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 .
Response to Amendment
This communication is filed in response to the action filed on 08/18/2025.
The claims 1-2, 4-7, 9-11, and 15 are currently amended. Claims 1-15 are currently pending.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments and amendments filed on 08/18/2025 on pages 7-9, under REMARKS with respect to 35 U.S.C. 101 claim rejections to claims 1-15 have been fully considered and are persuasive. The rejections to the claims have been withdrawn.
Applicant’s arguments filed on 08/18/2025 on pages 9-11, under REMARKS with respect to 35
U.S.C. 102 and 35 U.S.C. 103 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive. Regarding claim 1
applicants on page 10 states that:
PNG
media_image1.png
206
691
media_image1.png
Greyscale
The examiner respectfully disagrees. The examiner would like to point to primary reference US 2019/0139441 A1 to AKELLA, particularly paragraphs [0100], and [0108]. The paragraphs state that the system may make comparisons of the cyclical processes and those comparisons include “comparison may, or may additionally, include detecting one or more types of differences from a group including object deviations, action deviations, sequence deviations, process deviations, and timing deviations” wherein time deviations would include a delay in an expected cycle time period. Further AKELLA states at paragraph [0108] that “The contextual training content can also present constructive feedback to an actor/worker during training. For example, outputting the results of the comparison of the current process in the current data set to the given process in the representative data set (relationship between a reference work process and an observed work process and the time differences) can include indicating in a graphical user interface a decrease or increase in the cycle time over a predetermined number of cycles, as illustrated in FIG. 13A. In another example, the graphical user interface can indicate
when no steps were missed over a predetermined number of cycles, as illustrated in FIG. 13B”, which allows the user of the system to monitor cycle times and to aid in spotting work delays by noticing a cycle time increase in a set number of cycles. Please see full rejection to the claims below.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
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 (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status.
The following is a quotation of the appropriate paragraphs of 35 U.S.C. 102 that form the basis for the rejections under this section made in this Office action:
A person shall be entitled to a patent unless –
(a)(1) the claimed invention was patented, described in a printed publication, or in public use, on sale, or otherwise available to the public before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
(a)(2) the claimed invention was described in a patent issued under section 151, or in an application for patent published or deemed published under section 122(b), in which the patent or application, as the case may be, names another inventor and was effectively filed before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claims 1, 5-6, 10-11, and 15 are rejected under 35 § U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by US 2019/0139441 A1 to AKELLA et al. (hereinafter “AKELLA”).
As per claim 1, AKELLA discloses an assistance system comprising: at least one camera that captures an image of each of a plurality of work areas (a computing system and method for tracking work tasks which comprises a sensor layer 702 and that layer comprises a plurality of camera at various stations; paragraphs [0079], [0112-0113]; tables 1-2); a hand detector that detects the presence of a hand in each of the plurality of work areas (an activity tracking engine 170 is used to track the motion of various body parts of a user including specifically a hand and if the tracked body part moves in a work cycle by analyzing frame by frame actions of the user in the work region; paragraph [0074-0078], [0080-0081]; table 1); a time period detector that detects a work state and a non-work time period during which the hand is not detected in each of the plurality of work areas (the system is adapted to track work cycles in real time and over time in which the cycle is expected to be performed which would comprise a time period, and the work cycle comprises a motion of the users hand and is tracked in tables 1-4 as depicted; paragraphs [0044-0045], [0074-0078]; table 1-4; claims 16); a display that outputs information relating to each of the work states (the system comprises a display to display the results of the work state determination; paragraphs [0095], [0113]); at least one memory storing a set of instructions (the computing system comprises a memory to store executable instructions related to the method; paragraph [0112]); and at least one processor configured to execute the set of instructions to: capture the image of each of the plurality of work areas using the camera (and the system comprises a processor to execute said stored instructions and those instructions cause the system to capture an image using the camera sensors; paragraphs [0079], [0113]); detect the presence of the hand in each of the plurality of work areas using the hand detector (the sensors and captured images are used to determine hand motion related to the work cycle and records results in tables such as table 1 using the sensors and the computer analytics module to track the hand specifically; paragraph [0074]; table 1); detect the hand in each of the captured images of each of the plurality of work areas (as seen in tables 1-2 the hand is identified in the frame and then determined if hand motion occurred within the work cycle being performed in the work area; paragraphs [0074-0075]; table 1-table 2); use the time period detector to determine the work state and the non-work time period in each of the plurality of work areas during which the hand is not detected (determine a time period using the real time, time stamps of the work cycle being performed and determining hand motion within the region of interest work area being observed and as seen in table 2 the hand motion is tracked through multiple frames and for example frame 2 includes a non-work time period where the hand was not detected or determined to be in motion; paragraphs [0071], [0074-0075]; table 1-table 2); claim 16; estimate a time period causing a work delay using a difference between a start time and a length between each of successive non-work time periods based on a relationship between a plurality of processes and each of the non-work time periods (the computing system estimates a timing deviation comparison determines if the current process was performed within two standard deviations of the time that the given process in the representative data set was performed, and does this by finding a difference in cycle times over a predetermined number of cycles; paragraphs [0100], [0108]); and output information on the display relating to a change in each of the work states over time (this information is output and displayed via graphical user interfaces presented on displays connected to the system and includes information such as but not limited to tables 1-4; paragraphs [0104], [0107-0108]).
