DETAILED ACTION
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and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114.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 3/6/2026 has been entered.
Claims 1-11, 13-16, 19 and 21 remain pending in this application.
Applicant's arguments have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
Claim Objections
Claims 1-11, 13-16, 19, and 21 are objected to because of the following informalities:
Claim 1 at line 14 “wherein the user interface is configure to” should be -- wherein the user interface is configured to--. Claims 11 and 16 has a similar issue.
Dependent claims 2-10, 13-15, 19 and 21 do not overcome the deficiency of the base claim and, therefore, are objected for the same reasons as the base claims.
Appropriate correction is required.
Response to Arguments
5. In response to Applicants’ arguments regarding the rejection of claims under 35 USC
101 filed 3/6/2026 (See pages 11-13 of Applicant’s remarks), the Applicants should please see the rejection below for clarification as it will substantially duplicate any response to the arguments in this section. However, the Applicant should please note that the limitations of the claim, even when taken as an ordered combination, do not provide steps that confine the abstract idea to a particular useful application. The newly added limitations of “wherein a user interface is provided to a user, and wherein the user interface is configure to: display deltas that exist between the package and an updated package; and receive user input from a user, wherein the user input includes feedback relating to at least one delta included in the deltas, and propagating the package to a different platform that is identified as having a same asset as the asset” merely recites insignificant extra solution activity, which does not integrate the judicial exception into a practical application and “modifying, based on the feedback, the package” is an additional mental process, as discussed below. Therefore, the recited judicial exceptions are not integrated into a practical application, and the claims are ineligible.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 101
6. The text of those sections of Title 35, U.S. Code not included in this action can be found in a prior Office action.
Claims 1-11, 13-16, 19 and 21 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 101 because the claimed invention is directed to an abstract idea without significantly more. The analysis specific to Claim 1 is being presented below. However, the Applicants should please note that the analysis for claim 1 is similar to that of claim 11 and therefore rejected for the same reasons.
Claim 1 recites:
“A method for propagating a package over a network from a package authoring platform to a remote asset management platform, said method further facilitating management of an asset associated with the package by tracking a state of the asset in a facility, said method being implemented by a service and comprising:
(a) generating a digital twin for the asset, wherein the digital twin is a digital representation of the asset;
(b) receiving, from the package authoring platform, a package that is associated with the asset, wherein the package outlines a set of governing criteria for the asset, wherein the package includes an installed symbol generated by a source that is different than the package authoring platform such that the package is assembled from a chain of multiple sources, and wherein a portion within the package includes a reference to the symbol, said reference being structured to facilitate selective updating to the package;
(b.1) wherein a user interface is provided to a user, and wherein the user interface is configure to: display deltas that exist between the package and an updated package; and
(b.2) receive user input from a user, wherein the user input includes feedback relating to at least one delta included in the deltas;
(c) providing a code to the asset management platform, the code being structured to facilitate, over the network, installation of the package at the asset management platform;
(d) transmitting the package to the asset management platform for installation of the package at the asset management platform;
(e) receiving, from the asset management platform, telemetry data that indicates operational conditions associated with the asset;
(f) using the telemetry data to determine compliance with the governing criteria of the package;
(g) receiving an update designed for the symbol within the package, the update originating from the source that is different than the package authoring platform such that the update passed through the chain of multiple sources until reaching the service,
(g.1) wherein the update is generated asynchronously and without a dependence on a determination as to which one or more asset management platforms include the symbol;
(h) selecting the portion that includes the reference to the symbol;
(i) applying the update to the symbol within the selected portion, resulting in generation of a selectively updated package;
(j) determining that, as a result of the asset management platform having previously installed the package, the update to the symbol is applicable to the package installed at the asset management platform;
(k) publishing the selectively updated package to the asset management platform;
(l) installing the selectively updated package at the asset management platform such that the update to the package associated with the hardware asset is performed in real-time and the update causes a change in a state of the hardware asset;
(m) accessing image data obtained from a plurality of cameras disposed within the facility, wherein the image data reflects a supply of materials located within the facility, wherein the supply of materials is used by the asset, and wherein an inventory database maintains an inventory record for the supply of materials;
(n) determining, by a trained machine learning model, a usage characteristic from the image data for the supply of materials to form a monitored usage of the supply of materials by the asset over time such that the service tracks the monitored usage of the supply of materials via the image data;
(o) based on the usage characteristic, predicting a first date when the supply of materials is likely to run out;
(p) based on the predicted first date, determining a second date when more of the supply of materials is to be ordered to avoid running out of the supply of materials;
(q) generating a recommendation using the determined second date, the recommendation indicating that more the supply of materials is to be ordered prior to the first date to enable the asset to continue to operate using the supply of materials;
(r) changing the inventory record in the inventory database to reflect an updated amount of the supply of materials when the amount of the supply of materials changes;
(s) modifying, based on the feedback, the package;
(t) propagating the package to a different platform that is identified as having a same asset as the asset.”
