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
This action is in reply to the application filed on 2/26/2025.
Claims 1-11 are currently pending and have been examined.
Information Disclosure Statement
The reference listed in the IDS dated 2/26/2025 has been considered.
Abstract
The title of the invention is not descriptive. A new title is required that is clearly indicative of the invention to which the claims are directed. See 37 CFR 1.72(a) and MPEP 606.
Claim Objections
Claim 7 is objected to because of the following informality: a position of the accepted address character string” should read “the position of the accepted address character string” to maintain proper antecedent basis with the use of the same term in Claim 1. Appropriate correction is required.
Claim Rejections – 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(b):
(b) CONCLUSION.—The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph:
The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the applicant regards as his invention.
Claims 1-11 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor (or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the applicant), regards as the invention.
Claims 1, 10, and 11 contain the following limitations: “accept an address character string of a delivery destination of a package” and “extract position information recorded in association with the accepted address character string from a database that associates an address character string representing a delivery destination a delivery of a package to which is completed with position information of a position where a deliverer who delivered a package to the delivery destination was present when the deliverer performed a predetermined action.” These limitations contain three instances of the term “a package,” and it is unclear as drafted whether subsequent instances of this term are intended to relate back to earlier instances of this term. Relatedly, these limitations contain multiple instances of “an address character string” and “a delivery destination” which are indefinite for similar reasons. Further relatedly, it is unclear as drafted to which of the two previously disclosed instances of “a delivery destination” (if these are intended to indicate different delivery destinations) the term “the delivery destination” is intended to relate back. For the purposes of this examination, these limitations will be interpreted as “accept an address character string of a delivery destination of a first package” and “extract position information recorded in association with the accepted address character string from a database that associates the accepted address character string representing the delivery destination a delivery of a second package to which is completed with position information of a position where a deliverer who delivered the second package to the delivery destination was present when the deliverer performed a predetermined action.” Claims 2-9 are rejected due to their dependence upon Claim 1. Relatedly, Claims 2, 6, and 9 each contain further instances of “a package,” which are indefinite for similar reasons and are respectively interpreted in view of the interpretations of Claim 1 set forth above.
Claim 4 contains the following limitations: “identify the partial time series including a time series closest to the delivery completion time with respect to each delivery destination” and “associate position information of each position included in the identified partial time series with an address character string of the delivery destination.” This language is indefinite for two reasons. Firstly, the context and manner in which the term “the partial time series” is used in Claim 4 conflicts with the context and manner in which it is used in Claim 2 (upon which Claim 4 depends), e.g., the time series/partial time series of Claim 2 as drafted relates to a single delivery of a single package to the delivery destination as opposed to Claim 4’s “the partial time series” being related to “each delivery destination;” Claims 2 and 4 include disparate steps in which the same “the partial time series” is extracted/identified seemingly based on different criteria. Secondly, in the second above-quoted limitation, “closest” is a relative term the bounds and meaning of which are unclear in the context of the claim language, and further if “time series” is intended as indicating multiple times/timestamps, it is unclear how such multiple times (as opposed to a singular time) may be “closest” to the delivery completion time. Thirdly, it is unclear as drafted whether “an address character string” is intended to relate back to “an address character string” of Claim 1 (upon which Claim 4 eventually depends). For the purposes of this examination, Claim 4 is interpreted as if it depended upon Claim 1 rather than Claim 2, and these limitations are interpreted as “identify a timestamp closest to the delivery completion time with respect to delivery of the second package to the delivery destination” and “associate a position associated with the timestamp with the accepted address character string of the delivery destination.”
Claim 5 contains the following limitation: “wherein the processors provide, when the latitude-longitude information is determined not to be correct, delivery-destination map information in which a distribution of the extracted position information is superimposed on a map.” It is unclear as drafted whether this step is a narrowing of the second “provide…” limitation of Claim 1 (upon which Claim 5 depends), or whether this is intended to recite a new and separate step for providing map information. For the purposes of this examination, this limitation is interpreted as relating back to and further narrowing the second “provide” limitation of Claim 1.
Claim 6 contains the following limitations: “the head piece of position information being a piece of position information having an early detection time, the detection time being a time when a position is detected, and an end piece of position information, the end piece of position information being a piece of position information having a late detection time” and “identify position information farthest from the identified.” These limitations are indefinite in multiple ways. Firstly, “early” and “late” are relative and subjective terms, claimed absent any temporal baselines or thresholds against which they may be measured. Relatedly, as “head piece” and “end piece” are respectively defined based on these relative and subjective terms, the bounds of these terms and their meaning within the claim language are rendered indefinite. Examiner notes compounding issues regarding the description of this functionality in the original disclosure (e.g., Paragraph 0081 as filed) including identification of multiple head pieces and end pieces, and similarly no objective measure of how “early” and “late” may be determined in relation to the exemplary time series thereof, which fails to provide Examiner with a reasonable manner of interpreting this claim language and further appears to render this issue unfixable without triggering 112(a) written description/new matter issues. Secondly, it is unclear as drafted whether “a package” and “a position” are respectively intended to relate back to “a package” and either instance of “a position” of Claim 1 (upon which Claim 6 depends). Thirdly, these limitations use the same term “position information” (absent “the”), making it unclear whether it is intended to relate back to any of the multiple pieces of “position information” disclosed earlier in the claim string (ie: the “position information” disclosed in Claim 1 as well as earlier instances of the term in Claim 6, if such instances are not intended to indicate the same “position information” set forth in Claim 1). Fourth, it is unclear as drafted what the “farthest” position information from the identified parking or stopping position would be, as the claim language fails to provide any bounds within which this “farthest” position information must exist (e.g., the other side of the world could be considered the “farthest” position). For the purposes of this examination, these limitations will be interpreted as “wherein the processors identify a parking or stopping position where a vehicle is parked or stopped when the second package is delivered to the delivery destination” and “identify a position associated with the parking or stopping position as a position of the delivery destination.”
Claim 7 contains the following limitation: “provide, when the acquired latitude-longitude information is an area information indicating a geographical area or when the latitude-longitude information associated with the address character string is not acquired, map information in which…” It is unclear as drafted whether this step is a narrowing of the second “provide…” limitation of Claim 1 (upon which Claim 7 depends), or whether this is intended to recite a new and separate step for providing map information. For the purposes of this examination, this limitation is interpreted as relating back to and further narrowing the second “provide” limitation of Claim 1.
