DETAILED ACTION
Status of Claims
This action is in reply to the RCE filed on October 02, 2025.
The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
Claims 1, 14, 16, 19, 21 and 23 have been amended.
Claims 26-28 have been added.
Claims 9 and 17 have been canceled.
Claims 1-8, 10-16 and 18-28 are currently pending and have been examined.
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and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114.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 October 2, 2025 has been entered.
Response to Amendments
Applicants’ amendments to claims 1, 14, 16, 19, 21 and 23 have been acknowledged.
Response to Arguments
Applicants’ arguments have been considered, but are moot in view of new grounds of rejection.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC §101
35 U.S.C. 101 reads as follows:
Whoever invents or discovers any new and useful process, machine, manufacture, or composition of matter, or any new and useful improvement thereof, may obtain a patent therefor, subject to the conditions and requirements of this title.
Claims 1-8, 10-16 and 18-28 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 101 because the claimed invention is directed to a judicial exception (i.e., an abstract idea) without “significantly more.”
Regarding Claims 1, 21 and 26, the claims describe a system and methods for monitoring consumer behavior on products for intelligent decision making which is a mental process (observation/evaluation) and a method of organizing a human activity (commercial interaction). The limitations on generating product level data, transmitting the data and utilizing the data for decision making could be all performed in the human mind and/or with the help of paper and pencil. Other than reciting general computer elements nothing in the claim precludes the steps for being performed in the human mind and/or the help of paper and pencil. All the steps of “generate”, “transmit” and “utilizing information for decision making” recite functions directed to commercial interactions. The limitations on encoding data and user interfaces are well known general computer functions. This judicial exception is not integrated into a practical application. The computers are recited at a high-level of generality such that it amounts no more than mere instructions to apply the exception using generic computer components. Accordingly, this additional element does not integrate the abstract idea into a practical application because it does not impose any meaningful limits on practicing the abstract idea. Generic computer components performing generic computer functions alone, do not amount to significantly more that an abstract idea. Simply implementing the abstract idea on a generic computer environment is not a practical application of the abstract idea and does not take the claims out of the mental process and method of organizing a human activity grouping. Moreover, when viewed as a whole with such additional elements considered as an ordered combination, the claims modified by adding generic computer components would be nothing more than a purely conventional computerized implementation of applicant's customers analytics in the general field of business management and would not provide significantly more than the judicial exception itself. The claims are directed to an abstract idea.
The claims do not include additional elements that even in combination are sufficient to amount to significantly more than the judicial exception. As discussed above, with respect to integration of the abstract idea into a practical application, the additional element of using computers to perform the generating, transmitting, encoding and utilizing steps amounts to no more than mere instructions to apply the exception using generic computer components. Mere instructions to apply an exception using generic computer components cannot provide an inventive concept. There are no improvements to technology or any new technology involved. The claims are not patent eligible.
Regarding dependent claims 2-8, 10-16, 18-20, 22-25 and 27-28, these claims are directed to limitations which serve to limit the components, the processing steps and the information used. These claims neither introduce a new abstract idea nor additional limitations which are significantly more than an abstract idea. They provide descriptive details that offer helpful context, but have no impact on statutory subject matter eligibility.
Therefore the limitations on the invention, when viewed individually and in ordered combination are directed to in-eligible subject matter.
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.
Claim(s) 1-4, 15, 19-21 and 23-27 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Roemerman (US 2020/0364387 A1) in view of Putcha (US 2017/0213185 A1).
Claim 1
A digital product network system, comprising:
a set of consumer digital products each having a product processor, a product memory, and a product network interface, (see at least abstract-digital twins).
wherein at least one of the set of consumer digital products is at least passing through a supply chain or in operation; and (see at least figures 6-7, paragraphs 0091-0093-automovile supply chain system that deliver components to a factory).
a product network platform having a platform processor, a platform memory, and a network interface, wherein the product processor and the platform processor collectively include non-transitory instructions that program the digital product network system to:
generate product level data at the product processor of at least one consumer digital product of the set of consumer digital products, (see at least figure 7 and paragraph 0093-report operational, environmental or other information).
wherein the product level data includes at least one of: product level behavior data, product level usage data, or environmental data, (see at least paragraphs 0028 and 0093-report operational, environmental or other information).
transmit the product level data from the product network interface of the at least one consumer digital product, receive the product level data at the control tower network interface of the product network platform, encode the product level data as a product level data structure configured to convey parameters indicated by the product level data across the set of consumer digital products, and (see at least paragraphs 0006, 0028 and 0102-0105-a sensor subsystem obtains operational data for each object).
write the product level data structure to at least one of: the product memory or the platform memory. (see at least paragraphs 0006, 0028 and 0102-0105).