Step 1:
The claim falls within statutory a category of being a method.
Step 2A – Prong 1:
The claim recites the limitations of:
(a) generating a digital twin for the asset, wherein the digital twin is a digital representation of the asset;
(f) using the telemetry data to determine compliance with the governing criteria of the package;
(g.1) wherein the update is generated asynchronously and without a dependence on a determination as to which one or more asset management platforms include the symbol;
(h) selecting the portion that includes the reference to the symbol;
(i) applying the update to the symbol within the selected portion, resulting in generation of a selectively updated package;
(j) determining that, as a result of the asset management platform having previously installed the package, the update to the symbol is applicable to the package installed at the asset management platform;
(n) determining a usage characteristic from the image data for the supply of materials to form a monitored usage of the supply of materials by the asset over time such that the service tracks the monitored usage of the supply of materials via the image data;
(o) based on the usage characteristic, predicting a first date when the supply of materials is likely to run out;
(p) based on the predicted first date, determining a second date when more of the supply of materials is to be ordered to avoid running out of the supply of materials;
(q) generating a recommendation using the determined second date, the recommendation indicating that more the supply of materials is to be ordered prior to the first date to enable the asset to continue to operate using the supply of materials;
(r) changing the inventory record to reflect an updated amount of the supply of materials when the amount of the supply of materials changes,
(s) modifying, based on the feedback, the package;
Limitations (a), (f), (g.1) (h)-(j), and (n)-(s) are limitations that, as drafted, are processes that, under its broadest reasonable interpretations, covers performance of the limitation in the mind. That is, nothing in the claim elements precludes the step from practically being performed in the mind or with a pen and paper, i.e. “determining”, “predicting” , “selecting”, “generating” , “applying”, “changing”, and “modifying” can be performed in the human mind through observation, evaluation, judgement, opinion with the aid of pen and paper. For example, “generating a digital twin” , “generating a recommendation…” and “changing the inventory record” and also “modifying the package” can be performed by a user with the aid of pen and paper by writing it down and/or making a note of it. As such, these limitations fall within the “Mental Processes” grouping of abstract ideas (e.g., using pen and paper).
Step 2A – Prong 2:
The claim recites the additional elements of “implemented by a service”, “ a network”, “a package authoring platform”, “a remote asset management platform”, “a user interface”, “inventory database”, “a trained machine learning model” and also limitations (b)-(e), (g), (k)-(m) and (t). The limitations “implemented by a service”, “ a network”, “a package authoring platform”, “a user interface”, “a remote asset management platform”, “inventory database” and “a trained machine learning model” are recited at a high level of generality, i.e., merely instructions to implement the abstract idea on a generic computer or merely uses a computer as a tool to perform the abstract idea. Additionally, limitations (b)-(e), (g), (l), (m), and (t) merely recite insignificant extra solution activity such as gathering, displaying, updating, transmitting and storing data, which does not integrate the judicial exception into a practical application, and limitation (k) is merely applying the judicial exception or abstract idea and therefore does not integrate the judicial exception into a practical application. Furthermore, the additional element of “method for propagating a package over a network from a package authoring platform to a remote asset management platform, said method further facilitating management of an asset associated with the package by tracking a state of the asset in a facility” merely links the use of the judicial exception to a particular technological environment or field of use, thus does not integrate the judicial exception into a practical application.
