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 .
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 and 5-20 are 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.
As indicated in the previously issued Office Action, regarding claim 6, the term “other” renders the claim indefinite because the claim includes elements not actually disclosed (those encompassed by “other”), thereby rendering the exact scope of the claim unascertainable. Please review/revise/clarify.
As indicated in the previously issued Office Action, claim 12 recites the limitation "the movement” (of the animal). There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
The term “approximately” in claims 1 and 19-20 is a relative term which renders the claim indefinite. The term “approximately” is not defined by the claim, the specification does not provide a standard for ascertaining the requisite degree, and one of ordinary skill in the art would not be reasonably apprised of the scope of the invention.
Claims 5, 7-11 and 13-18 are rejected as depending (directly or indirectly) from rejected independent claim 1.
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 and 5-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over U.S. Patent Application Publication No. 2022/0200519 to Biffert et al. (“Biffert”) in view of U.S. Patent No. 4,937,822 to Weddle et al. (“Weddle”).
Regarding claim 1, Biffert discloses a system (e.g. livestock management system 10, as discussed at para. 40) for monitoring animal activity (para. 11), the system (10) comprising: i) an animal tag (20, as shown in figs. 1A-D and discussed at para. 40) having a tag identifier (e.g. indicia or markings allowing tag 20 to be identified, as discussed at para. 63), the animal tag (20) attached to (fig. 2) an animal (e.g. livestock 12, as shown in fig. 2 and discussed at para. 40) to generate (para. 6) animal data packets (e.g. processed data discussed at para. 6) comprising timestamped (per para. 47, determinations can be made based on time) location data (para. 3 and 6) having tag latitudinal and longitudinal coordinates (para. 99), and timestamped (per para. 47, determinations can be made based on time) activity data relating to activity (para. 3 and 7) of the animal (12) over a window of time (para. 56), a) wherein the animal tag (20) comprises an accelerometer (e.g. three-axis accelerometer 52, as shown in fig. 3 and discussed at para. 81), and b) wherein the accelerometer (52) is configured to constantly record movement data (per para. 85, accelerometer 52 provides data regarding movement of tag 20, and thus, movement of livestock 12); and ii) a processor (50, as shown in fig. 3 and discussed at para. 81) configured to evaluate (per para. 189, the tag 20 can perform an evaluation of current or historical livestock activity; note that processor 50 will contribute to this evaluation) the animal data packets (aforementioned data discussed at para. 6) to determine an activity classification (i.e. “determining livestock behavior”, as discussed at para. 3) for the animal (12) wearing (fig. 2) the animal tag (20) over the window of time (para. 56), wherein the processor (50) and memory (per para. 81 and fig. 3, processor 50 contains a memory component therein) store animal data (para. 81) and the animal data packets (aforementioned data discussed at para. 6).
Biffert does not disclose the processor (50) arranging the movement data (aforementioned para. 85 data regarding movement of the livestock) in approximately 5 second packets.
Weddle teaches the concept of providing data in approximately 5 second packets (col. 8, lines 18-21).
Given that Biffert and Weddle both concern systems in which information travels between transmitters and receivers, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to apply the Weddle 5 second data packet teachings to the Biffert system, in order to provide the benefit of yielding a resultant Biffert livestock management system that gathers and evaluates information in an optimally up-to-date manner.
Regarding claim 5, Biffert in view of Weddle discloses the system according to claim 1, wherein the activity classification (aforementioned “determining livestock behavior” in Biffert para. 3) includes behavioral data (Biffert para. 3) indicative of a behavior (Biffert para. 3) of the animal (Biffert 12) at one or more points in time during the window of time (Biffert para. 56) or across an entirety of the window of time (Biffert para. 56).
Regarding claim 6, Biffert in view of Weddle discloses the system according to claim 5, wherein the behavioral data (Biffert para. 3) indicative of the behavior (Biffert para. 3) of the animal (Biffert 12) at one or more points in time during the window of time (Biffert para. 56) or across the entirety of the window of time (Biffert para. 56) is classified as one of: walking (i.e. ambulation, per Biffert para. 42); resting (Biffert para. 42); grazing (i.e. eating, per Biffert para. 42); ruminating (Biffert para. 42); drinking (Biffert para. 42); and other (i.e. breeding, per Biffert para. 42).
