DETAILED ACTION
This Office action has been issued in response to amendment filed February 09, 2026.
Claims 1, 4, 6, 8, 16, 17, 20, 21, 24, 27, 32 and 37 have been amended. Claims 1-4, 6, 8, 11, 16, 17, 19-21, 24, 27-32 and 37 are pending. Applicant’s arguments are carefully and respectfully considered. Accordingly, rejections have been removed where arguments were persuasive, but rejections have been maintained where arguments were not persuasive. Also, a new rejection based on the newly added amendments have been set forth. Accordingly, claims 1-20 are rejected and this action has been made FINAL, as necessitated by amendment.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s argument with regards to 35 USC 103 (i.e., pages 19-22) have been fully considered, but they are not persuasive. Applicant’s argues that Lin in view of Prabhu do not teach or suggest “…Lin, the technical problem Lin aims to solve is the inconvenience to use…Lin is different from that of the present application…no would it have been obvious…solution of the present application…..Lin fails to disclose a sub-planned object model…Lin is complex and cumbersome…Lin requires correlates a spatial model…Lin fails to disclose “generating a corresponding first record using attribute parameters of the target planned object at different times in the future based on the target planned object model corresponding to the times; and generating a corresponding second record using attribute parameters of the sub-object at different times in the future based on the sub-planned object model corresponding to the times; wherein the attribute parameters comprises at least one of an attribute name, a data type, a first spatial attribute, or a member attribute” as claimed in amended claim 1…Lin is different function from the present application. Prabhu fails to disclose a sub-planned object model…..at least one sub-object. Prabhu fails to disclose generating a corresponding….member attribute”. Examiner respectfully disagrees with the applicant’s arguments for several reasons. Amended claims changed the scope of the claim invention. Lin in view of Prabhu in fact teaches the amended claim recited limitations. Lin teaches plan data objects, plan database, future plan data, temporal attribute, and instantiation by production/shift combinations ([0107], [0198], [0210]), which reads the claim limitations of generating a corresponding first record using attribute parameters of the…..planned object at different times in the future based on the…planned object model corresponding to the times”. Lin teaches child-level temporal layer corresponding to the parent-level temporal layer, and the multi-level structure of the spatial model includes at least one parent-level spatial layer and at least one child-level spatial layer corresponding to the parent-level spatial layer ([0116], [0107]), plan data is of a future nature and can exist at a future time point ([0210]), plan data model that contains different versions of the same temporal and spatial statuses, the plan database stores multiple versions of the plan data model. The multiple versions of the plan data model are instantiated into multiple versions of the plan data objects. The plan data objects are the managed objects ([0232]), which reads the limitations of “generating a corresponding second record using attribute parameters of the sub-object at different times in the future based on the sub-planned object model corresponding to the times”. Lin teaches child-level temporal layer corresponding to the parent-level temporal layer, and the multi-level structure of the spatial model includes at least one parent-level spatial layer and at least one child-level spatial layer corresponding to the parent-level spatial layer ([0116], [0107]), temporal distribution can be the number of shifts per day, and the duration of every shift. The number of production process performance data in an actual production line ([0199]), a spatial object in the first-level spatial model as a second-level spatial model, and similarly drawing a spatial object in the (n−1)th-level spatial model as an nth-level spatial model ([0214]), a plan leads to a series of corresponding changes in the sub-plans ([0233]), which reads the claim limitations of “wherein the attribute parameters comprises at least one of an attribute name, a data type, a first spatial attribute, or a member attribute”. Lin does not explicitly teach the limitations of “a target planned object model or the target planned object model”. Although, Lin teaches spatial-temporal database models, such as the idea about object-oriented spatial-temporal models, feature-based spatial-temporal database models, event-based spatial-temporal database models and the like ([0010]). However, in the same field of endeavor, Prabhu teaches the limitations of “a target planned object model or the target planned object model” (see [0079], e.g., plan model include goal model, target values for one or more outcome measures). Therefore, the combined references teach the amended claim recited limitations. In addition, Prabhu teaches the limitations of business entities include hierarchical relationship ([0024]), each plan model can model one or more respective business outcomes and plurality of business unit ([0025]), plans can be adopted by the organization (or a portion of the organization) for accomplishing goals. Plans and goals of different sub-parts of an organization implementing in different times ([0027]), plan models and other parameters designating the levels of aggregation to be employed ([0099]), these features also teach the claim limitations of “generating a corresponding first record using attribute parameters of the target planned object at different times in the future based on the target planned object model corresponding to the times;
generating a corresponding second record using attribute parameters of the sub-object at different times in the future based on the sub-planned object model corresponding to the times”. Therefore, taken alone or the combination of the references teach the amended claim recited limitations. The difference in objectives does not defeat the case for obviousness. Reason or motivation to modify the reference may often suggest what the inventor has done, but for a different purpose or to solve a different problem. It is not necessary that the prior art suggest the combination to achieve the same advantage or result discovered by applicant (see [MPEP § 2144], In re Linter, 458 F.2d 1013, 173 USPQ 560 (CCPA 1972)). Applicants fail to consider the references which are prior art of record (e.g., non-final rejection mailed on 11/21/2025, page 25). The Examiner encourages the full consideration of the references cited in the “Prior Art” on record. Consideration of the references which were cited as the prior art of record is recommended to properly amend the claims of the instant application to be patentably distinguished beyond the prior art of record.
