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 .
Status of Claims
Claims 1-5 have been examined in this Non-Final. Claims 1-5 are currently pending.
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on 12/06/2024 was filed after the mailing date. The submission is in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statement is being considered by the examiner.
Priority
Application 18/970,924 filed 12/06/2024 claims priority to foreign application JP2024-023191 filed 02/19/2024.
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 1-5 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 101 because the claimed invention is directed to judicial exception (i.e., a law of nature, a natural phenomenon, or an abstract idea) without significantly more. Claims 1-5 are directed to a system, method, or product which are/is one of the statutory categories of invention. (Step 1: YES).
Claim 1 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 101 because the claimed invention is directed to an abstract idea without significantly more. The claim recites a device for acquiring carbon emission data of a vehicle, parameters of cargo transported by the vehicle and calculating carbon emission amounts for each of the cargo groups. For Claim 1 the limitations of:
[…] acquire[s] data on a carbon emission amount of a vehicle and a plurality of parameters correlated with respective weights of a plurality of cargo groups transported by the vehicle, the cargo groups including at least one cargo, wherein
[…] calculate[s] a carbon emission amount for each of the cargo groups based on the data on the carbon emission amount of the vehicle and the parameters, as drafted, are processes that, under the broadest reasonable interpretation, covers certain methods of organizing human activity (i.e., managing personal behavior including following rules or instructions, and/or commercial or legal interactions,) but for recitation of generic computer components. The Examiner notes that “certain method[s] of organizing human activity” includes a person's interaction with a computer (see MPEP 2106.04(a)(2)(II)). That is, other than reciting a device implemented by a control unit, the claimed invention amounts to the process of gathering data about transportation vehicles and calculating the carbon emissions. For example, but for the control unit, this claim encompasses a person to gather carbon emissions of a vehicle, cargo information, and calculating the amount of carbon emissions based on the vehicle carbon emissions and cargo information based on this data in the manner described in the identified abstract idea, supra. Therefore, in short, each of the bolded elements represents data collection, and processing steps towards performing the “commercial or legal interaction” of tracking and determining carbon emissions based on the vehicle and its parameters. If a claim limitation, under its broadest reasonable interpretation, covers managing personal behavior or interactions between people but for the recitation of generic computer components, and/or agreements in the form of contracts; legal obligations; advertising, marketing or sales activities or behaviors; business relations, then it falls within the “certain methods of organizing human activity” grouping of abstract ideas.
Alternatively, the Examiner asserts that the claimed limitation of calculating a carbon emission amount for each of the cargo groups based on the data on the carbon emission amount of the vehicle and the parameters, can also be considered to cover mathematical concepts. The Examiner notes that “Mathematical Concepts” includes a mathematical relationships, mathematical formulas or equations, and mathematical calculations. If a claim limitation, under its broadest reasonable interpretation, covers a numerical formula or equation it will be considered as falling within the “mathematical concepts” grouping. In addition, there are instances where a formula or equation is written in text format that should also be considered as falling within this grouping. The types of identified abstract ideas are considered together as a single abstract idea for analysis purposes. Accordingly, Claim 1 recites an abstract idea. (Step 2A- Prong 1: YES. The claims recite an abstract idea).
This judicial exception is not integrated into a practical application. Claims 1 recites the additional elements of an information processing device and control unit that implements the identified abstract idea. These additional elements are not described by the applicant and are recited at a high-level of generality (i.e., one or more generic computers performing a generic computer functions) such that it amounts no more than mere instructions to apply the exception using a generic computer components. Accordingly, even in combination these additional elements do not integrate the abstract idea into a practical application because it does not impose any meaningful limits on practicing the abstract idea. Claim 1 is directed to an abstract idea. (Step 2A-Prong 2: NO: the additional claimed elements are not integrated into a practical application).
The claim does not include additional elements that are sufficient to amount to significantly more than the judicial exception. As discussed above with respect to integration of the abstract idea into a practical application, the additional elements of an information processing device and control unit, to perform the noted steps amounts to no more than mere instructions to apply the exception using a generic computer component. Mere instructions to apply an exception using a generic computer component cannot provide an inventive concept (“significantly more”). Accordingly, even in combination, these additional elements do not provide significantly more. As such claim 1 is not patent eligible. (Step 2B: NO. The claims do not provide significantly more).
