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 .
Status of Claims
This Office Action is in response to the claims filed 12/27/2024. Claims 1-19 are presently pending and are presented for examination.
Information Disclosure Statement
The Information Disclosure Statement filed on 02/04/2025 has been considered. An initialed copy of the Form 1449 is enclosed herewith.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 101
35 U.S.C. 101 reads as follows:
Whoever invents or discovers any new and useful process, machine, manufacture, or composition of matter, or any new and useful improvement thereof, may obtain a patent therefor, subject to the conditions and requirements of this title.
Claims 1-19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 101.
Claim 1 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 101 because the claimed invention is directed to a mental process, and therefore an abstract idea. The claim recites “wherein a mission planning system of the networked server system generates a swath layout for the project based on the project information” & “wherein the mission planning system evaluates first machine information for the first working machine and determines a first path plan based on the first machine information and the first section assigned from the swath layout;” which, under the broadest reasonable interpretation is a mental process provided a human observing the environment of the working machines to learn project information such as the site plan/project activity and machine information such as location, battery or fuel level, see [0058] of instant application. The claim does not meaningfully limit how the analysis (evaluation & determinations) is performed, and there is nothing about performing the analysis of the data itself that would limit how it can be performed. For example, nothing in the claims, outside of the generic recitation of “wherein a mission planning system” limits the scope of performing the mental process, as a human could reasonably observe the environment of a working machine to identify the site plan, project activity and location of the working machine to determine a swath layout and a path plan for the working machine. The claim does not provide any details about how the output of the analysis is used to effectuate any meaningful operation of the working machines, and the plain meaning of “evaluate” or “determine” encompasses performing a mental process, e.g., collecting information, analyzing it, and displaying certain results of the collection and analysis. See Electric Power Group v. Alstom, S.A., 830 F.3d 1350, 1353-54, 119 USPQ2d 1739, 1741-42 (Fed. Cir. 2016).
Under step 2A, prong 2 claim 1 does not include additional elements that are sufficient enough to amount the abstract idea into a practical application, because the recitations “A management system for a plurality of working machines, comprising: a networked server system, comprising a server memory and a server controller operatively connected to, and configured to manage, the server memory; a project request source device, comprising a user interface including a display and user input device, and a device control unit including a device processor and a device memory, wherein the device control unit is configured to manage the user interface, and wherein the project request source device is communicatively coupled via a communication network to the networked server system; a first working machine, which is one of the plurality of working machines, comprising a first application gateway configured to communicate with the networked server system over the communication network, a first machine control unit comprising a first processor and a first memory, which stores first machine operating instructions, a first machine actuator system having a first machine control actuator, and a first automation sensor;”, & “wherein a mission planning system” are directed to generic linking, merely defining an environment of the abstract idea with generically recited elements, provided for linking the abstract idea to a particular technological environment, and lacking an element to incorporate a result of performing the abstract idea with the recited structures in a meaningful way see MPEP, 2106.05(f) & 2106.05(e).
Further under step 2A, prong 2 claim 1 does not include additional elements that are sufficient enough to amount the abstract idea into a practical application, because the recitations “wherein the server controller receives a project request from the project request source device, and wherein the project request is for a project and includes project information, including a site plan and a project activity, and wherein the server controller analyzes the project request to identify the project information;”, “wherein the mission planning system assigns a first section from the swath layout to the first working machine;”, and “wherein the mission planning system generates a first mission plan based on the first path plan and the project activity, and wherein the first mission plan includes machine instructions for the first working machine; and wherein the networked server system transmits the first mission plan to the first working machine over the communication network.” are directed to insignificant extra solution activity data gathering/outputting, merely reciting steps for gathering and outputting data either for or as a result of performing the mental process. For example, reciting steps to receive a project request and project information pertaining the data used for performing steps of the mental process and gathering/outputting data, such as a first section from the swath layout and a first mission plan/machine instructions, amounting to nothing more than mere radio transmissions determined as the result of performing steps of the recited mental process, and lacking any recitation to effectuate an output of performing the mental process as a control step, see MPEP 2106.05(g).
