DETAILED ACTION
This Final Office Action is in response to Applicant's amendments and arguments filed on June 11, 2026. Applicant has amended claims 21, 24, 40 and added claim 41. Currently, claims 21-41 are pending. The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
Response to Amendments
The objection to the title is withdrawn in light of the amendment to the specification.
The 35 U.S.C. 101 rejections of claims 21-40 are maintained in light of applicant’s amendments and arguments.
The 35 U.S.C. 103 rejections of claims 21-40 are withdrawn in light of applicant’s amendments and arguments. Applicant’s amendments necessitated the new grounds for rejection in this office action.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s remarks submitted on 6/11/26 have been considered and are not persuasive. Applicant argues on p. 11 of the remarks that the 101 rejection is improper but has not provided specific arguments. Examiner notes that rejection is maintained. Applicant argues on p. 11 of the remarks that the 103 rejection is improper in light of the clarifying amendments. Examiner notes the amended language is shown by the Abari reference that was previously used in the rejection of claims 23 and 36. Therefore, the claims remain rejected under 103.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 101
35 U.S.C. 101 reads as follows:
Whoever invents or discovers any new and useful process, machine, manufacture, or composition of matter, or any new and useful improvement thereof, may obtain a patent therefor, subject to the conditions and requirements of this title.
Claims 21-41 are clearly drawn to at least one of the four categories of patent eligible subject matter recited in 35 U.S.C. 101 (method, system and non-transitory computer readable medium). Claims 21-41 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 101 because the claimed invention is directed to a judicial exception (i.e., a law of nature, a natural phenomenon, or an abstract idea) without significantly more. Claims 21, 34 and 40 recite the abstract idea of generating, based on one or more first transportation-relevant conditions, a navigational task route that includes one or more locations where one or more first prioritized tasks are to be executed by a technician to service one or more micromobility transit vehicles and determining a status associated with the one or more first prioritized tasks being executed by the technician and accessing one or more second transportation-relevant conditions wherein the one or more second transportation-relevant conditions comprise a level of availability of micromobility transit vehicles in a geographic region and determining, based on the determined status associated with the one or more first prioritized tasks and the one or more second transportation-relevant conditions, one or more additional values associated with performing one or more additional tasks other than the one or more first prioritized tasks and generating an updated navigational task route based on one or more values associated with the one or more first prioritized tasks and the determined one or more additional values associated with the one or more additional tasks, wherein the updated navigational task route comprises one or more second prioritized tasks selected from the one or more first prioritized tasks and the one or more additional tasks. The claims are directed to generating task routes based on priorities for a technician to service vehicles. Under prong 1 of Step 2A, these claims are considered abstract because the claims are a type of certain methods of organizing human activity (including business relations). Applicant’s claims are organized human activity because the routing of technicians for tasks is a type of organizing human behavior and servicing transit vehicles are a type of commercial activity. Under prong 2 of Step 2A, the judicial exception is not integrated into a practical application because the claims (the judicial exception and any additional elements individually or in combination such as displaying the navigational task route on a device and displaying the updated navigational task route to present the one or more second prioritized tasks along the updated navigational task route and a non-transitory memory; and one or more hardware processors coupled to the non-transitory memory and configured to read instructions from the non-transitory memory to cause the system to perform operations and non-transitory machine-readable medium having stored thereon machine- readable instructions executable to cause a micromobility transit vehicle task management system to perform operations) are not an improvement to a computer or a technology, the claims do not apply the judicial exception with a particular machine, the claims do not effect a transformation or reduction of a particular article to a different state or thing nor do the claims apply the judicial exception in some other meaningful way beyond generally linking the use of the judicial exception to a particular technological environment such that the claims as a whole is more than a drafting effort designed to monopolize the exception. These limitations at best are merely implementing an abstract idea on a computer, or merely uses a computer as a tool to perform an abstract idea - see MPEP 2106.05(f). Under Step 2B, the claims do not include additional elements that are sufficient to amount to significantly more than the judicial exception because the additional elements individually or in combination such as displaying the navigational task route on a device and displaying the updated navigational task route to present the one or more second prioritized tasks along the updated navigational task route and a non-transitory memory; and one or more hardware processors coupled to the non-transitory memory and configured to read instructions from the non-transitory memory to cause the system to perform operations and non-transitory machine-readable medium having stored thereon machine- readable instructions executable to cause a micromobility transit vehicle task management system to perform operations (as evidenced by para [0031]-[0041], [0050]-[0051], [0057]-[0059] of applicant’s own specification) are well understood, routine and conventional in the field. Dependent claims 21-32, 35-39, 41 also do not include additional elements that are sufficient to amount to significantly more than the judicial exception because the additional elements either individually or in combination are merely an extension of the abstract idea itself by further showing accessing historic user ride request demand and historic traffic data; and predicting, for each of the one or more first prioritized tasks and the one or more additional tasks, a demand for micromobility transit vehicles at a location corresponding to the task based on the historic user ride request demand, a current time of day, the real-time traffic conditions, the historic traffic data, or the real-time weather conditions, wherein determining the one or more additional values associated with performing the one or more additional tasks is further based on the predicted demand and wherein a value associated with performing a task is determined based on a cost to perform the task and value generated by an increase in a level of availability of one or more micromobility transit vehicles by an execution of the task and wherein the one or more additional tasks comprise one or more new tasks that are created after the one or more first prioritized tasks are added to the navigational task route and wherein the one or more additional tasks comprise one or more tasks excluded from the navigational task route when the one or more first prioritized tasks are added to the navigational route and wherein generating the updated navigational task route comprises adding a task among the one or more additional tasks into the one or more second prioritized tasks when adding the task optimizes collective values of the one or more second prioritized task and wherein generating the updated navigational task route comprises removing a task among the one or more first prioritized tasks from the one or more second prioritized tasks when an updated value of the task based on the determined status associated with the one or more first prioritized tasks and the one or more second transportation- relevant conditions fails to optimize collective values of the one or more second prioritized tasks and wherein the one or more first prioritized tasks are determined to be included into the navigational