Roemerman discloses automotive supply chain system and obtaining operational/environmental data of products. Roemerman does not explicitly discloses the following limitation, however, Putcha does:
product level consumer behavior data (see at least paragraph 0056-observations of consumer behavior).
wherein the product network platform uses connectivity to coordinate at least one of: distributed manufacturing networks, adaptive edge intelligence capabilities, or microservices architecture for real-time distributed decision making across the set of consumer digital products (see at least paragraph 0056-determine a quantity per use based on tracking number of uses).
one or more digital twins including at least one of: a product type of digital twin, a user type of digital twin, or a process type of digital twin integrated with the product level data structure, and wherein each digital twin provides different virtual representations of at least one associated consumer digital product of the set of consumer digital products and utilizes the product level data for adaptive intelligent decision making. (see at least paragraph 0056-determine a quantity per use based on tracking number of uses).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention to apply the teachings in Putcha to Roemerman because collecting consumer’s behavior information may improve overall decision making and system’s efficiency (Putcha paragraph 0056). A person of ordinary skill in the art would have conceived the idea of creating such configuration. Moreover, the claimed subject matter would have been no more than a predictable combination of known techniques according to their respective purposes within routine skill and creativity.
Claim 2
Furthermore, Roemerman discloses the following limitations:
wherein the product network platform is at least one of a remotely located server or at least one control product of the set of consumer digital products. (see at least paragraph 0123).
Claim 3
Furthermore, Roemerman discloses the following limitations:
wherein the product processor and the platform processor are further programmed to communicate based on a shared communication system configured for facilitating communication of the product level data from the set of consumer digital products amongst themselves and with the product network platform. (see at least paragraphs 0091-0093).
Claim 4
Furthermore, Putcha discloses the following limitations:
wherein the set of consumer digital products and the product network platform have a set of microservices and a microservices architecture. (see at least paragraph 0056-determine a quantity per use based on tracking number of uses).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention to apply the teachings in Putcha to Roemerman because collecting consumer’s behavior information may improve overall decision making and system’s efficiency (Putcha paragraph 0056). A person of ordinary skill in the art would have conceived the idea of creating such configuration. Moreover, the claimed subject matter would have been no more than a predictable combination of known techniques according to their respective purposes within routine skill and creativity.
Claim 15
Furthermore, Roemerman discloses the following limitations:
wherein the digital product network system is further programmed for: identifying a condition of the set of consumer digital products; (see at least paragraph 0053).
encoding the condition as one of the parameters of the product level data structure; and (see at least paragraph 0053).
at least one of tracking or monitoring the condition across the set of consumer digital products. (see at least paragraph 0107).
Claim 19
Furthermore Putcha discloses the following limitations:
wherein the digital product network system is further programmed to have a robotic process automation (RPA) system and to adaptive generate RPA processes based on behavior analysis performed by the one or more digital twins and user interaction patterns derived from use of the at least one of the set of consumer digital products. (see at least paragraph 0056).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention to apply the teachings in Putcha to Roemerman because collecting consumer’s behavior information may improve overall system’s efficiency (Putcha paragraph 0056). A person of ordinary skill in the art would have conceived the idea of creating such configuration. Moreover, the claimed subject matter would have been no more than a predictable combination of known techniques according to their respective purposes within routine skill and creativity.
Claim 20
Furthermore, Roemerman discloses the following limitations:
wherein the product level data further includes at least one of: a behavior of a user, a timestamp, a length of time in use, an identification of interaction with another consumer digital product, condition data, image data, or sound data. (see at least paragraph 0053).
Claim 23
Furthermore, Putcha discloses the following limitations:
wherein at least one of the consumer digital product includes a quality system having a monitoring system and at least one of a digital bed product, a light switch product, or a refrigerator door detector (see at least paragraphs 0030 and 0057-0059).
and wherein the one or more digital twins provide virtual representations of behavior patterns which is used to gamify quality improvement interactions. (see at least paragraphs 0057-0059).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention to apply the teachings in Putcha to Roemerman because collecting consumer’s behavior information may improve overall system’s efficiency (Putcha paragraph 0056). A person of ordinary skill in the art would have conceived the idea of creating such configuration. Moreover, the claimed subject matter would have been no more than a predictable combination of known techniques according to their respective purposes within routine skill and creativity.
Claim 24
Furthermore, Putcha discloses the following limitations:
wherein the product level data includes at least one of: a sleep duration, a restlessness of sleep, an ambient light in proximity to the digital bed product, or a time the refrigerator door detector was last activated. (see at least paragraph 0030).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention to apply the teachings in Putcha to Roemerman because collecting consumer’s behavior information may improve overall system’s efficiency (Putcha paragraph 0056). A person of ordinary skill in the art would have conceived the idea of creating such configuration. Moreover, the claimed subject matter would have been no more than a predictable combination of known techniques according to their respective purposes within routine skill and creativity.
