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 .
This action is in response to applicant’s amendment/arguments filed on 08/11/2026. Claims 8, 10, 15, 17-21 and 23-30 have been cancelled. Claims 1 and 22 have been amended. Currently, claims 1-7, 9, 11-14, 16, 22 and 31-33 are pending. This action is made FINAL.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments/amendments with respect to amended claim 1 have been considered but are moot in view of the new ground(s) of rejection.
Response to Amendments
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 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.
This application currently names joint inventors. In considering patentability of the claims the examiner presumes that the subject matter of the various claims was commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the claimed invention(s) absent any evidence to the contrary. Applicant is advised of the obligation under 37 CFR 1.56 to point out the inventor and effective filing dates of each claim that was not commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the later invention in order for the examiner to consider the applicability of 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(C) for any potential 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) prior art against the later invention.
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 set forth in Graham v. John Deere Co., 383 U.S. 1, 148 USPQ 459 (1966), that are applied 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.
Claims 1-6, 9, 12, 22 and 31-33 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Moore et al. (US 20090289776 A1) in view of Bartling et al. (US 20140075232 A1).
Consider claim 1, Moore discloses a device (read industrial RFID tag 2104 (102) mounted on a shipping container, figures 1 and 23, par [0102] and [0473]), comprising,
a microcontroller (read as data processing and controller 132, which functions as the RF network node’s central processing unit and includes program storage, sequential logic and data bus interface, figure 1, par [0101]);
an antenna for capturing power during one or more energy harvesting cycles, the power being transferred to a power storage of the device (read as antenna 108 receiving an RF carrier during a read cycle, power management 130 harvesting, rectifying and filtering the carrier power, and a power storage facility containing capacitors, a battery or both that receives and stores the harvested power, figures 1 and 4, par [0083], [0088]-[0089] and [0185])
and the microcontroller is configured to perform processing for a task that samples a sensor of the device and processes data to identify a condition of a package to which the device is attached (read as data processing and controller 132 gathering sensor reading, and industrial RFID tag 2104 on packaging or shipping container monitors sensor 138, compares the sensor values with stored limits, and transmits a status or warning identifying shock, temperature or another environment conditions; additionally, in its food monitoring application, a sensor on the military RFID tag 2114, which provides environmental information for processing the condition of the tagged item, figures 1, 23 and 27, par [0102], [0471]-[0473] and [0540]),
wherein as the package moves along one or more geolocations, the device uses additional captured power from one or more energy harvesting cycles to continue to process said task to sample the sensor and process data to identify the condition of the package (read as antenna 108 and power management 130 harvesting RF carrier power, while periodic reader interrogations provides power for the tag to assess monitored conditions; as the tagged package moves from a warehouse to a distribution site and between truck, rail, ship and air transportation, reader networks activate industrial RFID tag 2104, which reads sensor 138 data, compares the readings with parameter limits and assesses the package condition; these additional powered interrogation cycles continues the sensor and condition processing as the package moves through physical locations, figures 1 and 23, par [0083], [0464], [0466] and [0469]-[0470]);
a persistent memory, wherein the device operates in a persistent manner and the persistent memory is used to save a processing state of the microcontroller (read as data processing and controller 132 with volatile or non-volatile memory for state functions and persistence 124 with selective memory cells retaining a flag register that represents the operational or sequential state of an ongoing process while carrier power is absent, which maintains operational continuity through a brief interruption, figure 1, par [0086] and [0101]);
wherein, during a subsequent activation cycle using RF-harvested power, the microcontroller continues performance of a previously started function based on the saved processing state (read as RFID tag 102 powering up when ambient electromagnetic energy provides RF power and persistence 124 retaining the operational or sequential state of the ongoing processor until stable power is reestablished; the retained state and maintained operation continuity corresponds to data processing and controller 132 continuing a previously started operation from the retained processing state after a brief power interruption, figures 1 and 11, par [0086] and [0283]);
