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 .
Claims 1-4, 9, 10, 12, 14, 15, and 17-19, and 21-28 are pending.
Claims 1-4, 9, 10, 12, 14, 15, and 17-19 are amended.
Claims 5-8, 11, 13, 16 and 20 are cancelled. Claims 21-28 are added.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to the Section 112 rejections have been fully considered and are persuasive. The previous Section 112 rejections have been withdrawn. However, in view of the amendments to the claims, new Section 112 rejections have set forth below.
Applicant's arguments with respect to the Section 101 rejection have been fully considered but they are not persuasive. Applicant argues that the amended claims do not recite subject matter that falls within the "organizing human activity" or "mental processes" groupings, but instead improved software technology for generating and executing localized workflows for construction projects. Examiner disagrees. The broadly recited additional elements, including performance of steps within a construction management software application, do not make the claims directed to improvements in software technology. Rather, the claims are directed to "organizing human activity" or "mental processes" and recited the use of software as an environment to perform such abstract ideas. Applicant also argues that the claims integrate any alleged abstract idea into a practical application. However, the processing of incongruous rules, such as regulatory constraints associated with a locality or jurisdiction, is an organized human activity often performed mentally by construction professionals such as architects, contractors, and home owners that ensure a building complies with local rules, including the requirement for rain barrels for stormwater management. The claimed steps describe mental processes performed in order to perform basic construction operations and remain directed to an abstract idea. The cited cases are simply not analogous to the instant claims, and no comparative claim analysis is performed. Arguments that the claims recited non-conventional, non-generic arrangement of elements are not supported by broad recitations in the claims of “at least one network interface; at least one processor; at least one non-transitory computer-readable medium; and program instructions stored on the at least one non-transitory computer-readable medium”. These are conventional elements used in their ordinary manner to perform the abstract idea in a computer environment. As such, the rejections are maintained.
Applicant’s arguments with respect to Section 102 have been considered but are moot because the new ground of rejection does not rely on any reference applied in the prior rejection of record for any teaching or matter specifically challenged in the argument. Any argument presented addressed language that was substantially amended, and the art rejections have been updated to address the amended claims.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
Claims 1-4, 9, 10, 12, 14, 15, 17-19, and 21-28 rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(a) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), first paragraph, as failing to comply with the written description requirement. The claim(s) contains subject matter which was not described in the specification in such a way as to reasonably convey to one skilled in the relevant art that the inventor or a joint inventor, or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the inventor(s), at the time the application was filed, had possession of the claimed invention.
Claims 1, 12, and 17 have been amended to recite “the given workflow comprising a given sequence of construction project tasks that are to be performed within the construction management software application”. Paragraphs [0024]-[0027] discuss a variety of software actions including prompt generations that is accomplished within the construction management software application. However, the actual construction project tasks are described in paragraphs [0110]-[0117] as physical tasks in the real world, involving a physical location at which the project is to commence and machines that are limited in use by the restrictions of the physical location. The performance of construction tasks in software is entirely antithetical to the need to determine a location, at least one incongruous rule and at least one incongruous data set, which include local regulations that may restrict construction activity including noise ordinances, building code restrictions, land use requirements, affordable housing requirements, existence of municipal casements or other permissions, among other potential restrictions and/or regulations that may prevent a task from being performed at a construction site. Appropriate correction is required.
Dependent claims 2-4, 9, 10, 14, 15, and 18, 19, and 21-28 are rejected at least for incorporating the issues of the claims from which they depend. Appropriate correction is required.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(b):
(b) CONCLUSION.—The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph:
The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the applicant regards as his invention.
Claims 1-4, 9, 10, 12, 14, 15, 17-19, and 21-28 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor, or for pre-AIA the applicant regards as the invention.
Claims 1, 12, and 17 recite “receive, from the first client station, workflow data specifying a given workflow for a given construction project, the given workflow comprising a given sequence of construction project tasks that are to be performed …” and “based on the received workflow data, generate the given workflow, wherein, when executed, the given workflow causes the computing platform ….”. It is unclear what is being generated in the step stating ““based on the received workflow data, generate the given workflow” as the “given workflow” was previously received from the first client station in the preceding step. That is, something that already exists cannot be generated. Appropriate correction is required.
