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 .
Per the 2019 (PEG) guidance, claim(s) 1-28 were reviewed for abstract
idea. Claim(s) 1-12, and14 -25, 27, and 28 can be streamlined to determine the subject matter eligibility, and the eligibility of the claims is “self-evident.” Claims 13 and 26 “fall within at least one of the groupings of abstract ideas enumerated in MPEP 2106.04(a)(2)”; however, claims 13 and 26, neither pass the subject matter eligibility requirement at step 2a prong 2, “practical application” nor pass the subject matter eligibility requirement at step 2B, “additional element(s) amount to more significantly more than the judicial exception.” See detailed, 35 USC 101 rejections of claims 13 and 26.
Claim Interpretation
Claimed “first wireless device” is interpreted to be “item management system 1 includes position tags 40a, 40b, 40c which are installed at different positions,” See ¶ 0053, “ach of the tags such as the position tags 40… is assumed to be a passive-type RFID tag (a passive tag). A passive tag is composed of: a small integrated circuit (IC) chip with an embedded memory; and an antenna, and has identification information for identifying the tag and some other information stored in the memory.” See ¶ 0057.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(f):
(f) Element in Claim for a Combination. – An element in a claim for a combination may be expressed as a means or step for performing a specified function without the recital of structure, material, or acts in support thereof, and such claim shall be construed to cover the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification and equivalents thereof.
The following is a quotation of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph:
An element in a claim for a combination may be expressed as a means or step for performing a specified function without the recital of structure, material, or acts in support thereof, and such claim shall be construed to cover the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification and equivalents thereof.
The claims in this application are given their broadest reasonable interpretation using the plain meaning of the claim language in light of the specification as it would be understood by one of ordinary skill in the art. The broadest reasonable interpretation of a claim element (also commonly referred to as a claim limitation) is limited by the description in the specification when 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is invoked.
As explained in MPEP § 2181, subsection I, claim limitations that meet the following three-prong test will be interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph:
(A) the claim limitation uses the term “means” or “step” or a term used as a substitute for “means” that is a generic placeholder (also called a nonce term or a non-structural term having no specific structural meaning) for performing the claimed function;
(B) the term “means” or “step” or the generic placeholder is modified by functional language, typically, but not always linked by the transition word “for” (e.g., “means for”) or another linking word or phrase, such as “configured to” or “so that”; and
(C) the term “means” or “step” or the generic placeholder is not modified by sufficient structure, material, or acts for performing the claimed function.
Use of the word “means” (or “step”) in a claim with functional language creates a rebuttable presumption that the claim limitation is to be treated in accordance with 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph. The presumption that the claim limitation is interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is rebutted when the claim limitation recites sufficient structure, material, or acts to entirely perform the recited function.
Absence of the word “means” (or “step”) in a claim creates a rebuttable presumption that the claim limitation is not to be treated in accordance with 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph. The presumption that the claim limitation is not interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is rebutted when the claim limitation recites function without reciting sufficient structure, material or acts to entirely perform the recited function.
Claim limitations in this application that use the word “means” (or “step”) are being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, except as otherwise indicated in an Office action. Conversely, claim limitations in this application that do not use the word “means” (or “step”) are not being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, except as otherwise indicated in an Office action.
This application includes one or more claim limitations that do not use the word “means,” but are nonetheless being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, because the claim limitation(s) uses a generic placeholder that is coupled with functional language without reciting sufficient structure to perform the recited function and the generic placeholder is not preceded by a structural modifier. Such claim limitation(s) is/are:
“a second wireless device that moves together with the item;” in claims 1-28 is interpreted to be “item tags 50 are wireless devices which are attached to respective items managed in the item management system 1… When each item 30 moves, the item tag 50 attached to the item 30 moves together with the item 30.” See ¶ 0056, “the item tags 50 is assumed to be a passive-type RFID tag (a passive tag). A passive tag is composed of: a small integrated circuit (IC) chip with an embedded memory; and an antenna, and has identification information for identifying the tag and some other information stored in the memory.” See ¶ 0057;
“at least one reading apparatus that reads identification information stored …” in claims 1-28 is interpreted to be, “tag reader 100 is a reading apparatus that reads information from the RFID tags.” See ¶ 0059; “FIG. 2, the tag reader 100 comprises a control unit 101, a storage unit 102, a communication unit 103, a positioning unit 104, a power supply 105, and a reading unit 106.” See ¶ 0065
“a management unit configured to manage … update… change… receive… determine.. provide…” in claims 1-28 is interpreted to be “item management unit 230 is a set of software modules that provide item management functions for managing data within the item DB 220. The individual software modules can run by one or more processors (not shown) of the management server 200 executing computer programs stored in a memory (not shown). In the present embodiment, the item management unit 230 includes a tag processing unit 231, a position management unit 232, a transfer processing unit 233, and an information provision unit 234.” See ¶ 0076, “tag processing unit 231 of the item management unit 230 adds, to the reading result table 350, reading result data received from each of the tag readers 100 via the communication unit 210.” See ¶ 0084, “adding a record of reading result data received from the tag reader 100 to the reading result table 350, the tag processing unit 231 invokes the position management unit 232. The position management unit 232 updates the values of Coordinates 316 of the corresponding item in the item table 310 with the latest positional coordinates of the item tag 50 indicated by the record added to the reading result table 350. Further, the position management unit 232 determines correspondence between the tag ID of the position tag 40 and the tag ID of the item tag 50” See ¶ 0087;
“a communication unit configured to transmit… communicate” in claims 12, 14-15, 25, 27-28 is interpreted to be “the tag reader 100 comprises a control unit 101, ... a communication unit 103” See ¶ 0065, “The communication unit 103 is a communication interface for the tag reader 100 to communicate with the management server 200.” See ¶ 0068, “control unit 101 transmits, to the management server 200 via the communication unit 103,” See ¶ 0066
Because this/these claim limitation(s) is/are being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, it/they is/are being interpreted to cover the corresponding structure described in the specification as performing the claimed function, and equivalents thereof.
