the expected WPANSs by first pinging one of the pre-configured networks according to its channel and network ID with an echo request to verify whether network connectivity can be made with the particular host.” in col. 5, ll. 45-col. 6, Il. 15; Examiner notes all container nodes associated with the same base station are connected to the same channel and network ID, such as network nodes 121 and 122 as illustrated in Fig. 1.).
Binding does not disclose the following limitations:
wherein the first wireless device has a unique identifier; and
wherein the second wireless device has a unique identifier;
Moakley (US 2016/0379165 A1) teaches a first and second wireless device having a unique identifier on Paragraph [0104], “registration of the loT device with the loT gateway may include, for example, transmitting an loT device identifier to the loT Gateway, along with an item identifier that identifies the item associated with the loT device and any environmental or business considerations associated with the item”.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the first and second wireless devices of Binding to include a unique identifier as taught by Moakley. One of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention would have been motivated to modify Binding in order to enable in transit monitoring of the condition of assets in a shipment and the transfer of custody of assets and/or shipments between multiple parties (see paragraph [0002] of Moakley).
As per claim 2, Binding discloses:
wherein the first wireless device is configured to transmit an acknowledgement request through the local area communication device of the first wireless device, the acknowledgement request including the broadcast address to which the first wireless device is associated, (col. 5, Il. 46-col. 6, Il. 15. The acknowledgment is the echo request/response);
wherein the second wireless device is configured to receive the acknowledgement request through the local area communication device of the second wireless device, and wherein the second wireless device is configured to transmit an acknowledgement response through the local area communication device of the second wireless device upon both receipt of the acknowledgement request through the local area communication device of the second wireless device; and determination that the broadcast address within the received acknowledgement request matches the broadcast address to which the second wireless device is associated, (col. 5, Il. 46-col. 6, Il. 15. The acknowledgment is the echo request/response);
Binding does not disclose the limitation below. However, Moakely teaches:
wherein the acknowledgement response includes the unique identifier of the second wireless device (see 0104] “registration of the loT device with the loT gateway may include, for example, transmitting an loT device identifier to the loT Gateway, along with an item identifier that identifies the item associated with the loT device and any environmental or business considerations associated with the item” of Moakley).
The motivation for making this modification to the disclosure of Binding is the same as that set forth above, in the rejection of claim 1.
As per claim 4, Binding does not disclose: wherein the wide area communication device includes one or more of a cellular network communication device and a satellite network communication device.
However, MOAKLEY discloses this limitation in: [0055] FIGS. 2A and 2B schematically depict...an loT gateway and loT devices are used to monitor a shipment and issue an alert regarding a lost package...loT gateway 202 includes communications circuitry that enables it to communicate with loT infrastructure 214, e.g., via wired or wireless communication...loT gateway may include a wireless wide area network (WWAN) for cellular communications 212 with an loT infrastructure 214.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was filed to include the above limitations as taught by MOAKLEY in the systems of Binding, since the claimed invention is merely a combination of old elements, and in the combination each element merely would have performed the same function as it did separately, and one of ordinary skill in the art would have recognized that the results of the combination were predictable.
As per claim 5, Binding discloses:
wherein the local area communication device of the first wireless device is a radio, and wherein the local area communication device of the second wireless device is a radio, (Abstract: a plurality of electronic tracking devices each being provided with a WPAN-enabled radio receiver/transmitter).
As per claim 6:
wherein the local area communication device of the first wireless device is an JEEE Standard 802.15.4 radio, and wherein the local area communication device of the second wireless device is an IEEE Standard 802.15.4 radio,
Binding discloses a WPAN-enabled radio receiver/transmitter in the Abstract: A” WPAN system for establishing communication between a control station of a cargo vessel and a plurality of containers that are loaded onto the vessel is provided that comprises a base station configured to establish and manage a pre-configured WPAN having a hybrid tree-mesh network topology and a plurality of electronic tracking devices each being provided with a WPAN-enabled radio receiver/transmitter and routing capabilities”.