Claim Rejections- 35 USC § 103
4. 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.
5. 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.
6. Claims 1-4, 6, 8, 11, 16, 17, 19-21, 24, 27-32 and 37 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Lin et al. (US 2019/0266138 A1), hereinafter Lin in view of Prabhu et al. (US 2019/0258973 A1), hereinafter Prabhu.
As for claim 1, Lin teaches a computer-implemented method comprising a hardware processor for digital twinning of a planned state of an object, the method comprising: constructing a…..planned object model of a…..planned object and a sub-planned object model of at least one sub-object constituting the…planned object (see [0002], variation-based method to record changes and relations, [0107], e.g., operational status of the to-be-managed object, and the method comprising steps of: modeling the to-be-managed object in consideration of temporal and spatial statuses of the to-be-managed object, [0279], various data types include digital data such as, such as temporal attribute data, spatial attribute data, audio data, video data, image data, enumeration),
wherein each of the….planned object model and the sub-planned object model of the at least one sub-object comprises a time attribute (see [0107], types of resultant management models and spatial and/or temporal attributes of managed objects, [0109], historical data and/or plan data of at least one said managed object at the spatial locations and/or the time points, determining a real-time operational status, a historical operational status and/or a planned operational status of the to-be-managed object);
setting the time attribute of each of the…planned object model and the sub-planned object model of the at least one sub-object to be a future time (see [0107], types of resultant management models and spatial and/or temporal attributes of managed objects, [0109], based on the types of the management models, spatial locations and/or time points of the managed objects, retrieving real-time data, [0201], e.g., set up and then broken down into sub-plans, such as factory-wide monthly plans, factory-wide daily plans, factory-wide shifts, workshop-specific monthly plans, workshop-specific daily plans, and workshop-specific shift plans);
configuring to establish an association relationship between the….planned object model and sub-planned object model of the at least one sub-object; generating a corresponding first record using attribute parameters of the….planned object at different times in the future based on the….planned object model corresponding to the times (see [0107], [0198], [0210]; Also see response to arguments section above);
generating a corresponding second record using attribute parameters of the sub-object at different times in the future based on the sub-planned object model corresponding to the times (see [0116], [0107], [0210], [0232]; Also see response to arguments section above);
wherein the attribute parameters comprises at least one of an attribute name, a data type, a first spatial attribute, or a member attribute (see [0116], [0107], [0199], [0214], [0233]; Also see response to arguments section above).
Lin teaches the claimed invention including the limitations of “planned object model, sub-planned object model” ([0107], [0201]), but does not explicit teach the limitations of
“a target planned object model or the target planned object model”. Although, Lin teaches
spatial-temporal database models, such as the idea about object-oriented spatial-temporal models, feature-based spatial-temporal database models, event-based spatial-temporal database models and the like ([0010]). However, in the same field of endeavor, Prabhu teaches the limitations of “a target planned object model or the target planned object model” (see [0079], e.g., plan model include goal model, target values for one or more outcome measures; Also see response to arguments section above).