As per claim 5, AKELLA discloses the assistance system according to claim 1, wherein the at least one processor is further configured to execute the instructions to: output on the display of a change in the work state over time (the system includes a variety of display types to display the results of the activity analytics system adapted to track cyclical work tasks and track completion and other parameters related to completion of the task; paragraphs [0077], [0082], [0100]); store the image (the system stores data locally in a memory storage unit which stores data and included image data; paragraphs [0042], [0093-0094], [0112]); receive designation of a time period (work cycle parameters include time duration (time period) of the work cycle being tracked for completion; paragraph [0071], [0108]); and output the image captured in a time period of interest based on the designation (the system is adapted to output via a display of a graphic user interface 155 results and completion of the work task assigned using the parameters of the described system; paragraphs [0100], [0113]).
As per claim 6, AKELLA discloses an assistance method comprising: detecting a hand using a hand detector from an image obtained by imaging a work area using a camera (a computing system and method for tracking work tasks which comprises a sensor layer 702 and that layer comprises a plurality of camera at various stations to image work area and image workers hands and track the motion of the hands; paragraphs [0079], [0112-0113]; tables 1-2); determining a work state based on a hand detection result (determine completion of the cyclical work task that involved the users hands and see tables 1-4 tracks the users hand motions within a ROI; paragraphs [0079-0083]; tables 1-4); outputting on a display information indicating the work state (the system is adapted to output via a display of a graphic user interface 155 results and completion of the work task assigned using the parameters of the described system; paragraphs [0100], [0113]); determining a non-work time period using a time period detector and based on a hand detection result (the system is adapted to perform the method of tracking work cycles in real time and over time in which the cycle is expected to be performed which would comprise a time period, and the work cycle comprises a motion of the users hand and is tracked in table 1 as depicted; paragraphs [0044-0045], [0074-0078]; table 1; claims 16); estimating a time period causing a work delay using a difference between a start time and a length between each of the successive non-work time periods based on a relationship between a plurality of processes and each of the non-work time periods (the computing system estimates a timing deviation comparison determines if the current process was performed within two standard deviations of the time that the given process in the representative data set was performed, and does this by finding a difference in cycle times over a predetermined number of cycles; paragraphs [0100], [0108]); and outputting on the display information relating to a change in each of the work states over time (this information is output and displayed via graphical user interfaces presented on displays connected to the system and includes information such as but not limited to tables 1-4; paragraphs [0104], [0107-0108]).
As per claim 10, AKELLA discloses the assistance method according to claim 6, comprising: outputting on the display a change in the work state over time (the system includes a variety of display types to display the results of the activity analytics system adapted to track cyclical work tasks and track completion and other parameters related to completion of the task; paragraphs [0077], [0082], [0100], [0113]); receiving designation of a time period (work cycle parameters include time duration (time period) of the work cycle being tracked for completion; paragraph [0071], [0108]); and outputting the image captured in a time period of interest based on the designation (the system is adapted to output via a display of a graphic user interface 155 results and completion of the work task assigned using the parameters of the described system; paragraphs [0100], [0113]).
