DETAILED ACTION
This communication is in response to the amendment/remarks filed 30 January 2026.
Claims 19 and 20 have been amended.
Claims 1-20 are currently pending.
Claims 1-20 are rejected.
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/Remarks
The objections to the claims have been remedied by amendment and are withdrawn.
Regarding 35 USC § 103, Applicant’s remarks have been fully considered but are not persuasive. Applicant argues hat “the Henry reference teaches that the reader device is first linked to a server by other means and then the code on the grate is used to gather relevant information. In view of this, the Henry reference does not teach that the machine-readable data pattern is linked to a resource displaying information as set forth in claim 1.” Remarks at 2. As an initial matter, the rejection does not indicate that Henry is utilized to teach “the machine-readable data pattern is linked to a resource displaying information.” The rejections (previously and again below) indicate that Henry teaches “the machine-readable data pattern is linked to a resource,” which Henry does teach. Additionally, the argument that “the reader device is first linked to a server by other means” does not negate a finding that Henry teaches that the machine-readable data pattern is linked to a resource. Applicant’s argument is not persuasive.
Applicant argues that “the De Villeneuve reference does not disclose at that these QR codes are used to link to a database with building information. Rather, they are used as a quality control measure.” Remarks as 3. As an initial matter, the rejection does not indicate that De Villeneuve is used to teach a QR code used to link to a database with building information. The rejections (previously and again below) indicate that De Villeneuve teaches “a resource displaying building information” which De Villeneuve does teach. Additionally, the argument that “they are used as a quality control measure” does not negate a finding that De Villeneuve teaches a resource displaying building information. Applicant’s argument is not persuasive. As a note, a database is not recited in claim 1. The rejections indicate that the database, found in claim 8, is taught by Henry.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 103 which forms the basis for all obviousness rejections set forth in this Office action:
A patent for a claimed invention may not be obtained, notwithstanding that the claimed invention is not identically disclosed as set forth in section 102 of this title, 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, 2, 4-16, and 18-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over US 2018/0291610 (“Henry”) in view of US 2017/0352101 (“De Villeneuve”).
Regarding Claim 1, Henry teaches a cover for a drainage pipe comprising: a machine-readable data pattern provided on the cover (See “A system and method for inspecting drains and drain grates wherein a machine-readable code is applied to a drain grate” in the abstract and “In accordance with principles of the present invention, the top and/or bottom of grate 102 is provided with a marking 106 to identify it in any desirable manner, such as by laser engraving. Marking 106 is preferably compatible with data collection technology, such as bar code (including any 2D linear bar code and 3D matrix bar code (e.g., QR code)), radio-frequency identification (“RFID”), touch memory, a micro-chip, a magnetic stripe, a proximity card, a smart card, and the like, all of which will be represented collectively herein as bar code” in ¶ 0009.), wherein the machine-readable data pattern is linked to a resource (See “In operation, once bar code 106 is applied to grate 102, an operator powers-up reader device 110 and the device connects with the server. The server downloads relevant data configuration files and any changes (e.g., additional data fields) thereto. Reader device 110 is then used by the operator to preferably capture the drain number (and optionally the serial number) of a drain, location of the drain, date-time stamp, operator name, operation code, and operator comments (e.g., repair drain, identify debris in drain, or take swab for germ testing)” in ¶ 0010.).
Henry does not expressly teach a resource displaying building information.
However, De Villeneuve teaches a resource displaying building information (See “At step 220, in response to guidance from visit schedule 1322, the maintenance agent takes pictures 1326 before the maintenance operation and pictures 1327 after the maintenance operation, of the QR-Code at the passage point by means of the camera 1103 of his smartphone 110. CMM module 133 generates or supplements maintenance report 1331 with the passage proof data 1332 using the geolocation 1324, the task duration 1333 obtained by the time-stamping 1325, and the encumbrance levels 1335, 1336 of the gutters before and after maintenance” in ¶ 0134 and Fig. 2 showing the displayed building information such as “Roof NE” and “Roof NW.).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time of filing to combine the teachings of Henry and De Villeneuve to display building information. The claimed invention is merely a combination of old elements, in the combination each element merely performs the same function as it does separately, and one of ordinary skill in the art would have recognized that the results of the combination were predictable.