Lin and Prabhu both references teach features that are directed to analogous art and they are from the same field of endeavor, such as objects, models, generate relationship among objects or component of those objects and store the data in a databases.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to incorporate Prabhu’s teaching to Lin’s system to generate a dependency models for defining interconnections between models which can be used to facilitate multi-plan model activities. A multi-plan helps a single enterprise having their own respective objectives, plans, and goals commensurate with their respective roles within the enterprise. Thus,
an enterprise can reach its goal, determine which model are most desirable or optimal for the particular enterprise (see Prabhu, [0002]).
As for claim 27, Lin teaches a computer-implemented method comprising a hardware processor subscribing a future state of an object, the method comprising: constructing a…..planned object model of a….planned object and a sub-planned object model of at least one sub-object constituting the…planned object (see [0002], variation-based method to record changes and relations, [0107], e.g., operational status of the to-be-managed object, and the method comprising steps of: modeling the to-be-managed object in consideration of temporal and spatial statuses of the to-be-managed object, [0123], subscription is performed by: having a client send a subscription request, [0279], various data types include digital data such as, such as temporal attribute data, spatial attribute data, audio data, video data, image data, enumeration),
wherein each of the….planned object model and the at least one sub-planned object model of the at least one sub- object comprises a time attribute (see [0107], types of resultant management models and spatial and/or temporal attributes of managed objects, [0109], historical data and/or plan data of at least one said managed object at the spatial locations and/or the time points, determining a real-time operational status, a historical operational status and/or a planned operational status of the to-be-managed object);
setting the time attribute of each of the target planned object model and the sub-planned object model of the at least one sub-object to be a future time (see [0107], types of resultant management models and spatial and/or temporal attributes of managed objects, [0109], based on the types of the management models, spatial locations and/or time points of the managed objects, retrieving real-time data, [0201], e.g., set up and then broken down into sub-plans, such as factory-wide monthly plans, factory-wide daily plans, factory-wide shifts, workshop-specific monthly plans, workshop-specific daily plans, and workshop-specific shift plans);
configure to stablish an association relationship between the…planned object model and the sub-planned object model of the at least one sub-object (see [0024], spatial-temporal database models, such as the idea about object-oriented spatial-temporal models, use either an object-oriented approach or a variation-based method to record spatial changes and relations, [0109], historical data and/or plan data of at least one said managed object at the spatial locations and/or the time points, determining a real-time operational status),
generating a corresponding first record using attribute parameters of the….planned object at different times in the future based on the….planned object model corresponding to the times (see [0107], [0198], [0210]; Also see response to arguments section above);
generating a corresponding second record using attribute parameters of the sub-object at different times in the future based on the sub-planned object model corresponding to the times (see [0116], [0107], [0210], [0232]; Also see response to arguments section above);
wherein the attribute parameters comprises at least one of an attribute name, a data type, a first spatial attribute, or a member attribute (see [0116], [0107], [0199], [0214], [0233]; Also see response to arguments section above).
and generating a subscription item according to a subscription request for a future state of the….planned object, generating subscription information matching the subscription item according to future states of the target planned object model and the sub-planned object model of the at least one sub-object associated with the ….planned object model, and sending the subscription information to a subscriber (see [0123], in response to the subscription request, to the client at least one data record that includes the spatial attribute and/or temporal attribute of to-be-managed object expressed in the natural language, [0124], the server send the query result, yet after the subscription, the server sends query results again when data variation within the spatial-temporal range is detected, [0146], matching the spatial status of the to-be-managed object to the spatial objects in all levels).
Lin teaches the claimed invention including the limitations of “planned object model, sub-planned object model” ([0107], [0201]), but does not explicit teach the limitations of
“a target planned object model or the target planned object model”. Although, Lin teaches
spatial-temporal database models, such as the idea about object-oriented spatial-temporal models, feature-based spatial-temporal database models, event-based spatial-temporal database models and the like ([0010]). However, in the same field of endeavor, Prabhu teaches the limitations of “a target planned object model or the target planned object model” (see [0079], e.g., plan model include goal model, target values for one or more outcome measures; Also see response to arguments section above).
