DETAILED ACTION
This office action is in response to the amendment dated February 16, 2026.
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 Status
Claims 1 and 15 are currently amended.
Claims 2-3, 5-11, 14, 16-17, 19-23, 25-26, and 28 are as originally filed.
Claims 4, 12-13, 18, 24, and 27 are as previously presented.
Claims 29 and 30 are newly filed.
Therefore, claims 1-30 are currently pending.
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.
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.
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.
Claims 1-28 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Bann (US PG Pub #2005/0065861) in view of Schoening (US PG Pub #2020/0250610) and further in view of Tokarev (US PG Pub #2018/0211146).
As to claim 1, Bann teaches an asset management and tracking system for use in a facility (Paragraph [0011] teaches a location tracking system for tracking the location of items within a controlled area; Paragraph [0005] tracking inventory in a warehouse), the system comprising:
one or more location designation radio frequency identification (RFID) tags disposed within a recess formed in a surface of a floor of the facility, each of the one or more location designation RFID tags indicating respective location information and being readable by an RFID reader to receive the location information (Paragraph [0021] teaches RFID tags at one or more known locations as markers; Paragraph [0024] teaches placing the RFID tags in holes in the floor; Paragraph [0025] teaches interrogating the RFID tags to determine the location of the interrogator; Figure 3 and Paragraph [0028] teach the plurality of RFID tags in a grid installed in the floor of a facility),
wherein each of the one or more location designation RFID tags is entirely contained within the recess such that a top of each of the one or more location designation RFID tags is no higher than the surface of the floor surrounding the recess (Paragraph [0024] teaches inserting the tags into a hole in the floor and filling the hole so that the floor is kept level).
However, Bann teaches the holes in the floor at approximately ½” deep and that a poker chip sized RFID tag can be inserted into each hole (Paragraph [0024]), but does not explicitly teach wherein a depth of the recess with respect to the surface of the floor surrounding the recess is no greater than 0.125 inches and wherein each of the one or more location designation RFID tags has a rectangular surface profile that is at least one (1.0) inch in length and at least 0.1 inches in width when disposed in the recess and has a thickness of less than 0.125 inches.
In the field of RFID based tracking, Schoening teaches wherein each of the one or more location designation RFID tags has a rectangular surface profile that is at least one (1.0) inch in length and at least 0.1 inches in width when disposed in the recess (Paragraph [0062] teaches a length of 2-10 inches and width of 0.5-5 inches) and has a thickness of less than 0.125 inches (Paragraph [0069] teaches the overall thickness T5 can be 0.10 inches). 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 teaching of Bann with the size of Schoening such that each of the one or more location designation RFID tags has a rectangular surface profile that is at least one (1.0) inch in length, at least 0.1 inches in width, and less than 0.125 inches thick because providing the largest feasible surface area helps the reader to reach and detect the RFID tag by facilitating strong communication connection (Paragraphs [0058] and [0075]-[0076]). Although Schoening teaches a location designation RFID tag with an overall thickness of 0.10 inches (Paragraph [0069]), Bann in view of Schoening does not render obvious wherein a depth of the recess with respect to the surface of the floor surrounding the recess is no greater than 0.125 inches.
In the field of buried RFID tags, Tokarev teaches drilling an opening with a dimension corresponding to the RFID tag (Paragraph [0077]), embedding the RFID tag at a distance of .001mm (0.00003937in) – 40mm (1.575in) from the surface (Paragraph [0078]), and covering the tag to provide a flush surface (Paragraph [0007]). 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 teaching of Bann in view of Schoening with the burying of Tokarev such that a depth of the recess with respect to the surface of the floor surrounding the recess is no greater than 0.125 inches because providing an opening with dimensions in accordance with the RFID tag that is 0.10 inches in thickness and mounting the RFID tag close to the surface improves efficiency and reliability of RFID tag operation by increasing the reliability of embedding, reducing dimensions, and reducing negative effects of embedding (Paragraph [0022]) while maintaining working operation when the housing or surface is worn (Paragraph [0079]).
As to claim 2, depending from the asset management and tracking system of claim 1, Bann teaches wherein the top of each of the one or more location designation RFID tags is below the surface of the floor surrounding the recess, wherein a space between the top of each of the one or more location designation RFID tags and the surface of the floor is filled with a bonding agent securing the one or more location designation RFID tags in the recess (Paragraph [0024] teaches filling the hole with RFID tag with a quick acting cement patch so that the floor is level).
As to claim 3, depending from the asset management and tracking system of claim 1, Bann teaches wherein the one or more location designation RFID tags disposed within the recess consist of a single location designation RFID tag (Paragraph [0024] teaches placing a tag into each hole), but does not explicitly teach wherein a length of the recess is approximately equal to a length of the single location designation RFID tag and a width of the recess is approximately equal to a width of the of the single location designation RFID tag.