Claim 7 contains the following limitation: “provide, when the acquired latitude-longitude information is an area information indicating a geographical area or when the latitude-longitude information associated with the address character string is not acquired, map information in which…” Claim 1 contains the following limitation: “acquire latitude-longitude information associated with the accepted address character string.” Claim 1 specifies that this latitude-longitude information must be acquired while Claim 7 specifies that this acquire latitude-longitude information may not be acquired. This causes ambiguity and indefiniteness, as both of these cannot be true simultaneously. See also the 112(d) rejection below regarding this same issue. Additionally, it is unclear as drafted how the other claimed condition of “when the acquired latitude-longitude information is an area information indicating a geographical area” modifies the claim language, as it is unclear when this would not be the case (ie: under the broadest reasonable interpretation of this claim language, this is what latitude-longitude information is and does by definition – it is a form of “area information” which indicates “a geographical area”). For the purposes of this examination, this limitation of Claim 7 will be interpreted as “wherein the map information in which a position of the accepted address character string is displayed on a map, which is provided when the latitude-longitude information is determined not to be correct, is based on the extracted position information.”
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(d):
(d) REFERENCE IN DEPENDENT FORMS.—Subject to subsection (e), a claim in dependent form shall contain a reference to a claim previously set forth and then specify a further limitation of the subject matter claimed. A claim in dependent form shall be construed to incorporate by reference all the limitations of the claim to which it refers.
The following is a quotation of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, fourth paragraph:
Subject to the following paragraph [i.e., the fifth paragraph of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112], a claim in dependent form shall contain a reference to a claim previously set forth and then specify a further limitation of the subject matter claimed. A claim in dependent form shall be construed to incorporate by reference all the limitations of the claim to which it refers.
Claim 7 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(d) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, 4th paragraph, as being of improper dependent form for failing to further limit the subject matter of the claim upon which it depends, or for failing to include all the limitations of the claim upon which it depends.
Claim 7 contains the following limitation: “provide, when the acquired latitude-longitude information is an area information indicating a geographical area or when the latitude-longitude information associated with the address character string is not acquired, map information in which…” 35 USC 112(d), in relevant part, states that “[a] claim in dependent form shall be construed to incorporate by reference all the limitations of the claim to which it refers” (Examiner’s emphasis). As Claim 1, upon which Claim 7 depends, specifies that this latitude-longitude information must be acquired (leaving no room for an interpretation wherein such information is not acquired), the condition of “when the latitude-longitude information associated with the address character string is not acquired” in the above-quoted language of Claim 7 violates this requirement of 112(d), improperly expanding rather than further narrowing the content of Claim 1 to include scenarios where this latitude-longitude information is not acquired.
Applicant may cancel the claim(s), amend the claim(s) to place the claim(s) in proper dependent form, rewrite the claim(s) in independent form, or present a sufficient showing that the dependent claim(s) complies with the statutory requirements.
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 1-11 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 101 because the claimed invention is directed to an abstract idea without significantly more.
Regarding Claims 1, 10, and 11, the limitations of accept an address character string of a delivery destination of a package; acquire latitude-longitude information associated with the accepted address character string; extract position information recorded in association with the accepted address character string from a database that associates an address character string representing a delivery destination a delivery of a package to which is completed with position information of a position where a deliverer who delivered a package to the delivery destination was present when the deliverer performed a predetermined action; determine, by comparing the acquired latitude-longitude information with the extracted position information, whether or not the latitude-longitude information is correct; provide, when the latitude-longitude information is determined to be correct, delivery-destination map information in which a position determined based on the latitude-longitude information is displayed on a map; and provide, when the latitude-longitude information is determined not to be correct, delivery-destination map information in which a position of the accepted address character string is displayed on a map, based on the extracted position information, as drafted, are processes that, under their broadest reasonable interpretations, cover certain methods of organizing human activity. For example, these limitations fall at least within the enumerated categories of commercial or legal interactions and/or managing personal behavior or relationships or interactions between people (see MPEP 2106.04(a)(2)(II)).
Additionally, the limitations of accept an address character string of a delivery destination of a package; acquire latitude-longitude information associated with the accepted address character string; extract position information recorded in association with the accepted address character string from a database that associates an address character string representing a delivery destination a delivery of a package to which is completed with position information of a position where a deliverer who delivered a package to the delivery destination was present when the deliverer performed a predetermined action; determine, by comparing the acquired latitude-longitude information with the extracted position information, whether or not the latitude-longitude information is correct; provide, when the latitude-longitude information is determined to be correct, delivery-destination map information in which a position determined based on the latitude-longitude information is displayed on a map; and provide, when the latitude-longitude information is determined not to be correct, delivery-destination map information in which a position of the accepted address character string is displayed on a map, based on the extracted position information, as drafted, are processes that, under their broadest reasonable interpretations, cover mental processes. For example, these limitations recite activity comprising observations, evaluations, judgments, and opinions (see MPEP 2106.04(a)(2)(III)).
Additionally, the limitation of determine, by comparing the acquired latitude-longitude information with the extracted position information, whether or not the latitude-longitude information is correct, as drafted, is a process that, under its broadest reasonable interpretation, covers mathematical concepts. For example, these limitations recite mathematical relationships and/or calculations (see MPEP 2106.04(a)(2)(I)).
If a claim limitation, under its broadest reasonable interpretation, covers fundamental economic principles or practices, commercial or legal interactions, managing personal behavior or relationships, or managing interactions between people, it falls within the “Certain Methods of Organizing Human Activity” grouping of abstract ideas. If a claim limitation, under its broadest reasonable interpretation, covers performance of the limitation in the mind or with the aid of pen and paper but for recitation of generic computer components, it falls within the “Mental Processes” grouping of abstract ideas. If a claim limitation, under its broadest reasonable interpretation, covers mathematical relationships, mathematical formulae or equations, or mathematical calculations, it falls within the “Mathematical Concepts” grouping of abstract ideas. Accordingly, the claims recite an abstract idea.
The judicial exception is not integrated into a practical application. In particular, the claim recites the additional elements of a device/computer comprising one or more processors, a non-transitory computer-readable recording medium storing a program executable by a computer, a database, and presumably a user interface. These, in the context of the claims as a whole, amount to no more than mere instructions to apply a judicial exception (see MPEP 2106.05(f)). Accordingly, these additional elements do not integrate the abstract ideas into a practical application because they do not, individually or in combination, impose any meaningful limits on practicing the abstract ideas. The claims are therefore directed to an abstract idea.
The claims do 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 judicial exception into a practical application, the additional elements amount to no more than mere instructions to apply a judicial exception for the same reasons as discussed above in relation to integration into a practical application. These cannot provide an inventive concept. Therefore, when considering the additional elements alone and in combination, there is no inventive concept in the claims, and thus the claims are not patent eligible.