Lin and Prabhu both references teach features that are directed to analogous art and they are from the same field of endeavor, such as objects, models, generate relationship among objects or component of those objects and store the data in a databases.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to incorporate Prabhu’s teaching to Lin’s system to generate a dependency models for defining interconnections between models which can be used to facilitate multi-plan model activities. A multi-plan helps a single enterprise having their own respective objectives, plans, and goals commensurate with their respective roles within the enterprise. Thus,
an enterprise can reach its goal, determine which model are most desirable or optimal for the particular enterprise (see Prabhu, [0002]).
As for claim 37,
The limitations therein have substantially the same scope as claim 1 because claim 37 is a non-transitory computer storage medium claim for implementing those steps of claim 1. Therefore, claim 37 is rejected for at least the same reasons as claim 1.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to incorporate Prabhu’s teaching to Lin’s system to generate a dependency models for defining interconnections between models which can be used to facilitate multi-plan model activities. A multi-plan helps a single enterprise having their own respective objectives, plans, and goals commensurate with their respective roles within the enterprise. Thus,
an enterprise can reach its goal, determine which model are most desirable or optimal for the particular enterprise (see Prabhu, [0002]).
As to claim 2, this claim is rejected based on the same reason as above to reject the claim above and are similarly rejected including the following:
Lin and Prabhu teaches:
wherein the target planned object is a target planned entity, and the sub-object is a sub-entity; or, the target planned object is a target planned event, and the sub-object is a sub-target planned event (see Lin, [0107]; Also, see Prabhu, [0079]).
As to claim 3, this claim is rejected based on the same reason as above to reject the claim above and are similarly rejected including the following:
Lin and Prabhu teaches:
wherein the future time is at least one moment in the future or at least one duration in the future (see Lin, [0176]).
As to claim 4, this claim is rejected based on the same reason as above to reject the claim above and are similarly rejected including the following:
Lin and Prabhu teaches:
wherein the configure to establish the association relationship between the target planned object model and the sub-planned object model of the at least the one sub-object comprises: configure to establish a parent-child relationship between the target planned object model and the sub-planned object model of the at least one sub-object by identifying the target planned object model as a model of a parent planned object and identifying the sub-planned object model as a model of a child planned object configured to belong to the parent planned object (see Lin, [0022], [0107]);
wherein the identifying the sub-planned object model as the model of the child planned object configured to belong to the parent planned object comprises: identifying the sub-planned object model as the model of the child planned object configured to belong to a unique parent planned object (see Lin, [0022], [0029]).
As to claim 6, this claim is rejected based on the same reason as above to reject the claim above and are similarly rejected including the following:
Lin and Prabhu teaches:
wherein in response to determining that the target planned object is a target planned entity, each of the target planned object model and the sub-planned object model of the at least one sub-object further comprises a first spatial attribute, and a value of the first spatial attribute of the sub-planned object model of the at least one sub-object is within a range of a value of the first spatial attribute of the target planned object model (see Lin, [0201]-[0202]);
the first spatial attribute comprises at least one of a spatial range, a spatial position, or a shape: wherein the method further comprises: configure to establish spatial coordinate systems for the target planned object model and the sub- planned object model of the at least one sub-object respectively; the spatial range is used for describing a spatial range where the target planned object and the at least one sub-object are located (see Lin, [0005], [0101], [0214]);
the spatial position is represented by an identifier of a first planned object where the sub-object is spatially located within the spatial range of the target planned object or a coordinate value of the sub-object in the spatial coordinate system of the target planned object model (see Lin, [0004]-[0005], [0008]; Also, see Prabhu, [0079]);
the shape of the target planned object model is represented by coordinates in a spatial coordinate system where the target planned object is located, and the shape of the sub-planned object model is represented by relative coordinates relative to a spatial coordinate system of the target planned object (see Lin, [0005], [0115]; Also see, Prabhu, [0079]).
