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
Due to communications filed 6/9/26, the following is a final office action. Claims 1, 8, 14, 15 are amended. Claim 19 is new. Claim 7 is cancelled. Claims 1-6, and 8-19 are pending in this application and are rejected as follows.
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 1-6 and 8-19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C, 101 because the claimed invention is directed to a judicial exception (I.e., a law of nature, a natural phenomenon, or an abstract idea) without significantly more.
As per independent claims 1, 14 and 15, these claim recite a judicial exception. The claims as a whole recite a method of "Organizing Human Activity" and "Mathematical Concepts". First, the claims recite a method for logistics planning, supply chain management, and resource allocation, which is direct to "Organizing Human Activity". The claims also recite calculating resource consumption, determining transportation durations through "determining a respective resource consumption and a respective transportation duration of a respective transportation route...", simulating multiple routes through determining "determining a first transportation route among the plurality of transportation routes...", and selecting an optimal route according to predetermined conditions through "initiating the providing of the product...according to the first transportation route". Thus, the claim recites an abstract idea.
Furthermore, the claims are not integrated into a practical application. The claims as a whole merely
describe using a generic computer to perform calculations and simulations, and initiating delivery of a
product by a transportation device. These elements are well-understood, routine and conventional
computer implementations and do not improve the functioning of the computer or any other
technology. The claim merely automates an abstract idea using generic computer components.
Simply integrating the abstract idea on a generic computer is insufficient to embody a practical
application.
Finally, the claims do not recite an inventive concept. The claim does not recite additional
elements that amount to significantly more than the abstract idea, solve a technical problem with a
technical solution, or improve computer functionality or transportation technology in a specific
unconventional way. Thus, even when viewed as a whole, nothing in the claims adds significantly more
(i.e., an inventive concept) to the abstract idea, and are ineligible.
Dependent claims 2-6, 8-13, 19, and 16-18 are also directed to same grouping of methods of "Organizing Human Activity" and "Mathematical Concepts. The additional elements of the computer-implemented method in claims 2-6 and 8-13; transportation devices of claim 3; internal or external transportation of claim 9; programming interface of claim 10; display and database of claim 11; display device and database of claim 12; transportation device of claim 13; the transportation device, computing device and storage device of claim 19; the non-transitory computer-readable medium of claims 16-19; transportation device of claim 17; transportation device of claim 18, are additional elements do no more than generally link the use of the judicial exception to a particular technological environment or field of use. Accordingly, in combination, 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.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102
and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory
basis (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of
rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same
under either status.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 103 which forms the basis for all obviousness rejections
set forth in this Office action:
A patent for a claimed invention may not be obtained, notwithstanding that the claimed invention is not identically disclosed as set forth in section 102, if the differences between the claimed invention and the prior art are such that the claimed invention as a whole would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which the claimed invention pertains. Patentability shall not be negated by the manner in which the invention
was made.
Claim(s) 1, 2, 5, 6, 8-16, 19 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Ericsson
et al's "Optimizing route choice for lowest fuel consumption-Potential effects of a new driver support
tool", and further in view of Luo et al (US 20230259872 A), and further in view of GUAN et al (CN 106156377 A).
As per claim 1, Ericsson et al discloses:
determining a respective resource consumption and a respective transportation duration of a
respective transportation route of the product from a predeterminable point of origin to the target
location; the determining of the respective resource consumption and the respective transportation
duration comprising simulating a plurality of transportation routes from the predeterminable point of
origin to the target location, (Page 375, para. 2: "Using the network analyst tool in ESRI's ArcView
program, which is based on Dijkstras algorithm (Zhao, 1997), the routes between the origin and
destination of the 50 journeys were optimized with regard to: (1) the lowest fuel consumption, (2) the
shortest time, and (3) the shortest distance. The fuel consumption, time and distance were compared
for the three routes... For each of the optimized parameters the other two were estimated. For
example, when the route was optimized for the shortest time, the distance and fuel consumption for
that route were estimated");
determining a first transportation route among the plurality of transportation routes that
satisfies at least one predeterminable condition with regard to the respective resource consumption and
the respective transportation duration, (In order to study whether there was a better choice of route,
the most fuel-saving route between the origin and destination of the 50 journeys was again optimized,
now with the added extra fuel penalty on the disturbed segment. The number of cases for which better
route choices were available was noted, together with the saving in fuel consumption and time, if any.