Claims 2-9, describing various additional limitations to the system of Claim 1, amount to substantially the same unintegrated abstract idea as Claim 1 (upon which these claims depend, directly or indirectly) and are rejected for substantially the same reasons.
Claim 2 discloses wherein the predetermined action is an action from when the deliverer gets off a vehicle until the deliverer delivers a package to the delivery destination and gets on the vehicle (further defining the abstract idea already set forth in Claim 1); the processors acquire a time series of positions of the deliverer, the positions being detected in a process in which the deliverer delivers a package (an abstract idea in the form of a certain method of organizing human activity and a mental process); estimate, from a time when each of the positions included in the acquired time series is detected, movement speed of the deliverer at each of the positions (an abstract idea in the form of a certain method of organizing human activity, a mental process, and a mathematical concept); extract, based on the estimated movement speed, a partial time series, the partial time series indicating a time section during which the deliverer is estimated not to be on board a vehicle, from the acquired time series (an abstract idea in the form of a certain method of organizing human activity and a mental process); and generate association information that associates the extracted partial time series with an address character string of the delivery destination to which the deliverer delivered a package (an abstract idea in the form of a certain method of organizing human activity and a mental process); and store the generated association information in the database (an abstract idea in the form of a certain method of organizing human activity and a mental process), which do not integrate the claim into a practical application.
Claim 3 discloses wherein the processors determine whether or not the acquired latitude-longitude information is an outlier with respect to a distribution of the extracted position information (an abstract idea in the form of a certain method of organizing human activity, a mental process, and a mathematical concept); determine, when determining that the latitude-longitude information is not an outlier, that the latitude-longitude information is correct (further defining the abstract idea already set forth in Claim 1); and determine, when determining that the latitude-longitude information is an outlier, that the latitude-longitude information is not correct (further defining the abstract idea already set forth in Claim 1), which do not integrate the claim into a practical application.
Claim 4 discloses wherein the processors acquire a delivery completion list that stores a delivery completion time indicating a time when delivery is completed with respect to each delivery destination (an abstract idea in the form of a certain method of organizing human activity and a mental process); identify the partial time series including a time series closest to the delivery completion time with respect to each delivery destination (an abstract idea in the form of a certain method of organizing human activity, a mental process, and a mathematical concept); and associate position information of each position included in the identified partial time series with an address character string of the delivery destination (an abstract idea in the form of a certain method of organizing human activity and a mental process), which do not integrate the claim into a practical application.
Claim 5 discloses wherein the processors provide, when the latitude-longitude information is determined not to be correct, delivery-destination map information in which a distribution of the extracted position information is superimposed on a map (further defining the abstract idea already set forth in Claim 1), which does not integrate the claim into a practical application.
Claim 6 discloses wherein the processors identify, when the latitude-longitude information is determined not to be correct, a parking or stopping position where a vehicle is parked or stopped when a package is delivered to the delivery destination, based on a head piece of position information, the head piece of position information being a piece of position information having an early detection time, the detection time being a time when a position is detected, and an end piece of position information, the end piece of position information being a piece of position information having a late detection time, among the extracted position information (an abstract idea in the form of a certain method of organizing human activity and a mental process); identify position information farthest from the identified parking or stopping position as a position of the delivery destination (an abstract idea in the form of a certain method of organizing human activity, a mental process, and a mathematical concept); and provide delivery-destination map information in which each of the identified parking or stopping position and the identified position of the delivery destination is arranged on a map (further defining the abstract idea already set forth in Claim 1), which do not integrate the claim into a practical application.
Claim 7 discloses wherein the processors provide, when the acquired latitude-longitude information is an area information indicating a geographical area or when the latitude-longitude information associated with the address character string is not acquired, map information in which a position of the accepted address character string is displayed on a map, based on the extracted position information (further defining the abstract idea already set forth in Claim 1), which does not integrate the claim into a practical application.
Claim 8 discloses wherein the processors extract pieces of position information recorded in association with the accepted address character string (an abstract idea in the form of a certain method of organizing human activity and a mental process); and remove an outlier from the extracted pieces of position information (an abstract idea in the form of a certain method of organizing human activity and a mental process), which do not integrate the claim into a practical application.
Claim 9 discloses wherein the predetermined action is an action of making a completion report to an effect that the deliverer has completed a delivery to each delivery destination (further defining the abstract idea already set forth in Claim 1); the processors acquire a time series of positions of the deliverer, the positions being detected in a process in which the deliverer delivers a package (an abstract idea in the form of a certain method of organizing human activity and a mental process); extract the time series closest to a time when the completion report is made or a delivery completion time that is input in the completion report from the acquired time series (an abstract idea in the form of a certain method of organizing human activity, a mental process, and a mathematical concept); generate association information associating position information included in the extracted time series with an address character string of the delivery destination (an abstract idea in the form of a certain method of organizing human activity and a mental process); and store the generated association information in the database (an abstract idea in the form of a certain method of organizing human activity and a mental process), which do not integrate the claim into a practical application.
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)(1) the claimed invention was patented, described in a printed publication, or in public use, on sale, or otherwise available to the public before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
(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.
Claims 1, 3-5, and 7-11 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Graham et al (PGPub 20080255758) (hereafter, “Graham”).