wherein the data identifying the condition is processed each time responsive to the power storage of the device having an amount of power so that the microcontroller proceeds to perform the processing of the task (read as harvested power stored in the power storage facility, RF network nodes determining the power required for a reader command from power received from that facility, and power management 130 powering data processing and controller 132 when sufficient power is available; during each powered periodic interrogation, the tag reads sensor 138 data, compares the readings with parameter limits and assesses the monitored condition; together, all these teachings correspond to processing the condition data each time the stored harvested power is sufficient for the controller to perform the task, figures 1, 4 and 23, par [0089], [0185], [0464] and [0466]);
a transmitter for communicating the data over a network to a remote compute (read as modulator 128 and antenna 108 transmitting the tag’s data return message to reader 140, followed by reader 140 transferring the data through network interface 1702, network 152 and computer service 202 to application server 148 (i.e. remote compute), with reader 140 serving as an intermediary between the tag transmitter and the remote compute, figures 1 and 17, par [0079], [0081] and [0344]);
wherein said power is captured from an ambient radio-frequency (RF) frequency, and said communicating of the data to the remote compute is processed via backscatter using a standards-based channel (read as RFID tag 102 powering from ambient electromagnetic waves and separately identifies the energy received through antenna 108 as an incoming radio frequency signal, the tag’s return message transmitted on a backscattered carrier wave, while data processing and controller 132 supports the Gen2 standard governing the tag-to-reader interface (i.e. standard-based channel); reader 140 then transfers (communicating) the tag data through network 152 and computer service 202 to application server 148 (i.e. remote compute), figures 1, 11 and 17, par [0079], [0083], [0105], [0283] and [0384]).
However, Moore discloses the claimed invention above and persistence 124 retained in non-volatile memory in the operational or sequential state of the ongoing processing and maintaining continuity through carrier interruption (par [0086]) but does not specifically disclose the persistent memory is used to save the processing state of the microcontroller between two or more of said energy harvesting cycles; and during a subsequent activation cycle, the microcontroller continues performance of a previously started function of said task based on the saved processing state.
Nonetheless, Bartling discloses a micro-control unit (MCU) implemented with nonvolatile logic and non-volatile logic (NVL) element arrays 1710 (persistent memory) that stores its machine state across a series of power interruptions; after power returns, the stored state is recovered, the processing device clocks are released and processing device 1700 resumes operations from the machine state that existed before the interruption, figures 17 and 18, par [0025], [0117] and [0125]).
Therefore, it would have been obvious for a person with ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to incorporate the teachings of Bartling into the teachings of Moore, to configure the data processing and controller 132 and persistence 124 using Bartling’s micro-control unit (MCU) implemented nonvolatile machine state storage and restoration, in order to preserve the state of Moore’s processing of sensor data for package conditions during intermittent RF power loss and resume that processing without consuming limited harvested energy for rest and reboot (see par [0025] and [0027] of Bartling).
Consider claim 2, as applied to claim 1 above, Moore, as modified by Bartling, discloses wherein the ambient radio-frequency (RF) frequency is present proximate to the device at one or more of said geolocations when the package is moved (read as RFID tag 102 powering up from an ambient electromagnetic wave and passing through a reader region in which an activating RF carrier wave is present within the tag’s proximity; as the tagged package moves through reader locations, the RF carrier is present close enough to antenna 108 to activate the device and permit data collect, figures 11 and 17, par [0283] and [0343]-[0344]).
Consider claim 3, as applied to claim 1 above, Moore, as modified by Bartling, discloses wherein said microcontroller is configured to generate packets or data related to the condition of the package and said data includes information usable to identify a location (read as data processing and controller 132 generating and transmitting sensor readings, telemetry, status and warning data identifying a package condition, using the monitored condition information to locate where the product experienced the out-of-limit condition, so the generated data includes information usable to identify the corresponding location, figures 1 and 23, par [0102] and [0466]).
Consider claim 4, as applied to claim 3 above, Moore, as modified by Bartling, discloses wherein the generated packets are encrypted for said communication over the network and configured for decryption by said remote compute (read as data processing and controller 132 encrypting data/packet for communication external to RFID tag 102 and configuring the packet so that only an intended processing device (i.e. application server 148) possessing the corresponding key can decode/decrypt it and process the protected package data/packet, figures 1 and 17, par [0102], [0104] and [0344]).
