Response to Amendment
This action is responsive to applicant’s amendment and remarks received on 10/24/2025. Claims 1-20 have been presented for examination. Claims 2, 4 and 19 have been amended. Claims 1-20 have been examined.
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.
Claims 1-5, 7-8, 10-11, and 14-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over O’Brien (Pub. No.: 2019/0066047 A1) in view of Juhasz (Pub. No.: 2020/0196788 A1).
1) In regard to claim 1, O’Brien discloses the claimed device (figs.1-3: discloses as a UAV) for tracking a portable product (fig. 1: 190) comprising:
a securing means for physically associating the portable product with the device, the securing means comprising a receptacle for the portable product (fig. 1: 105 discloses as a cargo receptacle),
wherein the receptacle is configured to fully enclose the portable product and the securing means further comprise retaining means configured to securely hold the portable product in the receptacle (¶0038 discloses the product is loaded in the cargo receptacle);
a sensor system (fig. 1: 114) comprising one or more of: a sensor configured to measure environmental conditions or a motion sensor (¶0045);
a control module (fig. 3: 304) comprising a processor (fig.3: 306) and a cellular network transceiver (fig. 3: 312), wherein the control module is connected to the sensor system (fig. 3: 302) and wherein the processor is configured to:
determine location information indicative of a location of the device, using cellular information received from a cellular network using the cellular network transceiver (¶0048); and
transmit a status message via the cellular network to a remote server, using the cellular network transceiver, the status message comprising one or more of the following: the location information, sensor system information from the sensor system, (¶0048).
O’Brien does not explicitly disclose a tamper detector configured to detect whether the portable product is physically associated with the device; control module is connected to the tamper detector, and the tamper information indicating whether the portable product is associated with the device.
However, Juhasz discloses it has been known for a device used to track a product to include a tamper detector configured to detect whether the portable product is physically associated with the device (¶0120), control module is connected to the tamper detector (fig. 1: 130 and 120), and the tamper information indicating whether the portable product is associated with the device (¶0104-¶0105).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the claimed invention was filed to allow the device of O’Brien to utilize a tamper detector to monitor the product, as taught by Juhasz.
One skilled in the art would be motivated to modify O’Brien as described above in order to prevent theft of a package, as taught by Juhasz (¶0004).
2) In regard to claim 2 (dependent on claim 1), O’Brien and Juhasz further disclose the device of claim 1, wherein the securing means comprise an attachment mechanism for securely attaching the device to the portable product, wherein the device is portable (O’Brien fig. 1 discloses a locked receptacle, ¶0015 discloses the UAV may be vehicle-mounted).
3) In regard to claim 3 (dependent on claim 1), O’Brien and Juhasz further disclose the device of claim 1, wherein the securing means comprises a receptacle for the portable product (O’Brien fig. 1), wherein the tamper detector comprises a presence detector configured to detect whether the portable product is located in the receptacle (Juhasz ¶0105).
4) In regard to claim 4 (dependent on claim 3), O’Brien and Juhasz further disclose the device of claim 3, wherein the presence detector comprises one or more of: a light detector configured to detect a change in light levels inside the receptacle, a change in light levels being indicative of the portable product being removed from the device, or a switch configured to detect whether the pharmaceutical product is removed from the receptacle (O’Brien ¶0045 discloses the device may have a weight sensor).
5) In regard to claim 5 (dependent on claim 1), O’Brien and Juhasz further disclose the device of claim 2, wherein the sensor system comprises one or more of: a temperature sensor or a humidity sensor (O’Brien ¶0045), and wherein the processor is further configured to determine whether environmental conditions are within pre-determined environmental condition thresholds and to transmit, as part of the status message, an environmental condition alarm message if the environmental conditions are not within the pre-determined environmental condition thresholds (O’Brien ¶0045 discloses the status message includes the temperature of the products).
6) In regard to claim 7 (dependent on claim 1), O’Brien and Juhasz further disclose the device of claim 1, wherein the motion sensor comprises an accelerometer configured to measure a movement signal of the device, wherein the processor is further configured to receive, from the accelerometer, the movement signal; determine, using the movement signal, whether the device is moving (Juhasz ¶0059).
O’Brien and Juhasz does not explicitly disclose transmit a plurality of status messages, using the cellular network transceiver, with a first pre-determined wait period between successive status messages if the device is not moving and with a second pre-determined wait period between successive status messages if the device is moving, wherein the first pre-determined wait period is longer than the second pre-determined wait period.
However, official notice is taken by the examiner that both the concept and advantage is known for a monitoring device to stagger messages based on the movement of the device.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the claimed invention was filed to allow the device of O’Brien to transmit messages at different times based on the movement of the device.
