DETAILED ACTION
The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA . The amendment filed 07/22/2026 has been received and considered. Claims 1-19 are presented for examination.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(d):
(d) REFERENCE IN DEPENDENT FORMS.—Subject to subsection (e), a claim in dependent form shall contain a reference to a claim previously set forth and then specify a further limitation of the subject matter claimed. A claim in dependent form shall be construed to incorporate by reference all the limitations of the claim to which it refers.
The following is a quotation of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, fourth paragraph:
Subject to the following paragraph [i.e., the fifth paragraph of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112], a claim in dependent form shall contain a reference to a claim previously set forth and then specify a further limitation of the subject matter claimed. A claim in dependent form shall be construed to incorporate by reference all the limitations of the claim to which it refers.
Claim 10 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(d) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, 4th paragraph, as being of improper dependent form for failing to further limit the subject matter of the claim upon which it depends, or for failing to include all the limitations of the claim upon which it depends. For claim 10, the identical feature is already claimed in the parent claim in line(s) 14. Applicant may cancel the claim(s), amend the claim(s) to place the claim(s) in proper dependent form, rewrite the claim(s) in independent form, or present a sufficient showing that the dependent claim(s) complies with the statutory requirements.
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 1-19 are rejected because the claimed invention is directed to a judicial exception without significantly more.
Independent claim 1, Step 1: a system (system = 2019 PEG Step 1 = yes)
Independent claim 1, Step 2A, Prong One: claim recites:
for each mobile element, determine, in response to an occurrence of a triggering condition, a position of the mobile element… wherein the triggering condition is expiration of a time interval, (mental concepts) and the time interval is calculated based on a probability that the mobile element has moved (mathematical concepts)
The limitations are substantially drawn to mental concepts: observation, evaluation, judgment, opinion and mathematical concepts: mathematical relationships, formulas or equations, and calculations; but for the recitation of generic computer components. Information and/or data also fall within the realm of abstract ideas because information and data are intangible. See Electric Power Group1 (Electric Power hereinafter): “Information… is an intangible”.
As to the limitations "for each mobile element, determine, in response to an occurrence of a triggering condition, a position of the mobile element… wherein the triggering condition is expiration of a time interval", as drafted and under a broadest reasonable interpretation, they "can be performed in the human mind or by a human using a pen and paper". Determinations are mental in nature. These activities can be characterized as entailing a user analyzing (observations, evaluations) and deciding/determining (judgments), i.e., processing information and/or data, that can be performed in the human mind or by a human using a pen and paper.
As to the limitations "the time interval is calculated based on a probability that the mobile element has moved", as drafted and under a broadest reasonable interpretation, they are mathematical concepts: calculations. See MPEP 2106.04(a) Abstract Ideas [R-07.2022]. These limitations are not elaborated but merely repeated in the Specification.
If a claim limitation, under its broadest reasonable interpretation, covers abstract ideas, then it falls within groupings of abstract ideas (2019 PEG Step 2A, Prong One: Abstract Idea Grouping? = Yes).
Independent claim 1, Step 2A, Prong two: The claim recites the additional elements: a digital twin datastore and one or more processors; wherein the digital twin datastore stores a transportation-system digital twin including real-world-element digital twins embedded therein; they are recited as performing generic computer functions routinely used in computer applications.
As to the limitations “for representing attributes in a transportation system digital twin", they are no more than intended use.
As to the limitations “wherein the transportation system digital twin corresponds to a transportation system; wherein each real-world-element digital twin provides a digital twin of a respective real-world element that is disposed within the transportation system; wherein the real-world-element digital twins include mobile-element digital twins; wherein each mobile-element digital twin provides a digital twin of a respective mobile element within the real-world elements… and update, in response to determining the position of the mobile element, the mobile-element digital twin corresponding to the mobile element to reflect the position of the mobile element", they represent no more than just “apply it” limitations, because they invoke computers merely as a tool to perform an existing process.
This judicial exception is not integrated into a practical application (2019 PEG Step 2A, Prong Two: Additional elements that integrate the Judicial exception/Abstract idea into a practical application? = NO).
Independent claim 1, Step 2B: As discussed with respect to Step 2A, claim 1 recites the additional elements: a digital twin datastore and one or more processors; wherein the digital twin datastore stores a transportation-system digital twin including real-world-element digital twins embedded therein, they are interpreted as drawn to a generic computer. Generic computer components recited as performing generic computer functions that are well-understood, routine and conventional activities amount to no more than implementing the abstract idea with a computerized system. The use of a computer to implement the abstract idea of a mathematical or mental algorithm has not been held by the courts to be enough to qualify as “significantly more”. The implementation on a computing system is described in the specification (underline emphasis added):
"[753]… A processor may be any kind of computational or processing device capable of executing program instructions, codes, binary instructions and the like".
As discussed with respect to Step 2A, Prong two, the limitations “for representing attributes in a transportation system digital twin" are no more than intended use, because no actual representation of attributes is ever performed in the body of the claim.
As discussed with respect to Step 2A, Prong two, limitations invoking computers merely as a tool to perform an existing process are just “apply it” limitations. See MPEP 2106.05(f)(2).
Taken alone the individual additional elements do not amount to significantly more than the above-identified judicial exception (the abstract idea). Looking at the additional elements as an ordered combination adds nothing that is not already present when looking at the additional elements taken individually. There is no indication that their combination improves the functioning of a computer itself or improves any other technology (underline emphasis added). Therefore, the claim does not amount to significantly more than the abstract idea itself (2019 PEG Step 2B: NO).
Dependent claims, Prong One: The claim limitations further the mental and mathematical concepts of their independent claim. (See Independent claim 1, Step 2A, Prong One above).
As to the limitations "4… wherein the triggering condition is an expiration of a dynamically determined time interval", "5… wherein the dynamically determined time interval is increased in response to determining a single mobile element within the transportation system", "6… wherein the dynamically determined time interval is increased in response to determining an occurrence of a predetermined period of reduced environmental activity", "7… wherein the dynamically determined time interval is decreased in response to determining abnormal activity within the transportation system", "8… wherein the dynamically determined time interval is a first time interval, and the dynamically determined time interval is decreased to a second time interval in response to determining movement of the mobile element", "9… wherein the dynamically determined time interval is increased from the second time interval to the first time interval in response to determining nonmovement of the mobile element for at least a third time interval", "10… wherein the triggering condition is expiration of a time interval", "12… wherein the triggering condition is proximity of the mobile element to another of the mobile elements", "13… wherein the triggering condition is based on density of movable elements within the transportation system", as drafted and under a broadest reasonable interpretation, they "can be performed in the human mind or by a human using a pen and paper". These activities can be characterized as entailing a user analyzing (observations, evaluations) and deciding/determining (judgments), i.e., processing information and/or data, that can be performed in the human mind or by a human using a pen and paper.