Step 2B:
As discussed with respect to Step 2A Prong 2, the additional elements of “implemented by a service”, “ a network”, “a package authoring platform”, “a user interface”, “a remote asset management platform”, “inventory database” and “a trained machine learning model”, as well as limitation (k), merely recite generic computer and computer components, and merely applying the abstract idea, respectively, and thus do not amount to significantly more than the judicial exception. The additional element of “method for propagating a package over a network from a package authoring platform to a remote asset management platform, said method further facilitating management of an asset associated with the package by tracking a state of the asset in a facility” merely recite the technological environment or field of use at a high level of generality. The courts have identified functions such as gathering, displaying, updating, transmitting and storing data as well-understood, routine, conventional activity, as recited in limitations (b)-(e), (g), (l), (m) and (s), and thus do not amount to significantly more than the judicial exception. See MPEP 2106.05(d). The same analysis applies here in 2B, i.e., simply adding extra-solution activity or generic computer components does not integrate a judicial exception into a practical application at Step 2A or provide an inventive concept in Step 2B. Therefore, none of the additional elements recite an inventive concept, thus, the claimed invention is patent ineligible under 35 USC 101.
Claim 16 recites:
“A method for propagating a package over a network from a package authoring platform to a remote asset management platform said method further facilitating management of an asset associated with the package by tracking a state of the asset in a facility, said method being implemented by a service and comprising:
(a) generating a digital twin for the asset, wherein the digital twin is a digital representation of the asset;
(b) receiving, from the package authoring platform, the package that is associated with the asset, wherein the package outlines a set of governing criteria for the asset, wherein the package includes an installed symbol generated by a source that is different than the package authoring platform such that the package is assembled from a chain of multiple sources, and wherein a portion within the package includes a reference to the symbol, said reference being structured to facilitate selective updating to the package;
(b.1) wherein a user interface is provided to a user, and wherein the user interface is configure to: display deltas that exist between the package and an updated package; and
(b.2) receive user input from a user, wherein the user input includes feedback relating to at least one delta included in the deltas;
(c) providing a code to the asset management platform, the code being structured to facilitate, over the network, installation of the package at the asset management platform;
(d) in response to a download request received from the asset management platform via use of the code, transmitting the package to the asset management platform for installation of the package at the asset management platform;
(e) receiving, from the asset management platform, telemetry data that indicates operational conditions associated with the asset, wherein the telemetry data includes sensor data from a sensor;
(f) using the telemetry data to determine compliance with the governing criteria of the package;
(g) receiving an update designed for the symbol within the package, the update originating from the source that is different than the package authoring platform such that the update passed through the chain of multiple sources until reaching the service,
(g.1) wherein the update is generated asynchronously and without a dependence on a determination as to which one or more asset management platforms include the symbol;
(h) selecting the portion that includes the reference to the symbol;
(i) applying the update to the symbol within the selected portion, resulting in generation of the selectively updated package;
(j) determining that, as a result of the asset management platform having previously installed the package, the update to the symbol is applicable to the package installed at the asset management platform;
(k) publishing the selectively updated package to the asset management platform, wherein the selectively updated package, after being received at the asset management platform, is caused to be installed at the asset management platform;
(l) installing the selectively updated package at the asset management platform such that the update to the package associated with the hardware asset is performed in real-time and the update causes a change in a state of the hardware asset;
(m) accessing image data obtained from a plurality of cameras disposed within the facility, wherein the image data reflects a supply of materials located within the facility, wherein the supply of materials is used by the asset, and wherein an inventory database maintains an inventory record for the supply of materials;
(n) determining, by a trained machine learning model, a usage characteristic from the image data for the supply of materials to form a monitored usage of the supply of materials by the asset over time such that the service tracks the monitored usage of the supply of materials via the image data;
(o) based on the usage characteristic, predicting a first date when the supply of materials is likely to run out;
(p) based on the predicted first date, determining a second date when more of the supply of materials is to be ordered to avoid running out of the supply of materials;
(q) generating a recommendation using the determined second date, the recommendation indicating that more the supply of materials is to be ordered prior to the first date to enable the asset to continue to operate using the supply of materials;
(r) changing the inventory record in the inventory database to reflect an updated amount of the supply of materials when the amount of the supply of materials changes;
(s) modifying, based on the feedback, the package;
(t) propagating the package to a different platform that is identified as having a same asset as the asset.”