Regarding claim 7, Biffert in view of Weddle discloses the system according to claim 5, wherein the activity classification (aforementioned “determining livestock behavior” in Biffert para. 3) further comprises pasture intake data (e.g. livestock intake, as discussed at Biffert para. 127), wherein the processor (Biffert 50) evaluates (Biffert para. 189) the animal data packets (aforementioned data discussed at Biffert para. 6) to determine the activity classification (aforementioned “determining livestock behavior” in Biffert para. 3) including the pasture intake data (aforementioned livestock intake, as discussed at Biffert para. 127) including an estimate of pasture intake (e.g. estimate of amount of grazing material consumed, as discussed at Biffert para. 262) determined based on the behavioral data (Biffert para. 3) for the animal (Biffert 12) associated with (Biffert fig. 2) the animal tag (Biffert 20).
Regarding claim 8, Biffert in view of Weddle discloses the system according to claim 6, wherein the estimate of pasture intake (e.g. estimate of amount of grazing material consumed, as discussed at Biffert para. 262) is determined based on behavioral data classified as grazing (Biffert para. 262).
Regarding claim 9, Biffert in view of Weddle discloses the system according to claim 1, wherein the animal tag (Biffert 20) generates timestamped (per Biffert para. 47, determinations can be made based on time) location data (Biffert para. 3) having tag latitudinal and longitudinal coordinates (Biffert para. 99) and timestamped (per Biffert para. 47, determinations can be made based on time) activity data relating to activity (Biffert para. 3) of the animal (Biffert 12) multiple times (i.e. “masses of data”, as discussed at Biffert para. 56) over the window of time (Biffert para. 56).
Regarding claim 10, Biffert in view of Weddle discloses the system according to claim 1, wherein the animal tag (Biffert 20) generates timestamped (per Biffert para. 47, determinations can be made based on time) location data (Biffert para. 3) having tag latitudinal and longitudinal coordinates (Biffert para. 99) and timestamped (per Biffert para. 47, determinations can be made based on time) activity data relating to activity (Biffert para. 3) of the animal (Biffert 12) at predetermined intervals (Biffert para. 119) over the window of time (Biffert para. 56).
Regarding claim 11, Biffert in view of Weddle discloses the system according to claim 1, wherein evaluating (Biffert para. 170) the animal data packets (aforementioned data discussed at Biffert para. 6) to determine the activity classification (aforementioned “determining livestock behavior” in Biffert para. 3)for the animal (Biffert 12) wearing (Biffert fig. 2) the animal tag (Biffert 20) over the window of time (Biffert para. 56) comprises determining a plurality of activity classifications (aforementioned “determining livestock behavior” in Biffert para. 3, and content of para. 42) for the animal (Biffert 12) wearing (Biffert fig. 2) the animal tag (Biffert 20), wherein each activity classification is associated with a sub-period (Biffert para. 85-88) of the window of time (Biffert para. 56).
Regarding claim 12, Biffert in view of Weddle discloses the system according to claim 1, wherein the timestamped (per Biffert para. 47, determinations can be made based on time) activity data relating to activity (Biffert para. 3) of the animal (Biffert 12) over a window of time (Biffert para. 56) comprises at least one of a temperature (Biffert para. 6) of the animal (Biffert 12) or the animal tag (Biffert 20) and the movement data (aforementioned Biffert para. 85 data regarding movement of the livestock) relating to the movement (Biffert para. 42) of the animal (Biffert 12).
Regarding claim 13, Biffert in view of Weddle discloses the system according to claim 1, wherein the processor (Biffert 50) is further configured to calculate a pasture performance value (e.g. usage value of pasturage, as discussed at Biffert para. 54) of a paddock or an area (e.g. area under management, as discussed at Biffert para. 5) associated with the animal (Biffert 12) based on the animal data packets (aforementioned data discussed at Biffert para. 6) and activity classification (aforementioned “determining livestock behavior” in Biffert para. 3) received from at least one of the animal tag (Biffert 20) or geofence data (e.g. determination of whether livestock is within geo-fence discussed at Biffert para. 126) associated with (Biffert para. 126) the animal tag (Biffert 20), wherein the paddock or the area (aforementioned area under management) associated with the animal (Biffert 12) is derived from the location data (Biffert para. 3) received from the animal tag (Biffert 20), wherein calculating the pasture performance value (aforementioned usage value of pasturage) based on the animal data packets (aforementioned data discussed at Biffert para. 6) received from the animal tag (Biffert 20) comprises evaluating (Biffert para. 189) the animal data packets (aforementioned data discussed at Biffert para. 6) for each timestamp (per Biffert para. 47, determinations can be made based on time) to determine the activity classification (aforementioned “determining livestock behavior” in Biffert para. 3) for the animal (Biffert 12) wearing (Biffert fig. 2) the animal tag (Biffert 20).