The gain was estimated through the differences, in fuel consumption and time, between the routes
without and with the information from the probe vehicles);
Ericsson et al does not specifically disclose the following limitations, however Luo discloses:
initiating the providing of the product by at least one transportation device according to the first
transportation route, (Luo: See Fig. 1 [shows a vehicle for transporting the perishable food item[s]]; [0004] "where the first path is a first candidate delivery route that includes loading a perishable food item at the first source node, traveling along the vehicle route represented by the first edge, and
delivering the perishable food item at the first destination node The embodiment also includes
generating a route plan that includes a plurality of finalized delivery routes that provide for delivery of
perishable food items from the source nodes to the destination nodes, the plurality of finalized delivery
routes including the first finalized delivery route. Other embodiments of this aspect include
corresponding computer systems, apparatus, and computer programs recorded on one or more
computer storage devices, each configured to perform the actions of the embodiment.");
the initiating of the providing of the product by the at least one transportation device according to the first transportation route comprising storing, by a storage device, the first transportation route and making the first transportation route available or transmitting the first transportation route to the at least one transportation device, in order to carry out a corresponding transportation of the product according to the first transportation route, (Luo et al: [0067] In the illustrated embodiment, the process stores data in a database that is stored on a computer readable storage medium and is used to store persistent data. For example, the delivery routes may be stored as delivery routes data in the database. The selected paths output by the hybrid A-Star algorithm represent respective delivery routes stored in the database. The delivery route data may include information such as the source node, a destination node, and any nodes between the source and destination nodes, including characteristic data associated with the nodes. The delivery route data may also include data identifying a transport vehicle to be used, load amounts of food items on a per-category basis, start time/date, distances along the route, and any other information that may be helpful for communicating the requirements and other information about the route to the driver or other interested parties; [0068] The process may use the route information to set up route plans. In some embodiments, the route plans may include delivery schedules for respective drivers. The route plans may include any of the information stored in the database associated with delivery route information, such as identifying a transport vehicle to be used, load amounts of food items on a per-category basis, start time/date, distances along the route. and any other information that may be helpful. The process may then output the route plans as a transport loading and routing report).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was made
to include the above limitations as taught by Luo in the systems of Ericsson et al, since the claimed
invention is merely a combination of old elements, and in the combination each element merely would
have performed the same function as it did separately, and one of ordinary skill in the art would have
recognized that the results of the combination were predictable.
Ericsson et al does not specifically disclose the following limitations, however GUAN et al discloses:
wherein the predeterminable time is a number of years in the future, wherein a scaling into the future is carried out for the respective resource consumption based on at least one macroeconomic parameter, and wherein the respective macroeconomic parameter takes into account an increase in productivity, progress in terms of productivity, an inflation rate, a gross domestic product, or purchasing power parity.
However, GUAN et al (CN 106156377 A) discloses: ("At present, our country strategic mineral
resources such as copper, gold foreign dependence is always high, especially copper, iron and other
mineral substance dependence are more than 50%. future 10-20 years, key process of urbanization in
the industrial development of our country, will continue increasing energy resource consumption and
demand contradiction will be further intensified. and heavy demand of mineral resource, but also
international market price greatly rising period, according to the expert prediction 21 century resource
price will continue in the new operation. Therefore, the country proposed increasing geological survey,
domestic foothold and improve strategic decision of geological mineral working to guarantee capability
of the national economic and social development").
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was made
to include the above limitations as taught by GUAN et al in the systems of Luo, since the claimed
invention is merely a combination of old elements, and in the combination each element merely would
have performed the same function as it did separately, and one of ordinary skill in the art would have
recognized that the results of the combination were predictable.