Step 1:
The claim falls within statutory a category of being a method.
Step 2A – Prong 1:
The claim recites the limitations of:
(a) generating a digital twin for the asset, wherein the digital twin is a digital representation of the asset;
(f) using the telemetry data to determine compliance with the governing criteria of the package;
(g.1) wherein the update is generated asynchronously and without a dependence on a determination as to which one or more asset management platforms include the symbol;
(h) selecting the portion that includes the reference to the symbol;
(i) applying the update to the symbol within the selected portion, resulting in generation of a selectively updated package;
(j) determining that, as a result of the asset management platform having previously installed the package, the update to the symbol is applicable to the package installed at the asset management platform;
(n) determining a usage characteristic from the image data for the supply of materials to form a monitored usage of the supply of materials by the asset over time such that the service tracks the monitored usage of the supply of materials via the image data;
(o) based on the usage characteristic, predicting a first date when the supply of materials is likely to run out;
(p) based on the predicted first date, determining a second date when more of the supply of materials is to be ordered to avoid running out of the supply of materials;
(q) generating a recommendation using the determined second date, the recommendation indicating that more the supply of materials is to be ordered prior to the first date to enable the asset to continue to operate using the supply of materials;
(r) changing the inventory record to reflect an updated amount of the supply of materials when the amount of the supply of materials changes;
(s) modifying, based on the feedback, the package;
Limitations (a), (f), (g.1) (h)-(j), and (n)-(s) are limitations that, as drafted, are processes that, under its broadest reasonable interpretations, covers performance of the limitation in the mind. That is, nothing in the claim elements precludes the step from practically being performed in the mind or with a pen and paper, i.e. “determining”, “predicting” “generating”, “selecting”, “applying”, “changing” and “modifying” can be performed in the human mind through observation, evaluation, judgement, opinion with the aid of pen and paper. For example, “generating a digital twin” , “generating a recommendation…” and “changing the inventory record” and also “modifying the package” can be performed by a user with the aid of pen and paper by writing it down and/or making a note of it. As such, these limitations fall within the “Mental Processes” grouping of abstract ideas (e.g., using pen and paper).
Step 2A – Prong 2:
The claim recites the additional elements of “implemented by a service”, “ a network”, “a package authoring platform”, “a remote asset management platform,” “a sensor”, “inventory database”, and “by a trained machine learning model” as well as limitations (b)-(e), (g), (k)-(m) and (t). The limitations “implemented by a service”, “ a network”, “a package authoring platform”, “a remote asset management platform”, “a user interface”, “a sensor”, “by a trained machine learning model”, and “inventory database” are recited at a high level of generality, i.e., merely instructions to implement the abstract idea on a generic computer or merely uses a computer as a tool to perform the abstract idea. Additionally, limitations (b)-(e), (g), (l), (m), and (t) merely recite insignificant extra solution activity such as gathering, displaying, updating, transmitting and storing data, which does not integrate the judicial exception into a practical application, and limitation (k) is merely applying the judicial exception or abstract idea and therefore does not integrate the judicial exception into a practical application. Furthermore, the additional element of “method for propagating a package over a network from a package authoring platform to a remote asset management platform, said method further facilitating management of an asset associated with the package by tracking a state of the asset in a facility” merely links the use of the judicial exception to a particular technological environment or field of use, thus does not integrate the judicial exception into a practical application.