Under step 2B, the claim does not include additional elements that are sufficient enough to amount to significantly more than the judicial exception because for example “A management system for a plurality of working machines, comprising: a networked server system, comprising a server memory and a server controller operatively connected to, and configured to manage, the server memory; a project request source device, comprising a user interface including a display and user input device, and a device control unit including a device processor and a device memory, wherein the device control unit is configured to manage the user interface, and wherein the project request source device is communicatively coupled via a communication network to the networked server system; a first working machine, which is one of the plurality of working machines, comprising a first application gateway configured to communicate with the networked server system over the communication network, a first machine control unit comprising a first processor and a first memory, which stores first machine operating instructions, a first machine actuator system having a first machine control actuator, and a first automation sensor;”, & “wherein a mission planning system” again are merely applying and generically linking the abstract idea to a particular technological environment, MPEP, 2106.05(f) & 2106.05(e), and does not impose any other meaningful limitation beyond generally linking the use of the judicial exception to a particular technological environment. For example, the recitations of “A management system for a plurality of working machines, comprising: a networked server system, comprising a server memory and a server controller operatively connected to, and configured to manage, the server memory; a project request source device, comprising a user interface including a display and user input device, and a device control unit including a device processor and a device memory, wherein the device control unit is configured to manage the user interface, and wherein the project request source device is communicatively coupled via a communication network to the networked server system; a first working machine, which is one of the plurality of working machines, comprising a first application gateway configured to communicate with the networked server system over the communication network, a first machine control unit comprising a first processor and a first memory, which stores first machine operating instructions, a first machine actuator system having a first machine control actuator, and a first automation sensor;”, & “wherein a mission planning system” are only provided to define the generic structures and steps for performing the mental process or provided to define an environment for applying the steps of the mental process and perform no additional functions.
Still further, the recitations “wherein the server controller receives a project request from the project request source device, and wherein the project request is for a project and includes project information, including a site plan and a project activity, and wherein the server controller analyzes the project request to identify the project information;”, “wherein the mission planning system assigns a first section from the swath layout to the first working machine;”, and “wherein the mission planning system generates a first mission plan based on the first path plan and the project activity, and wherein the first mission plan includes machine instructions for the first working machine; and wherein the networked server system transmits the first mission plan to the first working machine over the communication network.” again are directed to insignificant extra solution activity data gathering and outputting under step 2B, as the gathering of data pertaining to a project request and project information for performing steps of the mental process, and gathering/outputting data pertaining to such as a first section from the swath layout and a first mission plan/machine instructions generated as a product of performing the mental process requires no more than ordinary skill in the art, and therefore is directed to well understood, routine, and conventional activity in the art, see MPEP 2106.05(d), II, i., iii., & iv. Receiving or transmitting data over a network, e.g., using the Internet to gather data, Symantec, 838 F.3d at 1321, 120 USPQ2d at 1362 (utilizing an intermediary computer to forward information); OIP Techs., Inc., v. Amazon.com, Inc., 788 F.3d 1359, 1363, 115 USPQ2d 1090, 1093 (Fed. Cir. 2015) (sending messages over a network); buySAFE, Inc. v. Google, Inc., 765 F.3d 1350, 1355, 112 USPQ2d 1093, 1096 (Fed. Cir. 2014) (computer receives and sends information over a network); Accordingly, the claims are not patent eligible.
Additionally, claims 2-11 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 101 by virtue of their dependency on claim 1.
Claim 12 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 101 with similar rationale as claim 1.
Additionally, claims 13-19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 101 by virtue of their dependency on claim 12.
Claims 2-4, 7-10, 13-14 and 17-19 do not include additional elements that are sufficient enough to amount the abstract idea into a practical application, because the claims are directed to insignificant extra solution activity data gathering and outputting steps, for example reciting steps to further define pre-solution and/or post-solution activity for/as a result of performing the mental process and outputting data without significantly more, see claims 2-4, 8-10, 13-14, and 17-19 reciting steps for receiving/outputting a swath layout, mission plan, pause notifications, and project modification requests to a plurality of working machines and structures in the environment of the abstract idea for performing additional steps as a result of the mental process, and claim 7 reciting steps for gathering data related to the available section of the uncompleted area of the swath layout. The mere recitation of when/how/what data is gathered/output, however again lacks a specific element reciting how the result of performing the mental process is applied or integrated as a specific control step, and therefore is directed to well understood routine and conventional activity in the art. These claims do not provide any details about how an output of the determination or evaluation is used to control any meaningful operation of the working machine, and the plain meaning of analyzing data encompasses mental observations or evaluations, e.g., a computer programmer’s mental identification of an anomaly in a data set. See Electric Power Group v. Alstom, S.A., 830 F.3d 1350, 1353-54, 119 USPQ2d 1739, 1741-42 (Fed. Cir. 2016); & University of Utah Research Foundation v. Ambry Genetics, 774 F.3d 755, 763, 113 USPQ2d 1241, 1246 (Fed. Cir. 2014) Also see MPEP 2106.05(g) iii. Selecting information, based on types of information and availability of information in a power-grid environment, for collection, analysis and display, Electric Power Group, LLC v. Alstom S.A., 830 F.3d 1350, 1354-55, 119 USPQ2d 1739, 1742 (Fed. Cir. 2016); & See 2106.05(a) iii. Gathering and analyzing information using conventional techniques and displaying the result, TLI Communications, 823 F.3d at 612-13, 118 USPQ2d at 1747-48.2. These additional elements do not integrate the abstract idea into a practical application because they do not impose any meaningful limits on practicing the abstract idea. Accordingly, these claims are not patent eligible.
