DETAILED ACTION
This is in response to the applicant’s communication filed on 12/17/25, wherein:
Claims 1 and 5-22 are currently pending.
Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status
The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
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 and 5-22 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 101 because the claimed invention is directed to an abstract idea without significantly more.
Step 1: Claim 1 recites a method and therefore, falls into a statutory category.
Step 2A – Prong 1 (Is a Judicial Exception Recited?):
The following underlined limitations identify the abstract limitations which are considered certain methods of organizing human activity:
in real-time with performing an activity on said machine, tool or vehicle, creating data on machine/tool/vehicle identity, activity performer identity, and time and position relating to performing the activity, wherein a mobile data unit is used for providing data linked to at least the activity being performed, the activity performer identity, and a performer position;
providing the data to the digital log system;
calculating a set limit value using a self-learning artificial intelligence algorithm based on data collected for activities performed on other machines, tools, or vehicles; and
performing a digital verification of the data using at least one indicator that is a measurable parameter that indicates whether the activity has been performed as intended or not by comparing the measured parameter with the set limit value, and verifying the data when the measured parameter has an allowable value in comparison with the set limit value.
These limitations constitute tracking maintenance activities for a vehicle, tool, or machine (Specification Page 1), which are processes that, under their broadest reasonable interpretation, are considered certain methods of organizing human activity – commercial or legal interactions (including agreements in the form of contracts and marketing or sales activities or behaviors) and/or managing personal behavior or relationships or interactions between people (including social activities, teaching, and following rules or instructions). Accordingly, the claim recites an abstract idea.
The types of identified abstract ideas are considered together as a single abstract idea for analysis purposes.
Step 2A-Prong 2 (Is the Exception Integrated into a Practical Application?): This judicial exception is not integrated into a practical application. In particular, the claim recites the additional elements of a mobile data unit, a digital log system, and a self-learning artificial intelligence algorithm. The computer is recited at a high-level of generality (i.e., as a generic processing device performing generic computer functions), such that it amounts to no more than mere instructions to apply the exception using a generic computer component. Accordingly, the additional elements do not integrate the abstract idea into a practical application because it does not impose any meaningful limits on practicing the abstract idea when considered both individually and as a whole. The claim is directed to an abstract idea. Even when viewed in combination, these additional elements do not integrate the recited judicial exception into a practical application, and the claim is directed to the judicial exception.
Step 2B (Does the claim recite additional elements that amount to Significantly More than the Judicial Exception?): The claims do not include additional elements that 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 a computer to perform the steps of the abstract idea amount to no more than mere instructions to apply the exception using a generic computer component. Mere instructions to apply an exception using a generic computer component cannot provide an inventive concept. The claim is not patent eligible, as when viewed individually, and as a whole, nothing in the claim adds significantly more to the abstract idea.
Dependent claims 5-8, 12-14, and 19-21 merely recite further embellishments of the abstract idea of independent claim 1 as discussed above with respect to integration of the abstract idea into a practical application, and these features only serve to further limit the abstract idea of independent claim 1; however, none of the dependent claims recite an improvement to a technology or technical field or provide any meaningful limits.
Claims 9, 10, 11, 15, 17, 18 further recites the additional element of a chip unit, one or more sensors, a server, a digital platform, which are recited at a high-level of generality such that it amounts no more than mere instructions to apply the exception using a generic computer component. Even in combination, this additional element does not integrate the abstract idea into a practical application and do not amount to significantly more than the abstract idea itself. The claims are ineligible.
In light of the detailed explanation and evidence provided above, the Examiner asserts that the claimed invention, when the limitations are considered individually and as whole, is directed towards an abstract idea.
Notice
In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status.
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 of this title, 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 are summarized as follows:
1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art.
2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue.
3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art.
4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness.
Claims 1, 5-7, and 9-15 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Angus et al. (US 20160071331), in view of Walls et al. (US 20210065085).
Referring to claim 1:
Angus discloses a method for in a digital log system for a machine, tool or vehicle (see at least Angus: Abstract), said method comprising in real-time with performing an activity on said machine, tool or vehicle creating data on machine/tool/vehicle identity, activity performer identity, time and position relating to performing the activity, wherein a mobile data unit is used for providing data linked to at least the activity being performed, the activity performer identify, and a performer position (see at least Angus: ¶36-39 “”; see also Angus: ¶ 46-48 “Maintenance entity 114 may include personnel 116. Personnel 116 may include mechanics, technicians, or any other appropriate maintenance personnel or other personnel for performing maintenance or other tasks on aircraft 102. Personnel 116 are human beings.”; see also Angus: ¶ 51-80 “Task script processor 140 also may be configured to generate report 144. Report 144 may include desired information regarding the performance of tasks on systems 104 on aircraft 102 in any appropriate form. For example, without limitation, report 144 may indicate that the task identified in task script 138 was performed on systems 104 on aircraft 102, personnel 116 that performed the task, maintenance device 118 that was used to perform the task, other appropriate information regarding performing the task on systems 104 on aircraft 102, or various combinations of such information… Maintenance device 118 and aircraft network data processing system 106 are examples of tools that may be used to perform electronically-enabled maintenance operations and other tasks on systems 104 on aircraft 102. A mechanical task may be performed on systems 104 on aircraft 102 using tool 147. Tool 147 may include any appropriate device that may be used by personnel 116 on aircraft 102 to perform a mechanical task on systems 104 on aircraft 102. Automated identification technology tag 150 may be attached to or otherwise associated with tool 147. Identification information for tool 147 may be stored in automated identification technology tag 150 in any appropriate manner and form. A mechanical task may include inspecting, reworking, replacing, or performing another appropriate task on or using hardware part 148 that may be part of systems 104 on aircraft 102. Automated identification technology tag 152 may be attached to or otherwise associated with hardware part 148. Identification information for hardware part 148 may be stored in automated identification technology tag 152 in any appropriate manner and form. For example, without limitation, one or both of automated identification technology tag 150 and automated identification technology tag 152 may comprise a radio frequency identification tag, contact memory, barcode, or another appropriate type of automated identification technology tag”; see also Angus: ¶ 99 “Approved personnel 402 may indicate personnel that are allowed to perform a task identified in a task script. For example, without limitation, approved personnel 402 may indicate the identity of specific personnel that may perform the task, license requirements 408 for personnel that may perform the task, or other characteristics or various combinations of characteristics of personnel that may be allowed to perform the task”; see also Angus: ¶ 111 “For example, without limitation, the rules for running task script 503 may identify personnel that are allowed to perform the task identified in task script 503. Rules checker 509 may be configured to use information provided by personnel identifier 511 to determine whether personnel who are attempting to perform the task identified in task script 503 are approved to perform the task. Personnel identifier 511 may be configured to identify personnel attempting to perform the task identified in task script 503 in any appropriate manner. For example, without limitation, personnel identifier 511 may be configured to identify personnel attempting to perform the task identified in task script 503 from a personnel digital signature for task script 503. Alternatively, or in addition, personnel identifier 511 may be configured to identify and authenticate personnel attempting to perform the task using identification information and a password entered by personnel via a user interface, using identification information on a smart card presented by the personnel, or in any other appropriate manner or combination of manners.”; see also Angus: ¶ 120 “Report 600 may include any appropriate information regarding a task identified in a task script that is performed or attempted to be performed on a system on an aircraft or other vehicle. For example, without limitation, report 600 may indicate task