Consider claim 5, as applied to claim 1 above, Moore, as modified by Bartling, discloses wherein said condition of said package includes one or both of temperature and humidity (read as the tagged package condition information sensed by temperature and humidity sensors, par [0201], [0391]-[0392] and [0464]).
Consider claim 6, as applied to claim 1 above, Moore, as modified by Bartling, discloses wherein the condition of said package includes information regarding changes in state responsive to human interaction with said package (read as handling and sensor information indicating that a tagged package was dropped, mishandled or moved, which identifies a change in its shock, movement or location state, and creating a history record identifying the personnel who moved the tagged food package, linking the recorded movement state with human interaction, figures 23 and 27, par [0468]-[0469] and [0533]).
Consider claim 9, as applied to claim 1 above, Moore, as modified by Bartling, discloses wherein the condition of said package is used for processing inventory tracking metrics of said package (read as using package environmental condition information, including temperature, humidity and storage history, to process shelf life, freshness, food age and revised expiration date values; using these condition derived values within the RFID inventory and distribution system that tracks the food package, so the values corresponds to inventory tracking metrics of the package, figure 27, par [0531]-[0532] and [0538]-[0540]).
Consider claim 12, as applied to claim 1 above, Moore, as modified by Bartling, discloses wherein said antenna is one of a plurality of antennas, wherein at least one antenna operates with impedance state selection (read as RFID tag 102 having multiple antennas 108 and selecting an antenna for communication; and for at least one selected antenna, impedance matching block 110 uses controlled switch states to connect or disconnect impedance components and determine the impedance match between antenna 108 and RF network node 104, corresponding to operation with impedance state selection, figures 1 and 2, par [0066]-[0067] and [0187]).
Consider claim 22, as applied to claim 2 above, Moore, as modified by Bartling, discloses wherein said ambient RF frequency is one or a plurality of RF frequencies and at least two antennas of a plurality of antennas are respectively configured to operate in different RF frequency bands (read as multiple antennas 108 in which one antenna operates in the HF band and another respective antenna operates in UHF or VHF band, each individual antenna may receive and transmit on different frequencies, corresponds to one or a plurality of RF frequencies within the ambient RF operation, figure 2, par [0187]).
Consider claim 31, as applied to claim 1 above, Moore, as modified by Bartling, discloses further including a memory capable of storing state data between energy harvesting cycles (read as controller and RF network node memories that store control states and may be shared or distribute; and store assignment logic state in nonvolatile memory over multiple operation power on and power off periods, so the memory can retain data between the RF energy harvesting cycle, par [0106], [0108] and [0176]).
Consider claim 32, as applied to claim 31 above, Moore, as modified by Bartling, discloses wherein the memory is of a type selected from volatile or non-volatile (read as the data processing and controller 132 may utilize a plurality of memory technologies, including random access memory (RAM), static RAM, dynamic RAM, read only memory (ROM), program read only memory (PROM) electrically erasable (EEPROM), flash memory, and the like, including other volatile or non-volatile memory technologies, par [0106] and [0176]).
Consider claim 33, as applied to claim 31 above, Moore, as modified by Bartling, discloses wherein the processor selects instructions to perform based on an amount of power available to the device (read as controller 132 using measured available power to control or select whether an operation should start, be completed, or wait for another power cycle, par [0088] and [0092]-[0094]).
Claims 7, 14 and 16 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Moore et al. (US 20090289776 A1) in view of Bartling et al. (US 20140075232 A1), and in further view of Collins (US 20130257594 A1).
Consider claim 7, as applied to claim 1 above, Moore, as modified by Bartling, discloses wherein said remote compute is part of a network processing system, the network processing system is configured to execute one or more operations to detect an anomaly regarding the package or contents of the package and provide a notification or indicator regarding said detected anomaly (read as application server 148 (i.e. remote compute) within the network 152, and receives package movement information, detects an anomalous delay when the package remains at one location longer than necessary, and provides an alert regarding the detected condition, figures 2 and 17, par [0180] and [0344]), wherein one or more network devices are used between the device and the remote compute (read as reader 140, network 1702 and computer service 202 as intervening network devices along the communication path between RFID tag 102 and remote application service 148, figure 17, par [0341] and [0344]) but does not specifically disclose the remote compute is part of a cloud processing system, the cloud processing system execute one or more artificial intelligence (AI) operations to detect an anomaly regarding the package.