As per claim 2, Ericsson et al does not disclose the following however Luo discloses:
wherein the at least one predeterminable condition is configured as an optimum of an objective
function that takes into account the respective resource consumption with a first weighting factor and
the respective transportation duration with a second weighting factor, (Luo [0004] The embodiment
also includes processing the path data using a plurality of evaluation techniques that result in a first set
of evaluation values, where the plurality of evaluation techniques comprises a first evaluation technique
based on a first optimization metric, a second evaluation techniques based on a second optimization
metric, and a third evaluation technique based on a combination of the first and second evaluation
techniques; [0142] In the illustrated embodiment, the historical path optimization module 414 also
builds demand and supply constraints for the current distribution and transport problem. The historical
path optimization module 414 will then check candidate delivery routes for compliance with the
constraints. Examples of constraints for an embodiment are as follows: [0143] a) Vehicle transport load,
i.e., a transport weight of a vehicle k cannot exceed the maximize load rating for that vehicle [0144] b)
Factory demand satisfaction, the supplied dairy products must meet the demand of the dairy factory on
a per-category basis [0145] c) Limited Source supply, the load amount at a source node cannot exceed
the amount of food product available on a per-category basis).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was made
to include the above limitations as taught by Luo in the systems of Ericsson et al, since the claimed
invention is merely a combination of old elements, and in the combination each element merely would
have performed the same function as it did separately, and one of ordinary skill in the art would have
recognized that the results of the combination were predictable.
As per claim 5, Ericsson et al does not disclose the following however Luo discloses: wherein a
plurality of points of origin are available for production of the product with a respective origin resource
consumption, wherein the respective resource consumption of the respective transportation route of
the product comprises the respective origin resource consumption for the production of the product,
([0029] In some embodiments, when the process identifies a node that corresponds with some
characteristic data, the process associates the characteristic data with that node, and then identifies the
node as a source node if the characteristic data is supplier characteristic data or as a destination node if
the characteristic data is processor characteristic data. In some embodiments, the source nodes
represent dairy farms and the characteristic data in the data property of the source nodes may include
supplier characteristic data such as product categories (e.g., categories of perishable food) produced by
the dairy farm and respective production levels; [0040] The hybrid A-Star algorithm starts at a source
node and uses a plurality of evaluation techniques to evaluate multiple path and transport options
across multiple time periods. The evaluation techniques are based on the evaluation metrics determined
by the process and combinations thereof...each evaluation technique includes a respective one of the
following evaluation functions:... f4: Extent of supply consumption, C [0045] f5: Extent of supply
consumption/Number of vehicles used/Transportation cost, C/D/A [0046] f6: Extent of supply
consumption/Transportation cost, C/A [0047] f7: Extent of supply consumption/Number of vehicles
used, C/D [0048] f8: Number of vehicles used/Transportation cost...); and
wherein the respective transportation duration of the respective transportation route of
the product takes into account the predeterminable point of origin, ([0029] In some
embodiments, when the process identifies a node that corresponds with some characteristic data, the
process associates the characteristic data with that node, and then identifies the node as a source node
if the characteristic data is supplier characteristic data or as a destination node if the characteristic data
is processor characteristic data. In some embodiments, the source nodes represent dairy farms and the
characteristic data in the data property of the source nodes may include supplier characteristic data
such as product categories (e.g., categories of perishable food) produced by the dairy farm and
respective production levels, as well as location, hours of operation, point of contact information, and so
on. In some embodiments, transport vehicles are provided by the dairy farms, and the data property
includes supplier characteristic data about available vehicles, such as the number of vehicles, the
respective load capacities, cost of operation (e.g., dollars per mile or per hour), etc.); [where dollars per
hour represent the duration of the present invention]);
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was made
to include the above limitations as taught by Luo in the systems of Ericsson et al, since the claimed
invention is merely a combination of old elements, and in the combination each element merely would
have performed the same function as it did separately, and one of ordinary skill in the art would have
recognized that the results of the combination were predictable.
As per claim 6, Ericsson et al does not disclose the following however Luo discloses:
wherein the respective resource consumption of the respective transportation route of the
product comprises the respective origin resource consumption for the production of the product at the
predeterminable point of origin, ([0040] The hybrid A-Star algorithm starts at a source node and uses a
plurality of evaluation techniques to evaluate multiple path and transport options across multiple time
periods. The evaluation techniques are based on the evaluation metrics determined by the process and
combinations thereof.. each evaluation technique includes a respective one of the following evaluation
functions:... f4: Extent of supply consumption, C [0045] f5: Extent of supply consumption/Number of
vehicles used/Transportation cost, C/D/A [0046] f6: Extent of supply consumption/Transportation cost,
C/A [0047] f7: Extent of supply consumption/Number of vehicles used, C/D [0048] f8: Number of
vehicles used/Transportation cost...).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was made
to include the above limitations as taught by Luo in the systems of Ericsson et al, since the claimed
invention is merely a combination of old elements, and in the combination each element merely would
have performed the same function as it did separately, and one of ordinary skill in the art would have
recognized that the results of the combination were predictable.