identifier 602, policy adherence information 603, task completion information 604, personnel 610, options selected 612, maintenance device 614, other information 615, or various combinations of information regarding a task performed, or attempted to be performed, on a system on a vehicle.” see also Angus: ¶ 121 “Task completion information 604 may include more detailed information regarding a completed task or a task that was not completed for some reason. For example, without limitation, task completion information 604 may indicate task completed 605 or task not completed 606. Task not completed 606 may indicate that a task identified in a task script was not completed for some reason. When task not completed 606 is indicated, reason 607 why the task was not completed may be indicated. For example, without limitation, reason 607 may indicate that the task script was determined not to be authentic, may indicate a rule for performing the task identified in the task script that was not satisfied, or may indicate some other reason or combination of reasons why the task was not completed. Task completed 605 may indicate that the task identified by the task script was completed. When task completed 605 is indicated, task completion information 604 may indicate date completed 608, time completed 609, or other appropriate information or combinations of information regarding the task that was completed.”; see also Angus: ¶ 169 “Illustrative embodiments provide an electronic task manual for an aircraft or other vehicle in which maintenance and diagnostic actions to be performed on the aircraft or other vehicle are encoded in computer executable form. Illustrative embodiments capture a complete audit trail that comprises a secure record of the tasks performed on the aircraft or other vehicle and under what authorization. Illustrative embodiments also provide an operator of the aircraft or other vehicle the ability to specify policies for performing certain tasks on the aircraft or other vehicle and the aircraft or other vehicle may rigorously verify that these policies are adhered to.”);
providing the data to the digital log system (see at least Angus: ¶ 70 “Operator 110 or another appropriate entity may use report 144 for any appropriate purpose. For example, without limitation, operator 110 may use report 144 to create an audit log for auditing tasks performed on aircraft 102. Alternatively, or in addition, an audit log based on report 144 may be created and maintained on aircraft 102.”; see also Angus: ¶ 124 “one or both of vehicle digital signature 620 and system digital signature 621 for report 600 may be checked to determine whether report 600 is authentic before using report 600 to create an audit log for auditing tasks performed on an aircraft or other vehicle.”; see also Angus: ¶ 144 “The report may be used to create an audit log for auditing tasks performed on the vehicle or for any other appropriate purpose or various combinations of purposes.”’ See also Angus: ¶ 169 “Illustrative embodiments capture a complete audit trail that comprises a secure record of the tasks performed on the aircraft or other vehicle and under what authorization”; see also Angus: ¶ 36-39; see also Angus: ¶ 46-48 “Maintenance entity 114 may include personnel 116. Personnel 116 may include mechanics, technicians, or any other appropriate maintenance personnel or other personnel for performing maintenance or other tasks on aircraft 102. Personnel 116 are human beings.”; see also Angus: ¶ 51-80 “Task script processor 140 also may be configured to generate report 144. Report 144 may include desired information regarding the performance of tasks on systems 104 on aircraft 102 in any appropriate form. For example, without limitation, report 144 may indicate that the task identified in task script 138 was performed on systems 104 on aircraft 102, personnel 116 that performed the task, maintenance device 118 that was used to perform the task, other appropriate information regarding performing the task on systems 104 on aircraft 102, or various combinations of such information.”; see also Angus: ¶ 99 “Approved personnel 402 may indicate personnel that are allowed to perform a task identified in a task script. For example, without limitation, approved personnel 402 may indicate the identity of specific personnel that may perform the task, license requirements 408 for personnel that may perform the task, or other characteristics or various combinations of characteristics of personnel that may be allowed to perform the task”; see also Angus: ¶ 111 “For example, without limitation, the rules for running task script 503 may identify personnel that are allowed to perform the task identified in task script 503. Rules checker 509 may be configured to use information provided by personnel identifier 511 to determine whether personnel who are attempting to perform the task identified in task script 503 are approved to perform the task. Personnel identifier 511 may be configured to identify personnel attempting to perform the task identified in task script 503 in any appropriate manner. For example, without limitation, personnel identifier 511 may be configured to identify personnel attempting to perform the task identified in task script 503 from a personnel digital signature for task script 503. Alternatively, or in addition, personnel identifier 511 may be configured to identify and authenticate personnel attempting to perform the task using identification information and a password entered by personnel via a user interface, using identification information on a smart card presented by the personnel, or in any other appropriate manner or combination of manners.”; see also Angus: ¶ 120 “Report 600 may include any appropriate information regarding a task identified in a task script that is performed or attempted to be performed on a system on an aircraft or other vehicle. For example, without limitation, report 600 may indicate task identifier 602, policy adherence information 603, task completion information 604, personnel 610, options selected 612, maintenance device 614, other information 615, or various combinations of information regarding a task performed, or attempted to be performed, on a system on a vehicle.” see also Angus: ¶ 121 “Task completion information 604 may include more detailed information regarding a completed task or a task that was not completed for some reason. For example, without limitation, task completion information 604 may indicate task completed 605 or task not completed 606. Task not completed 606 may indicate that a task identified in a task script was not completed for some reason. When task not completed 606 is indicated, reason 607 why the task was not completed may be indicated. For example, without limitation, reason 607 may indicate that the task script was determined not to be authentic, may indicate a rule for performing the task identified in the task script that was not satisfied, or may indicate some other reason or combination of reasons why the task was not completed. Task completed 605 may indicate that the task identified by the task script was completed. When task completed 605 is indicated, task completion information 604 may indicate date completed 608, time completed 609, or other appropriate information or combinations of information regarding the task that was completed.”; see also Angus: ¶ 169 “Illustrative embodiments provide an electronic task manual for an aircraft or other vehicle in which maintenance and diagnostic actions to be performed on the aircraft or other vehicle are encoded in computer executable form. Illustrative embodiments capture a complete audit trail that comprises a secure record of the tasks performed on the aircraft or other vehicle and under what authorization. Illustrative embodiments also provide an operator of the aircraft or other vehicle the ability to specify policies for performing certain tasks on the aircraft or other vehicle and the aircraft or other vehicle may rigorously verify that these policies are adhered to.”);
[calculating] a set limit value [using a self-learning artificial intelligence algorithm based on data collected for activities performed on other machines, tools, or vehicles] (see at least Angus: ¶ 36 “the task script may identify various preconditions to be satisfied for the task to be performed”; see also Angus: ¶ 38 “data processing system also may be configured to ensure that conditions for performing the task, as indicated by the rules in the task script, the policy, or both, are satisfied before running the task script”; see also Angus: ¶ 51; see also Angus ¶ 55 “the task scripts may identify various preconditions to be satisfied for the task scripts to be executed.”; see also Angus: ¶ 64, 91, 97, 99-100, 112, 139, and 141-146 “In response to a determination that current conditions do satisfy the rules for performing the task, the task script may be run to perform the task steps identified in the task script (operation 918). It may be determined whether options for any of the task steps are identified in the task script (operation 920).” Where Angus does not disclose the limitation in the brackets and this limitation is addressed below); and