task route by: determining one or more tasks to be executed based on a level of availability of one or more micromobility transit vehicles; determining a value associated with performing each of the tasks based on a cost to perform the task and an increase in the level of availability of the one or more micromobility transit vehicles by performing the task; and prioritizing the one or more tasks into an order of execution that maximizes a total of values associated with performing the one or more tasks, wherein the values of the tasks are adjusted in the prioritizing based on the order of the execution and wherein the prioritizing the one or more tasks is based on a number of devices associated with technicians in a geographical service area encompassing the one or more tasks, carrying capacities of technician vehicles corresponding to the devices, a minimization of travel time between tasks, or an estimated time to complete each of the one or more tasks and determining the order of execution that minimizes a travel time required to complete each of the one or more tasks and maximizes the total of the values associated with performing the one or more tasks and wherein each of the one or more first prioritized tasks and the one or more additional tasks is a move task, a drop-off task, a pick-up task, a battery swap task, or a service maintenance task and wherein the updated navigational task route is to guide the technician to each of the one or more second prioritized tasks in a sequential manner. Dependent claims 33 and 41 does not include additional elements that are sufficient to amount to significantly more than the judicial exception because the additional elements individually or in combination such as wherein the status associated with the one or more first prioritized tasks includes Global Positioning System (GPS) location information of the device that is associated with the technician and retrieving, from the device associated with the technician, an updated Global Positioning System (GPS) location information of the device associated with the technician and wherein the one or more additional values associated with performing the one or more additional tasks is further based on the updated GPS location information of the device associated with the technician (as evidenced by para [0031]-[0041], [0050]-[0051], [0057]-[0059] of applicant’s own specification) are well understood, routine and conventional in the field.
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.
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.
Claims 21-41 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Lin et al. (US 2019/0353494 A1) (hereinafter Lin) in view of Strother et al. (US 2016/0196701 A1) (hereinafter Strother) in in view of Abari et al. (US 2019/0197798 A1) (hereinafter Abari).
Claims 21, 34 and 40:
Lin, as shown, discloses the following limitations of claims 21, 34 and 40:
A method (and corresponding system and non-transitory computer readable medium – see para [0057], showing equivalent computing functionality and component) comprising, by a micromobility transit vehicle task management system: generating, based on one or more first transportation-relevant conditions, a navigational task route that includes one or more locations where one or more first prioritized tasks are to be executed by a technician (see para [0003], "According to another embodiment a system of providing route recommendations for field service technicians is provided. The system includes a processor and a memory including computer-executable instructions that, when executed by the processor, cause the processor to perform operations. The operations include identifying a current geographic location of a service technician and receiving a list of tasks for the service technician. The list of tasks includes, for each of the tasks, a geographic location of the task, a deadline of the task, and a priority of the task. A plurality of route options are generated for the service technician based at least in part on the list of tasks and the current geographic location of the service technician. Each of the plurality of route options includes a geographic location of at least one of the tasks in the list of tasks. The route options are output.");
displaying the navigational task route on a device (see para [0031], " In accordance with one or more embodiments, a route recommendation system to assist field service technicians in making decisions about which service tasks to perform and an order for performing the service tasks is provided. In accordance with one or more embodiments, a graphical user interface (GUI) is displayed to technicians with tasks plotted on a map with color-coded priorities and scores of various route options. The service technician can interact with route recommendation system to customize a route." And Fig 1, showing route options);
determining a status associated with the one or more first prioritized tasks being executed by the technician (see para [0037], "Referring back to FIG. 2, task completion information 218 can be received by the route recommendation system 202, for example, from the service technician. Recommended routes of one or more service technicians can be updated based on the route recommendation system 202 being notified that a task has been completed.");
accessing one or more second transportation-relevant conditions (see para [0008], "generating a plurality of route options is further based at least in part on a route customization received from the service technician, traffic conditions, scoring factors, and a skill level of the service technician.");
determining, based on the determined status associated with the one or more first prioritized tasks and the one or more second transportation-relevant conditions, one or more additional values associated with performing one or more additional tasks other than the one or more first prioritized tasks (see para [0037]-[0038], "Service technician customizations 216 can be utilized to modify contents of route options, or route recommendation, based on service technician preferences and/or knowledge. For example, a service technician may know that a particular customer does not want non-critical service tasks to be performed on weekend days, or the service technician may have local road knowledge not reflected in the mapping software, or the service technician may expect a task to take longer or shorter than an amount of time used to create the recommended routes, or the service technician may prefer to do a particular type of service at multiple geographic locations on the same day of the week. In another example, a first technician expresses a preference to work on particular tasks of a first type and another technician expresses a preference to work on different tasks of a second type. In an embodiment, the preferences of the technicians are taken into account by the route recommendation system 202 when assigning the tasks. In an embodiment, the skill set of and/or experience levels of the technicians are taken into account by the route recommendation system 202 when assigning the tasks. The technician customizations 216 entered by the service technician can be used to modify the recommended route options output by the route recommendation system 202. It might not be possible to find routes that meet all the technician customizations 216 however the route recommendation system 202 will attempt to meet as many as possible in the recommended routes." and see para [0053], " If it is determined at block 410, that customizations have been received from the service technician, then processing continues at block 412 where the route options are updated based on the input from the service technician, and the updated route options and scores are output at block 408. In an embodiment, block 410 also includes determining whether the service technician location has changed, and processing continues at block 412 only if it is determined that customizations have been received and the service technician location has not changed, otherwise processing continues at block 402. In one or more embodiments the route options are also updated and output in response to any of the inputs shown in FIG. 2. For example, the route options can be updated based on receiving task completion information, or in response to receiving new scheduled or unscheduled tasks, or in response to the geographic location of the service technician changing. The service technicians can apply customizations to these updated route options.");