Nonetheless, Collins discloses a secure asset tracking system, comprising a cloud-based processor 18 executing artificial intelligence expert system software 30 on tagged asset movement data, the cloud-based processor 18 learns an expected movement range from prior records, detects a deviation when new data falls outside that range and outputs a flag message at I/O terminal 20, figures 1 and 2, par [0014]-[0016] and [0018].
Therefore, it would have been obvious for a person with ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to incorporate the teachings of Collins into the teachings of Moore, which modified by Bartling, to configure the application server 148 using Collins’s cloud processor and artificial intelligence expert system, in order to distinguish abnormal package movement from normal distribution activity and generate an actionable alert for supply chain management review (see par [0016] and [0018] of Collins).
Consider claim 14, as applied to claim 1 above, Moore, as modified by Bartling, discloses wherein said remote compute is part of a network processing location that includes program instructions for receiving and/or processing to identify said location of the package (read as application server 148 (i.e. remote compute) receives package movement information at multiple locations, processing and aggregating the information and identifying the tagged package’s present location, figures 2 and 17, par [0180] and [0344]) but does not specifically disclose said remote compute is part of a cloud processing location.
Nonetheless, Collins disclose cloud-based processor 18 and cloud-hosted database 16 receiving GPS verified asset location data/information through Internet 24 and processing successive movement records as the tagged asset moves between locations, figure 1, par [0014]-[0016]).
Therefore, it would have been obvious for a person with ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to incorporate the teachings of Collins into the teachings of Moore, which modified by Bartling, to host Moore’s package location processing on Collins’s cloud processor and database, in order to centralize location records received from distributed reader sites and maintain remotely accessible package location information (see par [0014]-[0016] of Collins).
Consider claim 16, as applied to claim 1 above, Moore, as modified by Bartling, discloses wherein processing is configured to be executed by the remote compute or computers in communication with the remote compute to provide intelligence regarding a state of the package (read as application server 148 (i.e. remote compute) and communicating reader processor 1704 processing package movement and sensor information to monitor package state, generates reports and provide alerts regarding the that state, figures 2 and 17, par [0180] and [0346]) but does not specifically disclose artificial intelligence (AI) processing configured to be executed by the remote compute or computers in communication with the remote compute.
Nonetheless, Collins discloses a secure asset tracking system, comprising a cloud-based processor 18 executing artificial intelligence expert system software 30 on tagged asset movement data to learn expected asset movement states, evaluate a current state against the learned range, identify a deviation and provide intelligence through an inspection flag or recommended action, figures 1 and 2, par [0015]-[0018].
Therefore, it would have been obvious for a person with ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to incorporate the teachings of Collins into the teachings of Moore, which modified by Bartling, to configure the application server 148 using Collins’s cloud processor and artificial intelligence expert system, in order to classify package movement and condition records and issue an intelligent flag when the package state departs from the learned range (see par [0016] and [0018] of Collins).
Claim 11 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Moore et al. (US 20090289776 A1) in view of Bartling et al. (US 20140075232 A1), and in further view of Ukkola et al. (US 20140025825 A1).
Consider claim 11, as applied to claim 1 above, Meadow, as modified by Zhu and Reynolds, discloses claimed invention above and wherein the microcontroller is configured to facilitate a communication protocol (read as data processing and controller 132 facilitating communications through communication facility 134 and supporting proprietary or standardized command protocols for exchanging information with external devices, figures 1, par [0102] and [0105]) but does not specifically disclose wherein the microcontroller is configured to facilitate a REST-based API.
Nonetheless, Ukkola discloses a constrained node having processor and sensor resources, with an end-to-end RESTful web service architecture and registering these resources through a REST interface/API, figures 1 and 3, par [0020], [0023], [0035] and [0037]-[0039].
Therefore, it would have been obvious for a person with ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to incorporate the teachings of Ukkola into the teaching of Moore, which modified by Bartling, to configure Moore’s controller and communications facility using Ukkola’s constrained node REST resource interface, in order to provide interoperable remote access to package sensor resources/information while reducing conventional web service overhead for the energy limited tag (see par [0020]-[0023] of Ukkola).