Claims 1, 12 and 17 recite “cause a first client station to present a workflow generation application for use in creating workflows that each comprise a respective sequence of construction project tasks that are to be performed within a construction management software application”. This phrase is unclear about what is being performed in the construction management software application due to the lack of commas or wherein clauses. There does not appear to be support in the specification for the idea that construction project tasks are performed within a construction management software application, and the construction project tasks are described in paragraphs [0110]-[0117] as physical tasks in the real world. Further, if the construction project tasks are performed within a construction management software application, the prompting for location data would be useless As such, for the purposes of examination, the phrase will be interpreted as stating “cause a first client station to present a workflow generation application for use in creating workflows within a construction management software application, wherein the workflows each comprise a respective sequence of construction project tasks that are to be performed”. Appropriate correction is required.
Claims 1, 12, and 17 recite “a location of a construction project”, and claims 9, 10, 14, 15, 18 and 19 recite “a location for the construction project task”. It is unclear if the claims intend to introduce a second location or if the location of the construction project task and the construction project are the same place. The specification does not seem to support construction project tasks being performed in a location than a construction project. Appropriate correction is required.
Claims 23 and 24 recite “The at least one non-transitory computer-readable medium of claim 1”. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claims, as these claims are dependent from claim 1 which recites a “computing platform”. As claims 23 and 24 are also substantial duplicates of claims 21 and 22, it is assumed for the sake of prosecution that these claims were intended to be dependent from claim 12. Appropriate correction is required.
Claims 9, 10, 14, 15, 18 and 19 recite “a location for the construction project task”. It is unclear if these recitations are supposed to differ from the recitation of “a location of a construction project” in claims 1, 12, and 17, or are supposed to be introducing new locations associated with specific tasks in a construction project. Appropriate correction is required.
Dependent claims 2-4, 9, 10, 14, 15, and 18, 19, and 21-28 are rejected at least for incorporating the issues of the claims from which they depend. Appropriate correction is required.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 101
35 U.S.C. 101 reads as follows:
Whoever invents or discovers any new and useful process, machine, manufacture, or composition of matter, or any new and useful improvement thereof, may obtain a patent therefor, subject to the conditions and requirements of this title.
Claims 1-4, 9, 10, 12, 14, 15, and 17-19, and 21-28 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 101 because the claimed invention is directed to an abstract idea without significantly more. Representative claim 17 recites “generate a logical flowchart for a construction project task, the logical flowchart based on at least one incongruous rule and at least one incongruous data set, each the at least one incongruous rule comprising an initial condition and a set of outcomes associated with the initial condition, the at least one incongruous data set including a given pair of first and second datum that are correlated with one another, wherein the first datum defines a prompt for entering a location of a construction project and the second datum defines a response to the prompt, store the logical flowchart for the construction project task, … creating workflows that each comprise a respective sequence of construction project tasks ….,
receive, …, workflow data specifying a given workflow for a given construction project, the given workflow comprising a given sequence of construction project tasks that are to be performed …, wherein the workflow data specifies that at least one of the given sequence of construction project tasks is based on the stored logical flowchart for the construction project task, based on the received workflow data, generate the given workflow, …receive, …, location data for the given construction project, evaluate the initial condition of the at least one incongruous rule of the logical flowchart based on the location data for the given construction project and additional data …, based on the evaluation, determine a given outcome from the set of outcomes associated with the initial condition, and cause an indication of the given outcome to be presented to a user”. Therefore, the claim as a whole is directed to “Construction Process Planning”, which is an abstract idea because it is a method of organizing human activity, including commercial interactions (including or sales activities or behaviors; business relations) and managing personal behavior or relationships or interactions between people (including social activities, teaching, and following rules or instructions), and mental process including concepts performed in the human mind (including an observation, evaluation, judgment, opinion). “Construction Planning Processes” is considered to be is a method of organizing human activity and mental process because planning flowcharts of construction processes are regularly conducted human processes, often within a single human mind, in construction management. For example, in order to bid on a construction project, a person must identify the requirements and limitations for the project, including applicable building codes and zoning regulations, and make decisions based on the legal rules that apply to the location where the building project is to be located. As such, claim 17 is directed to an abstract idea.