As to the limitations "11… wherein the time interval is calculated based on a probability that the mobile element has moved", "15… calculating, using the plurality of sensors within the transportation system, an optimized path for the mobile element", and "17… wherein the optimized path minimizes interactions between mobile elements and humans within the transportation system", they are substantially drawn to mathematical concepts: mathematical relationships, formulas or equations, and calculations.
If a claim limitation, under its broadest reasonable interpretation, covers abstract ideas, then it falls within groupings of abstract ideas (2019 PEG Step 2A, Prong One: Abstract Idea Grouping? = Yes).
Dependent claims, Step 2A, Prong two: The claims recite “14… wherein the path information is obtained from a navigation module of the mobile element”, "15… obtain path information including detecting… movement of the mobile element, obtaining a destination for the mobile element", and "16… wherein the optimized path includes using path information for other mobile elements within the real-world elements", these limitations describe the concept of “mere data gathering”, which corresponds to the concepts identified as abstract ideas by the courts. Data gathering, including when limited to particular content does not change its character as information, is also within the realm of abstract ideas. Data gathering has not been held by the courts to be enough to qualify as “significantly more”. See Electric Power.
As to the limitations “15… using a plurality of sensors within the transportation system", they represent no more than just “apply it” limitations, because they invoke other machinery merely as a tool to perform an existing process.
As to the limitations "15… instructing the mobile element to navigate the optimized path", they are insignificant extra-solution activity – data outputting.
As to the limitations "11… refine the time interval based on an analysis of determined positions of the mobile element, including reducing a frequency of position determination for the mobile element when a plurality of consecutive determined positions are identical or within a predetermined margin of error" and "19… perform traffic modeling, and wherein the traffic modeling includes use of a particle traffic model, a trigger-response mobile-element-following traffic model, a macroscopic traffic model, a microscopic traffic model, a submicroscopic traffic model, a mesoscopic traffic model, or a combination thereof", these limitations represent no more than just “apply it” limitations, because they recite only the idea of a solution or outcome, i.e. these claim limitations fail to recite details of how a solution to a problem is accomplished.
This judicial exception is not integrated into a practical application of the exception (2019 PEG Step 2A, Prong Two: Additional elements that integrate the Judicial exception/Abstract idea into a practical application? = NO).
Dependent claims, Step 2B: As discussed with respect to Step 2A, claims recite data gathering, these limitations are recited at a high level of generality; and therefore, remain insignificant extra-solution activity even upon reconsideration.
As discussed with respect to Step 2A, Prong two, limitations invoking computers or other machinery merely as a tool to perform an existing process are just “apply it” limitations. See MPEP 2106.05(f)(2).
As discussed with respect to Step 2A, Prong two, the limitations identified as data outputting are insignificant extra-solution activity. See MPEP 2106.05(g)(3).
As discussed with respect to Step 2A, Prong two, limitations reciting only the idea of a solution or outcome are just “apply it” limitations, because these claim limitations fail to recite details of how a solution to a problem is accomplished. See MPEP 2106.05(f)(1). (See Independent claim 1, Step 2B above). Examiner notes that "wherein the traffic modeling includes use of" is not elaborated. As to the limitations "11… refine the time interval based on an analysis of determined positions of the mobile element, including reducing a frequency of position determination for the mobile element when a plurality of consecutive determined positions are identical or within a predetermined margin of error", they are so broad that little is known about how the claimed refining the time interval is performed. The specification merely reads (underline emphasis added):
'[0650]… digital twin system 200 may analyze data received from the digital twin I/O system 204 to refine, remove, or add conditions. For example, the digital twin system 200 may optimize data collection times for movable elements that are updated more frequently than needed (e.g., multiple consecutive received positions being identical or within a predetermined margin of error)'
The claims do not amount to significantly more than the abstract idea itself (2019 PEG Step 2B: NO).
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 set forth in Graham v. John Deere Co., 383 U.S. 1, 148 USPQ 459 (1966), that are applied for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103(a) 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.
Examiner would like to point out that any reference to specific figures, columns and lines should not be considered limiting in any way, the entire reference is considered to provide disclosure relating to the claimed invention.
Claims 1, 3-10, and 12-19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103(a) as being unpatentable over Hartmut, (Hartmut hereinafter), International Pub. No. WO2018203886, taken in view of T. Ambra and C. Macharis, (Ambra hereinafter), “Agent-Based Digital Twins (ABM-Dt) In Synchromodal Transport and Logistics: the Fusion of Virtual and Pysical Spaces”.
As to claim 1, Hartmut discloses a system… comprising: a digital twin datastore and one or more processors (see "[0030]… digital twin is created and stored locally on the train car's controller"); wherein the digital twin datastore stores a transportation-system digital twin including real-world-element digital twins embedded therein; wherein the transportation system digital twin corresponds to a transportation system (see "[0023]… section of FIG. 1, labeled "Digital Twins" shows how the train system can be modeled… Digital twins provide a layer of abstraction over a digital twin that allows interactions with real world devices"); wherein each real-world-element digital twin provides a digital twin of a respective real-world element that is disposed within the transportation system (see "[0026]… use of digital twins is dynamic in nature and digital twins may be created and destroyed as a particular process executes and things change in the physical world… relationships are maintained in a registry that specifies the types, properties, and interrelationships of the digital twins. This registry may be a database or other collection of data"); wherein the real-world-element digital twins include mobile-element digital twins; wherein each mobile-element digital twin provides a digital twin of a respective mobile element within the real-world elements (see "[0023]… train is represented as a digital twin that is an aggregate of car digital twins. This allows the complexity of basic function requests to be greatly reduced through abstraction"); and wherein the one or more processors are configured to, for each mobile element, determine, in response to an occurrence of a triggering condition, a position of the mobile element, and update, in response to determining the position of the mobile element, the mobile-element digital twin corresponding to the mobile element to reflect the position of the mobile element (see '[0025]… HMI code for addressing all robots can be simplified to a single function call… a function call "GetAllRobots()" that returns a list of the digital twins for each robot in the physical plant. Then, the ShowPositionQ function call iterates over each robot digital twin in the list and issues a ShowPositionQ request. Note that this abstraction allows new robots to be added to the plant without additional recording of the HM1. For example, the "Physical Assets" section shows a new robot (labeled "3") added to the plant. In this case, the underlying registry of the plant (discussed below) will be updated accordingly such that when the "GetAllRobotsO" is next executed, it will return the new robot in the list').
