DETAILED ACTION
Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status
The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
Response to Amendment
Examiner acknowledges applicant’s response and amendments regarding claim interpretation under 35 U.S.C. 112(f).
Applicant’s amendment to independent claims 1,9 and 10 overcomes each and every rejection made under 35 U.S.C.101 set forth in the previous office action mailed on 03/17/2026. Therefore the rejections made under 35 U.S.C.101 are withdrawn.
Applicant’s argument regarding claims 1, 9 and 10 that neither in combination nor individually cited prior arts of record Kitazumi et al., Haligowski et al. teach the new amended limitation, adjust a resolution of the event network in accordance with a resolution specified by a user via an operational terminal in a case where a first number of the plurality of nodes at a first resolution is changed to a second number of the plurality of nodes at a second resolution that corresponds to greater information indicated by the event network, the second resolution and the second number of the plurality of nodes exceeding the first number of the plurality of nodes and the first resolution, has been fully considered but in moot in view of newly cited prior art of record, Zhang et al. in combination with cited prior arts of record Grossman et al. since applicant’s amendments substantially changes the scope of the claims 1,9 and 10. The newly cited prior art, Zhang et al. explicitly teaches in [0005],[0006] and [0030] that the system can dynamically adjust the number of nodes in a workflow (event network) based on user selection of dimensions (resolution) in a user interface or user selection of a particular node in the workflow to provide more related number of nodes added to the existing workflow while maintaining the hierarchical structure of the workflow. Zhang et al. is an analogous art to Grossman et al. because they are from the same field of endeavor that is generating automated workflow. Therefore it would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person of ordinary skill in the art to modify the work status monitoring system detecting plurality of events and outputting results of the plurality of events in an ordered manner as taught by Grossman et al. by applying the know technique of dynamically changing the number of nodes in a workflow based on user selected resolution as taught by Zhang et al. to yield predictable results of adjusting the workflow based on user inputs as taught by Zhang et al. in [0031].
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 103 which forms the basis for all obviousness rejections set forth in this Office action:
A patent for a claimed invention may not be obtained, notwithstanding that the claimed invention is not identically disclosed as set forth in section 102, if the differences between the claimed invention and the prior art are such that the claimed invention as a whole would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which the claimed invention pertains. Patentability shall not be negated by the manner in which the invention was made.
Claim(s) 1,3,5,7,9 and 10 are rejected under 35 U.S.C.103 as being unpatentable over Grossman et al. (US 20200349482 A1) in view of Zhang et al. (US 20160132215 A1) and Senescu (US 20140188544 A1).
Regarding claim 1 Grossman et al .teaches, a work status monitoring system (computer implemented method/system for generating workflow for a task, [0008]) comprising:
a central processing unit (central processing unit executing software applications, [0163]) configured to: detect a plurality of events that have occurred in a work area (event data collection engine collecting event data. Each event data represents a task performed by a user in workspace-work area, [0048], and [0058]);
generate an event network composed of a plurality of nodes indicating the plurality of events and a plurality of edges indicating an order of generation of the plurality of nodes (“…A separate W-graph may be generated for each particular task based on the event data collected from a plurality of clients/users performing the same particular task via the design application. For each user performing the particular task, the server may generate an original workflow1 that graphically represents the overall process the user implemented to perform/complete the particular task. The original workflow comprises a sequence of events, each event comprising an edge representing a user technique (set of commands)and a corresponding node representing a state of the design/task that results from implementing the user technique...”, [0049] and Fig.4);
adjust a resolution of the event network (the user may select W-suggest feature of the workflow and based on user selection, the current workflow is modified and presented to the user, that is adjusted to a resolution, [0060] and [0061]);
combine nodes of events related within a specified degree of relation among the plurality of nodes into one node (“…The server may also generate a condensed version (condensed workflow) of the original workflow, the condensed workflow including a set of zero or more original nodes and a set of zero or more combined nodes. Each combined node may represent two or more similar nodes from the original workflow. Similar nodes may comprise two or more nodes that represent two or more design/task states that are determined to be similar within a threshold value2…”, [0049]);
Grossman et al. does not teach the details of in accordance with a resolution specified by a user via an operational terminal in a case where a first number of the plurality of nodes at a first resolution is changed to a second number of the plurality of nodes at a second resolution that corresponds to greater information indicated by the event network, the second resolution and the second number of the plurality of nodes exceeding the first number of the plurality of nodes and the first resolution; convert the event network of which the resolution has been adjusted into a Design Structure Matrix (DSM), the DSM being information indicating a relationship of an order of occurrences of a plurality of events; and output a result of the conversion including information about the DSM. However Grossman et al. teaches the user can request more information for feature of the workflow based of which the original workflow is modified as taught in [0053]).