Regarding Claims 1, 10, and 11, Graham discloses:
A device/computer comprising one or more processors (¶ 0050-0051, 0064, 0074; Figs. 4, 5; computer program instructions loaded onto a general purpose computer, special purpose computer, or other programmable data processing apparatus to produce a machine which executes the computer program instructions);
a non-transitory computer-readable recording medium executable by a computer (¶ 0050-0051, 0064, 0074; Figs. 4, 5; computer program instructions loaded onto a general purpose computer, special purpose computer, or other programmable data processing apparatus to produce a machine which executes the computer program instructions);
wherein the processors accept an address character string of a delivery destination of a package ();
acquire latitude-longitude information associated with the accepted address character string (¶ 0009, 0065, 0077-0078, 0080, 0122; Fig. 6A; the plurality of geocode samples may be made up of Global Positioning System (GPS) records captured by a GPS sensor during the delivery or the pickup of an item addressed to or from the unique point address; the plurality of geocode samples and the reference geocode each include longitude and latitude data; GPS module may be configured to continuously or periodically store GPS readings; the system waits for the occurrence of a predefined GPS trigger event; such predefined GPS trigger events may include, but are not limited to, the first label scan event for a stop, an electronic signature capture event, an input to the device indicating that the driver has left a particular item at the current location (i.e., without capturing a signature), an input or event that indicates to the device that the current stop is now complete, or an input specifically instructing the device to capture a GPS reading; when a GPS trigger event does occur (e.g., the driver performs the first package scan of a stop), the process proceeds to step 102 where, in response to the trigger event, the system obtains the most recent GPS location data from the GPS module);
extract position information recorded in association with the accepted address character string from a database that associates an address character string representing a delivery destination a delivery of a package to which is completed with position information of a position where a deliverer who delivered a package to the delivery destination was present when the deliverer performed a predetermined action (¶ 0056-0057, 0064, 0082; Fig. 4, 6A; processes implemented in accordance with embodiments of the present invention include developing a reference location data set (e.g., a reference geocode and/or a zone of confidence) for each point address to which an item may be delivered; this can be accomplished by using the portable computing device to gather geocode samples, such as GPS readings, at each delivery or pickup address over a period of time; this data can then be uploaded to a delivery management system, which, after an appropriate number of geocode samples, processes the sample data and creates a reference location data set for each delivery address; create a repository of geocode samples and reference location data sets and associate this location data with a point address (e.g., a potential delivery location); the portable device information repository is basically used for storing delivery information collected by the portable devices for each unique point address, including the geocode samples (e.g., GPS latitude/longitude records) collected by the portable devices during past deliveries (or pickups); the system sets out to obtain the reference location data set that is associated with the current UOW; each reference location data set includes a reference geocode (e.g., a reference longitude and latitude) and a radius value that defines a circle of confidence (COC) about the reference geocode, within which delivery of a related item is considered acceptable; the portable device may wirelessly access the delivery management system in an attempt to obtain reference location data);
determine, by comparing the acquired latitude-longitude information with the extracted position information, whether or not the latitude-longitude information is correct (¶ 0083-0084; Fig. 6A; the system determines whether the current GPS reading is within the zone of confidence defined by the reference location data; in an embodiment where the zone of confidence is a circle, the system determines whether or not the calculated proximity distance is less than the circle of confidence radius provided in the reference location data set);
provide, when the latitude-longitude information is determined to be correct, delivery-destination map information in which a position determined based on the latitude-longitude information is displayed on a map (¶ 0084-0085; Figs. 6B, 7, 8; the system displays or issues the appropriate type of mis-delivery feedback to the driver, e.g., neutral, positive, or negative feedback, by displaying an appropriate visual indicator on the display of the portable device; the portable device may provide the driver with feedback in other ways in addition to or as an alternative to the icons 140, 141, and 142; the portable device may display a map with visual indicators representing the reference geocode (e.g., the latitude and longitude reference point), the zone of confidence, and visual indicators for one or more of the GPS readings; in this way the driver may be able to see on the map whether a current GPS reading is within the zone of confidence and where the current GPS reading is with respect to the zone of confidence); and
provide, when the latitude-longitude information is determined not to be correct, delivery-destination map information in which a position of the accepted address character string is displayed on a map, based on the extracted position information (¶ 0084-0085; Figs. 6B, 7, 8; the system displays or issues the appropriate type of mis-delivery feedback to the driver, e.g., neutral, positive, or negative feedback, by displaying an appropriate visual indicator on the display of the portable device; the portable device may provide the driver with feedback in other ways in addition to or as an alternative to the icons 140, 141, and 142; the portable device may display a map with visual indicators representing the reference geocode (e.g., the latitude and longitude reference point), the zone of confidence, and visual indicators for one or more of the GPS readings; in this way the driver may be able to see on the map whether a current GPS reading is within the zone of confidence and where the current GPS reading is with respect to the zone of confidence).
Regarding Claim 3, Graham discloses the limitations of Claim 1. Graham additionally discloses:
wherein the processors determine whether or not the acquired latitude-longitude information is an outlier with respect to a distribution of the extracted position information (¶ 0012-0013, 0069, 0083-0084, 0098-0099, 0120; Fig. 6A; the system determines whether the current GPS reading is within the zone of confidence defined by the reference location data; in an embodiment where the zone of confidence is a circle, the system determines whether or not the calculated proximity distance is less than the circle of confidence radius provided in the reference location data set; if the package status codes for all of the packages at a stop have, for example, an "unsuccessful" status code associated therewith, then the business logic module may be configured to ignore the stop completely; the business logic module may be configured to select which trigger events may be suitable to use in generating reference location data and/or how much to weight each geocode sample recorded during the trigger events; some status codes may be designated by the LDS to be "ignore codes" that indicate records that may produce unreliable geocode samples and therefore should be ignored, e.g., certain status codes may indicate that the pickup or delivery of the package or other item was deemed unsuccessful since the address was incorrect or for some other reason);
determine, when determining that the latitude-longitude information is not an outlier, that the latitude-longitude information is correct (¶ 0012-0013, 0069, 0083-0084, 0098-0099, 0120; Fig. 6A; the system determines whether the current GPS reading is within the zone of confidence defined by the reference location data; in an embodiment where the zone of confidence is a circle, the system determines whether or not the calculated proximity distance is less than the circle of confidence radius provided in the reference location data set; the business logic module may be configured to select which trigger events may be suitable to use in generating reference location data and/or how much to weight each geocode sample recorded during the trigger events; if the package status codes for all of the packages at a stop have, for example, an "unsuccessful" status code associated therewith, then the business logic module may be configured to ignore the stop completely; some status codes may be designated by the LDS to be "ignore codes" that indicate records that may produce unreliable geocode samples and therefore should be ignored, e.g., certain status codes may indicate that the pickup or delivery of the package or other item was deemed unsuccessful since the address was incorrect or for some other reason; if the system determines that the GPS reading is within the reference zone of confidence, the system sets the type of mis-delivery feedback to “positive”); and
determine, when determining that the latitude-longitude information is an outlier, that the latitude-longitude information is not correct (¶ 0012-0013, 0069, 0083-0084, 0098-0099, 0120; Fig. 6A; the system determines whether the current GPS reading is within the zone of confidence defined by the reference location data; in an embodiment where the zone of confidence is a circle, the system determines whether or not the calculated proximity distance is less than the circle of confidence radius provided in the reference location data set; the business logic module may be configured to select which trigger events may be suitable to use in generating reference location data and/or how much to weight each geocode sample recorded during the trigger events; if the package status codes for all of the packages at a stop have, for example, an "unsuccessful" status code associated therewith, then the business logic module may be configured to ignore the stop completely; some status codes may be designated by the LDS to be "ignore codes" that indicate records that may produce unreliable geocode samples and therefore should be ignored, e.g., certain status codes may indicate that the pickup or delivery of the package or other item was deemed unsuccessful since the address was incorrect or for some other reason; alternatively, if the system determines that the GPS reading is outside the reference zone of confidence, the system sets the type of mis-delivery feedback to "negative").