This judicial exception is not integrated into a practical application. In particular, claim 17 recites the following additional elements: first and second client station, to cause a first client station to present a workflow generation application for use in creating workflows that each comprise a respective sequence of construction project tasks that are to be performed within a construction management software application, when executed, the given workflow causes the computing platform to: based on the first datum of the logical flowchart, generate a text-based graphical user interface (GUI) comprising a prompt for providing the location of the given construction project, cause a second client station to present the text-based GUI comprising the prompt for providing the location of the given construction project, and additional data that either (i) is provided via an additional prompt that is presented via the text-based GUI or (ii) was previously stored within a database associated with the construction management software application and is retrieved from the database. These additional elements individually or in combination do not integrate the exception into a practical application. That is, the recitations of additional elements amount merely reciting the words ‘‘apply it’’ (or an equivalent) with the judicial exception, or merely including instructions to implement an abstract idea on a computer, or merely using a computer as a tool to perform an abstract idea (see MPEP 2106.05(f)). Courts have indicated that the gathering and analyzing information using conventional techniques and displaying the result. TLI Communications LLC v. AV Automotive LLC, 823 F.3d 607, 612-613, 118 USPQ2d 1744, 1747-1748 (Fed. Cir. 2016). The computing elements are generically recited software and hardware elements that amount to reciting using a generic computer to perform generic communications for obtaining answers to questions. That is, as the specification notes, the presentation of prompts for gathering and storing information using generically described technology (see paragraphs [0056]-[0075] of the specification) are used to describe the tools or environment in which the abstract idea is performed. Those tools amount to using a generic computer to perform generic functions, which may include using email to gather data regarding conditions and rules, and generating a flowchart for such construction processes, which amounts to using text editors or graphical layout tools such as Visio. As such, the claimed additional elements do no more than generally link the use of a judicial exception to a particular technological environment or field of use (see MPEP 2106.05(h)). Accordingly, these additional elements do not integrate the abstract idea into a practical application because they do not impose any meaningful limits on practicing the abstract idea. Claim 17 is directed to an abstract idea.
Claim 17 does not include additional elements that are sufficient to amount to significantly more than the judicial exception. As discussed above with respect to integration of the abstract idea into a practical application, the additional elements, individually and in combination, recite well-understood, routine, and conventional activity (e.g. Receiving or transmitting data over a network, e.g., using the Internet to gather data, Symantec, 838 F.3d at 1321, 120 USPQ2d at 1362 (utilizing an intermediary computer to forward information)) and are merely being used to apply the abstract idea to a technological environment. That is, while the claims describe computing software and hardware, those limitations are used to provide a technological environment, but solve no technological problem or technological solution. Accordingly, claim 17 is ineligible.
Claims 1 and 12 recite substantially similar features to those recited in representative claim 17 and are ineligible based on substantially the same reasons.
Dependent claims 2-11, 13-16 and 18-20 merely further limit the abstract idea and are thereby considered to be ineligible.
Dependent claims 2 and 27 further limit the abstract idea of “Construction Planning Processes” by introducing the element of selecting a template logical flowchart from a plurality of template logical flowcharts, and to generate the logical flowchart for the construction project task are based on the template logical flowchart, which does not include an improvement to another technology or technical field, an improvement to the functioning of the computer itself, or meaningful limitations beyond generally linking the use of the abstract idea to a particular technological environment. Therefore, dependent claims 2 and 27 are also non-statutory subject matter.
Dependent claims 3 and 28 further limit the abstract idea of “Construction Planning Processes” by introducing the element of to generate the logical flowchart for the construction project task are based on platform-side input, which does not include an improvement to another technology or technical field, an improvement to the functioning of the computer itself, or meaningful limitations beyond generally linking the use of the abstract idea to a particular technological environment. Therefore, dependent claims 3 and 28 are also non-statutory subject matter.
Dependent claim 4 further limits the abstract idea of “Construction Planning Processes” by introducing the element of to store the logical flowchart for the construction project task on a platform generated flowchart database, which does not include an improvement to another technology or technical field, an improvement to the functioning of the computer itself, or meaningful limitations beyond generally linking the use of the abstract idea to a particular technological environment. Therefore, dependent claim 4 is also non-statutory subject matter.
Dependent claims 9 and 14 further limits the abstract idea of “Construction Planning Processes” by introducing the element of one or more of the at least one incongruous rule, the at least one incongruous data set, the initial condition, the set of outcomes, and the given pair of first and second datum are associated with a local jurisdiction for a location for the construction project task, which does not include an improvement to another technology or technical field, an improvement to the functioning of the computer itself, or meaningful limitations beyond generally linking the use of the abstract idea to a particular technological environment. Therefore, dependent claims 9 and 14 are also non-statutory subject matter.
Dependent claims 10, 15, 18, and 19 further limits the abstract idea of “Construction Planning Processes” by introducing the element of at least one of the at least one incongruous rule, the at least one incongruous data set, the initial condition, the set of outcomes, and the given pair of first and second datum is associated with a local regulation/jurisdiction associated with a location for the construction project task, which does not include an improvement to another technology or technical field, an improvement to the functioning of the computer itself, or meaningful limitations beyond generally linking the use of the abstract idea to a particular technological environment. Therefore, dependent claims 10, 15, 18, and 19 are also non-statutory subject matter.