Zhang et al. teaches, in accordance with a resolution specified by a user via an operational terminal in a case where a first number of the plurality of nodes at a first resolution is changed to a second number of the plurality of nodes at a second resolution that corresponds to greater information indicated by the event network (based on user input received in a graphical interface, the workflow of the organizational chart is dynamically updated. For example the user selects node 114, the sub-nodes of the selected node are identified and added to the workflow3 thus increasing the number of nodes to provide more information for the selected node within the workflow thus the workflow is changed to second resolution with increased number of nodes. The user can select the node the second time which can remove the sub-nodes from the workflow thus reducing the number of nodes back to first resolution. That is based on user selected resolution, the number of nodes in the workflow is adjusted, [0005], [0028] and [0030]), the second resolution and the second number of the plurality of nodes exceeding the first number of the plurality of nodes and the first resolution (when the user first selects the node 114, the subnodes are added to the workflow that is number of nodes increases that is resolution of information increases compared to original or first resolution of the generated workflow, [0028], [0030] and [0032]).
Grossman et al. and Zhang et al. are analogous art because they are from the same field of endeavor that is automatically generating workflow.
Therefore it would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person of ordinary skill in the art to modify the work status monitoring system detecting plurality of events and outputting results of the plurality of events in an ordered manner as taught by Grossman et al. by applying the know technique of dynamically changing the number of nodes in a workflow based on user selected resolution as taught by Zhang et al. to yield predictable results of adjusting the workflow based on user inputs as taught by Zhang et al. in [0031].
Neither in combination nor individually Grossman et al. and Zhang et al. teach the details of convert the event network of which the resolution has been adjusted into a into a Design Structure Matrix (DSM), the DSM being information indicating a relationship of an order of occurrences of a plurality of events; and output a result of the conversion including information about the DSM.
Senescu teaches, convert the event network of which the resolution has been adjusted4 into a Design Structure Matrix (DSM) (inferring dependence information in real-time for example from a workflow (resolution adjusted in view of Grossman et al. and Zhang et al.), create a design structure matrix -DSM, [0005] and [0006]), the DSM being information indicating a relationship of an order of occurrences of a plurality of events (the created DSM shows the dependencies between tasks- order of occurrences of plurality of events, [0004] and [0005]);
and output a result of the conversion including information about the DSM (the created DSM is visually displayed in user interface, [0005] and [0035]).
Senescu is an analogous art to Grossman et al. and Zhang et al. because they are from the same field of endeavor that is automatically creating workflows.
Therefore it would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the
claimed invention to a person of ordinary skill in the art to modify the work status monitoring system generating event network/workflow having adjusted views per specified resolution as taught by combination of Grossman et al. and Zhang et al. by applying the known technique of converting the adjusted event network/workflow into a DSM as taught by Senescu to yield predictable results of determining dependencies between various tasks/steps in a process.
