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 .
Application, submitted on 03/23/2023, has been received, entered, and made of record. Currently, claims 1-34 remain pending in the application.
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on 09/09/2024 was filed in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97 and 1.98. Accordingly, the information disclosure statement is being considered by the examiner. However, Applicant has not provided an explanation of relevance of cited document(s).
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 1-34 are rejected under 35 U.S.C.101 because the claimed invention is directed to an abstract idea without significantly more.
The Examiner has identified independent claim 1 as the claim that represents the claimed invention for analysis and is similar to independent claims 11 and 23.
The claims 1-10 are directed to a system, and claims 11-34 are directed to a communication controller which are one of the statutory categories of invention.
Claim 1 recites: “A tool tracking system comprising: a location module, configured to receive location information used to determine a tool's location; a communication controller configured to communicate with at least one of a mobile computing device and a cloud-based computing system; and wherein upon a triggering event, the communication controller transmits at least one of the received location information and the tool's location to the at least one mobile computing device and the cloud-based computing system.”
These limitations when considered collectively as an ordered combination, is a process that covers a Mental Process as these limitations relate to concepts performed in the human mind (including an observation, evaluation, judgment, opinion and use of a pen and paper). That is, the mental process is determining a tools location which can be done in the human mind just by observation or evaluation.
The claim also recites a location module, a communication controller, a mobile computing device and a cloud-based computing system which do not necessarily restrict the claim from reciting an abstract idea. That is, other than, a location module, a communication controller, a mobile computing device and a cloud-based computing system, nothing in the claim precludes the steps from being performed as Mental Process. If the claim limitations, under the broadest reasonable interpretation, covers the concepts that can be performed in the human mind but for the recitation of generic computer components, then it falls within the “Mental Processes” and “Certain methods of organizing human activity” grouping of abstract ideas, respectively. Accordingly, the claim 1 recites an abstract idea.
The claim 1 does not include additional elements that are sufficient to amount to significantly more than the judicial exception because the additional elements of a location module, a communication controller, a mobile computing device and a cloud-based computing system are recited at a high level of generality in that it results in no more than simply applying the abstract idea using generic computer elements. As discussed above with respect to integration of the abstract idea into a practical application, the additional elements amount to no more than mere instructions to apply the exception using a generic computer component (MPEP 2106.05(f)). The additional elements, when considered separately and as an ordered combination, does not add significantly more (also known as an “inventive concept”) to the exception. The additional elements of the instant underlying process, when taken in combination, together do not offer significantly more than the sum of the functions of the elements when each is taken alone. That is, the additional elements are everything other than determining a tools location. In other words, receiving the location, and sending the received location and tools location to the computing device and cloud system are additional elements. These additional elements do NOT integrate this mental process into a practical application in Step 2A prong 2 and are NOT significantly more in Step 2B. In other words, there is no inventive concept. It is simply receiving location/tool information and forwarding it to some outside entity.
ELEMENTS THAT THE COURTS HAVE RECOGNIZED AS WELL-UNDERSTOOD, ROUTINE, CONVENTIONAL ACTIVITY IN PARTICULAR FIELDS
Because examiners should rely on what the courts have recognized, or those of ordinary skill in the art would recognize, as elements that describe well‐understood, routine activities, the following section provides examples of elements that have been recognized by the courts as well-understood, routine, conventional activity in particular fields. It should be noted, however, that many of these examples failed to satisfy other considerations (e.g., because they were recited at a high level of generality and thus were mere instructions to apply an exception, or were insignificant extra-solution activity). Thus, examiners should carefully analyze additional elements in a claim with respect to all relevant Step 2B considerations, including this consideration, before making a conclusion as to whether they amount to an inventive concept.
