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 .
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on 07/29/2024 and 06/05/2026 was filed in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statement is being considered by the examiner.
Drawings
The drawings are objected to as failing to comply with 37 CFR 1.84(p)(5) because they include the following reference character(s) not mentioned in the description:
Element 604, and 610 in Figures 6-9
Element 1400 in Figure 14
Corrected drawing sheets in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(d), or amendment to the specification to add the reference character(s) in the description in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(b) are required in reply to the Office action to avoid abandonment of the application. Any amended replacement drawing sheet should include all of the figures appearing on the immediate prior version of the sheet, even if only one figure is being amended. Each drawing sheet submitted after the filing date of an application must be labeled in the top margin as either “Replacement Sheet” or “New Sheet” pursuant to 37 CFR 1.121(d). If the changes are not accepted by the examiner, the applicant will be notified and informed of any required corrective action in the next Office action. The objection to the drawings will not be held in abeyance.
Specification
The disclosure is objected to because of the following informalities:
The use of the term Bluetooth and WiFi, which is a trade name or a mark used in commerce, has been noted in this application. The term should be accompanied by the generic terminology; furthermore the term should be capitalized wherever it appears or, where appropriate, include a proper symbol indicating use in commerce such as ™, SM , or ® following the term.
Although the use of trade names and marks used in commerce (i.e., trademarks, service marks, certification marks, and collective marks) are permissible in patent applications, the proprietary nature of the marks should be respected and every effort made to prevent their use in any manner which might adversely affect their validity as commercial marks.
Appropriate correction is required.
Double Patenting
The nonstatutory double patenting rejection is based on a judicially created doctrine grounded in public policy (a policy reflected in the statute) so as to prevent the unjustified or improper timewise extension of the “right to exclude” granted by a patent and to prevent possible harassment by multiple assignees. A nonstatutory double patenting rejection is appropriate where the conflicting claims are not identical, but at least one examined application claim is not patentably distinct from the reference claim(s) because the examined application claim is either anticipated by, or would have been obvious over, the reference claim(s). See, e.g., In re Berg, 140 F.3d 1428, 46 USPQ2d 1226 (Fed. Cir. 1998); In re Goodman, 11 F.3d 1046, 29 USPQ2d 2010 (Fed. Cir. 1993); In re Longi, 759 F.2d 887, 225 USPQ 645 (Fed. Cir. 1985); In re Van Ornum, 686 F.2d 937, 214 USPQ 761 (CCPA 1982); In re Vogel, 422 F.2d 438, 164 USPQ 619 (CCPA 1970); In re Thorington, 418 F.2d 528, 163 USPQ 644 (CCPA 1969).
A timely filed terminal disclaimer in compliance with 37 CFR 1.321(c) or 1.321(d) may be used to overcome an actual or provisional rejection based on nonstatutory double patenting provided the reference application or patent either is shown to be commonly owned with the examined application, or claims an invention made as a result of activities undertaken within the scope of a joint research agreement. See MPEP § 717.02 for applications subject to examination under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA as explained in MPEP § 2159. See MPEP § 2146 et seq. for applications not subject to examination under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA . A terminal disclaimer must be signed in compliance with 37 CFR 1.321(b).
The filing of a terminal disclaimer by itself is not a complete reply to a nonstatutory double patenting (NSDP) rejection. A complete reply requires that the terminal disclaimer be accompanied by a reply requesting reconsideration of the prior Office action. Even where the NSDP rejection is provisional the reply must be complete. See MPEP § 804, subsection I.B.1. For a reply to a non-final Office action, see 37 CFR 1.111(a). For a reply to final Office action, see 37 CFR 1.113(c). A request for reconsideration while not provided for in 37 CFR 1.113(c) may be filed after final for consideration. See MPEP §§ 706.07(e) and 714.13.