If applicant does not intend to have this/these limitation(s) interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, applicant may: (1) amend the claim limitation(s) to avoid it/them being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph (e.g., by reciting sufficient structure to perform the claimed function); or (2) present a sufficient showing that the claim limitation(s) recite(s) sufficient structure to perform the claimed function so as to avoid it/them being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph.
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 13 and 26 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 101 because the claimed invention is directed to a judicial exception (i.e., a law of nature, a natural phenomenon, or an abstract idea) without significantly more. Claim(s) 13 and 26 are directed to a process. The claim(s) does/do not include additional elements that are sufficient to amount to significantly more than the judicial exception because the claimed steps could be met by: Claims 13 and 26 have following additional elements “first reading apparatus,” “first wireless device,” “second wireless device,” and “management unit.” 26 have following additional elements “second reading apparatus.”
Step 1: Is the claim to a process, machine, manufacture or composition of matter? Yes, because claims 13 and 26 are directed to a process.
Can Analysis be streamlined? No, because when viewed claims 13 and 26, as a whole, the eligibility of the claim is not self-evident.
Step 2A Prong One: evaluate whether the claim recites a judicial exception (an abstract idea enumerated in the 2019 PEG, a law of nature, or a natural phenomenon). Yes, because the claims 13 and 26 recite a judicial exception:
The claims 13 and 26 to fall into the “Mental Process’” category of abstract ideas defined by the courts and 2019 PEG Guidance. Specifically, the claims to fall into the following subcategories:
Concepts Relating To Organizing Or Analyzing Information In A Way That Can Be Performed Mentally Or Is Analogous To Human Mental Work: For Example,
managing item data that indicates an entity to which an item belongs among a plurality of entities, i.e. ” (collecting/monitoring data) a data gathering activity;
in a state where the item data indicates that the item belongs to a second entity related to a second position, i.e. (setting a rule/definition) a human mental process (concepts performed in the human mind e.g., observation, evaluation, judgment) per Oct. 2019 Update;
reading… identification information from a first… device installed at a first position, i.e. ” (collecting/monitoring data) a data gathering activity;
reading… identification information from a second … device that has moved to the first position together with the item, i.e. ” (collecting/monitoring data) a data gathering activity;
transmitting… reading result data indicating that the first reading apparatus has read identification information of the first device and identification information of the second device, , i.e. ” (collecting/monitoring data) a data gathering activity; and
updating the item data such that the item data indicates that the item belongs to a first entity related to the first position based on the reading result data received from the first reading apparatus, predicting the occurrence of the incident, i.e. (evaluative decision based on a condition) a human mental process, i.e. (portion/threshold logic implicates mathematical relationships), Mathematical concepts (mathematical relationships/thresholds);
In this case, examples of gathering information/data and mathematical concepts can be performed by a human with a pen and paper; examples of mental process can be performed by a human mental process See MPEP 2106.05(g) and Vanda Memo.
Step 2A Prong Two: Identifying whether there are any additional elements recited in the claim beyond the judicial exception(s), and evaluating those additional elements to determine whether they integrate the judicial exception into a practical application? No, because the claims do not recite any additional elements recited in the claim beyond the judicial exception, and those additional elements do not integrate the judicial exception into a practical application because:
It is Examiner’s position that claims 13 and 26 comprise following additional elements: “first reading apparatus,” “first wireless device,” “second wireless device,” “management unit,” and “second reading apparatus.” The additional elements do not integrate into a practical application of the exception. Generally linking the use of the judicial exception to a particular technological environment or field of use – see MPEP 2106.05(h). Furthermore, Applying or using the judicial exception in some other meaningful way beyond generally linking the use of the judicial exception to a particular technological environment, such that the claim as a whole is more than a drafting effort designed to monopolize the exception - see MPEP 2106.05(e) and Vanda Memo.