Dependent Claims 2-5 are similarly rejected because they either further define/narrow the abstract idea of independent claim 1 as discussed above. Claim(s) 2 merely describe(s) the parameters indicating the respective weights of the cargo groups, calculating weight ratios of the cargo groups using the parameters, and calculating the carbon emission amount for each of the cargo groups based on the data on the carbon emission amount of the vehicle and the weight ratios of the cargo groups. Claim(s) 3 merely describe(s) the parameters indicating respective volumes of the cargo groups, calculating volume ratios of the cargo groups using the parameters, and calculating the carbon emission amount for each of the cargo groups based on the data on the carbon emission amount of the vehicle and the volume ratios of the cargo groups. Claim(s) 4 merely describe(s) a route from a departure location to a destination of the vehicle including a section in which a plurality of cargo groups that is at least some of the cargo groups is transported, and calculating a carbon emission amount for each of the at least some of the cargo groups in the section using data on the carbon emission amount of the vehicle in the section and a plurality of parameters correlated with respective weights of the at least some of the cargo groups. Claim(s) 5 merely describe(s) calculating a carbon emission amount for each of the cargo groups transported by the vehicle based on a result of calculating the carbon emission amount for each of the at least some of the cargo groups in the section.
Claims 2-5 include the additional element of the control unit. The control unit is analyzed in the same manner as the control unit in the independent claim and does not provide a practical application or significantly more for the same reasons above. Therefore claims 2-5 are considered patent ineligible for the reasons given above.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
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 the appropriate paragraphs of 35 U.S.C. 102 that form the basis for the rejections under this section made in this Office action:
A person shall be entitled to a patent unless –
(a)(2) the claimed invention was described in a patent issued under section 151, or in an application for patent published or deemed published under section 122(b), in which the patent or application, as the case may be, names another inventor and was effectively filed before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claim(s) 1-2 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) as being anticipated by Russo (US 12165096 B2).
Regarding Claim 1,
Russo 096B2 discloses, An information processing device comprising a control unit that acquires data on a carbon emission amount of a vehicle "Computing device 104 may use a carbon emission machine-learning model to calculate carbon emission data 144" (Russo 096B2 Col. 10 Lines 40-43). "With continued reference to FIG. 1, memory 156 contains instructions configuring processor 160 to determine carbon emission data 144 as a function of shipment elements 116. For the purposes of this disclosure, “carbon emission data” is data describing carbon emissions of a shipment. In one or more embodiments, carbon emissions may include carbon dioxide (CO2) gas… A “pollutant”, as used in this disclosure, is a substance that degrades environmental quality….In some embodiments, greenhouse gas data may include data from one or more pollutant sources. A “pollutant source” as used in this disclosure is any originating source of a pollutant. A pollutant source may include, but is not limited to, transport vehicles, power grids, combustion from boilers, furnaces, transport vehicle emissions, emissions from processes performed by or goods manufactured by a transport vehicle, and the like" (Russo 096B2 Col. 7 Lines 3-34).
and a plurality of parameters correlated with respective weights of a plurality of cargo groups transported by the vehicle, the cargo groups including at least one cargo, "For the purposes of this disclosure, a “shipment element” is a characteristic and/or information related to the process of transporting cargo, which includes one or more goods, of a customer via vehicle, such as, for example, a transport vehicle. In one or more embodiments, shipment element 116 may include time data (e.g., departure and arrival date of shipment), vehicle data (e.g., make and model of a vehicle), cargo data (e.g., dimensions of cargo, weight of cargo, and the like), rate data (e.g., rate of travel (mph)), geographical data (e.g., surface gradient, surface type, and the like), condition data (e.g., ambient temperatures, weather conditions, and the like), as discussed further in FIG. 3" (Russo 096B2 Col. 5 Lines 47-59). "For the purposes of this disclosure, “cargo data” is information related to one or more characteristics of a moveable good, such as and without limitation, a product of a customer. For instance, and without limitation, cargo data may include information related to a quantity of a good, which may be measured in weight (e.g., 200 lbs), a spatial measurement (e.g., 6 ft3), or a numerical value (e.g., 150 count of a particular product). In another instance, and without limitation, cargo data 304 may include characteristic information, such as fragility, shape, surface area, packaging, expiration date, perishable status, temperature requirement, and the like" (Russo 096B2 Col. 10 Lines 7-19).