In this case, Examiner interprets that the limitations of this claim are no more than non- functional descriptive material. Claiming that the local area communication device of the first wireless device is an JEEE Standard 802.15.4 radio, and wherein the local area communication device of the second wireless device is an IEEE Standard 802.15.4 radio has no bearing on the attachment toa shipping component of the consolidated shipment or communication with the server computing system, and therefore holds no patentable weight. Examiner thereby interprets that the radio can be any type of device used to communicate wirelessly with the other devices as long as it is suitable to be able to attach toa shipping component.
It would have been obvious at the time Binding was filed to use a JEEE Standard 802.15.4 radio, and a IEEE Standard 802.15.4 radio at the time Binding’s was filed with the motivation of wirelessly communicating with the shipping component.
As per claim 7, Binding discloses:
wherein the first wireless device is configured to communicate with an Internet gateway through at least one of the local area communication device of the first wireless device and the wide
area communication device of the first wireless device, (see “vessel base station 120 is in communication with container nodes 121, 122, 123, 124, 125, 126, and 127 through a first WPAN 160” in col. 4, ll. 57-67; “WPAN system 100 includes a vessel control station 110 in communication with a number of vessel bast stations 120...through a vessel local area network (LAN) 150...LAN 10 can consist of a vessel control station 190 that monitors and exercises control over WPAN system 100 and one or more vessel base stations linked to the vessel control station“ in col. 4, Il., 33-56”).
As per claim 8, Binding discloses:
at least one additional wireless device each configured to include a local area communication device and a battery, wherein the at least one additional wireless device is configured for attachment to at least one additional shipment component of the consolidated shipment, (Examiner notes container node 123, 124, 125, 126, and 127 encompasses at least one additional wireless device as illustrated in Fig. 1 and is structurally the same as container node 121 as mapped above. ).
wherein each of the at least one additional wireless device is configured for bi-directional communication with the first wireless device through the local area communication device of the first wireless device and the local area communication device of each of the at least one additional wireless device, (see “each tracking device has WPAN routing capabilities, and the container nodes constitute the actual network to perform routing and configuration functionalities...Each container node needs only to transmit as far as the next neighboring container node” in col. 7, Il. 11-47).
wherein each of the at least one additional wireless device is associated with the same broadcast address, (see “newly arriving container nodes attempt to connect to one of the expected WPANSs by first pinging one of the pre-configured networks according to its channel and network ID with an echo request to verify whether network connectivity can be made with the particular host.” in col. 5, ll. 45-col. 6, Il. 15; Examiner notes all container nodes associated with the same base station are connected to the same channel and network ID, such as network nodes 121 and 122 as illustrated in Fig. 1.).
Binding does not disclose the limitation below. However, Moakley teaches:
and wherein each of the at least one additional wireless device has a unique identifier; wherein the acknowledgement response includes the unique identifier of the second wireless device. (see [0104] “registration of the loT device with the loT gateway may include, for example, transmitting an loT device identifier to the loT Gateway, along with an item identifier that identifies the item associated with the loT device and any environmental or business considerations associated with the item” of Moakley).
The motivation for making this modification to the disclosure of Binding is the same as that set forth above, in the rejection of claim 1.
As per claim 17, Binding does not disclose the limitation below. However, Moakely teaches:
wherein the server computing system includes a computer memory that includes program instructions for creating and storing an association between the unique identifier of the first wireless device and the first shipment component of the consolidated shipment, and wherein the computer memory of the server computing system includes program instructions for creating and storing an association between the unique identifier of the second wireless device and the second shipment component of the consolidated shipment, ([0025] ...the technologies described herein include one or more stateful gateway devices that are enabled to locally collect, analyze, and process raw data (e.g., from one or more IoT devices) in the field before forwarding results to one or more centralized systems...Accordingly, the term “stateful gateway,” as used herein, means a gateway device that is configured to store...provisioned configurations about the environment in which it is placed, e.g., shipping data; and [0104] “registration of the loT device with the loT gateway may include, for example, transmitting an loT device identifier to the loT Gateway, along with an item identifier that identifies the
item associated with the loT device and any environmental or business considerations associated with the item” of Moakley).
