DETAILED ACTION
This office action is in response to the initial filing dated July 9, 2025.
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 .
Claim Status
Claims 1-15 are currently pending.
Double Patenting
The nonstatutory double patenting rejection is based on a judicially created doctrine grounded in public policy (a policy reflected in the statute) so as to prevent the unjustified or improper timewise extension of the “right to exclude” granted by a patent and to prevent possible harassment by multiple assignees. A nonstatutory double patenting rejection is appropriate where the conflicting claims are not identical, but at least one examined application claim is not patentably distinct from the reference claim(s) because the examined application claim is either anticipated by, or would have been obvious over, the reference claim(s). See, e.g., In re Berg, 140 F.3d 1428, 46 USPQ2d 1226 (Fed. Cir. 1998); In re Goodman, 11 F.3d 1046, 29 USPQ2d 2010 (Fed. Cir. 1993); In re Longi, 759 F.2d 887, 225 USPQ 645 (Fed. Cir. 1985); In re Van Ornum, 686 F.2d 937, 214 USPQ 761 (CCPA 1982); In re Vogel, 422 F.2d 438, 164 USPQ 619 (CCPA 1970); In re Thorington, 418 F.2d 528, 163 USPQ 644 (CCPA 1969).
A timely filed terminal disclaimer in compliance with 37 CFR 1.321(c) or 1.321(d) may be used to overcome an actual or provisional rejection based on nonstatutory double patenting provided the reference application or patent either is shown to be commonly owned with the examined application, or claims an invention made as a result of activities undertaken within the scope of a joint research agreement. See MPEP § 717.02 for applications subject to examination under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA as explained in MPEP § 2159. See MPEP § 2146 et seq. for applications not subject to examination under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA . A terminal disclaimer must be signed in compliance with 37 CFR 1.321(b).
The filing of a terminal disclaimer by itself is not a complete reply to a nonstatutory double patenting (NSDP) rejection. A complete reply requires that the terminal disclaimer be accompanied by a reply requesting reconsideration of the prior Office action. Even where the NSDP rejection is provisional the reply must be complete. See MPEP § 804, subsection I.B.1. For a reply to a non-final Office action, see 37 CFR 1.111(a). For a reply to final Office action, see 37 CFR 1.113(c). A request for reconsideration while not provided for in 37 CFR 1.113(c) may be filed after final for consideration. See MPEP §§ 706.07(e) and 714.13.
The USPTO Internet website contains terminal disclaimer forms which may be used. Please visit www.uspto.gov/patent/patents-forms. The actual filing date of the application in which the form is filed determines what form (e.g., PTO/SB/25, PTO/SB/26, PTO/AIA /25, or PTO/AIA /26) should be used. A web-based eTerminal Disclaimer may be filled out completely online using web-screens. An eTerminal Disclaimer that meets all requirements is auto-processed and approved immediately upon submission. For more information about eTerminal Disclaimers, refer to www.uspto.gov/patents/apply/applying-online/eterminal-disclaimer.
Claims 1, 7, and 13 are rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claims 2, 9, and 16, respectively, of U.S. Patent No. 12,425,809. Although the claims at issue are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other because the patent claims include all of the limitations of the instant application claims, respectively. The patent claims also include additional limitations. Hence, the instant application claims are generic to the species of invention covered by the respective patent claims. As such, the instant application claims are anticipated by the patent claims and are therefore not patentably distinct therefrom. (See Eli Lilly and Co. v. Barr Laboratories Inc., 58 USPQ2D 1869, "a later genus claim limitation is anticipated by, and therefore not patentably distinct from, an earlier species claim", In re Goodman, 29 USPQ2d 2010, "Thus, the generic invention is 'anticipated' by the species of the patented invention" and the instant “application claims are generic to species of invention covered by the patent claim, and since without terminal disclaimer, extant species claims preclude issuance of generic application claims”).
