DETAILED ACTION
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 .
Continued Examination Under 37 CFR 1.114
A request for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, including the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e), was filed in this application after final rejection. Since this application is eligible for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114. Applicant's submission filed on 22Aug 2026 has been entered.
Response to Arguments
Examiner’s response re: 101 Rejection
Applicant’s arguments, see Pages 6-13, filed 22 Aug 2025, with respect to Claims 1-9have been fully considered and are persuasive. The 101 Rejection of Claims 1-9 has been withdrawn.
Examiner’s response re: 103 Rejection
Applicant’s arguments, see Pages 13-24, filed 22 Aug 2025, with respect to the rejection(s) of claim(s) 1-9 under 103 have been fully considered and are persuasive. Therefore, the rejection has been withdrawn. However, upon further consideration, a new ground(s) of rejection is made in view of Luca, Iida, Nellros, Araki, and Karri.
.
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 factual inquiries for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows:
1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art.
2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue.
3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art.
4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness.
This application currently names joint inventors. In considering patentability of the claims the examiner presumes that the subject matter of the various claims was commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the claimed invention(s) absent any evidence to the contrary. Applicant is advised of the obligation under 37 CFR 1.56 to point out the inventor and effective filing dates of each claim that was not commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the later invention in order for the examiner to consider the applicability of 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(C) for any potential 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) prior art against the later invention.
Claims 1 and 5 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over DeLuca et al. US 9228846 B2 (herein, Luca), in view of Karri et al., US 20230088692 A1 (Karri), Iida et al., US 20250123633 A1 (herein, Iida), and in further view of Araki et al., US 20240034335 A1 (herein, Araki).
Regarding Claims 1 and 5, Luca discloses, a management apparatus (Abstract) comprising:
an information acquirer (Claim 6 - GPS) configured to acquire a plurality of pieces of positional information of a device to be managed over a predetermined period (Claim 6 – “…to receive a set of preferences for generating a set of loop routes… type of transportation…travel time…”);
an acquired information storage configured to store the plurality of pieces of positional information (Col. 9, lines 1-5, “As another example, a storage device in data processing system 600 is any hardware apparatus that may store data. Memory 606, persistent storage 608, and computer readable media 620 are examples of storage devices in a tangible form.”);
an operation information manager configured to determine (Claim 13 – “…wherein each loop route of the set of loop routes starts and ends at the beginning location,…”), based on the plurality of pieces of positional information stored by the acquired information storage, an area (Claim 13 – “…at least a portion of a specified loop route…”) in which each positional information corresponding to a predetermined area (Claim 13 – “…the set of loop routes…”) are obtained the most in the predetermined period as a device presence area (FIG. 3 illustrates the area of the device presence and Claim 13 – “…does not overlap any other portion of the specified loop route…”) in which the device (type of transportation such as a vehicle in Claim 13) to be managed has been present in the predetermined period.
Luca discloses pieces of positional information and the device but does not disclose, wherein the pieces of positional information represent locational positions the device had been located.
However, Karri teaches, wherein the pieces of positional information represent locational positions the device had been located (¶[0042] – “…A driving log (e.g., relating to past locations, a complete history of trips taken within a selected time frame, a location inputted into a global positioning system (GPS) and/or maps program, among other things) may also be gathered from each of the autonomous vehicles to identify any utilized and/or unutilized computing resources. As described previously, any real-time monitoring (e.g., as same applies to the collection of dynamic and up-to-date driving logs here) requires the informed consent of all those people whose autonomous vehicle data is captured for analysis. An analysis of driving logs of each of the autonomous vehicles may disclose how the vehicles are running (e.g., including a timing, a speed, and/or a route traveled by the autonomous vehicles…”).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the apparatus as disclosed by Luca to include the positional information of the pieces as taught by Karri. Doing so, provides greater capability by enhancing the apparatus in managing the accuracy of the management apparatus in relation to the locational positions of the pieces.
Luca discloses the operation information manager, predetermined period, device, and an operation period (Claim 13 – “…set of preferences…at least a portion of a specified loop route…”) but does not disclose,
an input and output interface configured to output a result, comprising device presence area information relating to the device presence area, determined by the operation information manager, wherein the predetermined period is an operation period of the device to be managed.
However, Iida teaches,
an input and output interface (FIG. 2, #116 – input/output interface) configured to output a result, comprising device presence area information relating to the device presence area (FIG. 7 illustrates the device presence area), determined by the operation information manager (¶[0060] – “…transmits data to an output device such as a display, a speaker, or a printer via the input/output interface 116…”), wherein the predetermined period is an operation period of the device to be managed.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the apparatus as disclosed by modified Luca to include the device presence area and input/output interface and its corresponding result as taught by Iida. Doing so, provides greater capability by enhancing the apparatus by the illustration of the device presence area and the managing the accuracy of the management apparatus.