Regarding claim 14, Biffert in view of Weddle discloses the system according to claim 7, wherein the processor (Biffert 50) is further configured to evaluate (Biffert para. 189) the pasture intake data (aforementioned livestock intake, as discussed at Biffert para. 127) to determine methane production data (per Biffert para. 97, a gas gauge may be utilized) including estimates of methane production (e.g. gas calculated by aforementioned gas gauge) for the animal (Biffert 12) associated with (Biffert fig. 2) the animal tag (Biffert 20).
Regarding claim 15, Biffert in view of Weddle discloses the system according to claim 1, wherein, the system (Biffert 10) comprises a plurality (Biffert written abstract) of animal tags (Biffert 20), each animal tag (Biffert 20) being attached to (Biffert fig. 2) a unique animal (Biffert 12) to generate timestamped (per Biffert para. 47, determinations can be made based on time) animal data packets (aforementioned data discussed at Biffert para. 6) comprising location data (Biffert para. 3) having tag latitudinal and longitudinal coordinates (Biffert para. 99) and activity data relating to activity (Biffert para. 3) of the animal (Biffert 12).
Regarding claim 16, Biffert in view of Weddle discloses the system according to claim 1, wherein the system (Biffert 10) further comprises applying a trained machine learning model (e.g. machine learning or artificial intelligence model discussed at Biffert para. 56) to animal data packets (aforementioned data discussed at Biffert para. 6) and evaluating (Biffert para. 189) the animal data packets (aforementioned data discussed at Biffert para. 6) to determine the activity classification (aforementioned “determining livestock behavior” in Biffert para. 3) for the animal (Biffert 12) wearing (Biffert fig. 2) the animal tag (Biffert 20) over the window of time (Biffert para. 56) comprises evaluating (Biffert para. 189) the animal data packets (aforementioned data discussed at Biffert para. 6) with a trained machine learning model (aforementioned machine learning or artificial intelligence model) to determine at least one of the activity classification (aforementioned “determining livestock behavior” in Biffert para. 3) or a pasture performance value (e.g. usage value of pasturage, as discussed at Biffert para. 54).
Regarding claim 17, Biffert in view of Weddle discloses the system according to claim 1, wherein the processor (Biffert 50) of the system (Biffert 10) for monitoring (Biffert para. 11) livestock (e.g. livestock discussed at Biffert para. 11) in an area (e.g. area under management, as discussed at Biffert para. 5) is further configured to generate an alert (Biffert para. 7) when the activity classification (aforementioned “determining livestock behavior” in Biffert para. 3) exceeds a threshold value or is outside of a threshold range (Biffert para. 54).
Regarding claim 18, Biffert in view of Weddle discloses the system according to claim 1, wherein the system further comprises an image of an area (e.g. surface map or topographical map discussed at Biffert para. 229) comprising one or more paddocks (e.g. small plot of land discussed at Biffert para. 187) having area latitudinal and longitudinal coordinates (Biffert para. 99) and the processor (Biffert 50) is further configured to: i) apply a tag overlay applicator so that each tag (Biffert 20) is graphically represented on the image of the area (aforementioned surface map or topographical map of Biffert para. 229) on a display (Biffert 152, as discussed at para. 229) at the corresponding latitudinal and longitudinal coordinates (per Biffert para. 229, the management system platform 140 can include mapping software) received from the animal data packets (Biffert para. 229); and ii) allocate to each graphically represented tag: a) a label comprising the tag identifier (aforementioned indicia or markings allowing Biffert tag 20 to be identified); b) the location data (Biffert para. 229); and c) activity data (e.g. location, per Biffert para. 229) relating to the animal (Biffert 12).