In the field of buried RFID tags, Tokarev teaches drilling an opening with a dimension corresponding to the RFID tag (Paragraph [0077]). 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 teaching of Bann with the burying of Tokarev such that a length of the recess is approximately equal to a length of the single location designation RFID tag and a width of the recess is approximately equal to a width of the of the single location designation RFID tag because providing an opening with dimensions in accordance with the RFID tag and mounting the RFID tag close to the surface improves efficiency and reliability of RFID tag operation by increasing the reliability of embedding, reducing dimensions, and reducing negative effects of embedding (Paragraph [0022]) while maintaining working operation when the housing or surface is worn (Paragraph [0079]).
As to claim 4, depending from the asset management and tracking system of claim 1, Bann does not explicitly teach wherein the one or more location designation RFID tags disposed within the recess comprise a plurality of location designation RFID tags disposed along a length of the recess, wherein a width of the recess is approximately equal to a width of one of the plurality of location designation RFID tags, and wherein the length of the recess is at least a combined length of the plurality of location designation RFID tags so as to enable the recess to accommodate the plurality of location designation RFID tags.
However, Bann does teach boring holes in the floor to place one tag in each hole (Paragraph [0024]), placing tags in a grid pattern (Paragraph [0020]; Figure 3), and utilizing strips of tags on the floor (Paragraphs [0006] and [0022]). 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 teaching of Bann such that the one or more location designation RFID tags disposed within the recess comprise a plurality of location designation RFID tags disposed along a length of the recess wherein the length of the recess is at least a combined length of the plurality of location designation RFID tags so as to enable the recess to accommodate the plurality of location designation RFID tags because this yields the predictable result of not requiring a sizable number of individual tags and individual bore holes to thereby provide for efficient manufacturing and installation of tags.
However, Bann does not render obvious wherein a width of the recess is approximately equal to a width of one of the plurality of location designation RFID tags.
In the field of buried RFID tags, Tokarev teaches drilling an opening with a dimension corresponding to the RFID tag (Paragraph [0077]). 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 teaching of Bann with the burying of Tokarev such that a width of the recess is approximately equal to a width of one of the plurality of location designation RFID tags because providing an opening with dimensions in accordance with the RFID tag and mounting the RFID tag close to the surface improves efficiency and reliability of RFID tag operation by increasing the reliability of embedding, reducing dimensions, and reducing negative effects of embedding (Paragraph [0022]) while maintaining working operation when the housing or surface is worn (Paragraph [0079]).
As to claim 5, depending from the asset management and tracking system of claim 1, Bann does not explicitly teach wherein the depth of the recess with respect to the surface of the floor surrounding the recess is no greater than 0.04 inches.
In the field of buried RFID tags, Tokarev teaches drilling an opening with a dimension corresponding to the RFID tag (Paragraph [0077]), embedding the RFID tag at a distance of .001mm (0.00003937in) – 40mm (1.575in) from the surface (Paragraph [0078]), and covering the tag to provide a flush surface (Paragraph [0007]). 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 teaching of Bann with the burying of Tokarev such that the depth of the recess with respect to the surface of the floor surrounding the recess is no greater than 0.04 inches because providing an opening with dimensions in accordance with the RFID tag and mounting the RFID tag close to the surface improves efficiency and reliability of RFID tag operation by increasing the reliability of embedding, reducing dimensions, and reducing negative effects of embedding (Paragraph [0022]) while maintaining working operation when the housing or surface is worn (Paragraph [0079]).
As to claim 6, depending from the asset management and tracking system of claim 5, Bann does not explicitly teach wherein the depth of the recess with respect to the surface of the floor surrounding the recess is no greater than 0.02 inches.
In the field of buried RFID tags, Tokarev teaches drilling an opening with a dimension corresponding to the RFID tag (Paragraph [0077]), embedding the RFID tag at a distance of .001mm (0.00003937in) – 40mm (1.575in) from the surface (Paragraph [0078]), and covering the tag to provide a flush surface (Paragraph [0007]). 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 teaching of Bann with the burying of Tokarev such that the depth of the recess with respect to the surface of the floor surrounding the recess is no greater than 0.02 inches because providing an opening with dimensions in accordance with the RFID tag and mounting the RFID tag close to the surface improves efficiency and reliability of RFID tag operation by increasing the reliability of embedding, reducing dimensions, and reducing negative effects of embedding (Paragraph [0022]) while maintaining working operation when the housing or surface is worn (Paragraph [0079]).