Hartmut does not disclose, but Ambra discloses for representing attributes in a transportation system digital twin (see “Algorithm 1… output: aid,ac,as,ad,aeta ϵ P ” in page 166; “Figure 4: Illustration of wherein the triggering condition is expiration of a time interval (see "dynamic features have been tested in SYMBIT’s digital GIS environment… where triggering events and firing rules induce reconfiguration and re-routing protocols of assets to assess modal shift and resilience to disruptions" in page 166, next to last paragraph), and the time interval is calculated (see "time interval" as "aeta<––peta" in page 166, 1st paragraph (underline emphasis added):
PNG
media_image1.png
550
770
media_image1.png
Greyscale
–– Examiner notes that "peta is the estimated time of arrival" in page 164, last paragraph to page 165, 1st paragraph) based on a probability (see "based on a probability" as "evaluate most probable implications", "DT relates to a living dynamic simulation environment that mimics the real physical system by continuously updating its virtual environment in order to provide support to certain tasks and evaluate most probable implications. In fact, the digital virtual environment exists in parallel with the real system and updates itself through sensors based on specific intervals and/or events. The DTs are digital instances (A) of the physical objects represented by agents. The DTs exist in a Digital Twin Environment (DTE) depicted by the environment of SYMBIT. The Physical Twins (P) represent assets such as barges, truck, trains, vans… that may send and intercept messages via sensors and receivers. These assets will be then converted into agents within the SYMBIT environment. As far as physical twins are concerned, p ϵ P posses various parameters (pid; pc; ps; pd; peta…) where pid is the identification number of the physical asset, pc are the asset’s coordinates (latitude/longitude), ps its current speed, pd its destination and peta is the estimated time of arrival… parameters determine the state of each p which means an update function renews the parameter values of p. The update function δ (eq 1) takes the last known state St-1 of p and updates its state, hence all its parameters, by an input from a real-time data feed" in page 164, last paragraph to page 165, 1st paragraph) that the mobile element has moved (see "GIS provides the real-time simulator with detailed and realistic routing for moving agents and geo-locations of stationary agents. Agents are used for depicting assets and their movement as well as how they are supposed to operate. The DEM element is process-centric and forms the main fibre of time via discrete time steps which are small enough to mimic real-time dynamics" in page 163, 1st paragraph).
Hartmut and Ambra are analogous art because they are related to digital twinning.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in this art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to use Ambra with Hartmut, because Ambra discloses that his "paper reviews the digital twin concept and its current applications in order to understand what it is, but also what it can become. Since simulation technology forms the backbone of the Digital Twin, a Digital Twin Environment (DTE) is needed where digital twins (digital instances) exist and test their performances. As the digital instances need to posses a certain level of self-awareness and decentralized routing and solution discovery, agents from the agent-based modelling (ABM) and multi-agent based systems (MAS) are considered for such purpose. The DTE herein is represented as a digital map by using Geographic Information System (GIS) with a great level of detail that will facilitate accurate navigation, route finding, and spatial awareness of agents" (see page 160, 1st paragraph), and as a result, Ambra reports that "simulation-based solutions are useful for failure prediction, developing systems, new designs and optimization of various system processes. The digital twin concept presents an imperative step to fuse virtual models with physical environments and their processes. More data availability and accessibility can improve synchromodal models and planning tools in order to provide more flexibility, higher speed, reliability and transparent overview of ongoing freight transport processes; these are the aspects that hinder most shippers from using intermodal services" (see page 168, 1st paragraph).
As to claim 3, Hartmut discloses wherein the mobile elements are vehicles within the transportation system (see "[0023]… section of FIG. 1, labeled "Digital Twins" shows how the train system can be modeled").
As to claim 4, Ambra discloses wherein the triggering condition is an expiration of a dynamically (see "In our previous work, that concerns the virtual dimension, dynamic features have been tested in SYMBIT’s digital GIS environment already, where triggering events and firing rules induce reconfiguration and re-routing protocols of assets to assess modal shift and resilience to disruptions (Ambra et al. 2019a)" in page 166, 1st paragraph; "dynamic features have been tested in SYMBIT’s digital GIS environment… where triggering events and firing rules induce reconfiguration and re-routing protocols of assets to assess modal shift and resilience to disruptions" in page 166, next to last paragraph; "DT relates to a living dynamic simulation environment that mimics the real physical system by continuously updating its virtual environment in order to provide support to certain tasks and evaluate most probable implications. In fact, the digital virtual environment exists in parallel with the real system and updates itself through sensors based on specific intervals and/or events" in page 164, last paragraph; "GIS provides the real-time simulator with detailed and realistic routing for moving agents and geo-locations of stationary agents. Agents are used for depicting assets and their movement as well as how they are supposed to operate. The DEM element is process-centric and forms the main fibre of time via discrete time steps which are small enough to mimic real-time dynamics" in page 163, 1st paragraph) determined time interval (see "digital virtual environment exists in parallel with the real system and updates itself through sensors based on specific intervals and/or events" in page 164, last paragraph).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in this art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to use Ambra with Hartmut, (see supra).
About Examiner's interpretation of "dynamically determined time interval", the Examiner notes that the Application description merely repeats the term. Merely repeating a term does not rise to a level of a definition of a term. In the absence of an elaboration of any special meanings for such term in the claims and Application description, there are no distinguishing features claimed.
As to claim 5, Ambra discloses wherein the dynamically (see "In our previous work, that concerns the virtual dimension, dynamic features have been tested in SYMBIT’s digital GIS environment already, where triggering events and firing rules induce reconfiguration and re-routing protocols of assets to assess modal shift and resilience to disruptions (Ambra et al. 2019a)" in page 166, 1st paragraph; "dynamic features have been tested in SYMBIT’s digital GIS environment… where triggering events and firing rules induce reconfiguration and re-routing protocols of assets to assess modal shift and resilience to disruptions" in page 166, next to last paragraph; "DT relates to a living dynamic simulation environment that mimics the real physical system by continuously updating its virtual environment in order to provide support to certain tasks and evaluate most probable implications. In fact, the digital virtual environment exists in parallel with the real system and updates itself through sensors based on specific intervals and/or events" in page 164, last paragraph; "GIS provides the real-time simulator with detailed and realistic routing for moving agents and geo-locations of stationary agents. Agents are used for depicting assets and their movement as well as how they are supposed to operate. The DEM element is process-centric and forms the main fibre of time via discrete time steps which are small enough to mimic real-time dynamics" in page 163, 1st paragraph) determined time interval is increased in response to determining a single mobile element within the transportation system (see "Algorithm 1… 3 Establish refresh event every minute to update parameter values" in page 166).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in this art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to use Ambra with Hartmut, (see supra).