The motivation for making this modification to the disclosure of Binding is the same as that set forth above, in the rejection of claim 1.
As per claim 18, Binding discloses: wherein the server computing system includes a computer memory that includes program instructions for generating the broadcast address associated with the first wireless device and the second wireless device, (col. 10, Il. 10-26; and col. 10, Il. 27-40; Fig. 4; and col. 5, Il. 46-col. 6, Il. 15)
As per claim 19, Binding discloses: wherein the computer memory of the server computing system includes program instructions for separately conveying the broadcast address to each of the first wireless device and the second wireless device, (col. 10, Il. 10-26; and col. 10, Il. 27-40; Fig. 4; and col. 5, Il. 46-col. 6, Il. 15).
As per claim 20, Binding discloses: wherein the first wireless device includes a computer memory that includes program instructions for periodically transmitting an acknowledgement request that includes the broadcast address associated with the first wireless device and the second wireless device, (col. 10, Il. 10-26; and col. 10, Il. 27-40; Fig. 4; and col. 5, Il. 46-col. 6, Il. 15).
As per claim 21, wherein the second wireless device includes a computer memory that includes program instructions for responding to the acknowledgement request by transmitting an acknowledgement response to the broadcast address associated with the first wireless device and the second wireless device, (col. 10, Il. 10-26; and col. 10, Il. 27-40; Fig. 4; and col. 5, Il. 46-col. 6, Il. 15).
As per claim 22, Binding doesn’t disclose the limitation below. However, Moakley teaches: wherein the second wireless device includes an impact force measurement device, and wherein the second wireless device includes a computer memory that includes program instructions for notifying the first wireless device by way of the broadcast address when the impact force measurement device measures an impact force that exceeds an impact force threshold value, ([0048] “As further shown in FIG. 1, a number of sensors, or loT devices 106, may be coupled to the loT gateway 104 and included in field asset 102. The loT devices 106 may be configured to measure or otherwise determine status factors relevant to the presence and/or condition asset 102, such as but not limited to the location of asset 102, ambient temperature, temperature of asset 102, impact force applied to asset 102” of Moakley).
The motivation for making this modification to the disclosure of Binding is the same as that set forth above, in the rejection of claim 1.
As per claim 23, Binding doesn’t disclose:
wherein the second wireless device includes a vibrational force measurement device, and wherein the second wireless device includes a computer memory that includes program instructions for notifying the first wireless device by way of the broadcast address when the vibrational force measurement device measures a vibrational force that exceeds a vibrational force threshold value.
However, MOAKLEY discloses: [0062] As further shown in FIG. 3 aircraft 300 may be ordered to travel along initial route 316, which takes aircraft 300 into bad weather 318. To address this problem, aircraft 300 may be rerouted to a new route 320 so as to stay in more favorable weather 322. In this scenario, loT gateway 302 may send a number of different alerts when it determines the presence of one or more alert conditions. For example, sensors in loT devices associated with packages 304, 306 may detect forces applied to packaged 304, 306 (e.g., resulting from turbulence), and report force data
to loT gateway. From that force data, loT gateway 302 may determine that the contents of packages 304 or 306 have exceeded their shock tolerances. Alternatively when the loT devices include sufficient processing power, they may independently evaluate force or other data, e.g., against one or more thresholds, make intelligent decisions about the condition of packages 304, 306 and/or their contents, and report such decisions to loT gateway 302.
The motivation for making this modification to the disclosure of Binding is the same as that set forth above, in the rejection of claim 1.
As er claim 26, Binding doesn’t disclose:
wherein the second wireless device has reduced functionality relative to the first wireless device.