As to claim 7, depending from the asset management and tracking system of claim 1, Bann teaches wherein the RFID reader is mounted to a movable device and configured to read the one or more location designation RFID tags as the movable device moves within the facility (Paragraphs [0030]-[0031] teach a forklift with RFID interrogators configured to read information from RFID tags to track the forklift throughout the controlled area; Paragraph [0035] teaches reading information from tags when the forklift passes over the RFID tags).
As to claim 8, depending from the asset management and tracking system of claim 7, Bann teaches wherein the movable device is a forklift (Paragraphs [0030]-[0031] teach a forklift with RFID interrogators).
As to claim 9, depending from the asset tracking and management system of claim 7, Bann teaches the system further comprising: one or more antennas disposed on the movable device, each of the one or more antennas being configured to detect and read the one or more location designation RFID tags based on a signal received from the RFID reader (Paragraphs [0026] and [0030] teach the forklift comprises RFID interrogators each comprising an antenna or a single RFID interrogator can be used with multiple antennas; Paragraph [0035] teaches reading information from tags when the forklift passes over the RFID tags).
As to claim 10, depending from the asset management and tracking system of claim 7, Bann does not explicitly teach the system further comprising a sensor-based detection device disposed on the movable device, the sensor-based detection device being configured to control the RFID reader to read the one or more location designation RFID tags or a product designation RFID tag on an object in response to the sensor-based detection device detecting the object in proximity to the sensor-based detection device.
In the field of RFID inventory tracking systems, Schoening teaches the system further comprising a sensor-based detection device disposed on the movable device, the sensor-based detection device being configured to control the RFID reader to read the one or more location designation RFID tags or a product designation RFID tag on an object in response to the sensor-based detection device detecting the object in proximity to the sensor-based detection device (Paragraph [0096] teaches a forklift with a sensor based detection device that turns on a reader in response to detecting a product on the forklift or near the forklift in order to read a product designation tag). 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 teaching of Bann with the sensor-based detection device of Schoening because selective control of interrogation based on sensed detections yields the predictable result of providing efficient operation while conserving energy and processing power by limiting how often the interrogators are activated.
As to claim 11, depending from the asset management and tracking system of claim 10, Bann does not explicitly teach wherein the RFID reader is controlled to read the product designation RFID tag, further comprising a portable communication device disposed on the movable device, the portable communication device being communicatively coupled to the RFID reader, wherein the RFID reader is configured to transmit product information read from the product designation RFID tag to the portable communication device, and wherein the portable communication device is configured to wirelessly transmit the received product information to an asset tracking and management device.
In the field of RFID inventory tracking systems, Schoening teaches wherein the RFID reader is controlled to read the product designation RFID tag, further comprising a portable communication device disposed on the movable device, the portable communication device being communicatively coupled to the RFID reader, wherein the RFID reader is configured to transmit product information read from the product designation RFID tag to the portable communication device, and wherein the portable communication device is configured to wirelessly transmit the received product information to an asset tracking and management device (Paragraph [0054] teaches a portable communication device or user interface device disposed on the forklift communicating with the asset tracking and management device; Paragraph [0099] teaches the RFID reader sending read tag IDs to the user interface device which communicates with the asset tracking and management device). 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 teaching of Bann with the portable communication device of Schoening because the inclusion of this device yields the predictable result of allowing for local processing and communication with a central system for a more robust system.
As to claim 12, depending from the asset management and tracking system of claim 1, Bann does not explicitly teach wherein each of the one or more location designation RFID tags comprises:
an inlay having a first side and a second side opposite the first side, the inlay further comprising:
an antenna,
an integrated circuit, and
a substrate, the antenna and the integrated circuit being disposed on the substrate;
a first protective layer disposed on the first side of the inlay; and
a second protective layer disposed on the second side of the inlay.
In the field of RFID inventory tracking systems, Schoening teaches wherein each of the one or more location designation RFID tags comprises:
an inlay having a first side and a second side opposite the first side, the inlay further comprising:
an antenna,
an integrated circuit, and
a substrate, the antenna and the integrated circuit being disposed on the substrate;
a first protective layer disposed on the first side of the inlay; and
a second protective layer disposed on the second side of the inlay (Paragraph [0058] teaches that location designation tags include an inlay including an antenna, an integrated circuit, and a substrate on which the antenna and RFID chip or integrated circuit is disposed, a first layer adhered to a first side of the inlay, and a second layer adhered to a second side of the inlay; Paragraphs [0061] and [0064] teach first and second layers disposed on the first side and second side of an inlay to help reduce or absorb impact thereby protecting the inlay).
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 teaching of Bann with the RFID tag of Schoening because this structure provides protection for the RFID tags, thereby extending the useful life of the tags (Paragraph [0061]).