As to claim 8, this claim is rejected based on the same reason as above to reject the claim above and are similarly rejected including the following:
Lin and Prabhu teaches:
wherein the method further comprises: in response to determining that the target planned object is a target planned entity, generating a parent record of the target planned object model and a child record of the sub-planned object model of the at least one sub-object in at least one duration in the future through the target planned object model and the sub-planned object model of the at least one sub-object, wherein the parent record and the child record are respectively used for describing attribute states of the target planned object and the at least one sub-object in the at least one duration in the future; wherein a time range of the child record the child record of the sub-planned object model of the at least one sub-object is within a time range of the parent record (see Lin, [0116], [0195]; Also see, Prabhu, [0079]);
wherein the method further comprises: configuring to establish an association relationship between the parent record and the child record of the sub-planned object model of the at least one sub-object, wherein the child record of the sub-planned object model of the at least one sub-object has a unique parent record (see Lin, [0197]; Also see, Prabhu, [0079]);
wherein each of the parent record and the child record of the sub-planned object model of the at least one sub-object comprises a record identifier for uniquely identifying the parent record or the child record of the sub-planned object model of the at least one sub-object (see Lin, [0008]; Also see, Prabhu, [0079]).
As to claim 11, this claim is rejected based on the same reason as above to reject the claim above and are similarly rejected including the following:
Lin and Prabhu teaches:
wherein each of the parent record and the child record of the sub-planned object model of the at least one sub-object record comprises a second spatial attribute, and the second spatial
attribute comprises at least one of a spatial range, a spatial size, a spatial shape or a spatial
position; wherein based on that the second spatial attribute is the spatial range, the parent record and the child record of the sub-planned object model of the at least one sub-object are used for describing change information of the spatial range of the target planned object and change information of the spatial range of the at least one sub-object in the at least one duration in the future; wherein in the at least one duration in the future, the spatial range of the child record of the sub-planned object model of the at least one sub-object is comprised within the spatial range of the parent record (see Lin, [0004], [0195]);
wherein based on that the second spatial attribute is the spatial size, the parent record and the child record of the sub-planned object model of the at least one sub-object are used for describing change information of the spatial size of the target planned object and change information of the spatial size of the at least one sub-object in the at least one duration in the future; wherein in the at least one duration in the future, the spatial size of the child record of the sub-planned object model of the at least one sub-object is smaller than the spatial size of the parent record; wherein based on that the second spatial attribute is the spatial position, the parent record and the child record of the sub-planned object model of the at least one sub-object are used for describing change information of spatial position movement of the target planned object and change information of spatial position movement of the at least one sub-object in the at least one duration in the future (see Lin, [0004], [0134], [0195]; Also see, Prabhu, [0079]);
wherein in the at least one duration in the future, the spatial position of the child record of the sub-planned object model of the at least one sub-object is comprised within the spatial position of the parent record; wherein based on that the second spatial attribute is the shape, the parent record and the child record of the sub-planned object model of the at least one sub-object are used for describing shape change information of the target planned object and shape change information of the at least one sub-object in the at least one duration in the future; wherein in the at least one duration in the future, the shape of the child record of the sub- planned object model of the at least one sub-object is comprised within the shape of the parent record (see Lin, [0115]-[0116], Also see, Prabhu, [0079]).
As to claim 16, this claim is rejected based on the same reason as above to reject the claim above and are similarly rejected including the following:
Lin and Prabhu teaches:
wherein the method further comprises: based on that the spatial position of the same sub-object changes from a second planned object to which the sub-object belongs to a third planned object at different future times, modifying the spatial position of the sub-planned object model corresponding to the sub-object at the future time after the spatial position changes (see Lin, [0006], [0008]; Also see, Prabhu, [0079]).
As to claim 17, this claim is rejected based on the same reason as above to reject the claim above and are similarly rejected including the following:
Lin and Prabhu teaches:
wherein based on that the target planned object model of the sub-planned object model of the at least one sub-object meets a deletion condition at different times in the future, the method further comprises: deleting a parent-child relationship between the sub-planned object model of the at least one sub-object and the target planned object model at a future time after meeting the deletion condition; wherein the meeting the deletion condition comprises: a range of the spatial position of the sub-planned object model changes to outside a range of the spatial position of the target planned object model (see Lin, [0241], [0257]; Also see, Prabhu, [0042], [0079]);
wherein after deleting the parent-child relationship between the sub-planned object model of the at least one sub-object and the target planned object model at the future time after meeting the deletion condition, the method further comprises: modifying the first spatial attribute of the sub-planned object model of the at least one sub-object to a physical space description where the sub-object corresponding to the sub-planned object model of the at least one sub-object is located (see Lin, [0010], [0024]).