performing a digital verification of the data using at least one indicator that is a measurable parameter (see at least Angus: ¶ 38 “The data processing system may be configured to check the various digital signatures provided with the task script to determine whether the task script is authentic before running the task script. The data processing system also may be configured to ensure that conditions for performing the task, as indicated by the rules in the task script, the policy, or both, are satisfied before running the task script.”; see also Angus: ¶ 112-113 “the rules for running task script 503 may indicate various conditions that must be satisfied before performing the task identified in task script 503. Rules checker 509 may be configured to use information provided by conditions identifier 512 to determine whether conditions for performing the task identified in task script 503 are satisfied. Conditions identifier 512 may be configured to identify various conditions in any appropriate manner.”; see also Angus: ¶ 100 “Conditions 404 may indicate various conditions under which a task identified in a task script may or may not be performed. For example, without limitation, conditions 404 may include approved faults 410, prerequisites in place 412, concurrent tasks 414, vehicle operations 416, vehicle location 418, other conditions 420, or various combinations of conditions”; see at least Angus: 97 “for performing a task identified in a task script. Rules indicated in policy 400 may be in place of or in addition to rules for performing the task indicated in the task script itself…For example, without limitation, policy 400 may indicate approved digital certificates 401, approved personnel 402, conditions 404, other policies 406, or various combinations of policies for performing a task on a system on a vehicle”) that indicates whether the activity has been performed as intended or not (see at least Angus: ¶ 144: “The report may be signed with a digital signature in a known manner (operation 926). For example, without limitation, the report may be signed with a vehicle digital signature identifying the vehicle on which the task was performed, a system digital signature identifying the system on which the task was performed, or both. The signed report then may be sent to an appropriate location (operation 928), with the process terminating thereafter. The report may be used to create an audit log for auditing tasks performed on the vehicle or for any other appropriate purpose or various combinations of purposes. The digital signature for the report may be checked to determine whether the report is authentic before using the report for any such purpose”; see also Angus: ¶ 70 “Operator 110 or another appropriate entity may use report 144 for any appropriate purpose. For example, without limitation, operator 110 may use report 144 to create an audit log for auditing tasks performed on aircraft 102.”; see also: ¶ 124 “Vehicle digital signature 620, system digital signature 621, or both, may be checked to determine whether report 600 is authentic. For example, without limitation, one or both of vehicle digital signature 620 and system digital signature 621 for report 600 may be checked to determine whether report 600 is authentic before using report 600 to create an audit log for auditing tasks performed on an aircraft or other vehicle”; see also Angus: ¶ 99 “Approved personnel 402 may indicate personnel that are allowed to perform a task identified in a task script. For example, without limitation, approved personnel 402 may indicate the identity of specific personnel that may perform the task, license requirements 408 for personnel that may perform the task, or other characteristics or various combinations of characteristics of personnel that may be allowed to perform the task”; see also Angus: ¶ 37 “maintenance entity digital signature may include a digital signature identifying personnel performing the task, a digital signature identifying a maintenance device used to perform the task, or both”; see also Angus: ¶ 45-50 “Maintenance entity 114 may include personnel 116. Personnel 116 may include mechanics, technicians, or any other appropriate maintenance personnel or other personnel for performing maintenance or other tasks on aircraft 102. Personnel 116 are human beings”; see also Angus: ¶ 63 “task script 138 may be determined to be authentic when task script 138 is determined to be signed with a digital signature to identify known personnel 116, a known maintenance device 118, or both.”; see also Angus: ¶ 75 “Maintenance device 118 and aircraft network data processing system 106 are examples of tools that may be used to perform electronically-enabled maintenance operations and other tasks on systems 104 on aircraft 102. A mechanical task may be performed on systems 104 on aircraft 102 using tool 147. Tool 147 may include any appropriate device that may be used by personnel 116 on aircraft 102 to perform a mechanical task on systems 104 on aircraft 102. Automated identification technology tag 150 may be attached to or otherwise associated with tool 147. Identification information for tool 147 may be stored in automated identification technology tag 150 in any appropriate manner and form.”; see also Angus: ¶ 95 “Task script 308 may be signed with maintenance entity digital signature 324 before task script 308 is sent to vehicle 322 or another appropriate location to perform task 304. Maintenance entity digital signature 324 may identify the maintenance entity performing task 304 on the system on vehicle 322 in a known manner. For example, without limitation, maintenance entity digital signature 324 may include personnel digital signature 326 identifying personnel performing task 304 on the system on vehicle 322, device digital signature 328 identifying a maintenance device for performing task 304 on the system on vehicle 322, or both”; see also Angus: ¶ 98-99 “policy 400 may indicate approved digital certificates 401, approved personnel 402, conditions 404, other policies 406, or various combinations of policies for performing a task on a system on a vehicle”; see also Angus: ¶ 108 “Maintenance entity digital signature 507 may identify a maintenance entity providing task script 503 to task script processor 500. For example, without limitation, maintenance entity digital signature 507 may include a personnel digital signature identifying personnel performing the task identified in task script 503, a device digital signature identifying a maintenance device for performing the task identified in task script 503, or both”; see also Angus: ¶ 111 “For example, without limitation, the rules for running task script 503 may identify personnel that are allowed to perform the task identified in task script 503. Rules checker 509 may be configured to use information provided by personnel identifier 511 to determine whether personnel who are attempting to perform the task identified in task script 503 are approved to perform the task. Personnel identifier 511 may be configured to identify personnel attempting to perform the task identified in task script 503 in any appropriate manner. For example, without limitation, personnel identifier 511 may be configured to identify personnel attempting to perform the task identified in task script 503 from a personnel digital signature for task script 503. Alternatively, or in addition, personnel identifier 511 may be configured to identify and authenticate personnel attempting to perform the task using identification information and a password entered by personnel via a user interface, using identification information on a smart card presented by the personnel, or in any other appropriate manner or combination of manners.”; see also Angus: ¶ 121 “Task completion information 604 may include more detailed information regarding a completed task or a task that was not completed for some reason. For example, without limitation, task completion information 604 may indicate task completed 605 or task not completed 606. Task not completed 606 may indicate that a task identified in a task script was not completed for some reason. When task not completed 606 is indicated, reason 607 why the task was not completed may be indicated. For example, without limitation, reason 607 may indicate that the task script was determined not to be authentic, may indicate a rule for performing the task identified in the task script that was not satisfied, or may indicate some other reason or combination of reasons why the task was not completed. Task completed 605 may indicate that the task identified by the task script was completed. When task completed 605 is indicated, task completion information 604 may indicate date completed 608, time completed 609, or other appropriate information or combinations of information regarding the task that was completed.”) by comparing the measured parameter with a set limit value, and verifying the data when the measured parameter has an allowable value in comparison with the set limit value (see at least Angus: ¶ 36 “the task script may identify various preconditions to be satisfied for the task to be performed”; see also Angus: ¶ 38 “data processing system also may be configured to ensure that conditions for performing the task, as indicated by the rules in the task script, the policy, or both, are satisfied before running the task script”; see also Angus: ¶ 51; see also Angus ¶ 55 “the task scripts may identify various preconditions to be satisfied for the task scripts to be executed.”; see also Angus: ¶64, 91, 97, 99-100, 112, 139, and 141-146 “In response to a determination that current conditions do satisfy the rules for performing the task, the task script may be run to perform the task steps identified in the task script (operation 918). It may be determined whether options for any of the task steps are identified in the task script (operation 920).”).
Angus discloses a system for vehicle auditing and control of maintenance and diagnosis (abstract). Angus does not disclose calculating a value using a self-learning artificial intelligence algorithm based on data collected for activities performed on other machines, tools, or vehicles.
However, Walls discloses a similar system for aircraft manufacturing management (abstract). Walls discloses calculating a value using a self-learning artificial intelligence algorithm based on data collected for activities performed on other machines, tools, or vehicles {Walls ¶48, 52 “The optimization artificial intelligence engine 112 can then reassess, and potentially revise, the set of rules based on a consolidation of the set of rules with emergent conditions such as those described above” ¶24 “a description of an outcome of the task (e.g., if the task is for measuring the dimensions of an aircraft component, the end state result for the MTWS might include a list of the measurements)” ¶46 “the optimization artificial intelligence engine 112 is configured to determine how to plan the manufacturing process, including any adjustments needed to MTWSs, based on conditions, events, etc. that have happened in more-recent time window . . . After MTWSs for a local system have executed for a particular aircraft, for instance, the local system can output, to the optimization artificial intelligence engine 112, end state results of the executions”}.
It would have been obvious for a person of ordinary skill in the art (PHOSITA) before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the system disclosed in Angus to incorporate calculating a value using AI as taught by Walls because this would provide a manner for intelligently recognizing patterns from events, conditions, etc. (Walls ¶48), thus aiding the user by increasing success.