“transmitting, by the first reading apparatus to a management unit configured to manage the item data, reading result data indicating that the first reading apparatus has read identification information of the first wireless device and identification information of the second wireless device; and updating, by the management unit, the item data such that the item data indicates that the item belongs to a first entity related to the first position based on the reading result data received from the first reading apparatus” are examples of insignificant extra solution activities have been ruled ineligible subject matter by the superior courts, See MPEP 2106.05(g) and Vanda Memo.
Furthermore, the additional elements “first reading apparatus,” “first wireless device,” “second wireless device,” “management unit,” and “second reading apparatus” perform no meaningful improvement or meaningful limitation: including (i) improvement to computer or (ii) improvement a non-computer technology in the field of managing item data. The additional elements “first reading apparatus,” “first wireless device,” “second wireless device,” “management unit,” and “second reading apparatus” do not “use the judicial exception in a manner that imposes a meaningful limit on the judicial exception, such that the claim is more than a drafting effort designed to monopolize the judicial exception.” The additional elements only add insignificant extra-solution activity to the judicial exception - see MPEP 2106.05(g)
Step 2B: Does the claim recite additional elements that amount to “significantly more” than the judicial exception? No, because the claims “as a whole” do not recite additional elements that amount to “significantly more” than the judicial exception because:
It is Examiner’s position that claims 13 and 26 comprise following additional elements: “first reading apparatus,” “first wireless device,” “second wireless device,” “management unit,” and “second reading apparatus.” However, these elements are identified as generic components and “as a whole” do not amount to “significantly more” than an abstract idea.
At best, the claimed subject matter requires the use of a generic “first reading apparatus,” “first wireless device,” “second wireless device,” “management unit,” and “second reading apparatus,” which are shown in the prior art rejections of claims 13 and 26, below. Examiner has cited sections of Trivelpiece et al. and Cristache, Lucian that teach these elements; therefore, these elements alone and in combination do not qualify as something “significantly more” than an abstract idea. The claimed limitations are (i) routine and conventional in the field of managing item data.
Limitations that are indicative of an inventive concept (aka “significantly more”):
Improvements to the functioning of a computer, or to any other technology or technical field - see MPEP 2106.05(a): None.
Applying the judicial exception with, or by use of, a particular machine - see MPEP 2106.05(b): None.
Effecting a transformation or reduction of a particular article to a different state or thing - see MPEP 2106.05(c): None.
Applying or using the judicial exception in some other meaningful way beyond generally linking the use of the judicial exception to a particular technological environment, such that the claim as a whole is more than a drafting effort designed to monopolize the exception - see MPEP 2106.05(e) and Vanda Memo: None.
Adding a specific limitation other than what is well-understood, routine, conventional activity in the field - see MPEP 2106.05(d): None.
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 1-12, and 16-26 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.
Claims 1, 7, 11, 16, 20 and 24 recite the limitation "wireless device." First, it is unclear whether the claimed “wireless device” is referring to the previously introduced “a first wireless device” or “a second wireless device.”
Claims 7 and 20 introduce “a wireless device” again which was previously introduced in the preceding independent claims. There is improper antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
Claims 7 and 20 recites, “two or more wireless devices” it is unclear whether the claimed “two or more wireless device” is referring to the previously introduced “first wireless device” or “second wireless device,” or “wireless device.” There is improper antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim
Claim 2-6, 8-10, 12, 17-19, 21-23, and 25 are rejected by the virtue of their dependency.
Claim 26 recites the limitation "the first reading apparatus". First, it is unclear whether the claimed “the first reading apparatus” is referring to the previously introduced “second reading apparatus” Furthermore, claim 26 did not introduce “a first reading apparatus”. There is improper antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
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) 1-4, 7-8, 11-17, 20-21, and 24-28 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Trivelpiece (US 2016/0358440 A1) and further in view of Cristache (US 2018/0217250 A1).