As to claim 6, Ambra discloses wherein the dynamically (see "In our previous work, that concerns the virtual dimension, dynamic features have been tested in SYMBIT’s digital GIS environment already, where triggering events and firing rules induce reconfiguration and re-routing protocols of assets to assess modal shift and resilience to disruptions (Ambra et al. 2019a)" in page 166, 1st paragraph; "dynamic features have been tested in SYMBIT’s digital GIS environment… where triggering events and firing rules induce reconfiguration and re-routing protocols of assets to assess modal shift and resilience to disruptions" in page 166, next to last paragraph; "DT relates to a living dynamic simulation environment that mimics the real physical system by continuously updating its virtual environment in order to provide support to certain tasks and evaluate most probable implications. In fact, the digital virtual environment exists in parallel with the real system and updates itself through sensors based on specific intervals and/or events" in page 164, last paragraph; "GIS provides the real-time simulator with detailed and realistic routing for moving agents and geo-locations of stationary agents. Agents are used for depicting assets and their movement as well as how they are supposed to operate. The DEM element is process-centric and forms the main fibre of time via discrete time steps which are small enough to mimic real-time dynamics" in page 163, 1st paragraph) determined time interval is increased in response to determining an occurrence of a predetermined period of reduced environmental activity (see "dynamic features have been tested in SYMBIT’s digital GIS environment… where triggering events and firing rules induce reconfiguration and re-routing protocols of assets to assess modal shift and resilience to disruptions" in page 166, next to last paragraph).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in this art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to use Ambra with Hartmut, (see supra).
As to claim 7, Ambra discloses wherein the dynamically (see "In our previous work, that concerns the virtual dimension, dynamic features have been tested in SYMBIT’s digital GIS environment already, where triggering events and firing rules induce reconfiguration and re-routing protocols of assets to assess modal shift and resilience to disruptions (Ambra et al. 2019a)" in page 166, 1st paragraph; "dynamic features have been tested in SYMBIT’s digital GIS environment… where triggering events and firing rules induce reconfiguration and re-routing protocols of assets to assess modal shift and resilience to disruptions" in page 166, next to last paragraph; "DT relates to a living dynamic simulation environment that mimics the real physical system by continuously updating its virtual environment in order to provide support to certain tasks and evaluate most probable implications. In fact, the digital virtual environment exists in parallel with the real system and updates itself through sensors based on specific intervals and/or events" in page 164, last paragraph; "GIS provides the real-time simulator with detailed and realistic routing for moving agents and geo-locations of stationary agents. Agents are used for depicting assets and their movement as well as how they are supposed to operate. The DEM element is process-centric and forms the main fibre of time via discrete time steps which are small enough to mimic real-time dynamics" in page 163, 1st paragraph) determined time interval is decreased in response to determining abnormal activity within the transportation system (see "stochastic insertion of extra service points, their impact on LSPs’ lead-times and load-factors, and dynamically changing speed parameters by means of geo-fences, have been tested" in page 166, next to last paragraph).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in this art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to use Ambra with Hartmut, (see supra).
As to claim 8, Ambra discloses wherein the dynamically (see "In our previous work, that concerns the virtual dimension, dynamic features have been tested in SYMBIT’s digital GIS environment already, where triggering events and firing rules induce reconfiguration and re-routing protocols of assets to assess modal shift and resilience to disruptions (Ambra et al. 2019a)" in page 166, 1st paragraph; "dynamic features have been tested in SYMBIT’s digital GIS environment… where triggering events and firing rules induce reconfiguration and re-routing protocols of assets to assess modal shift and resilience to disruptions" in page 166, next to last paragraph; "DT relates to a living dynamic simulation environment that mimics the real physical system by continuously updating its virtual environment in order to provide support to certain tasks and evaluate most probable implications. In fact, the digital virtual environment exists in parallel with the real system and updates itself through sensors based on specific intervals and/or events" in page 164, last paragraph; "GIS provides the real-time simulator with detailed and realistic routing for moving agents and geo-locations of stationary agents. Agents are used for depicting assets and their movement as well as how they are supposed to operate. The DEM element is process-centric and forms the main fibre of time via discrete time steps which are small enough to mimic real-time dynamics" in page 163, 1st paragraph) determined time interval is a first time interval, and the dynamically determined time interval is decreased to a second time interval in response to determining movement of the mobile element (see "GIS provides the real-time simulator with detailed and realistic routing for moving agents and geo-locations of stationary agents. Agents are used for depicting assets and their movement as well as how they are supposed to operate. The DEM element is process-centric and forms the main fibre of time via discrete time steps which are small enough to mimic real-time dynamics" in page 163, 1st paragraph).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in this art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to use Ambra with Hartmut, (see supra).
As to claim 9, Ambra discloses wherein the dynamically (see "In our previous work, that concerns the virtual dimension, dynamic features have been tested in SYMBIT’s digital GIS environment already, where triggering events and firing rules induce reconfiguration and re-routing protocols of assets to assess modal shift and resilience to disruptions (Ambra et al. 2019a)" in page 166, 1st paragraph; "dynamic features have been tested in SYMBIT’s digital GIS environment… where triggering events and firing rules induce reconfiguration and re-routing protocols of assets to assess modal shift and resilience to disruptions" in page 166, next to last paragraph; "DT relates to a living dynamic simulation environment that mimics the real physical system by continuously updating its virtual environment in order to provide support to certain tasks and evaluate most probable implications. In fact, the digital virtual environment exists in parallel with the real system and updates itself through sensors based on specific intervals and/or events" in page 164, last paragraph; "GIS provides the real-time simulator with detailed and realistic routing for moving agents and geo-locations of stationary agents. Agents are used for depicting assets and their movement as well as how they are supposed to operate. The DEM element is process-centric and forms the main fibre of time via discrete time steps which are small enough to mimic real-time dynamics" in page 163, 1st paragraph) determined time interval is increased from the second time interval to the first time interval in response to determining nonmovement of the mobile element for at least a third time interval (see "GIS provides the real-time simulator with detailed and realistic routing for moving agents and geo-locations of stationary agents. Agents are used for depicting assets and their movement as well as how they are supposed to operate. The DEM element is process-centric and forms the main fibre of time via discrete time steps which are small enough to mimic real-time dynamics" in page 163, 1st paragraph).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in this art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to use Ambra with Hartmut, (see supra).
As to claim 10, Ambra discloses wherein the triggering condition is expiration of a time interval (see "dynamic features have been tested in SYMBIT’s digital GIS environment… where triggering events and firing rules induce reconfiguration and re-routing protocols of assets to assess modal shift and resilience to disruptions" in page 166, next to last paragraph).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in this art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to use Ambra with Hartmut, (see supra).
As to claim 12, Hartmut discloses wherein the triggering condition is proximity of the mobile element to another of the mobile elements (see "(1) Sensor detects new car… (2) Generate digital twin based on ontology data" in Fig. 3A).