Modified Luca does not disclose, and wherein, based on the result comprising the device presence area information relating to the device presence area, information is communicated to the device to facilitate managing operation of the device or equipment associated with the device.
However, Araki teaches, wherein, based on the result comprising the device presence area information relating to the device presence area, information is communicated to the device to facilitate managing operation of the device or equipment associated with the device (¶0081] – “…wherein, based on the result comprising the device presence area information relating to the device presence area, information is communicated to the device to facilitate managing operation of the device or equipment associated with the device….”).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the apparatus as disclosed by modified Luca to include the device presence area and input/output interface and its corresponding result as taught by Iida. Doing so, provides greater capability by enhancing the apparatus by the illustration of the device presence area and the managing the accuracy of the management apparatus.
Claims 2-4 and 9 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over DeLuca et al. US 9228846 B2 (herein, Luca), in view of Iida et al., US 20250123633 A1 (herein, Iida), and in further view of Nellros et al., US 20200410861 A1 (herein, Nellros).
Regarding Claim 2, modified Luca discloses the operation information manager and positional information, but does not disclose,
wherein the operation information manager is configured to determine the device presence area in which the device to be managed has been present on the basis of positional information obtained outside the predetermined period when a predetermined number or more of pieces of positional information are not obtained in the predetermined period.
However, Nellros teaches, wherein the operation information manager is configured to determine the device presence area in which the device to be managed has been present on the basis of positional information obtained outside the predetermined period (¶[0060] – “…recorded at different points in time….”) when a predetermined number or more of pieces (FIG. 4A, #10) of positional information are not obtained in the predetermined period (¶[0060] – “…position of each individual vehicle is typically recorded periodically…” – i.e., being periodically recorded, thus not in the predetermined period).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the apparatus as disclosed by modified Luca to include the timing after an end per the predetermined period as taught by Nellros. Doing so, provides greater capability by enhancing the apparatus in managing the accuracy of the management apparatus.
Regarding Claim 3, modified Luca discloses the operation information manager and predetermined period but does not disclose, wherein the operation information manager is configured to determine the device presence area in which the device to be managed has been present on the basis of positional information obtained at a timing after an end of the predetermined period and closest to the end of the predetermined period.
However, Nellros further discloses, wherein the operation information manager is configured to determine determines the presence device area (FIG. 4b illustrates the area) in which the device to be managed has been present on the basis of positional information obtained at a timing after an end (¶[0061] – “…only stops where a vehicle has stopped for some time is relevant..” – i.e., the stop has a timing which is at the end) of the predetermined period and closest to the end of the predetermined period (¶[0061] – “…i.e. stayed for a pre-determined time…”).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the apparatus as disclosed by modified Luca to include the timing closest to the end per the predetermined period as taught by Nellros. Doing so, provides greater capability by enhancing the apparatus in managing the accuracy of the management apparatus.
Regarding Claim 4, modified Luca discloses the operation information manager and predetermined period but does not disclose, wherein the operation information manager is configured to determine the device presence area in which the device to be managed has been present on the basis of positional information obtained at a timing closest to the predetermined period.
However, Nellros teaches, wherein the operation information manager is configured to determine the device presence area in which the device to be managed has been present on the basis of positional information obtained at a timing closest to the predetermined period (FIG. 4b, ¶[0062] – “…one cluster 30 will represent vehicles stops 20 that are located close to each other…”).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the apparatus as disclosed by modified Luca to include the timing closest to the predetermined period as taught by Nellros. Doing so, provides greater capability by enhancing the apparatus in managing the accuracy of the management apparatus.
Regarding Claim 9, modified Luca further discloses, wherein the plurality of pieces of positional information includes a first positional information (Col. 3, lines 63-68 – “…a first house…”) and a second positional information (Col. 3, lines 63-68 – “…a second house…”),
the first positional information is acquired at a first point (Col. 3, lines 63-68 – “…a route that starts …” i.e., thus a first point) included in the predetermined area, and
the second positional information is acquired at a second point(Col. 3, lines 63-68 – “…goes 5 blocks north…” – i.e., thus a second point) included in the predetermined area, the second point being different from the first point.
Claims 6-8 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Nellros , in view of Karri et al., US 20230088692 A1 (Karri), Iida et al., US 20250123633 A1 (herein, Iida), and in further view of Luca.
