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. This is the first office action on the merits and is responsive to the papers filed 12/08/2022. Claims 1-20 are currently pending and examined below. Information Disclosure Statement The information disclosure statements submitted by Applicant are in compliance with the provision of 37 CFR 1.97, 1.98 and MPEP § 609. They have been placed in the application file and the information referred to therein has been considered as to the merits. Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112 The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(b): (b) CONCLUSION.— The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention. The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA), second paragraph: The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the applicant regards as his invention. Claims 8 and 18 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA), second paragraph, as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor (or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the applicant), regards as the invention. The claims recite a Markush group consisting of Euclidean distance, Manhattan distance, and Hamming distance. Euclidean and Manhattan distances are continuous geometric distance metrics applicable to real-valued coordinate spaces, whereas Hamming distance is a discrete metric applicable to symbol strings or bit vectors. Accordingly, the recited alternatives do not share a single common structural or functional characteristic, rendering the scope of the claim unclear. Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103 The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 103 which forms the basis for all obviousness rejections set forth in this Office action: A patent for a claimed invention may not be obtained, notwithstanding that the claimed invention is not identically disclosed as set forth in section 102, if the differences between the claimed invention and the prior art are such that the claimed invention as a whole would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which the claimed invention pertains. Patentability shall not be negated by the manner in which the invention was made. Claims 1-5, 7-15, 17-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Bhowmick et al. (US 20190080503 A1, “ Bhowmick ”) in view of Komeichi et al. (US 10488196 B2, “ Komeichi ”). Regarding claim 1, Bhowmick teaches a method for tracking an object comprising: receiving point cloud data from a three-dimensional (3D) coordinate measurement device, the point cloud data corresponding at least in part to the object (Para 4 and 37, “…acquiring a reference point-cloud defining a reference surface and a template point-cloud defining a template surface…”); analyzing, by a processing system, the point cloud data by comparing a point of the point cloud data to a corresponding reference point from reference data to determine a distance between the point and the corresponding reference point, wherein the point and the corresponding reference point are associated with the object (Para 50, “…determine a corresponding reference vertex for every template vertex……determine vertex distance between every template vertex and the determined corresponding reference vertex…”); determining, by the processing system, whether a change to a location of the object occurred by comparing the distance to a distance threshold (Para 4, 50 “…wherein the determined vertex distance above a predefined vertex distance threshold is indicative of the change… ” ) ; and responsive to determining that the change to the location of the object occurred, displaying a change indicium on a display of the processing system (Para 32 “…graphical user interface to display the change detection results” and Para 51 “An output point-cloud is generated to indicate the change detected… and can be displayed.”), Bhowmick fails to explicitly teach wherein the point cloud data is captured by performing a scan using the 3D coordinate measurement device (Col 9: lines 43-49, “A distance measuring light is irradiated… and scanned over a total circumference.”), wherein the 3D coordinate measurement device: performs a plurality of rotations about an axis during the scan (Col 13: lines 20-21 “The point cloud data is rotated one round (360°) around the vertical axis as the center.”), captures a plurality of 3D coordinates of the object during each of the plurality of rotations (Col 11: lines 55-59, Col 14: lines 21-25), transmits, to the processing system (Fig.1 control arithmetic unit 15), a first plurality of 3D coordinates of the object captured during a first rotation of the plurality of rotations of the 3D coordinate measurement device (Col 11: lines 54-55), and transmits, to the processing system, a second plurality of 3D coordinates of the object captured during a second rotation of the plurality of rotations of the 3D coordinate measurement device (Col 12: lines 15-23). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the invention to combine the teachings of Bhowmick with Komeichi . Bhowmick teaches analyzing point cloud data to detect changes by comparing distances between corresponding points and reference data, but does not limit how the point cloud data is acquired. Komeichi teaches a laser scanner that acquires point cloud data by rotational scanning and transmits the data to a processing system. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to use Komeichi’s laser scanner to acquire the point cloud data used by Bhowmick , as this represents the use of a known and predictable scanning technique to provide suitable input data for Bhowmick’s change-detection processing. Bhowmick , in view of Komeichi , teaches the processing system displaying the first plurality of 3D coordinates on the display ( Bhowmick , para 25 “The data sources … connected to a computing device through a network” and para 32 “…graphical user interface to display the change detection results”. Komeichi discloses transmitting three-dimensional coordinate measurement data acquired by rotational scanning to a control arithmetic unit for processing. Although Komeichi does not explicitly disclose displaying the processed point cloud data, Bhowmick teaches displaying point cloud data and change indicia on a display. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to output the processed point cloud data acquired by Komeichi to a display as taught by Bhowmick in order to visualize the scanned object and monitor changes, which represents a predictable use of prior art elements according to their established functions.), the processing system displaying, on the display, the second plurality of 3D coordinates instead of the first plurality of 3D coordinates ( Bhowmick , para 37 “reference point-cloud … template point-cloud acquired at different time instances”. Bhowmick teaches processing and displaying point cloud data and updating the displayed output based on newly analyzed point cloud data. Komeichi teaches acquiring successive pluralities of three-dimensional coordinates during successive rotational scans and transmitting those pluralities to a processing system. Although Komeichi does not explicitly disclose displaying the successive point cloud datasets, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to display the newly acquired point cloud data in place of previously displayed point cloud data as taught by Bhowmick , since displaying updated scan data is a predictable and expected function when monitoring objects using point cloud data.). Regarding claim 2, Bhowmick , in view of Komeichi , teaches the method of claim 1, wherein the 3D coordinate measurement device transmits the first plurality of 3D coordinates and the second plurality of 3D coordinates to a cloud computing system via network ( Bhowmick , para 25 “The data sources may receive the point-cloud sets acquired from a plurality of 3D-scanners such as Kinect® or aerial Light Detection and Ranging (LiDAR) laser scanners or the like. The data sources 106-1 to 106-n may be connected to a computing device 104 through a network 108.”). Regarding claim 3, Bhowmick , in view of Komeichi , teaches the method of claim 1, wherein the processing system transmits the first plurality of 3D coordinates and the second plurality of 3D coordinates to a cloud computing system ( Bhowmick , para 27, 34 “The repository may store the point-clouds … and intermediate processed data”). Regarding claim 4, Bhowmick , in view of Komeichi , teaches the method of claim 1, wherein the object is a geometric primitive (Para 21, 49-50. Bhowmick discloses representing an object using point cloud data comprising vertices and geometric relationships, which encompasses representing the object as a geometric primitive. Also, under BRI “a geometric primitive” is broad (plane, surface, mesh element, vertex set……………). Regarding claim 5, Bhowmick , in view of Komeichi , teaches the method of claim 1, wherein the object is a planar surface ( Bhowmick , Para 46 “identifying a local reference planar surface represented by the corresponding plurality of neighbor points and a local template planar…”). Regarding claim 7, Bhowmick , in view of Komeichi , teaches the method of claim 1, wherein the object is a free-form surface (( Bhowmick,para 21, 23, 50. Bhowmick discloses detecting changes in surfaces represented by point cloud data by comparing corresponding vertices of a template point cloud and a reference point cloud and identifying deformed vertices based on a distance threshold. Because Bhowmick represents surface geometry using unconstrained point cloud vertices without limiting the surface to a predefined parametric or analytic form, the disclosed surface representation encompasses free-form surfaces under the broadest reasonable interpretation . See also, para 55 , Bhowmick identifying a car…… …) . Regarding claim 8, Bhowmick , in view of Komeichi , teaches the method of claim 1, wherein the distance is selected from the group consisting of a Euclidean distance ( Bhowmick,para 50 “…determine vertex distance between every template vertex and the determined corresponding reference vertex”. Bhowmick teaches determining distances between 3D coordinates, which inherently involves Euclidean distance, and the use of alternative distance metrics would have been an obvious mathematical variation.), a Hamming distance, and a Manhattan