Regarding Claim 8, Henry teaches a building information system comprising: a cover for a drainage pipe located within a perimeter of a building; a machine-readable data pattern on the cover (See “A system and method for inspecting drains and drain grates wherein a machine-readable code is applied to a drain grate” in the abstract and “In accordance with principles of the present invention, the top and/or bottom of grate 102 is provided with a marking 106 to identify it in any desirable manner, such as by laser engraving. Marking 106 is preferably compatible with data collection technology, such as bar code (including any 2D linear bar code and 3D matrix bar code (e.g., QR code)), radio-frequency identification (“RFID”), touch memory, a micro-chip, a magnetic stripe, a proximity card, a smart card, and the like, all of which will be represented collectively herein as bar code” in ¶ 0009. See also ¶ 0003 describing the types of buildings where drain inspection is necessary.), wherein the machine-readable data pattern is linked to a resource; and a database for storing the resource, wherein the database provides the resource in response to the machine-readable data pattern being scanned (See “In operation, once bar code 106 is applied to grate 102, an operator powers-up reader device 110 and the device connects with the server. The server downloads relevant data configuration files and any changes (e.g., additional data fields) thereto. Reader device 110 is then used by the operator to preferably capture the drain number (and optionally the serial number) of a drain, location of the drain, date-time stamp, operator name, operation code, and operator comments (e.g., repair drain, identify debris in drain, or take swab for germ testing)” in ¶ 0010.).
Henry does not expressly teach a resource displaying building information.
However, De Villeneuve teaches a resource displaying building information (See “At step 220, in response to guidance from visit schedule 1322, the maintenance agent takes pictures 1326 before the maintenance operation and pictures 1327 after the maintenance operation, of the QR-Code at the passage point by means of the camera 1103 of his smartphone 110. CMM module 133 generates or supplements maintenance report 1331 with the passage proof data 1332 using the geolocation 1324, the task duration 1333 obtained by the time-stamping 1325, and the encumbrance levels 1335, 1336 of the gutters before and after maintenance” in ¶ 0134 and Fig. 2 showing the displayed building information such as “Roof NE” and “Roof NW.).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time of filing to combine the teachings of Henry and De Villeneuve to display building information. The claimed invention is merely a combination of old elements, in the combination each element merely performs the same function as it does separately, and one of ordinary skill in the art would have recognized that the results of the combination were predictable.
Regarding Claims 2 and 16, Henry further teaches the machine-readable data pattern comprises a visual imprint (See “In accordance with principles of the present invention, the top and/or bottom of grate 102 is provided with a marking 106 to identify it in any desirable manner, such as by laser engraving” in ¶ 0009.).
Regarding Claim 4, Henry further teaches the machine-readable data pattern is waterproof, weather-resistant, and UV-resistant (See “In accordance with principles of the present invention, the top and/or bottom of grate 102 is provided with a marking 106 to identify it in any desirable manner, such as by laser engraving” in ¶ 0009 wherein laser engraving is generally considered to be waterproof, weather-resistant, and UV-resistant.).
Regarding Claims 5 and 10, Henry does not expressly teach the resource comprises a web page, a document, and an image.
However, De Villeneuve teaches the resource comprises a web page, a document, and an image (See Figs. 2-4.).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time of filing to combine the teachings of Henry and De Villeneuve to have the resource comprise a web page, document, and image. The claimed invention is merely a combination of old elements, in the combination each element merely performs the same function as it does separately, and one of ordinary skill in the art would have recognized that the results of the combination were predictable.
Regarding Claims 6 and 11, Henry further teaches the resource is editable (See “In operation, once bar code 106 is applied to grate 102, an operator powers-up reader device 110 and the device connects with the server. The server downloads relevant data configuration files and any changes (e.g., additional data fields) thereto. Reader device 110 is then used by the operator to preferably capture the drain number (and optionally the serial number) of a drain, location of the drain, date-time stamp, operator name, operation code, and operator comments (e.g., repair drain, identify debris in drain, or take swab for germ testing). In a preferred embodiment, data, once entered into reader device 110, may not be altered by the user. Reader device 110 sends all the captured information to the server for storage” in ¶ 0010 wherein the addition of data to the resource is considered an edit.).
Regarding Claim 7, Henry further teaches the information comprises maintenance history (See “Reader device 110 is then used by the operator to preferably capture the drain number (and optionally the serial number) of a drain, location of the drain, date-time stamp, operator name, operation code, and operator comments (e.g., repair drain, identify debris in drain, or take swab for germ testing)” in ¶ 0010.).
Henry does not expressly teach the building information comprises a floor plan, a drainage system schematic.