The USPTO Internet website contains terminal disclaimer forms which may be used. Please visit www.uspto.gov/patent/patents-forms. The actual filing date of the application in which the form is filed determines what form (e.g., PTO/SB/25, PTO/SB/26, PTO/AIA /25, or PTO/AIA /26) should be used. A web-based eTerminal Disclaimer may be filled out completely online using web-screens. An eTerminal Disclaimer that meets all requirements is auto-processed and approved immediately upon submission. For more information about eTerminal Disclaimers, refer to www.uspto.gov/patents/apply/applying-online/eterminal-disclaimer.
Claims 1-4 are provisionally rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being
unpatentable over claim 1-4 of copending Application No. 18/782,390 (reference application). Although the claims at issue are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other because the operator of a golf vehicle would be using a portable device, the golf cart is merely intended use.
This is a provisional nonstatutory double patenting rejection because the patentably indistinct claims have not in fact been patented.
Instant Application: 18/782,384
US Pub No. US 20260032404 A1
Copending Application: 18/782,390
US Pub No. US 20260032403 A1
1. A golf course geofence system comprising: a remote computing device configured to:
receive a request from a portable device to generate a geofence at a current location of the portable device on a golf course, the request including at least one of (a) a first request to generate a predefined shape geofence or (b) a second request to generate a freeform geofence;
acquire position data regarding a position of the portable device; and
generate the geofence at the current location in response to the request and based on the position data.
2. The golf course geofence system of claim 1, further comprising the portable device, wherein the portable device is configured to prompt a user to edit or delete an existing geofence based on the location of the portable device.
3. The golf course geofence system of claim 1, wherein the request includes a function of the geofence, wherein the function includes at least one of a keep-out boundary, a keep-in boundary, or a warning boundary.
4. The golf course geofence system of claim 1, wherein the remote computing device is configured to: monitor a vehicle location of a vehicle relative to the geofence; and transmit a signal to the vehicle in response the vehicle location indicating that the vehicle has entered, has exited, or is approaching the geofence, the signal configured cause the vehicle to adjust operation thereof or provide a warning to an operator thereof.
1. A golf course system comprising: one or more processing circuits including one or more memory devices and one or more processors, the one or more memory devices configured to store instructions thereon that, when executed by the one or more processors, cause the one or more processors to: receive a request from an operator of a golf vehicle to generate a geofence at a current location of the golf vehicle on a golf course, the request including at least one of (a) a first request to generate a predefined shape geofence or (b) a second request to generate a freeform geofence;
acquire position data regarding a position of the golf vehicle; and
generate the geofence at the current location in response to the request and based on the position data.
2.The golf course system of claim 1, wherein the instructions cause the one or more processors to prompt the operator to edit or delete an existing geofence based on the current location of the vehicle.
3.The golf course system of claim 1, wherein the request includes a function of the geofence, wherein the function includes at least one of a keep-out boundary, a keep-in boundary, or a warning boundary.
4.The golf course system of claim 1, wherein the instructions cause the one or more processors to: monitor a vehicle location of one or more vehicles on the golf course relative to the geofence; and transmit a signal to at least one vehicle of the one or more vehicles in response the vehicle location indicating that the at least one vehicle has entered, has exited, or is approaching the geofence, the signal configured cause the at least one vehicle to adjust operation thereof or provide a warning to an operator thereof.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(b):
(b) CONCLUSION.—The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph:
The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the applicant regards as his invention.
Claims 7-13, 17-18 and 20 rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor (or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the applicant), regards as the invention.
Claim 1 recites “the request including at least one of (a) a first request to generate a predefined shape geofence or (b) a second request to generate a freeform geofence”, which is in the alternative. Therefore, if the alternative in claim 1 for each respective claim is selected then the dependent claims would be rendered indefinite.
As exemplary, claim 7 recites “wherein the menu of user selectable options includes an option to generate the predefined shape geofence.” which is directed only toward a predefined shape so if you select freeform shape in claim 1, then claim 7 which is directed toward predefined shape would be indefinite.
Similarly, claim 9 recites “wherein the menu of user selectable options includes an option to generate the freeform geofence.” which is directed only toward a freeform shape, so if you select predefined shape in claim 1, then claim 9 would be indefinite. Applicant is encouraged to amend claims so that it is clear what is being claimed and so that the limitations are consistent with claim 1.
