DETAILED ACTION
The present office action is responsive to the applicant’s filing an amendment on 07/01/2026.
The application has claim 1 present and has been amended. Claims 2-22 have been cancelled. All present claims have been examined.
Previous rejections under 35 USC § 101 and 35 USC § 103 have been withdrawn as necessitated by the claim amendments.
This action is made Final.
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 .
Examiner Notes
Examiner cites particular columns, paragraphs, figures and line numbers in the references as applied to the claims below for the convenience of the applicant. Although the specified citations are representative of the teachings in the art and are applied to the specific limitations within the individual claim, other passages and figures may apply as well. It is respectfully requested that, in preparing responses, the applicant fully consider the references in their entirety as potentially teaching all or part of the claimed invention, as well as the context of the passage as taught by the prior art or disclosed by the examiner. The entire reference is considered to provide disclosure relating to the claimed invention. The claims & only the claims form the metes & bounds of the invention. Office personnel are to give the claims their broadest reasonable interpretation in light of the supporting disclosure. Unclaimed limitations appearing in the specification are not read into the claim. Prior art was referenced using terminology familiar to one of ordinary skill in the art. Such an approach is broad in concept and can be either explicit or implicit in meaning. Examiner's Notes are provided with the cited references to assist the applicant to better understand how the examiner interprets the applied prior art. Such comments are entirely consistent with the intent & spirit of compact prosecution.
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.
Claim(s) 1 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Matsunaga (US 20210166180), in view of Kang (KR 20190041651) English translation provided and in view of MATSUYAMA WO2021006183A1 (English translation).
In regards to claim 1, Matsunaga teaches a method of controlling an information processing apparatus, including a processor the method comprising: receiving, a first signal output from a first sensor, wherein the first signal includes information on a location of a worker associated with the time information (see para 8-12, 50: on para 8 teaches “a work identification unit that identifies a work content and a working hour of a worker based on time-series data of position information of the worker at least in a work region”. Para 11 teaches “a position information acquisition device that acquires position information of a worker in at least a work region as time-series data”. On para 50 teaches “the work evaluation system according to the present embodiment, a work content of a worker is identified based on a work position of the worker by acquiring position information of the worker in the work region S. Further, in a case where at least the position information of the worker in the work region S is acquired as time-series data, it is possible to identify where the worker currently stays in the work region S and to where the worker moved”. On para 64 teaches “motion information of the body part of the worker may be information based on a measurement value of a sensor that can detect the movement or posture of the body part, such as an acceleration sensor. Further, information acquired by spatial scanning such as LiDAR may be used as the motion information of the body part of the worker. The motion information of the body part of the worker that is acquired by the motion information acquisition device is output to the information processing apparatus”),
and information on a state of a production apparatus (see abstract and at least para 8-12, 51-52, 75, 153; time information associated to worker and production apparatus. On para 51 teaches “Examples of the work result information include the number of products (that is, a production amount) processed in the work lines L1 to L3, a quality of a processed product, and the like. Such work result information of the work lines L1 to L3 can be acquired by, for example, capturing an image of a product conveyed on the line with an image capturing device, and the like“. On para 153 teaches “the worker can include a factory machine. A machine can also be considered as a worker in a wide sense, and it is also possible to evaluate a work status by using the work evaluation system of the present technology based on data indicating an operating status of the machine”); and
displaying, by the processor, the accumulated time in the first combination of the location of the worker and the state of the production apparatus on a display screen (see FIG. 5-8 and at least para 82-95: presents quantified information based on the data from the worker and the production apparatus. On Para 94 teaches “the quantified information generation unit 115 may record the generated quantified information in the quantified information DB 125, or may perform processing of outputting the quantified information to the output unit 43 to present the quantified information to an operator or the like”);
determining, by the processor, whether the accumulated time in the first combination is outside an allowable range set for the first combination; and when the accumulated time in the first combination is outside the allowable range, transmitting, by the processor, an alert or an instruction message to a terminal held by the worker or to an administrator terminal, wherein the alert or the instruction message indicates a response corresponding to the state of the production apparatus (see para 84-86, 133-139: provides a process that determines if meeting parameters on an allowable range based on the worker and production apparatus. On para 139: exceeding a range e.g. it is possible to set a rule such that abnormality notification is made in a case where “a product inspection worker (who) leaves (what) a product inspection area (where) during operation of the line (when)”. As for the “target (who)”, an individual worker may be set or a job position may be set. As for the “action (what)”, various actions can be set, and a more specific action such as “leaving for 5 minutes” may be set. Para 94 teaches “the quantified information generation unit 115 may record the generated quantified information in the quantified information DB 125, or may perform processing of outputting the quantified information to the output unit 43 to present the quantified information to an operator or the like”. On para 153 teaches “the worker can include a factory machine. A machine can also be considered as a worker in a wide sense, and it is also possible to evaluate a work status by using the work evaluation system of the present technology based on data indicating an operating status of the machine”).