Dependent claims 21, 23 and 26 further limits the abstract idea of “Construction Planning Processes” by introducing the element of to receive, from the second client station, the location data for the given construction project comprise to: receive, from the second client station, an indication of user input to the prompt for providing the location of the construction project.
Dependent claims 22, 24, and 26 further limits the abstract idea of “Construction Planning Processes” by introducing the element the location data comprises GPS data, and to receive, from the second client station, the location data for the given construction project comprise receive, from the second client station, the GPS data.
Dependent claims 2-4, 9, 10, 14, 15, 18, 19, and 21-28 also do not integrated into a practical application. The dependent claims recite a GUI prompt within a construction planning application that is executed by the computing platform; a user-generated flowchart database of the computing platform, and other language related to the sending and receiving of prompt data between various network computer devices via graphical user interfaces (GUIs), and receiving GPS data. These additional elements merely generally link the abstract idea to a particular technological environment or field of use. While these elements indicate a field of use, the elements are recited at a high level of generality and amount to requiring the use of commercially available computer elements to perform organized human activities. MPEP 2106.04(d)(I) indicates that generally linking an abstract idea to a particular technological environment or field of use cannot provide a practical application. Accordingly, even in combination, these additional elements do not integrate the abstract idea into a practical application. This has been re-evaluated under the “significantly more” analysis and has also been found insufficient to provide significantly more. MPEP 2106.05(A) indicates that generally linking an abstract idea to a particular technological environment or field of use cannot provide significantly more. As such, the recitations of additional elements individually or in combination do not integrate the exception into a practical application, but rather, the recitation of any recitations of additional elements amounts to merely reciting the words ‘‘apply it’’ (or an equivalent) with the judicial exception, or merely including instructions to implement an abstract idea on a computer, or merely uses a computer as a tool to perform an abstract idea (see MPEP 2106.05(f)). That is, the claims provide no practical limits or improvements to any technology. Accordingly, dependent claims 2-4, 9, 10, 14, 15, 18, 19, and 21-28 are also ineligible.
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.
Claims 1, 3, 4, 9, 10, 12, 14, 15, 18, 19, 21, 23, 25, and 28 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over U.S. Patent Application Publication No. 20180174250 to Faulkner in view of U.S. Patent Application Publication No. 20100153151 to Toenjes.
With regards to claims 1, 12, and 17, Faulkner teaches:
at least one network interface; at least one processor; at least one non-transitory computer-readable medium; and program instructions stored on the at least one non-transitory computer-readable medium that are executable by the at least one processor such that the computing platform is configured to (paragraph [0004], “Various embodiments of the present disclosure can include systems, methods, and non-transitory computer readable media. In some embodiments, a system includes one or more processors, and a memory storing instructions that, when executed by the one or more processors, cause the system to perform operations. In some embodiments, a method includes the operations. In some embodiments, a non-transitory computer readable medium includes instructions to perform the operations.”):
generating a logical flowchart for a construction project task (paragraph [0105], “The project intake and assignment management engine 606 may be configured to determine workflow for a new project based on project details and required or recommended regulatory process for the new project.”), the logical flowchart based on at least one incongruous rule and at least one incongruous data set, the at least one incongruous rule comprising an initial condition and a set of outcomes associated with the initial condition, the at least one incongruous data set including a given pair of first and second datum that are correlated with one another (paragraph [0105], “For example, the project intake and assignment management engine 606 may determine substantial steps for construction based on the type of project, a preliminary step (e.g., safety confirmation) to be performed before the substantial steps for construction, a regulatory process to be performed in the midst of the substantial steps, an inspection process to be performed between the substantial steps, and so on.”; paragraph [0033], “The construction-related datasets may include datasets related to regulatory procedures and/or certificates/licenses regulated under laws and/or regulatory rules.”), wherein the first datum defines a prompt for entering a location of a construction project and the second datum defines a response to the prompt (paragraph [0062], “The administrator service engine 222 may represent a functional module configured to manage a construction project profile of a construction project and project GUIs associated with the construction project and/or administrator GUIs. In some embodiments, the administrator service engine 222 is configured to manage contents to be included in project GUIs and/or administrator GUIs. For example, the administrator service engine 222 may determine contents (e.g., on-going project stats, past project stats, a geolocation map, or the like) to be included in an administrator GUI (e.g., an administrator portal GUI). In some embodiments, the administrator service engine 222 is configured to manage project assignment of construction projects.”; paragraph [0110], “The geolocation management engine 612 may represent a functional module configured to manage geolocation of construction projects. In some embodiments, the geolocation management engine 612 is configured to determine geographic locations of construction projects associated with a construction entity and generate map data for a map to indicate the geographic locations of the construction projects. In some embodiments, the map is caused to be included in an administrator GUI by the administrator GUI management engine 604.”);
