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 .
Response to Amendment
Claims 1-9 and 11-15 are pending in this application.
Claim objection are withdrawn.
Applicant’s arguments on claim rejections 35 USC 102 and 35 USC 103, filed 5/30/2026, have been fully considered and are persuasive. Therefore, the rejection has been withdrawn. However, upon further consideration, a new ground(s) of rejection is made in view of Holmes.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to claims 1-9 and 11-15 have been considered but are moot because the new ground of rejection does not rely on any reference applied in the prior rejection of record for any teaching or matter specifically challenged in the argument.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 103 which forms the basis for all obviousness rejections set forth in this Office action:
A patent for a claimed invention may not be obtained, notwithstanding that the claimed invention is not identically disclosed as set forth in section 102, if the differences between the claimed invention and the prior art are such that the claimed invention as a whole would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which the claimed invention pertains. Patentability shall not be negated by the manner in which the invention was made.
Claims 1-3, 5, 7-8 and 11-15 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Padmanabhan et al. (US 2020/0250683, hereinafter “Padmanabhan”) in view of Holmes (US 2022/0392355).
Regarding claim 1, Padmanabhan teaches A system comprising at least one processor configured to (Padmanabhan, [0042]: discussing about a system having at least a processor):
run at least one digital twin of at least one real-world asset (Padmanabhan, [0042]: discussing about generating a digital twin for a finished goods product by the product manufacturer, the digital twin having embedded therein a new certificate of authenticity generated using one of the plurality of templates, the new certificate of authenticity uniquely identifying the finished goods product by a product identifier specified with the new certificate of authenticity; transacting the digital twin onto the private blockchain by adding an asset to the private blockchain to store the digital twin;);
receive datasets from a plurality of data sources, the plurality of data sources being communicably coupled to the at least one processor via a first application programming interface (API) (Padmanabhan, [0240]: At block 730, processing logic receives, via the API, a transaction for the blockchain matching the newly declared smart action and executes the smart contract to enforce capture of the one or more additional mandatory fields.);
update the at least one digital twin, based on the received datasets (Padmanabhan, [0241]: At block 735, processing logic adds the transaction to a new block on the blockchain pursuant to successful capture of the one or more additional mandatory fields, in which the one or more additional mandatory fields are included within a payload portion of the added transaction. [0248]: According to another embodiment of methods 600 and 700, the base function specified by the new custom function declared is an UPDATE asset command function; in which adding the transaction to the new block on the blockchain includes executing the UPDATE asset command function to modify an existing asset recorded by the blockchain…);
receive, from a user device, a query for obtaining information from the at least one digital twin, the user device being communicably coupled to the at least one processor via a second API (Padmanabhan, [0055]: Further depicted is the host organization 110 receiving input and other requests 115 from customer organizations 105A-C via network 125 (such as a public Internet). For example, incoming search queries, database queries, API requests, interactions with displayed graphical user interfaces and displays at the user client devices 106A-C, or other inputs may be received from the customer organizations 105A-C to be processed against the database system 130, or such queries may be constructed from the inputs and other requests 115 for execution against the databases 155A and 155B or the query interface 180, pursuant to which results 116 are then returned to an originator or requestor, such as a user of one of a user client device 106A-C at a customer organization 105A-C.);
process the query to generate a response comprising said information (Padmanabhan, [0055]: discussing about incoming search queries, database queries, API requests to be processed against the database system 130 or the databases 155A and 155B); and
send the response to the user device (Padmanabhan, [0055]: discussing about results 116 are then returned to an originator or requestor, such as a user of one of a user client device 106A-C at a customer organization 105A-C).
Padmanabhan does not explicitly teach wherein the at least one real-world asset is an aircraft; and utilize the response to calculate at least one of carbon dioxide emissions and contrail formation for a given flight path, and propose an alternate flight path of the aircraft based on the calculated at least one of: carbon dioxide emissions or contrail formation.