Step 2B:
As discussed with respect to Step 2A Prong 2, the additional elements of “implemented by a service”, “ a network”, “a package authoring platform”, “a remote asset management platform,”, “ a user interface”, “a sensor”, “by a trained machine learning model” and “inventory database”, as well as limitation (k), merely recite generic computer and computer components, and merely applying the abstract idea, respectively, and thus do not amount to significantly more than the judicial exception. The additional element of “method for propagating a package over a network from a package authoring platform to a remote asset management platform, said method further facilitating management of an asset associated with the package by tracking a state of the asset in a facility” merely recite the technological environment or field of use at a high level of generality. The courts have identified functions such as gathering, displaying, updating, transmitting and storing data as well-understood, routine, conventional activity, as recited in limitations (b)-(e), (g), (l), (m) and (t), and thus do not amount to significantly more than the judicial exception. See MPEP 2106.05(d). The same analysis applies here in 2B, i.e., simply adding extra-solution activity or generic computer components does not integrate a judicial exception into a practical application at Step 2A or provide an inventive concept in Step 2B. Therefore, none of the additional elements recite an inventive concept, thus, the claimed invention is patent ineligible under 35 USC 101.
Additionally, claim 2 recites “wherein information describing the asset is available to the service and includes one or more of: a make of the asset, a model of the asset, a position of the asset, or a proximity of the asset to another asset”, which is merely insignificant extra solution activity of gathering data/information. This limitation does not integrate the abstract idea into a practical application because it does not impose any meaningful limits on practicing the abstract idea or provide an inventive concept and thus does not amount to significantly more that the abstract idea. As such, this claims fail both Step 2A prong 2 and Step 2B. Therefore, claim 2 is ineligible.
Additionally claim 3 recites “wherein the package includes one or more of: parts data for the asset, procedure data for the asset, a work order template for the asset, vendor data for the asset, or instrumentation data for the asset,” which is merely insignificant extra solution activity of transmitting data/information. This limitation does not integrate the abstract idea into a practical application because it does not impose any meaningful limits on practicing the abstract idea or provide an inventive concept and thus does not amount to significantly more that the abstract idea. As such, this claims fail both Step 2A prong 2 and Step 2B. Therefore, claim 3 is ineligible.
Additionally, claim 4 recites “wherein the governing criteria for the asset includes one or more of compliance data with respect to a regulation associated with the asset or performance information associated with the asset,” which is merely insignificant extra solution activity of gathering data/information. This limitation does not integrate the abstract idea into a practical application because it does not impose any meaningful limits on practicing the abstract idea or provide an inventive concept and thus does not amount to significantly more that the abstract idea. As such, this claims fail both Step 2A prong 2 and Step 2B. Therefore, claim 4 is ineligible.
Additionally, Claim 5 recites “wherein the method further includes: surfacing a user option to accept, reject, or postpone a portion of the updated package,” which is merely insignificant extra solution activity of displaying data. This limitation does not integrate the abstract idea into a practical application because it does not impose any meaningful limits on practicing the abstract idea or provide an inventive concept and thus does not amount to significantly more that the abstract idea. As such, this claims fail both Step 2A prong 2 and Step 2B. Therefore, claim 5 is ineligible.
Additionally, Claim 6 recites “wherein the package is a nested package in which one or more additional packages are nested therein”, which is merely insignificant extra solution activity of transmitting data/information. This limitation does not integrate the abstract idea into a practical application because it does not impose any meaningful limits on practicing the abstract idea or provide an inventive concept and thus does not amount to significantly more that the abstract idea. As such, this claims fail both Step 2A prong 2 and Step 2B. Therefore, claim 6 is ineligible.
Additionally, Claim 7 recites “wherein the telemetry data includes one or more of: sensor data from a sensor external relative to the asset or sensor data from a sensor associated with the asset”, which is merely insignificant extra solution activity of gathering data/information. This limitation does not integrate the abstract idea into a practical application because it does not impose any meaningful limits on practicing the abstract idea or provide an inventive concept and thus does not amount to significantly more that the abstract idea. As such, this claims fail both Step 2A prong 2 and Step 2B. Therefore, claim 7 is ineligible.