The courts have recognized the following computer functions as well‐understood, routine, and conventional functions when they are claimed in a merely generic manner (e.g., at a high level of generality) or as insignificant extra-solution activity:
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); TLI Communications LLC v. AV Auto. LLC, 823 F.3d 607, 610, 118 USPQ2d 1744, 1745 (Fed. Cir. 2016) (using a telephone for image transmission); OIP Techs., Inc., v. Amazon.com, Inc., 788 F.3d 1359, 1363, 115 USPQ2d 1090, 1093 (Fed. Cir. 2015) (sending messages over a network); buySAFE, Inc. v. Google, Inc., 765 F.3d 1350, 1355, 112 USPQ2d 1093, 1096 (Fed. Cir. 2014) (computer receives and sends information over a network); but see DDR Holdings, LLC v. Hotels.com, L.P., 773 F.3d 1245, 1258, 113 USPQ2d 1097, 1106 (Fed. Cir. 2014) ("Unlike the claims in Ultramercial, the claims at issue here specify how interactions with the Internet are manipulated to yield a desired result‐‐a result that overrides the routine and conventional sequence of events ordinarily triggered by the click of a hyperlink." (emphasis added));
Thus, claim 1 is not patent eligible.
Similar arguments can be extended to other independent claims 11 and 23, and hence the claims 11 and 23 are rejected on similar grounds as claim 1. In addition, claims 11 and 23 recite a cellular modem, a short-range communication module, a processing element that amount to generic computer implementation.
The dependent claims have been given the full two-part analysis including analyzing the additional limitations both individually and in combination. Dependent claims 2-10, 12-22, and 24-34 are held to be patent ineligible under 35 U.S.C. 101 because the additional recited limitations only narrow the abstract idea further and thus correspond to “Mental Process” and hence are abstract for the reasons presented above. The dependent claims do not recite any new additional elements that are not present in independent claims 1, 11 and 23.
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 1-7, 11-20, and 23-32 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Burch et al. US 2019/0222957 A1 (Hereinafter referred to as Burch) in view of Vetter US 2021/0123737 A1.
Referring to claim 1, Burch discloses a tool tracking system (fig.1, tool monitoring system 100) comprising:
a location module (fig.2, GPS unit 215), configured to receive location information used to determine a tool's location ([0049]) (Note: The GPS unit 215 interprets the GPS signals to determine a position of the tracking unit 150 associated with the tool);
a communication controller (fig.2, tracking unit 150) configured to communicate with at least one of a mobile computing device and a computing system ([0046] and [0049]) (Note: the controller 220 is configured to communicate with remote monitoring device (e.g., smart phone 120, PC 135, or server 140) via the cellular unit 205 and WLAN unit 210); and
wherein upon a triggering event, the communication controller transmits at least one of the received location information and the tool's location to the at least one mobile computing device and the computing system ([0049] and [0060]) (Note: The GPS unit 215 interprets the GPS signals to determine a position of the tracking unit 150. The determined position is output by the GPS unit 215 to the controller 220 as position data. The controller 220 also obtains tool status and usage data which, in combination with the position data, is collectively referred to as tool data (system information). When a poll command (triggering event) is received by the tool 105, the controller 220 of the tool 105 gathers tool data (system information) for transmission. The controller 220 may gather new tool data or may assemble the most recently gathered tool data (i.e., tool data gathered before the poll command was received). The gathered tool data is then output back to the requesting tool polling module 275 (of remote monitoring device (e.g., smart phone 120, PC 135, or server 140))).
Burch fails to explicitly disclose transmitting the system information to a cloud-based computing system.
However, in the same field of endeavor, Vetter discloses transmitting the system information to a cloud-based computing system (fig.1, [0025], [0027] and [0029]) (Note: the reference discloses transmitting tool data to a cloud-based computing device 110).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention by the applicant to replace the computing system of Burch with a cloud-based computing system as taught by Vetter. The suggestion/motivation for doing so would have been to improve security and reliability.
Referring to claim 2, Burch in view of Vetter discloses the tool tracking system according to claim 1. Burch further discloses wherein the communication controller further comprises a user input configured upon activation to transmit system information from a tool to a (cloud-based )computing system (fig.5A and [0059]-[0060]) (Note: user may poll tool data by touching the obtain tool data button 320, which initiates a polling command, and when the poll command is received by the tool 105, the controller 220 of the tool 105 gathers tool data (system information) for transmission).