As per claim 11, AKELLA discloses a non-transitory computer-readable storage medium storing a program for causing a computer to execute: detection processing of detecting a hand using a hand detector from an image obtained by imaging a work area using a camera (a computing system and method for tracking work tasks which comprises a sensor layer 702 and that layer comprises a plurality of camera at various stations; paragraphs [0079], [0112-0113]; tables 1-2); determination processing of determining a work state based on a hand detection result (determining using an activity tracking engine 170 is used to track the motion of various body parts of a user including specifically a hand and if the tracked body part moves in a work cycle by analyzing frame by frame actions of the user in the work region; paragraph [0074-0078], [0080-0081]; table 1); determination processing of determining a non-work time period using a time period detector and based on a hand detection result (the system is adapted to track work cycles in real time and over time in which the cycle is expected to be performed which would comprise a time period, and the work cycle comprises a motion of the users hand and is tracked in tables 1-4 as depicted; paragraphs [0044-0045], [0074-0078]; table 1-4; claims 16); estimation processing of a time period causing a work delay using a difference between a start time and a length between each of successive non-work time periods based on a relationship between a plurality of processes and each of the non-work time periods (the computing system estimates a timing deviation comparison determines if the current process was performed within two standard deviations of the time that the given process in the representative data set was performed, and does this by finding a difference in cycle times over a predetermined number of cycles; paragraphs [0100], [0108]); output processing of outputting information on a display indicating the work state (the system comprises a display to display the results of the work state determination; paragraphs [0095], [0113]); and output processing of outputting information on the display relating to a change in each of the work states over time (this information is output and displayed via graphical user interfaces presented on displays connected to the system and includes information such as but not limited to tables 1-4; paragraphs [0104], [0107-0108]).
As per claim 15, AKELLA discloses the non-transitory computer-readable storage medium according to claim 11, wherein the program causes the computer to further execute: image storage processing of storing the image (the system stores data locally in a memory storage unit which stores data and included image data; paragraphs [0042], [0093-0094], [0112]); and reception processing of receiving designation of the time periods (work cycle parameters include time duration (time period) of the work cycle being tracked for completion; paragraph [0071], [0108]), and the output processing outputs the image captured in a time period of interest based on the designation (the system is adapted to output via a display of a graphic user interface 155 results and completion of the work task assigned using the parameters of the described system; paragraphs [0100], [0113]).
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 103 which forms the basis for all obviousness rejections set forth in this Office action:
A patent for a claimed invention may not be obtained, notwithstanding that the claimed invention is not identically disclosed as set forth in section 102, if the differences between the claimed invention and the prior art are such that the claimed invention as a whole would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which the claimed invention pertains. Patentability shall not be negated by the manner in which the invention was made.
The text of those sections of Title 35, U.S. Code not included in this action can be found in a prior Office action.
The factual inquiries for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows:
1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art.
2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue.
3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art.
4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or non-obviousness.
Claims 2-4, 7-9, and 12-14 are rejected under 35 § U.S.C. 103 as being obvious over US 2019/0139441 A1 to AKELLA et al. (hereinafter “AKELLA”) in view of US 2016/0125348 A1 to DYER et al. (hereinafter “DYER”).
As per claim 2, AKELLA discloses the assistance system according to claim 1, wherein the at least one processor is further configured to execute the instructions to: detect hands from images obtained by imaging the plurality of work areas in which work is performed for the plurality of processes (as seen in tables 1-4 hand motion detection of the users hand performing the cyclical work task is tracked while the user performs the work cycle within the defined region of interest, it is stated the work task may be any kind of task that is performed repeatedly or in a cycle; paragraphs [0036], [0041], [0052], [0074-0076]; tables 1-4). AKELLA fails to disclose respectively, and determine, as the work state, the non-work time period in which no hand is continuously detected in each of the plurality of work areas.
DYER discloses respectively, and determine, as the work state, the non-work time period in which no hand is continuously detected in each of the plurality of work areas (a motion tracking system 300 which w2ould track user motion including hand motion to provide motion tracking in a workplace the system includes activity estimator 314 configured to connect with a wearable element 108 which would be placed on the users hand to detect motion and the activity estimator is configured to track activity of the worker including an activity percentage score to determine if a user is resting and can further be used to time break times; abstract; figs 1, 4, 11, 13; paragraphs [0076], [0080], [0083], [0090]).