As per claim 8, Ericsson et al' does not disclose:
wherein the respective macroeconomic parameter takes into account the increase in
productivity, the progress in terms of productivity, the inflation rate, the gross domestic product, or the
purchasing power parity along the respective transportation route of the product.
However, GUAN et al (CN 106156377 A) discloses:
At present, our country strategic mineral resources such as copper, gold foreign dependence is
always high, especially copper, iron and other mineral substance dependence are more than 50%. future
10-20 years, key process of urbanization in the industrial development of our country, will continue
increasing energy resource consumption and demand contradiction will be further intensified. and
heavy demand of mineral resource, but also international market price greatly rising period, according
to the expert prediction 21 century resource price will continue in the new operation. Therefore, the
country proposed increasing geological survey, domestic foothold and improve strategic decision of
geological mineral working to guarantee capability of the national economic and social development.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was made
to include the above limitations as taught by GUAN et al in the systems of Luo, since the claimed
invention is merely a combination of old elements, and in the combination each element merely would
have performed the same function as it did separately, and one of ordinary skill in the art would have
recognized that the results of the combination were predictable.
As per claim 9, Ericsson et al does not disclose the following however Luo discloses:
providing information about the respective resource consumption with regard to internal or
external transportation or transportation by land, road, rail, ship or air, or about transshipment or
storage processes, ([0030] In some such embodiments, the destination nodes represent dairy factories
and the characteristic data in the data property of the destination nodes may include processor
characteristic data such as product categories (e.g., categories of perishable food products). In some
such embodiments, the edges represent vehicle routes (i.e., roads, highways, etc.) and the characteristic
data in the data property of the edges may include transport characteristic data such as travel distance,
height and/or weight restrictions, tolls, steep grades, road construction or road closures, etc; [0156]
Edges 506A represent travel routes between the connected pair of nodes, which may include one or
more roads, highways, etc. ).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was made
to include the above limitations as taught by Luo in the systems of Ericsson et al, since the claimed
invention is merely a combination of old elements, and in the combination each element merely would
have performed the same function as it did separately, and one of ordinary skill in the art would have
recognized that the results of the combination were predictable.
As per claim 10, Ericsson et al does not disclose the following however Luo discloses:
wherein providing the information comprises providing the information via at least one
programming interface to a respective information database or to a respective web server that has the
information in each case, ([0212] Computer readable program instructions for carrying out operations of
the present invention may be assembler instructions, instruction-set-architecture (ISA) instructions,
machine instructions, machine dependent instructions, microcode, firmware instructions, state-setting
data, configuration data for integrated circuitry, or either source code or object code written in any
combination of one or more programming languages, including an object oriented programming
language such as Smalltalk, C++, or the like, and procedural programming languages, such as the "C"
programming language or similar programming languages. The computer readable program instructions
may execute entirely on the user's computer, partly on the user's computer, as a stand-alone software
package, partly on the user's computer and partly on a remote computer or entirely on the remote
computer or server).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was made
to include the above limitations as taught by Luo in the systems of Ericsson et al, since the claimed
invention is merely a combination of old elements, and in the combination each element merely would
have performed the same function as it did separately, and one of ordinary skill in the art would have
recognized that the results of the combination were predictable.