wherein the control unit calculates a carbon emission amount for each of the cargo groups based on the data on the carbon emission amount of the vehicle and the parameters. "With continued reference to FIG. 3, as shown in step 325, method 300 may include determining carbon emission data of a shipment. In one or more embodiments, carbon emission data 144 may include a plurality of carbon emission data 144 related to one or more shipments elements of the shipment. As a nonlimiting example, a first carbon emission datum may be associated with a first shipment element, a second carbon emission datum may be associated with a second shipment element, and so on" (Russo 096B2 Col. 11 Lines 38-46).
Regarding Claim 2,
Russo 096B2 discloses the device of claim 1, as shown above. Russo 096B2 further discloses, the parameters indicate the respective weights of the cargo groups; and "For instance, and without limitation, cargo data may include information related to a quantity of a good, which may be measured in weight (e.g., 200 lbs), a spatial measurement (e.g., 6 ft3), or a numerical value (e.g., 150 count of a particular product)" (Russo 096B2 Col. 10 Lines 10-15).
the control unit is configured to calculate weight ratios of the cargo groups using the parameters, and "With continued reference to FIG. 3, memory 156 contains instructions configuring processor 160 to calculate a carbon emission data 144. In one or more embodiments, carbon emission data may include carbon emission rates. For the purposes of this disclosure, a “carbon emission rate” is a measurement of carbon emissions measured against another quantity. In some embodiments, calculating carbon emission rate may be as a function of a shipment element data. As a non-limiting example, carbon emission rate may be calculated as a function of distance data. In some embodiments, carbon emission rate may be a measurement of carbon emissions over a distance (e.g., traveled distance by a transportation vehicle carrying goods). In some embodiments, carbon emission rate may be expressed in units of weight (or mass) over distance. As non-limiting examples, carbon emission rate may be expressed in lbs/mi, kg/m, tons/km, and the like. In some embodiments, carbon emission rate may be calculated as a function of time data. In some embodiments, carbon emission rate may be a measurement of carbon emissions over time. In some embodiments, carbon emission rate may be expressed in units of weight (or mass) over time. As non-limiting examples, carbon emission rate may be expressed in lbs/min, kg/hr, tons/hr, and the like. In some embodiments, carbon emission rate may be calculated as a function of cargo data. In some embodiments, carbon emission rate may be a measurement of carbon emissions over cargo weight. In some embodiments, this may be a ratio" (Russo 096B2 Col. 13 Lines 27-54).
calculate the carbon emission amount for each of the cargo groups based on the data on the carbon emission amount of the vehicle and the weight ratios of the cargo groups. " In some embodiments, carbon emission rate may be expressed in units of weight (or mass) over cargo weight (or mass). As non-limiting examples, carbon emission rate may be expressed in tons/lb, lbs/lbs, kg/kg, kg/g, and the like. In some embodiments, calculating carbon emission rate may include calculating a carbon emission rate for each of a plurality of tasks that an operator has conducted. In some embodiments, calculating carbon emission rate may include calculating a carbon emission rate for each operator of a plurality of operators. In some embodiments, calculating carbon emission rate may include calculating a carbon emission rate for each vehicle of a plurality of vehicles. This may be done, for example and without limitation, when task data includes a vehicle data. As a non-limiting example, this may include calculating a carbon emission rate for each vehicle that an operator uses" (Russo 096B2 Col. 13 Line 54 - Col. 14 Line 2).
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, 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.
Claim(s) 3 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Russo (US 12165096B2), in view of Hamaguchi (JP2010254789).