Referring to claim 5:
Angus, as modified by Walls, discloses wherein several indicators are used when performing the digital verification of the data (see at least Angus: ¶144: “The report may be signed with a digital signature in a known manner (operation 926). For example, without limitation, the report may be signed with a vehicle digital signature identifying the vehicle on which the task was performed, a system digital signature identifying the system on which the task was performed, or both. The signed report then may be sent to an appropriate location (operation 928), with the process terminating thereafter. The report may be used to create an audit log for auditing tasks performed on the vehicle or for any other appropriate purpose or various combinations of purposes. The digital signature for the report may be checked to determine whether the report is authentic before using the report for any such purpose”; see also Angus: ¶ 70 “Operator 110 or another appropriate entity may use report 144 for any appropriate purpose. For example, without limitation, operator 110 may use report 144 to create an audit log for auditing tasks performed on aircraft 102.”; see also: ¶ 124 “Vehicle digital signature 620, system digital signature 621, or both, may be checked to determine whether report 600 is authentic. For example, without limitation, one or both of vehicle digital signature 620 and system digital signature 621 for report 600 may be checked to determine whether report 600 is authentic before using report 600 to create an audit log for auditing tasks performed on an aircraft or other vehicle”; see also Angus: ¶ 99 “Approved personnel 402 may indicate personnel that are allowed to perform a task identified in a task script. For example, without limitation, approved personnel 402 may indicate the identity of specific personnel that may perform the task, license requirements 408 for personnel that may perform the task, or other characteristics or various combinations of characteristics of personnel that may be allowed to perform the task”; see also Angus: ¶ 37 “maintenance entity digital signature may include a digital signature identifying personnel performing the task, a digital signature identifying a maintenance device used to perform the task, or both”; see also Angus: ¶ 45-50 “Maintenance entity 114 may include personnel 116. Personnel 116 may include mechanics, technicians, or any other appropriate maintenance personnel or other personnel for performing maintenance or other tasks on aircraft 102. Personnel 116 are human beings”; see also Angus: ¶ 63 “task script 138 may be determined to be authentic when task script 138 is determined to be signed with a digital signature to identify known personnel 116, a known maintenance device 118, or both.”; see also Angus: ¶ 75 “Maintenance device 118 and aircraft network data processing system 106 are examples of tools that may be used to perform electronically-enabled maintenance operations and other tasks on systems 104 on aircraft 102. A mechanical task may be performed on systems 104 on aircraft 102 using tool 147. Tool 147 may include any appropriate device that may be used by personnel 116 on aircraft 102 to perform a mechanical task on systems 104 on aircraft 102. Automated identification technology tag 150 may be attached to or otherwise associated with tool 147. Identification information for tool 147 may be stored in automated identification technology tag 150 in any appropriate manner and form.”; see also Angus: ¶ 95 “Task script 308 may be signed with maintenance entity digital signature 324 before task script 308 is sent to vehicle 322 or another appropriate location to perform task 304. Maintenance entity digital signature 324 may identify the maintenance entity performing task 304 on the system on vehicle 322 in a known manner. For example, without limitation, maintenance entity digital signature 324 may include personnel digital signature 326 identifying personnel performing task 304 on the system on vehicle 322, device digital signature 328 identifying a maintenance device for performing task 304 on the system on vehicle 322, or both”; see also Angus: ¶ 98-99 “policy 400 may indicate approved digital certificates 401, approved personnel 402, conditions 404, other policies 406, or various combinations of policies for performing a task on a system on a vehicle”; see also Angus: ¶ 108 “Maintenance entity digital signature 507 may identify a maintenance entity providing task script 503 to task script processor 500. For example, without limitation, maintenance entity digital signature 507 may include a personnel digital signature identifying personnel performing the task identified in task script 503, a device digital signature identifying a maintenance device for performing the task identified in task script 503, or both”; see also Angus: ¶ 111 “For example, without limitation, the rules for running task script 503 may identify personnel that are allowed to perform the task identified in task script 503. Rules checker 509 may be configured to use information provided by personnel identifier 511 to determine whether personnel who are attempting to perform the task identified in task script 503 are approved to perform the task. Personnel identifier 511 may be configured to identify personnel attempting to perform the task identified in task script 503 in any appropriate manner. For example, without limitation, personnel identifier 511 may be configured to identify personnel attempting to perform the task identified in task script 503 from a personnel digital signature for task script 503. Alternatively, or in addition, personnel identifier 511 may be configured to identify and authenticate personnel attempting to perform the task using identification information and a password entered by personnel via a user interface, using identification information on a smart card presented by the personnel, or in any other appropriate manner or combination of manners.”).
Referring to claim 6:
Angus, as modified by Walls, discloses wherein the digital log system also comprises a user interface provided to a user of the machine, tool or vehicle, and wherein the step of providing the data on the machine/tool/vehicle identity, activity performer identity, time and position relating to performing the activity involves visualization in the user interface (see at least Angus: ¶ 121 “task completed 605 is indicated, task completion information 604 may indicate date completed 608, time completed 609, or other appropriate information or combinations of information regarding the task that was completed”; see at least Angus: ¶ 103; ).
Referring to claim 7:
Angus, as modified by Walls, discloses wherein the activity is a maintenance activity (see at least Angus: ¶ 144: “The report may be signed with a digital signature in a known manner (operation 926). For example, without limitation, the report may be signed with a vehicle digital signature identifying the vehicle on which the task was performed, a system digital signature identifying the system on which the task was performed, or both. The signed report then may be sent to an appropriate location (operation 928), with the process terminating thereafter. The report may be used to create an audit log for auditing tasks performed on the vehicle or for any other appropriate purpose or various combinations of purposes. The digital signature for the report may be checked to determine whether the report is authentic before using the report for any such purpose”; see also Angus: ¶ 70 “Operator 110 or another appropriate entity may use report 144 for any appropriate purpose. For example, without limitation, operator 110 may use report 144 to create an audit log for auditing tasks performed on aircraft 102.”; see also: ¶ 124 “Vehicle digital signature 620, system digital signature 621, or both, may be checked to determine whether report 600 is authentic. For example, without limitation, one or both of vehicle digital signature 620 and system digital signature 621 for report 600 may be checked to determine whether report 600 is authentic before using report 600 to create an audit log for auditing tasks performed on an aircraft or other vehicle”; see also Angus: ¶ 99 “Approved personnel 402 may indicate personnel that are allowed to perform a task identified in a task script. For example, without limitation, approved personnel 402 may indicate the identity of specific personnel that may perform the task, license requirements 408 for personnel that may perform the task, or other characteristics or various combinations of characteristics of personnel that may be allowed to perform the task”; see also Angus: ¶ 37 “maintenance entity digital signature may include a digital signature identifying personnel performing the task, a digital signature identifying a maintenance device used to perform the task, or both”; see also Angus: ¶ 45-50 “Maintenance entity 114 may include personnel 116. Personnel 116 may include mechanics, technicians, or any other appropriate maintenance personnel or other personnel for performing maintenance or other tasks on aircraft 102. Personnel 116 are human beings”; see also Angus: ¶ 63 “task script 138 may be determined to be authentic when task script 138 is determined to be signed with a digital signature to identify known personnel 116, a known maintenance device 118, or both.”; see also Angus: ¶ 75 “Maintenance device 118 and aircraft network data processing system 106 are examples of tools that may be used to perform electronically-enabled maintenance operations and other tasks on systems 104 on aircraft 102. A mechanical task may be performed on systems 104 on aircraft 102 using tool 147. Tool 147 may include any appropriate device that may be used by personnel 116 on aircraft 102 to perform a mechanical task on systems 104 on aircraft 102. Automated identification technology tag 150 may be attached to or otherwise associated with tool 147. Identification information for tool 147 may be stored in automated identification technology tag 150 in any appropriate manner and form.”; see also Angus: ¶ 95 “Task script 308 may be signed with maintenance entity digital signature 324 before task script 308 is sent to vehicle 322 or another appropriate location to perform task 304. Maintenance entity digital signature 324 may identify the maintenance entity performing task 304 on the system on vehicle 322 in a known manner. For example, without limitation, maintenance entity digital signature 324 may include personnel digital signature 326 identifying personnel performing task 304 on the system on vehicle 322, device digital signature 328 identifying a maintenance device for performing task 304 on the system on vehicle 322, or both”; see also Angus: ¶ 98-99 “policy 400 may indicate approved digital certificates 401, approved personnel 402, conditions 404, other policies 406, or various combinations of policies for performing a task on a system on a vehicle”; see also Angus: ¶ 108 “Maintenance entity digital signature 507 may identify a maintenance entity providing task script 503 to task script processor 500. For example, without limitation, maintenance entity digital signature 507 may include a personnel digital signature identifying personnel performing the task identified in task script 503, a device digital signature identifying a maintenance device for performing the task identified in task script 503, or both”; see also Angus: ¶ 111 “For example, without limitation, the rules for running task script 503 may identify personnel that are allowed to perform the task identified in task script 503. Rules checker 509 may be configured to use information provided by personnel identifier 511 to determine whether personnel who are attempting to perform the task identified in task script 503 are approved to perform the task. Personnel identifier 511 may be configured to identify personnel attempting to perform the task identified in task script 503 in any appropriate manner. For example, without limitation, personnel identifier 511 may be configured to identify personnel attempting to perform the task identified in task script 503 from a personnel digital signature for task script 503. Alternatively, or in addition, personnel identifier 511 may be configured to identify and authenticate personnel attempting to perform the task using identification information and a password entered by personnel via a user interface, using identification information on a smart card presented by the personnel, or in any other appropriate manner or combination of manners.”).