Regarding Claim 4, Graham discloses the limitations of Claim 1. Graham additionally discloses:
wherein the processors acquire a delivery completion list that stores a delivery completion time indicating a time when delivery is completed with respect to each delivery destination (¶ 0010, 0059, 0061, 0080, 0086, 0094, 0103, 0118, 0120, 0130; Table 1; the predefined trigger event may include, for example, an input or event that indicates to the device that the delivery or pickup of the item is now complete; GPS trigger events may include, but are not limited to, the first package scan event for a stop, an electronic signature capture event, an input to the device indicating that a package or item has been left at the current location (i.e., without capturing a signature), and an input or event that indicates to the device that the current stop is now complete; the system stores all relevant data associated with the current GPS trigger event, including, but not limited to, location identifier (e.g., unique address or address code), type of GPS trigger event, GPS location reading (i.e., latitude and longitude), timestamp data, and information on the type of mis-delivery feedback that was issued (if any) in connection with the current GPS trigger event; the business logic rules determine usefulness by making assumptions about the accuracy of the geocode samples based on such information as the age of the geocode sample, the trigger event that prompted recording of the sample, the type of location associated with the point address, the age of the geocode reading (e.g., the GPS reading) at the time that the geocode reading was recorded by the trigger event, whether the delivery or pickup stop associated with the geocode sample was deemed to be a successful delivery or pickup stop, and other information related to the delivery or pickup and/or the geocode reading; as the job control system of the LDS performs various jobs, the job control system may update the status of each job in the job tables; the portable device information history data may include one or more status codes associated with each package record; the status codes may be used by the delivery service to indicate information about the status of the delivery or pickup of the particular package or item, e.g., if the delivery or pickup was deemed successful);
identify the partial time series including a time series closest to the delivery completion time with respect to each delivery destination (¶ 0078, 0122; although a GPS reading is preferably taken simultaneously with the trigger event, in some instances the portable device may be unable to receive a GPS signal at all times; as such, the portable device may be configured to periodically capture GPS readings and associate the last captured GPS reading with the trigger event if a current GPS reading is unavailable); and
associate position information of each position included in the identified partial time series with an address character string of the delivery destination (¶ 0078, 0086, 0107-0115, 0122; Figs. 6D, 11; although a GPS reading is preferably taken simultaneously with the trigger event, in some instances the portable device may be unable to receive a GPS signal at all times; as such, the portable device may be configured to periodically capture GPS readings and associate the last captured GPS reading with the trigger event if a current GPS reading is unavailable; the system stores all relevant data associated with the current GPS trigger event, including, but not limited to, location identifier (e.g., unique address or address code), type of GPS trigger event, GPS location reading (i.e., latitude and longitude), timestamp data, and information on the type of mis-delivery feedback that was issued (if any) in connection with the current GPS trigger event; the LDS may take the new data stored in LDS file system and organize the new data into one or more portable device information history tables; the LDS may use the get-repository data module to get the data from the file system and organize it into a plurality of tables, such as an address table, a stop table, a packages table, and a geocode trigger table; the LDS may also create a unique point ID for each unique point address that it receives in the data; step 325 involves reading each geocode sample (e.g., GPS record) in the new data and any associated contextual information about the geocode sample and then determining how useful each geocode sample may be in accurately identifying the true location (e.g., the true latitude and longitude) of the associated point address).
Regarding Claim 5, Graham discloses the limitations of Claim 1. Graham additionally discloses wherein the processors provide, when the latitude-longitude information is determined not to be correct, delivery-destination map information in which a distribution of the extracted position information is superimposed on a map (¶ 0084-0085; Figs. 6B, 7, 8; the system displays or issues the appropriate type of mis-delivery feedback to the driver, e.g., neutral, positive, or negative feedback, by displaying an appropriate visual indicator on the display of the portable device; the portable device may provide the driver with feedback in other ways in addition to or as an alternative to the icons 140, 141, and 142; the portable device may display a map with visual indicators representing the reference geocode (e.g., the latitude and longitude reference point), the zone of confidence, and visual indicators for one or more of the GPS readings; in this way the driver may be able to see on the map whether a current GPS reading is within the zone of confidence and where the current GPS reading is with respect to the zone of confidence).
Regarding Claim 7, Graham discloses the limitations of Claim 1. Graham additionally discloses wherein the processors provide, when the acquired latitude-longitude information is an area information indicating a geographical area or when the latitude-longitude information associated with the address character string is not acquired, map information in which a position of the accepted address character string is displayed on a map, based on the extracted position information (¶ 0084-0085; Figs. 6B, 7, 8; the system displays or issues the appropriate type of mis-delivery feedback to the driver, e.g., neutral, positive, or negative feedback, by displaying an appropriate visual indicator on the display of the portable device; the portable device may provide the driver with feedback in other ways in addition to or as an alternative to the icons 140, 141, and 142; the portable device may display a map with visual indicators representing the reference geocode (e.g., the latitude and longitude reference point), the zone of confidence, and visual indicators for one or more of the GPS readings; in this way the driver may be able to see on the map whether a current GPS reading is within the zone of confidence and where the current GPS reading is with respect to the zone of confidence).
Regarding Claim 8, Graham discloses the limitations of Claim 1. Graham additionally discloses:
wherein the processors extract pieces of position information recorded in association with the accepted address character string (¶ 0056-0057, 0064, 0082; Fig. 4, 6A; processes implemented in accordance with embodiments of the present invention include developing a reference location data set (e.g., a reference geocode and/or a zone of confidence) for each point address to which an item may be delivered; this can be accomplished by using the portable computing device to gather geocode samples, such as GPS readings, at each delivery or pickup address over a period of time; this data can then be uploaded to a delivery management system, which, after an appropriate number of geocode samples, processes the sample data and creates a reference location data set for each delivery address; create a repository of geocode samples and reference location data sets and associate this location data with a point address (e.g., a potential delivery location); the portable device information repository is basically used for storing delivery information collected by the portable devices for each unique point address, including the geocode samples (e.g., GPS latitude/longitude records) collected by the portable devices during past deliveries (or pickups); the system sets out to obtain the reference location data set that is associated with the current UOW; each reference location data set includes a reference geocode (e.g., a reference longitude and latitude) and a radius value that defines a circle of confidence (COC) about the reference geocode, within which delivery of a related item is considered acceptable; the portable device may wirelessly access the delivery management system in an attempt to obtain reference location data); and
remove an outlier from the extracted pieces of position information (¶ 0012-0013, 0069, 0083-0084, 0098-0099, 0120; Fig. 6A; the system determines whether the current GPS reading is within the zone of confidence defined by the reference location data; in an embodiment where the zone of confidence is a circle, the system determines whether or not the calculated proximity distance is less than the circle of confidence radius provided in the reference location data set; the business logic module may be configured to select which trigger events may be suitable to use in generating reference location data and/or how much to weight each geocode sample recorded during the trigger events; if the package status codes for all of the packages at a stop have, for example, an "unsuccessful" status code associated therewith, then the business logic module may be configured to ignore the stop completely; some status codes may be designated by the LDS to be "ignore codes" that indicate records that may produce unreliable geocode samples and therefore should be ignored, e.g., certain status codes may indicate that the pickup or delivery of the package or other item was deemed unsuccessful since the address was incorrect or for some other reason; alternatively, if the system determines that the GPS reading is outside the reference zone of confidence, the system sets the type of mis-delivery feedback to "negative").