For the purposes of examining, the Examiner acknowledges the alternative and only “a first request to generate a predefined shape geofence” will be addressed. Therefore the claims that are directed to generate a freeform geofence (i.e. 9-10,12-13,18,20), have no patentable weight.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 103 which forms the basis for all obviousness rejections set forth in this Office action:
A patent for a claimed invention may not be obtained, notwithstanding that the claimed invention is not identically disclosed as set forth in section 102, if the differences between the claimed invention and the prior art are such that the claimed invention as a whole would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which the claimed invention pertains. Patentability shall not be negated by the manner in which the invention was made.
The factual inquiries 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, 3-5, 11, 15-17 and 19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Lee Sang (KR102778310B1 and Lee Sang hereinafter) in view of Kern, JR. et al (US20160381502A1 and Kern hereinafter).
Regarding Claim 1, Lee Sang teaches a golf course geofence system (see Drawing 1, element S) comprising: a remote computing device (see Drawing 1, element 200) configured to: (i.e. FIG. 1, a geofencing-based automatic speed control system (S) for a golf cart according to an embodiment of the present invention is configured to include a smart device (100) that sets a no-drive zone for a golf cart (10) through geofencing, monitors the driving status of a golf cart (10)) Page 2, the request including at least one of (a) a first request to generate a predefined shape geofence (i.e. an operating server (200) that stores and manages geographical conditions including an orthophoto of each golf course (i.e. predefined shape) and latitude, longitude, and height data) Page 2 or
(b) a second request to generate a freeform geofence (i.e. technology for controlling the operation of a golf cart so that it can only drive in a zone set through geofencing, automatically adjusting the speed in stages by integrating an orthophoto of a golf course and latitude, longitude, and height data, and driving autonomously while providing real-time guidance (i.e. freeform geofence) on driving conditions including terrain and distance information through a smart device.) Page 2;
Lee Sang doesn’t explicitly teach
receive a request from a portable device to generate a geofence at a current location of the portable device
acquire position data regarding a position of the portable device; and generate the geofence at the current location in response to the request and based on the position data.
However in a similar field of endeavor Kern teaches
receive a request from a portable device to generate a geofence at a current location of the portable device (i.e. receiving manual user input requesting the dynamic creation of a geo-fence as in 120. For example, the manual user input can include user input received by a website or a mobile application, for example, via the user's mobile device. The manual user input can also include user input received via a user input device, for example, a physical button, connected to or associated with, either physically or wirelessly, the GPS tracker device.) Para [0022],
acquire position data regarding a position of the portable device (i.e. The GPS tracker device 300 can be located at Position A, and the geo-fence 310 can be created at a predetermined radius R around Position A.) Para [0023]; and generate the geofence at the current location in response to the request and based on the position data (i.e. The GPS tracker device 300 can be located at Position A, and the geo-fence 310 can be created at a predetermined radius R around Position A… the manual user input received as in 120 can identify the distance of the radius R. Once the geo-fence is created as in 130, the method 100 can include determining whether the GPS tracker device 300 has crossed (i.e. current location) the geo-fence 310 as in 140.) Para [0024].
Therefore, it would have been obvious for one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the teachings of Lee Sang with the teachings suggested by Kern. The motivation would be for dynamic creation of a geo-fence, see Kern at Abstract.
Regarding Claim 15, Lee Sang in view of Kern, Lee Sang-Kern hereinafter, suggests all the limitations of claim 1 in device form rather than system form. Further Lee Sang discloses a device (i.e. FIG. 1, a geofencing-based automatic speed control system (S) for a golf cart according to an embodiment of the present invention is configured to include a smart device (100) that sets a no-drive zone for a golf cart (10) through geofencing, monitors the driving status of a golf cart (10)) Page 2 and Drawing 1, element 100. Therefore, the rejection of claim 1 applies equally as well to the limitations of claim 15.