generating an updated navigational task route based on one or more values associated with the one or more first prioritized tasks and the determined one or more additional values associated with the one or more additional tasks, wherein the updated navigational task route comprises one or more second prioritized tasks selected from the one or more first prioritized tasks and the one or more additional tasks (see para [0016], "In addition to one or more of the features described herein, or as an alternative, further embodiments of the method may include determining whether a route customization was received from the service technician. In response to determining that a route customization was received from the service technician, the plurality of route options are updated based at least in part on the route customization, and the updated route options are output." and see para [0037], " Referring back to FIG. 2, task completion information 218 can be received by the route recommendation system 202, for example, from the service technician. Recommended routes of one or more service technicians can be updated based on the route recommendation system 202 being notified that a task has been completed. Another input to the route recommendation system 202 shown in the embodiment in FIG. 2 is service technician customizations 216. Service technician customizations 216 can be utilized to modify contents of route options, or route recommendation, based on service technician preferences and/or knowledge. For example, a service technician may know that a particular customer does not want non-critical service tasks to be performed on weekend days, or the service technician may have local road knowledge not reflected in the mapping software, or the service technician may expect a task to take longer or shorter than an amount of time used to create the recommended routes, or the service technician may prefer to do a particular type of service at multiple geographic locations on the same day of the week. In another example, a first technician expresses a preference to work on particular tasks of a first type and another technician expresses a preference to work on different tasks of a second type." and see para [0053] and Fig. 4); and
displaying the updated navigational task route to present the one or more second prioritized tasks along the updated navigational task route (see para [0054], "In accordance with one or more embodiments, only a subset of the route options is output to a mobile device of the service technician. The subset can include those routes having the highest scores and/or the routes that most closely match the customizations requested by the service technician. In an embodiment, two to four route options are output to the mobile device of the service technician. In other embodiments, more than four route options are output to the mobile device of the service technician.").
Lin, however, does not specifically disclose prioritized tasks are to be executed by a technician to service one or more micromobility transit vehicles. In analogous art, Strother discloses the following limitations:
prioritized tasks are to be executed by a technician to service one or more micromobility transit vehicles (see para [0089], "FIG. 8 is a flowchart illustrating technique 400, possibly employed by Notification Module 158, for selecting maintenance providers to perform maintenance tasks created by Task Creation Module 152. The technique starts at 402. At 404, the technique receives a maintenance task, possibly created by Task Creation Module 152. At 406, the technique retrieves information of maintenance providers, possibly stored in Maintenance Provider Information database 122. Based on the retrieved maintenance provider information, the technique identifies one or more maintenance providers preapproved for performing the particular maintenance task at 408. The technique may identify preapproved maintenance providers based on one or more of the following criteria: the maintenance task type, the difficulty level of the maintenance task, the priority and urgency of the maintenance task, the location of the bicycle requiring the performance of the maintenance task, the qualifications, capabilities, expertise, experience and trainings of maintenance providers, the ratings of maintenance providers, the locations of maintenance providers, and the average time required for each maintenance provider to complete all assigned maintenance tasks and the particular type of maintenance task. By setting very stringent criteria, very few maintenance providers, possibly only maintenance providers who are staff of the Bicycle Sharing System 40, are preapproved for performing the maintenance task. At 410, the technique may select all of the identified preapproved maintenance providers for notification by setting no selection criteria.")
It would have been obvious to one or ordinary skill in the art at the time of the invention to combine the teachings of Strother with Lin because integrating technicians servicing micromobility improves the efficiency for sharing systems by better management of their vehicles (see Strother, para [0002]-[0003]).
Moreover, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the invention to include the system for fleet management of maintenance tasks as taught by Strother in the route recommendation system for field service technicians of Lin, since the claimed invention is merely a combination of old elements, and in the combination each element merely would have performed the same function as it did separately, and one of ordinary skill in the art would have recognized that the results of the combination were predictable.
Lin and Strother, however, do not specifically disclose wherein the one or more second transportation-relevant conditions comprise a level of availability of micromobility transit vehicles in the region. In analogous art, Abari discloses the following limitations:
wherein the one or more second transportation-relevant conditions comprise a level of availability of micromobility transit vehicles in the region (see para [0014]-[0015], "Particular embodiments described herein relate to generating, by a transportation management system, a prediction of demand for autonomous vehicles in a fleet of autonomous vehicles based on, among other factors, data representing current conditions and future events, and scheduling an autonomous vehicle for service based on the prediction. The transportation management system may send instructions to the autonomous vehicle causing it to drive to a service center where the scheduled services are to be performed. The data representing current conditions may include data received from sensors located within autonomous vehicles in the fleet or notifications of current events that are likely to affect demand for autonomous vehicles. The prediction of demand for autonomous vehicles may also be based on historic supply and demand data derived from data received from autonomous vehicles in the fleet and/or data received from a transportation application running on various requestor computing devices, data representing characteristics of vehicles in the fleet, location data received from vehicles in the fleet and/or other factors...When scheduling autonomous vehicles for service, a transportation system may also take into consideration the capabilities, available capacity, speed of operations, and/or locations of various service centers. In particular embodiments, a transportation management system may generate a predictive model for supply and demand for a fleet of autonomous vehicles using machine learning." and see para [0020], " For example, transportation management system 110 may have determined that demand at or near a particular location within the region in which fleet 130 operates is currently high and/or is predicted to be high in the near term. In response to this determination, transportation management system 110 has provided instructions 155b to autonomous vehicle 134 to drive to the determined prepositioning location following route 160d, at which point autonomous vehicle 134 may be returned to the pool of autonomous vehicles available to fulfill ride requests." and see para [0026]-[0027])
It would have been obvious to one or ordinary skill in the art at the time of the invention to combine the teachings of Abari with Lin and Strother because including a level of availability of micromobility transit vehicles in the region enables more efficient dispatching of vehicles and fulfilling transportation requests (see Abari, para [0001]-[0002]).