Consider claim 1, Trivelpiece teaches, an item management system (100) for managing item data that indicates an entity to which an item (110) belongs among a plurality of entities (102), See Fig. 1, Trivelpiece teaches, “system 100 comprises a Retail Store Facility (“RSF”) 128 in which display equipment 104, 106 is disposed. The display equipment is provided for displaying objects 1101-110N, 1161-116N to customers of the retail store.” See ¶ 0025comprising:
a first wireless device (106) installed at a first position, Trivelpiece teaches, “RF beacons 106.sub.1, . . . , 106.sub.M may also optionally be included with the proximity systems 114.sub.1, . . . , 114.sub.M. RF beacons are well known in the art, and therefore will not be described herein. The RF beacons are generally configured to communicate with the handheld reader 120 to facilitate the determination as to where the handheld reader 120 is within the RSF 128 at any given time.” See ¶ 0031, Trivelpiece teaches, “placing RFID tags at fixed locations within the facility. The handheld reader reads these RFID tags. Since the handheld reader knows where the RFID tags are physically located within the store, the handheld reader can use this information to determine where it is pointing and where it is in the store.” See ¶ 0064;
a second wireless device (112/118) that moves together with the item (110/116), Trivelpiece teaches, “RFID tags are attached to objects (e.g., objects 110.sub.1, . . . , 110.sub.N, 116.sub.1, . . . , 116.sub.N of FIG. 1) located within the facility.” See ¶ 0048 and ¶ 0027;
at least one reading apparatus (104/120) that reads identification information stored in a wireless device, Trivelpiece teaches, “the RFID readers read the RFID tags, and communicate information to the data store 126 for storage therein. This information can include, but is not limited to, first unique identifiers of the RFID readers, second unique identifiers of RFID tags that were read by the RFID readers” See ¶ 0029; and
a management unit configured to manage the item data, Trivelpiece teaches, “FIG. 2, there is provided a detailed block diagram of an exemplary architecture for a server 200” See ¶ 0033, Trivelpiece teaches, “FIG. 2 represents one embodiment of a representative server configured to facilitate the provision of a three dimensional map showing highly accurate locations of RFID tags (e.g., RFID tags 112.sub.1, . . . , 112.sub.N, 118.sub.1, . . . , 118.sub.N of FIG. 1) and/or a handheld reader within an RSF (e.g., RSF 128 of FIG. 1). As such, the server 200 of FIG. 2 implements at least a portion of a method for providing such accurate locations” See ¶ 0034;
With respect to, wherein, in a state where the item data indicates that the item belongs to a second entity (display equipment 102M) related to a second position (102M location) which is different from the first position (1021 location), the management unit (220) is configured to update the item data [i.e. location of item associated with object tag 118] such that the item data indicates that the item (118) belongs to a first entity (1021 location) related to the first position (1021 location) provided that a first reading apparatus (104) has read identification information of the first wireless device (location ID tag106) and identification information of the second wireless device (118), Trivelpiece teaches, “On a continuous or periodic basis, data received from the RFID readers and/or tags is re-analyzed to update the location and/or orientation determination for the handheld reader” See ¶ 0021, Trivelpiece does not go into the details of updating tags location, in an analogous art, Cristache teaches, “a networked radio frequency identification system that includes a plurality of radio frequency identification (RFID) tag readers, a computer in signal communication with the RFID tag readers over a network, and a software module for storage on and operable by the computer that localizes RFID tags based on information received from the RFID tag readers using a network model having endpoints and oriented links.” See ¶ 0004; Cristache teaches, “The system 20 is configured to work with one or more RFID tags 70 that typically include unique identifiers and may include other information. In an example embodiment, an RFID tag 70 is carried by a person that travels into, out of, and within the structure 22. However, in other embodiments, RFID tags are also associated with non-human objects. The RFID tags may also be embedded in cards, clothing, devices, vehicles, or other objects in some embodiments. In one embodiment, the RFID tag 70 is a passive RFID device.” See ¶ 0026, Cristache teaches, “system 20 also includes a computer 36 that has a processor 38 in data communication with a memory unit 40 and a storage device 42 also in data communication with the processor 38. In an example embodiment, the computer 36 is an application and database server.” See ¶ 0023,
Cristache teaches, “tag can also be coded with semantic routes or path codes. The semantic routes or path codes can be pre-recorded or created and updated when the tag passes locations, links and checkpoints.” See ¶ 0157,
Cristache teaches, “as a tag passes through the path of travel its memory may be updated with information about location, link, inferred semantics or semantic groups.” See ¶ 0158,
Cristache teaches, “particular locations may be assigned for changing the activation status or operational status of groups of tags, such as by automatically changing the status when the tag is present at the location.” See ¶ 0163;
Cristache teaches, “the system may use during the process a semantic assigned previously to the truck (e.g. RFID DISABLED which may have been assigned to the truck, possibly, just because the system detected that an article first detected at location A but disappeared from the semantic field for an interval of time, reappeared at the location B and the out of field time matches the time interval of the truck moving from the location A to location B)” See ¶ 0101. Cristache teaches, “a tracked artifact may be assigned different semantics based on the path followed as explained throughout the application.” See ¶ 0107.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skilled in the art at the time of invention (effective filing date for AIA application) to modify the invention of Trivelpiece and update the data associated with object RFID tags (110/116) to indicate that the object assigned to entity at a new position when the RFID reader has read identification information of the location ID tag and identification information of the moved RFID tag are associated with object RFID tag, as suggested by, Cristache, ¶ 0101, 0157-0163, in an effort to store accurate information associated with the object read by the RFID reader.
Consider claim 2, the item management system according to claim 1,
wherein, in a state where the item data indicates that the item belongs to the second entity, the management unit is configured to, provided that a second reading apparatus (104M) associated with the second entity (102M) has read identification information of the first wireless device (106) and identification information of the second wireless device (118) and the first reading apparatus (1041) associated with the first entity (1021) has read identification information of the first wireless device (106) and identification information of the second wireless device (118), update the item data such that the item data indicates that the item (116) belongs to the first entity (1021), See Cristache, ¶ 0101, 0157-0163, updates the RFID tag location data once the RFID tag belongs to one group travel to another location associated with another group location.