Regarding claim 19, Biffert discloses a method (para. 168 and 339-340) for monitoring animal activity (para. 11) comprising: i) evaluating (per para. 189, the tag 20 can perform an evaluation of current or historical livestock activity; note that processor 50 will contribute to this evaluation) animal data (e.g. data discussed at para. 6) comprising a tag identifier (e.g. indicia or markings allowing tag 20 to be identified, as discussed at para. 63) for an animal tag (20, as shown in figs. 1A-D and discussed at para. 40) attached to (fig. 2) an animal (e.g. livestock 12, as shown in fig. 2 and discussed at para. 40) to generate animal data packets (e.g. processed data discussed at para. 6) comprising timestamped (per para. 47, determinations can be made based on time) location data (para. 3) having tag latitudinal and longitudinal coordinates (para. 99) and timestamped (per para. 47, determinations can be made based on time) activity data relating to activity (para. 3 and 7) of the animal (12) over a window of time (para. 56); and ii) determining an activity classification (i.e. “determining livestock behavior”, as discussed at para. 3) for the animal (12) wearing (fig. 2) the animal tag (20) over the window of time (para. 56), iii) wherein the animal tag (20) comprises an accelerometer (e.g. three-axis accelerometer 52, as shown in fig. 3 and discussed at para. 81), iv) wherein the accelerometer (52) is configured to constantly record movement data (per para. 85, accelerometer 52 provides data regarding movement of tag 20, and thus, movement of livestock 12), and v) wherein the processor (50) and memory (per para. 81 and fig. 3, processor 50 contains a memory component therein) store animal data (para. 81) and the animal data packets (aforementioned data discussed at para. 6).
Biffert does not disclose the processor (50) arranging the movement data (aforementioned para. 85 data regarding movement of the livestock) in approximately 5 second packets.
Weddle teaches the concept of providing data in approximately 5 second packets (col. 8, lines 18-21).
For the reasons set forth in the rejection of claim 1, supra, it would have been obvious to apply the Weddle 5 second data packet teachings to the Biffert system.
Regarding claim 20, Biffert discloses an animal tag (20, as shown in figs. 1A-D and discussed at para. 40) attachable to (fig. 2) an animal (e.g. livestock 12, as shown in fig. 2 and discussed at para. 40) for monitoring (para. 11) and classifying animal activity (i.e. “determining livestock behavior”, as discussed at para. 3), the animal tag (20) having a tag identifier (e.g. indicia or markings allowing tag 20 to be identified, as discussed at para. 63) and a processor (50, as shown in fig. 3 and discussed at para. 81) configured to: i) generate animal data packets (e.g. processed data discussed at para. 6) comprising timestamped (per para. 47, determinations can be made based on time) location data (para. 3) having tag latitudinal and longitudinal coordinates (para. 99) and timestamped (per para. 47, determinations can be made based on time) activity data relating to activity (para. 3 and 7) of the animal (12) over a window of time (para. 56); and ii) evaluate (per para. 189, the tag 20 can perform an evaluation of current or historical livestock activity; note that processor 50 will contribute to this evaluation) the animal data packets (aforementioned data discussed at para. 6) to determine an activity classification (i.e. “determining livestock behavior”, as discussed at para. 3) for the animal (12) wearing (fig. 2) the animal tag (20) over the window of time (para. 56), a) wherein the animal tag (20) comprises an accelerometer (e.g. three-axis accelerometer 52, as shown in fig. 3 and discussed at para. 81), b) wherein the accelerometer (52) is configured to constantly record movement data (per para. 85, accelerometer 52 provides data regarding movement of tag 20, and thus, movement of livestock 12), and c) wherein the processor (50) and memory (per para. 81 and fig. 3, processor 50 contains a memory component therein) store animal data (para. 81) and the animal data packets (aforementioned data discussed at para. 6).
Biffert does not disclose the processor (50) arranging the movement data (aforementioned para. 85 data regarding movement of the livestock) in approximately 5 second packets.
Weddle teaches the concept of providing data in approximately 5 second packets (col. 8, lines 18-21).
For the reasons set forth in the rejection of claim 1, supra, it would have been obvious to apply the Weddle 5 second data packet teachings to the Biffert system.
Response to Arguments
In response to Applicant’s claim amendments, a further search of the pertinent areas of prior art was executed. Within said search, the aforementioned Weddle reference was identified. Accordingly, Applicant’s arguments have been considered, but are moot because the new ground of rejection relies on a combination not applied in the prior rejection of record.
Conclusion
Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a). 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 JUSTIN V LEWIS whose telephone number is (571)270-5052. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 7:30AM-5:00PM.
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, Daniel J. Troy can be reached at (571) 270-3742. 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.
/JUSTIN V LEWIS/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3637
Prosecution Insights