Claim 25
Furthermore, Roemerman discloses the following limitations:
further comprising: identifying a condition of the set of consumer digital products; (see at least paragraph 0053).
encoding the condition as one of the parameters of the product level data structure; and(see at least paragraph 0053).
at least one of tracking or monitoring the condition across the set of consumer digital products. (see at least paragraph 0107).
Claim(s) 5-8, 10-11, 14, 18, 22 and 28 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Roemerman (US 2020/0364387 A1) in view of Putcha (US 2017/0213185 A1), further in view of Thomsen (US PUB 2020/0265329 A1).
Claim 5
Furthermore, Roemerman discloses the following limitations:
further comprising a display associated with at least one of the product network platform or the set of consumer digital products, wherein the digital product network system is further programmed to: generate a graphical user interface with at least one user interface display; (see at least paragraphs 0126-0128).
generate the parameters of at least one digitally enabled product of the set of consumer digital products in the at least one user interface display; and (see at least paragraph 0121).
Roemerman does not explicitly discloses the following limitation, however Thomsen does:
generate a proximity display of proximal consumer digital products of the set of consumer digital products in the at least one user interface display (see at least paragraphs 0066-0069).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention to further modify the teachings on Roemerman/Putcha with the teachings in Thomsen in order to improve data collection and visualization (Thomsen paragraph 0071). A person of ordinary skill in the art would have conceived the idea of creating such configuration. Moreover, the claimed subject matter would have been no more than a predictable combination of known techniques according to their respective purposes within routine skill and creativity.
Claim 6
Furthermore Thomsen discloses the following limitations:
wherein the generating the proximity display includes generating the proximity display of proximal products that are geographically proximate. (see at least paragraph 0066).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention to further modify the teachings on Roemerman/Putcha with the teachings in Thomsen in order to improve data collection and visualization (Thomsen paragraph 0071). A person of ordinary skill in the art would have conceived the idea of creating such configuration. Moreover, the claimed subject matter would have been no more than a predictable combination of known techniques according to their respective purposes within routine skill and creativity.
Claim 7
Furthermore Thomsen discloses the following limitations:
wherein the generating the proximity display of the proximal products is further programmed to filter the proximal products by at least one of: product type, product capability, or product brand. (see at least paragraphs 0070-0072).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention to further modify the teachings on Roemerman/Putcha with the teachings in Thomsen in order to improve data collection and visualization (Thomsen paragraph 0071). A person of ordinary skill in the art would have conceived the idea of creating such configuration. Moreover, the claimed subject matter would have been no more than a predictable combination of known techniques according to their respective purposes within routine skill and creativity.
Claim 8
Furthermore Thomsen discloses the following limitations:
wherein the generating the proximity display includes generating the proximity display of proximal products that are proximate to at least one of the set of consumer digital products by at least one of: product type proximity, product capability proximity, or product brand proximity. (see at least paragraphs 0070-parent/child relationship, 0071-visualization system assigning groups such as production line, 0072 and 0079).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention to further modify the teachings on Roemerman/Putcha with the teachings in Thomsen in order to improve data collection and visualization (Thomsen paragraph 0071). A person of ordinary skill in the art would have conceived the idea of creating such configuration. Moreover, the claimed subject matter would have been no more than a predictable combination of known techniques according to their respective purposes within routine skill and creativity.
Claim 10
Furthermore Thomsen discloses the following limitations:
wherein the product network platform provides edge computation and edge intelligence configured for edge distributed decision making among the set of consumer digital products. (see at least abstract and paragraphs 0060, 0063, 0241and 0258).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention to further modify the teachings on Roemerman/Putcha with the teachings in Thomsen in order to improve data collection, analysis and visualization (Thomsen paragraph 0071). A person of ordinary skill in the art would have conceived the idea of creating such configuration. Moreover, the claimed subject matter would have been no more than a predictable combination of known techniques according to their respective purposes within routine skill and creativity.
Claim 11
Furthermore Thomsen discloses the following limitations:
wherein the product network platform provides edge computation and edge intelligence configured for edge network bandwidth management between or out of the set of consumer digital products. (see at least abstract and paragraphs 0060, 0063, 0241 and 0258).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention to further modify the teachings on Roemerman/Putcha with the teachings in Thomsen in order to improve data collection, analysis and visualization (Thomsen paragraph 0071). A person of ordinary skill in the art would have conceived the idea of creating such configuration. Moreover, the claimed subject matter would have been no more than a predictable combination of known techniques according to their respective purposes within routine skill and creativity.