As to claim 13, Ambra discloses wherein the triggering condition is based on density of movable elements within the transportation system (see "density of movable elements" as "Physical Twins (P) represent assets such as barges, truck, trains, van… pc are the asset’s coordinates (latitude/longitude), ps its current speed, pd its destination and peta is the estimated time of arrival", "DT relates to a living dynamic simulation environment that mimics the real physical system by continuously updating its virtual environment in order to provide support to certain tasks and evaluate most probable implications. In fact, the digital virtual environment exists in parallel with the real system and updates itself through sensors based on specific intervals and/or events. The DTs are digital instances (A) of the physical objects represented by agents. The DTs exist in a Digital Twin Environment (DTE) depicted by the environment of SYMBIT. The Physical Twins (P) represent assets such as barges, truck, trains, vans… that may send and intercept messages via sensors and receivers. These assets will be then converted into agents within the SYMBIT environment. As far as physical twins are concerned, p ϵ P posses various parameters (pid; pc; ps; pd; peta…) where pid is the identification number of the physical asset, pc are the asset’s coordinates (latitude/longitude), ps its current speed, pd its destination and peta is the estimated time of arrival… parameters determine the state of each p which means an update function renews the parameter values of p. The update function δ (eq 1) takes the last known state St-1 of p and updates its state, hence all its parameters, by an input from a real-time data feed" in page 164, last paragraph to page 165, 1st paragraph).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in this art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to use Ambra with Hartmut, (see supra).
As to claim 14, Ambra discloses wherein the path information is obtained from a navigation module of the mobile element (see "The DTs are digital instances (A) of the physical objects represented by agents. The DTs exist in a Digital Twin Environment (DTE) depicted by the environment of SYMBIT. The Physical Twins (P) represent assets such as barges, truck, trains, vans… that may send and intercept messages via sensors and receivers" in page 164, last paragraph).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in this art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to use Ambra with Hartmut, (see supra).
As to claim 15, Ambra discloses wherein the one or more processors are further configured to obtain path information including detecting, using a plurality of sensors within the transportation system, movement of the mobile element, obtaining a destination for the mobile element, calculating, using the plurality of sensors within the transportation system, an optimized path for the mobile element, and instructing the mobile element to navigate the optimized path (see "The DTs are digital instances (A) of the physical objects represented by agents. The DTs exist in a Digital Twin Environment (DTE) depicted by the environment of SYMBIT. The Physical Twins (P) represent assets such as barges, truck, trains, vans… that may send and intercept messages via sensors and receivers. These assets will be then converted into agents within the SYMBIT environment. As far as physical twins are concerned, p ϵ P posses various parameters (pid; pc; ps; pd; peta…) where pid is the identification number of the physical asset, pc are the asset’s coordinates (latitude/longitude), ps its current speed, pd its destination and peta is the estimated time of arrival… parameters determine the state of each p which means an update function renews the parameter values of p. The update function δ (eq 1) takes the last known state St-1 of p and updates its state, hence all its parameters, by an input from a real-time data feed" in page 164, last paragraph to page 165, 1st paragraph).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in this art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to use Ambra with Hartmut, (see supra).
As to claim 16, Ambra discloses wherein the optimized path includes using path information for other mobile elements within the real-world elements (see "The DTs are digital instances (A) of the physical objects represented by agents. The DTs exist in a Digital Twin Environment (DTE) depicted by the environment of SYMBIT. The Physical Twins (P) represent assets such as barges, truck, trains, vans… that may send and intercept messages via sensors and receivers. These assets will be then converted into agents within the SYMBIT environment. As far as physical twins are concerned, p ϵ P posses various parameters (pid; pc; ps; pd; peta…) where pid is the identification number of the physical asset, pc are the asset’s coordinates (latitude/longitude), ps its current speed, pd its destination and peta is the estimated time of arrival… parameters determine the state of each p which means an update function renews the parameter values of p. The update function δ (eq 1) takes the last known state St-1 of p and updates its state, hence all its parameters, by an input from a real-time data feed" in page 164, last paragraph to page 165, 1st paragraph).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in this art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to use Ambra with Hartmut, (see supra).
As to claim 17, Ambra discloses wherein the optimized path minimizes interactions between mobile elements and humans within the transportation system (see "digital twins (with data and information exchange flows both ways between the physical and virtual system). A DT is thus not a mere detached virtual representation of a physical twin, but rather a living organisms that interacts with its physical twin via sensors and receivers connected through the Internet of things (IoT) or ICT" in page 161, next to last paragraph; "DT relates to a living dynamic simulation environment that mimics the real physical system by continuously updating its virtual environment in order to provide support to certain tasks and evaluate most probable implications. In fact, the digital virtual environment exists in parallel with the real system and updates itself through sensors based on specific intervals and/or events" in page 164, last paragraph).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in this art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to use Ambra with Hartmut, (see supra).
As to claim 18, Hartmut discloses wherein the mobile elements include autonomous vehicles and non-autonomous vehicles (see "[0025] The general concept shown in FIG. 1 can be extended to other applications. For example, FIG. 2 shows a conceptual view 200 of an alternative system where the physical assets are mobile robots"), and Ambra discloses the optimized path reduces interactions of the autonomous vehicles with the non-autonomous vehicles (see "Synchromodality/Synchromodal transport is to support real-time optimal integration of different transport modes and infrastructure… Synchromodal transport/Synchromodality presents an extension of intermodal transport by including real-time re-routing of loading units over the network to cope with disturbances and/or customer requirements" in page 159, 1st & 2nd paragraphs).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in this art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to use Ambra with Hartmut, (see supra).
As to claim 19, Ambra discloses perform traffic modeling, and wherein the traffic modeling includes use of (see "Synchromodality/Synchromodal transport is to support real-time optimal integration of different transport modes and infrastructure… Synchromodal transport/Synchromodality presents an extension of intermodal transport by including real-time re-routing of loading units over the network to cope with disturbances and/or customer requirements" in page 159, 1st & 2nd paragraphs), .
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in this art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to use Ambra with Hartmut, (see supra).
Claim 2 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103(a) as being unpatentable over Hartmut taken in view of Ambra as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Youngchoon Park, (Park hereinafter), U.S. Patent 12400035.
As to claim 2, Hartmut and Ambra do not disclose, but Park discloses wherein the mobile elements are workers within the transportation system (see 'create a virtual representation (e.g., "digital twins" or "shadow records") of each object entity (e.g., person, room, building subsystem, device, and the like) in the building within Cloud building management platform' in col. 36, line 67 to col. 37, line 3).