Referring to claim 9:
Angus, as modified by Walls, discloses wherein a chip unit is arranged on the machine, tool or vehicle, said chip unit arranged to provide data to the digital log system (see at least Angus: ¶ 75-77 “automated identification technology tag 150 and automated identification technology tag 152 may comprise a radio frequency identification tag, contact memory, barcode, or another appropriate type of automated identification technology tag… Reader 154 may be configured to read identification information for tool 147 from automated identification technology tag 150 and send the identification information read from automated identification technology tag 150 to task script processor 140, to read identification information for hardware part 148 from automated identification technology tag 152 and to send the identification information read from automated identification technology tag 152 to task script processor 140, or both. Reader 154 may be implemented and operated on aircraft 102 in any appropriate manner. For example, without limitation, reader 154 may be implemented as part of maintenance device 118 or in another appropriate manner such that reader 154 may be operated by personnel 116 on aircraft 102 to provide identification information for tool 147, hardware part 148, or both tool 147 and hardware part 148, to task script processor 140. Alternatively, or in addition, reader 154 may be located in an appropriate position on aircraft 102 and operated automatically by task script processor 140 to provide identification information for tool 147, hardware part 148, or both tool 147 and hardware part 148, to task script processor 140.”).
Referring to claim 10:
Angus, as modified by Walls, discloses wherein one or more sensors are arranged on the machine, tool or vehicle, and wherein said one or more sensors are arranged to detect a parameter change linked to a certain activity and send data with reference to said parameter change (see at least Angus: ¶ 36 “the task script may identify various preconditions to be satisfied for the task to be performed”; see also Angus: ¶ 38 “data processing system also may be configured to ensure that conditions for performing the task, as indicated by the rules in the task script, the policy, or both, are satisfied before running the task script”; see also Angus: ¶ 51; see also Angus ¶ 55 “the task scripts may identify various preconditions to be satisfied for the task scripts to be executed.”; see also Angus: ¶ 64, 91, 97, 99-100, 112, 139, and 141-146 “In response to a determination that current conditions do satisfy the rules for performing the task, the task script may be run to perform the task steps identified in the task script (operation 918). It may be determined whether options for any of the task steps are identified in the task script (operation 920).”).
Referring to claim 11:
Angus, as modified by Walls, discloses wherein data in the digital log system is sent to a server and saved, and wherein saved data is used to optimise maintenance of a specific machine, tool or vehicle (see at least Angus: ¶ 162).
Referring to claim 12:
Angus, as modified by Walls, discloses wherein data on machine/tool/vehicle identity, time and/or position generated and saved from different users is compared to optimise maintenance of a specific machine, tool or vehicle to a certain user (see at least Angus: ¶ 144: “The report may be signed with a digital signature in a known manner (operation 926). For example, without limitation, the report may be signed with a vehicle digital signature identifying the vehicle on which the task was performed, a system digital signature identifying the system on which the task was performed, or both. The signed report then may be sent to an appropriate location (operation 928), with the process terminating thereafter. The report may be used to create an audit log for auditing tasks performed on the vehicle or for any other appropriate purpose or various combinations of purposes. The digital signature for the report may be checked to determine whether the report is authentic before using the report for any such purpose”; see also Angus: ¶ 70 “Operator 110 or another appropriate entity may use report 144 for any appropriate purpose. For example, without limitation, operator 110 may use report 144 to create an audit log for auditing tasks performed on aircraft 102.”; see also: ¶ 124 “Vehicle digital signature 620, system digital signature 621, or both, may be checked to determine whether report 600 is authentic. For example, without limitation, one or both of vehicle digital signature 620 and system digital signature 621 for report 600 may be checked to determine whether report 600 is authentic before using report 600 to create an audit log for auditing tasks performed on an aircraft or other vehicle”; see also Angus: ¶ 99 “Approved personnel 402 may indicate personnel that are allowed to perform a task identified in a task script. For example, without limitation, approved personnel 402 may indicate the identity of specific personnel that may perform the task, license requirements 408 for personnel that may perform the task, or other characteristics or various combinations of characteristics of personnel that may be allowed to perform the task”; see also Angus: ¶ 37 “maintenance entity digital signature may include a digital signature identifying personnel performing the task, a digital signature identifying a maintenance device used to perform the task, or both”; see also Angus: ¶ 45-50 “Maintenance entity 114 may include personnel 116. Personnel 116 may include mechanics, technicians, or any other appropriate maintenance personnel or other personnel for performing maintenance or other tasks on aircraft 102. Personnel 116 are human beings”; see also Angus: ¶ 63 “task script 138 may be determined to be authentic when task script 138 is determined to be signed with a digital signature to identify known personnel 116, a known maintenance device 118, or both.”; see also Angus: ¶ 75 “Maintenance device 118 and aircraft network data processing system 106 are examples of tools that may be used to perform electronically-enabled maintenance operations and other tasks on systems 104 on aircraft 102. A mechanical task may be performed on systems 104 on aircraft 102 using tool 147. Tool 147 may include any appropriate device that may be used by personnel 116 on aircraft 102 to perform a mechanical task on systems 104 on aircraft 102. Automated identification technology tag 150 may be attached to or otherwise associated with tool 147. Identification information for tool 147 may be stored in automated identification technology tag 150 in any appropriate manner and form.”; see also Angus: ¶ 95 “Task script 308 may be signed with maintenance entity digital signature 324 before task script 308 is sent to vehicle 322 or another appropriate location to perform task 304. Maintenance entity digital signature 324 may identify the maintenance entity performing task 304 on the system on vehicle 322 in a known manner. For example, without limitation, maintenance entity digital signature 324 may include personnel digital signature 326 identifying personnel performing task 304 on the system on vehicle 322, device digital signature 328 identifying a maintenance device for performing task 304 on the system on vehicle 322, or both”; see also Angus: ¶ 98-99 “policy 400 may indicate approved digital certificates 401, approved personnel 402, conditions 404, other policies 406, or various combinations of policies for performing a task on a system on a vehicle”; see also Angus: ¶ 108 “Maintenance entity digital signature 507 may identify a maintenance entity providing task script 503 to task script processor 500. For example, without limitation, maintenance entity digital signature 507 may include a personnel digital signature identifying personnel performing the task identified in task script 503, a device digital signature identifying a maintenance device for performing the task identified in task script 503, or both”; see also Angus: ¶ 111 “For example, without limitation, the rules for running task script 503 may identify personnel that are allowed to perform the task identified in task script 503. Rules checker 509 may be configured to use information provided by personnel identifier 511 to determine whether personnel who are attempting to perform the task identified in task script 503 are approved to perform the task. Personnel identifier 511 may be configured to identify personnel attempting to perform the task identified in task script 503 in any appropriate manner. For example, without limitation, personnel identifier 511 may be configured to identify personnel attempting to perform the task identified in task script 503 from a personnel digital signature for task script 503. Alternatively, or in addition, personnel identifier 511 may be configured to identify and authenticate personnel attempting to perform the task using identification information and a password entered by personnel via a user interface, using identification information on a smart card presented by the personnel, or in any other appropriate manner or combination of manners.”).
