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 § 102 In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis ( i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status. 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. The text of those sections of Title 35, U.S. Code not included in this action can be found in a prior Office action. Claims 1-3 , 5-8 , 13-14 and 20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102 (a)(1) as being anticipated by Nashif (U.S. Patent Application Publication No. 2021/0158241) . As to claim 1, Nashif teaches a workflow assistance system comprising: a mobile terminal carried by a worker to different production areas of the production process and supporting a first multimodal user interface of options for controlling operation of the first production area, the first multimodal user interface being configured to provide instructions to the worker and to receive instructions from the worker, the mobile terminal being in data communication with a data network; (para 45 and 56) a static terminal located proximate a first production area of the production process and supporting a second multimodal user interface of options for controlling operation of the first production area, the static terminal being in data communication with the data network; (para 55-56) a production management server running production operations management software in data communication with the data network, the production management server being controllably coupled to the static terminal and the production operations management software providing instructions for the second multimodal user interface of the static terminal; (para 31 and 34-35) a workflow server configured to execute workflow server instructions, the workflow server being in data communication with the data network and controllably coupled to the mobile terminal and to the static terminal; (para 55-56) wherein the workflow server executing the workflow server instructions determines workflow assistance instructions for assisting the worker to operate the first production area via the first multimodal user interface of the mobile terminal. (para 31 and 34-35) As to claim 2, Nashif teaches all the limitations of claim 1 as discussed above. Nashif further teaches: wherein the workflow assistance instructions include an instruction to assist the worker to select between the options for controlling operation of the first production area through one or more of the first multimodal user interface and the second multimodal user interface. (para 55-56) As to claim 3, Nashif teaches all the limitations of claim 2 as discussed above. Nashif further teaches: wherein the workflow assistance instructions include an instruction to assist the worker to select a sequence of options for controlling operation of the first production ar ea. (para 30, 56 and 63) As to claim 5, Nashif teaches all the limitations of claim 1 as discussed above. Nashif further teaches: wherein: the workflow server instructions include workflow monitoring instructions; (para 55-56) the workflow monitoring instructions include instructions to track and store worker action data; (para 55-56) and the worker action data includes the actions of the worker in the production process (para 55-56) As to claim 6, Nashif teaches all the limitations of claim 5 as discussed above. Nashif further teaches: wherein the worker action data includes the sequence of actions of the worker in the production process. (para 30, 56 and 63) As to claim 7, Nashif teaches all the limitations of claim 6 as discussed above. Nashif further teaches: wherein the worker action data includes the sequence of interactions with one or more of the first multimodal user interface and the second multimodal user interface. (para 30, 56 and 63) As to claim 8, Nashif teaches all the limitations of claim 5 as discussed above. Nashif further teaches: wherein: the worker is a first worker; and the worker action data includes the actions of the first worker and a second worker in the production process. (para 55-56) As to claim 13, Nashif teaches all the limitations of claim 5 as discussed above. Nashif further teaches: wherein: the workflow monitoring instructions include instructions to track and store worker interaction data; (para 55-56) the worker interaction data includes the interactions of the worker with one or more of the mobile terminal and the static terminal. (para 55-56) As to claim 14, Nashif teaches all the limitations of claim 13 as discussed above. Nashif further teaches: wherein: the mobile terminal defines a first mobile terminal carried by a first worker; the workflow assistance system further comprises a second mobile terminal carried by a second worker; (para 45 and 56) the worker interaction data includes the interactions of the first worker and the second worker with one or more of the first mobile terminal, the second mobile terminal, and the static terminal. (para 45 and 56) As to claim 20, Nashif teaches all the limitations of claim 5 as discussed above. Nashif further teaches: wherein: the stored worker action data includes the results of a given action taken by the worker at different times; (para 55-56 and 111) the workflow server instructions include instructions for determining the workflow assistance instructions related to the given action based on the results of the given action at different times in the stored worker action data (para 55-56 and 111) Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103 In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis ( i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status. 