Consider claim 3, the item management system according to claim 1, wherein the first reading apparatus (1041) is a reading apparatus that has read identification information of a first user device (1081) associated with the first entity, Trivelpiece teaches, “hardware architecture of FIG. 3 represents an embodiment of a representative handheld reader 300 configured to facilitate improved object locating within an RSF (e.g., RSF 128 of FIG. 1). In this regard, the handheld reader 300 comprises an RF enabled device 300 for allowing data to be exchanged with an external device (e.g., RFID readers 1041, . . . sensors 1081” See ¶ 0040, 0041.
Consider claim 4, the item management system according to claim 1, wherein each reading apparatus (RFID readers 104.sub.1, . . . , 104.sub.M) is configured to shorten a reading range in response to a user operation, and the management unit is configured to change an entity to which the item belongs in the item data based on a reading result obtained in a state where the reading range is shortened in response to the user operation, Cristache teaches, “the system settings may have high weights for settings corresponding to low transmitted RF output power, low antenna gain, and linear polarization of external interrogators at building access locations, but very low or null weights for other settings. This results in RFID tags being sensed at a shorter range during the off-hours interval than during the regular hours interval and requires a close proximity of an RFID tag to an external antenna before access is allowed. In one example, an RF signal strength setting is adjusted based on the received time interval and associated security level setting. ” See ¶ 0070
Consider claim 7, the item management system according to claim 1, wherein each reading apparatus (104) is configured to transmit, to the management unit (200), a result of reading including identification information read from a wireless device (106/112/118) and a time of the reading, Trivelpiece teaches, “Unique identifiers of the RFID enabled devices and RFID tags are stored in a data store so as to be associated with each other, as shown by step 408. Time stamps are also respectively stored with the unique identifiers. The time stamps indicate the times at which the RFID tags were read by the RF enabled devices.” See ¶ 0047, Trivelpiece teaches, “software application 224 is generally operative to facilitate: the determination of RFID tag locations within a facility; mapping of the RFID tag locations in a virtual three dimensional space; the determination of a handheld reader's location within the facility; mapping of the handheld reader's location in the virtual three dimensional space; the determination of the handheld reader's orientation; and/or the inclusion of an indication on the three dimensional map specifying the handheld reader's orientation. The map data can be processed by the server 200 and/or the external device to evaluate the relative locations of the handheld reader and the security tags.” See ¶ 0037 and
the management unit is configured to determine correspondence between pieces of identification information read from two or more wireless devices (106/112/118) based on temporal correlation between reading results received from a same reading apparatus (104), Trivelpiece teaches, “If the handheld reader receives RF signals from a plurality of fixed RFID readers, then a conclusion can be made that the handheld reader is pointing in a direction towards those fixed RFID readers. The RSSI levels can be used to determine a more accurate location and/or orientation of the handheld reader within the facility. Next, if the handheld reader reads the RFID tags that are in the Field-Of-View (“FOV”) of one of the fixed RFID readers, then a conclusion can be made that the handheld reader is pointing in a direction towards that fixed RFID reader's semi-sphere antenna pattern. The more RFID tags read by the handheld reader, the more information is obtained to determine how far the handheld reader is from a fixed RFID reader and/or tag. The handheld reader can vary its RFID read power and use an averaging technique to improve its location determination.” See ¶ 0021, Cristache teaches, “Wearable sensors can also sense different vital signs within the same or close interval of time when two or more people are detected in close proximity and then assign a semantic attribute based also on those e.g. “RELAXED” or “ALERT”.” See ¶ 0099.
Consider claim 8, the item management system according to claim 1, wherein each of the first entity (1021) and the second entity (102M) is one of [[an owner of an item, a user of an item, a manager of an item,]] a place to store an item, and a location of an item, Trivelpiece teaches, “the proximity systems are disposed on display equipment (e.g., display equipment 102.sub.1, . . . , 102.sub.M of FIG. 1), emergency equipment, checkout counters and/or EAS system equipment.” See ¶ 0046.