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify AKELLA to have determine a non-work time period in which no hand is continuously detected in each of the plurality of work areas of DYER reference. The Suggestion/motivation for doing so would have been to provide the ability via activity estimator 314 to generate activity reports, which can be used to assess productivity and to identify potential employee issues as suggested by DYER at paragraph [0090]. Further, one skilled in the art could have combined the elements as described above by known method with no change in their respective functions, and the combination would have yielded nothing more than predictable results. Therefore, it would have been obvious to combine DYER with AKELLA to obtain the invention as specified in claim 2.
As per claim 3, AKELLA in view of DYER discloses the assistance system according to claim 2. Modified AKELLA fails to disclose wherein the at least one processor is further configured to execute the instructions to: determine a process in which the work is stagnant, from among the plurality of processes, as the work state, based on the non-work time period determined for each of the plurality of work areas.
DYER discloses wherein the at least one processor is further configured to execute the instructions to: determine a process in which the work is stagnant, from among the plurality of processes, as the work state, based on the non-work time period determined for each of the plurality of work areas (the activity estimator 314 of the motion tracking system is adapted to compute a activity percentage as seen in the table of fig 11 allowing the owner of the system to monitor when employees are working, resting and taking breaks and to determine if break times are being adhered to within one of the work area’s denoted with a job name in the prior mention table which defines the work areas and if the activity percentage was zero it is determined the work is stagnant or stopped; abstract; figs 1, 4, 11, 13; paragraphs [0076], [0080], [0083], [0090]).
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify AKELLA to have determine a process in which the work is stagnant of DYER reference. The Suggestion/motivation for doing so would have been to provide the ability via activity estimator 314 to generate activity reports, which can be used to assess productivity, track work progress, and to identify potential employee issues as suggested by DYER at paragraph [0090]. Further, one skilled in the art could have combined the elements as described above by known method with no change in their respective functions, and the combination would have yielded nothing more than predictable results. Therefore, it would have been obvious to combine DYER with AKELLA to obtain the invention as specified in claim 3.
As per claim 4, AKELLA in view of DYER discloses the assistance system according to claim 2. Modified AKELLA fails to disclose wherein the at least one processor is further configured to execute the instructions to: estimate the time period causing the work delay in which the work is stagnant, based on the relationship between the plurality of processes and the non-work time period determined for each of the plurality of work areas.
DYER discloses wherein the at least one processor is further configured to execute the instructions to: estimate the time period causing the work delay in which the work is stagnant, based on the relationship between the plurality of processes and the non-work time period determined for each of the plurality of work areas (the activity estimator based on the activity percentage determined for each worker is able to determine if break times are being adhered to and can monitor if an employee is taking extended break times for the assigned job acting as the assigned work area and a defined break schedule that is to be adhered to, further the activity estimator which determines activity percentage can track the time periods over which the activity percentage has fallen below a certain level and determine a delay has occurred over the tracked time period; fig 11; paragraphs [0032], [0080], [0083], [0090], [0111]).
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify AKELLA to have the ability to estimate a time period causing an occurrence of a non-work time period of the process in which the work is stagnant of DYER reference. The Suggestion/motivation for doing so would have been to provide the ability via activity estimator 314 to generate activity reports, which can be used to assess productivity and to identify potential employee issues as suggested by DYER at paragraph [0090]. Further, one skilled in the art could have combined the elements as described above by known method with no change in their respective functions, and the combination would have yielded nothing more than predictable results. Therefore, it would have been obvious to combine DYER with AKELLA to obtain the invention as specified in claim 4.
As per claim 7, AKELLA discloses the assistance method according to claim 6, comprising: detecting hands from images obtained by imaging a plurality of work areas in which work is performed for the plurality of processes, respectively (as seen in tables 1-4 hand motion detection of the users hand performing the cyclical work task is tracked while the user performs the work cycle within the defined region of interest, it is stated the work task may be any kind of task that is performed repeatedly or in a cycle; paragraphs [0036], [0041], [0052], [0074-0076]; tables 1-4). AKELLA fails to disclose and determining, as the work state, a non-work time period in which no hand is continuously detected in each of the plurality of work areas.
DYER discloses and determining, as the work state, a non-work time period in which no hand is continuously detected in each of the plurality of work areas (a motion tracking system 300 which would track user motion including hand motion to provide motion tracking in a workplace the system includes activity estimator 314 configured to connect with a wearable element 108 which would be placed on the users hand to detect motion and the activity estimator is configured to track activity of the worker including an activity percentage score to determine if a user is resting and can further be used to time break times; abstract; figs 1, 4, 11, 13; paragraphs [0076], [0080], [0083], [0090]).