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. The text of those sections of Title 35, U.S. Code not included in this action can be found in a prior Office action. The factual inquiries for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows: 1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art. 2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue. 3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art. 4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness . Claim s 4 , 9-12 and 15-19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Nashif (U.S. Patent Application Publication No. 2021/0158241) in view of Agarwal et al. referred herein as Agarwal (U.S. Patent Application Publication No. 2012/0095585) . As to claim 4, Nashif teaches all the limitations of claim 1 as discussed above. Nashif further teaches: wherein: the first production area includes a machine configured to be manually operated by the worker; (para 31) Nashif does not explicitly teach: the workflow assistance instructions include instructions for assisting the worker to manually operate the machine. However, Agarwal teaches: the workflow assistance instructions include instructions for assisting the worker to manually operate the machine. ( para 34) It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the effective filling date of the invention to include instruction to operate a machine in Nashif as taught by Agarwal. Motivation to do so comes from the knowledge taught by Agarwal that doing so would allow collaboration between all the people in the corporation and the whole system. As to claim s 9 and 15 , Nashif teaches all the limitations of claim s 8 and 14 as discussed above. Nashif does not teach : the workflow server instructions include instructions for selecting preferred worker action data from the stored worker action data; and the workflow server instructions include instructions for determining the workflow assistance instructions based on the preferred worker action data However, Agarwal teaches: the workflow server instructions include instructions for selecting preferred worker action data from the stored worker action data; and the workflow server instructions include instructions for determining the workflow assistance instructions based on the preferred worker action data (para 16) It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the effective filling date of the invention to include instruction to operate a machine in Nashif as taught by Agarwal. Motivation to do so comes from the knowledge taught by Agarwal that doing so would allow collaboration between all the people in the corporation and the whole system . As to claim s 10 , 16 and 18 , Nashif in view of Agarwal teach all the limitations of claim 9 as discussed above. Nashif further teaches: wherein: the workflow server instructions include instructions for identifying whether actions of the first worker or the second worker in the stored worker action data were more effective in the production process; and the preferred worker action data is selected based at least in part on the actions deemed more effective in the production process . (para 111 and 116) As to claim s 11 and 17 , Nashif in view of Agarwal teach all the limitations of claim s 9 and 15 as discussed above. Nashif further teaches: wherein: the workflow server instructions include instructions for accessing stored worker experience data for the first worker and the second worker; (para 55-56) Nashif does not teach: the preferred worker action data is selected based at least in part on the experience of the first worker compared to the second worker. However, Agarwal teaches: the preferred worker action data is selected based at least in part on the experience of the first worker compared to the second worker. (para 16 and 53) It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the effective filling date of the invention to include instruction to operate a machine in Nashif as taught by Agarwal. Motivation to do so comes from the knowledge taught by Agarwal that doing so would allow collaboration between all the people in the corporation and the whole system As to claim s 1 2 and 19 , Nashif in view of Agarwal teach all the limitations of claim 9 and 15 as discussed above. Nashif further teaches: wherein: the workflow monitoring instructions include instructions to track and store incident data for actions taken by the first worker and by the second worker; the incident data identifies if an action did not satisfy specified parameters; (para 55-56 and 111 ) Nashif does not teach: and the workflow server instructions include instructions for selecting the preferred worker action data based at least in part on the stored incident data. However, Agarwal teaches: and the workflow server instructions include instructions for selecting the preferred worker action data based at least in part on the stored incident data. (para 16 and 53) It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the effective filling date of the invention to include instruction to operate a machine in Nashif as taught by Agarwal. Motivation to do so comes from the knowledge taught by Agarwal that doing so would allow collaboration between all the people in the corporation and the whole system Conclusion Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to FILLIN "Examiner name" \* MERGEFORMAT ZEINA ELCHANTI whose telephone number is FILLIN "Phone number" \* MERGEFORMAT (313)446-6561 . The examiner can normally be reached FILLIN "Work Schedule?" \* MERGEFORMAT M-F 8:00 AM-5:00 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, FILLIN "SPE Name?" \* MERGEFORMAT Jeffrey Zimmerman can be reached at FILLIN "SPE Phone?" \* MERGEFORMAT 571-272-4602 . 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. /ZEINA ELCHANTI/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3628