Zhang et al. teach:
[0030] The workflow begins at step (1) (reference numeral 151) with the system (which can be a computer system that includes a processor and non-transitory memory) detecting user input on the graphical user interface that is representative of selecting node 114. Node 114 represents an employee and selection of node 114 can be interpreted as an interest to display the direct reports of the employee. Once node 114 has been selected, the workflow continues by identifying the sub nodes(e.g., direct reports) of node 114 at step (2) (reference numeral 152). This can be completed by querying the hierarchical organization for the direct reports of node 114. This can be the subnodes that are directly connected to node 114. Once the subnodes have been identified, the workflow can continue by determining a layout to apply to the subnodes at step (3) (reference numeral 153). The layout can be selected from one or more predefined layouts that are applicable to the subnodes. The applicability of a predefined layout to the subnodes can be determined by the number of subnodesthat exist. For example, there may be three applicable layouts (4×1, 2×2, and 1×4) that are applicablewhen there are four subnodes available. Here, the workflow can determine that the layout to apply to the subnodes is a vertical vector since the number of subnodes is below a predefined threshold. Once the layout has been determined, the workflow can continue by presenting the subnodes in a matrix according to the layout at step (4) (reference numeral 154)5.
Regarding claim 3, combination of Grossman et al., Zhang et al. and Senescu teach the work status monitoring system according to claim 1. In addition Grossman et al. teaches, wherein the central processing unit is configured to output as the information about the DSM (modified workflow6 presented to the user, [0050]), both the DSM generated based on the plurality of events and a DSM of a preset standard (the server compares the current workflow (DSM generated plurality of events) with primary representative workflow (DSM of preset standard7), [0053]).
Regarding claim 5, combination of Grossman et al., Zhang et al. and Senescu teach the work status monitoring system according to claim 1. In addition Senescu teaches, wherein the central processing unit is configured to display the information about the DSM on a monitor (the computing device 200 has user interface-monitor for displaying the generated DSM, [0005],[0006] and [0035]).
Regarding claim 7, combination of Grossman et al., Zhang et al. and Senescu teach the work status monitoring system according to claim 1. In addition Grossman et al. teaches, wherein the central processing unit is configured to determine whether or not a first event represented by a first node, the first node being any one of the plurality of nodes, and a second event represented by a second node, the second node being another one of the plurality of nodes (each node from a different workflow are merged based into single node when it is determined the nodes are similar within a threshold value, [0045],[0063] and [0079]-[0081]), are related within the specified degree of relation based on at least one of an object involved
in an occurrence of each of the first and the second events (the object is the particular task of a process and each worker can perform different ways to perform the same particular task for the and for each worker, workflows with nodes are generated and then nodes from different workflows are combined based on similarity threshold, [0049] and [0063]), a time when each of the first and the second events has occurred (each node of the workflow are timestamped that is the time when the event of the node occurred is known, [0063] and [0079]), and a place where each of the first and the second events has occurred (the current workflows are created for a company having plurality of clients communicating to cloud server. The location for each client should be known by the cloud server that is location of the workflows performed are known, [0012], [0045] and [0063]).
Regarding claim 9, combination of Grossman et al., Zhang et al. and Senescu teach the claimed work status monitoring system. Therefore together they teach a work status monitoring method implementing the functional steps of the work status monitoring system as discussed above in claim 1.
Regarding claim 10, combination of Grossman et al., Zhang et al. and Senescu teach the claimed work status monitoring system. Therefore together they teach a work status monitoring program implementing the functional steps of the work status monitoring system as discussed above in claim 1. Claim 10 has additional limitation which is taught by Grossman et al., a non-transitory computer readable medium (one or more non-transitory computer readable media, [0189]).
Claim 4 is rejected under 35 U.S.C.103 as being unpatentable over Grossman et al. (US 20200349482 A1) in view of Zhang et al. (US 20160132215 A1) and Senescu (US 20140188544 A1) and in further view of Kitazumi et al. (US 20220215327 A1).
Regarding claim 4, combination of Grossman et al., Zhang et al. and Senescu teach the work status monitoring system according to claim 1. In addition Senescu et al. teaches, wherein the central processing unit is configured to output, as the information about the DSM (the computing device 200 has CPU and user interface-monitor for displaying the generated DSM, [0005],[0006] and [0035]).
Neither in combination nor individually Grossman et al., Zhang et al. and Senescu teach the details of a status of a change in the DSM through a repetition of items of work.