storing the logical flowchart for the construction project task (paragraph [0081], “FIG. 4 is a flowchart of an example of a method for managing a construction worker profile according to some embodiments. This flowchart described in this paper illustrate modules (and potentially decision points) organized in a fashion that is conducive to understanding. It should be recognized, however, that the modules can be reorganized for parallel execution, reordered, modified (changed, removed, or augmented), where circumstances permit.”; paragraph [0114], “An applicable engine such as the project intake and assignment management engine 606 in FIG. 6 may determine the required or recommended worker's certificates/licenses for the required or recommended regulatory process and the project details. In some embodiments, an archive of laws and/or regulations related to construction work is retrieved from applicable source such as the construction datastore 218 in FIG. 2, and the required or recommended worker's certificates/licenses are determined based thereon.”);
causing a first client station to present a workflow generation application for use in creating workflows that each comprise a respective sequence of construction project tasks that are to be performed within a construction management software application (paragraph [0005], “The operations may further include determining a workflow of the construction project based on the project details and the regulatory process to be performed, and causing a second GUI indicating the determined workflow of the construction project to be generated on terminals associated with one or more of the candidate workers selected through the GUI.”; paragraph [0006], “In some embodiments, the operations further include validating a completion of a step of the workflow based on an on-site input for the step. The operations may further include disabling the validation of the completion of the step of the workflow when the on-site input is associated with a worker whose worker profile indicates lack of a certificate or a license required to perform the step. In some embodiments, the operations further include disabling validation a completion of a second step of the workflow that follows the step of the workflow until the validation of the completion of the step.”);
receiving, from the first client station, workflow data specifying a given workflow for a given construction project, the given workflow comprising a given sequence of construction project tasks that are to be performed within the construction management software application (paragraph [0105], “The project intake and assignment management engine 606 may be configured to determine workflow for a new project based on project details and required or recommended regulatory process for the new project. For example, the project intake and assignment management engine 606 may determine substantial steps for construction based on the type of project, a preliminary step (e.g., safety confirmation) to be performed before the substantial steps for construction, a regulatory process to be performed in the midst of the substantial steps, an inspection process to be performed between the substantial steps, and so on.”), wherein the workflow data specifies that at least one of the given sequence of construction project tasks is based on the stored logical flowchart for the construction project task (paragraph [0107], “In some embodiments, the project progress management engine 608 is configured to perform the validation with respect to one or more (e.g., all) steps of a workflow and disable validation of subsequent step(s) until validation of a step of the workflow. The project progress management engine 608 may be configured to disable validation of completion of a step of the workflow when the evidence input is associated with (e.g., made by) a worker whose construction worker profile indicates lack of a certificate or a license required to perform the step.”),
based on the received workflow data, generating the given workflow, wherein, when executed (paragraph [0107], “In some embodiments, the project progress management engine 608 is configured to perform the validation with respect to one or more (e.g., all) steps of a workflow and disable validation of subsequent step(s) until validation of a step of the workflow. The project progress management engine 608 may be configured to disable validation of completion of a step of the workflow when the evidence input is associated with (e.g., made by) a worker whose construction worker profile indicates lack of a certificate or a license required to perform the step.”), the given workflow causes the computing platform to:
based on the first datum of the logical flowchart, generate a text-based graphical user interface (GUI) comprising a prompt for providing the location of the given construction project (paragraph [0134], “The upcoming project stats window 1112 includes visual presentations (e.g., graph) of the numbers of lead-involving projects, non-lead-involving projects, and projects on pre-1978 property handled by the entity, for each of different periods till due dates. For example, the visual presentation distinguishes the different types of projects by different colors.”; paragraph [0135], “The geolocation map window 1114 includes visual presentations (e.g., map) indicating locations of construction projects handled by the entity by plots in the visual presentations. Selection of plot may navigate the GUI to a project GUI of the selected project.”);
cause a second client station to present the text-based GUI comprising the prompt for providing the location of the given construction project (paragraph [0079], “In some embodiments, the worker assignment management engine 310 is configured to request the worker GUI management engine 304 to cause a GUI for inputting evidence of completion of a step of a construction work assignment to be presented on an applicable terminal such as the worker terminal 106 in FIG. 1. For example, the evidence may include a picture of a construction site and/or measurement of a construction material included in the picture. In another example, the evidence may include video clip recording a regulatory construction work step performed by the worker.”; paragraph [0107], “In some embodiments, the project progress management engine 608 is configured to perform validation of the evidence inputs, for example, in order to validate completion of a step of a workflow. For example, the evidence inputs (e.g., photo images) may be an on-site input from applicable terminals, such as the worker terminal 106 in FIG. 1, and the project progress management engine 608 analyzes contents (e.g., image data) and metadata (e.g., date, geographical location, author, author signature, or the like) of the evidence inputs to validate completion of the step of the workflow.”);