As to claim 13, depending from the asset management and tracking system of claim 12, Bann does not explicitly teach wherein each of the one or more location designation RFID tags further comprises a printing layer fixedly disposed on the first layer to accept printing, wherein the printing layer is visible on the corresponding location designation RFID tag from a position above corresponding location designation RFID tag when the corresponding location designation RFID tag is disposed within the recess.
In the field of RFID inventory tracking systems, Schoening teaches wherein each of the one or more location designation RFID tags further comprises a printing layer fixedly disposed on the first layer to accept printing, wherein the printing layer is visible on the corresponding location designation RFID tag from a position above corresponding location designation RFID tag when the corresponding location designation RFID tag is disposed within the recess (Paragraph [0068] teaches the location designation RFID tags include a printing layer disposed on the first layer to visually convey information about the particular location designation RFID to a user; Figure 5 shows the printing layer 67 above the first layer 42). 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 tags of Bann with the printing layer of Schoening because a visual printing layer aides the placement of the location designation RFID tags, aides a forklift driver in determining where they are in the environment, and can help disguise the tags (Paragraph [0068]).
As to claim 14, depending from the asset management and tracking system of claim 12, Bann does not explicitly teach wherein each of the one or more location designation RFID tags has an overall thickness of approximately 0.02 inches.
In the field of RFID inventory tracking systems, Schoening teaches wherein each of the one or more location designation RFID tags has an overall thickness of approximately 0.02 inches (Paragraph [0069] teaches the overall thickness can be approximately 0.236 inches). 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 tags of Bann with the thickness and structure of Schoening because the structure of the RFID tags of Schoening provides protection in a variety of ways to extend the life of the RFID tag (Paragraphs [0061] and [0070]).
As to claim 15, Bann teaches a method associated with an asset management and tracking system in a facility (Paragraph [0019] teaches a method for configuring a controlled area in accordance with a system; Paragraph [0011] teaches a location tracking system for tracking the location of items within a controlled area; Paragraph [0005] tracking inventory in a warehouse), the method comprising:
forming a recess in a surface of a floor of the facility (Paragraph [0024] teaches boring holes in the floor); and
disposing one or more location designation radio frequency identification (RFID) tags entirely within the recess such that a top of each of the one or more location designation RFID tags is no higher than the surface of the floor surrounding the recess (Paragraph [0021] teaches RFID tags at one or more known locations as markers; Paragraph [0024] teaches inserting the tags into a hole in the floor; Paragraph [0025] teaches interrogating the RFID tags to determine the location of the interrogator; Figure 3 and Paragraph [0028] teach the plurality of RFID tags in a grid installed in the floor of a facility), each of the one or more location designation RFID tags indicating respective location information and being readable by an RFID reader to receive the location information (Paragraph [0024] teaches inserting the tags into a hole in the floor and filling the hole so that the floor is kept level).
However, Bann teaches the holes in the floor at approximately ½” deep and that a poker chip sized RFID tag can be inserted into each hole (Paragraph [0024]), but does not explicitly teach wherein a depth of the recess with respect to the surface of the floor surrounding the recess is no greater than 0.125 inches and wherein each of the one or more location designation RFID tags has a rectangular surface profile that is at least one (1.0) inch in length and at least 0.1 inches in width when disposed in the recess and has a thickness of less than 0.125 inches.
In the field of RFID based tracking, Schoening teaches wherein each of the one or more location designation RFID tags has a rectangular surface profile that is at least one (1.0) inch in length and at least 0.1 inches in width when disposed in the recess (Paragraph [0062] teaches a length of 2-10 inches and width of 0.5-5 inches) and has a thickness of less than 0.125 inches (Paragraph [0069] teaches the overall thickness T5 can be 0.10 inches). 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 teaching of Bann with the size of Schoening such that each of the one or more location designation RFID tags has a rectangular surface profile that is at least one (1.0) inch in length, at least 0.1 inches in width, and less than 0.125 inches thick because providing the largest feasible surface area helps the reader to reach and detect the RFID tag by facilitating strong communication connection (Paragraphs [0058] and [0075]-[0076]). Although Schoening teaches a location designation RFID tag with an overall thickness of 0.10 inches (Paragraph [0069]), Bann in view of Schoening does not render obvious wherein a depth of the recess with respect to the surface of the floor surrounding the recess is no greater than 0.125 inches.
In the field of buried RFID tags, Tokarev teaches drilling an opening with a dimension corresponding to the RFID tag (Paragraph [0077]), embedding the RFID tag at a distance of .001mm (0.00003937in) – 40mm (1.575in) from the surface (Paragraph [0078]), and covering the tag to provide a flush surface (Paragraph [0007]). 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 teaching of Bann in view of Schoening with the burying of Tokarev such that a depth of the recess with respect to the surface of the floor surrounding the recess is no greater than 0.125 inches because providing an opening with dimensions in accordance with the RFID tag that is 0.10 inches in thickness and mounting the RFID tag close to the surface improves efficiency and reliability of RFID tag operation by increasing the reliability of embedding, reducing dimensions, and reducing negative effects of embedding (Paragraph [0022]) while maintaining working operation when the housing or surface is worn (Paragraph [0079]).
