Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status
The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
Claim Objections
Claims 1, 21 are objected to because of the following informalities: Claim 1, line 7 and claim 21, line 8 recite “...the asset management client application ...”. This should be changed to “...an asset management client application ...”. Appropriate correction is required.
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)(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 - 3, 11 - 13, 21 - 23 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) as being anticipated by Loda (US 20240056772 A1).
Regarding claim 1, Loda discloses a method (Title, [0002]; [0003] discloses “This architecture can then detect and track the precise location of any item tagged with an electronic device…”; i.e. asset location and tracking disclosed) comprising:
initiating, by a computing device, an identification of current geolocation data of registered assets in a defined environment (Fig. 1 discloses assets/tags 114 & 116; [0040] discloses “..The asset management system 100 includes an asset location system 110 including an array of asset sensors 112 (e.g., nodes, sensor nodes, etc.). The sensors 112 are each configured to detect signals from assets on a work site, such as a factory, warehouse, or construction site. For example, the sensors 112 may detect tracking tags 116 coupled to various assets 114, such as hand tools, workpieces, vehicles, user devices, or any other object to which a tracking tag may be coupled….”; computing device is Fig. 1, elements 130/140; Fig. 19 discloses identification of registered assets, e.g. tool name column; [0053] discloses “…information about the associated asset (e.g., the asset name, Tool ID, distance, etc. …”; Abstract discloses “Usage includes indoor such as a factory or warehouse as well as outdoor supply depots, staging areas, supplier locations and enroute.”; wherein defined environment is one of these);
generating and providing, by the computing device, a real-time map of the registered assets positioned in the defined environment based on the identified geolocation data ([0008] discloses “ … generating an asset tracking heatmap … generating a heatmap representing the locations of the one or more assets within the time period.”; [0009] discloses overlaying asset tracking information on facility image in real-time);
identifying, by the computing device, for display in the asset management client application a subset of the registered assets based on a request received from the asset management client application in the client device (Fig. 1, smartphone 120; [0008] discloses “… receiving, from a first smart device, a selection of one or more assets, receiving, from a first smart device, a selection of a time period, and generating a heatmap representing the locations of the one or more assets within the time period….”; wherein the client device is the 1st smart device e.g. Fig. 1, smartphone 120 and the subset is the selection of the one or more assets; Figs. 12 – 14 disclose DALS Tool Finder, which is the application in the smartphone 120; [0076]);
and enabling, by the computing device, real time interaction from the asset management client application in the client device with a plurality of executable operations for a selected one of the subset of registered assets ([0004] discloses “ …receive, from the first smart device, a selection of a first asset, identify a location of the first asset, determine the location of the first smart device based on signals detected from the first smart device by a first subset of the plurality of sensors, and provide, to the first smart device, directions from the first smart device to the first asset.”; wherein the real-time interaction is providing directions).
Regarding claim 2, Loda discloses the initiating the identification of the current geolocation data of the registered assets in the defined environment, further comprises:
identifying, by the computing device, which of the registered assets comprise one or more mobile assets ([0037] discloses “A digital ecosystem for an asset positioning system is provided, which is capable of tracking any item in real-time …”; hence mobile assets are identified; Fig. 24 also provides information e.g. event, area, duration that identifies mobile assets);
and determining, by the computing device, a recorded amount of time any of the identified one or more mobile assets is currently away from a corresponding one of one or more stored home bases for each of the one or more mobile assets (Figs. 24 – 25; [0057] discloses “…the tracking history 2406 for a specific asset… The entries indicate the action 2410, the worksite 2412, the location 2414, the duration 2416 that the asset was in the location 2414, and a timestamp 2418 indicating the time and date that the action occurred….”; wherein the tracking history will indicate the time away from a home base).
Regarding claim 3, Loda discloses providing the map of the registered assets positioned in the defined environment further comprises:
providing, by the computing device, a table of a current home- or-away status and the recorded amount of time currently away from the corresponding one of one or more stored home bases for each of the one or more mobile assets (Fig. 24 discloses for each asset, event, site, are, duration. Hence, the site/area information provides home/away information and duration provides time of home/away information).
Claim 11 is similarly analyzed as claim 1, with claim 11 reciting equivalent apparatus limitations. Claims 11 also recites asset management computing system, processors, memory. Loda discloses asset management computing system ([0040], 1st sentence), processors and memory ([0043] – [0045]).
Claim 12 is similarly analyzed as claim 2.
Claim 13 is similarly analyzed as claim 3.
Claim 21 is similarly analyzed as claim 1.
Claim 22 is similarly analyzed as claim 2.
Claim 23 is similarly analyzed as claim 3.
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.
Claims 5, 15, 25 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over by Loda (US 20240056772 A1) in view of Kulkarni et al. (US 20180332434 A1).
Regarding claim 5, Loda discloses transmitting, by the computing device, the data for interactive access in the asset management client application in the client device (Fig. 1, elements 130/140 communicate with smartphone 120).
Loda does not disclose the enabling real time interaction further comprises:
providing, by the computing device, in the asset management client application in the client device engagement of a scanner link for a code scanner to scan an identification code on the selected one of the subset of registered assets;
obtaining, by the computing device, asset detail data based on a received scan of the identification code from one or more remote server devices associated with the selected one of the subset of registered assets.