However, MOAKLEY discloses: [0048] As further shown in FIG. 1, a number of sensors, or loT devices 106, may be coupled to the loT gateway 104 and included in field asset 102. The loT devices 106 may be configured to measure or otherwise determine status factors relevant to the presence and/or condition asset 102, such as but not limited to the location of asset 102, ambient temperature, temperature of asset 102, impact force applied to asset 102,
The motivation for making this modification to the disclosure of Binding is the same as that set forth above, in the rejection of claim 1.
Claim(s) 24, 25 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Binding (US 7378960 B1), and further in view of MOAKLEY (US 2016/0379165 A1), and further in view of EHRLICH et al (CA 2572005 A1).
As per claim 24, Binding discloses: wherein the second wireless device includes a temperature measurement device, and wherein the second wireless device includes a computer memory that
includes program instructions for notifying the first wireless device by way of the broadcast address when the temperature measurement device measures a temperature that exceeds a temperature threshold value,
However, EHRLICH et al (CA 2572005 A1) discloses:
Page 19, lines 15-19, “One example of a store-and-forward application is where the temperature in a freight container Is periodically captured and stored; when the shipment is received, the temperature readings from the trip are downloaded and viewed to ensure that the temperature and humidity stayed within the desired range. Polling requires an initial device discovery process that associates a device address with each physical device in the network. The controller (i.e., coordinator) then polls each wireless device on the network successively, typically by sending a serial query message and retrying as needed to ensure a valid response. Upon receiving the query's answer, the controller performs its pre-programmed command/control actions based on the response data and then polls the next wireless device.
Page 26, lines 10-15, “Figure 11 illustrates the beacon frame format. As described above, beacons add new level of functionality to the network, wherein client devices can wake up only when a beacon is to be broadcast.”.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was filed to include the above limitations as taught by EHRLICH et al in the systems of Binding, since the claimed invention is merely a combination of old elements, and in the combination each element merely would have performed the same function as it did separately, and one of ordinary skill in the art would have recognized that the results of the combination were predictable.
As per claim 25, Binding does not disclose:
wherein the second wireless device includes a humidity measurement device, and wherein the second wireless device includes a computer memory that includes program instructions for notifying the
first wireless device by way of the broadcast address when the humidity measurement device measures a humidity that exceeds a humidity threshold value,
However, EHRLICH et al (CA 2572005 A1) discloses:
Page 19, lines 15-19, “One example of a store-and-forward application is where the temperature in a freight container Is periodically captured and stored; when the shipment is received, the temperature readings from the trip are downloaded and viewed to ensure that the temperature and humidity stayed within the desired range. Polling requires an initial device discovery process that associates a device address with each physical device in the network. The controller (i.e., coordinator) then polls each wireless device on the network successively, typically by sending a serial query message and retrying as needed to ensure a valid response. Upon receiving the query's answer, the controller performs its pre-programmed command/control actions based on the response data and then polls the next wireless device.
Page 26, lines 10-15, “Figure 11 illustrates the beacon frame format. As described above, beacons add new level of functionality to the network, wherein client devices can wake up only when a beacon is to be broadcast.”.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was filed to include the above limitations as taught by EHRLICH et al in the systems of Binding, since the claimed invention is merely a combination of old elements, and in the combination each element merely would have performed the same function as it did separately, and one of ordinary skill in the art would have recognized that the results of the combination were predictable.
Claim(s) 3 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Binding (US 7378960 B1), and further in view of MOAKLEY (US 2016/0379165 A1), and further in view of ANGELO: (AU 2009222584 A1).
As per claim 3, Binding discloses:
wherein the first wireless device includes data identifying the second wireless device as being associated with the same broadcast address, (see “newly arriving container nodes attempt to connect to one of the expected WPANs by first pinging one of the pre-configured networks according to its channel and network ID with an echo request to verify whether network connectivity can be made with the particular host.” in col. 5, Il. 45-col. 6, Il. 15; Examiner notes all container nodes associated with the same base station are connected to the same channel and network ID, such as network nodes 121 and 122 as illustrated in Fig. 1.).