As to claim 16, depending from the method of claim 15, Bann teaches wherein the top of each of the one or more location designation RFID tags disposed in the recess is below the surface of the floor surrounding the recess, and the method further comprising filling a space between the top of each of the one or more location designation RFID tags and the surface of the floor with a bonding agent to secure the one or more location designation RFID tags in the recess (Paragraph [0024] teaches filling the hole with RFID tag with a quick acting cement patch so that the floor is level).
As to claim 17, depending from the method of claim 15, Bann teaches wherein disposing the one or more location designation RFID tags in the recess consists of disposing a single location designation RFID tag in the recess (Paragraph [0024] teaches placing a tag into each hole), but does not explicitly teach wherein forming the recess comprises forming the recess with a length approximately equal to a length of the single location designation RFID and with a width approximately equal to a width of the single location designation RFID tag.
In the field of buried RFID tags, Tokarev teaches drilling an opening with a dimension corresponding to the RFID tag (Paragraph [0077]). 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 teaching of Bann with the burying of Tokarev such that forming the recess comprises forming the recess with a length approximately equal to a length of the single location designation RFID and with a width approximately equal to a width of the single location designation RFID tag because providing an opening with dimensions in accordance with the RFID tag and mounting the RFID tag close to the surface improves efficiency and reliability of RFID tag operation by increasing the reliability of embedding, reducing dimensions, and reducing negative effects of embedding (Paragraph [0022]) while maintaining working operation when the housing or surface is worn (Paragraph [0079]).
As to claim 18, depending from the method of claim 15, Bann does not explicitly teach wherein disposing the one or more location designation RFID tags in the recess comprises disposing a plurality of location designation RFID tags disposed along a length of the recess, and wherein forming the recess comprises forming the recess with (i) a width approximately equal to a width of one of the plurality of location designation RFID tags, and (ii) the length being at least a combined length of the plurality of location designation RFID tags so as to enable the recess to accommodate the plurality of location designation RFID tags.
However, Bann does teach boring holes in the floor to place one tag in each hole (Paragraph [0024]), placing tags in a grid pattern (Paragraph [0020]; Figure 3), and utilizing strips of tags on the floor (Paragraphs [0006] and [0022]). 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 teaching of Bann such that disposing the one or more location designation RFID tags in the recess comprises disposing a plurality of location designation RFID tags disposed along a length of the recess with the length being at least a combined length of the plurality of location designation RFID tags so as to enable the recess to accommodate the plurality of location designation RFID tags because this yields the predictable result of not requiring a sizable number of individual tags and individual bore holes to thereby provide for efficient manufacturing and installation of tags.
However, Bann does not render obvious wherein a width of the recess is approximately equal to a width of one of the plurality of location designation RFID tags.
In the field of buried RFID tags, Tokarev teaches drilling an opening with a dimension corresponding to the RFID tag (Paragraph [0077]). 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 teaching of Bann with the burying of Tokarev such that a width of the recess is approximately equal to a width of one of the plurality of location designation RFID tags because providing an opening with dimensions in accordance with the RFID tag and mounting the RFID tag close to the surface improves efficiency and reliability of RFID tag operation by increasing the reliability of embedding, reducing dimensions, and reducing negative effects of embedding (Paragraph [0022]) while maintaining working operation when the housing or surface is worn (Paragraph [0079]).
As to claim 19, depending from the method of claim 15, Bann does not explicitly teach wherein the depth of the recess with respect to the surface of the floor surrounding the recess is no greater than 0.04 inches.
In the field of buried RFID tags, Tokarev teaches drilling an opening with a dimension corresponding to the RFID tag (Paragraph [0077]), embedding the RFID tag at a distance of .001mm (0.00003937in) – 40mm (1.575in) from the surface (Paragraph [0078]), and covering the tag to provide a flush surface (Paragraph [0007]). 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 teaching of Bann with the burying of Tokarev such that the depth of the recess with respect to the surface of the floor surrounding the recess is no greater than 0.04 inches because providing an opening with dimensions in accordance with the RFID tag and mounting the RFID tag close to the surface improves efficiency and reliability of RFID tag operation by increasing the reliability of embedding, reducing dimensions, and reducing negative effects of embedding (Paragraph [0022]) while maintaining working operation when the housing or surface is worn (Paragraph [0079]).
As to claim 20, depending from the method of claim 19, Bann does not explicitly teach wherein the depth of the recess with respect to the surface of the floor surrounding the recess is no greater than 0.02 inches.