Regarding Claim 9, Graham discloses the limitations of Claim 1. Graham additionally discloses:
wherein the predetermined action is an action of making a completion report to an effect that the deliverer has completed a delivery to each delivery destination (¶ 0059, 0080; the portable computing device can be configured to collect geocode samples (e.g., GPS readings) when the device recognizes the occurrence of one or more predefined trigger events; such predefined trigger events may include, but are not limited to: (1) the first package scan event for a stop, (2) an electronic signature capture event, (3) an input to the device indicating that the driver has left a particular package at the current location (e.g., without capturing a signature), (4) an input or event that indicates to the device that the current stop is now complete, and/or (5) an input specifically instructing the device to capture a geocode sample);
the processors acquire a time series of positions of the deliverer, the positions being detected in a process in which the deliverer delivers a package (¶ 0077-0078, 0107, 0122, 0138; Fig. 11; each GPS location data set includes: a location identifier (e.g., a unique address or address code) for identifying where the GPS reading is believed to have been taken (i.e., the intended delivery address), a trigger type for identifying the type of GPS trigger event that facilitated the GPS data capture event, a GPS location reading (e.g., a latitude and longitude reading) obtained in response to such event, timestamp data for identifying the approximate time/date when the event occurred and the time of the GPS reading if different from the time of the trigger event, and feedback information for identifying the type of feedback (if any) that was issued by the device; the timestamp data of each GPS location data set may further include information related to the "age" of the GPS reading recorded in response to a trigger event; in this regard, the GPS module may be configured to continuously or periodically store temporary GPS readings, regardless of whether a trigger event has occurred; the portable device may be configured to periodically capture GPS readings and associate the last captured GPS reading with the trigger event; the LDS may periodically (e.g., daily) check the portable device information repository for new data, such as new geocode samples and/or delivery data received from a portable delivery device; checking the repository for new data that may be useful in the generation of reference location data sets, where the "new data" is data that has been added to or data that has been modified in the repository since the last time the subscription module checked and/or received data from the repository; update the reference location data set repository by adding a new data set or by modifying an existing data set associated with the point address);
extract the time series closest to a time when the completion report is made or a delivery completion time that is input in the completion report from the acquired time series (¶ 0078, 0122; although a GPS reading is preferably taken simultaneously with the trigger event, in some instances the portable device may be unable to receive a GPS signal at all times; as such, the portable device may be configured to periodically capture GPS readings and associate the last captured GPS reading with the trigger event if a current GPS reading is unavailable);
generate association information associating position information included in the extracted time series with an address character string of the delivery destination (¶ 0078, 0086, 0107-0115, 0122; Figs. 6D, 11; although a GPS reading is preferably taken simultaneously with the trigger event, in some instances the portable device may be unable to receive a GPS signal at all times; as such, the portable device may be configured to periodically capture GPS readings and associate the last captured GPS reading with the trigger event if a current GPS reading is unavailable; the system stores all relevant data associated with the current GPS trigger event, including, but not limited to, location identifier (e.g., unique address or address code), type of GPS trigger event, GPS location reading (i.e., latitude and longitude), timestamp data, and information on the type of mis-delivery feedback that was issued (if any) in connection with the current GPS trigger event; the LDS may take the new data stored in LDS file system and organize the new data into one or more portable device information history tables; the LDS may use the get-repository data module to get the data from the file system and organize it into a plurality of tables, such as an address table, a stop table, a packages table, and a geocode trigger table; the LDS may also create a unique point ID for each unique point address that it receives in the data; step 325 involves reading each geocode sample (e.g., GPS record) in the new data and any associated contextual information about the geocode sample and then determining how useful each geocode sample may be in accurately identifying the true location (e.g., the true latitude and longitude) of the associated point address); and
store the generated association information in the database (¶ 0086, 0107-0115; Figs. 6B, 11; the system stores all relevant data associated with the current GPS trigger event, including, but not limited to, location identifier (e.g., unique address or address code), type of GPS trigger event, GPS location reading (i.e., latitude and longitude), timestamp data, and information on the type of mis-delivery feedback that was issued (if any) in connection with the current GPS trigger event; reading each geocode sample (e.g., GPS record) in the new data and any associated contextual information about the geocode sample and then determining how useful each geocode sample may be in accurately identifying the true location (e.g., the true latitude and longitude) of the associated point address; at step 345, the LDS stores the reference location data set (e.g., the reference geocode and the associated zone of confidence) for each address in the reference location data set repository; the LDS repeats the steps 300-345 continuously or periodically in order to continuously process new geocode data and/or associated delivery data collected by portable devices or other sources).
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.
The factual inquiries for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows:
1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art.
2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue.
3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art.
4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness.
Claims 2 and 6 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Graham in view of Turner et al (PGPub 20230143826) (hereafter, “Turner”).