As per claim 11, Ericsson et al does not disclose the following however Luo discloses:
displaying the determined respective resource consumption, the determined respective
transportation duration, or the determined respective resource consumption and the determined
respective transportation duration of the first transportation route of the product on a display device,
([0192] In the illustrated embodiment, the A-Star module 808 outputs optimal delivery routes may be
stored as delivery routes data, for example in the database 418 (shown in FIG. 4). The selected paths
output by the A-Star module 808 represent respective delivery routes stored in the database 418. The
delivery route data may include information such as the source node, a destination node, and any nodes
between the source and destination nodes, including characteristic data associated with the nodes. The
delivery route data may also include data identifying a transport vehicle to be used, load amounts of
food items on a per-category basis, start time/date, distances along the route, and any other
information that may be helpful for communicating the requirements and other information about the
route to the driver or other interested parties. This data is output to the reporting module 416; [0116] In
some such embodiments, the destination nodes represent dairy factories and the characteristic data in
the data property of the destination nodes may include processor characteristic data such as product
categories (e.g., categories of perishable food products) processed by the dairy factory, intake limits for
the respective product categories, as well as location, hours of operation, point of contact information,
and so on. In some such embodiments, the edges represent vehicle routes (i.e., roads, highways, etc.)
and the characteristic data in the data property of the edges may include transport characteristic data
such as travel distance, height and/or weight restrictions, tolls, steep grades, road construction or road
closures, etc);
storing the determined respective resource consumption, the determined respective
transportation duration, or the determined respective resource consumption and the determined
respective transportation duration of the first transportation route of the product together with
information about the product in a product life cycle management database; or a combination thereof,
([0116] In some such embodiments, the destination nodes represent dairy factories and the
characteristic data in the data property of the destination nodes may include processor characteristic
data such as product categories (e.g., categories of perishable food products) processed by the dairy
factory, intake limits for the respective product categories, as well as location, hours of operation, point
of contact information, and so on. In some such embodiments, the edges represent vehicle routes (i.e.,
roads, highways, etc.) and the characteristic data in the data property of the edges may include
transport characteristic data such as travel distance, height and/or weight restrictions, tolls, steep
grades, road construction or road closures, etc).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was made to
include the above limitations as taught by Luo in the systems of Ericsson et al, since the claimed
invention is merely a combination of old elements, and in the combination each element merely would
have performed the same function as it did separately, and one of ordinary skill in the art would have
recognized that the results of the combination were predictable.
As per claim 12, Ericsson et al does not disclose the following however Luo discloses:
displaying the respective point of origin on the display device; storing the respective point of
origin in the product life cycle management database; or a combination thereof, ([0067], The selected
paths output by the hybrid A-Star algorithm represent respective delivery routes stored in the database.
The delivery route data may include information such as the source node).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was made
to include the above limitations as taught by Luo in the systems of Ericsson et al, since the claimed
invention is merely a combination of old elements, and in the combination each element merely would
have performed the same function as it did separately, and one of ordinary skill in the art would have
recognized that the results of the combination were predictable.
As per claim 13, Ericsson et al does not disclose the following however Luo discloses:
providing the product by the at least one transportation device according to the first
transportation route, (([0004] where the first path is a first candidate delivery route that includes
loading a perishable food item at the first source node, traveling along the vehicle route represented by
the first edge, and delivering the perishable food item at the first destination node The embodiment
also includes generating a route plan that includes a plurality of finalized delivery routes that provide for
delivery of perishable food items from the source nodes to the destination nodes, the plurality of
finalized delivery routes including the first finalized delivery route. Other embodiments of this aspect
include corresponding computer systems, apparatus, and computer programs recorded on one or more
computer storage devices, each configured to perform the actions of the embodiment.).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was made
to include the above limitations as taught by Luo in the systems of Ericsson et al, since the claimed
invention is merely a combination of old elements, and in the combination each element merely would
have performed the same function as it did separately, and one of ordinary skill in the art would have
recognized that the results of the combination were predictable.
As per claim 14, this claim recites limitations similar to those disclosed in independent claim 1,
and is therefore rejected for similar reasons.
As per claim 15, this claim recites limitations similar to those disclosed in independent claim 1,
and is therefore rejected for similar reasons.
As per claim 16: wherein the at least one predeterminable condition is configured as an
optimum of an objective function that takes into account the respective resource consumption with a
first weighting factor and the respective transportation duration with a second weighting factor.
Please see the rejection of claim 2.
As per claim 19, Ericsson et al does not disclose the following however Luo discloses:
wherein initiating the providing of the product by the at least one transportation device according to the first transportation route further comprises the at least one transportation device directly implementing the first transportation route, or transmitting, by a computing device or the storage device, commands to the at least one transportation device.