In the field of buried RFID tags, Tokarev teaches drilling an opening with a dimension corresponding to the RFID tag (Paragraph [0077]), embedding the RFID tag at a distance of .001mm (0.00003937in) – 40mm (1.575in) from the surface (Paragraph [0078]), and covering the tag to provide a flush surface (Paragraph [0007]). 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 teaching of Bann with the burying of Tokarev such that the depth of the recess with respect to the surface of the floor surrounding the recess is no greater than 0.02 inches because providing an opening with dimensions in accordance with the RFID tag and mounting the RFID tag close to the surface improves efficiency and reliability of RFID tag operation by increasing the reliability of embedding, reducing dimensions, and reducing negative effects of embedding (Paragraph [0022]) while maintaining working operation when the housing or surface is worn (Paragraph [0079]).
As to claim 21, depending from the method of claim 15, Bann teaches the method further comprising:
providing the RFID reader, the RFID reader being mounted to a movable device, and
reading the one or more location designation RFID tags via the RFID reader as the movable device moves within the facility (Paragraphs [0030]-[0031] teach a forklift with RFID interrogators configured to read information from RFID tags to track the forklift throughout the controlled area; Paragraph [0035] teaches reading information from tags when the forklift passes over the RFID tags).
As to claim 22, depending from the method of claim 21, Bann teaches wherein the movable device is a forklift (Paragraphs [0030]-[0031] teach a forklift with RFID interrogators).
As to claim 23, depending from the method of claim 21, Bann teaches the method further comprising:
providing one or more antennas, the one or more antennas being disposed on the movable device; and
detecting and reading the one or more location designation RFID tags based on a signal received from the RFID reader (Paragraphs [0026] and [0030] teach the forklift comprises RFID interrogators each comprising an antenna or a single RFID interrogator can be used with multiple antennas; Paragraph [0035] teaches reading information from tags when the forklift passes over the RFID tags).
As to claim 24, depending from the method of claim 21, Bann does not explicitly teach the method further comprising:
providing a sensor-based detection device, the sensor-based detection device being disposed on the movable device;
via operation of the sensor-based detection device, sensing an object in proximity to the sensor-based detection device;
in response to detecting the object, controlling the RFID reader via the sensor-based detection device to read the one or more location designation RFID tags or a product designation RFID tag on the object.
In the field of RFID inventory tracking systems, Schoening teaches the method further comprising:
providing a sensor-based detection device, the sensor-based detection device being disposed on the movable device;
via operation of the sensor-based detection device, sensing an object in proximity to the sensor-based detection device;
in response to detecting the object, controlling the RFID reader via the sensor-based detection device to read the one or more location designation RFID tags or a product designation RFID tag on the object (Paragraph [0096] teaches a forklift with a sensor based detection device that turns on a reader in response to detecting a product on the forklift or near the forklift in order to read a product designation tag). 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 teaching of Bann with the sensor-based detection device of Schoening because selective control of interrogation based on sensed detections yields the predictable result of providing efficient operation while conserving energy and processing power by limiting how often the interrogators are activated.
As to claim 25, depending from the method of claim 24, Bann does not explicitly teach wherein the RFID reader is controlled to read the product designation RFID tag, and the method further comprising:
providing a portable communication device, the portable communication device being disposed on the movable device;
communicatively coupling the portable communication device to the RFID reader;
via the RFID reader, transmitting product information read from the product designation RFID tag to the portable communication device; and
via the portable communication device, wirelessly transmitting the received product information to an asset tracking and management device.
In the field of RFID inventory tracking systems, Schoening teaches wherein the RFID reader is controlled to read the product designation RFID tag, and the method further comprising:
providing a portable communication device, the portable communication device being disposed on the movable device;
communicatively coupling the portable communication device to the RFID reader;
via the RFID reader, transmitting product information read from the product designation RFID tag to the portable communication device; and
via the portable communication device, wirelessly transmitting the received product information to an asset tracking and management device (Paragraph [0054] teaches a portable communication device or user interface device disposed on the forklift communicating with the asset tracking and management device; Paragraph [0099] teaches the RFID reader sending read tag IDs to the user interface device which communicates with the asset tracking and management device). 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 teaching of Bann with the portable communication device of Schoening because the inclusion of this device yields the predictable result of allowing for local processing and communication with a central system for a more robust system.
As to claim 26, depending from the method of claim 15, Bann does not explicitly teach wherein each of the one or more location designation RFID tags comprises:
an inlay having a first side and a second side opposite the first side, the inlay further comprising:
an antenna,
an integrated circuit, and
a substrate, the antenna and the integrated circuit being disposed on the substrate;
a first protective layer disposed on the first side of the inlay; and
a second protective layer disposed on the second side of the inlay.