As to claim 1, US Patent #12,425,809 claims an apparatus, comprising:
a memory, configured to store:
a plurality of geofences, each geofence indicating a jobsite location; and
existing asset location information comprising current global positioning coordinates of one or more tagged assets; and
a processor communicatively coupled to the memory and configured to:
obtain first updated asset location information corresponding to a tagged asset, the first updated asset location information comprising possible updates to the existing asset location information;
in response to determining that the tagged asset is coupled to at least one gateway, determine whether first global positioning coordinates in the first updated asset location information overlap a first geofence of a first jobsite location;
in response to determining that the first global positioning coordinates in the first updated asset location information overlap the first geofence, generate a first jobsite assignment indicating that the tagged asset is located in a first jobsite location;
obtain second updated asset location information corresponding to the tagged asset;
in response to determining that the tagged asset is coupled to a previously coupled gateway, maintain the tagged asset coupled to the previously coupled gateway;
determine global positioning coordinates of the previously coupled gateway as second global positioning coordinates of the tagged asset;
determine whether the second global positioning coordinates are within the first geofence of the first jobsite location;
in response to determining that the second global positioning coordinates are not within the first geofence, determine whether the tagged asset is associated with the first jobsite assignment; and
in response to determining that the tagged asset is associated with the first jobsite assignment, remove the first jobsite assignment indicating that the tagged asset is located in the first jobsite location (Claim 2).
As to claim 7, US Patent #12,425,809 claims a system, comprising:
one or more gateways configured to track a plurality of tagged assets; and
a server communicatively coupled to the one or more gateways and configured to:
obtain first updated asset location information corresponding to a tagged asset, the first updated asset location information comprising possible updates to existing asset location information comprising current global positioning coordinates of one or more tagged assets;
in response to determining that the tagged asset is coupled to at least one gateway, determine whether first global positioning coordinates in the first updated asset location information overlap a first geofence of a first jobsite location;
in response to determining that the first global positioning coordinates in the first updated asset location information overlap the first geofence, generate a first jobsite assignment indicating that the tagged asset is located in a first jobsite location;
obtain second updated asset location information corresponding to the tagged asset;
in response to determining that the tagged asset is coupled to a previously coupled gateway, maintain the tagged asset coupled to the previously coupled gateway;
determine global positioning coordinates of the previously coupled gateway as second global positioning coordinates of the tagged asset;
determine whether the second global positioning coordinates are within the first geofence of the first jobsite location;
in response to determining that the second global positioning coordinates are not within the first geofence, determine whether the tagged asset is associated with the first jobsite assignment; and
in response to determining that the tagged asset is associated with the first jobsite assignment, remove the first jobsite assignment indicating that the tagged asset is located in the first jobsite location (Claim 9).
As to claim 13, US Patent #12,425,809 claims a method, comprising:
obtaining first updated asset location information corresponding to a tagged asset, the first updated asset location information comprising possible updates to existing asset location information comprising current global positioning coordinates of one or more tagged assets;
in response to determining that the tagged asset is coupled to at least one gateway, determining whether first global positioning coordinates in the first updated asset location information overlap a first geofence of a first jobsite location;
in response to determining that the first global positioning coordinates in the first updated asset location information overlap the first geofence, generating a first jobsite assignment indicating that the tagged asset is located in a first jobsite location;
obtaining second updated asset location information corresponding to the tagged asset;
in response to determining that the tagged asset is coupled to a previously coupled gateway, maintaining the tagged asset coupled to the previously coupled gateway;
determining global positioning coordinates of the previously coupled gateway as second global positioning coordinates of the tagged asset;
determining whether the second global positioning coordinates are within the first geofence of the first jobsite location;
in response to determining that the second global positioning coordinates are not within the first geofence, determining whether the tagged asset is associated with the first jobsite assignment; and
in response to determining that the tagged asset is associated with the first jobsite assignment, removing the first jobsite assignment indicating that the tagged asset is located in the first jobsite location (Claim 16).