Matsunaga teach state of production as shown above, but doesn’t specifically teach a second signal from a second sensor, the second signal includes information on a state of a production apparatus; wherein the information on the state of a production apparatus indicates whether the production apparatus is operating normally; storing, by the processor, the first signal associated with the time information and the second signal associated with the time information as measurement data; accumulating, by the processor, time in a first combination of the location of the worker and the state of the production apparatus based on the extracted measurement data.
Kang teaches a second signal from a second sensor, the second signal includes information on a state of a production apparatus; wherein the information on the state of a production apparatus indicates whether the production apparatus is operating normally (see at least para 12-13: obtaining operation data from worker and of each machine. On para 17 teaches accurately identifying the causes and responsibilities for machine errors or product errors. On para 66 teaches “machine operation information collection unit (240) of the server (200) may collect operation data of the machine (10) in real time from the sensor assembly (100) and analyze whether there are errors in the machine (10) and errors in the products produced by the machine (10). At this time, the machine operation information collection unit (240) can derive a pattern from the operation data collected over the entire time after the machine (10) is operated, and analyze whether there is an error in the machine (10) and an error in the product by comparing the operation data collected thereafter with the pattern. Also, see at least para 30 and 74: On para 74 teaches collect worker movement information from the recognition sensor and machine operation data from the sensor assembly (100), and by combining these, it can refer to the machine error and product error status and the time-based location information of the worker device together.); storing, by the processor, the first signal associated with the time information and the second signal associated with the time information as measurement data; accumulating, by the processor, time in a first combination of the location of the worker and the state of the production apparatus based on the extracted measurement data (see at least para 12-13, 17, 26, 30, 64-65, 70, 72-74. On para 12-13 teaches obtaining operation data from worker and of each machine. On para 17 teaches accurately identifying the causes and responsibilities for machine errors or product errors. Para 26: sensor data for operation data of a machine. Para 30 teaches analyzing the associated data timed based location information for each worker and the operation data of each machine. On para 63-64 teaches worker and location data is associated with time based on sensor data received. On para 70 transmit operation status. On para 72: “the server (200) can store the data pattern of the measurement value for a predetermined time before the malfunction occurred and derive a statistical value”. On para 74 teaches collect worker movement information from the recognition sensor and machine operation data from the sensor assembly (100), and by combining these, it can refer to the machine error and product error status and the time-based location information of the worker device together).
As such, it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to use these teachings of Kang in combination with Matsunaga, since by doing so it would provide a system improvement for obtaining data with sensors, storing and analyzing data associated to the status of the machine and the worker, and thus enhancing the determination associated to the status and providing evidence of the associated data and determinations (see para 31 and 52).
Although Matsunaga teaches as modified by Kang teaches worker and machine status determination using sensor data as shown above, it doesn’t specifically teach a location information flag of the worker; (state of production apparatus) associated with time information and a state flag of the production apparatus; associating, by the processor, measurement data of the first signal and measurement data of the second signal that have an identical timestamp; extracting, by the processor, from the measurement data associated with the identical timestamp, measurement data in which the state flag of the production apparatus is ON and measurement data in which the location information flag of the worker is ON;
MATSUYAMA teaches a location information flag of the worker; (state of production apparatus) associated with time information and a state flag of the production apparatus; associating, by the processor, measurement data of the first signal and measurement data of the second signal that have an identical timestamp; extracting, by the processor, from the measurement data associated with the identical timestamp, measurement data in which the state flag of the production apparatus is ON and measurement data in which the location information flag of the worker is ON; (see at least para 33, 40-49, 66-75: teaches user and machine determination where location of a user is determined and machine status is determined and using means to determine the machine status by a number of light for status determination. As provided by the system examples of color lights can be used depending on the desired amount of status indications the system can use them to make determinations for the different status. The use of the light status is interpreted to be used in a similar way to flags which can be used for the machines as for the 3 status used for the worker. FIG. 4-8 and para 80-95: teaches the use of the various acquired data and providing charts and tables for the determinations based on the status data acquired by the system).
As such, it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to use these teachings MATSUYAMA in order to be able to make the user information and status flag associated with state of the production apparatus in the accumulated-time representation to be incorporated to the determination and alert rule taught by Matsunaga, since it would provide a performance improvement by notifying when a user or operation is not performing on the set parameters which would cause to be remedied by the worker or operation as needed.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments have been considered but are moot because the new ground of rejection does not rely on any reference applied in the prior rejection of record for any teaching or matter specifically challenged in the argument.
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 MARIO M VELEZ-LOPEZ whose telephone number is (571)270-7971. The examiner can normally be reached on M-F 9:30am-5:30pm.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Scott Baderman, can be reached at telephone number 571-272-3644. 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 Patent Center and the Private Patent Application Information Retrieval (PAIR) system. Status information for published applications may be obtained from Patent Center or Private PAIR. Status information for unpublished applications is available through Patent Center and Private PAIR for authorized users only. Should you have questions about access to the Private PAIR system, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free).
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) Form at https://www.uspto.gov/patents/uspto-automated- interview-request-air-form.
/MARIO M VELEZ-LOPEZ/
Examiner, Art Unit 2118
/SCOTT T BADERMAN/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2118
Prosecution Insights