In the field of RFID inventory tracking systems, Schoening teaches wherein each of the one or more location designation RFID tags comprises:
an inlay having a first side and a second side opposite the first side, the inlay further comprising:
an antenna,
an integrated circuit, and
a substrate, the antenna and the integrated circuit being disposed on the substrate;
a first protective layer disposed on the first side of the inlay; and
a second protective layer disposed on the second side of the inlay (Paragraph [0058] teaches that location designation tags include an inlay including an antenna, an integrated circuit, and a substrate on which the antenna and RFID chip or integrated circuit is disposed, a first layer adhered to a first side of the inlay, and a second layer adhered to a second side of the inlay; Paragraphs [0061] and [0064] teach first and second layers disposed on the first side and second side of an inlay to help reduce or absorb impact thereby protecting the inlay).
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 teaching of Bann with the RFID tag of Schoening because this structure provides protection for the RFID tags, thereby extending the useful life of the tags (Paragraph [0061]).
As to claim 27, depending from the method of claim 26, Bann does not explicitly teach wherein each of the one or more location designation RFID tags further comprises a printing layer fixedly disposed on the first layer to accept printing, wherein the printing layer is visible on the corresponding location designation RFID tag from a position above corresponding location designation RFID tag when the corresponding location designation RFID tag is disposed within the recess.
In the field of RFID inventory tracking systems, Schoening teaches wherein each of the one or more location designation RFID tags further comprises a printing layer fixedly disposed on the first layer to accept printing, wherein the printing layer is visible on the corresponding location designation RFID tag from a position above corresponding location designation RFID tag when the corresponding location designation RFID tag is disposed within the recess (Paragraph [0068] teaches the location designation RFID tags include a printing layer disposed on the first layer to visually convey information about the particular location designation RFID to a user; Figure 5 shows the printing layer 67 above the first layer 42). 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 tags of Bann with the printing layer of Schoening because a visual printing layer aides the placement of the location designation RFID tags, aides a forklift driver in determining where they are in the environment, and can help disguise the tags (Paragraph [0068]).
As to claim 28, depending from the method of claim 26, Bann does not explicitly teach wherein each of the one or more location designation RFID tags has an overall thickness of approximately 0.02 inches.
In the field of RFID inventory tracking systems, Schoening teaches wherein each of the one or more location designation RFID tags has an overall thickness of approximately 0.02 inches (Paragraph [0069] teaches the overall thickness can be approximately 0.236 inches). 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 tags of Bann with the thickness and structure of Schoening because the structure of the RFID tags of Schoening provides protection in a variety of ways to extend the life of the RFID tag (Paragraphs [0061] and [0070]).
9. Claims 29-30 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Bann (US PG Pub #2005/0065861) in view of Schoening (US PG Pub #2020/0250610) and further in view of Tokarev (US PG Pub #2018/0211146) as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Lovoi et al. (Lovoi; US PG Pub #2006/0061472).
As to claim 29, depending from the asset management and tracking system of claim 1, Bann does not explicitly teach wherein each of the one or more location designation RFID tags has a thickness of 0.04 inches or less.
In the field of RFID tags, Lovoi teaches wherein each of the one or more location designation RFID tags has a thickness of 0.04 inches or less (Paragraph [0004] teaches it is known to have RFID tags less than 0.5mm in thickness; Paragraph [0035] teaches an RFID tag of 0.05mm or less in thickness; Claim 13 claims an RFID tag of no more than 0.02 inches thick). 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 tags of Bann with the dimensions of Lovoi because it is known to make RFID tags sufficiently small to be incorporated into very small objects, even paper money (Paragraph [0003]).
As to claim 30, depending from the asset management and tracking system of claim 1, Bann does not explicitly teach wherein each of the one or more location designation RFID tags has a thickness of 0.03 inches or less.
In the field of RFID tags, Lovoi teaches wherein each of the one or more location designation RFID tags has a thickness of 0.03 inches or less (Paragraph [0004] teaches it is known to have RFID tags less than 0.5mm in thickness; Paragraph [0035] teaches an RFID tag of 0.05mm or less in thickness; Claim 13 claims an RFID tag of no more than 0.02 inches thick). 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 tags of Bann with the dimensions of Lovoi because it is known to make RFID tags sufficiently small to be incorporated into very small objects, even paper money (Paragraph [0003]).