Hartmut, Ambra, and Park are analogous art because they are related to digital twinning.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in this art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to use Park with Hartmut and Ambra, because Park discloses "an enterprise integration layer 510, an automated measurement and validation (AM&V) layer 512, a demand response (DR) layer 514, a fault detection and diagnostics (FDD) layer 516, an integrated control layer 518, and a building subsystem integration later 520. Layers 510-520 can be configured to receive inputs from building subsystems 528 and other data sources, determine improved and/or optimal control actions for building subsystems 528 based on the inputs, generate control signals based on the improved and/or optimal control actions, and provide the generated control signals to building subsystems 528" (see col. 21, lines 40-50), and as a result, Park reports that "Integrated control layer 518 can be configured to enhance the effectiveness of demand response layer 514 by enabling building subsystems 528 and their respective control loops to be controlled in coordination with demand response layer 514. This configuration may advantageously reduce disruptive demand response behavior relative to conventional systems" (see col. 23, lines 30-37).
Claim 11 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103(a) as being unpatentable over Hartmut taken in view of Ambra as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Eric Haney, (Haney hereinafter), U.S. Pre–Grant publication 20220018664.
As to claim 11, Ambra discloses wherein the time interval is calculated (see "time interval" as "aeta<––peta" in page 166, 1st paragraph (underline emphasis added):
PNG
media_image1.png
550
770
media_image1.png
Greyscale
–– Examiner notes that "peta is the estimated time of arrival" in page 164, last paragraph to page 165, 1st paragraph) based on a probability (see "based on a probability" as "evaluate most probable implications", "DT relates to a living dynamic simulation environment that mimics the real physical system by continuously updating its virtual environment in order to provide support to certain tasks and evaluate most probable implications. In fact, the digital virtual environment exists in parallel with the real system and updates itself through sensors based on specific intervals and/or events. The DTs are digital instances (A) of the physical objects represented by agents. The DTs exist in a Digital Twin Environment (DTE) depicted by the environment of SYMBIT. The Physical Twins (P) represent assets such as barges, truck, trains, vans… that may send and intercept messages via sensors and receivers. These assets will be then converted into agents within the SYMBIT environment. As far as physical twins are concerned, p ϵ P posses various parameters (pid; pc; ps; pd; peta…) where pid is the identification number of the physical asset, pc are the asset’s coordinates (latitude/longitude), ps its current speed, pd its destination and peta is the estimated time of arrival… parameters determine the state of each p which means an update function renews the parameter values of p. The update function δ (eq 1) takes the last known state St-1 of p and updates its state, hence all its parameters, by an input from a real-time data feed" in page 164, last paragraph to page 165, 1st paragraph) that the mobile element has moved (see "GIS provides the real-time simulator with detailed and realistic routing for moving agents and geo-locations of stationary agents. Agents are used for depicting assets and their movement as well as how they are supposed to operate. The DEM element is process-centric and forms the main fibre of time via discrete time steps which are small enough to mimic real-time dynamics" in page 163, 1st paragraph).
Hartmut and Ambra do not disclose, but Haney discloses wherein the one or more processors are further configured to refine the time interval based on an analysis of determined positions of the mobile element, including reducing a frequency of position determination for the mobile element when a plurality of consecutive determined positions are identical (see '[0076]… Wayfinding Route can be recalculated based on several different triggering events: [0077] If no input or obstacle data has changed, the Wayfinding Route will be constant and can therefore be maintained without recalculating. The directional vector that is suggested by the route can then be fed in whole or in part to the overall vehicle control system in accordance with FIG. 9. [0078] If input or obstacle data has changed (or has been changed beyond a provided or calculated threshold), the Wayfinding Route may divert from the previous path and will need to be recalculated. Obstacle/Goal data from different categorical levels and/or different communication channels may be received and trigger recalculation in a non-synchronous fashion. This refreshing function may happen frequently and can therefore be limited if electrical or computational or other resources are limited. [0079] The Wayfinding Route can be re-calculated on a standard time interval to ensure any changes in the environment/vehicle dynamics are captured. [0080] If the estimated Location, or “Planned Location”, dictated by a previously-calculated Wayfinding Route is significantly different than the Current Vehicle Location, or “Actual Location”, the Wayfinding Route is preferably recalculated. This scenario is applicable, for example, when a vehicle has been diverted due to some external force or due to some other control system depicted in FIG. 9 which has caused a vehicle to change its path. The Wayfinding Route should be recalculated in this case because the route going through the new location may be different than the previous path due to changes in position relative to either obstacles or goals. [0081] At any point in time, if an obstacle or goal is removed, added, edited or if the status of the obstacle, goal, or vehicle changes in any way such that its imparted flow path on the vehicle is changed, the overall process may be reinitialized, in part or in whole, to calculate a new Wayfinding Route').
Hartmut, Ambra, and Haney are analogous art because they are related to digital twinning.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in this art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to use Haney with Hartmut and Ambra, because Haney discloses '[0056]… wayfinding functionality is part of an outer control loop with dictates broad motion of a vehicle… other systems include… [0057] Sense & Detect manages detection of objects/obstacles through visual, radio frequency (RF), or other means. Depending on the vehicle, mission, and object identification, Sense & Detect can have very different goals: collision avoidance, cargo/passenger pickup, controlled landing, controlled mating with other vehicles, surveillance, and target prosecution are examples requiring this type of control. [0058] Flight Control manages safe and controlled flight of vehicles based on propulsion, aerodynamic, and other forces. [0059] Extra-Vehicle Commands are commands by humans or systems outside the vehicle—e.g., FAA, police forces, emergency vehicles. [0060] Intra-Vehicle Commands are commands by humans or systems inside the vehicle…', and as a result, Haney reports that "… [t]he overall vehicle motion, then, is governed by the synthesis of each these inputs. Depending on the contextual setting, the prioritization of inputs can be very different—for instance, the vehicle flight control system can override in instances where other systems dictate a maneuver that is unsafe or physically impossible. Multiple approaches for prioritization are comprehended—the synthesis of multiple parallel “digital twins”… is one such example'.
As to the limitations "11… refine the time interval based on an analysis of determined positions of the mobile element, including reducing a frequency of position determination for the mobile element when a plurality of consecutive determined positions are identical or within a predetermined margin of error", Examiner notes that the specification merely reads (underline emphasis added):
'[0650]… digital twin system 200 may analyze data received from the digital twin I/O system 204 to refine, remove, or add conditions. For example, the digital twin system 200 may optimize data collection times for movable elements that are updated more frequently than needed (e.g., multiple consecutive received positions being identical or within a predetermined margin of error)'
Response to Arguments
Regarding the claim objections, the amendment corrected all deficiencies, and the objections are withdrawn.
Regarding the Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112, the amendment corrected all deficiencies, and the objections are withdrawn.