Regarding Claim 2, Graham discloses the limitations of Claim 1. Graham additionally discloses:
wherein the predetermined action is an action from when the deliverer gets off a vehicle until the deliverer delivers a package to the delivery destination and gets on the vehicle (¶ 0059, 0080; the portable computing device can be configured to collect geocode samples (e.g., GPS readings) when the device recognizes the occurrence of one or more predefined trigger events; such predefined trigger events may include, but are not limited to: (1) the first package scan event for a stop, (2) an electronic signature capture event, (3) an input to the device indicating that the driver has left a particular package at the current location (e.g., without capturing a signature), (4) an input or event that indicates to the device that the current stop is now complete, and/or (5) an input specifically instructing the device to capture a geocode sample);
the processors acquire a time series of positions of the deliverer, the positions being detected in a process in which the deliverer delivers a package (¶ 0077-0078, 0107, 0122, 0138; Fig. 11; each GPS location data set includes: a location identifier (e.g., a unique address or address code) for identifying where the GPS reading is believed to have been taken (i.e., the intended delivery address), a trigger type for identifying the type of GPS trigger event that facilitated the GPS data capture event, a GPS location reading (e.g., a latitude and longitude reading) obtained in response to such event, timestamp data for identifying the approximate time/date when the event occurred and the time of the GPS reading if different from the time of the trigger event, and feedback information for identifying the type of feedback (if any) that was issued by the device; the timestamp data of each GPS location data set may further include information related to the "age" of the GPS reading recorded in response to a trigger event; in this regard, the GPS module may be configured to continuously or periodically store temporary GPS readings, regardless of whether a trigger event has occurred; the portable device may be configured to periodically capture GPS readings and associate the last captured GPS reading with the trigger event; the LDS may periodically (e.g., daily) check the portable device information repository for new data, such as new geocode samples and/or delivery data received from a portable delivery device; checking the repository for new data that may be useful in the generation of reference location data sets, where the "new data" is data that has been added to or data that has been modified in the repository since the last time the subscription module checked and/or received data from the repository; update the reference location data set repository by adding a new data set or by modifying an existing data set associated with the point address);
estimate, from a time when each of the positions included in the acquired time series is detected, movement speed of the deliverer at each of the positions (¶ 0075, 0077-0078, 0107, 0122, 0138; Fig. 11; the GPS module may be configured to continuously or periodically store temporary GPS readings, regardless of whether a trigger event has occurred; the portable device may be configured to periodically capture GPS readings and associate the last captured GPS reading with the trigger event; update the reference location data set repository by adding a new data set or by modifying an existing data set associated with the point address; the GPS module may include a GPS sensor that is configured to acquire, for example, a latitude, longitude, altitude, course, speed, universal time (UTC), and date, wherein such data may be acquired in National Electrical Manufacturers Association (NEMA) data format or other appropriate data format); and
store the generated association information in the database (¶ 0086, 0107-0115; Figs. 6B, 11; the system stores all relevant data associated with the current GPS trigger event, including, but not limited to, location identifier (e.g., unique address or address code), type of GPS trigger event, GPS location reading (i.e., latitude and longitude), timestamp data, and information on the type of mis-delivery feedback that was issued (if any) in connection with the current GPS trigger event; reading each geocode sample (e.g., GPS record) in the new data and any associated contextual information about the geocode sample and then determining how useful each geocode sample may be in accurately identifying the true location (e.g., the true latitude and longitude) of the associated point address; at step 345, the LDS stores the reference location data set (e.g., the reference geocode and the associated zone of confidence) for each address in the reference location data set repository; the LDS repeats the steps 300-345 continuously or periodically in order to continuously process new geocode data and/or associated delivery data collected by portable devices or other sources).
Graham does not explicitly disclose but Turner does disclose extract, based on the estimated movement speed, a partial time series, the partial time series indicating a time section during which the deliverer is estimated not to be on board a vehicle, from the acquired time series (¶ 0044-0045; Fig. 3; to identify stops of the delivery vehicle, the GPS readings from the delivery vehicle may be analyzed according to the following sequence; first, the stream of GPS readings from the delivery vehicle is analyzed to identify a subset of sequential GPS readings during which the velocity of the delivery vehicle is indicated as being sufficiently small; the “sufficiently small” velocity may be selectively established as needed dependent upon an accuracy or precision required in the stop determination and the frequency of readings from the GPS devices of the delivery vehicle; subsequences of GPS readings indicating the sufficiently small velocity may be interpreted as stops of the delivery vehicle; thus, for each such subsequence of GPS readings, a stop can be determined based on the average latitude, longitude, and heading of the subsequence of GPS readings having the sufficiently small velocity; for the determined stop, a time of arrival is interpreted to be the time of the earliest GPS reading in the subsequence minus one-half the standard time between GPS readings and the time of departure from the determined stop is the time of the latest GPS reading in the subsequence plus one-half the standard time between GPS readings).
Graham additionally discloses generate association information that associates the extracted time series with an address character string of the delivery destination to which the deliverer delivered a package (¶ 0078, 0086, 0107-0115, 0122; Figs. 6D, 11; although a GPS reading is preferably taken simultaneously with the trigger event, in some instances the portable device may be unable to receive a GPS signal at all times; as such, the portable device may be configured to periodically capture GPS readings and associate the last captured GPS reading with the trigger event if a current GPS reading is unavailable; the system stores all relevant data associated with the current GPS trigger event, including, but not limited to, location identifier (e.g., unique address or address code), type of GPS trigger event, GPS location reading (i.e., latitude and longitude), timestamp data, and information on the type of mis-delivery feedback that was issued (if any) in connection with the current GPS trigger event; the LDS may take the new data stored in LDS file system and organize the new data into one or more portable device information history tables; the LDS may use the get-repository data module to get the data from the file system and organize it into a plurality of tables, such as an address table, a stop table, a packages table, and a geocode trigger table; the LDS may also create a unique point ID for each unique point address that it receives in the data; step 325 involves reading each geocode sample (e.g., GPS record) in the new data and any associated contextual information about the geocode sample and then determining how useful each geocode sample may be in accurately identifying the true location (e.g., the true latitude and longitude) of the associated point address). Graham does not explicitly disclose but Turner does disclose wherein the extracted time series is the extracted partial time series (¶ 0044-0045, 0103; Figs. 3, 7; to identify stops of the delivery vehicle, the GPS readings from the delivery vehicle may be analyzed according to the following sequence; first, the stream of GPS readings from the delivery vehicle is analyzed to identify a subset of sequential GPS readings during which the velocity of the delivery vehicle is indicated as being sufficiently small; subsequences of GPS readings indicating the sufficiently small velocity may be interpreted as stops of the delivery vehicle; thus, for each such subsequence of GPS readings, a stop can be determined based on the average latitude, longitude, and heading of the subsequence of GPS readings having the sufficiently small velocity; for the determined stop, a time of arrival is interpreted to be the time of the earliest GPS reading in the subsequence minus one-half the standard time between GPS readings and the time of departure from the determined stop is the time of the latest GPS reading in the subsequence plus one-half the standard time between GPS readings; unidentified stops might also describe actual stops for item delivery or traffic control that are missing from the route description or else incorrectly located or incorrectly sequenced; by flagging and identifying daily stops, unplanned stops that should be in the route description can be better determined and identified; by such collection of regular, unplanned stops (regular in time, duration, location, etc.) the route can be updated to account for the common or regular stops; the unplanned stops are collected over some time period, for example, one week, two weeks, one month, two months, and so forth, identifying where clusters of the unplanned stops occur; assuming that a cluster represents a history of stops at one location, a general location for the cluster of unplanned stopped can be determined (for example, by averaging the latitudes, longitudes, and headings of each of the stops in the cluster of unplanned stops); the resulting clusters will likely represent frequent stops at a single location).