receive, from the second client station, location data for the given construction project (paragraph [0107], “In some embodiments, the project progress management engine 608 is configured to perform validation of the evidence inputs, for example, in order to validate completion of a step of a workflow. For example, the evidence inputs (e.g., photo images) may be an on-site input from applicable terminals, such as the worker terminal 106 in FIG. 1, and the project progress management engine 608 analyzes contents (e.g., image data) and metadata (e.g., date, geographical location, author, author signature, or the like) of the evidence inputs to validate completion of the step of the workflow.”);
evaluate the initial condition of the at least one incongruous rule of the logical flowchart based on the location data for the given construction project and additional data that either (i) is provided via an additional prompt that is presented via the text-based GUI or (ii) was previously stored within a database associated with the construction management software application and is retrieved from the database (paragraph [0107], “In some embodiments, the project progress management engine 608 is configured to perform the validation with respect to one or more (e.g., all) steps of a workflow and disable validation of subsequent step(s) until validation of a step of the workflow. The project progress management engine 608 may be configured to disable validation of completion of a step of the workflow when the evidence input is associated with (e.g., made by) a worker whose construction worker profile indicates lack of a certificate or a license required to perform the step. In some embodiments, the project progress management engine 608 is configured to determine that a construction project is completed, when all validation processes for the one or more steps of a workflow are successfully completed and an owner's approval input is received.”);
based on the evaluation, determine a given outcome from the set of outcomes associated with the initial condition (paragraph [0056], “When a construction project is completed (e.g., the approval/rating management engine 134 receives such notice from the regulation-compliant construction management server 104), the approval/rating management engine 134 may generate an alert for a property owner to approval completion of the construction project and also generates a GUI for receiving approval (e.g., signature). This process may automatically generate, through the GUI, a closure report detailing aspects associated to the job. In one example, the regulation-compliant construction management server 104 may, upon receiving confirmation that the project is completed, assemble and provide associated documentation regarding the project, site process documentation, images, and/or the like.”); and
cause an indication of the given outcome to be presented to a user (paragraph [0056], “When a construction project is completed (e.g., the approval/rating management engine 134 receives such notice from the regulation-compliant construction management server 104), the approval/rating management engine 134 may generate an alert for a property owner to approval completion of the construction project and also generates a GUI for receiving approval (e.g., signature). This process may automatically generate, through the GUI, a closure report detailing aspects associated to the job. In one example, the regulation-compliant construction management server 104 may, upon receiving confirmation that the project is completed, assemble and provide associated documentation regarding the project, site process documentation, images, and/or the like.”).
Faulkner fails to explicitly teach the first datum defines a prompt for entering a location of a construction project and the second datum defines a response to the prompt as part of the generation of the flowchart. However, Toenjes teaches generating a logical flowchart based on first datum defines a prompt for entering a location of a construction project and the second datum defines a response to the prompt (paragraph [0006], “the software application being configured to interact with a user of the user computer through a plurality of graphical user interface (GUI) pages, the GUI pages being configured to (1) prompt the user for information about a construction project, and (2) accept information about the construction project from the user computer to thereby define the construction project, and wherein the software application is further configured to process the accepted construction project information against the data structure to determine all of the permits which are applicable to the defined construction project.”).
This part of Toenjes is applicable to the system of Faulkner as they both share characteristics and capabilities, namely, they are directed to construction project management. 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 system of Faulkner to include the generation location prompting as taught by Toenjes. One of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention would have been motivated to modify Faulkner in order to provide a single portal for quickly and efficiently determining all of the permit requirements applicable to a construction project (see the paragraph [0004] of Toenjes).
With regards to claims 3 and 28, Faulkner teaches: generate the logical flowchart for the construction project task comprise program instructions that are executable by the at least one processor such that the computing platform is configured to: based on platform-side input, generate the logical flowchart for the construction project task (paragraph [0035], “In some embodiments, an administrator terminal 108 is configured to receive or generate a new construction project profile for a new construction project and send the new construction project profile to the regulation-compliant construction management server 104 for regulation-compliance construction management. The administrator terminal 108 may be configured to receive one or more construction worker profiles for construction workers and send an instruction to assign construction workers for a new construction project to the regulation-compliant construction management server 104.”).