Referring to claim 13:
Angus, as modified by Walls, discloses wherein the method involves a multi-verification procedure in which the digital verification is complemented with at least one other verification, performed by the activity performer, which first provides data and a verification, or performed by the user of the machine, tool or vehicle, which user performs a personal data verification, or complemented with both (see at least Angus: ¶ 144: “The report may be signed with a digital signature in a known manner (operation 926). For example, without limitation, the report may be signed with a vehicle digital signature identifying the vehicle on which the task was performed, a system digital signature identifying the system on which the task was performed, or both. The signed report then may be sent to an appropriate location (operation 928), with the process terminating thereafter. The report may be used to create an audit log for auditing tasks performed on the vehicle or for any other appropriate purpose or various combinations of purposes. The digital signature for the report may be checked to determine whether the report is authentic before using the report for any such purpose”; see also Angus: ¶ 70 “Operator 110 or another appropriate entity may use report 144 for any appropriate purpose. For example, without limitation, operator 110 may use report 144 to create an audit log for auditing tasks performed on aircraft 102.”; see also: ¶ 124 “Vehicle digital signature 620, system digital signature 621, or both, may be checked to determine whether report 600 is authentic. For example, without limitation, one or both of vehicle digital signature 620 and system digital signature 621 for report 600 may be checked to determine whether report 600 is authentic before using report 600 to create an audit log for auditing tasks performed on an aircraft or other vehicle”; see also Angus: ¶ 99 “Approved personnel 402 may indicate personnel that are allowed to perform a task identified in a task script. For example, without limitation, approved personnel 402 may indicate the identity of specific personnel that may perform the task, license requirements 408 for personnel that may perform the task, or other characteristics or various combinations of characteristics of personnel that may be allowed to perform the task”; see also Angus: ¶ 37 “maintenance entity digital signature may include a digital signature identifying personnel performing the task, a digital signature identifying a maintenance device used to perform the task, or both”; see also Angus: ¶ 45-50 “Maintenance entity 114 may include personnel 116. Personnel 116 may include mechanics, technicians, or any other appropriate maintenance personnel or other personnel for performing maintenance or other tasks on aircraft 102. Personnel 116 are human beings”; see also Angus: ¶ 63 “task script 138 may be determined to be authentic when task script 138 is determined to be signed with a digital signature to identify known personnel 116, a known maintenance device 118, or both.”; see also Angus: ¶ 75 “Maintenance device 118 and aircraft network data processing system 106 are examples of tools that may be used to perform electronically-enabled maintenance operations and other tasks on systems 104 on aircraft 102. A mechanical task may be performed on systems 104 on aircraft 102 using tool 147. Tool 147 may include any appropriate device that may be used by personnel 116 on aircraft 102 to perform a mechanical task on systems 104 on aircraft 102. Automated identification technology tag 150 may be attached to or otherwise associated with tool 147. Identification information for tool 147 may be stored in automated identification technology tag 150 in any appropriate manner and form.”; see also Angus: ¶ 95 “Task script 308 may be signed with maintenance entity digital signature 324 before task script 308 is sent to vehicle 322 or another appropriate location to perform task 304. Maintenance entity digital signature 324 may identify the maintenance entity performing task 304 on the system on vehicle 322 in a known manner. For example, without limitation, maintenance entity digital signature 324 may include personnel digital signature 326 identifying personnel performing task 304 on the system on vehicle 322, device digital signature 328 identifying a maintenance device for performing task 304 on the system on vehicle 322, or both”; see also Angus: ¶ 98-99 “policy 400 may indicate approved digital certificates 401, approved personnel 402, conditions 404, other policies 406, or various combinations of policies for performing a task on a system on a vehicle”; see also Angus: ¶ 108 “Maintenance entity digital signature 507 may identify a maintenance entity providing task script 503 to task script processor 500. For example, without limitation, maintenance entity digital signature 507 may include a personnel digital signature identifying personnel performing the task identified in task script 503, a device digital signature identifying a maintenance device for performing the task identified in task script 503, or both”; see also Angus: ¶ 111 “For example, without limitation, the rules for running task script 503 may identify personnel that are allowed to perform the task identified in task script 503. Rules checker 509 may be configured to use information provided by personnel identifier 511 to determine whether personnel who are attempting to perform the task identified in task script 503 are approved to perform the task. Personnel identifier 511 may be configured to identify personnel attempting to perform the task identified in task script 503 in any appropriate manner. For example, without limitation, personnel identifier 511 may be configured to identify personnel attempting to perform the task identified in task script 503 from a personnel digital signature for task script 503. Alternatively, or in addition, personnel identifier 511 may be configured to identify and authenticate personnel attempting to perform the task using identification information and a password entered by personnel via a user interface, using identification information on a smart card presented by the personnel, or in any other appropriate manner or combination of manners.”).
Referring to claim 14:
Angus, as modified by Walls, discloses wherein the method involves providing a dynamic maintenance plan for a user, said dynamic maintenance plan arranged to be changed based on the change of at least one data input parameter, such as date when a maintenance activity was performed, performance data of the machine/tool/vehicle and/or operational position of the machine/tool/vehicle (see at least Angus: ¶ 36 “the task script may identify various preconditions to be satisfied for the task to be performed”; see also Angus: ¶ 38 “data processing system also may be configured to ensure that conditions for performing the task, as indicated by the rules in the task script, the policy, or both, are satisfied before running the task script”; see also Angus: ¶ 51; see also Angus ¶ 55 “the task scripts may identify various preconditions to be satisfied for the task scripts to be executed.”; see also Angus: ¶ 64, 91, 97, 99-100, 112, 139, and 141-146 “In response to a determination that current conditions do satisfy the rules for performing the task, the task script may be run to perform the task steps identified in the task script (operation 918). It may be determined whether options for any of the task steps are identified in the task script (operation 920).”).
Referring to claim 15:
Angus, as modified by Walls, discloses wherein the method also involves providing a calculation of a machine value optimisation coefficient on the machine, tool or vehicle, wherein the following data is provided in a digital platform: basic data on the machine, tool or vehicle; data on performed maintenance from a digital maintenance log together with digitally certified verification(s) on performed maintenance; said method also comprising then calculating the machine value optimisation coefficient; and providing the machine value optimisation coefficient, preferably in a digital format (see at least Angus: ¶ 144: “The report may be signed with a digital signature in a known manner (operation 926). For example, without limitation, the report may be signed with a vehicle digital signature identifying the vehicle on which the task was performed, a system digital signature identifying the system on which the task was performed, or both. The signed report then may be sent to an appropriate location (operation 928), with the process terminating thereafter. The report may be used to create an audit log for auditing tasks performed on the vehicle or for any other appropriate purpose or various combinations of purposes. The digital signature for the report may be checked to determine whether the report is authentic before using the report for any such purpose”; see also Angus: ¶ 70 “Operator 110 or another appropriate entity may use report 144 for any appropriate purpose. For example, without limitation, operator 110 may use report 144 to create an audit log for auditing tasks performed on aircraft 102.”; see also: ¶ 124 “Vehicle digital signature 620, system digital signature 621, or both, may be checked to determine whether report 600 is authentic. For example, without limitation, one or both of vehicle digital signature 620 and system digital signature 621 for report 600 may be checked to determine whether report 600 is authentic before using report 600 to create an audit log for auditing tasks performed on an aircraft or other vehicle”; see also Angus: ¶ 99 “Approved personnel 402 may indicate personnel that are allowed to perform a task identified in a task script. For example, without limitation, approved personnel 402 may indicate the identity of specific personnel that may perform the task, license requirements 408 for personnel that may perform the task, or other characteristics or various combinations of characteristics of personnel that may be allowed to perform the task”; see also Angus: ¶ 37 “maintenance entity digital signature may include a digital signature identifying personnel performing the task, a digital signature identifying a maintenance device used to perform the task, or both”; see also Angus: ¶ 45-50 “Maintenance entity 114 may include personnel 116. Personnel 116 may include mechanics, technicians, or any other appropriate maintenance personnel or other personnel for performing maintenance or other tasks on aircraft 102. Personnel 116 are human beings”; see also Angus: ¶ 63 “task script 138 may be determined to be authentic when task script 138 is determined to be signed with a digital signature to identify known personnel 116, a known maintenance device 118, or both.”; see also Angus: ¶ 75 “Maintenance device 118 and aircraft network data processing system 106 are examples of tools that may be used to perform electronically-enabled maintenance operations and other tasks on systems 104 on aircraft 102. A mechanical task may be performed on systems 104 on aircraft 102 using tool 147. Tool 147 may include any appropriate device that may be used by personnel 116 on aircraft 102 to perform a mechanical task on systems 104 on aircraft 102. Automated identification technology tag 150 may be attached to or otherwise associated with tool 147. Identification information for tool 147 may be stored in automated identification technology tag 150 in any appropriate manner and form.”; see also Angus: ¶ 95 “Task script 308 may be signed with maintenance entity digital signature 324 before task script 308 is sent to vehicle 322 or another appropriate location to perform task 304. Maintenance entity digital signature 324 may identify the maintenance entity performing task 304 on the system on vehicle 322 in a known manner. For example, without limitation, maintenance entity digital signature 324 may include personnel digital signature 326 identifying personnel performing task 304 on the system on vehicle 322, device digital signature 328 identifying a maintenance device for performing task 304 on the system on vehicle 322, or both”; see also Angus: ¶ 98-99 “policy 400 may indicate approved digital certificates 401, approved personnel 402, conditions 404, other policies 406, or various combinations of policies for performing a task on a system on a vehicle”; see also Angus: ¶ 108 “Maintenance entity digital signature 507 may identify a maintenance entity providing task script 503 to task script processor 500. For example, without limitation, maintenance entity digital signature 507 may include a personnel digital signature identifying personnel performing the task identified in task script 503, a device digital signature identifying a maintenance device for performing the task identified in task script 503, or both”; see also Angus: ¶ 111 “For example, without limitation, the rules for running task script 503 may identify personnel that are allowed to perform the task identified in task script 503. Rules checker 509 may be configured to use information provided by personnel identifier 511 to determine whether personnel who are attempting to perform the task identified in task script 503 are approved to perform the task. Personnel identifier 511 may be configured to identify personnel attempting to perform the task identified in task script 503 in any appropriate manner. For example, without limitation, personnel identifier 511 may be configured to identify personnel attempting to perform the task identified in task script 503 from a personnel digital signature for task script 503. Alternatively, or in addition, personnel identifier 511 may be configured to identify and authenticate personnel attempting to perform the task using identification information and a password entered by personnel via a user interface, using identification information on a smart card presented by the personnel, or in any other appropriate manner or combination of manners.”).