Referring to claim 3, Burch in view of Vetter discloses the tool tracking system according to claim 1. Burch further discloses wherein the communication controller further comprises a motion sensor configured to detect whether a tool is stationary or non-stationary ([0153]) (Note: the reference discloses the tool includes an accelerometer to detect motion).
Referring to claim 4, Burch in view of Vetter discloses the tool tracking system according to claim 3. Burch further discloses wherein the motion sensor is an accelerometer ([0153]) (Note: the reference discloses the tool includes an accelerometer to detect motion).
Referring to claim 5, Burch in view of Vetter discloses the tool tracking system according to claim 1. Burch further discloses wherein the communication controller further comprises a rechargeable battery (fig.8B, battery 230) configured to provide power to the communication controller in the absence of another power source ([0046]-[0047]) (Note: the reference discloses rechargeable battery 230 that enables the tracking unit 150 to operate even when the battery 160 is not inserted into the tool 105).
Referring to claim 6, Burch in view of Vetter discloses the tool tracking system according to claim 1. Burch discloses wherein the short-range communication module is configured to employ a Bluetooth Low Energy communications protocol ([0044]) (Note: other antennas may be included in addition to or in place of the antennas 185 to enable other types of wireless communication (e.g., Bluetooth™)).
Referring to claim 7, Burch in view of Vetter discloses the tool tracking system according to claim 1. Burch discloses wherein the short-range communication module is configured to employ an IEEE 802.11 wireless local area network protocol ([0044]) (Note: the WLAN antenna 195 and WLAN unit 210 facilitate wireless communication according to IEEE 802.11 protocols).
Referring claim 10, Burch in view of Vetter discloses the tool tracking system according to claim 1. Burch further discloses wherein the communication controller is configured to be removably (figs.9A-B, tracking unit 150) mounted to a tool (fig.1, Tool 105).
Referring to claim 11, Burch discloses a communication controller (figs.9A-B, tracking unit 150) removably connectable with a tool (fig.1, Tool 105), the communication controller comprising:
a cellular modem (fig.2, cellular unit 205);
a location module (fig.2, GPS unit 215), wherein the location module is configured to determine location associated with the tool ([0049]) (Note: The GPS unit 215 interprets the GPS signals to determine a position of the tracking unit 150 associated with the tool);
a short-range communication module (fig.2, WLAN unit 210), wherein the communication module is configured to communicate with a user's mobile device ([0050]) (Note: The WLAN unit 210 converts the tool data to a WLAN-compatible format and transmits the tool data to a remote device, such as internet-enabled smart phone 120); and
a processing element (fig.2, controller 220) connected with the cellular modem, the location module, and short-range communication module (fig.2),
wherein the processing element receives system information and upon a triggering event transmits the system information to a computing system ([0049] and [0060]) (Note: The GPS unit 215 interprets the GPS signals to determine a position of the tracking unit 150. The determined position is output by the GPS unit 215 to the controller 220 as position data. The controller 220 also obtains tool status and usage data which, in combination with the position data, is collectively referred to as tool data (system information). When a poll command (triggering event) is received by the tool 105, the controller 220 of the tool 105 gathers tool data (system information) for transmission. The controller 220 may gather new tool data or may assemble the most recently gathered tool data (i.e., tool data gathered before the poll command was received). The gathered tool data is then output back to the requesting tool polling module 275 (of remote monitoring device (e.g., smart phone 120, PC 135, or server 140))).
Burch fails to explicitly disclose transmitting the system information to a cloud-based computing system.
However, in the same field of endeavor, Vetter discloses transmitting the system information to a cloud-based computing system (fig.1, [0025], [0027] and [0029]) (Note: the reference discloses transmitting tool data to a cloud-based computing device 110).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention by the applicant to replace the computing system of Burch with a cloud-based computing system as taught by Vetter. The suggestion/motivation for doing so would have been to improve security and reliability.