With regards to claim 4, Faulkner teaches: store the logical flowchart for the construction project task comprise program instructions that are executable by the at least one processor such that the computing platform is configured to: store the logical flowchart for the construction project task on a platform generated flowchart database of the computing platform(paragraph [0040], “In some embodiments, the construction datastore management engine 116 generates a construction project profile based on datasets received from one or more of the worker terminal(s) 106, the administrator terminal(s) 108, and the property owner terminal(s) 110. Datasets received from one or more of the worker terminal(s) 106, the administrator terminal(s) 108, and the property owner terminal(s) 110 may include a type of construction project (e.g., painting, plumbing, carpet flooring, room restructuring, or the like), a construction year of a property, a geographical location of the property, construction materials and/or tools to be used, a budget, a due date, and so on.”; paragraph [0050], “In the example of FIG. 1, an administrator terminal 108 includes a GUI output engine 126, a compliance management engine 128, and a communication interface engine 130. Similar to the GUI output engine 120 of a worker terminal 106, the GUI output engine 126 may represent a functional module configured to output a GUI based on datasets for GUI received from the communication interface engine 112 of the regulation-compliant construction management server 104 by the communication interface engine 130. In some embodiments, the GUI output by the GUI output engine 120 includes a project portal GUI, and various applicable GUIs navigated from the project portal GUI including a project assignment GUI. GUIs output by the GUI output engine 126, in some examples, are presented on a display of the administrator terminal 108 and/or any applicable external displays.”).
With regards to claims 9 and 14, Faulkner teaches: each of the at least one incongruous rule, the at least one incongruous data set, the initial condition, set of outcomes, and the given pair of first and second datum are associated with one or more of a geographical location for the construction task, a local jurisdiction for the construction task, or combinations thereof (paragraph [0043], “The datasets received from one or more of the worker terminal(s) 106, the administrator terminal(s) 108, and the property owner terminal(s) 110 may include name or identifier of a property owner, a geographical location and area of a property, restrictive law or regulatory rules (e.g., zoning) associated with the property.”; paragraph [0062], “In some embodiments, the administrator service engine 222 is configured to manage project assignment of construction projects. For example, the administrator service engine 222 may determine one or more candidate workers who possess certificates/licenses required or recommended for a construction project and are associated with a specific geographical area from registered workers and may cause an administrator GUI to indicate details of the one or more candidate workers.”).
With regards to claims 10, 15, 18, and 19, Faulkner teaches: at least one of the at least one incongruous rule, the at least one incongruous data set, the initial condition, he set of outcomes, and the given pair of first and second datum, and the one or more second datum is associated with a local regulation/ local jurisdiction for the construction task (paragraph [0052], “The communication interface engine 130 may be configured to transmit the regulatory procedures to be performed and/or the associated certificates/licenses to the regulation-compliant construction management server 104, such that the regulation-compliant construction management server 104 generates, updates, and/or manages various applicable profiles, such as construction project profiles, construction worker profiles, and construction property profiles.”; paragraph [0066], “The construction worker profile may include name and/or identifier of a construction worker, specialty of the worker (e.g., painter, plumber, welder, crane operator, or the like), geographic location (e.g., service area) of the worker, status of certifications/licenses related to construction projects and/or specific to the specialty, and states and details of construction project assigned to the worker. The registration of a construction worker may be performed through applicable terminals, such as the worker terminal 106 and/or the administrator terminal 108 in FIG. 1.”).
With regards to claims 21, 23 and 25, Faulkner teaches to receive, from the second client station, an indication of user input to the prompt for providing the location of the construction project (paragraph [0062], “In some embodiments, the administrator service engine 222 is configured to manage contents to be included in project GUIs and/or administrator GUIs. For example, the administrator service engine 222 may determine contents (e.g., on-going project stats, past project stats, a geolocation map, or the like) to be included in an administrator GUI (e.g., an administrator portal GUI). In some embodiments, the administrator service engine 222 is configured to manage project assignment of construction projects. For example, the administrator service engine 222 may determine one or more candidate workers who possess certificates/licenses required or recommended for a construction project and are associated with a specific geographical area from registered workers and may cause an administrator GUI to indicate details of the one or more candidate workers.”).
Claims 2 and 27 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over U.S. Patent Application Publication No. 20180174250 to Faulkner and U.S. Patent Application Publication No. 20100153151 to Toenjes as applied to claims 1, 3, 4, 9, 10, 12, 14, 15, 18, 19, 21, 23, 25, and 28 above, and further in view of U.S. Patent Application Publication No. 20200342378 to McCormick et al.
