DETAILED ACTION
1. Claims 1-20 of application 18/637,936, filed on 17-April-2024, are presented for examination. The IDSs received on 17-April-2024 and 27-June-2025 have been considered.
The replacement drawing received on 5-June-2024 is approved by the examiner.
The present application, filed on or after 16-March-2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
Claim Objections
2.1 Claims 10 and 13 are objected to under 37 CFR 1.75(d)(1), wherein --
The claim or claims must conform to the invention as set forth in the remainder of the specification and the terms and phrases used in the claims must find clear support or antecedent basis in the description so that the meaning of the terms in the claims may be ascertainable by reference to the description. (See 1.58(a))
2.2 Applicant is advised that should claim 10 be found allowable, claim 13 will be objected to under 37 CFR 1.75 as being a substantial duplicate thereof. When two claims in an application are duplicates or else are so close in content that they both cover the same thing, despite a slight difference in wording, it is proper after allowing one claim to object to the other as being a substantial duplicate of the allowed claim. See MPEP § 706.03(k).
2.3 Claim 13 is objected to under 37 CFR 1.75(d)(1), as being of improper dependent form for failing to further limit the subject matter of a previous claim. Applicant is required to cancel the claim, or amend the claim to place the claim in proper dependent form, or rewrite the claim in independent form.
Claim Rejections under 35 U.S.C. § 102(a)(1)
3.1 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)(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.
3.2 Claims 1-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Nichols, USP Publication 2009/0256860.
3.3 Nichols discloses:
Claims 1 and 15: A stakeout system constructed to stakeout a worksite according to a site plan [¶0002; 0004], the system comprising:
a set of fiducial markers, each being associated with a corresponding construction operation performed at the worksite [0015 (The system may further include a plurality of reference markers.); 0019 (Design or topographical data, received in block 315 may be superposed on the visual image in block 320. In one embodiment, superposing of a target design surface in block 320 may include using at least one of a fiducial marker or reference mark.)];
a set of sensors of diverse sensory modalities, the set of sensors generating respective signals from which information associated with the construction operation is conveyed [0017-0018 (GNSS input 110 may be configured to receive data corresponding to a spatial location and/or orientation of an earthmoving machine…visual input 115 may be usable to receive imaging data from an imaging device (camera, video device)); 0020 (earthmoving machine 405 may receive spatial positioning data and orientation from a GPS satellite 425 via GPS receiver 410); 0025 (alignment of the visual image of the work site 610 and target design surface 615 may be determined using position and/or orientation data collected from one of angle sensors, inertial sensors, GNSS receivers and positioning devices in general.)]; and
a processor [0017 (processor); 0020 (controller)] constructed to:
ascertain from the signals a location of a work machine at the worksite and the corresponding construction operation performed thereat [0019 (Process 300 may be initiated by receiving design and/or topographical data for a work site (e.g., worksite 220) at block 305. Design data received at block 305 may include a target elevation and/or grade for a work site. Similarly, topographical data received at block 305 may relate to cut and/or fill data for the work site. The spatial position and/or orientation of an earthmoving machine ( e.g., earthmoving machine 205) may be received at block 310.); 0020 (control center 415 can collect topographical reference data from one or more of a plurality of reference markers 4301 -430n such as, a grade, indicated by 435, of the work site.)]; and
constrain the work machine to the construction operation according to the location of the work machine in the site plan [0013 (the controller can provide a desired grade, elevation, or fill information to an operator of an earthmoving machine as one or more of a plan, profile and 3D model representation.); 0022 (a target design surface may be superposed on the real time image of the work site. As such, an operator of the earthmoving machine can be provided with the desired design data while operating the earthmoving machine.)].
Claims 2, 11 and 16: wherein the fiducial markers are attached to grade stakes distributed over the construction site according to the site plan [0015 (The system may further include a plurality of reference markers…the control center configured to collect the orientation and position of the earthmoving machine and reference markers to provide a generate topographical model of a work site. The controller may communicate with elements of the system to provide a real time display of the work site including a target design surface.); 0019 (Design or topographical data, received in block 315 may be superposed on the visual image in block 320. In one embodiment, superposing of a target design surface in block 320 may include using at least one of a fiducial marker or reference mark.)].