Moreover, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the invention to include the system for fleet management for autonomous vehicles as taught by Abari in the Lin and Strother combination, since the claimed invention is merely a combination of old elements, and in the combination each element merely would have performed the same function as it did separately, and one of ordinary skill in the art would have recognized that the results of the combination were predictable.
Claims 22 and 35:
Further, Lin discloses the following limitations
wherein the one or more second transportation- relevant conditions comprise real-time weather conditions, real-time traffic conditions, a current carrying capacity of a technician vehicle corresponding to the device that is associated with the technician, or an estimated time for completing an in-progress task associated with the device (see para [0033], "the recommendation system can provide multiple route options to service technicians based on factors such as, but not limited to a current location of the service technician 102, a list of service tasks to be performed, and current traffic conditions" and see para [0035], "As shown in FIG. 2, map and traffic information 206 can also be input to the route recommendation system 202. In an embodiment the map and traffic information 206 is provided by commercially available mapping software such as, but not limited to MapQuest or Google Maps. In addition, scoring factors 220, or key performance indicators (KPIs), can also be input to the route recommendation system 202. The score of a route indicates a measurement of the efficiency of the option with respect to given KPIs. The scoring factors can include, but are not limited to: a distance between a geographic location of the service technician and a geographic location of the task; traffic conditions, task deadline, and task priority. Each of the scoring factors can be assigned a weight based on their importance. For example, the task priority can be given more weight than current traffic conditions and thus, a route that includes higher priority tasks can be assigned a higher score than a route that includes lower priority tasks.")
Claims 23 and 36:
Lin and Strother does not specifically disclose accessing historic user ride request demand and historic traffic data. In analogous art, Abari discloses the following limitations:
accessing historic user ride request demand and historic traffic data (see para [0017], "The phrase “historical supply and demand data” refers to past levels of ridership demand and autonomous vehicle supply that were experienced by the transportation service and/or observed by the transportation management system." and see para [0025], "The method may begin at step 210, at which a transportation management system may access historic data associated with supply and demand for autonomous vehicles in a fleet of autonomous vehicles. In particular embodiments, the historic supply and demand data for autonomous vehicles may be specific to the region in which the fleet of autonomous vehicles operates or to particular locations within the region in which the fleet of autonomous vehicles operates, or may be specific to autonomous vehicles with particular characteristics, such as a vehicle type, a vehicle class, or an optional vehicle feature." and see para [0026], "In particular embodiments, a future event about which the transportation management system receives data may be an upcoming event that is predicted to take place based on learned patterns of events that affect demand in the region in which the fleet of autonomous vehicles operates. For example, the time and duration of rush hours on certain days may be predicted based on learned patterns of traffic. In particular embodiments, a current condition about which the transportation management system receives data may be the status of an autonomous vehicle or service center, or a condition affecting traffic in the region in which the fleet of autonomous vehicles operates. For example, the transportation management system may receive status information from the autonomous vehicles and/or service centers or may receive notifications about current events (such as traffic accidents, road construction, or weather events) from the autonomous vehicles, from service centers, or from third parties or external services (such as news, weather services, or government information services)."); and
predicting, for each of the one or more first prioritized tasks and the one or more additional tasks, a demand for micromobility transit vehicles at a location corresponding to the task based on the historic user ride request demand, a current time of day, the real-time traffic conditions, the historic traffic data, or the real-time weather conditions (see para [0037], "At step 340, the transportation management system may generate a prediction of demand for autonomous vehicles in the fleet based on the initial predictive model of supply and demand and any predicted events. Generating the prediction of demand for the fleet may include generating respective predictions of demand for vehicles with certain characteristics and/or at certain locations within the region in which the fleet of autonomous vehicles operates." and see para [0040], "the transportation management system may update the predictive model of supply and demand for the fleet of autonomous vehicles based on the performance of event predictions, current conditions, known future events, and/or data indicative of actual supply and demand. In particular embodiments, the transportation system may use machine learning to generate and update a predictive model of supply and demand for a fleet of autonomous vehicles. For example, a machine-learning model may be trained on a set of training data. Each training sample may include information about input conditions, such as current conditions (including, in particular embodiments, data received from sensors located within autonomous vehicles or notifications of current events that are likely to affect demand for autonomous vehicles, such as weather or traffic disruptions) and future events (including, in particular embodiments, known and predicted future events that are likely to affect demand), a prediction of near-term demand for autonomous vehicles (including a demand level and a predicted duration of the predicted demand level) based on those inputs, and an indication of whether the prediction was correct. The machine-learning model may be trained to take as input, e.g., current conditions and future events, and to output predictions of near-term demand for autonomous vehicles that are increasingly more likely to be correct."), wherein determining the one or more additional values associated with performing the one or more additional tasks is further based on the predicted demand (see para [0028], "At step 240, the transportation management system may identify a given autonomous vehicle in need of service, identify a service center suitable for servicing the given autonomous vehicle, and determine a time at which a given autonomous vehicle is to be serviced at the identified service center, based at least in part on the prediction of demand, after which the system may schedule the vehicle for service. For example, the transportation management system may be configured to determine (e.g., based on a status or other data received from the given autonomous vehicle) that the vehicle is due for periodic maintenance or inspection, that the vehicle battery needs to be charged, that the vehicle needs to be refueled, or that the vehicle is in need of repair.").