Holmes teaches wherein the at least one real-world asset is an aircraft; and utilize the response to calculate at least one of carbon dioxide emissions and contrail formation for a given flight path, and propose an alternate flight path of the aircraft based on the calculated at least one of: carbon dioxide emissions or contrail formation (Holmes, [0019]: As mentioned above, the preparation of a flight plan, which includes the selection of a route will, if the route is followed, define corresponding costs in terms of consumption or generation of certain parameters or values that are likely to correspond to the route. These costs in terms of consumption or generation of parameters may include time consumption, fuel consumption, carbon generation, contrail generation, turbulence, and/or the like. [0040]: Example embodiments may include modules or components that are configured not only to track these trajectories, but to continuously monitor and update possible trajectories associated with one or more of the aircraft so that, for example, optimized routes can be suggested with respect to individually selectable parameters (e.g., time, fuel cost, carbon footprint, contrail generation, turbulence avoidance, etc.).).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the generating digital twin of Padmanabhan with the teaching about optimization of flight plan of Holmes because it may be of significant value for improving safety and efficiency for current operations of commercial, business, general aviation and uncrewed aerial systems (UAS) aircraft operations worldwide (Holmes, [0146]).
Regarding claim 2, Padmanabhan in view of Holmes teaches wherein the first API is used to query an index of the plurality of data sources, for receiving the datasets from the plurality of data sources (Padmanabhan, [0055]: Further depicted is the host organization 110 receiving input and other requests 115 from customer organizations 105A-C via network 125 (such as a public Internet). For example, incoming search queries, database queries, API requests, interactions with displayed graphical user interfaces and displays at the user client devices 106A-C, or other inputs may be received from the customer organizations 105A-C to be processed against the database system 130, or such queries may be constructed from the inputs and other requests 115 for execution against the databases 155A and 155B or the query interface 180, pursuant to which results 116 are then returned to an originator or requestor, such as a user of one of a user client device 106A-C at a customer organization 105A-C.).
Regarding claim 3, Padmanabhan in view of Holmes teaches wherein the at least one digital twin is updated by indexing or by running at least one data processing pipeline on data belonging to the received datasets (Padmanabhan, [0421]: For example, according to one embodiment, such methodologies may further receive a second transaction requesting retrieval, from the private blockchain, of the updated data record previously written to the blockchain; retrieve the updated data record from the index without interacting with the private blockchain; and return the updated data record retrieved from the index responsive to the second transaction requesting the retrieval. Thus, in addition to indexing location information, contents of the records may also be retrieved, wholly negating the need to transact with the blockchain for a read-only retrieval request which has been previously been indexed.).
Regarding claim 5, Padmanabhan in view of Holmes teaches wherein the at least one processor is configured to receive, from the user device, a customized tag associated with the query, wherein the customized tag provides extra information to facilitate processing of the query (Padmanabhan, [0186] and Fig. 4B: Still further depicted is the add blockchain data query 474 element which may be dragged and dropped (e.g., action 405) into the configured smart action 462 to create a blockchain data query for use with a smart action upon its instantiation. Such a query may seek to retrieve data from the blockchain during a transaction for assets and coins created via the declared smart action. Still further shown here is the add customer ID lookup 474 which may be utilized to perform a lookup from the host organization or the commerce cloud platform or the blockchain utilizing a user's customer ID when known. Alternatively, the add unknown customer matching 474 function may be dragged and dropped (e.g., action 405) into the configured smart action 462 so as to enable alternative customer matching when a customer ID is unknown. For instance, matching may be based on data elements such as the customer's name, phone number, rewards card ID, credit card number, receipt number, transaction ID, etc. [0187]: Once the administrator has finished arranging the configured smart action 462 via the drag and drop 405 actions or adding supplementary code to the various configured blocks as necessary (e.g., to define a blockchain query or a matching function, etc.) then the administrator may click the accept button to save and release the configured smart action 462 for use with the specifically defined transactions based on the transaction type trigger 481.).