Regarding Claim 3, Lee Sang-Kern teaches all the limitations of claim 1 as discussed above. Further Lee Sang teaches wherein the request includes a function of the geofence, wherein the function includes at least one of a keep-out boundary, a keep-in boundary, or a warning boundary (see Drawing 5; i.e. transmits one of the driving status of the golf cart (10) that is matched with the identification ID, information on no-driving zones, an orthophoto of the golf course, and geographical conditions including latitude, longitude, and height data, warning information, or safety level to the smart device (100).) Page 5.
Regarding Claim 4, Lee Sang-Kern teaches all the limitations of claim 1 as discussed above. Further Lee Sang teaches wherein the remote computing device is configured to: monitor a vehicle location of a vehicle relative to the geofence (i.e. the smart device (100) monitors the driving status of the golf cart (10) and transmits a control signal to the golf cart (10) for adjusting the driving speed and driving direction (S604). Next, the smart device (100) determines whether the golf cart (10) is expected to drive into a no-driving zone (S606).) Page 5; and transmit a signal to the vehicle in response the vehicle location (i.e. the smart device (100) monitors the driving status of the golf cart (10) and transmits a control signal to the golf cart (10) for adjusting the driving speed and driving direction (S604).) Page 5 indicating that the vehicle has entered, has exited, or is approaching the geofence (see Drawing 5 for normal (i.e. entered the geofence boundary), warning (i.e. approaching the geofence boundary) and danger (i.e. exited the geofence boundary) status messages for the golf cart), the signal configured cause the vehicle to adjust operation thereof (i.e. transmits a control signal to the golf cart (10) for adjusting the driving speed and driving direction (S604).) Page 5 or provide a warning to an operator thereof (see Drawing 5; i.e. As a result of the judgment in step S606, if the golf cart (10) is expected to drive into a no-driving zone, the smart device (100) outputs warning information to induce movement to a safe zone (S608).) Page 5.
Regarding Claim 5, Lee Sang-Kern teaches all the limitations of claim 1 as discussed above. Further Lee Sang teaches wherein the remote computing device is configured to: overlay the geofence onto a map of the golf course (see Drawing 5); and apply the geofence to a physical location on the golf course corresponding with the map (see Drawing 5).
Regarding Claim 11 and Claim 17, Lee Sang-Kern teaches all the limitations of claims 1 and 15, respectively, as discussed above. Further Kern teaches wherein the remote computing device is configured to: receive the first request to generate the predefined shape geofence (i.e. receives the manual user input requesting the dynamic creation of a geo-fence as in 120, the method 100 can include creating the geo-fence as in 130.) Para [0023], the first request including a selection of a respective preset shape from a plurality of preset shapes and one or more dimensions for the respective preset shape from the portable device (i.e. The GPS tracker device 300 can be located at Position A (i.e. current location), and the geo-fence 310 can be created at a predetermined (i.e. the recited preset) radius R (i.e. dimensions) around Position A…the manual user input received as in 120 can identify the distance of the radius R.) Para [0023]; and generate the geofence based on the respective preset shape, the one or more dimensions, and the current location of the portable device (i.e. The GPS tracker device 300 can be located at Position A (i.e. current location), and the geo-fence 310 can be created at a predetermined (i.e. the recited preset) radius R (i.e. dimensions) around Position A…the manual user input received as in 120 can identify the distance of the radius R.) Para [0023].
Regarding Claim 16, Lee Sang-Kern teaches all the limitations of claim 15 as discussed above. Further Kern teaches wherein the one or more processing circuits include at least one of (a) a first processing circuit for the portable device (i.e. the GPS tracker device 410 can include a transceiver 412, a user interface device 414, control circuitry 416, one or more programmable processors 418, and executable control software 420 stored on a transitory or non-transitory computer readable medium) Para [0032] or (b) a second processing circuit remote from the portable device (i.e. Similarly, the remote computer or server 430 can include a transceiver 432, a user interface device 434, control circuitry 436, one or more programmable processors 438, and executable control software 440 stored on a transitory or non-transitory computer readable medium,) Para [0032].