Claims 8 & 22 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Angus et al. (US 20160071331), in view of Walls et al. (US 20210065085), and further in view of Plante (US 20170323494).
Referring to claim 8:
Angus, as modified by Walls, discloses wherein data on machine/tool/vehicle identity, [time] and position is provided by a unique identifier arranged on the machine, tool or vehicle (see at least Angus: ¶ 75-77 “automated identification technology tag 150 and automated identification technology tag 152 may comprise a radio frequency identification tag, contact memory, barcode, or another appropriate type of automated identification technology tag.” ¶76 “Identification information for hardware part 148 may be stored in automated identification technology tag 152 in any appropriate manner and form” ¶77 “reader 154 may be located in an appropriate position on aircraft 102” where, when the tag is read at the reader, the position is that of the reader and where the portion of the claim in brackets is not disclosed by Angus, as modified by Wells, and is addressed below).
Angus, as modified by Walls, discloses a system for vehicle auditing and control of maintenance and diagnosis (abstract). Angus, as modified by Walls, does not disclose wherein data on time is provided.
However, Plante discloses a similar system for a driver history report (abstract).
Plante discloses wherein data on time is provided {Plante ¶90, 96 “these sensors may include any of those from the group: imager; accelerometer; speedometer; position; orientation; time;”}.
It would have been obvious for a person of ordinary skill in the art (PHOSITA) before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the system disclosed in Angus and Walls to incorporate data on time as taught by Plante because this would provide a manner for recording event records (Plante ¶90), thus aiding the user by providing a record of information.
Referring to claim 22:
Angus, as modified by Walls and Plante, discloses wherein the unique identifier includes a QR code, RFID unit, chip or tracker unit arranged on the machine, tool or vehicle (see at least Angus: ¶ 75-77 “automated identification technology tag 150 and automated identification technology tag 152 may comprise a radio frequency identification tag, contact memory, barcode, or another appropriate type of automated identification technology tag.”).
Claims 16-17, 19, and 20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Angus et al. (US 20160071331), in view of Walls et al. (US 20210065085), and further in view of Twiss (US 20160301558).
Referring to claim 16:
Angus, as modified by Walls, discloses a system for vehicle auditing and control of maintenance and diagnosis (abstract). Angus, as modified by Walls, does not disclose wherein the basic data is at least one parameter relating to any of the following: manufacturer, model, or year of manufacturing, or a combination thereof.
However, Twiss, discloses a similar system for management, implementing and optimizing the maintenance of a plurality of consumable physical components of a network. Twiss discloses wherein the basic data is at least one parameter relating to any of the following: manufacturer, model, or year of manufacturing, or a combination thereof (Twiss ¶32 component identifier and the lifespan remaining on the product (year of manufacturing).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of filing to apply the known technique of using component identifiers such as the make and the year of manufacture to generate maintenance information (as disclosed by Twiss) to the known method and system for determining optimal maintenance tasks based on current operating conditions, the identified equipment, and verified mechanic (as disclosed by Angus) to create an increase in performance and capabilities has led to increased power consumption and greater consumption of physical components of a network. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to apply the known technique of using component identifiers such as the make and the year of manufacture to generate maintenance information because it would create an increase in performance and capabilities has led to increased power consumption and greater consumption of physical components of a network (see Twiss ¶ 2).
Furthermore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of filing to apply the known technique of using component identifiers such as the make and the year of manufacture to generate maintenance information (as disclosed by Twiss) to the known method and system for determining optimal maintenance tasks based on current operating conditions, the identified equipment, and verified mechanic (as disclosed by Angus) to create an increase in performance and capabilities has led to increased power consumption and greater consumption of physical components of a network, because the claimed invention is merely applying a known technique to a known method ready for improvement to yield predictable results. See KSR Int’l Co. v. Teleflex Inc., 550 U.S. 398, 406 (2007). In other words, all of the claimed elements were known in the prior art and one skilled in the art could have combined the elements as claimed by known methods with no change in their respective functions, and the combination would have yielded nothing more than predictable results to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the invention (i.e., predictable results are obtained by applying the known technique of using component identifiers such as the make and the year of manufacture to generate maintenance information to the known method and system for determining optimal maintenance tasks based on current operating conditions, the identified equipment, and verified mechanic to create an increase in performance and capabilities has led to increased power consumption and greater consumption of physical components of a network). See also MPEP § 2143(I)(D).
Referring to claim 17:
Angus, as modified by Walls, discloses a system for vehicle auditing and control of maintenance and diagnosis (abstract). Angus, as modified by Walls, does not disclose wherein the following data is also provided in the digital platform and used for the calculation of the machine value optimisation coefficient: data on usage of the machine, tool or vehicle.
However, Twiss, discloses a similar system for management, implementing and optimizing the maintenance of a plurality of consumable physical components of a network. Twiss discloses wherein the following data is also provided in the digital platform and used for the calculation of the machine value optimisation coefficient: data on usage of the machine, tool or vehicle (see at least Twiss: ¶ 32 “The current operating status data 116 a, 116 b and 116 c includes data that indicates the operating or maintenance status of at least a subcomponent, such as a fan motor, of the consumable physical components 110. In some implementations, the current operating status data 116 a, 116 b and 116 c includes at least one of the power consumption, the energy usage, a component identifier, a component type and a remaining expected lifespan for each one of the consumable physical components 110”; see also Twiss: ¶ 23, 27, 33, 35, 58, and 65: discussing the use of historical usage data related to the component in order to determine optimal operating status).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of filing to apply the known technique of using usage information to help determine and implement maintenance plans (as disclosed by Twiss) to the known method and system for determining optimal maintenance tasks based on current operating conditions and verifying the maintenance steps taken (as disclosed by Angus) to create an increase in performance and capabilities has led to increased power consumption and greater consumption of physical components of a network. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to apply the known technique of using usage information to help determine and implement maintenance plans because it would create an increase in performance and capabilities has led to increased power consumption and greater consumption of physical components of a network (see Twiss ¶ 2).
Furthermore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of filing to apply the known technique of using usage information to help determine and implement maintenance plans (as disclosed by Twiss) to the known method and system for determining optimal maintenance tasks based on current operating conditions and verifying the maintenance steps taken (as disclosed by Angus) to create an increase in performance and capabilities has led to increased power consumption and greater consumption of physical components of a network, because the claimed invention is merely applying a known technique to a known method ready for improvement to yield predictable results. See KSR Int’l Co. v. Teleflex Inc., 550 U.S. 398, 406 (2007). In other words, all of the claimed elements were known in the prior art and one skilled in the art could have combined the elements as claimed by known methods with no change in their respective functions, and the combination would have yielded nothing more than predictable results to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the invention (i.e., predictable results are obtained by applying the known technique of using usage information to help determine and implement maintenance plans to the known method and system for determining optimal maintenance tasks based on current operating conditions and verifying the maintenance steps taken to create an increase in performance and capabilities has led to increased power consumption and greater consumption of physical components of a network). See also MPEP § 2143(I)(D).