Additionally, Claim 8 recites “wherein the asset management platform includes a plugin component that facilitates communications between the asset management platform and the service, and wherein the service is a cloud service,” which are additional elements recited at a high level of generality used to carry out or apply the abstract idea. Thus, the limitation does not integrate the abstract ides into a practical application because it does not impose any meaningful limits on practicing the abstract idea or provide an inventive concept and thus does not amount to significantly more that the abstract idea. As such, this claims fail both Step 2A prong 2 and Step 2B. Therefore, claim 8 is ineligible.
Additionally, Claim 9 recites “wherein the service includes a machine learning (ML) engine, and wherein the ML engine submits the recommendation to the asset management platform,” which are additional elements recited at a high level of generality used to carry out or apply the abstract idea. Thus, the limitation does not integrate the abstract ides into a practical application because it does not impose any meaningful limits on practicing the abstract idea or provide an inventive concept and thus does not amount to significantly more that the abstract idea. As such, this claims fail both Step 2A prong 2 and Step 2B. Therefore, claim 9 is ineligible.
Additionally, Claim 10 recites “wherein the recommendation further includes one or more of: a recommendation as to a new position for the asset or a recommendation as to when the asset is to be serviced”, which is merely insignificant extra solution activity. This limitation does not integrate the abstract idea into a practical application because it does not impose any meaningful limits on practicing the abstract idea or provide an inventive concept and thus does not amount to significantly more that the abstract idea. As such, this claims fail both Step 2A prong 2 and Step 2B. Therefore, claim 10 is ineligible.
Additionally, claim 13 recites “acquire data from one or more other platforms having other assets that are identified as being the same to said asset; and compile fleet data that corresponds to said asset and said other assets”, which is merely insignificant extra solution activity of gathering data/information. This limitation does not integrate the abstract idea into a practical application because it does not impose any meaningful limits on practicing the abstract idea or provide an inventive concept and thus does not amount to significantly more that the abstract idea. As such, this claims fail both Step 2A prong 2 and Step 2B. Therefore, claim 13 is ineligible.
Additionally, claim 14 recites “wherein the telemetry data includes one or more of: image data, environmental conditions data, or instrumentation data”, which is merely insignificant extra solution activity of gathering data/information. This limitation does not integrate the abstract idea into a practical application because it does not impose any meaningful limits on practicing the abstract idea or provide an inventive concept and thus does not amount to significantly more that the abstract idea. As such, this claims fail both Step 2A prong 2 and Step 2B. Therefore, claim 14 is ineligible.
Additionally, claim 15 recites “wherein a second recommendation is generated based on the telemetry data”, which is an additional mental process, as explained above. As such, this claim fails both Step 2A prong 2 and Step 2B. Therefore, claim 15 is ineligible.
Additionally, claim 19 recites “providing a prediction to the asset management platform, and wherein the prediction relates to a supply chain for the asset”, which is merely insignificant extra solution activity of gathering data/information. This limitation does not integrate the abstract idea into a practical application because it does not impose any meaningful limits on practicing the abstract idea or provide an inventive concept and thus does not amount to significantly more that the abstract idea. As such, this claims fail both Step 2A prong 2 and Step 2B. Therefore, claim 19 is ineligible.
Additionally, Claim 21 recites “wherein the one or more sensors include a non- image based sensor”, which is an additional element recited at a high level of generality used to carry out or apply the abstract idea. Thus, the limitation does not integrate the abstract ides into a practical application because it does not impose any meaningful limits on practicing the abstract idea or provide an inventive concept and thus does not amount to significantly more that the abstract idea. As such, this claims fail both Step 2A prong 2 and Step 2B. Therefore, claim 21 is ineligible.
Conclusion
7. Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to CHENECA SMITH whose telephone number is (571)270-1651. The examiner can normally be reached Mon-Fri 8:00AM-4:30PM 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, Hyung S Sough can be reached at 571-272-6799. 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.
/CHENECA SMITH/Examiner, Art Unit 2192
/S. Sough/SPE, Art Unit 2192