As to claim 19, this claim is rejected based on the same reason as above to reject the claim above and are similarly rejected including the following:
Lin and Prabhu teaches:
wherein in response to determining that the target planned object is a target planned event, a start time of the parent planned object is earlier than or equal to a start time of the child planned object, and an end time of the parent planned object is later than or equal to an end time of the child planned object (see Lin, [0060], [0115]).
As to claim 20, this claim is rejected based on the same reason as above to reject the claim above and are similarly rejected including the following:
Lin and Prabhu teaches:
wherein in response to determining that the target planned object is a target planned event, each of the target planned object model and the sub-planned object model comprises a parent object, and the establishing the parent-child relationship between the target planned object model and the sub-planned object model comprises: configure to establish the parent-child relationship between the target planned object model and the sub-planned object model by determining the parent object of the sub-planned object model as an object identifier of the target planned object model (see Lin, [0008], [0116]; Also see, Prabhu, [0079]).
As to claim 21, this claim is rejected based on the same reason as above to reject the claim above and are similarly rejected including the following:
Lin and Prabhu teaches:
wherein in response to determining that the target planned object is a target planned event, based on that the target planned object model of the sub-planned object model meets a deletion condition at different times in the future, the method further comprises: deleting the parent-child relationship between the sub-planned object model and the target planned object model at a future time after meeting the deletion condition; wherein the meeting the deletion condition comprises: an end time of the child planned object is later than an end time of the parent planned object, or a duration of the child planned object is longer than a duration of the parent planned object; wherein each of the target planned object model and the sub-planned object model further comprises a spatial attribute; the spatial attribute comprises at least one of a spatial range or a spatial position; wherein the spatial range is used for describing a spatial range where the target planned object and the sub-object occur; the spatial position is used for describing that the spatial position of the sub-planned object model is within a range of the spatial position of the target planned object model or the spatial range of the sub-planned object model is within the spatial range of the target planned object model (see Lin, [0017], [0115], [0201]; Also see, Prabhu, [0079]).
As to claim 24, this claim is rejected based on the same reason as above to reject the claim above and are similarly rejected including the following:
Lin and Prabhu teaches:
wherein each of a record of the target planned object model and a record of the sub-planned object model comprises a record identifier for uniquely identifying the record of the target planned object model or the record of the sub-planned object model; wherein the method further comprises: configure to establish a tree storage structure using the first record as a root storage node and using the second record as a child storage node of the root storage node; determining a start time of a time attribute of the root storage node as a preset reference time, and determining a start time of a time attribute of the child storage node as a relative offset time of the preset reference time (see Lin, [0008], [0011], [0201]; Also see, Prabhu, [0079]).
As to claim 28, this claim is rejected based on the same reason as above to reject the claim above and are similarly rejected including the following:
Lin and Prabhu teaches:
wherein the target planned object is a target planned entity, and the sub-object is a sub-entity; or, the target planned object is a target planned event, and the sub-object is a sub-target planned event (see Line, [0017]; Also see, Prabhu, [0079]).
As to claim 29, this claim is rejected based on the same reason as above to reject the claim above and are similarly rejected including the following:
Lin and Prabhu teaches:
wherein the target planned object model comprises a parent object identifier for uniquely mapping the target planned object model of the target planned object; the sub-planned object model of the at least one sub-object comprises a child object identifier for uniquely mapping the sub-planned object model of the sub-object (see Lin, [0116], [0214]; Also see, Prabhu, [0079]).
As to claim 30, this claim is rejected based on the same reason as above to reject the claim above and are similarly rejected including the following:
Lin and Prabhu teaches:
wherein the generating the subscription item according to the subscription request for the future state of the target planned object, and generating the subscription information matching the subscription item according to the future states of the target planned object model and the sub-planned object model of the at least one sub-object associated with the target planned object model, comprises: receiving a subscription request for a future state of a planned object, the subscription request comprising a parent object identifier and a child object identifier, and generating a subscription item according to the subscription request; for a target planned object model, generating subscription information for querying a future state of each sub-planned object model associated with the target planned object model according to the parent object identifier of the target planned object model (see Lin, [0116], [0214]; Also see, Prabhu, [0079]);
for a sub-planned object model, generating subscription information for querying a future state of the target planned object model associated with the sub-planned object model according to the child object identifier of the sub-planned object model (see Lin, [0116], [0201]; Also see, Prabhu, [0079]).