Consider claim 11, the item management system according to claim 1, wherein the wireless device is a radio frequency identification (RFID) tag, See Trivelpiece ¶ 0019, 0021, and the reading apparatus is configured to emit an electromagnetic wave to a reading range and read the identification information sent back from the RFID tag utilizing energy of the electromagnetic wave, Cristache teaches, “each endpoint is done using one or more RF interrogators. Each interrogator includes a transceiver and an antenna. The interrogator antennas emit electromagnetic waves generated by the transceiver which, when received by an RFID tag or card, eventually activates the tag or card. Once the tag is activated, it reflects a wave with encoded data that is received by the interrogator.” See ¶ 0031
Consider claim 12, the item management system according to claim 1, comprising a server apparatus arranged in a cloud environment and comprising the management unit, Trivelpiece teaches, “a remote data store 126 using a server 124,”
wherein each reading apparatus comprises a communication unit (302/350) configured to transmit a result of reading to the server apparatus directly or indirectly via another apparatus, Trivelpiece teaches, “RF enabled device 350 comprises an antenna 302 for allowing data to be exchanged with the external device via RF technology (e.g., RFID technology or other RF based technology).” See ¶ 0041. See Fig. 1. Cristache teaches, “system 20 also includes a computer 36 that has a processor 38 in data communication with a memory unit 40 and a storage device 42 also in data communication with the processor 38. In an example embodiment, the computer 36 is an application and database server. Additional computers or computer banks are also present in some embodiments. The computer 36 is in signal communication with a network 44. The network 44 is a wired network in an example embodiment, but is a wireless network in other embodiments. The RF readers 24a, 28, and 32a are also in signal communication with the network 44. The RF readers 24b, 32b, and 32c are in signal communication with a concentrator 46a” See ¶ 0023.
Consider claim 13, an item management method for managing item data that indicates an entity to which an item belongs among a plurality of entities, the method comprising, in a state where the item data indicates that the item belongs to a second entity related to a second position:
reading, by a first reading apparatus, identification information from a first wireless device installed at a first position;
reading, by the first reading apparatus, identification information from a second wireless device that has moved to the first position together with the item;
transmitting, by the first reading apparatus to a management unit configured to manage the item data, reading result data indicating that the first reading apparatus has read identification information of the first wireless device and identification information of the second wireless device; and
updating, by the management unit, the item data such that the item data indicates that the item belongs to a first entity related to the first position based on the reading result data received from the first reading apparatus, See rejection of claim 1.
Consider claim 14, a reading apparatus comprising:
a reading unit capable of reading, from a first wireless device installed at a first position out of a plurality of positions and from a second wireless device that moves together with an item, identification information stored in each wireless device; and
a communication unit configured to communicate with an information processing apparatus that manages item data indicating an entity to which the item belongs among a plurality of entities; wherein, in a case where the reading unit has read identification information of the first wireless device and identification information of the second wireless device, the communication unit is configured to transmit a result of reading by the reading unit to the information processing apparatus to cause the information processing apparatus to change an entity to which the item belongs in the item data from a second entity related to a second position that is different from the first position to a first entity related to the first position, See rejections of claims 1 and 12.
Consider claim 15, an information processing apparatus that manages item data indicating an entity to which an item belongs among a plurality of entities comprising:
a communication unit configured to communicate with at least one reading apparatus capable of reading, from a first wireless device installed at a first position out of a plurality of positions and from a second wireless device that moves together with the item, identification information stored in each wireless device; and a management unit configured to, in a state where the item data indicates that the item belongs to a second entity related to a second position that is different from the first position, update the item data such that the item data indicates that the item belongs to a first entity related to the first position provided that the communication unit has received reading result data indicating that a first reading apparatus has read identification information of the first wireless device and identification information of the second wireless device, See rejections of claims 1 and 12.
Consider claim 16, an item management system for managing item data that indicates an entity to which an item belongs among a plurality of entities comprising:
a first wireless device installed at a first position;
a second wireless device that moves together with the item; at least one reading apparatus that reads identification information stored in a wireless device; and
a management unit configured to manage the item data;
wherein, in a state where the item data indicates that the item belongs to a first entity related to the first position, the management unit is configured to update the item data such that the item data indicates that the item belongs to a second entity provided that a second reading apparatus associated with the second entity has read identification information of the first wireless device and identification information of the second wireless device, See rejection of claim 1;
wherein the second reading apparatus being associated with the second entity includes at least one of: existence of data which associates the second reading apparatus (104M) with the second entity (102M), Trivelpiece teaches, “RF beacons 106.sub.1, . . . , 106.sub.M may also optionally be included with the proximity systems 114.sub.1, . . . , 114.sub.M. RF beacons are well known in the art, and therefore will not be described herein. The RF beacons are generally configured to communicate with the handheld reader 120 to facilitate the determination as to where the handheld reader 120 is within the RSF 128 at any given time” See ¶ 0031.
or the second reading apparatus (104M) having read identification information of a user device (108M) associated with the second entity (102M), Trivelpiece teaches, “handheld readers orientation and location is determined using a combination of at least two of: sensor data generated by first sensors disposed in the handheld reader (e.g., accelerometers, gyroscopes and compasses); (6) sensor data generated by second sensors disposed at known locations within the facility (e.g., photoelectric sensors)” See ¶ 0006, “hardware architecture of FIG. 3 represents an embodiment of a representative handheld reader 300 configured to facilitate improved object locating within an RSF (e.g., RSF 128 of FIG. 1). In this regard, the handheld reader 300 comprises an RF enabled device 300 for allowing data to be exchanged with an external device (e.g., RFID readers 1041, . . . sensors 1081” See ¶ 0040, 0041.