Kitazumi et al. teaches, a status of a change in the DSM8 through a repetition of items of work (during the analysis step where the generated time chart is compared with the benchmark time chart, the missed steps or the steps that took longer than benchmark or excess work was performed for a step can be identified thus showing a change in the steps of the workflow (DSM in view of Senescu) through repetition of steps (excess work), [0084] and [0085]).
Kitazumi et al., Grossman et al., Zhang et al. and Senescu are analogous art because they are from the same field of endeavor that is automatically creating workflows.
Therefore it would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person of ordinary skill in the art to modify the work status monitoring system generating DSM as taught by combination of Grossman et al., Zhang et al. and Senescu by applying the known technique of change in status in a workflow (DSM in view of Senescu) thorugh a repetition of items of work as taught by Kitazumi et al. to yield predictable results of observing changes in a workflow or DSM.
Claim 8 is rejected under 35 U.S.C.103 as being unpatentable over Grossman et al. (US 20200349482 A1) in view of Zhang et al. (US 20160132215 A1) and Senescu (US 20140188544 A1) and in further view of Kitazumi et al. (US 20220215327 A1) and Diekmann et al. (US 20220055393 A1).
Regarding claim 8, combination of Grossman et al., Zhang et al. and Senescu teach the work status monitoring system according to claim 1.
Neither in combination nor individually Grossman et al., Zhang et al. and Senescu teach the plurality of events that have occurred in the work area by using at least one of a distance measurement sensor and a camera.
Kitazumi et al. teaches, the plurality of events that have occurred in the work area by using at least one of a camera (captured images received from the camera are parsed to determine worker steps to create a time chart having plurality of events indicating worker work steps, [0051], [0064] and [0066]).
Therefore it would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person of ordinary skill in the art to modify the work status monitoring system generating DSM based on plurality of events as taught by combination of Grossman et al., Zhang et al. and Senescu by applying the known technique of capturing information about the events using a camera as taught by Kitazumi et al. to yield predictable results of determining information about event of a workflow or DSM.
Neither in combination nor individually Grossman et al., Zhang et al., Senescu and Kitazumi et al. teach the details of distance measurement sensor.
Diekmann et al. teaches, at least one of a distance measurement sensor
(plate location measured by distance measurement sensor, [0032]).
Diekmann et al., Grossman et al., Zhang et al., Senescu and Kitazumi et al. are analogous art because they are from the same field of endeavor that is monitoring work status for processes.
Therefore it would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the
claimed invention to a person of ordinary skill in the art to modify the work status
monitoring system detecting plurality of events using a camera as taught by combination of Grossman et al., Zhang et al., Senescu and Kitazumi et al. by applying the known technique of using a distance measurement sensor to determine certain details about the process as taught by Diekmann et al. to yield predictable results of determining details about the events in a process/ workflow.
Conclusion
Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a). Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a).
A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of the advisory action. In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the mailing date of this final action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ANZUMAN SHARMIN whose telephone number is (571)272-7365. The examiner can normally be reached M and Th 7:00am - 3:00pm and Tue 8:00am-12:00pm.
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, KAMINI SHAH can be reached at (571)272-2279. 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.
/ANZUMAN SHARMIN/ Examiner, Art Unit 2115
/KAMINI S SHAH/ Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2115
1 Event network diagram created based on collected events.
2 Combining nodes of events similar within a threshold value.
3 The sub-nodes are presented as a part of the workflow thus increasing number of nodes, not in a separate window.
4 Modified workflow in view of Grossman et al.
5 Original workflow modified to include the sub nodes that is increasing the number of nodes that is second resolution with higher number of nodes than first resolution.
6 DSM in view of Senescu.
7 Someone of ordinary skill in the art can substitute the concept of comparing generated workflow to preset workflow to generated DSM compared with preset DSM to obtain predictable result, MPEP.2143.I.(B). Both workflow and DSM show sequence of tasks performed to complete a task.
8 DSM in view of Senescu
Prosecution Insights