Referring to claim 12, Burch in view of Vetter discloses the communication controller according to claim 11. Burch further discloses a user input configured upon activation to transmit system information from a tool to the ([cloud-based) computing system (fig.5A and [0059]-[0060]) (Note: user may poll tool data by touching the obtain tool data button 320, which initiates a polling command, and when the poll command is received by the tool 105, the controller 220 of the tool 105 gathers tool data (system information) for transmission).
Referring to claim 13, Burch in view of Vetter discloses the communication controller according to claim 11. Burch further discloses a motion sensor configured to detect whether a tool is stationary or non-stationary ([0153]) (Note: the reference discloses the tool includes an accelerometer to detect motion).
Referring to claim 14, Burch in view of Vetter discloses the communication controller according to claim 13. Burch further discloses wherein the motion sensor is an accelerometer ([0153]) (Note: the reference discloses the tool includes an accelerometer to detect motion).
Referring to claim 15, Burch in view of Vetter discloses the communication controller according to claim 11. Burch further discloses wherein the triggering event is a predetermined amount of time from the last transmission (fig.7 and [0082]) (Note: the reference discloses data transmission from the tool based on a timer when the controller 220 determines whether movement has occurred since the previous timer expiration).
Referring to claim 16, Burch in view of Vetter discloses the communication controller according to claim 13. Burch discloses wherein the triggering event is the detection of the tool remaining stationary for a predetermined amount of time (fig.7 and [0082]) (Note: after the timer is determined to have elapsed in step 465, the controller 220 determines whether movement has occurred since the previous timer expiration).
Referring to claim 17, Burch in view of Vetter discloses the communication controller according to claim 11. Burch further disclose a rechargeable battery (fig.8B, battery 230) configured to provide power to the communication controller in the absence of another power source ([0046]-[0047]) (Note: the reference discloses rechargeable battery 230 that enables the tracking unit 150 to operate even when the battery 160 is not inserted into the tool 105).
Referring to claim 18, Burch in view of Vetter discloses the communication controller according to claim 17. Burch further discloses a circuit configured to recharge the rechargeable battery ([0046]-[0047]) (Note: since the battery 230 is rechargeable, it is obvious that there is a circuit configured to recharge the battery).
Referring to claim 19, Burch in view of Vetter discloses the communication controller according to claim 11. Burch discloses wherein the short-range communication module is configured to employ a Bluetooth Low Energy communications protocol ([0044]) (Note: other antennas may be included in addition to or in place of the antennas 185 to enable other types of wireless communication (e.g., Bluetooth™)).
Referring to claim 20, Burch in view of Vetter discloses the communication controller according to claim 19. Burch discloses wherein the short-range communication module is configured to employ an IEEE 802.11 wireless local area network protocol ([0044]) (Note: the WLAN antenna 195 and WLAN unit 210 facilitate wireless communication according to IEEE 802.11 protocols).
Referring to claim 23, Burch discloses a communication controller (tracking unit 150) comprising:
a cellular modem (fig.2, cellular unit 205), wherein the cellular modem includes an internal processor configured to receive system information and upon a triggering event transmits the system information to a computing system ([0049]-[0050], and [0059]-[0060]) (Note: The controller 220 obtains tool status and usage data which, in combination with the position data, is collectively referred to as tool data (system information). When a poll command (triggering event) is received by the tool 105, the controller 220 of the tool 105 gathers tool data (system information) for transmission via the cellular unit 205. Thus, cellular unit 205 (with internal processor) receives tool data (system information) from the controller 220. The controller 220 may gather new tool data or may assemble the most recently gathered tool data (i.e., tool data gathered before the poll command was received). The gathered tool data is then output back via the cellular unit 205 to the requesting tool polling module 275 (of remote monitoring device (e.g., smart phone 120, PC 135, or server 140)));
a location module (fig.2, GPS unit 215), wherein the location module is configured to determine location associated with a tool ([0049]) (Note: The GPS unit 215 interprets the GPS signals to determine a position of the tracking unit 150 associated with the tool); and
a short-range communication module (fig.2, WLAN unit 210), wherein the short-range communication module is configured to communicate with a user's mobile device ([0050]) (Note: The WLAN unit 210 converts the tool data to a WLAN-compatible format and transmits the tool data to a remote device, such as internet-enabled smart phone 120).