Regarding Claim 19, Lee Sang teaches (i.e. the smart device (100) monitors the driving status of the golf cart (10) and transmits a control signal to the golf cart (10) for adjusting the driving speed and driving direction (S604). Next, the smart device (100) determines whether the golf cart (10) is expected to drive into a no-driving zone (S606).) Page 5; and transmitting, by the one or more processing circuits, a signal to the vehicle in response the vehicle location (i.e. the smart device (100) monitors the driving status of the golf cart (10) and transmits a control signal to the golf cart (10) for adjusting the driving speed and driving direction (S604).) Page 5 indicating that the vehicle has entered, has exited, or is approaching the geofence (see Drawing 5 for normal (i.e. entered the geofence boundary), warning (i.e. approaching the geofence boundary) and danger (i.e. exited the geofence boundary) status messages for the golf cart), the signal configured cause the vehicle to adjust operation thereof (i.e. transmits a control signal to the golf cart (10) for adjusting the driving speed and driving direction (S604).) Page 5 or provide a warning to an operator thereof (see Drawing 5; i.e. As a result of the judgment in step S606, if the golf cart (10) is expected to drive into a no-driving zone, the smart device (100) outputs warning information to induce movement to a safe zone (S608).) Page 5.
Lee Sang doesn’t explicitly teach
a method comprising: receiving, by one or more processing circuits, a request from a user of a portable device to generate a geofence at a current location of the portable device; acquiring, by the one or more processing circuits, position data regarding a position of the portable device; generating, by the one or more processing circuits, the geofence at the current location in response to the request and based on the position data;
However in a similar field of endeavor Kern teaches
a method comprising: receiving, by one or more processing circuits, a request from a user of a portable device to generate a geofence at a current location of the portable device(i.e. receiving manual user input requesting the dynamic creation of a geo-fence as in 120. For example, the manual user input can include user input received by a website or a mobile application, for example, via the user's mobile device. The manual user input can also include user input received via a user input device, for example, a physical button, connected to or associated with, either physically or wirelessly, the GPS tracker device.) Para [0022]; acquiring, by the one or more processing circuits, position data regarding a position of the portable device (i.e. The GPS tracker device 300 can be located at Position A, and the geo-fence 310 can be created at a predetermined radius R around Position A.) Para [0023]; generating, by the one or more processing circuits, the geofence at the current location in response to the request and based on the position data(i.e. The GPS tracker device 300 can be located at Position A, and the geo-fence 310 can be created at a predetermined radius R around Position A… the manual user input received as in 120 can identify the distance of the radius R. Once the geo-fence is created as in 130, the method 100 can include determining whether the GPS tracker device 300 has crossed (i.e. current location) the geo-fence 310 as in 140.) Para [0024].
Therefore, it would have been obvious for one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the teachings of Lee Sang with the teachings suggested by Kern. The motivation would be for dynamic creation of a geo-fence, see Kern at Abstract.
Claims 2, 6-8 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Lee Sang (KR102778310B1 and Lee Sang hereinafter) in view of Kern, JR. et al (US20160381502A1 and Kern hereinafter) and further in view of Rathod (US 20180350144 A1 and Rathod hereinafter).
Regarding Claim 2, Lee Sang-Kern hereinafter, teaches all the limitations of claim 1 as discussed above. Further Rathod teaches wherein the portable device is configured to prompt a user to edit or delete an existing geofence based on the location of the portable device (i.e. Geofence created by user can be edited or deleted. To mark a location of interest, user specifies its latitude and longitude. To adjust the proximity for the location, user adds a radius. The latitude, longitude, and radius define a geofence, creating a circular area, or fence, around the location of interest.) Para [0418].