Consider claim 17, the item management system according to claim 16, wherein each reading apparatus is configured to shorten a reading range in response to a user operation, and the management unit is configured to change an entity to which the item belongs in the item data based on a reading result obtained in a state where the reading range is shortened in response to the user operation, See rejections of claim 4.
Consider claim 20, the item management system according to claim 16, wherein each reading apparatus is configured to transmit, to the management unit, a result of reading including identification information read from a wireless device and a time of the reading, and the management unit is configured to determine correspondence between pieces of identification information read from two or more wireless devices based on temporal correlation between reading results received from a same reading apparatus, See rejection of claim 7.
Consider claim 21, the item management system according to claim 16, wherein each of the first entity and the second entity is one of an owner of an item, a user of an item, a manager of an item, a place to store an item, and a location of an item, See rejection of claim 8.
Consider claim 24, the item management system according to claim 16, wherein the wireless device is a radio frequency identification (RFID) tag, and the reading apparatus is configured to emit an electromagnetic wave to a reading range and read the identification information sent back from the RFID tag utilizing energy of the electromagnetic wave, See rejection of claim 11.
Consider claim 25, the item management system according to claim 16, comprising a server apparatus arranged in a cloud environment and comprising the management unit, wherein each reading apparatus comprises a communication unit configured to transmit a result of reading to the server apparatus directly or indirectly via another apparatus, See rejection of claim 12.
Consider claim 26, an item management method for managing item data that indicates an entity to which an item belongs among a plurality of entities, the method comprising, in a state where the item data indicates that the item belongs to a first entity related to a first position:
reading, by a second reading apparatus associated with a second entity, identification information from a first wireless device installed at the first position;
reading, by the second reading apparatus, identification information from a second wireless device that moves together with the item;
transmitting, by the first reading apparatus to a management unit configured to manage the item data, reading result data indicating that the second reading apparatus has read identification information of the first wireless device and identification information of the second wireless device; and
updating, by the management unit, the item data such that the item data indicates that the item belongs to the second entity based on the reading result data received from the second reading apparatus, See rejection of claim 1.
wherein the second reading apparatus being associated with the second entity includes at least one of: existence of data which associates the second reading apparatus with the second entity, or the second reading apparatus having read identification information of a user device associated with the second entity, See rejection of claim 16.
Consider claim 27, a reading apparatus comprising: a reading unit capable of reading, from a first wireless device installed at a first position out of a plurality of positions and from a second wireless device that moves together with an item, identification information stored in each wireless device; and
a communication unit configured to communicate with an information processing apparatus that manages item data indicating an entity to which the item belongs among a plurality of entities; wherein the reading apparatus is associated with a second entity by at least one of existence of data which associates the reading apparatus with the second entity, or the reading apparatus reading identification information of a user device associated with the second entity, and wherein, when the reading unit has read identification information of the first wireless device and identification information of the second wireless device, the communication unit is configured to transmit a result of reading by the reading unit to the information processing apparatus to cause the information processing apparatus to change an entity to which the item belongs in the item data from a first entity related to the first position to the second entity, See rejections of claims 1 and 12.
Consider claim 28, an information processing apparatus that manages item data indicating an entity to which an item belongs among a plurality of entities, comprising:
a communication unit configured to communicate with at least one reading apparatus capable of reading, from a first wireless device installed at a first position out of a plurality of positions and from a second wireless device that moves together with the item, identification information stored in each wireless device; and a management unit configured to, in a state where the item data indicates that the item belongs to a first entity related to the first position, update the item data such that the item data indicates that the item belongs to a second entity provided that the communication unit has received reading result data indicating that a second reading apparatus associated with the second entity has read identification information of the first wireless device and identification information of the second wireless device, wherein the second reading apparatus being associated with the second entity includes at least one of: existence of data which associates the second reading apparatus with the second entity, or the second reading apparatus having read identification information of a user device associated with the second entity, See rejections of claims 1 and 12.
Claim(s) 5-6 and 18-19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Trivelpiece (US 2016/0358440 A1), in view of Cristache (US 2018/0217250 A1), and further in view of Herrala (US 2012/0161963 A1).