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed February 16, 2026 with respect to claims 1-30 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
The applicant argues the subject matter of independent claims 1 and 15 on pages 10-16 of the filed response and addresses the dependent claims on page 17. Specifically, the applicant argues on pages 10-11 that Bann teaches a circular tag buried up to four times deeper than the claimed subject matter and therefore does not teach a rectangular tag in a shallow recess. On pages 11-12, the applicant argues that Schoening teaches away from embedding tags in the floor and therefore no characteristics of those tags would be obvious to modify to embed in a floor. On pages 12-14, the applicant argues that Tokarev does not recite a depth of the recess or tag and instead discusses the distance from the surface to the tag. On pages 15-16, the applicant argues that there is no reason to combine the prior art and that the technique of embedding in Tokarev is not applicable to the floor of Bann. On page 17, the applicant argues that the dependent claims are patentable due to the same reasons as the independent claims. The examiner respectfully disagrees.
As to the applicant’s argument on pages 10-11 that Bann does not teach a rectangular tag in a shallow recess, the office action admits as much, hence the rejection under 35 USC 103 as being unpatentable over the combination of Bann in view of Schoening and Tokarev.
With respect to the teaching of Schoening, argued on pages 11-12, the applicant cites paragraphs [0006], [0010], and [0066] as evidence that Schoening teaches away from the claimed subject matter. However, Schoening does not explicitly teach away from embedding tags in the floor in the manner of stating that this cannot be done. Instead, paragraph [0006] of Schoening states that it requires “considerable work”, paragraph [0010] speaks to the advantages of non-invasive tag placement, and paragraph [0066] states that tags “on a floor” have been used with limited success. Further, paragraph [0006] states that placing RFID tags in the floor is a “known” method. Therefore, Schoening does not teach away from embedding tags in the floor, but simply prefers to locate the tags non-invasively. Further, the combination of prior art is not Schoening in view of Bann where one of ordinary skill in the art looks to modify the tags of Schoening to locate them in a floor as in Bann. Rather, the combination is Bann in view of Schoening. It is already known from the teaching of Bann that the tags are located in the floor. The location of the tag is not important in the combination since Bann is relied on for this teaching. Instead, Schoening is relied upon for the dimensions of the tag. One of ordinary skill in the art would have recognized the teaching of Schoening as it pertains to RFID tags and been able to modify the tags of Bann based on an alternative physical configuration of known RFID tags.
As to the applicant’s arguments on pages 12-14 with respect to Tokarev, the teaching of Tokarev is not relied upon for explicitly teaching a specific recess height. However, Tokarev does teach that the dimensions of a drilled opening correspond to the RFID tag, embedding the tag at 0.001mm from the surface, and covering the tag to provide a flush surface. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art that the depth of the recess is the depth of the tag + 0.001mm (0.00003937in). Therefore, in combination with the tag dimensions of Schoening (Paragraph [0069] teaches the overall thickness T5 can be 0.10 inches), the recess has a depth of 0.10003937in which reads on the claimed “no greater than 0.125 inches”. Therefore, the combination of prior art teachings render obvious the claimed subject matter.
In response to applicant’s argument on page 15 that there is no teaching, suggestion, or motivation to combine the references, the examiner recognizes that obviousness may be established by combining or modifying the teachings of the prior art to produce the claimed invention where there is some teaching, suggestion, or motivation to do so found either in the references themselves or in the knowledge generally available to one of ordinary skill in the art. See In re Fine, 837 F.2d 1071, 5 USPQ2d 1596 (Fed. Cir. 1988), In re Jones, 958 F.2d 347, 21 USPQ2d 1941 (Fed. Cir. 1992), and KSR International Co. v. Teleflex, Inc., 550 U.S. 398, 82 USPQ2d 1385 (2007). In this case, Schoening provides the teaching, suggestion, or motivation to combine in that providing the largest feasible surface area helps the reader to reach and detect the RFID tag by facilitating strong communication connection (Paragraphs [0058] and [0075]-[0076]) and Tokarev provides the teaching, suggestion, or motivation of mounting the RFID tag close to the surface to improve efficiency and reliability of RFID tag operation by increasing the reliability of embedding, reducing dimensions, and reducing negative effects of embedding (Paragraph [0022]).
In response to the applicant’s argument on pages 15-16 regarding the technique of embedding, the claims do not recite a technique of embedding and the prior art is not relied upon for a specific embedding technique. Therefore, this argument is not immediately relevant to the claimed subject matter.
For these reasons, the rejections to independent claims 1 and 15 are maintained.
With respect to the applicant’s arguments on page 17 regarding the dependent claims, without further arguments to the specific subject matter of the dependent claims, these claims remain rejected since the base claims are properly rejected.
Conclusion
THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. 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.
Contact Information
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to RYAN W SHERWIN whose telephone number is (571)270-7269. The examiner can normally be reached M-F, 7:00-8:00, 9:00-3:00 and 4:00-5:00 EST.
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, Steven Lim can be reached at 571.270.1210. 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.
/RYAN W SHERWIN/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2688
Prosecution Insights