Regarding Claim 6, Lee Sang-Kern teaches all the limitations of claim 1 as discussed above. Further Kern teaches wherein the portable device includes: a position sensor (i.e. The GPS tracker (i.e. position sensor) device 300 can be located at Position A, and the geo-fence 310 can be created at a predetermined radius R around Position A.) Para [0023]; a user interface including a display (i.e. the GPS tracker device 410 can include a transceiver 412 (i.e. communications interface), a user interface device 414) Para [0032] and (i.e. the manual user input can include user input received by a website or a mobile application, for example, via the user's mobile device. The manual user input can also include user input received via a user input device, for example, a physical button, connected to or associated with, either physically or wirelessly, the GPS tracker device.) Para [0022]; a communications interface configured to facilitate wireless communications with the remote computing device (i.e. the GPS tracker device 410 can include a transceiver 412 (i.e. communications interface), a user interface device 414) Para [0032];
Lee Sang -Kern don’t explicitly teach
However in a similar field of endeavor Rathod teaches
a controller configured to: cause the display to display a menu of user selectable options (i.e. There are three basic types of geofences available: Circle—geographical area with a given center and the shape of a circle with a minimum radius of 20 meters (radius and center of the circle are defined by user) 3320. Polygon—area bounded by an arbitrary polygon with any number of vertices (user can draw any type of geofence 3344 on map 3345). Route—allows creating a virtual perimeter between two (or more) points 3571/3573/3572.) Para [0416]; receive a selection from the user interface to create the geofence (i.e. User can draw a geofence on the map: Circle—move a circle with a mouse, having pressed the center of the circle. To change the size of the circle pulls the point on the edge of the circle. Polygon—initially has a form of the correct pentagon, which can be easily and randomly changed. To add new vertices user need to pull the mouse over the center of one of the polygon's sides. To delete a vertex just e.g. double-click on it. Route—user need to choose start and end points, the system will automatically build a route between them.) Para [0417]; and transmit the request to the remote computing device in response to the selection (the system will automatically build a route between them.) Para [0417].
Therefore, it would have been obvious for one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the teachings of KR102778310B1-Kern with the teachings suggested by Rathod. The motivation would be for using geofences to define virtual perimeters, see Rathod at [0416].
Regarding Claim 7, Lee Sang -Kern in view of Rathod, KR102778310B1-Kern-Rathod hereinafter teaches all the limitations of claim 6 as discussed above. Further Rathod teaches wherein the menu of user selectable options includes an option to generate the predefined shape geofence (i.e. There are three basic types of geofences available: Circle—geographical area with a given center and the shape of a circle with a minimum radius of 20 meters (radius and center of the circle are defined by user) 3320. Polygon—area bounded by an arbitrary polygon with any number of vertices (user can draw any type of geofence 3344 on map 3345). Route—allows creating a virtual perimeter between two (or more) points 3571/3573/3572.) Para [0416].
Regarding Claim 8, Lee Sang -Kern-Rathod teaches all the limitations of claim 7 as discussed above. Further Rathod teaches wherein, in response to a first selection of the option to generate the predefined shape geofence, the controller is configured to: cause the display to display a library of preset shapes in response to the first selection (i.e. There are three basic types of geofences available: Circle—geographical area with a given center and the shape of a circle with a minimum radius of 20 meters (radius and center of the circle are defined by user) 3320. Polygon—area bounded by an arbitrary polygon with any number of vertices (user can draw any type of geofence 3344 on map 3345). Route—allows creating a virtual perimeter between two (or more) points 3571/3573/3572.) Para [0416]; receive a second selection of a respective preset shape from the library of preset shapes via the user interface (i.e. User can draw a geofence on the map: Circle—move a circle with a mouse, having pressed the center of the circle. To change the size of the circle pulls the point on the edge of the circle. Polygon—initially has a form of the correct pentagon, which can be easily and randomly changed. To add new vertices user need to pull the mouse over the center of one of the polygon's sides. To delete a vertex just e.g. double-click on it. ) Para [0417]; receive an input via the user interface regarding one or more dimensions of the respective preset shape (i.e. There are three basic types of geofences available: Circle—geographical area with a given center and the shape of a circle with a minimum radius of 20 meters (radius and center of the circle are defined by user) 3320. Polygon—area bounded by an arbitrary polygon with any number of vertices (user can draw any type of geofence 3344 on map 3345). Route—allows creating a virtual perimeter between two (or more) points 3571/3573/3572.) Para [0416]; and transmit the respective preset shape and the one or more dimensions to the remote computing device.