Regarding Claim 3,
Russo 096B2 discloses the device according to claim 1, as shown above. Russo 096B2 further discloses the parameters indicate respective volumes of the cargo groups; and " For instance, and without limitation, cargo data may include information related to a quantity of a good, which may be measured in weight (e.g., 200 lbs), a spatial measurement (e.g., 6 ft.sup.3), or a numerical value (e.g., 150 count of a particular product)" (Russo 096B2 Col.10 Lines 10-15).
Examiner Note: Volume is a spatial measurement
Russo 096B2 discloses a method for determining carbon emissions of a shipment, but fails to disclose the control unit is configured to calculate volume ratios of the cargo groups using the parameters, and calculate the carbon emission amount for each of the cargo groups based on the data on the carbon emission amount of the vehicle and the volume ratios of the cargo groups. Hamaguchi discloses a greenhouse gas discharge evaluation device with respect to movement by a route. Hamaguchi teaches,
the control unit is configured to calculate volume ratios of the cargo groups using the parameters, and "In addition, when multiple items are transported simultaneously by a single transport vehicle, the emission evaluation unit 7 may calculate the weight ratio or volume ratio of each item relative to the multiple items" (Hamaguchi Par. 0047)
calculate the carbon emission amount for each of the cargo groups based on the data on the carbon emission amount of the vehicle and the volume ratios of the cargo groups. "The emission evaluation unit 7 calculates the greenhouse gas emissions per item based on the calculated weight ratio or volume ratio of each item and the calculated greenhouse gas emissions of the transport vehicle, and evaluates the calculated greenhouse gas emissions per item" (Hamaguchi Par. 0047).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the claimed invention to have combined the method of determining carbon emissions of a shipment of Russo 096B2 with calculating the volume ratio, and the carbon emission amount based on the volume ration and vehicle emissions of Hamaguchi to reduce the amount of processing required for the comparison calculation (Hamaguchi Par. 0022).
Claim(s) 4 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Russo (US 12165096B2), in view of Russo (US 12359929B2).
Regarding Claim 4,
Russo 096B2 discloses a method for determining carbon emissions of a shipment, but fails to disclose a route from a departure location to a destination of the vehicle, and a control unit that calculates a carbon emission amount for each of the at least some of the cargo groups using data on the carbon emission amount of the vehicle in the section and a plurality of parameters corelated with respective weights of the cargo groups. Russo 929B2, however, discloses receiving transport data for offsetting carbon emissions. Russo 929B2, teaches, a route from a departure location to a destination of the vehicle includes a section in which a plurality of cargo groups that is at least some of the cargo groups is transported; and "For the purposes of this disclosure, a “transport” is a movement of one or more objects from a first location to a second location via a transport vehicle" (Russo 929B2 Col. 5 Lines 7-10). "The period of time may be, as a nonlimiting example, the duration of a shipment and/or a at least a portion of the shipment (e.g., over a specific distance of a shipment distance). As another nonlimiting example, the period of time may be the period of time it took to complete a particular task (e.g., reach a specific checkpoint or complete an entire shipment). " (Russo 929B2 Col. 7 Lines 48-54). "Objects may include, as nonlimiting examples, cargo, goods, livestock, non-fungible goods, fungible goods, produce, cargo containers, oil, liquids, gasoline, food, meals, people, products, and the like" (Russo 929B2 Col. 5 Lines 35-39).
Examiner Note: Tracking when a checkpoint is reached is a section of travel.