Consider claim 5, the item management system according to claim 1, wherein the management unit is configured to:
change an entity to which the item belongs in the item data based on a result of reading at least by the first reading apparatus and the received [[reservation]] information, See Cristache, ¶ 0101, 0157-0163,
With respect to, receive reservation information indicating that an operation to transfer the item between entities will be carried out, and change an entity to which the item belongs based on the received reservation information, in an analogous art, Herrala teaches, “a method for changing a usability status of an asset in a location tracking system, the method comprising: establishing a direct device-to-device wireless communication connection between a user tag associated with a person and an asset tag associated with an asset in the location tracking system, wherein the user tag is used for monitoring the location of the person, and the asset tag is used for monitoring locations of the asset,” See ¶ 0005. Herrala teaches, “usability status may be a reservation status of the asset. In such embodiments, the reservation procedure of the asset may be triggered by establishing the connection in block 202, and the reserving person associated with the user tag and the reserved asset associated with the asset tag are immediately paired, which enables the reserving person to make the reservation in the location of the reserved asset by using only his/her user tag,” See ¶ 0021. Herrala teaches, “the server carries out location tracking of user tags and asset tags active in the LTS in step S2. This may be a continuous process carried out by the server in order to keep record about the locations of personnel and equipment.” See ¶ 0026, Herrala teaches, “In block 508, if it is determined whether or not a valid reservation has been made in time. The "time period" may be an actual time period counted by the server from the execution of step 504, or it may be measured in terms of a detected distance moved by the asset after step 504. Any other measure of duration or interval may be used. This gives time for the user moving the asset to either leave the asset intact or to make a valid reservation… if the server determines in block 508 that a valid reservation has been made, the process proceeds to block 512 in which the server updates the reservation status of the asset (see steps S7 and S12) in its database. The server may also transmit to the asset tag another control message configuring the asset tag” See 0033.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skilled in the art at the time of invention (effective filing date for AIA application) to modify the combination of Trivelpiece-Cristache and change the entity to which the item belongs to base on wireless tracking and reservation information, as suggested by, Herrala ¶ 0033, in an effort to make sure the asset is being used by a person/entity had the reservation of the asset.
Consider claim 6, the item management system according to claim 5, wherein the management unit is configured to update the item data such that the item data indicates that the item belongs to the first entity based on a result of reading at least by the first reading apparatus and on the reservation information indicating that an operation to move the item to the first position will be carried out, See Cristache, ¶ 0101, 0157-0163, Herrala ¶ ¶ 0021, 0026, 0033.
Consider claim 18, the item management system according to claim 16, wherein the management unit is configured to:
receive reservation information indicating that an operation to transfer the item between entities will be carried out, and
change an entity to which the item belongs in the item data based on a result of reading at least by the second reading apparatus and the received reservation information, See rejection of claim 5.
Consider claim 19, the item management system according to claim 18, wherein the management unit is configured to update the item data such that the item data indicates that the item belongs to the second entity based on the result of reading at least by the second reading apparatus and on the reservation information indicating that an operation to pick up the item from the first position will be carried out by a user associated with the second entity, See rejection of claim 6.
Claim(s) 9-10, and 22-23 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Trivelpiece (US 2016/0358440 A1), in view of Cristache (US 2018/0217250 A1), and further in view of Schoening (US 2020/0250610 A1).
Consider claim 9, the item management system according to claim 1, wherein the management unit is configured to provide a user terminal (202) of a user (122) associated with each entity (102) with information related to an item which belongs to that entity based on the item data, Trivelpiece teaches, “the server 200 comprises a user interface 202… user interface can include input devices (e.g., a keypad 250) and output devices (e.g., speaker 252, a display 254, and/or light emitting diodes 256), which facilitate user-software interactions for controlling operations of the server 200.” See ¶ 0035. In an analogous art, Schoening teaches, “the product delivery information is shown in multiple locations 60, 64, and 66 on the display screens 50C, 50D, 50E, 50F, 50G, and 50H. In particular, when the RFID reader 20 queries the tracking application 36, for example, the tracking application 36 sends product information from the product and order database 27 to the user interface device 23, after the RFID reader 20 has locked on to one product 13, as illustrated in FIG. 13. The product information sent by the tracking application 36 to the user interface device 23 shown on the display screen 50B includes, for example, the current location 64 of the product 13, the destination 66 of the product 13, and the trailer truck, if the destination 66 of the product is a bay 16 with a truck waiting to be loaded.” See ¶ 0107.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skilled in the art at the time of invention (effective filing date for AIA application) to modify the combination of Trivelpiece-Cristache and display on each entity with information related to an item which belongs to that entity based on the item data, as suggested by, Schoening ¶ 0107, in an effort to make sure, the current location 64 of the product 13, the destination 66 of the product 13, and the trailer truck, if the destination 66 of the product is a bay 16 with a truck waiting to be loaded.
Consider claim 10, the item management system according to claim 9, wherein the information provided to the user terminal includes position information of each item, Schoening ¶ 0107.
Consider claim 22, the item management system according to claim 16, wherein the management unit is configured to provide a user terminal of a user associated with each entity with information related to an item which belongs to that entity based on the item data, See rejection of claim 9.
Consider claim 23, the item management system according to claim 22, wherein the information provided to the user terminal includes position information of each item, See rejections of claim 10.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Omer S. Khan whose telephone number is (571)270-5146. The examiner can normally be reached 10:00 am to 8:00 pm EST.
Examiner interviews are available via telephone, in-person, and video conferencing using a USPTO supplied web-based collaboration tool. To schedule an interview, applicant is encouraged to use the USPTO Automated Interview Request (AIR) at http://www.uspto.gov/interviewpractice.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Brian A. Zimmerman can be reached at 571-272-3059. 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.
/Omer S Khan/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2686