Burch fails to explicitly disclose transmitting the system information to a cloud-based computing system.
However, in the same field of endeavor, Vetter discloses transmitting the system information to a cloud-based computing system (fig.1, [0025], [0027] and [0029]) (Note: the reference discloses transmitting tool data to a cloud-based computing device 110).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention by the applicant to replace the computing system of Burch with a cloud-based computing system as taught by Vetter. The suggestion/motivation for doing so would have been to improve security and reliability.
Referring to claim 24, the same ground of rejection provided for claim 12 is applicable herein.
Referring to claim 25, the same ground of rejection provided for claim 13 is applicable herein.
Referring to claim 26, the same ground of rejection provided for claim 14 is applicable herein.
Referring to claim 27, the same ground of rejection provided for claim 15 is applicable herein.
Referring to claim 28, the same ground of rejection provided for claim 16 is applicable herein.
Referring to claim 29, the same ground of rejection provided for claim 17 is applicable herein.
Referring to claim 30, the same ground of rejection provided for claim 18 is applicable herein.
Referring to claim 31, the same ground of rejection provided for claim 19 is applicable herein.
Referring to claim 32, the same ground of rejection provided for claim 20 is applicable herein.
Claims 8-9, 21-22, and 33-34 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Burch in view of Vetter, and further in view of Koegel et al. US 2025/0159051 A1 (hereinafter referred to as Koegel).
Referring to claim 8, Burch in view of Vetter discloses the tool tracking system according to claim 1, except wherein the cellular modem utilizes a low power wide area network radio technology standard.
However, in the same field of endeavor, Koegel discloses wherein the cellular modem utilizes a low power wide area network radio technology standard ([0008]) (Note: the reference discloses communication between a cloud server and power tools by means of an LPWAN (low power wide area network radio technology), a Sigfox, a LoRa, an NB-IoT).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention by the applicant to modify the cellular modem of Burch in view of Vetter with a low power wide area network radio technology standard as taught by Koegel. The suggestion/motivation for doing so would have been to provide long-range communication with extremely low power consumption that will improve battery life (long battery life).
Referring to claim 9, Burch in view of Vetter and Koegel discloses the tool tracking system according to claim 8. Koegel discloses wherein the low powered wide-area network is operable according to Cat-M or NB-IoT protocols ([0008]) (Note: the reference discloses communication between a cloud server and power tools by means of an NB-IoT).
The same motivation provided for claim 8 is applicable herein.
Referring to claim 21, Burch in view of Vetter discloses the communication controller according to claim 11, except wherein the cellular modem utilizes a low power wide area network radio technology standard.
However, in the same field of endeavor, Koegel discloses wherein the cellular modem utilizes a low power wide area network radio technology standard ([0008]) (Note: the reference discloses communication between a cloud server and power tools by means of an LPWAN (low power wide area network radio technology), a Sigfox, a LoRa, an NB-IoT).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention by the applicant to modify the cellular modem of Burch in view of Vetter with a low power wide area network radio technology standard as taught by Koegel. The suggestion/motivation for doing so would have been to provide long-range communication with extremely low power consumption that will improve battery life (long battery life).
Referring to claim 22, Burch in view of Vetter and Koegel discloses the communication controller according to claim 21. Koegel discloses wherein the low powered wide-area network is operable according to Cat-M or NB-IoT protocols ([0008]) (Note: the reference discloses communication between a cloud server and power tools by means of an NB-IoT).
The same motivation provided for claim 21 is applicable herein.
Referring to claim 33, the same ground of rejection provided for claim 21 is applicable herein.
Referring to claim 34, the same ground of rejection provided for claim 22 is applicable herein.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to MOUSTAPHA DIABY whose telephone number is (571)270-1669. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday: 9AM-6PM.
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, ABDERRAHIM MEROUAN can be reached at (571) 270-5254. 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.
/MOUSTAPHA DIABY/
Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2683