Claims 3, 12 and 17: wherein the construction operation associated with the fiducial markers on the grade stakes include cut, fill and slope excavation operations [0017 (design data may include a target design surface for at least a portion of the worksite, wherein the target design surface relates to a desired grade, elevation or representation of the work site. According to another embodiment, design data may relate to a desired cut and/or fill for material. For example, design data may indicate a height or depth of stones to be placed in a particular location.); 0019 (Design data received at block 305 may include a target elevation and/or grade…topographical data received at block 305 may relate to cut and/or fill data for the work site.)].
Claims 4 and 18: wherein the processor is further constructed to generate, as the site plan, a local site plan that refers to a selected location on the worksite [0017 (design data may include a target design surface for at least a portion of the worksite, wherein the target design surface relates to a desired grade, elevation or representation of the work site. According to another embodiment, design data may relate to a desired cut and/or fill for material. For example, design data may indicate a height or depth of stones to be placed in a particular location.); 0024 (As shown in FIG. 6a, the target design surface 615 may be presented as lines indicating at least one of a desired elevation and grade for the portion of the work site. It may also be appreciated that target design surface 615 may be presented as shaded, colored or patterned regions…display window 600a may relate to a portion of work site 610 (e.g., portion of a work site 220) in the vicinity of an earthmoving machine.)].
Claims 5 and 19: wherein the processor is further constructed to determine the construction operation at the selected location by interpolating the construction operations at grade stakes bounding the selected location on the worksite [0017 (controller 100 may be configured to provide design data, wherein design data may include a target design surface for at least a portion of the worksite, wherein the target design surface relates to a desired grade, elevation or representation of the work site); 0024 (It may be appreciated that a target design surface 615 may be superposed on the visual image of the work site 610. As shown in FIG. 6a, the target design surface 615 may be presented as lines indicating at least one of a desired elevation and grade for the portion of the work site. It may also be appreciated that target design surface 615 may be presented as shaded, colored or patterned regions…display window 600a may relate to a portion of work site 610 (e.g., portion of a work site 220) in the vicinity of an earthmoving machine.)].
Claims 6, 10, 13 and 20: wherein the processor is further constructed to generate a modified local site plan that alters the construction operation at the selected location beyond the interpolated construction operations [0023 (Continuing to refer to FIG. 5, process 500 may include determining if a position and/or orientation of the earth moving machine is modified at block 530…an operator of the earth moving machine may employ input terminals (e.g., terminals 235) of a controller to update at least one of the visual image and topographical data of the work site.)].
Claim 7: wherein the processor is further constructed to retrieve a global site plan as the site plan that refers to a global control point [0019 (Process 300 may be initiated by receiving design and/or topographical data for a work site (e.g., worksite 220) at block 305. Design data received at block 305 may include a target elevation and/or grade for a work site. Similarly, topographical data received at block 305 may relate to cut and/or fill data for the work site.); 0020 (work site 400 may be a pre-defined area having at least one boundary. As shown in FIG. 4, work site 400 conforms to a rectangular shape in general. However, it should be appreciated that the work site 400 may conform to other shapes.)].
Claims 8 and 14: wherein the fiducial markers are emissive in a spectrum other than a visible light spectrum to which a sensor from among the set of sensors is responsive [0019 (Design or topographical data, received in block 315 may be superposed on the visual image in block 320. In one embodiment, superposing of a target design surface in block 320 may include using at least one of a fiducial marker or reference mark.); 0017 (input/output (I/O) interface 130 may be usable to receive design and/or updated topographical data for a work site via a wired or wireless link.)].
Claim 9: In regard to claim 9, the limitations of this claim were discussed in the rejection of claims 1, 4 and 5, and are therefore considered rejected for the reasons as set forth above.