Claim 13 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Moore et al. (US 20090289776 A1) in view of Bartling et al. (US 20140075232 A1), and in further view of Collins (US 20130257594 A1), and in further view of Meadow (US 20190120929 A1).
Consider claim 13, as applied to claim 1 above, Moore, as modified by Bartling, discloses wherein interactions of the package relate to tracked state data of the package as the package moves long said one more geolocations (read as RFID tag 2104 associated with a product/package and monitored through network of readers as the product/package moves by truck, rail, ship and aircraft, the tag retains handling and environmental history, status during off-loading, dropping or mishandling events, time, mode of transport, owner of transport, environmental conditions and shock conditions arising during transfers between transportation modes, figure 23, par [0468]-[0471]) wherein said remote compute is part of a network processing location that includes program instructions for receiving said condition of the package and is configured to execute metric generation programs (read as RFID 102 providing processed data/information to application server 148 and the application server 148 (i.e. remote compute) receives the information, performs information aggregation and creates an aggregated movement report (movement metric generation), figure 17, par [0180], [0344] and [0346]) the metric generation programs include processing for aggregating interactions associated with the package (read as application server 148 performing information aggregation on product movement records/information obtained from multiple readers and creating the aggregated movement report covering the product’s total movement from the beginning of distribution to its present location, figure 2, par [0180]) but does not specifically disclose said remote compute is part of a cloud processing location, and the metric generation program include machine learning processing for learning interactions associated with package.
Nonetheless, Collins disclose cloud-based processor 18 and cloud-hosted database 16 receiving GPS verified asset location data/information through Internet 24 and processing successive movement records as the tagged asset moves between locations, figure 1, par [0014]-[0016]); and the cloud-based processor 18 executing artificial intelligence expert system software 30 on tagged asset movement data to learn expected asset movement states/profile, evaluate a current state against the learned range/profile, identify a deviation and provide intelligence through an inspection flag or recommended actions, which correspond to movement metric for interactions associated with the tagged assert, figures 1 and 2, par [0007]-[0008] and [0015]-[0018].
Therefore, it would have been obvious for a person with ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to incorporate the teachings of Collins into the teachings of Moore, which modified by Bartling, to configure the application server 148 and aggregated movement report using Collins’s cloud processor and artificial intelligence expert system, in order to distinguish abnormal package movement from normal distribution activity and generate an actionable alert for supply chain management review (see par [0016] and [0018] of Collins).
However, Moore, as modified by Bartling and Collins, discloses the claimed invention above but does not specifically disclose wherein said interactions of the package are rendered on user interfaces that enable viewing of said interactions of the package.
Nonetheless, Meadow discloses product label data and complete history data chain are synchronized with a cloud service, authorized users access location and tracking history through user device’s (i.e. smartphone) interface; for example, as shown in figure 24, which visually presents the particular product’s Data Values and movement across streets and buildings from past locations through the present location, figures 4 and 24, par [0049]-[0052], [0192], [0196], [0210], [0214] and [0330].
Therefore, it would have been obvious for a person with ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to incorporate the teachings of Meadow into the teachings of Moore, which modified by Bartling and Collins, to configure the package history presentation using Meadow’s product log and smartphone interface synchronized with the cloud service, in order to provide authorized users immediate access to the package’s tracked interaction history for supply chain management review (see par [0052] and [0214] of Meadow).
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 extension fee 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 date of this final action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Junpeng Chen whose telephone number is (571) 270-1112. The examiner can normally be reached on Monday - Thursday, 8:00 a.m. - 5:00 p.m., 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, Anthony S Addy can be reached on 571-272-7795. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300.
Information regarding the status of an application may be obtained from the Patent Application Information Retrieval (PAIR) system. Status information for published applications may be obtained from either Private PAIR or Public PAIR. Status information for unpublished applications is available through Private PAIR only. For more information about the PAIR system, see http://pair-direct.uspto.gov. Should you have questions on access to the Private PAIR system, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free).
/Junpeng Chen/
Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2645