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify AKELLA to have the ability of determining, as the work state, a non-work time period in which no hand is continuously detected in each of the plurality of work areas of DYER reference. The Suggestion/motivation for doing so would have been to provide the ability via activity estimator 314 to generate activity reports, which can be used to assess productivity and to identify potential employee issues as suggested by DYER at paragraph [0090]. Further, one skilled in the art could have combined the elements as described above by known method with no change in their respective functions, and the combination would have yielded nothing more than predictable results. Therefore, it would have been obvious to combine DYER with AKELLA to obtain the invention as specified in claim 7.
As per claim 8, AKELLA in view of DYER discloses the assistance method according to claim 7. Modified AKELLA fails to disclose comprising: determining, as the work state, a process in which the work is stagnant from among the plurality of processes, based on the non-work time period determined for each of the plurality of work areas.
DYER discloses comprising: determining, as the work state, a process in which the work is stagnant from among the plurality of processes, based on the non-work time period determined for each of the plurality of work areas (the activity estimator 314 of the motion tracking system is adapted to compute a activity percentage as seen in the table of fig 11 allowing the owner of the system to monitor when employees are working, resting and taking breaks and to determine if break times are being adhered to within one of the work area’s denoted with a job name in the prior mention table which defines the work areas and if the activity percentage was zero it is determined the work is stagnant or stopped; abstract; figs 1, 4, 11, 13; paragraphs [0076], [0080], [0083], [0090]).
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify AKELLA to have determining that a process in which the work is stagnant from among the plurality of processes, based on the non-work time period determined for each of the plurality of work areas of DYER reference. The Suggestion/motivation for doing so would have been to provide the ability via activity estimator 314 to generate activity reports, which can be used to assess productivity, track work progress, and to identify potential employee issues as suggested by DYER at paragraph [0090]. Further, one skilled in the art could have combined the elements as described above by known method with no change in their respective functions, and the combination would have yielded nothing more than predictable results. Therefore, it would have been obvious to combine DYER with AKELLA to obtain the invention as specified in claim 8.
As per claim 9, AKELLA in view of DYER discloses the assistance method according to claim 7. Modified AKELLA fails to disclose comprising: estimating the time period causing the work delay in which the work is stagnant based on the relationship between the plurality of processes and the non-work time period determined for each of the plurality of work areas.
DYER discloses comprising: estimating the time period causing the work delay in which the work is stagnant based on the relationship between the plurality of processes and the non-work time period determined for each of the plurality of work areas (the activity estimator based on the activity percentage determined for each worker is able to determine if break times are being adhered to and can monitor if an employee is taking extended break times for the assigned job acting as the assigned work area and a defined break schedule that is to be adhered to, further the activity estimator which determines activity percentage can track the time periods over which the activity percentage has fallen below a certain level and determine a delay has occurred over the tracked time period; fig 11; paragraphs [0032], [0080], [0083], [0090], [0111]).
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify AKELLA to have estimating the time period causing the work delay in which the work is stagnant based on the relationship between the plurality of processes of DYER reference. The Suggestion/motivation for doing so would have been to provide the ability via activity estimator 314 to generate activity reports, which can be used to assess productivity and to identify potential employee issues as suggested by DYER at paragraph [0090]. Further, one skilled in the art could have combined the elements as described above by known method with no change in their respective functions, and the combination would have yielded nothing more than predictable results. Therefore, it would have been obvious to combine DYER with AKELLA to obtain the invention as specified in claim 9.
As per claim 12, AKELLA discloses the non-transitory computer-readable storage medium according to claim 11, wherein: the detection processing detects hands from images obtained by imaging a plurality of work areas in which work is performed for the plurality of processes, respectively (as seen in tables 1-4 hand motion detection of the users hand performing the cyclical work task is tracked while the user performs the work cycle within the defined region of interest, it is stated the work task may be any kind of task that is performed repeatedly or in a cycle; paragraphs [0036], [0041], [0052], [0074-0076]; tables 1-4). AKELLA fails to disclose and the determination processing detects, as the work state, a non-work time period in which no hand is continuously detected in each of the plurality of work areas.