(See Claim 1 of Luo et al: “1. A computer implemented method comprising:...generating path data representative of a first path beginning at a first source node and ending at a first destination node, wherein the first path comprises a first edge connected between the first source node and the first destination node, and wherein the first path is a first candidate delivery route that includes loading a perishable food item at the first source node, traveling along the vehicle route represented by the first edge, and delivering the perishable food item at the first destination node...).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was made
to include the above limitations as taught by Luo in the systems of Ericsson et al, since the claimed
invention is merely a combination of old elements, and in the combination each element merely would
have performed the same function as it did separately, and one of ordinary skill in the art would have
recognized that the results of the combination were predictable.
Claim(s) 4, is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Ericsson et al's
"Optimizing route choice for lowest fuel consumption-Potential effects of a new driver support tool",
and further in view of Luo et al (US 20230259872 A), and further in view of GUAN et al (CN 106156377 A), and further in view of SHI (CN 108470264 A).
As per claim 4, Ericsson et al' does not disclose:
consumption comprises at least one form of...one form of material consumption, use of the
respective transportation device, a greenhouse gas emission, or an expense, each of which is attributable
to the transportation of the product,
However, Luo discloses: ([0040] The hybrid A-Star algorithm starts at a source node and uses a
plurality of evaluation techniques to evaluate multiple path and transport options across multiple time
periods. The evaluation techniques are based on the evaluation metrics determined by the process and
combinations thereof. For n evaluation metrics, the process uses 2.sup.n-1 evaluation techniques. Thus,
for the present embodiment that includes four evaluation metrics A, B, C, and D, the process uses
fifteen evaluation techniques, where each evaluation technique includes a respective one of the
following evaluation functions: [0041] f1: Transportation cost, A [0042] f2: Number of vehicles used, D
[0043] f3: Degree of demand satisfaction, B [0044] f4: Extent of supply consumption, C [0045] f5: Extent
of supply consumption/Number of vehicles used/Transportation cost, C/D/A [0046] f6: Extent of supply
consumption/Transportation cost, C/A [0047] f7: Extent of supply consumption/Number of vehicles
used, C/D [0048] f8: Number of vehicles used/Transportation cost, D/A [0049] f9: Degree of demand
satisfaction/Transportation cost, B/A [0050] f10: Degree of demand satisfaction/Extent of supply
consumption, B/C [0051] f11: Degree of demand satisfaction/Number of vehicles used, B/D [0052] f12:
Extent of supply consumption/Degree of demand satisfaction/Transportation cost, C/B/A [0053] f13:
Number of vehicles used/Degree of demand satisfaction/Transportation cost, D/B/A [0054] f14: Extent
of supply consumption/Degree of demand satisfaction/Number of vehicles used, C/B/D [0055] f15:
Number of vehicles used/Extent of supply consumption/Degree of demand satisfaction/Transportation
cost, D/C/B/A);
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was made
to include the above limitations as taught by Luo in the systems of Ericsson et al, since the claimed
invention is merely a combination of old elements, and in the combination each element merely would
have performed the same function as it did separately, and one of ordinary skill in the art would have
recognized that the results of the combination were predictable.
Ericsson et al' does not disclose: energy consumption,
However, SHI discloses: "the transportation resources consumed comprises an electricity or fuel
consumption, and so on."
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was made
to include the above limitations as taught by SHI in the systems of Luo, since the claimed invention is
merely a combination of old elements, and in the combination each element merely would have
performed the same function as it did separately, and one of ordinary skill in the art would have
recognized that the results of the combination were predictable.
Claim(s) 3, 17, 18 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Ericsson et al's
"Optimizing route choice for lowest fuel consumption-Potential effects of a new driver support tool",
and further in view of Luo et al (US 20230259872 A), and further in view of GUAN et al (CN 106156377 A), and further in view of FUTAMURA (JP 2021024722 A).
As per claim 3, Ericsson et al' does not disclose:
wherein the respective transportation route comprises a plurality of transshipment points at which the
product is transferred from one transportation device of the at least one transportation devices to
another transportation device of the at least one transportation device.