One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to include the delivery-based location data analysis and routing techniques of Turner with the delivery location verification and correction system of Graham to provide better delivery-based recording, analysis, routing, and updating, thereby improving the efficiency of delivery operations (see at least Paragraphs 0019, 0023, 0059, 0103, and 0127 of Turner).
Regarding Claim 6, Graham discloses the limitations of Claim 1. Graham does not explicitly disclose but Turner does disclose:
wherein the processors identify, when the latitude-longitude information is determined not to be correct, a parking or stopping position where a vehicle is parked or stopped when a package is delivered to the delivery destination, based on a head piece of position information, the head piece of position information being a piece of position information having an early detection time, the detection time being a time when a position is detected, and an end piece of position information, the end piece of position information being a piece of position information having a late detection time, among the extracted position information (¶ 0044-0045; Fig. 3; to identify stops of the delivery vehicle, the GPS readings from the delivery vehicle may be analyzed according to the following sequence; first, the stream of GPS readings from the delivery vehicle is analyzed to identify a subset of sequential GPS readings during which the velocity of the delivery vehicle is indicated as being sufficiently small; the “sufficiently small” velocity may be selectively established as needed dependent upon an accuracy or precision required in the stop determination and the frequency of readings from the GPS devices of the delivery vehicle; subsequences of GPS readings indicating the sufficiently small velocity may be interpreted as stops of the delivery vehicle; thus, for each such subsequence of GPS readings, a stop can be determined based on the average latitude, longitude, and heading of the subsequence of GPS readings having the sufficiently small velocity; for the determined stop, a time of arrival is interpreted to be the time of the earliest GPS reading in the subsequence minus one-half the standard time between GPS readings and the time of departure from the determined stop is the time of the latest GPS reading in the subsequence plus one-half the standard time between GPS readings);
identify position information farthest from the identified parking or stopping position as a position of the delivery destination (¶ 0044-0045, 0103; Figs. 3, 7; to identify stops of the delivery vehicle, the GPS readings from the delivery vehicle may be analyzed according to the following sequence; first, the stream of GPS readings from the delivery vehicle is analyzed to identify a subset of sequential GPS readings during which the velocity of the delivery vehicle is indicated as being sufficiently small; subsequences of GPS readings indicating the sufficiently small velocity may be interpreted as stops of the delivery vehicle; thus, for each such subsequence of GPS readings, a stop can be determined based on the average latitude, longitude, and heading of the subsequence of GPS readings having the sufficiently small velocity; for the determined stop, a time of arrival is interpreted to be the time of the earliest GPS reading in the subsequence minus one-half the standard time between GPS readings and the time of departure from the determined stop is the time of the latest GPS reading in the subsequence plus one-half the standard time between GPS readings; unidentified stops might also describe actual stops for item delivery or traffic control that are missing from the route description or else incorrectly located or incorrectly sequenced; by flagging and identifying daily stops, unplanned stops that should be in the route description can be better determined and identified; by such collection of regular, unplanned stops (regular in time, duration, location, etc.) the route can be updated to account for the common or regular stops; the unplanned stops are collected over some time period, for example, one week, two weeks, one month, two months, and so forth, identifying where clusters of the unplanned stops occur; assuming that a cluster represents a history of stops at one location, a general location for the cluster of unplanned stopped can be determined (for example, by averaging the latitudes, longitudes, and headings of each of the stops in the cluster of unplanned stops); the resulting clusters will likely represent frequent stops at a single location); and
provide delivery-destination map information in which each of the identified parking or stopping position and the identified position of the delivery destination is arranged on a map (¶ 0044-0045, 0052, 0103, 0105, 0114; Figs. 4, 7; Fig. 4 is a map showing a route along a road with route stops, GPS locations from two GPS devices, and consensus stops shown; Fig. 7 is a map showing clusters of points indicating stops along the route which, in some embodiments, are determined using the processes described elsewhere herein; each point on the map represents a stop along the route; each shaded point represents a cluster of points representing unexpected stops with a density that exceeds a threshold over a number of days and shows where the delivery vehicle stopped nearly every day; the I/O interface 904 may include any element or component that conveys information to the user of the delivery system (for example, a carrier, a carrier manager, and so forth) and/or receives input from the user; the I/O interface includes one or more display devices that allows the visual presentation of data; I/O interface may present one or more maps, reports, graphs, or images as described above, for example one or more of the map of FIG. 4, the graphs of FIGS. 6A and 6B, or the map of stops of FIG. 7).
The rationale to combine remains the same as for Claim 2.
Discussion of Prior Art Cited but Not Applied
For additional information on the state of the art regarding the claims of the present application, please see the following documents not applied in this Office Action (all of which are prior art to the present application):
PGPub 20160092456 – “Methods and Systems for Creating and Using a Location Identification Grid,” Bonnell et al, disclosing a system for assigning delivery locations based on a destination address, such delivery locations in some embodiments being retrieved based on historical information
PGPub 20060145837 – “Item-based Monitoring Systems and Methods,” Horton et al, disclosing a delivery tracking system which determines whether an item is being delivered to a correct delivery destination by comparing GPS coordinates to known GPS coordinates and geofencing around the delivery destination
PGPub 20190295158 – “Transaction Classification based on Transaction Time Predictions,” Wu, disclosing the recording and analysis of historical location data to estimate the time, location, and content of transactions
US 8725407 – “Enhanced Location Information for Points of Interest,” Hurley et al, disclosing a system for identifying particular parcel drop-off points in association with a delivery destination/address
Hidaka et al, Data-Driven Approaches to Detecting Misdeliveries in Truck Logistics using GPS Data, 2023 IEEE International Conference on Big Data, pgs. 1922-1927
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to MARK C CLARE whose telephone number is (571)272-8748. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 6:30am-2:30pm EST.
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, Jeffrey Zimmerman can be reached at (571) 272-4602. 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.
/MARK C CLARE/Examiner, Art Unit 3628
/MICHAEL P HARRINGTON/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3628