Regarding Claim 6, Nellros discloses, a management method (FIG. 3, #200, Abstract) comprising:
acquiring a plurality of pieces of positional information (¶[0049] – “…determine a geographical position…”) of a device (FIG. 2, #12) to be managed over a predetermined period (¶[0050] – “…determined continuously, or at a certain pre-determined or configurable time interval according to various embodiments…”);
storing the plurality of pieces of positional information (¶[0005] – “…the information obtained from actual rests performed by crews of individual vehicles, store the information in a database and enable individual vehicles to share the information…”)
determining, based on the plurality of pieces of positional information stored, a device presences area (¶[0042] – “simple parking area” – for a device) in which the device (12) to be managed has been present on the basis of positional information obtained outside the predetermined period (FIG. 4a, ¶[0060] – “…each individual vehicle is typically recorded periodically…”) when each piece of the positional information corresponding to predetermined areas is not obtained in the predetermined period (¶[0060] – “…position of each individual vehicle is typically recorded periodically…” – i.e., being periodically recorded, thus not in the predetermined period).
Nellros discloses pieces of positional information and the device but does not disclose, wherein the pieces of positional information represent locational positions the device had been located.
However, Karri teaches, wherein the pieces of positional information represent locational positions the device had been located (¶[0042] – “…A driving log (e.g., relating to past locations, a complete history of trips taken within a selected time frame, a location inputted into a global positioning system (GPS) and/or maps program, among other things) may also be gathered from each of the autonomous vehicles to identify any utilized and/or unutilized computing resources. As described previously, any real-time monitoring (e.g., as same applies to the collection of dynamic and up-to-date driving logs here) requires the informed consent of all those people whose autonomous vehicle data is captured for analysis. An analysis of driving logs of each of the autonomous vehicles may disclose how the vehicles are running (e.g., including a timing, a speed, and/or a route traveled by the autonomous vehicles…”).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the apparatus as disclosed by Luca to include the positional information of the pieces as taught by Karri. Doing so, provides greater capability by enhancing the apparatus in managing the accuracy of the management apparatus in relation to the locational positions of the pieces.
Modified Nellros discloses the predetermined period but does not disclose, outputting a result determined, wherein the predetermined period is an operation period of the device to be managed.
However, modified Luca teaches, outputting a result determined (Col. 7, lines 49-51 – “…input/output unit 612 may send output to a printer. Display 614 provides a mechanism to display information to a user….”), wherein the predetermined period is an operation period of the device to be managed (Claim 13 – “…set of preferences…at least a portion of a specified loop route…”).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the management method as disclosed by Nellros to include the outputting a result and the operation period as taught by Iida. Doing so, provides the user with additional information so as to improve his decision making ability regarding the management method.
Modified Nellros does not disclose, and wherein, based on the result comprising the device presence area information relating to the device presence area, information is communicated to the device to facilitate managing operation of the device or equipment associated with the device.
However, Araki teaches, wherein, based on the result comprising the device presence area information relating to the device presence area, information is communicated to the device to facilitate managing operation of the device or equipment associated with the device (¶0081] – “…wherein, based on the result comprising the device presence area information relating to the device presence area, information is communicated to the device to facilitate managing operation of the device or equipment associated with the device….”).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the apparatus as disclosed by modified Luca to include the device presence area and input/output interface and its corresponding result as taught by Iida. Doing so, provides greater capability by enhancing the apparatus by the illustration of the device presence area and the managing the accuracy of the management apparatus.
Regarding Claim 7, Nellros further discloses, wherein the determining of the device presence area comprises determining the device presence area (FIG. 4b) in which the device (12) to be managed has been present on the basis of positional information obtained at a timing (FIG. 4b, ¶[0061] – “…one stop is typically defined by time…”) after an end of the predetermined period (¶[0061] - “…stop…” – i.e., the stop has an end and predetermined time period to the stop) and closest to the end of the predetermined period ([0061]).
Regarding Claim 8, Nellros further discloses, wherein the determining of the device presence area comprises determining the device presence area (FIG. 4b-c illustrates and area) in which the device to be managed has been present on the basis of positional information obtained at a timing after an end (¶[0061] – “…only stops where a vehicle has stopped for some time is relevant..” – i.e., the stop has a timing which is at the end) of the predetermined period and closest to the end of the predetermined period (¶[0061] – “…i.e. stayed for a pre-determined time…”).
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. The references cited but not utilized in the Office Action pertain to management apparatus and methods.
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 LUIS G DEL VALLE whose telephone number is (303)297-4313. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday, 0730 - 1630 MST.
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, Anne Antonucci can be reached on (313) 446-6519. 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.
/LUIS G DEL VALLE/Examiner, Art Unit 3666
/ANNE MARIE ANTONUCCI/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3666