It would have been obvious to one or ordinary skill in the art at the time of the invention to combine the teachings of Abari with Lin and Strother because including using historical data enables more efficient dispatching of vehicles and fulfilling transportation requests (see Abari, para [0001]-[0002]).
Moreover, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the invention to include the system for fleet management for autonomous vehicles as taught by Abari in the Lin and Strother combination, since the claimed invention is merely a combination of old elements, and in the combination each element merely would have performed the same function as it did separately, and one of ordinary skill in the art would have recognized that the results of the combination were predictable.
Claims 24 and 37:
Lin does not specifically disclose wherein a value associated with performing a task is determined based on a cost to perform the task. In analogous art, Strother discloses the following limitations:
wherein a value associated with performing a task is determined based on a cost to perform the task and value generated by an increase in a level of availability of one or more micromobility transit vehicles by an execution of the task (see para [0079]-[0088], showing a confidence value that includes consideration of the expected cost of not sending out a mechanic and the expected cost of sending out a maintenance provider where it would be obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art that ridership fares are correlated with availability of vehicles)
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the invention to include the system for fleet management of maintenance tasks as taught by Strother in the route recommendation system for field service technicians of Lin, since the claimed invention is merely a combination of old elements, and in the combination each element merely would have performed the same function as it did separately, and one of ordinary skill in the art would have recognized that the results of the combination were predictable.
Claim 25:
Further, Lin discloses the following limitations:
wherein the one or more additional tasks comprise one or more new tasks that are created after the one or more first prioritized tasks are added to the navigational task route (see para [0053], " For example, the route options can be updated based on receiving task completion information, or in response to receiving new scheduled or unscheduled tasks, or in response to the geographic location of the service technician changing. ")
Claim 26:
Further, Lin discloses the following limitations:
wherein the one or more additional tasks comprise one or more tasks excluded from the navigational task route when the one or more first prioritized tasks are added to the navigational route (see para [0036]-[0037], where the technician customization can result in things like customer not wanting non-critical service tasks to be performed on weekend days is a type of exclusion given broadest reasonable interpretation).
Claims 27 and 38:
Further, Lin discloses the following limitations:
wherein generating the updated navigational task route comprises adding a task among the one or more additional tasks into the one or more second prioritized tasks when adding the task optimizes collective values of the one or more second prioritized tasks (see para [0034], " Turning now to FIG. 2, a schematic block diagram 200 illustrating inputs to a route recommendation system 202 for field service technicians is generally shown in accordance with one or more embodiments of the present disclosure. As shown in FIG. 2, scheduled tasks 204 are input to the route recommendation system 202. The input can include for example, for each scheduled task, a geographic location were the service will take place, a deadline (e.g., specific time, day, week, month, etc.) for completing the task, and a priority of the task (e.g., task to clean and elevator is lower priority than a task to fix a non-running elevator). In addition to scheduled tasks 204, unscheduled tasks 208 can also be input to the route recommendation system 202. Unscheduled tasks 208 can be tasks with a high priority that must be performed immediately (e.g., sole elevator in a busy building is not running or a person is stuck in an elevator) or tasks with a lower priority (e.g., one of several light bulbs in an elevator is not working). The high priority unscheduled tasks 208 are typically performed as soon as possible. In contrast, the lower priority unscheduled tasks 208 can be taken care of by the service provider when discovered or can be added to the scheduled tasks 204.")
Claims 28 and 39:
Further, Lin discloses the following limitations:
wherein generating the updated navigational task route comprises removing a task among the one or more first prioritized tasks from the one or more second prioritized tasks when an updated value of the task based on the determined status associated with the one or more first prioritized tasks and the one or more second transportation- relevant conditions fails to optimize collective values of the one or more second prioritized tasks (see para [0038], "The technician customizations 216 entered by the service technician can be used to modify the recommended route options output by the route recommendation system 202. It might not be possible to find routes that meet all the technician customizations 216 however the route recommendation system 202 will attempt to meet as many as possible in the recommended routes." where it would be obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art that not possible to find routes that meet customizations can be considered failing to optimizing given broadest reasonable interpretation and see para [0035]-[0037], showing scoring factors that are based on task attributes such as deadline, priority and traffic conditions are factors for a scorew that is used in determining route recommendations and see para [0053], " If it is determined at block 410, that customizations have been received from the service technician, then processing continues at block 412 where the route options are updated based on the input from the service technician, and the updated route options and scores are output at block 408. In an embodiment, block 410 also includes determining whether the service technician location has changed, and processing continues at block 412 only if it is determined that customizations have been received and the service technician location has not changed, otherwise processing continues at block 402. In one or more embodiments the route options are also updated and output in response to any of the inputs shown in FIG. 2. For example, the route options can be updated based on receiving task completion information, or in response to receiving new scheduled or unscheduled tasks, or in response to the geographic location of the service technician changing. The service technicians can apply customizations to these updated route options.")