Prior Art
4. The following prior art, discovered in an updated search and herein made of record, is considered pertinent to Applicant’s disclosure, and consists of documents A-D on the attached PTO-892 Notice of References Cited:
Document A defines a document of particular relevance, wherein the claimed invention cannot be considered novel or cannot be considered to involve an inventive step when the document is taken alone.
Documents B-D define the general state of the art which is not considered to be of particular relevance.
Prior Art of Record
5. The Examiner has cited particular paragraphs or columns and line numbers in the references applied to the claims above for the convenience of the applicant. Although the specified citations are representative of the teachings of the art and are applied to specific limitations within the individual claim, other passages and figures may apply as well. It is respectfully requested of the applicant in preparing responses, to fully consider the references in their entirety as potentially teaching all or part of the claimed invention, as well as the context of the passage as taught by the prior art or disclosed by the Examiner. The prompt development of a clear issue requires that the replies of the Applicant meet the objections to and rejections of the claims. Applicant should also specifically point out the support for any amendments made to the disclosure (see MPEP §2163.06). Applicant is reminded that the Examiner is entitled to give the Broadest Reasonable Interpretation (BRI) of the language of the claims. Furthermore, the Examiner is not limited to Applicant’s definition which is not specifically set forth in the claims. SEE MPEP 2141.02 [R-07.2015] VI. PRIOR ART MUST BE CONSIDERED IN ITS ENTIRETY, INCLUDING DISCLOSURES THAT TEACH AWAY FROM THE CLAIMS: A prior art reference must be considered in its entirety, i.e., as a whole, including portions that would lead away from the claimed invention. W.L. Gore & Associates, Inc. v. Garlock, Inc., 721 F.2d 1540, 220 USPQ 303 (Fed. Cir. 1983), cert, denied, 469 U.S. 851 (1984). See also MPEP §2123.
In addition, disclosures in a reference must be evaluated for what they would fairly teach one of ordinary skill in the art. See In re Snow, 471 F.2d 1400, 176 USPQ 328 (CCPA 1973) and In re Boe, 355 F.2d 961, 148 USPQ 507 (CCPA 1966). Specifically, in considering the teachings of a reference, it is proper to take into account not only the specific teachings of the reference, but also the inferences that one skilled in the art would reasonably have been expected to draw from the reference. See In re Freda, 401 F.2d 825, 159 USPQ 342 (CCPA 1968) and In re Shepard, 319 F.2d 194, 138 USPQ 148 (CCPA 1963). Likewise, it is proper to take into consideration not only the teachings of the prior art, but also the level of ordinary skill in the art. See In re Luck, 476 F.2d 650, 177 USPQ 523 (CCPA 1973). Specifically, those of ordinary skill in the art are presumed to have some knowledge of the art apart from what is expressly disclosed in the references. See In re Jacoby, 309 F.2d 513, 135 USPQ 317 (CCPA 1962).
Response Guidelines
6.1 A shortened statutory period for response to this non-final action is set to expire 3 (three) months and 0 (zero) days from the date of this letter. Unless the applicant is notified in writing that a reply is required in less than six months (see the shortened response period previously noted), a maximum period of six months is allowed, if a petition for an extension of time and the fee set in § 1.17(a) are filed (see MPEP 710 and 35 U.S.C. 133). Failure to respond within the required period for response will cause the application to become abandoned (see MPEP 710.02, 710.02(b)).
6.2 Any response to the Examiner in regard to this non-final action should be
directed to: Russell Frejd, telephone number (571) 272-3779, Monday-Friday from 0730 to
1600 ET. If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful,
please contact the examiner’s supervisor, Peter Nolan, who can be reached at
(571) 270-7016.
mailed to: Commissioner of Patents and Trademarks
P.O. Box 1450, Alexandria, VA 22313-1450
faxed to: (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.
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.
Hand-delivered responses should be brought to the Customer Service Window, Randolph Building, 401 Dulany Street, Alexandria, VA, 22314.
/RUSSELL FREJD/
Primary Examiner AU 3661