HOWEVR, FUTAMURA (JP 2021024722 A) discloses: "As described above, the delivery item
moving step S1 for moving the delivery item 4 from the transportation device 1 to the drone delivery
area 3 provided above the stop 2 (upper floor), and the load for loading the delivery item 4 into the
drone 5. By including the loading process S2 and the delivery process S3 for delivering the delivery 4 to
the delivery destination using the drone 5, the delivery 4 carried by the transportation device 1 is
transshipped to another transportation device and aggregated in the distribution center. It is possible to
sort the delivered deliverables 4 at the drone delivery place 3 and quickly deliver them to the delivery
destination without causing them to do so".
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was made
to include the above limitations as taught by FUTAMURA in the systems of Luo, since the claimed
invention is merely a combination of old elements, and in the combination each element merely would
have performed the same function as it did separately, and one of ordinary skill in the art would have
recognized that the results of the combination were predictable.
As per claim 17: wherein the respective transportation route comprises a plurality of
transshipment points at which the product is transferred from one transportation device of the at least
one transportation devices to another transportation device of the at least one transportation device.
Please see the rejection of claim 3.
As per claim 18: wherein the respective resource consumption comprises at least one form of
energy consumption, one form of material consumption, use of the respective transportation device, a
greenhouse gas emission, or an expense, each of which is attributable to the transportation of the
product.
Please see the rejection of claim 3.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 6/9/26 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
With regard to the 35 USC 101 rejection, Applicant argues that the amended claims further tie the claims to particular hardware and real world applications and obviate the claim rejections. However, Examiner respectfully disagrees. Under Step 2A, Prong One, the claims recite mathematical concepts and certain methods of human activity, including route simulation, resource consumption and duration calculations, route optimization, and economic forecasting. Under Step 2B, the recited storage, communication, and transportation hardware merely implements or transmits the results of these calculations and does not improve the functioning of the hardware or another technology. Therefore the hardware and real-world application do not integrate the judicial exception into a practical application.
With regard to the 103 rejection, Applicant states that claim was amended to incorporate the subject matter of dependent claim 7, and argues that Ericcson et al , Luo et al and Guan et al do not teach or disclose that “a scaling into the future is carried out for the respective resource consumption based on at least one macroeconomic parameter," where "the respective macroeconomic parameter takes into account an increase in productivity, progress in terms of productivity, an inflation rate, a gross domestic product, or purchasing power parity”. However, Examiner respectfully disagrees. Guan et al discloses this limitation by disclosing: "At present, our country strategic mineral resources such as copper, gold foreign dependence is always high, especially copper, iron and other mineral substance dependence are more than 50%. future 10-20 years, key process of urbanization in the industrial development of our country, will continue increasing energy resource consumption and demand contradiction will be further intensified. and heavy demand of mineral resource, but also international market price greatly rising period, according to the expert prediction 21 century resource price will continue in the new operation. Therefore, the country proposed increasing geological survey, domestic foothold and improve strategic decision of geological mineral working to guarantee capability of the national economic and social development". In this passage, “a scaling into the future” of the present invention is disclosed by future 10-20 years of Guan et al, the “the respective resource consumption” of the present invention is represented by the energy resource consumption of Guan et al, the “one macroeconomic parameter..where the respective macroeconomic parameter takes into account...gross domestic product” of the present invention is represented by mineral resources such as copper, iron and other mineral substance of Guan et al. In Guan, the future 10-20 years, key process is carried out for the increase of energy resource consumption based on mineral resources such as copper, gold, and therefore teaches “a scaling into the future is carried out for the respective resource consumption based on at least one macroeconomic parameter," where "the respective macroeconomic parameter takes into account an increase in productivity, progress in terms of productivity, an inflation rate, a gross domestic product, or purchasing power parity”.
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 Akiba Robinson whose telephone number is 571-272-6734 and email is Akiba.Robinsonboyce@USPTO.gov. The examiner can normally be reached on Monday-Thursday 6:30am-4:30pm.
If attempts to reach the Examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the Examiner's supervisor, Nathan Uber can be reached on 571-270-3923. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300.
Any inquiry of a general nature or relating to the status of this application or proceeding should be directed to the receptionist whose telephone number is (703) 305-3900.
August 25, 2026
/AKIBA K ROBINSON/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3626
Prosecution Insights