Claim 29:
Further, Lin discloses the following limitations:
wherein the one or more first prioritized tasks are determined to be included into the navigational task route by: determining one or more tasks to be executed based on a level of availability of one or more micromobility transit vehicles (see para [0053], "At block 408, the route options and scores are output, for example as the GUI 100 shown in FIG. 1. If it is determined at block 410, that customizations have not been received from the service technician, then processing continues at block 402 where a current geographic location of the service technician is identified. If it is determined at block 410, that customizations have been received from the service technician, then processing continues at block 412 where the route options are updated based on the input from the service technician, and the updated route options and scores are output at block 408. In an embodiment, block 410 also includes determining whether the service technician location has changed, and processing continues at block 412 only if it is determined that customizations have been received and the service technician location has not changed, otherwise processing continues at block 402. In one or more embodiments the route options are also updated and output in response to any of the inputs shown in FIG. 2. For example, the route options can be updated based on receiving task completion information, or in response to receiving new scheduled or unscheduled tasks, or in response to the geographic location of the service technician changing. The service technicians can apply customizations to these updated route options.");
prioritizing the one or more tasks into an order of execution that maximizes a total of values associated with performing the one or more tasks, wherein the values of the tasks are adjusted in the prioritizing based on the order of the execution (see para [0034], "Turning now to FIG. 2, a schematic block diagram 200 illustrating inputs to a route recommendation system 202 for field service technicians is generally shown in accordance with one or more embodiments of the present disclosure. As shown in FIG. 2, scheduled tasks 204 are input to the route recommendation system 202. The input can include for example, for each scheduled task, a geographic location were the service will take place, a deadline (e.g., specific time, day, week, month, etc.) for completing the task, and a priority of the task (e.g., task to clean and elevator is lower priority than a task to fix a non-running elevator). In addition to scheduled tasks 204, unscheduled tasks 208 can also be input to the route recommendation system 202. Unscheduled tasks 208 can be tasks with a high priority that must be performed immediately (e.g., sole elevator in a busy building is not running or a person is stuck in an elevator) or tasks with a lower priority (e.g., one of several light bulbs in an elevator is not working). The high priority unscheduled tasks 208 are typically performed as soon as possible. In contrast, the lower priority unscheduled tasks 208 can be taken care of by the service provider when discovered or can be added to the scheduled tasks 204.")
Lin, however, does not specifically disclose determining a value associated with performing each of the tasks based on a cost to perform the task and an increase in the level of availability of the one or more micromobility transit vehicles by performing the task. In analogous art, Strother discloses the following limitations:
determining a value associated with performing each of the tasks based on a cost to perform the task and an increase in the level of availability of the one or more micromobility transit vehicles by performing the task (see para [0079]-[0088], showing a confidence value that includes consideration of the expected cost of not sending out a mechanic and the expected cost of sending out a maintenance provider)
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the invention to include the system for fleet management of maintenance tasks as taught by Strother in the route recommendation system for field service technicians of Lin, since the claimed invention is merely a combination of old elements, and in the combination each element merely would have performed the same function as it did separately, and one of ordinary skill in the art would have recognized that the results of the combination were predictable.
Claim 30:
Further, Lin discloses the following limitations:
wherein the prioritizing the one or more tasks is based on a number of devices associated with technicians in a geographical service area encompassing the one or more tasks, carrying capacities of technician vehicles corresponding to the devices, a minimization of travel time between tasks, or an estimated time to complete each of the one or more tasks (see para [0035], "As shown in FIG. 2, map and traffic information 206 can also be input to the route recommendation system 202. In an embodiment the map and traffic information 206 is provided by commercially available mapping software such as, but not limited to MapQuest or Google Maps. In addition, scoring factors 220, or key performance indicators (KPIs), can also be input to the route recommendation system 202. The score of a route indicates a measurement of the efficiency of the option with respect to given KPIs. The scoring factors can include, but are not limited to: a distance between a geographic location of the service technician and a geographic location of the task; traffic conditions, task deadline, and task priority. Each of the scoring factors can be assigned a weight based on their importance. For example, the task priority can be given more weight than current traffic conditions and thus, a route that includes higher priority tasks can be assigned a higher score than a route that includes lower priority tasks." where the scoring shows priority between tasks and the scoring may be based on travel time, etc.)
Claim 31:
Further, Lin discloses the following limitations:
wherein the prioritizing the one or more tasks into the order of execution comprises: determining the order of execution that minimizes a travel time required to complete each of the one or more tasks (see para [0033], " As shown in FIG. 1, the recommendation system can provide multiple route options to service technicians based on factors such as, but not limited to a current location of the service technician 102, a list of service tasks to be performed, and current traffic conditions. Each route recommendation, or route option, can have a score that measures its efficiency with respect to selected criteria, or scoring factors, such as reduced travel time. As shown in FIG. 1, “Route option 1” 106 has a score of 4.8 and “Route option 2” 104 has a score of 3.2. Input from the service technicians can be used to modify the route recommendations. In this manner, a service technician can customize the recommended routes based, for example, on knowledge of local road conditions, or a longer than average service time, or preferred days for performing particular tasks. One or more embodiments of the present invention allow the service technicians to select tasks to be performed based on the recommendation system while satisfying service constraints such as required response time.")
Lin does not explicitly disclose maximizes the total of the values associated with performing the one or more tasks. In analogous art, Strother discloses the following limitations:
and maximizes the total of the values associated with performing the one or more tasks (see para [0077], " At 308, the technique calculates the percentile of each bicycle's idle time in the distribution of bicycle idle time. At 310, the technique compares the each bicycle's calculated idle time percentile with an idle time threshold. If the individual bicycle's idle time percentile is below the idle time threshold, the technique at 314 increases the diagnostic confidence value that a maintenance task should be created for the bicycle; and the technique ends at 316. If the individual bicycle's idle time percentile is not below the idle time threshold, the technique at 318 decreases the diagnostic confidence value that a maintenance task should be created for the bicycle; and the technique ends at 320.")