As to claim 31, this claim is rejected based on the same reason as above to reject the claim above and are similarly rejected including the following:
Lin and Prabhu teaches:
wherein the generating the subscription item according to the subscription request for the future state of the target planned object, and generating the subscription information matching the subscription item according to the future states of the target planned object model and the at least one sub-planned object model the sub-planned object model of the at least one sub-object associated with the target planned object model, comprises: receiving a subscription request for a future state of a planned object, the subscription request comprising a time range, and generating a subscription item comprising the time range; generating subscription information for querying a future state of each sub-planned object model associated with the target planned object model within the time range according to the parent object identifier of the target planned object model (see Lin, [0109], [0123], [0201]; Also see, Prabhu, [0079]).
As to claim 32, this claim is rejected based on the same reason as above to reject the claim above and are similarly rejected including the following:
Lin and Prabhu teaches:
in response to determining that the target planned object is the target planned entity, receiving a query request for a future state of the target planned object, wherein the query request comprises a spatial range; for a target planned object model, querying a future state of each sub-planned object model within a spatial range of the target planned object model according to the spatial range; for a sub-planned object model, querying a target planned object model with a spatial range comprising a spatial range of the sub-planned object model and/or a first sub-planned object model comprised in the spatial range of the target planned object model according to the spatial range of the sub-planned object model (see Lin, [0007], [0109], [0201]; Also see, Prabhu, [0079]).
Prior Arts
7. US 2015/0066903 A1 teaches object, entity model. Query module, relational database. A user can create a new security policy or use the security system information to customize the generic ontology models into resulting ontology models specific for the particular security system ([0022]).
US 2022/0067233 A1 teaches generating a digital twin of physical environment includes a relational model comprising probability distributions regarding attributes of components in the physical environment and relationships between the components ([0005]).
EP3531310 A1 teaches setting specific attributes of the to-be-managed object, performing retrieval based on types of the management models, real-time data and plan data, a user can know spatial-temporal operational statues of the to be manage object, saving storage in computes (abstract).
Also see, US 20210286912, US 20220197306, US 2019013867, WO2021075927 A1, US 20220067233, US 6789054, US 20080313596, US 7971180, US 20080312980, US 20120179511, US 20170140007, US 20080312979, US 20070244777, US 6212672, US 20170140310, US 11567945, US 20190258973, these reference also read the claim recited limitation. These references are state of the art at the time of the claimed invention.
Conclusion
8. The examiner suggests, in response to this Office action, support being shown for language added to any original claims on amendment and any new claims. That is, indicate support for newly added claim language by specifically pointing to page(s) and line no(s) in the specification and/or drawing figure(s). This will assist the examiner in prosecuting the application (see 37 C.F.R. § 1.75(d)(1), 37 C.F.R. § 1.83(f)).
9. The prior art made of record on form PTO-892 and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. Applicant is required under 37 C.F.R. § 1.111(c) to consider these references fully when responding to this action (see MPEP § 7.96). Applicant is advised to clearly point out the patentable novelty which he or she thinks the claims present, in view of the state of the art disclosed by the references cited or the objections made. He or she must also show how the amendments avoid such references or objections See 37 CFR 1.111(c).
10. Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a). Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a).
A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any extension fee pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of the advisory action. In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the date of this final action.
11. Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communication from the examiner should be directed to Daniel A Kuddus whose telephone number is (571) 270-1722. The examiner can normally be reached on Monday to Thursday 8.00 a.m.-5.30 p.m. The examiner can also be reached on alternate Fridays from 8.00 a.m. to 4.30 p.m.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor Boris Gorney can be reached on (571) 270-5626. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or processing is assigned is 571-273-8300. Information regarding the status of an application may be obtained from the Patent Application Information Retrieval (PAIR) system. Status information for published applications may be obtained from the either Private PAIR or Public PAIR. Status information for unpublished applications is available through Private PAIR only.
For more information about the PAIR system, see http://pair-direct.uspto.gov. Should you have questions on access to the Private PAIR system, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative or access to the automated information system, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
/DANIEL A KUDDUS/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2154
06/16/26
Prosecution Insights