In the same field of endeavor, however, Kulkarni discloses the enabling real time interaction further comprises:
providing, by the computing device, in the asset management client application in the client device engagement of a scanner link for a code scanner to scan an identification code on the selected one of the subset of registered assets (Fig. 1B, cloud server provides application 5102 in mobile device 5000 with code; [0212] discloses “Information regarding the asset 7000 may be entered by the operator 9002, scanned from a bar-code 7100 on the asset, selected from a list of possible asset types provided to the mobile application 5102 by a cloud server 3000,…”; wherein subset is asset selected from a list of possible asset types);
obtaining, by the computing device, asset detail data based on a received scan of the identification code from one or more remote server devices associated with the selected one of the subset of registered assets ([0212] discloses obtaining “.. rules appropriate for that type of asset…”; wherein the asset detail data is interpreted as the rules appropriate for that type of asset).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the invention, to use the method, as taught by Kulkarni, in the system of Loda because this would allow asset information to be obtained and used by other entities in the system.
Claim 15 is similarly analyzed as claim 5.
Claim 25 is similarly analyzed as claim 5.
Claims 8, 18, 28 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over by Loda (US 20240056772 A1).
Regarding claim 8, Loda discloses the enabling real time interaction further comprises:
enabling, by the computing device, an imaging link in the asset management client application to enable an imager in the client device;
and obtaining and storing, by the computing device, an image of the selected one of the subset of registered assets ([0060] discloses “…a photograph of the worksite may be taken periodically (e.g., daily, hourly, every minute, etc.) or on-demand while the data from the tracking devices is received. … The photographs may provide additional information that can be used to contextualize the movements of the tracked assets … The system may use image processing techniques to identify objects that may not be tracked by the system …”; wherein an image of the selected one of the subset of registered assets could be assets in a particular area covered by the image).
Loda does not disclose enabling, by the computing device, an imaging link in the asset management client application to enable an imager in the client device.
However, this is Obvious to Try (Rationales for Obviousness (MPEP 2143, Rationales E) ) since the cloud/local controller (Fig.1, elements 130/140) communicates with the smartphone 120 and hence if an image of a certain area is required, the link can be sent by the cloud/controller to the smartphone 120.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the invention, to take an image of the asset in response to notification of engagement of the imaging link because this would allow asset information to be obtained and used by other entities in the system.
Claim 18 is similarly analyzed as claim 8.
Claim 28 is similarly analyzed as claim 8.
Claims 4, 10, 14, 20, 24, 30 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over by Loda (US 20240056772 A1) in view of Sittig et al. (US 20210027239 A1).
Regarding claim 4, Loda discloses one or more mobile assets is currently away from the corresponding one of the one or more stored home bases (Figs. 24 – 25; [0057] discloses “….. the worksite 2412, the location 2414, the duration 2416 that the asset was in the location 2414, and a timestamp 2418 indicating the time and date that the action occurred….”; wherein the tracking history will indicate when an asset is away from a home base).
Loda does not disclose limiting, by the computing device, the enabled operational aspects to a subset when the selected one of the subset of registered assets is one of the one or more mobile assets.
In the same field of endeavor, however, Sittig discloses the enabled operational aspects to a subset when the selected one of the subset of registered assets is one of the one or more mobile assets ([0070] discloses uses of filter criteria which can be used to determine operational aspects; [0071], [0075] give examples of operational aspects e.g. [0071] discloses sets of assets a user has access to, [0075] discloses permissions to share access records and rules that indicate notification preferences).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the invention, to use the method, as taught by Sittig, in the system of Loda because this would allow for only certain operations to be performed when away from home base, thereby improving system efficiency e.g. notification can be sent to somebody nearby when away from home, thereby improving response time.
Regarding claim 10, Loda does not disclose enabling real time interaction further comprises:
determining, by the computing device, a system update status of the selected one of the subset of registered assets;
and updating, by the computing device, the selected one of the subset of registered assets when the determining indicates the system update status of the one of the identified registered assets is out of date.
In the same field of endeavor, however, Sittig discloses enabling real time interaction further comprises:
determining, by the computing device, a system update status of the selected one of the subset of registered assets ([0070] discloses uses of a timestamp associated with an asset entry and filter criteria; hence from timestamp and filter criteria, one of ordinary skill in the art knows if the entry is out of date);
and updating, by the computing device, the selected one of the subset of registered assets when the determining indicates the system update status of the one of the identified registered assets is out of date ([0054] discloses “…the first entity system 208 may allow all asset service providers associated with the first entity system 208 to update information regarding all assets (e.g., allowed to update certain fields of asset entries, such as a timestamp associated with the asset entry and a geographic location of the asset associated with the asset entry)….”; [0057]).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the invention, to use the method, as taught by Sittig, in the system of Loda because this would allow the asset information to be updated if it is out of date, thereby providing the latest asset information for use.
Claim 14 is similarly analyzed as claim 4.
Claim 20 is similarly analyzed as claim 10.
Claim 24 is similarly analyzed as claim 4.
Claim 30 is similarly analyzed as claim 10.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 6 - 7, 9, 16 - 17, 19, 26 - 27, 29 are objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
Other Prior Art Cited
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to the applicant’s disclosure.
The following patents/publications are cited to further show the state of the art with respect to mobile asset tracking and interaction:
Filter et al. (US 20240152887 A1) discloses digital asset-based interaction system.
Werner et al. (US 20210089514 A1) discloses tracking and verification of physical assets.
Vancorenland et al. (US 20190332838 A1) discloses systems and methods for locating rack-based assets.
Reagan et al. (US 20170026308 A1) discloses controlling resources used by computing devices.
Contact Information
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ADOLF DSOUZA whose telephone number is (571)272-1043. The examiner can normally be reached Mon - Fri 9 AM - 5 PM.
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, Chieh M Fan can be reached at 571-272-3042. 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.
/ADOLF DSOUZA/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2632