Regarding the rejections under 101, Applicant's arguments have been considered, but they are not persuasive. Applicant argues, (see page 7, 2nd paragraph to page 8, 1st paragraph):
‘… claim 1 as amended is not directed to an abstract idea under Step 2A, Prong One. The Office has alleged that the limitation "determine, in response to an occurrence of a triggering condition, a position of the mobile element" is a mental process that can be performed in the human mind or with pen and paper. Claim 1 as amended, however, further recites "wherein the triggering condition is expiration of a time interval, and the time interval is calculated based on a probability that the mobile element has moved." Claim 1 as amended recites a specific technical mechanism-calculating a time interval based on a probability that the mobile element has moved and using that interval to govern when the system determines and updates mobile-element positions in a digital twin datastore that is not a mental process. The Office also characterized the probability limitation (from original claim 11) as a mathematical concept. Applicant respectfully submits that "the time interval is calculated based on a probability that the mobile element has moved," as recited by claim 1 as amended, does not recite any mathematical relationship, formula, or equation. The claim language specifies a criterion that governs when the system triggers position determination and digital-twin updates; it does not recite a mathematical concept. Accordingly, claim 1 as amended does not fall within the mental processes or mathematical concepts groupings of abstract ideas. Claim 1, as amended, recites, inter alia, "wherein the triggering condition is expiration of a time interval, and the time interval is calculated based on a probability that the mobile element has moved." Applicant submits that this limitation integrates any alleged abstract idea into a practical application under Step 2A, Prong Two of the 2019 PEG and amounts to significantly more under Step 2B’
The MPEP reads (underline emphasis added):
'2106.04(a) Abstract Ideas [R-07.2022]… The enumerated groupings of abstract ideas are defined as:
1) Mathematical concepts – mathematical relationships, mathematical formulas or equations, mathematical calculations (see MPEP § 2106.04(a)(2), subsection I)…
2106.04(a)(2)… C. Mathematical calculations A claim that recites a mathematical calculation, when the claim is given its broadest reasonable interpretation in light of the specification, will be considered as falling within the "mathematical concepts" grouping. A mathematical calculation is a mathematical operation (such as multiplication) or an act of calculating using mathematical methods to determine a variable or number, e.g., performing an arithmetic operation such as exponentiation…
Examples of mathematical calculations recited in a claim include…
vi. calculating the difference between local and average data values, In re Abele'.
Examiner's response: Applicant's argument is not persuasive, because if a claim limitation, under its broadest reasonable interpretation – see MPEP 2106.04(a)(2) supra – covers mathematical concepts, then it falls within the "(a) Mathematical concepts" grouping of abstract ideas. See Independent claim 1, Step 2A, Prong One.
If Applicant disagrees, Examiner invites Applicant to elaborate the exact meaning of the claimed and argued limitations by mapping them to the Specification; that is, which paragraph(s) provide support for the claimed and argued subject matter.
Applicant further argues, (see page 8, 2nd paragraph to page 9, next to last paragraph):
‘… Claim 1, as amended, recites, inter alia, "wherein the triggering condition is expiration of a time interval, and the time interval is calculated based on a probability that the mobile element has moved." Applicant submits that this limitation integrates any alleged abstract idea into a practical application under Step 2A, Prong Two of the 2019 PEG and amounts to significantly more under Step 2B.
Specifically, claim 1 as amended recites a system in which the triggering condition for determining and updating a mobile element's position is expiration of a time interval that is calculated based on a probability that the mobile element has moved. This is a specific technological improvement to the operation of the digital twin system. By tying the update cadence to the probability that a mobile element has moved, the system improves the functioning of the digital twin system itself. The specification describes this improvement in detail: "the time intervals may be based on probability of the respective movable element having moved within a time period," with the interval "relatively shorter for workers expected to move frequently" and "relatively longer for workers expected to move infrequently," and dynamically adjusted based on conditions, including "occasional mid-interval locations... to reinforce or evaluate the efficacy of the particular time interval." As-Filed Specification, paragraph [0649]. The specification further describes that the system "may optimize data collection times for movable elements that are updated more frequently than needed (e.g., multiple consecutive received positions being identical or within a predetermined margin of error)." As-Filed Specification, paragraph [0650]. This detail demonstrates that the improvement would be apparent to one skilled in the art.
Moreover, claim 1 as amended effects an improvement in the functioning of the digital twin system itself. Under MPEP § 2106.04(d)(1), a claim that improves the functioning of a computer or improves another technology or technical field integrates the judicial exception into a practical application…
the specification details how the probability-based time interval calculation improves the functioning of the digital twin system by matching the update cadence to the likelihood of movement, and how the system refines the interval based on analysis of determined positions. The ordered combination of calculating a time interval based on the probability of movement and triggering position updates upon expiration of that interval improves the functioning of the digital twin system…
The limitations of claim 1 as amended are also not mere data gathering or data output. Claim 1 recites that the triggering condition is expiration of a time interval calculated based on a probability that the mobile element has moved. This probability-based interval calculation governs when the system performs position determination and digital twin updates-it is the mechanism by which the system operates more efficiently, not insignificant extra-solution activity…’
The MPEP reads (underline emphasis added):
‘2106.05(a) Improvements to the Functioning of a Computer or To Any Other Technology or Technical Field [R-07.2022]…
the judicial exception alone cannot provide the improvement. The improvement can be provided by one or more additional elements… In addition, the improvement can be provided by the additional element(s) in combination with the recited judicial exception… II. IMPROVEMENTS TO ANY OTHER TECHNOLOGY OR TECHNICAL FIELD… an improvement in the abstract idea itself (e.g. a recited fundamental economic concept) is not an improvement in technology’
Electric Power reads:
"the focus of the claims is not on such an improvement in computers as tools, but on certain independently abstract ideas that use computers as tools"
The MPEP also reads (underline emphasis added):
'2106.04(d)(1) Evaluating Improvements in the Functioning of a Computer, or an Improvement to Any Other Technology or Technical Field in Step 2A Prong Two [R-10.2019]... the claimed invention may integrate the judicial exception into a practical application by demonstrating that it improves the relevant existing technology… the word "improvements" in the context of this consideration is limited to improvements to the functioning of a computer or any other technology/technical field, whether in Step 2A Prong Two or in Step 2B...'.
About "additional elements", BASCOM2, (BASCOM hereinafter) reads (underline emphasis added):
“the ‘elements of each claim both individually and ‘as an ordered combination’ to determine whether the additional elements [beyond those that recite the abstract idea”
And the MPEP further reads (underline emphasis added):
‘2106.05(f) Mere Instructions To Apply An Exception [R-10.2019]… In addition to the abstract idea, the claims also recited the additional element of…’.
Examiner's response: Applicant's argument is not persuasive, because any argued improvement stems from the mathematical or mental concepts of an algorithm and not the additional elements. See supra Electric Power and MPEP § 2106.05(a).