Regarding claim 7, Padmanabhan in view of Holmes teaches wherein the first API and the second API collectively provide an open multi-API specification upon which a platform for data querying is built (Padmanabhan, [0058]: In one embodiment, the query interface 180 implements an Application Programming Interface (API) through which queries may be executed against the databases 155A and 155B or the other data stores. [0059]: In certain embodiments, the Application Programming Interface (API) of the query interface 180 provides an API model through which programmers, developers, and administrators may interact with the blockchain services interface 190 or the database system 130, or both, as the needs and particular requirements of the API caller dictate. [0240]: At block 730, processing logic receives, via the API, a transaction for the blockchain matching the newly declared smart action and executes the smart contract to enforce capture of the one or more additional mandatory fields.).
Regarding claim 8, Padmanabhan in view of Holmes teaches wherein the at least one processor is configured to send the received datasets to at least one other digital twin being run on at least one other processor, wherein the at least one processor and the at least one other processor are communicably coupled to each other (Padmanabhan, [0399]: According to another embodiment, method 1300 further includes: receiving a digital signature for the new certificate of authenticity from the product manufacturer; applying the digital signature for the new certificate of authenticity forming a digitally signed certificate of authenticity attesting to the product manufacturer's certification of authenticity of the finished goods product identified by the product identifier specified with the new certificate of authenticity; and in which transacting the digital twin onto the private blockchain includes transacting the digital twin having the digitally signed certificate of authenticity embedded therein onto the private blockchain.
Claim 11 is rejected under the same rationale as claim 1.
Claim 12 is rejected under the same rationale as claim 2.
Claim 13 is rejected under the same rationale as claim 3.
Claim 14 is rejected under the same rationale as claim 5.
Claim 15 is rejected under the same rationale as claim 1. Padmanabhan also teaches A computer program product for implementing at least one interactive digital twin, the computer program product comprising a non-transitory machine-readable data storage medium having stored thereon program instructions (Padmanabhan, [0045]: Such a computer program may be stored in a computer readable storage medium, such as, but not limited to, any type of disk including optical disks, CD-ROMs, and magnetic-optical disks, read-only memories (ROMs), random access memories (RAMs), EPROMs, EEPROMs, magnetic or optical cards, or any type of media suitable for storing electronic instructions, each coupled to a computer system bus.).
Claims 4 and 9 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Padmanabhan in view of Holmes and further in view of Deutsch et al. (US 2019/0138970, hereinafter “Deutsch”).
Regarding claim 4, Padmanabhan in view of Holmes teaches the system of claim 1 as discussed above. Padmanabhan in view of Holmes does not explicitly teach wherein a given data processing pipeline comprises a sequence of data processes based at least on a type of real-world asset corresponding to the at least one digital twin.
Deutsch teaches wherein a given data processing pipeline comprises a sequence of data processes based at least on a type of real-world asset corresponding to the at least one digital twin ([0094]: FIG. 8 illustrates a structure 800 of a behavior of a contextual digital twin that can be associated with a twin template in accordance with an example embodiment. The behavior 800 has a policy object 802, a requirements object 804, and actions 840 (which are what the behavior is). It's included in a template 800 because behaviors are associated with a template of a digital twin. Actions 840 may include little snippets of code that take some executable action on a twin or with respect to a twin. A collection of actions 840 is referred to as a “skill” 830 but it may also be referred to as a behavior. Actions 840 do most of the work. Actions may be nested. Actions may be sequenced. It's typically a little piece of JavaScript.).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the generating digital twin of Padmanabhan and Holmes with the teaching about the twin template of Deutsch because it can enable users to improve business processes, for example by improving effectiveness of asset maintenance or improving operational performance if appropriate industrial-specific data collection and modeling technology is developed and applied (Deutsch, [0041]).
Regarding claim 9, Padmanabhan in view of Holmes teaches the system of claim 1 as discussed above. Padmanabhan in view of Holmes does not explicitly teach wherein the received datasets comprise at least one of: Automatic Dependent Surveillance Broadcast (ADSB) data, weather prediction data, contrail forecast data.