Claims 5-6, 11, and 15-16 do not include additional elements that are sufficient enough to amount the abstract idea into a practical application, because claims recite steps to defining additional data, steps, and structures in the environment of the abstract idea, and therefore directed to generic linking. See claims 5 and 15 defining the available section and project modification request, claims 6 and 16 defining the different working machine, and claim 11 defining when/how to perform post-solution activity data output of swath sections. Defining a technological environment of the mental process, merely links the process to generic data, steps or structure, lacking any element reciting how an output of performing the process is integrated to impact the operation of the robot or effectuate any control, see MPEP, 2106.05(f) & 2106.05(e). These additional elements do not integrate the abstract idea into a practical application because they do not impose any meaningful limits on practicing the abstract idea. Accordingly, these claims are not patent eligible.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 1 and 12 would be allowable if rewritten or amended to overcome the rejection(s) under 35 U.S.C. 101, set forth in this Office action.
The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter:
Regarding claim 1 and similarly with respect to claim 12
The recitation “wherein the server controller receives a project request from the project request source device, and wherein the project request is for a project and includes project information, including a site plan and a project activity, and wherein the server controller analyzes the project request to identify the project information; wherein a mission planning system of the networked server system generates a swath layout for the project based on the project information, wherein the mission planning system assigns a first section from the swath layout to the first working machine; wherein the mission planning system evaluates first machine information for the first working machine and determines a first path plan based on the first machine information and the first section assigned from the swath layout; wherein the mission planning system generates a first mission plan based on the first path plan and the project activity, and wherein the first mission plan includes machine instructions for the first working machine; and wherein the networked server system transmits the first mission plan to the first working machine over the communication network.” overcomes the art of record rendering the claims in a manner specific enough to overcome the methods disclosed in the closest prior art, Anderson et. al. (U.S. Publication No. 2024/0040965). The claims specifically overcome the art of record, because of the limitations directed to generating a swath layout or pattern for a working machine based on a site plan and a project activity, dividing the layout into sections for different working machines, generating a path based on the section and layout, generating plan for the working machine based on the path, and finally generating instructions for the working machine based on the plan. For example, Anderson discloses Fig. 8 discloses receiving information pertaining to a working area, working machine information, determining a window (swath) location & pattern, and determining a position/movement plan, and corresponding commands (instructions) based on the determined positions and movements, however generation of the pattern based on the site plan/activities, dividing the pattern into sections for different machines, and generating the plan based on the pattern and the divided section is neither disclosed or rendered reasonably obvious in view of the art of record. The subject matter of the claims is therefore allowable.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. Anderson et. al. (U.S. Publication No. 2024/0040965) discloses a system and method for controlling soil compaction including receiving information pertaining to a working area, working machine information, determining a window (swath) location & pattern, and determining a position/movement plan, and corresponding commands (instructions) based on the determined positions and movements, see Anderson Abstract and Fig. 8.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JERROD IRVIN DAVIS whose telephone number is (571)272-7083. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 9:00 am - 7:00 pm.
Examiner interviews are available via telephone, in-person, and video conferencing using a USPTO supplied web-based collaboration tool. To schedule an interview, applicant is encouraged to use the USPTO Automated Interview Request (AIR) at http://www.uspto.gov/interviewpractice.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Wade Miles can be reached at (571) 270-7777. 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.
/JERROD IRVIN DAVIS/Examiner, Art Unit 3656