With regards to claims 2 and 27, Faulkner teaches construction flowchart generation, but fails to explicitly teach using templates for logical flowcharts. However, Mc Cormick et al. teaches:
to select a template logical flowchart from a plurality of template logical flowcharts (paragraph [0010], “In this respect, the WBS created by the organization may comprise a set of customized, multi-dimensional “WBS codes” that can be used to categorize work to be performed on a project, where these WBS codes follow a particular format defined by the organization (referred to herein as a “WBS code template” or simply just a “template”) that comprises a particular sequence of two or more different WBS variables concatenated together in a particular manner.”), and
wherein the program instructions that are executable by the at least one processor such that the computing platform is configured to based on the template logical flowchart, generate the logical flowchart for the construction project task (paragraph [0012], “a first client station associated with a first user to present a first interface for defining an organization-level WBS that comprises a first set of WBS codes for use in breaking down work, (2) receiving, from the first client station, data defining the organization-level WBS that includes (a) data defining an organization-level template for the first set of WBS codes that specifies a given sequence of two or more WBS variables that are concatenated together and (b) data defining a respective, organization-level set of possible values for each of the two or more WBS variables specified in the organization-level template, (3) causing a second client station associated with a second user to present a second interface for defining a project-level WBS that comprises a second set of WBS codes for use in breaking down work on a given project, wherein the second interface uses the data defining the organization-level WBS to initially define (a) a project-level template for the second set of WBS codes that specifies a given sequence of two or more WBS variables that are concatenated together and (b) a respective, project-level set of possible values for each of the two or more WBS variables specified in the project-level template, (4) receiving, from the second client station, data defining one or more modifications to the project-level WBS for the given project, wherein the one or more modifications comprise at least one of (a) a modification to the project-level template or (b) a modification to a respective project-level set of possible values for a WBS variable specified in the project-level template, and (5) causing a third client station associated with a third user to present one or more third interfaces that enable the third user to use the second set of WBS codes to manage the particular project.”).
This part of McCormick et al. is applicable to the system of Faulkner as they both share characteristics and capabilities, namely, they are directed to construction management processes. 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 system of Faulkner to include the workflow templates for generating construction projects as taught by McCormick et al. One of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention would have been motivated to modify Faulkner in order to enable construction professionals to create a customized WBS for a construction project and visualize work that is broken down into smaller components in multiple dimensions, which may facilitate management of the given project in a more efficient and convenient manner (see paragraph [0033] of McCormick et al.).
Claims 22, 24, and 26 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over U.S. Patent Application Publication No. 20180174250 to Faulkner and U.S. Patent Application Publication No. 20100153151 to Toenjes as applied to claims 1, 3, 4, 9, 10, 12, 14, 15, 18, 19, 21, 23, 25, and 28 above, and further in view of U.S. Patent Application Publication No. 20240273424 to Bartek et al.
With regards to claims 22, 24, and 26, Faulkner teaches construction flowchart generation, but fails to explicitly teach receiving GPS location data. However, Bartek et al. teaches the location data comprises GPS data, and to receive, from the second client station, the location data for the given construction project comprise receive, from the second client station, the GPS data (paragraph [0005], “A client device including a GPS receiver receives input from the user to further refine the location of the user and the scheduled work along the segment of track enabling the network of users to track the location to avoid hazardous environment for the field users. The system can improve GPS techniques by enabling the GPS receiver to determine its position more accurately and improve its signal-acquisition sensitivity to operate even in weak-signal environments with input from proximate network connections (i.e., networks initiated by the user). In particular, the client device can include a mobile device that includes a GPS receiver, a microprocessor, a display, and a wireless communication transceiver.”).
This part of Bartek et al. is applicable to the system of Faulkner as they both share characteristics and capabilities, namely, they are directed to construction management processes. 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 system of Faulkner to include the GPS location data as taught by Bartek et al. One of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention would have been motivated to modify Faulkner in order to enabling the GPS receiver to determine its position more accurately and improve its signal-acquisition sensitivity to operate even in weak-signal environments with input from proximate network connections (see paragraph [0005] of Bartek et al.).
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 Joshua D Schneider whose telephone number is (571)270-7120. The examiner can normally be reached on Monday - Friday, 9am-5pm.
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, Jessica Lemieux can be reached on (571)270-3445. 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.
/J.D.S./ /JESSICA LEMIEUX/Examiner, Art Unit 3626 Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3626
Prosecution Insights