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 .
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
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 2 and 10 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 applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the applicant), regards as the invention.
Claim 2 recites “The method of claim”, with no claim number following the phrase. For the purposes of examination, the Examiner has assumed the dependency to be on claim 1. Please amend with the intended claim dependency.
Claim 2 recites the limitation "the selecting" in line 2. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
Claim 10 ends with a comma, not a period. It is not clear whether or not the claim is completed. For the purposes of examination, the Examiner has assumed the claim to be complete. Please amend to ensure the claim in its entirety is included and that the claim ends with a period to indicate completion.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
The following is a quotation of the appropriate paragraphs of 35 U.S.C. 102 that form the basis for the rejections under this section made in this Office action:
A person shall be entitled to a patent unless –(a)(1) the claimed invention was patented, described in a printed publication, or in public use, on sale, or otherwise available to the public before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claim(s) 1-6, 8, 10, and 12-14 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by US 5671362 A (Cowe).
Regarding claim 1: Cowe teaches a method for tracking non-homogeneous products (Abstract; Figs. 1-2; Col 8 Lns 19-25, individual items 30 may vary in shape) on a shelf (Fig. 2, tray-like shelf 20) by using a plurality of weighing assemblies that are jointly operable to measure the combined weight of the shelf and of the products arranged thereupon (Figs. 1-2, sensors 33; Col. 7 Lns 57-60, weight related signal), the method comprising: a. monitoring weight measurement data corresponding to the weight of the shelf and the products arranged thereupon, said weight measurement data measured by the plurality of weighing assemblies and transmitted therefrom as respective streams of weight measurement data points (Figs. 1-2; Col 7, Lns 24-30, computer monitoring system 18); and b. responsively to a change over time in the values of said weight measurement data, determining a set of weight-event parameters of a weight event, the set of weight- event parameters comprising a product identification and an action taken with respect to the product, the action comprising one of adding to the shelf, removing from the shelf, and moving within the shelf (Figs. 9-21; Col 11, lns 6-46, monitor the footprint of each item 30 located on the shelf), the determining comprising: i. aggregating, across all of the streams, changes in said weight measurement data corresponding to a specific time (Figs. 11-13; Col. 22,25), ii. mapping a change in weight distribution on the shelf, using the aggregated changes in weight measurement data (Abstract, Col. 11, lns 20-39, mapping of the shelf to indicate the track/locations of all items), and iii. assigning a set of weight-event parameters for resolving the mapped change in weight distribution, the product identification based at least in part on per- product weight data retrieved from a product database (Abstract; Figs. 9-11; Col 3, Lns 20-30).
Regarding claim 2: Cowe teaches the method of claim 1 (see above), additionally comprising: performing at least one of: (i) recording information based on the results of the selecting in a non-transient, computer-readable medium (Col 11, lns 25-39), and (ii) displaying information based on the results of the selecting on a display device (Figs. 1-4, display 42).
Regarding claim 3: Cowe teaches the method of claim 1 (see above), wherein said assigning comprises: i. identifying at least one candidate set of weight-event parameters for resolving the mapped change in weight distribution, using per-product weight data retrieved from a product database (Col 22, lns 10-25), ii. assigning an event likeliness score to each candidate set of weight-event parameters (Col 15, lns 10-18), and iii. selecting the set of candidate weight-event parameters having the highest event likeliness score (Col 20, lns 5-18, Col 22, sensing program 300).
Regarding claim 4: Cowe teaches the method of claim 1 (see above), wherein the determining includes calculating a probability, using a probability distribution function, in at least the assigning (Abstract; Figs. 9,17, subprogram 322).
Regarding claim 5: Cowe teaches the method of claim 1 (see above), wherein the assigned set of weight-event parameters includes exactly one product and one action (Col 13, Lns 56-64, exact shelf identification code).
Regarding claim 6: Cowe teaches the method of claim 1 (see above), wherein the assigned set of weight-event parameters includes at least one of (i) two or more products and (ii) two or more actions (Col 14, lns 1-20).
Regarding claim 8: Cowe teaches the method of claim 1 (see above), wherein the determining is carried out responsively to an absolute value of the change over time in the values of said weight measurement data exceeding a pre- determined threshold (Col. 24, lns 20-42).
Regarding claim 10: Cowe teaches the method of claim 1 (see above), additionally comprising, before said determining: responsively to a change over time in the values of transmitted weight measurement data, analyzing each of the streams of weight measurement data points to detect noise and drift (Col 6, lns 32-40; Col 11, lns 15-30); and in response to the detection of said noise and drift, performing at least one of (A) at filtering out at least a portion of said noise and drift and (B) compensating for at least a portion of said noise and drift in the weight measurement data points, such that the performing generates revised weight measurement data, wherein (i) said aggregating includes aggregating said revised weight measurement data across all of the streams, and (ii) said mapping is based on the change in values in said revised weight measurement data (Col 9, lns 2-4; Col 22, lns 23-27).