Referring to claim 19:
Angus, as modified by Walls, discloses a system for vehicle auditing and control of maintenance and diagnosis (abstract). Angus, as modified by Walls, does not disclose wherein the method also involves adjustment based on market data or market prognosis data.
However, Twiss, discloses a similar system for management, implementing and optimizing the maintenance of a plurality of consumable physical components of a network. Twiss discloses wherein the method also involves adjustment based on market data or market prognosis data (see at least Twiss: ¶ 32 “The current operating status data 116 a, 116 b and 116 c includes data that indicates the operating or maintenance status of at least a subcomponent, such as a fan motor, of the consumable physical components 110. In some implementations, the current operating status data 116 a, 116 b and 116 c includes at least one of the power consumption, the energy usage, a component identifier, a component type and a remaining expected lifespan for each one of the consumable physical components 110”; see also Twiss: ¶ 23, 27, 33, 35, 58, and 65: discussing the use of historical usage data related to the component in order to determine optimal operating status where historical usage data is market data).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of filing to apply the known technique of using historical information to help determine and implement maintenance plans (as disclosed by Twiss) to the known method and system for determining optimal maintenance tasks based on current operating conditions and verifying the maintenance steps taken (as disclosed by Angus) to create an increase in performance and capabilities has led to increased power consumption and greater consumption of physical components of a network. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to apply the known technique of using historical information to help determine and implement maintenance plans because it would create an increase in performance and capabilities has led to increased power consumption and greater consumption of physical components of a network (see Twiss ¶ 2).
Furthermore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of filing to apply the known technique of using historical information to help determine and implement maintenance plans (as disclosed by Twiss) to the known method and system for determining optimal maintenance tasks based on current operating conditions and verifying the maintenance steps taken (as disclosed by Angus) to create an increase in performance and capabilities has led to increased power consumption and greater consumption of physical components of a network, because the claimed invention is merely applying a known technique to a known method ready for improvement to yield predictable results. See KSR Int’l Co. v. Teleflex Inc., 550 U.S. 398, 406 (2007). In other words, all of the claimed elements were known in the prior art and one skilled in the art could have combined the elements as claimed by known methods with no change in their respective functions, and the combination would have yielded nothing more than predictable results to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the invention (i.e., predictable results are obtained by applying the known technique of using historical information to help determine and implement maintenance plans to the known method and system for determining optimal maintenance tasks based on current operating conditions and verifying the maintenance steps taken to create an increase in performance and capabilities has led to increased power consumption and greater consumption of physical components of a network). See also MPEP § 2143(I)(D).
Referring to claim 20:
Angus, as modified by Walls and Twiss, discloses wherein the data on usage is at least one parameter relating to any of the following: distance run, main production, production type, road usage transport, tillage, processed area, usage time, or output power, or a combination thereof (see at least Twiss: ¶ 32 “The current operating status data 116 a, 116 b and 116 c includes data that indicates the operating or maintenance status of at least a subcomponent, such as a fan motor, of the consumable physical components 110. In some implementations, the current operating status data 116 a, 116 b and 116 c includes at least one of the power consumption, the energy usage, a component identifier, a component type and a remaining expected lifespan for each one of the consumable physical components 110”; see also Twiss: ¶ 23, 27, 33, 35, 58, and 65: discussing the use of historical usage data related to the component in order to determine optimal operating status and where the remaining expected lifespan is a parameter relating to the usage time).
Claims 18 and 21 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Angus et al. (US 20160071331), in view of Walls et al. (US 20210065085), and further in view of Strother et al. (US 20160196701).
Referring to claim 18:
Angus, as modified by Walls, discloses a system for vehicle auditing and control of maintenance and diagnosis (abstract). Angus, as modified by Walls, does not disclose wherein the following data is also provided in the digital platform and used for the calculation of the machine value optimisation coefficient: geo data linked to the usage of the machine, tool or vehicle.
However, Strother, discloses management maintenance of a fleet of equipment. Strother discloses geo data linked to the usage of the machine, tool or vehicle (see at least Strother: ¶ 46 “FIG. 5 is a flowchart illustrating technique 240, possibly employed by Task Creation Module 152, for creating maintenance tasks based on diagnostic confidence values. The technique starts at 242. At 244, the technique receives bicycle maintenance information. For example, Task Creation Module 152 may receive bicycle maintenance information related to the status of bicycles in Bicycle Sharing System 40. Bicycle maintenance information may include a bicycle being used less than expected based on its rental history, a bicycle being used less than expected based on rental trends and predicted usage, frequency of rental, bicycle mileage, bicycle age, maintenance history, and sensor data. Maintenance information may also include the time of year, day of the week, time of day, and weather history and forecast.” Where at least the weather history/forecast is geo data).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of filing to apply the known technique of using usage and weather information to help determine and implement maintenance plans (as disclosed by Strother) to the known method and system for determining optimal maintenance tasks based on current operating conditions and verifying the maintenance steps taken (as disclosed by Angus) to lead to more efficiently verifying that maintenance providers have satisfactorily completed maintenance tasks. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to apply the known technique of using usage and weather information to help determine and implement maintenance plans because it would lead to more efficiently verifying that maintenance providers have satisfactorily completed maintenance tasks (see Strother ¶ 3).
Furthermore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of filing to apply the known technique of using usage and weather information to help determine and implement maintenance plans (as disclosed by Strother) to the known method and system for determining optimal maintenance tasks based on current operating conditions and verifying the maintenance steps taken (as disclosed by Angus) to lead to more efficiently verifying that maintenance providers have satisfactorily completed maintenance tasks, because the claimed invention is merely applying a known technique to a known method ready for improvement to yield predictable results. See KSR Int’l Co. v. Teleflex Inc., 550 U.S. 398, 406 (2007). In other words, all of the claimed elements were known in the prior art and one skilled in the art could have combined the elements as claimed by known methods with no change in their respective functions, and the combination would have yielded nothing more than predictable results to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the invention (i.e., predictable results are obtained by applying the known technique of using usage and weather information to help determine and implement maintenance plans to the known method and system for determining optimal maintenance tasks based on current operating conditions and verifying the maintenance steps taken to create an increase in performance and capabilities has led to increased power consumption and greater consumption of physical components of a network). See also MPEP § 2143(I)(D).
Referring to claim 21:
Angus, as modified by Walls and Strother, discloses wherein the geo data linked to the usage is at least one parameter relating to any of the following: soil type, topography, humidity, or weather conditions, or a combination thereof (see at least Strother: ¶ 46 “FIG. 5 is a flowchart illustrating technique 240, possibly employed by Task Creation Module 152, for creating maintenance tasks based on diagnostic confidence values. The technique starts at 242. At 244, the technique receives bicycle maintenance information. For example, Task Creation Module 152 may receive bicycle maintenance information related to the status of bicycles in Bicycle Sharing System 40. Bicycle maintenance information may include a bicycle being used less than expected based on its rental history, a bicycle being used less than expected based on rental trends and predicted usage, frequency of rental, bicycle mileage, bicycle age, maintenance history, and sensor data. Maintenance information may also include the time of year, day of the week, time of day, and weather history and forecast.”).
Response to Arguments
I. REJECTIONS
A. 101 Rejections
Applicant argues that claim 1 includes the use of an AI self-learning algorithm which “provides an advantage over state of the art methods” and thereby provides a practical application of the abstract idea. Remarks 7-8. Examiner respectfully disagrees. The AI self-learning algorithm has not been improved. Rather, as is indicated above, the AI self-learning algorithm is recited at a high-level of generality (i.e., as a generic processing device performing generic computer functions), such that it amounts to no more than mere instructions to apply the exception using a generic computer component.
B. Response to 102/103 Rejections
Applicant argues that the prior art does not disclose the claims as amended. Examiner has provided a new rejection with new art which addresses the amended limitations (see above).
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to CARRIE S GILKEY whose telephone number is (571)270-7119. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Thursday 7:30-4:30 CT and Friday 7:30-12 CT.
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, Jessica Lemieux can be reached on 571-270-3445. 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.
/CARRIE S GILKEY/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3626