However, De Villeneuve teaches the building information comprises a floor plan, a drainage system schematic (See “At step 210, visit schedule 1322 is displayed on display screen 1101 of the maintenance agent smartphone 110. This visit schedule 1322 indicates to agent on a map of the building the passage points 1323, for instance the gutters or downpipes that he has to clean. To these passage points 1323 are associated on-site QR-Codes, e.g. painted inside each gutter of the building” in ¶ 0133 and Fig. 2.).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time of filing to combine the teachings of Henry and De Villeneuve to include the floor plan, schematic, and maintenance history. The claimed invention is merely a combination of old elements, in the combination each element merely performs the same function as it does separately, and one of ordinary skill in the art would have recognized that the results of the combination were predictable.
Regarding Claim 9 Henry does not expressly teach providing the resource comprises displaying the resource on a user device.
However, De Villeneuve teaches providing the resource comprises displaying the resource on a user device (See “At step 210, visit schedule 1322 is displayed on display screen 1101 of the maintenance agent smartphone 110. This visit schedule 1322 indicates to agent on a map of the building the passage points 1323, for instance the gutters or downpipes that he has to clean. To these passage points 1323 are associated on-site QR-Codes, e.g. painted inside each gutter of the building” in ¶ 0133.).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time of filing to combine the teachings of Henry and De Villeneuve to display the resource on a user device. The claimed invention is merely a combination of old elements, in the combination each element merely performs the same function as it does separately, and one of ordinary skill in the art would have recognized that the results of the combination were predictable.
Regarding Claim 12, Henry further teaches the database is dynamically updated in response to the machine-readable data pattern being scanned (See “In operation, once bar code 106 is applied to grate 102, an operator powers-up reader device 110 and the device connects with the server. The server downloads relevant data configuration files and any changes (e.g., additional data fields) thereto. Reader device 110 is then used by the operator to preferably capture the drain number (and optionally the serial number) of a drain, location of the drain, date-time stamp, operator name, operation code, and operator comments (e.g., repair drain, identify debris in drain, or take swab for germ testing). In a preferred embodiment, data, once entered into reader device 110, may not be altered by the user. Reader device 110 sends all the captured information to the server for storage” in ¶ 0010.).
Regarding Claim 13, Henry further teaches dynamically updating the database further comprises uploading an edit (See “In operation, once bar code 106 is applied to grate 102, an operator powers-up reader device 110 and the device connects with the server. The server downloads relevant data configuration files and any changes (e.g., additional data fields) thereto. Reader device 110 is then used by the operator to preferably capture the drain number (and optionally the serial number) of a drain, location of the drain, date-time stamp, operator name, operation code, and operator comments (e.g., repair drain, identify debris in drain, or take swab for germ testing). In a preferred embodiment, data, once entered into reader device 110, may not be altered by the user. Reader device 110 sends all the captured information to the server for storage” in ¶ 0010.).
While it could be inferred that Henry includes a network, Henry does not expressly teach via a network.
However, De Villeneuve teaches via a network (See “Computer system 100 comprises a set of terminals 110-114 capable of accessing computer servers 130, 140, 150, 160, 170 via a computer network 120 such as the Internet” in ¶ 0080.).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time of filing to combine the teachings of Henry and De Villeneuve to utilize a network. The claimed invention is merely a combination of old elements, in the combination each element merely performs the same function as it does separately, and one of ordinary skill in the art would have recognized that the results of the combination were predictable.
Regarding Claim 14, Henry does not expressly teach the edit comprises a text, an image, and a document.
However, De Villeneuve teaches the edit comprises a text, an image, and a document (See Figs. 2-4.).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time of filing to combine the teachings of Henry and De Villeneuve to edit text, image, and a document. The claimed invention is merely a combination of old elements, in the combination each element merely performs the same function as it does separately, and one of ordinary skill in the art would have recognized that the results of the combination were predictable.
Regarding Claim 15, Henry further teaches dynamically updating the database further comprises recording a time when the machine-readable data pattern is accessed (See “Reader device 110 is then used by the operator to preferably capture the drain number (and optionally the serial number) of a drain, location of the drain, date-time stamp, operator name, operation code, and operator comments (e.g., repair drain, identify debris in drain, or take swab for germ testing). In a preferred embodiment, data, once entered into reader device 110, may not be altered by the user. Reader device 110 sends all the captured information to the server for storage” in ¶ 0010.).