DYER discloses and the determination processing detects, as the work state, a non-work time period in which no hand is continuously detected in each of the plurality of work areas (a motion tracking system 300 to provide motion tracking in a workplace the system includes activity estimator 314 configured to connect with a wearable element 108 which would be placed on the users hand to detect motion and the activity estimator is configured to track activity of the worker including an activity percentage score to determine if a user is resting and can further be used to time break times; abstract; figs 1, 4, 11, 13; paragraphs [0076], [0080], [0083], [0090]).
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify AKELLA to have determination processing detects, as the work state, a non-work time period in which no hand is continuously detected in each of the plurality of work area of DYER reference. The Suggestion/motivation for doing so would have been to provide the ability via activity estimator 314 to generate activity reports, which can be used to assess productivity and to identify potential employee issues as suggested by DYER at paragraph [0090]. Further, one skilled in the art could have combined the elements as described above by known method with no change in their respective functions, and the combination would have yielded nothing more than predictable results. Therefore, it would have been obvious to combine DYER with AKELLA to obtain the invention as specified in claim 12.
As per claim 13, AKELLA in view of DYER discloses the non-transitory computer-readable storage medium according to claim 12. Modified AKELLA fails to disclose wherein: the determination processing determines, as the work state, a process in which the work is stagnant from among the plurality of processes, based on the non-work time period determined for each of the plurality of work areas.
DYER discloses wherein: the determination processing determines, as the work state, a process in which the work is stagnant from among the plurality of processes, based on the non-work time period determined for each of the plurality of work areas (the activity estimator 314 of the motion tracking system is adapted to compute a activity percentage as seen in the table of fig 11 allowing the owner of the system to monitor when employees are working, resting and taking breaks and to determine if break times are being adhered to within one of the work area’s denoted with a job name in the prior mention table which defines the work areas and if the activity percentage was zero it is determined the work is stagnant or stopped; abstract; figs 1, 4, 11, 13; paragraphs [0076], [0080], [0083], [0090]).
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify AKELLA to have the determination processing determines, as the work state, a process in which the work is stagnant from among the plurality of processes of DYER reference. The Suggestion/motivation for doing so would have been to provide the ability via activity estimator 314 to generate activity reports, which can be used to assess productivity, track work progress, and to identify potential employee issues as suggested by DYER at paragraph [0090]. Further, one skilled in the art could have combined the elements as described above by known method with no change in their respective functions, and the combination would have yielded nothing more than predictable results. Therefore, it would have been obvious to combine DYER with AKELLA to obtain the invention as specified in claim 13.
As per claim 14, AKELLA in view of DYER discloses the non-transitory computer-readable storage medium according to claim 12. Modified AKELLA fails to disclose wherein the determination processing estimates a time period causing an occurrence of a non-work time period of the process in which the work is stagnant based on a relationship between the plurality of processes and the non-work time period determined for each of the plurality of work areas.
DYER discloses wherein the determination processing estimates a time period causing an occurrence of a non-work time period of the process in which the work is stagnant based on a relationship between the plurality of processes and the non-work time period determined for each of the plurality of work areas (the activity estimator based on the activity percentage determined for each worker is able to determine if break times are being adhered to and can monitor if an employee is taking extended break times for the assigned job acting as the assigned work area and a defined break schedule that is to be adhered to, further the activity estimator which determines activity percentage can track the time periods over which the activity percentage has fallen below a certain level and determine a delay has occurred over the tracked time period; fig 11; paragraphs [0032], [0080], [0083], [0090], [0111]).
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify AKELLA to have wherein the at least one processor is further configured to execute the instructions to estimate a time period causing an occurrence of a non-work time period of the process in which the work is stagnant, based on a relationship between the plurality of processes and the non-work time period determined for each of the plurality of work areas of DYER reference. The Suggestion/motivation for doing so would have been to provide the ability via activity estimator 314 to generate activity reports, which can be used to assess productivity and to identify potential employee issues as suggested by DYER at paragraph [0090]. Further, one skilled in the art could have combined the elements as described above by known method with no change in their respective functions, and the combination would have yielded nothing more than predictable results. Therefore, it would have been obvious to combine DYER with AKELLA to obtain the invention as specified in claim 14.
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.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to DEVIN JACOB DHOOGE whose telephone number is (571) 270-0999. The examiner can normally be reached 7:30-5:00.
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, Andrew Bee can be reached on (571) 270-5183. 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.
/Devin Dhooge/
USPTO Patent Examiner
Art Unit 2677
/ANDREW W BEE/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2677