Deutsch teaches wherein the received datasets comprise at least one of: Automatic Dependent Surveillance Broadcast (ADSB) data, weather prediction data, contrail forecast data ([0101] FIG. 12 illustrates an architecture 1200 of an instance of a resource in accordance with an example embodiment. For example, a resource may be something external to the system that a digital twin may need to call on, for example, a data source to be called on to run a software, etc. such as a web service, and the like. In this example, a weather service (e.g., weather.com, etc.) can be a resource and the weather service can have behaviors and create domain events. The weather service can also be down or have a failure. The weather service can create instances of the resources.).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the generating digital twin of Padmanabhan and Holmes with the teaching about the twin template of Deutsch because it can enable users to improve business processes, for example by improving effectiveness of asset maintenance or improving operational performance if appropriate industrial-specific data collection and modeling technology is developed and applied (Deutsch, [0041]).
Claim 6 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Padmanabhan in view of Holmes and further in view of Marquez et al. (US 2023/0393443, hereinafter “Marquez”).
Regarding claim 6, Padmanabhan in view of Holmes teaches the system of claim 1 as discussed above. Padmanabhan in view of Holmes does not explicitly teach wherein the response is generated in an open format, the open format being at least one of: a comma-separated value (CSV) format, a JavaScript Object Notation (JSON) format, a Keyhole Mark-up Language (KML) format.
Marquez teaches wherein the response is generated in an open format, the open format being at least one of: a comma-separated value (CSV) format, a JavaScript Object Notation (JSON) format, a Keyhole Mark-up Language (KML) format ([0175]: In some embodiments, a network configuration file is a textual description of the digital twin (e.g., the interconnect drawings). Network configuration files may have a flat file format with no structure for indexing and/or no structural relationship between records. Examples of flat file types include plain text files, comma-separated value files, and delimiter-separated value files. A JavaScript object notation format (JSON), or other object notation format that uses human-readable text to transmit data objects consisting of attribute-value pairs, may be used for a network configuration file.).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the generating digital twin of Padmanabhan and Holmes with the teaching about the flat file types of Marquez because it would offer highly portable, easy to create/manipulate in text editors and does not require complex database management software.
Conclusion
Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a). Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a).
A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of the advisory action. In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the mailing date of this final action.
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Brown (US 2006/0155432) discloses that an aircraft 10 is commonly preprogrammed with a flight path 14 and always maintains contact with at least one ground based aircraft monitoring station throughout its flight. In carrying out the methods and systems described herein, aircraft 10 may include one or more sensors 12 calibrated to collect atmospheric information proximate to aircraft 10, that is, the operating environment about aircraft 10. Preferably, aircraft 10 includes a plurality of sensors calibrated to collect atmospheric information including but not limited to moisture, humidity, winds, cross winds, wind speeds, wind shear, altitude, temperature, salinity (salt content), turbulence, air pockets, electrical storms, precipitation, pollution content and the like. Information concerning the pollution content includes but is not limited nitrogen oxides, carbon dioxide, ozone, aerosols, soot, sulfur oxides, turbine engine emissions and the like.
Tal et al. (US 2022/0116742) discloses that stored data also be referred to as digital assets, GIS assets, digital twins, data points, data shape, or such terms used to describe an asset in a real world on a geospatial information system. GIS Assets 201 can be depicted on a map environment in various ways, including as points, lines, polygons, multi-polygons (a group of polygons). The GIS assets 201 are typically stored for use in a database or in data file format, such as a KML, KMZ, Shape File, GeoJSON, CSV, XML, or other file format which can be used to describe an object within a geo-spatial space.
Contact Information
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to PHONG H NGUYEN whose telephone number is (571)270-1766. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday, 8:30am-5pm EST.
Examiner interviews are available via telephone, in-person, and video conferencing using a USPTO supplied web-based collaboration tool. To schedule an interview, applicant is encouraged to use the USPTO Automated Interview Request (AIR) at http://www.uspto.gov/interviewpractice.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Ajay Bhatia can be reached at (571) 272-3906. 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.
/PHONG H NGUYEN/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2156
July 11, 2026
Prosecution Insights