Claim 14
Furthermore Thomsen discloses the following limitations:
wherein the digital product network system is further programmed to have a quality management system having a system for capturing product complaints at the set of consumer digital products (see at least figure 27 (calculated asset behavior data) and 0188-expected behaviors of the asset (movement speed, temperature, product misplacement, 0190-behavior of the modeled industrial asset as well as the products being manufactured by the industrial assets, 0231-using AI analysis to determine overall performance quality of the assets) .
and wherein the quality management system uses artificial intelligence to provide complaint resolution based on digital twin insights from the one or more digital twins (see at least figure 44b-apply artificial intelligence to modify based on results of the AI analysis).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention to further modify the teachings on Roemerman/Putcha with the teachings in Thomsen in order to improve data collection, analysis and visualization (Thomsen paragraph 0071). A person of ordinary skill in the art would have conceived the idea of creating such configuration. Moreover, the claimed subject matter would have been no more than a predictable combination of known techniques according to their respective purposes within routine skill and creativity.
Claim 18
Furthermore Thomsen discloses the following limitations:
wherein the digital product network system is further programmed to have a robotic process automation (RPA) system configured to gamify an interaction based on what consumer digital products are in the set of consumer digital products (see at least paragraphs 0003-rate data, 0066, 0113-hierarchical asset architecture and 0172).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention to further modify the teachings on Roemerman/Putcha with the teachings in Thomsen in order to improve data collection, analysis and visualization (Thomsen paragraph 0071). A person of ordinary skill in the art would have conceived the idea of creating such configuration. Moreover, the claimed subject matter would have been no more than a predictable combination of known techniques according to their respective purposes within routine skill and creativity.
Claim(s) 12-13 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Roemerman (US 2020/0364387 A1) in view of Putcha (US 2017/0213185 A1), further in view of Lee (US PUB 2022/0398572 A1).
Claim 12
Furthermore Lee discloses the following limitations:
wherein the digital product network system is further programmed to have a distributed ledger system (see at least paragraphs 0026-0027).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention to further modify the teachings on Roemerman/Putcha with the teachings in Lee in order to ensure high level of security while maintaining flexibility to handle transactions in connection to digital assets (Lee paragraph 0002). A person of ordinary skill in the art would have conceived the idea of creating such configuration. Moreover, the claimed subject matter would have been no more than a predictable combination of known techniques according to their respective purposes within routine skill and creativity.
Claim 13
Furthermore Lee discloses the following limitations:
wherein the distributed ledger system is a block chain ledger. (see at least paragraphs 0026-0027).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention to further modify the teachings on Roemerman/Putcha with the teachings in Lee in order to ensure high level of security while maintaining flexibility to handle transactions in connection to digital assets (Lee paragraph 0002). A person of ordinary skill in the art would have conceived the idea of creating such configuration. Moreover, the claimed subject matter would have been no more than a predictable combination of known techniques according to their respective purposes within routine skill and creativity.
Claim(s) 16 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Roemerman (US 2020/0364387 A1) in view of Putcha (US 2017/0213185 A1), further in view of Lee (US PUB 2022/0398572 A1), further in Thomsen (US PUB 2020/0265329 A1)
Claim 16
Furthermore Lee discloses the following limitations:
wherein the digital product network system is further programmed to have a smart contract system for creating of a smart contract based on the product level data structure (see at least paragraph 0011).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention to further modify the teachings on Roemerman/Putcha with the teachings in Lee in order to ensure high level of security while maintaining flexibility to handle transactions in connection to digital assets (Lee paragraph 0002). A person of ordinary skill in the art would have conceived the idea of creating such configuration. Moreover, the claimed subject matter would have been no more than a predictable combination of known techniques according to their respective purposes within routine skill and creativity.
The combination Roemerman/Putcha/Lee does not explicitly disclose the following limitations:
wherein the digital product network system is further programmed for configuring the smart contract based on data from the one or more digital twins and implementing co-location-sensitive configuration of terms such that terms and conditions depend on proximity of at least one of the set of consumer digital products, and wherein the proximity is determined using the data from the one or more digital twins.
However, Thomsen in at least paragraphs 0070-0072 discloses defining associations such as parent/child relationships and assigning groups comprising hierarchical elements. In view of these teachings, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention to apply the proximity configuration system disclosed in Thomsen to the smart contract agreement system disclosed in Lee in order to improve data collection, analysis and visualization (Thomsen paragraph 0071). A person of ordinary skill in the art would have conceived the idea of creating such configuration. Moreover, the claimed subject matter would have been no more than a predictable combination of known techniques according to their respective purposes within routine skill and creativity.
As per claims 21-22 and 26-28, claims 21-22 and 26-28 recite substantially similar limitations to claims 1 and 5 and are therefore rejected using the same art and rationale set forth above.
CONCLUSION
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to DENISSE Y ORTIZ ROMAN whose telephone number is (571)270-5506. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Thursday 9-7.
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, Fahd A Obeid can be reached at 571-270-3324. 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.
/DENISSE Y ORTIZ ROMAN/Examiner, Art Unit 3627
/FAHD A OBEID/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3627