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the invention to include the system for fleet management of maintenance tasks as taught by Strother in the route recommendation system for field service technicians of Lin, since the claimed invention is merely a combination of old elements, and in the combination each element merely would have performed the same function as it did separately, and one of ordinary skill in the art would have recognized that the results of the combination were predictable.
Claim 32:
Further, Lin discloses the following limitations:
wherein each of the one or more first prioritized tasks and the one or more additional tasks is a move task, a drop-off task, a pick-up task, a battery swap task, or a service maintenance task (see para [0032], "Turning now to FIG. 1, a schematic illustration of a graphical user interface (GUI) 100 for presenting a suggested route to a field service technician is generally shown in accordance with one or more embodiments of the present disclosure. Geographic locations of scheduled tasks, both scheduled tasks 108 and unscheduled tasks 110, as well as current geographic locations of service technicians 112 are overlaid on the map shown in the GUI of FIG. 1. As used herein, the term “service technician” or “field service technician” refers to an employee who travels between different locations to perform maintenance or repair tasks. An example is a service technician for elevators who may service elevators in different locations." and see para [0034], "Turning now to FIG. 2, a schematic block diagram 200 illustrating inputs to a route recommendation system 202 for field service technicians is generally shown in accordance with one or more embodiments of the present disclosure. As shown in FIG. 2, scheduled tasks 204 are input to the route recommendation system 202. The input can include for example, for each scheduled task, a geographic location were the service will take place, a deadline (e.g., specific time, day, week, month, etc.) for completing the task, and a priority of the task (e.g., task to clean and elevator is lower priority than a task to fix a non-running elevator). In addition to scheduled tasks 204, unscheduled tasks 208 can also be input to the route recommendation system 202. Unscheduled tasks 208 can be tasks with a high priority that must be performed immediately (e.g., sole elevator in a busy building is not running or a person is stuck in an elevator) or tasks with a lower priority (e.g., one of several light bulbs in an elevator is not working). The high priority unscheduled tasks 208 are typically performed as soon as possible. In contrast, the lower priority unscheduled tasks 208 can be taken care of by the service provider when discovered or can be added to the scheduled tasks 204.")
Claim 33:
Further, Lin discloses the following limitations:
wherein the status associated with the one or more first prioritized tasks includes Global Positioning System (GPS) location information of the device that is associated with the technician (see para [0035], where it would be obvious to one or ordinary skill in the art that google maps on mobile devices uses GPS)
Claim 41:
Further, Lin discloses the following limitations:
retrieving, from the device associated with the technician, an updated Global Positioning System (GPS) location information of the device associated with the technician (see para [0035], "As shown in FIG. 2, map and traffic information 206 can also be input to the route recommendation system 202. In an embodiment the map and traffic information 206 is provided by commercially available mapping software such as, but not limited to MapQuest or Google Maps. In addition, scoring factors 220, or key performance indicators (KPIs), can also be input to the route recommendation system 202. The score of a route indicates a measurement of the efficiency of the option with respect to given KPIs. The scoring factors can include, but are not limited to: a distance between a geographic location of the service technician and a geographic location of the task; traffic conditions, task deadline, and task priority. Each of the scoring factors can be assigned a weight based on their importance. For example, the task priority can be given more weight than current traffic conditions and thus, a route that includes higher priority tasks can be assigned a higher score than a route that includes lower priority tasks." where it is obvious to one or ordinary skill in the art that identifying a geographic location for a technician while using GoogleMaps or MapQuest depends on the GPS on the technician device) and
wherein the one or more additional values associated with performing the one or more additional tasks is further based on the updated GPS location information of the device associated with the technician (see para [0008]-[0009], "In addition to one or more of the features described herein, or as an alternative, further embodiments of the system may include that the generating a plurality of route options is further based at least in part on a route customization received from the service technician, traffic conditions, scoring factors, and a skill level of the service technician. In addition to one or more of the features described herein, or as an alternative, further embodiments of the system may include that each of the plurality of route options further includes a score, and the operations further include calculating the score for each of the plurality of route options based at least in part on scoring factors and weights assigned to each of the scoring factors. The scoring factors include at least one of the current location of the service technician relative to a geographic location of the tasks in the route option, a number of tasks in the route option, and a priority of the tasks in the route option." and see para [0035], "As shown in FIG. 2, map and traffic information 206 can also be input to the route recommendation system 202. In an embodiment the map and traffic information 206 is provided by commercially available mapping software such as, but not limited to MapQuest or Google Maps. In addition, scoring factors 220, or key performance indicators (KPIs), can also be input to the route recommendation system 202. The score of a route indicates a measurement of the efficiency of the option with respect to given KPIs. The scoring factors can include, but are not limited to: a distance between a geographic location of the service technician and a geographic location of the task; traffic conditions, task deadline, and task priority. Each of the scoring factors can be assigned a weight based on their importance. For example, the task priority can be given more weight than current traffic conditions and thus, a route that includes higher priority tasks can be assigned a higher score than a route that includes lower priority tasks." showing scoring factors are based technician location that gets updated such as traffic conditions), and
wherein the updated navigational task route is to guide the technician to each of the one or more second prioritized tasks in a sequential manner (see para [0052]-[0053], " Referring back to FIG. 4, at block 406, route options for the service technician and their associated scores are generated based at least in part on contents of the list of tasks and the current geographic location of the service technician. The generating of the route options can also take into account other items such as, but not limited to: current or expected traffic conditions, grouping of particular tasks, an order of performing a group of tasks, and an estimated time to complete each task. In one or more embodiments, a score for each of the route options is calculated based at least in part on scoring factors and weights assigned to each of the scoring factors as described previously. In one or more embodiments, the scoring factors can include one or more of the current location of the service technician relative to a geographic location of the tasks in the route option, a number of tasks in the route option, and a priority of the tasks in the route option. At block 408, the route options and scores are output, for example as the GUI 100 shown in FIG. 1. If it is determined at block 410, that customizations have not been received from the service technician, then processing continues at block 402 where a current geographic location of the service technician is identified. If it is determined at block 410, that customizations have been received from the service technician, then processing continues at block 412 where the route options are updated based on the input from the service technician, and the updated route options and scores are output at block 408. In an embodiment, block 410 also includes determining whether the service technician location has changed, and processing continues at block 412 only if it is determined that customizations have been received and the service technician location has not changed, otherwise processing continues at block 402. In one or more embodiments the route options are also updated and output in response to any of the inputs shown in FIG. 2. For example, the route options can be updated based on receiving task completion information, or in response to receiving new scheduled or unscheduled tasks, or in response to the geographic location of the service technician changing. The service technicians can apply customizations to these updated route options.").