One skilled in the art would be motivated to modify O’Brien as described above in order to increase the efficiency of the device by allowing the device to conserve energy from only sending messages when the device detects it has moved from one location to another.
7) In regard to claim 8 (dependent on claim 1), O’Brien and Juhasz further disclose the device of claim1, wherein the control module comprises a memory and the processor is further configured to record a log file entry to the memory, the log file entry comprising one or more of the following: the sensor system information, the tamper detector information, or the location information (O’Brien ¶0018).
8) In regard to claim 10 (dependent on claim 1), O’Brien and Juhasz further disclose the device of claim 1, further comprising a battery connected to the control module (O’Brien fig. 3: 320)
O’Brien and Juhasz do not explicitly disclose the processor is configured to receive a battery level indicator, indicative of a remaining battery level of the battery; and transmit, as part of the status message, the battery level indicator.
However, official notice is taken by the examiner that both the concept and advantage is known for a monitoring device to have an indicator to indicate the battery level of the device and report the battery level.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the claimed invention was filed to allow the device of O’Brien to utilize a battery indicator to provide an indication of the battery level.
One skilled in the art would be motivated to modify O’Brien and Juhasz as described above in order to provide an indication to a user of the device the current battery level and whether the device needs to be charged.
9) In regard to claim 11 (dependent on claim 10), O’Brien and Juhasz further disclose the device of claim 10.
O’Brien and Juhasz do not explicitly disclose an inductive charging circuit connected to the battery configured to receive electrical energy for charging the battery.
However, official notice is taken by the examiner that both the concept and advantage is known for a monitoring device to utilize an inductive charging circuit for charging the battery of the device.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the claimed invention was filed to allow the monitoring device to use an inductive charging circuity for charging the battery.
One skilled in the art would be motivated to modify O’Brien as described above in order to use a known charging device for charging a battery.
10) In regard to claim 14 (dependent on claim 1), O’Brien and Juhasz further disclose the device of one of claim 1.
O’Brien and Juhasz do not explicitly disclose the processor is further configured to: receive, using the cellular network transceiver from the remote server, a product identification number; store, in the memory, the product identification number; and transmit the status message including the product identification number.
However, official notice is taken by the examiner that both the concept and advantage is known for a monitoring device product to be assigned a product identification number.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the claimed invention was filed to allow the device of O’Brien to receive and transmit a product identification number.
One skilled in the art would be motivated to modify O’Brien as described above in order to allow the server to know which device is communicating information to the server and to be able to track the product.
11) In regard to claim 15 (dependent on claim 1), O’Brien and Juhasz further disclose the device of one of claim 1, wherein the cellular network transceiver comprises one or more of: a narrowband Internet of things module or an enhanced General Packet Radio Service module (O’Brien ¶0016).
12) In regard to claim 16 (dependent on claim 1), O’Brien and Juhasz further disclose the device of claim 1.
O’Brien and Juhasz do not explicitly disclose wherein the control module further comprises an electronic SIM module storing a plurality of connectivity profiles and the processor is further configured to: activate a particular connectivity profile depending on the cellular information received from the cellular network, and transmit the status message using the particular connectivity profile.
However, official notice is taken by the examiner that both the concept and advantage is known for a monitoring device to use a sim module to store a plurality of connectivity profiles and activate one of the profiles based on a message received from the network.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the claimed invention was filed to allow the device of O’Brien to store a plurality of profiles on a sim module and allow the device to communicate with one of the profiles over the communication network.
One skilled in the art would be motivated to modify O’Brien as described above in order to allow the device to handle multiple products at one time, thereby, increasing the overall efficiency of the device.
13) In regard to claim 17 (dependent on claim 1), O’Brien and Juhasz further disclose the device of one of claim 1, wherein the processor is further configured to determine, using the cellular information received from the cellular network, cellular station identification information of one or more cellular stations to which the cellular network transceiver is connected, wherein the cellular station identification information relates to one or more of the following: a geographic location of the particular cellular station or a signal strength of a transmission received from the particular cellular station (its inherent a cellular station identification is associated with a location of the cellular network transceiver).
14) In regard to claim 18 (dependent on claim 1), O’Brien and Juhasz further disclose the device of one of claim 1.
O’Brien and Juhasz do not explicitly disclose wherein the processor is configured to
determine, using the cellular information received from the cellular network, whether the cellular network supports a low-power wide-area network protocol, in particular a narrowband Internet of Things protocol;
transmit the status message using the low-power wide-area network protocol if the cellular network supports the low-power wide-area network protocol; and
transmit the status message using a short message service of the cellular network if the cellular network does not support the low-power wide-area network protocol.