wherein the first wireless device is configured to transmit an acknowledgement request through the local area communication device of the first wireless device, the acknowledgement request including the broadcast address to which the first wireless device is associated, (col. 5, Il. 46-col. 6, Il. 15. The acknowledgment is the echo request/response);
wherein the first wireless device is configured to monitor for receipt of an acknowledgement response from the second wireless device associated with the same broadcast address, wherein the first wireless device is configured to determine when the second wireless device does not provide an acknowledgement response in reply to the acknowledgement request, (Col. 5, lines 61-63, If instead, after some specified time-out or delay period without receiving an echo response, the container node will determine that the ping on the particular network ID has failed, and the node will try to ping a new pre-configured WPAN ID. The process repeats until a network connection is established or the new container node has attempted and failed to connect to a WPAN after each of the pre-configured networks have been pinged).
and wherein the first wireless device is configured to record the date, time, and location when the second wireless device does not provide an acknowledgement response in reply to the acknowledgement request, and wherein the first wireless device is configured to transmit data
specifying the date, time, and location when the second wireless device does not provide an acknowledgement response in reply to the acknowledgement request in reference to the unique identifier of the second wireless device to the server computing system through the wide area communication device, ‘ANGELO: (AU 2009222584 A1): The response 1100 provides an acknowledgement of the request, and includes a transaction identifier field 1102, a transaction label field 1104, and a request status field 1106. The response 1100 also provides an error code field 1108 and an error description field 1110 which convey error conditions to the requesting application. 40 COMS ID No: ARCS-251528 Received by IP Australia: Time (H:m) 17:50 Date (Y-M-d) 2009-10-02).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was filed to include the above limitations as taught by ANGELO in the systems of Binding, since the claimed invention is merely a combination of old elements, and in the combination each element merely would have performed the same function as it did separately, and one of ordinary skill in the art would have recognized that the results of the combination were predictable.
Prior Art Considered
The following prior art is considered relevant by the Examiner, however, has not been used in the present Office Action:
DOMINGUEZ et al (EP 2747004 A1)
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 8/13/25 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
With regard to independent claim 1, Applicant argues that Binding does not teach or suggest that the vessel base station 120 is attached to a container that is part of a consolidated shipment of multiple containers and that the vessel base station of Binding does not teach or suggest the first shipment component of claim 1. However, Examiner has now clarified what represents as the first shipment component. As clarified above in the Office Action, Examiner interprets that the shipping component of the present invention is analogous to the container of Binding. In addition, and as also now clarified in the Office Action, Examiner interprets the wireless device of the present invention as the tracking device of Binding. In fact, the a local area communication device of the present invention is analogous to the vessel base station of Binding. Therefore, with regard to the following: “wherein the first wireless device is attached to a first shipment component of the consolidated shipment such that the first wireless device moves with the first shipment component, wherein the consolidated shipment includes multiple independently movable shipment components that are collectively shipped together” of the present invention, Binding teaches that “Each tracking device is configured to be joined to a respective container of the plurality of containers and to connect to the WPAN upon being activated”, (Abstract), and “each tracking device has WPAN routing capabilities, and the container nodes constitute the actual network to perform routing and configuration functionalities...Each container node needs only to transmit as far as the next neighboring container node” in col. 7, Il. 11-47, [which shows the movement of containers (along with attached tracking devices].
With regard to dependent claims 2, 4-8, 17-23 and 26, also claims 24 and 25, and further claim 3, these claims incorporate all features of the independent claim 1 and are therefore unpatentable for at least the same reasons as its independent claim 1.
Conclusion
THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. 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 Akiba Robinson whose telephone number is 571-272-6734 and email is Akiba.Robinsonboyce@USPTO.gov. The examiner can normally be reached on Monday-Thursday 6:30am-4:30pm.
If attempts to reach the Examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the Examiner's supervisor, Resha Desai can be reached on 571-270-7792. 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 (I N USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
Any inquiry of a general nature or relating to the status of this application or proceeding should be directed to the receptionist whose telephone number is (703) 305-3900.
October 20, 2025
/AKIBA K ROBINSON/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3628