distance. Regarding claim 9, Bhowmick , in view of Komeichi , teaches the method of claim 1, wherein the 3D coordinate measurement device is a laser scanner ( Komeichi , col 3: lines 58-60). Regarding claim 10, Bhowmick , in view of Komeichi , teaches the method of claim 9, wherein the laser scanner comprises: a scanner processing system including a scanner controller ( Komeichi , Fig. 1, col 7: line 51-col 8: line 15, Komeichi discloses a scanner processing system including a scanner controller in the form of a control arithmetic unit that controls scanning and processing of measurement data.); a housing ( Komeichi , Fig. 1, frame unit 5, col 3: line 61 to col: line 3); and a 3D scanner disposed within the housing and operably coupled to the scanner processing system (Fig. 1, col 3: line 61 to col: line 3. Komeichi discloses a three-dimensional scanner disposed within the frame (housing) and operably coupled to the scanner processing system.), the 3D scanner having a light source ( Komeichi , Fig. 1, col 5: lines 25-29, istance measuring light emitter 31 is, e.g., a semiconductor laser), a beam steering unit ( Komeichi , Fig. 1, col 5: lines 30-36, scanning mirror 7), a first angle measuring device ( Komeichi , Fig.1, col 4: lines 16-25 horizontal angle detector 14), a second angle measuring device ( Komeichi , Fig.1, col 4: lines 34-36, vertical angle detector 18), and a light receiver ( Komeichi , Fig.1, Col 6: lines 45-49, col 4: lines 34-36, photodetection element 44), the beam steering unit cooperating with the light source and the light receiver to define a scan area ( Komeichi , Fig. 1, col 5: lines 21-36, col 6: lines 34-54. Komeichi discloses that the scanning mirror directs the emitted light across a measurement area and that reflected light is received during scanning.), the light source and the light receiver configured to cooperate with the scanner processing system to determine a first distance to a first object point based at least in part on a transmitting of a light by the light source and a receiving of a reflected light by the light receiver ( Komeichi , Fig. 1, col 5: lines 21-36, col 6: lines 34-54. Komeichi discloses determining a distance based on the emission of distance-measuring light and reception of reflected light under control of the control arithmetic unit.), the 3D scanner configured to cooperate with the scanner processing system to determine 3D coordinates of the first object point based at least in part on the first distance, a first angle of rotation, and a second angle of rotation ( Komeichi , Fig. 1, col 6: lines 55-59). Claims 11-15, 17- 20 are system claims corresponding to method claims 1 -10. They are rejected for the same reasons. Claims 6, 16 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Bhowmick in view of Komeichi and Denis Wohlfeld (US 20190285404 A1, “ Wohlfeld ”). Regarding claim 6, Bhowmick , in view of Komeichi , fails to explicitly teach but Wohlfeld teaches the method of claim 1, wherein the object is a curved surface (Para 60, the surfaces may be curved). One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to apply the curved-surface representation taught by Wohlfeld to the point-cloud-based change detection method of Bhowmick because Bhowmick analyzes point cloud data to detect changes in object geometry, while Wohlfeld explicitly teaches that point cloud data may represent curved surfaces. Incorporating curved surface representations into Bhowmick’s framework would allow the same distance-based comparison and thresholding techniques to be applied to objects having curved geometry, which represents a predictable and straightforward extension of point cloud analysis techniques to different surface geometries. Claims 16 is a system claim corresponding to method claim 6. It is rejected for the same reasons. Conclusion The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. Oliver et al. (US 20150160347 A1), teaches using a two-dimensional scanner to speed registration of three-dimensional scan data Igal et al. (US 20190154824 A1), teaches method and apparatus for continous tracking in a multi-radar system Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JEMPSON NOEL whose telephone number is (571) 272-3376. The examiner can normally be reached on Monday-Friday 8:00-5:00. 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, Yuqing Xiao can be reached on (571) 270-3603. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300. Information regarding the status of an application may be obtained from the Patent Application Information Retrieval (PAIR) system. Status information for published applications may be obtained from either Private PAIR or Public PAIR. Status information for unpublished applications is available through Private PAIR only. For more information about the PAIR system, see https://ppair-my.uspto.gov/pair/PrivatePair. Should you have questions on access to the Private PAIR system, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative or access to the automated information system, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000. /JEMPSON NOEL/ Examiner, Art Unit 3645 /LUKE D RATCLIFFE/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3645