Regarding claim 12: Cowe teaches a system for tracking non-homogeneous products (Abstract, Figs. 1-2; Col 8, lns 19-25, individual items 30 may vary in shape) on a shelf (Fig. 2, tray-like shelf 20), comprising: a. a plurality of weighing assemblies in contact with the shelf and jointly operable to measure the combined weight of the shelf and of products arranged thereupon (Figs. 1-2, sensors 33; Col 7, lns 57-60, weight related signal); b. one or more computer processors (microprocessors 120, 150); and c. a non-transient computer-readable storage medium comprising program instructions (Col 11, lns 20-30), which when executed by the one or more computer processors, cause the one or more computer processors to carry out the following steps: i. monitoring weight measurement data corresponding to the weight of the shelf and the products arranged thereupon, said weight measurement data measured by the plurality of weighing assemblies and transmitted therefrom as respective streams of weight measurement data points (Figs. 1-2; Col 7, lns 24-30, computer monitoring system 18); ii. responsively to a change over time in the values of said weight measurement data, determining a set of weight-event parameters of a weight event, the set of weight-event parameters comprising a product identification and an action taken with respect to the product, the action comprising one of adding to the shelf, removing from the shelf, and moving within the shelf (Figs. 9-21; Col 11, lns 6-46, monitor the footprint of each item 30 located on the shelf), the determining comprising: A. aggregating, across all of the streams, changes in weight measurement data corresponding to a specific time (Figs. 11-13; Col 22,25), B. mapping a change in weight distribution on the shelf, using the aggregated changes in weight measurement data (Abstract; Col 11, lns 20-39, mapping of the shelf to indicate the track/locations of all items), and C. assigning a set of weight-event parameters for resolving the mapped change in weight distribution, the product identification based at least in part on per-product weight data retrieved from a product database (Abstract; Figs. 9-11; Col 3, lns 20-30).
Regarding claim 13: Cowe teaches the system of claim 12 (see above), wherein said program instructions, when executed by the one or more computer processors, cause the one or more computer processors to carry at least one of: (i) recording information based on the results of the selecting in a non-transient, computer- readable medium (Col 11, lns 25-39), and (ii) displaying information based on the results of the selecting on a display device (Figs. 1-4, display 42).
Regarding claim 14: Cowe teaches the system of claim 12 (see above), wherein said assigning comprises: i. identifying at least one candidate set of weight-event parameters for resolving the mapped change in weight distribution, using product-weight data retrieved from a product database (Col 22, lns 10-25), ii. assigning an event likeliness score to each candidate set of weight-event parameters (Col 15, lns 10-18), and iii. selecting the set of candidate weight-event parameters having the highest event likeliness score (Col 20, lns 5-18, sensing program 300).
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 7, 9, and 11 objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter: The reference used in the rejections above has been identified as the closest piece of prior art to the claimed invention. This art makes no mention of machine learning, nor of a specific data speed and noise threshold as claimed. Additionally, no additional prior art was found that could cure the deficiencies of Cowe in a satisfactory manner. Therefore, the subject matter of the limitations in these claims is allowable.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
JP 6279351 B2 teaches a weight measurement method by moving a reference weight.
CZ 31014 U1 teaches a system and equipment of on-line monitoring of shelf storage.
JP 6115771 B2 teaches a filling and weighing system suitable for manufacturing a packaged product using a weight sorter.
US 8716609 B2 teaches a method of determining the weight of the contents of a container involves using a roll-off truck's own container loading system to remove a container from a number of weight measure elements.
JP 4822701 B2 teaches a vehicle weight measuring apparatus including a weighing platform and a load detector.
US 7601923 B2 teaches a weighing system with multiple weight measurement devices to measure multiple articles travelling along an upstream processing path simultaneously.
US 20030141117 A1 teaches a method and apparatus which automates the weight measurement of a payload in conjunction with a roller bed based loading/unloading station.
US 6555767 B1 teaches a low cost strain gauge load cell of metal and plastic.
JP 2002286537 A teaches a forklift with weight sensors transmitting weight data to a host computer for management.
JP 2002098578 A teaches a weight measurement system using an electronic balance originating from static electricity.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JULIA FITZPATRICK whose telephone number is (703)756-5783. The examiner can normally be reached Mon-Fri 8am-4pm.
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, Laura Martin can be reached at (571)272-2160. 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.
/JULIA FITZPATRICK/Examiner, Art Unit 2855
/LAURA MARTIN/SPE, Art Unit 2855