However, official notice is taken by the examiner that both the concept and advantage is known for a monitoring device to a finite number of protocols for communicating over a communication network.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the claimed invention was filed to allow the device of O’Brien to communicate over the cellular network with a specific communication protocol based off of the protocol available to communicate via said network.
One skilled in the art would be motivated to modify O’Brien as described above in order to use one of many communication techniques for communicating information via a network.
15) In regard to claim 19 (dependent on claim 1), O’Brien and Juhasz further disclose the device of claim 1.
O’Brien and Juhasz do not explicitly disclose wherein the memory is configured to store a private key and the processor is further configured to digitally sign the status message using the private key and to transmit the status message, via the cellular network, to a node of a distributed system.
However, official notice is taken by the examiner that both the concept and advantage is known for a monitoring device memory to store a private key and transmitted with the status message.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the claimed invention was filed to allow the monitoring device of O’Brien to use a system such as Blockchain for communicating securely with a digital key.
One skilled in the art would be motivated to modify O’Brien as described above in order to use an encryption technique for allowing communication to be secured.
16) In regard to claim 20 (dependent on claim 1), O’Brien and Juhasz further disclose the device of claim 1, wherein the processor is further configured to receive, via the cellular network, a release message from the remote server, and wherein the device is configured to disengage the securing means upon reception of the release message (Juhasz ¶0097).
Claims 6 and 9 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over O’Brien (Pub. No.: 2019/0066047 A1) in view of Juhasz (Pub. No.: 2020/0196788 A1) and further in view of Scarso (Pub. No.: 2023/0215252 A1).
1) In regard to claim 6 (dependent on claim 1), O’Brien and Juhasz further disclose the device of claim 1.
O’Brien and Juhasz do not explicitly disclose the sensor system comprises a barometric pressure sensor configured to measure an atmospheric pressure, the processor being further configured to: determine whether the device is airborne by detecting a drop in the atmospheric pressure below a pre-determined barometric pressure threshold, and deactivate the cellular network transceiver while the device is airborne.
However, Scarso discloses it has been known for a monitoring device to determine whether a device is airborne, and deactivating a cellular network transceiver while the device is airborne (Scarso ¶0081).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the claimed invention was filed to allow the device of O’Brien to deactivate the cellular transceiver when the device detects it is airborne, as taught by Scarso.
One skilled in the art would be motivated to modify O’Brien as described above in order to be able to travel in compliance with regulations, as taught by Scarso (¶0081).
2) In regard to claim 9 (dependent on claim 8), O’Brien and Juhasz further disclose the device of claim 8.
O’Brien and Juhasz do not explicitly disclose the processor is further configured to: determine whether the cellular network transceiver is connected to the cellular network, designate currently recorded log file entries as unsent if the cellular network transceiver is not connected to the cellular network, and transmit the unsent log file entries as part of one or more status messages, once the cellular network transceiver reconnects to the cellular network.
However, Scarso discloses it has been known for a monitoring device processor to determine whether the cellular network transceiver is connected to the cellular network, designate currently recorded log file entries as unsent if the cellular network transceiver is not connected to the cellular network, and transmit the unsent log file entries as part of one or more status messages, once the cellular network transceiver reconnects to the cellular network (¶0082).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the claimed invention was filed to allow the device of O’Brien to transmit data once communication is reestablished, as taught by Scarso.
One skilled in the art would be motivated to modify O’Brien as described above in order to transmit an updated report to the server so the server can be updated.
Response to Amendment
Applicant's arguments filed on 10/24/2025 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
As to claim 1, on pages 9 of applicant’s response, applicant argues:
“Applicants contend that O'Brien also fails to teach that the control module is configured to determine location information indicative of a location of the device using cellular information received from a cellular network using the cellular network transceiver. The Office cites para. [0048] of O'Brien as teaching this feature. (Action, p. 4). However, the relied upon para. [0048] in O'Brien describes location data which can include, for example OPS coordinates of the UAV, and discloses communicating via a cellular network, but not using the cellular network for determining the UAV location.”
The examiner respectfully disagrees with applicant’s argument, because O’Brien ¶0048 discloses location data may be a marker data or way point data. The action was taking the position it is known for a way point or marker data being one of a cellular tower. Hence, during the flight path of the UAV the UAV can determine and transmit when it is near a cellular tower and transmit this information to be used to determine the UAV location. Thus, applicant arguments are not persuasive and the rejection is maintained.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 12 and 13 are objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
Conclusion
THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a).
A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of the advisory action. In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the mailing date of this final action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to CURTIS J KING whose telephone number is (571)270-5160. The examiner can normally be reached Mon-Fri 6:00 - 2:00 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, Quan-Zhen Wang can be reached at 571-272-3114. 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.
/CURTIS J KING/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2685