Although a GPS is obvious in Lin, it is not explicit. In analogous art, Strother discloses the following limitations:
retrieving, from the device associated with the technician, an updated Global Positioning System (GPS) location information of the device associated with the technician (see para [0027], "For every maintenance task, Notification Module 158 may consider the locations of maintenance providers and the location of maintenance task, i.e. the location of the bicycle requiring the performance of the maintenance task, in selecting maintenance providers to notify of the maintenance task. Notification Module 158 may notify only maintenance providers that are presently within a certain distance of the bicycle with an associated maintenance task. The location of a maintenance provider may be the GPS location of the maintenance provider. Smart Watch 185, Mobile Phone 186, Tablet 188, or Computer 190 that a maintenance provider carries may provide the GPS capability for determining the location of the maintenance provider. Alternatively, Notification Module 158 may notify only maintenance providers that have been notified of or assigned one or more maintenance tasks within a certain distance of the bicycle with a maintenance task being considered for notification.") and wherein the one or more additional values associated with performing the one or more additional tasks is further based on the updated GPS location information of the device associated with the technician (see para [0089]-[0090], "FIG. 8 is a flowchart illustrating technique 400, possibly employed by Notification Module 158, for selecting maintenance providers to perform maintenance tasks created by Task Creation Module 152. The technique starts at 402. At 404, the technique receives a maintenance task, possibly created by Task Creation Module 152. At 406, the technique retrieves information of maintenance providers, possibly stored in Maintenance Provider Information database 122. Based on the retrieved maintenance provider information, the technique identifies one or more maintenance providers preapproved for performing the particular maintenance task at 408. The technique may identify preapproved maintenance providers based on one or more of the following criteria: the maintenance task type, the difficulty level of the maintenance task, the priority and urgency of the maintenance task, the location of the bicycle requiring the performance of the maintenance task, the qualifications, capabilities, expertise, experience and trainings of maintenance providers, the ratings of maintenance providers, the locations of maintenance providers, and the average time required for each maintenance provider to complete all assigned maintenance tasks and the particular type of maintenance task. By setting very stringent criteria, very few maintenance providers, possibly only maintenance providers who are staff of the Bicycle Sharing System 40, are preapproved for performing the maintenance task. At 410, the technique may select all of the identified preapproved maintenance providers for notification by setting no selection criteria. Alternative, at 410, the technique may select more than one and fewer than all of the identified preapproved maintenance providers to notify of the maintenance task. When selecting fewer than all of the identified preapproved maintenance providers for notification, the technique may consider the location of the bicycle requiring the performance of the maintenance task, the locations of maintenance providers, and the distance between the location of the bicycle requiring the performance of the maintenance task and the location of the identified preapproved maintenance providers. For example, preapproved maintenance providers within a certain threshold distance of the location of the maintenance task may be selected for notification. The threshold distance of the location of the bicycle requiring the performance of the maintenance task may be predetermined. Alternatively, the threshold distance may be dynamically determined while the technique selects preapproved maintenance providers for notification to ensure that a sufficient number of preapproved maintenance providers are selected for notification. The location of the preapproved maintenance provider may be determined by the GPS locations of maintenance providers. Smart Watch 185, Mobile Phone 186, Tablet 188, or Computer 190 that a maintenance provider carries may provide the GPS capability for determining the location of maintenance providers. Electronic Control 58 may contain a GPS unit that determines the location of the bicycle requiring the performance of the maintenance task.")
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the invention to include the system for fleet management of maintenance tasks as taught by Strother in the route recommendation system for field service technicians of Lin, since the claimed invention is merely a combination of old elements, and in the combination each element merely would have performed the same function as it did separately, and one of ordinary skill in the art would have recognized that the results of the combination were predictable.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Gordenker et al. (US 2021/0019690 A1), a system for generating technician dispatching schedules where the dispatching schedule can be generated on demand or on-the-fly based on a plurality of complex factors such as job requirements, technician skill, technician location, job value, technician sales ability, technician location, future job locations, overall availability of other technicians, or other factors
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 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 mailing date of this final action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to SUJAY KONERU whose telephone number is (571)270-3409. The examiner can normally be reached M-F, 8:30 AM to 5 pm.
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, Patricia Munson can be reached on 571- 270-5396. 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.
/SUJAY KONERU/
Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3624
Prosecution Insights