the control unit calculates a carbon emission amount for each of the at least some of the cargo groups in the section using data on the carbon emission amount of the vehicle in the section and a plurality of parameters correlated with respective weights of the at least some of the cargo groups. "For the purposes of this disclosure, “carbon dioxide emissions” are the emissions of carbon dioxide that are emitted by a transport vehicle during a transit. In one or more embodiments, carbon emission metric 144 includes a qualitative or quantitative measurement of greenhouse gas output during a transport, such as a first transport, by a vehicle, such as a first vehicle. For example, and without limitation, carbon emission metric may include greenhouse gas data, as discussed further below. Carbon emission metric 144 may include a carbon impact, where a carbon impact quantitatively or qualitatively describes the environmental impact by a transport due to carbon emissions produced during the transport. “Carbon impact”, for the purposes of this disclosure, is a measurement of the amount of carbon dioxide produced through an activity of transport. An increase in carbon impact may contribute to climate change. In some embodiments, carbon impact of a transport, or vehicle 116 of the transport, may be calculated using the following equation: d×w×Efx (Formula 1.1),where dν is the distance traveled during the transport, w is the weight of the object load, and EFx is the emissions factor. The emissions factor is the CO2 emitted by the transport unit per ton-mile. In one or more embodiments, carbon emissions, as used in this disclosure, may include carbon dioxide (CO2), nitrous oxide (N2O), fluorinated gases, methane (CH4), and the like. For example, and without limitations, carbon emission metric may include emission intensity, such as carbon intensity (e.g., 1.2 kg CO2e/BOE) or methane intensity (e.g., 20%), emissions quantity (e.g., fluorinated gas emissions of 5 metric tons), and the like" (Russo 929B2 Col. 13 Lines 33-65).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the claimed invention to have combined the method of determining carbon emissions of a shipment of Russo 096B2 with a route from a departure location to a destination of the vehicle includes a section in which a plurality of cargo groups that is at least some of the cargo groups is transported, and calculating a carbon emission amount for each of the at least some of the cargo groups in the section using data on the carbon emission amount of the vehicle in the section and a plurality of parameters correlated with respective weights of the at least some of the cargo groups of Russo 929B2 to reduce carbon impact of a transport, or transportation corporation conducting the transport and minimize error functions (Russo 929B2 Col. 2 Lines 30-31, Col. 25 Lines 32-33).
Claim(s) 5 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Russo (US 12165096B2), in view of Russo (US12359929B2), and in further view of Milcoff (US12182826 B1).
Regarding Claim 5,
The combination of Russo 096B2 and Russo 929B2 disclose the method of determining carbon emissions of a shipment as shown above. The combination of Russo 096B2 and Russo 929B2 fail to explicitly disclose calculating the carbon emission amount for each of the at least some of the cargo groups in the section. Milcoff, however, discloses receiving freight data to determine transport configurations and carbon emissions. Milcoff teaches, wherein the control unit calculates a carbon emission amount for each of the cargo groups transported by the vehicle based on a result of calculating the carbon emission amount for each of the at least some of the cargo groups in the section. ““Transport route” for the purposes of this disclosure is a segment of an overall route that is traversed by one transport carrier 132. For example, a projected transport journey 152 may contain multiple transport routes 156 wherein a first transport route 156 may transport a freight from an origin location to a first stop, a second transport route 156 may transport the freight from the second stop to a third stop, and the third transport route 156 may transport the freight from the third stop to a final destination. " (Milcoff Col. 10 Lines 48-56). "In one or more embodiments, real carbon data 180 may include real carbon blocks. “Real carbon block” for the purposes of this disclosure is information associated with the actual carbon emitted for a transport route 156. In an embodiment, real carbon data 180 may include an aggregation of one or more real carbon blocks wherein each real carbon block may include a portion of the total carbon emitted. In one or more embodiments, one or more location-based sensors and one or more carbon sensors may be used to determine the total carbon emitted for a transport carrier 132 over a particular transport route 156. In one or more embodiments, real carbon blocks may be used to determine which transport route 156 was affected by an increase in carbon emission. In one or more embodiments, real carbon blocks may be received in any way as described in this disclosure, such as in reference to real carbon data 180. In one or more embodiments, carbon outlier 196 may include real carbon block and projected carbon block 168. In one or more embodiments, processor may be configured to transmit carbon outlier 196 to remote device 136." (Milcoff Col. 35 Lines 20-40).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the claimed invention to have combined the method of determining carbon emissions of a shipment of Russo 096B2 and Russo 929B2 with calculating the carbon emission amount for each cargo groups in a section of Milcoff to make informed decisions in association with selection of transports (Milcoff Col. 1 Lines 16-17).
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Emily M Kraisinger whose telephone number is (703)756-4583. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 7:30 AM -4:30 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, Jessica Lemieux can be reached at 571-270-3445. 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.
/E.M.K./Examiner, Art Unit 3626
/JESSICA LEMIEUX/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3626