Regarding Claim 18, Henry does not expressly teach at least two covers located within the perimeter of the building, each having machine-readable data patterns; and at least two resources displaying building information, each resource being linked to the machine-readable data patterns.
However, De Villeneuve teaches at least two covers located within the perimeter of the building, each having machine-readable data patterns; and at least two resources displaying building information, each resource being linked to the machine-readable data patterns (See “At step 210, visit schedule 1322 is displayed on display screen 1101 of the maintenance agent smartphone 110. This visit schedule 1322 indicates to agent on a map of the building the passage points 1323, for instance the gutters or downpipes that he has to clean. To these passage points 1323 are associated on-site QR-Codes, e.g. painted inside each gutter of the building” in ¶ 0133 and “At step 220, in response to guidance from visit schedule 1322, the maintenance agent takes pictures 1326 before the maintenance operation and pictures 1327 after the maintenance operation, of the QR-Code at the passage point by means of the camera 1103 of his smartphone 110. CMM module 133 generates or supplements maintenance report 1331 with the passage proof data 1332 using the geolocation 1324, the task duration 1333 obtained by the time-stamping 1325, and the encumbrance levels 1335, 1336 of the gutters before and after maintenance. Management module 161 computes a work quality 16551 by difference between encumbrance levels 1335, 133” in ¶ 0134.).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time of filing to combine the teachings of Henry and De Villeneuve to have at least two covers. The claimed invention is merely a combination of old elements, in the combination each element merely performs the same function as it does separately, and one of ordinary skill in the art would have recognized that the results of the combination were predictable.
Regarding Claim 19, Henry does not expressly teach the at least two resources display different building information.
However, De Villeneuve teaches the at least two resources display different building information (See Fig. 6 and accompanying paragraphs 0138-0144 wherein different information is displayed when dealing with an incident or damage.).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time of filing to combine the teachings of Henry and De Villeneuve to provide different information. The claimed invention is merely a combination of old elements, in the combination each element merely performs the same function as it does separately, and one of ordinary skill in the art would have recognized that the results of the combination were predictable.
Regarding Claim 20, Henry does not expressly teach the at least two resources display identical building information.
However, De Villeneuve teaches the at least two resources display identical building information (See Fig. 5 and accompanying paragraphs 0131-0134 wherein the agent sees the same data as they service multiple sites.).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time of filing to combine the teachings of Henry and De Villeneuve to provide identical information. The claimed invention is merely a combination of old elements, in the combination each element merely performs the same function as it does separately, and one of ordinary skill in the art would have recognized that the results of the combination were predictable.
Claims 3 and 17 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Henry in view of De Villeneuve and further in view of US 2014/0299662 (“Harrison”).
Regarding Claims 3 and 17, Henry teaches the visual imprint comprises a quick response (QR) code, a barcode (See “Marking 106 is preferably compatible with data collection technology, such as bar code (including any 2D linear bar code and 3D matrix bar code (e.g., QR code)), radio-frequency identification (“RFID”), touch memory, a micro-chip, a magnetic stripe, a proximity card, a smart card, and the like” in ¶ 0009.).
Neither Henry nor De Villeneuve expressly teach a universal product code.
However, Harrison teaches a universal product code (See “Infographic symbols are graphic visual representations of information, data or knowledge intended to present complex information quickly and clearly. They can rapidly improve cognition by utilizing the human brain's visual ability to see patterns and trends or machine vision's ability to image and decode information contained within infographic symbols such as barcodes, Data Matrix codes or QR codes; among many other machine readable infographic symbols. The most recognizable machine readable infographic symbol is the UPC barcode that is required to be on all types of commodity products sold through retail distribution in the US. It is most commonly used in grocery stores and other retail outlets in conjunction with scanners at the check-out station. This is a one dimensional barcode which may be scanned or imaged, as opposed to the QR code or Data Matrix code which are two dimensional codes and must be imaged in order to be decoded” in ¶ 0080.).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time of filing to combine the teachings of Henry, De Villeneuve, and Harrison to include multiple patterns. The motivation, as shown in Harrison, is to allow for different types of readers. Additionally, the claimed invention is merely a combination of old elements, in the combination each element merely performs the same function as it does separately, and one of ordinary skill in the art would have recognized that the results of the combination were predictable.
Conclusion
THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a).
A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any 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.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to MEREDITH A LONG whose telephone number is (571)272-3196. The examiner can normally be reached Mon - Fri 9:30 - 6.
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, Ilana Spar can be reached on 571-270-7537. 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.
/MEREDITH A LONG/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3622