Claim 14 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over (KR102778310B1 and Lee Sang hereinafter) in view of Kern, JR. et al (US20160381502A1 and Kern hereinafter) and further in view of Cornwall (US 9924315 B1 and Cornwall hereinafter).
Regarding Claim 14, Lee Sang-Kern teaches all the limitations of claim 1 as discussed above. Further Cornwall teaches wherein the remote computing device is configured to: determine that the portable device is in or near a pre-existing geofence based on the position data (i.e. Geofence configuration data 306 inputted into the mapping module 207 may further configure one or more acceptable geofence transitions that may be used to trigger the notifications displayed by the child geofence or the altered notifications displayed by the combination of the child and parent geofence. The geofence transitions that may trigger the geofences may include entering, exiting or dwelling within the geofence.) Col. 7, lns 25-32; cause the portable device to provide a notification regarding an ability to edit or delete the pre-existing geofence in response to the portable device being in or near the pre-existing geofence (i.e. A triggered geofence may transmit a push notification or other campaign message to a client device 101 interacting with the child geofence or child geofence that has been modified by an overlapping parent geofence, once each of the geofences has been established and activated.) Col. 7, lns. 32-37; receive a signal from the portable device in response to the notification, the signal including one or more inputs to modify or delete the pre-existing geofence (i.e. In step 807, the parent geofence may be encoded, compressed and/or transmitted by the server module 307 over network 120 to the client device 101. The client device 101 may receive the geofence data of the parent geofence and map the parent geofence to the mapping interface 302 via the mapping module 207. The server module 307 may periodically transmit updated geofence data to the mapping module 207 and/or the mapping module 207 may request, retrieve or download updated geofence data periodically.) Col. 16, lns. 9-17; modify or delete the pre-existing geofence based on the signal (i.e. Updated geofence data may include updates to the number (i.e. delete) of parent or child geofences, the status (active or inactive) of the parent or child geofence, geofence location changes (i.e. modify), changes to the notification messages and/or changes in triggering transitions.) Col. 16, lns. 17-22.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Anderson (9788156B1) suggests creation/generation of freeform geofences; determining a geofence by receiving an indication to determine a first location. The method includes determining a second location. Furthermore, the method includes connecting sequentially each of a set of sequentially determined locations to determine a geofence, wherein the set of sequentially determined locations includes at least the first location and the second location.
Anderson (US 20180139573 A1) suggests creation/generation of freeform geofences; and storing a plurality of pre-defined geofences in a database, storing a plurality of geofence activation rules in a database, each activation rule being based on data obtained from at least one member selected from the group consisting of analytics data, calendaring data and on-demand data, enable a geofence activation rule, selecting at least one pre-defined geofence based on the enabled geofence activation rule and activating and deactivating the at least one selected pre-defined geofence based on the enabled a geofence activation rule.
Ziskind (US 20160212586 A1) suggests creation/generation of freeform geofences; (i.e. providing start and stop motion triggers, the user may track an asset by receiving notices when the asset stops and when the asset starts moving again. This allows the user to track the asset without having prior knowledge of where the device will be located when the conditions for location-based tracking will be met. Additionally, once the asset has stopped moving, the location-based tracking mechanism may automatically create a geofence around the asset such that the user will receive a notification when the asset has left the newly defined area.) Para [0007] and (once a stop motion trigger 74 is met, the asset device 30 may continuously record the current location 25 of the asset device 30 until a start motion trigger 72 is met and assign each point recorded to a geofence 47. In this way, the asset device 30 may map out a new location to create a comprehensive geofence 47 around the recorded current locations 25 [0064]
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Iyonda L. Lewis whose telephone number is (571)272-4440. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday 8:00am - 4:00pm.
Examiner interviews are available via telephone, in-person, and video conferencing using a USPTO supplied web-based collaboration tool. To schedule an interview, applicant is encouraged to use the USPTO Automated Interview Request (AIR) at http://www.uspto.gov/interviewpractice.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Alison Slater can be reached at (571) 270-0375. 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.
/IYONDA L LEWIS/Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2647
Iyonda.Lewis@USPTO.gov
/Alison Slater/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2647
Prosecution Insights