Improved abstract ideas are species of the genus abstract idea. As to Applicant's arguments about the amended limitations, they are substantially drawn to mental processes or mathematical concepts. Mental processes or mathematical concepts cannot be "additional element(s)", because mental processes and mathematical concepts are abstract ideas. (See supra 2106.04(d)(1), BASCOM, and MPEP 2106.05(f))
Thus, the claims are directed to abstract ideas not integrated into a practical application or amounting to significantly more than the identified abstract idea.
Regarding the rejections under 103, Applicant's arguments have been considered but they are not persuasive. Applicant argues, (see page 9, last paragraph to page 11, 2nd paragraph):
‘… Ambra at most, as best understood by Applicant, describes fixed or event-based updates. For example, Ambra describes a fixed "refresh event every minute to update parameter values." See Ambra, page 166, Algorithm 1. Ambra also describes generic "discrete time steps which are small enough to mimic real-time dynamics." See Ambra, page 163. Neither of these passages teaches or suggests calculating the update time interval based on a probability that the mobile element has moved, as recited in claim 1 as amended. Ambra's cited passages describe parameter representation and periodic state updates at fixed intervals or in response to events, not probability-based interval calculation…’
Examiner's response: Applicant's analysis of the reference falls short. Ambra indeed discloses the argued limitations. See rejection supra.
Applicant further argues, (see page 11, last paragraph to page 13, 2nd paragraph):
‘… Ambra discloses a "dynamically determined time interval" and its condition-based adjustment, citing Ambra's statement that its environment "updates itself through sensors based on specific intervals and/or events" and its description of "discrete time steps which are small enough to mimic real- time dynamics." See Ambra, pages 163-164. Applicant respectfully submits that these passages describe fixed, predetermined intervals and event-based triggers, not a dynamically determined interval that is increased or decreased based on the specific conditions recited in claims 5-9. For claim 6, the Office cited Ambra's "reconfiguration and re-routing protocols of assets," and for claim 7, the Office cited "stochastic insertion of extra service points" and "dynamically changing speed parameters by means of geo- fences." See Ambra, page 166. As best understood by Applicant, these passages concern reconfiguring routes and changing asset speed parameters-not increasing or decreasing the position-update interval based on reduced or abnormal environmental activity, as recited in claims 6 and 7. For claims 8 and 9, the cited "discrete time steps" passage says nothing about decreasing the interval upon detecting movement of the mobile element or increasing the interval upon detecting nonmovement for at least a third time interval. With respect to claim 11 as amended, the Office equated "based on a probability" with Ambra's statement that the digital twin environment is configured to "evaluate most probable implications." See Ambra, page 164. Applicant respectfully submits that evaluating "most probable implications" concerns evaluating outcomes of decisions, not calculating an update time interval from a probability that the mobile element has moved. Moreover, Ambra's update function that "renews the parameter values" from a real-time data feed does not teach refining the time interval by reducing sampling frequency when consecutive determined positions are identical or within a predetermined margin of error, as further recited in claim 11 as amended.
With respect to claim 13, the Office pointed only to Ambra's asset parameters (coordinates, speed, destination, ETA) and general update description. See Ambra, pages 164-165. These passages do not teach a triggering condition based on density of movable elements within the transportation system, as recited in claim 13. As best understood by Applicant, Ambra's cited passages describe individual asset parameters and state updates, not a triggering condition that varies based on how many movable elements are present in the transportation system.
Moreover, the Office's articulated motivation to combine Hartmut with Ambra does not cure these deficiencies. The Office cited Ambra's statement that "simulation-based solutions are useful for failure prediction, developing systems, new designs and optimization of various system processes" and that "[m]ore data availability and accessibility can improve synchromodal models and planning tools." See Office Action, citing Ambra, pages 160 and 168. Applicant respectfully submits that these statements provide no articulated reason to arrive at the specific limitation of claim 1 as amended, "wherein the triggering condition is expiration of a time interval, and the time interval is calculated based on a probability that the mobile element has moved." Under MPEP § 2143.03, all claim limitations must be considered, and a generalized motivation to combine cannot supply a limitation absent from both references. Even combining Ambra's DTE/synchromodal and parameter-update teachings with Hartmut's GetAllRobots(/ShowPosition() registry yields at most fixed or event-based updates Ambra's "refresh event every minute" and generic "discrete time steps." See Ambra, pages 166 and 163. The combination still does not teach or suggest calculating the update interval based on a probability that the mobile element has moved, as recited by claim 1 as amended…’
Examiner's response: Applicant's argument is not persuasive, because about Examiner's interpretation of "dynamically determined time interval", the Examiner notes that the Application description merely repeats the term. Merely repeating a term does not rise to a level of a definition of a term. In the absence of an elaboration of any special meanings for such term in the claims and Application description, there are no distinguishing features claimed. Therefore throughout the prosecution of this application, the claims have been given a broad reasonable interpretation in light of the Application description according to definitions of these terms well known to any one of ordinary skill in the pertinent art or according to any of these terms’ examples in the Application description. About the limitation in question, see also the prior art made of record and not relied upon cited below.
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.
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Ambra et al., “Should I Stay or Should I Go? Assessing Intermodal and Synchromodal Resilience from a Decentralized Perspective”, discloses "As dynamic models can be time-driven and event-driven, the latter represents a better fit as nonlinear evolution of the model in continuous time would not account for real-time dynamics. The ABM approach herein is represented as a discrete-event system (event-driven)" (see page 5, next to last paragraph).
Robert Daily, Harmonic Potential Field Path Planning for High Speed Vehicles discloses wherein the one or more processors are further configured to refine the time interval based on an analysis of determined positions of the mobile element, including reducing a frequency of position determination for the mobile element when a plurality of consecutive determined positions are within a predetermined margin of error (see "To guarantee that the trajectory remains a safe distance from all obstacles a particular streamline needs to be followed. The vehicle controller in this case still uses the potential field gradient at the vehicle’s location as a desired heading but it is augmented to include the lateral distance to the desired streamline. This lateral error is calculated by performing a search of the stream function along the lateral axis of the vehicle to find the desired stream function value (recall that a streamline is a contour of the stream function at a particular value)" in page 4613, Section IV.B. paragraph 1).
Examiner would like to point out that any reference to specific figures, columns and lines should not be considered limiting in any way, the entire reference is considered to provide disclosure relating to the claimed invention.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JUAN CARLOS OCHOA whose telephone number is (571)272-2625. The examiner can normally be reached Mondays, Tuesdays, Thursdays, and Fridays 9:30AM - 7:00 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, Renee Chavez can be reached at 571-270-1104. 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.
/JUAN C OCHOA/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2186
1 Electric Power Group, LLC v. Alstom S.A., 119 USPQ2d 1739 Fed. Cir. 2016
2 BASCOM Global Internet Services, Inc. v. AT&T Mobility LLC, U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit, No. 2015-1763 (June 27, 2016)
Prosecution Insights