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 2-6, 8-12, and 14-15 are objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter:
Independent claims 1, 7, and 13 are rejected solely due to double patenting. The independent claims recite an apparatus, a system, and a method, respectively, including the limitations of in response to determining that the tagged asset is coupled to a previously coupled gateway, maintain the tagged asset coupled to the previously coupled gateway;
determine global positioning coordinates of the previously coupled gateway as second global positioning coordinates of the tagged asset;
determine whether the second global positioning coordinates are within the first geofence of the first jobsite location;
in response to determining that the second global positioning coordinates are not within the first geofence, determine whether the tagged asset is associated with the first jobsite assignment; and
in response to determining that the tagged asset is associated with the first jobsite assignment, remove the first jobsite assignment indicating that the tagged asset is located in the first jobsite location.
The prior art of record does not teach, suggest, or render obvious the claimed limitations.
The closest art of record is to Ashaari et al. (Ashaari; US PG Pub #2019/0325174). To represent the teaching of the prior art with respect to the independent claims, below is how Ashaari relates to independent claim 1 and similar interpretations can be given for claims 7 and 13.
As to claim 1, Ashaari teaches an apparatus (Paragraph [0041] teaches a system hub), comprising:
a memory (Paragraph [0041] teaches the system hub includes a memory), configured to store:
a plurality of geofences (Paragraph [0052] teaches the system hub storing a map of a facility with equipment and virtual fences; Paragraph [0055] teaches defining work zones; Paragraph [0094] teaches boundaries, zones, and virtual fences establishing work zones), each geofence indicating a jobsite location (Figure 3, Item 312 and Figure 3, Item 322); and
existing asset location information comprising current global positioning coordinates of one or more tagged assets (Paragraphs [0067] and [0071] teach the system hub records the location of detected tags; Paragraph [0032] teaches location information of tagged items includes coordinates; Paragraph [0061] teaches the use of GPS data); and
a processor communicatively coupled to the memory (Paragraph [0041] teaches the system hub includes a processor to coordinate various components and use the information it receives) and configured to:
obtain first updated asset location information corresponding to a tagged asset, the first updated asset location information comprising possible updates to the existing asset location information (Paragraph [0071] teaches sensors transmitting all collected data to the system hub including tag location; Paragraphs [0079]-[0080] teaches the system hub receiving sensor data and determine coordinates of the tag; Paragraph [0067] teaches updating tag position or location information; Paragraph [0051] teaches sensors obtaining tag location data periodically or the sensors being always on to continuously obtain tag location data);
in response to determining that the tagged asset is coupled to at least one gateway (Paragraphs [0065] and [0067] teach determining if a sensor connects with a tag), determine whether first global positioning coordinates in the first updated asset location information overlap a first geofence of a first jobsite location (Paragraph [0071] teaches comparing received tag location information with a map or virtual version to determine if the tag is within a virtual fence, zone, or boundary; Figure 3 shows two distinct zones 312 and 322; Paragraph [0083] teaches determining if a tag is within zone 312); and
in response to determining that the first global positioning coordinates in the first updated asset location information overlap the first geofence, generate a first jobsite assignment indicating that the tagged asset is located in a first jobsite location (Paragraph [0071] teaches when the position of a tag is determined to be within a virtual fence, zone, or boundary, the presence of the tag within that boundary is recorded; Figure 3 shows zones 312 and 322; Paragraph [0081] teaches logging position by associating the position with the identifier of the tag; Paragraph [0083] teaches determining if a tag is within zone 312).
However, Ashaari does not teach, suggest, or render obvious the identified limitations.
Another relevant reference is to Mondal et al. (Mondal; US PG Pub #2015/0097674). Specifically to dependent claim 5, in the field of tool tracking, Mondal teaches the processor is configured to associate the tagged asset to a label indicating that the tagged asset is a predefined asset type (Paragraph [0046] teaches a user interface allowing the user to view or manage inventory including association of tools with a group; Paragraph [0009] teaches assigning tools to a group and monitoring whether the tools are with their assigned group, relocated, missing, or left behind) and generate a report including the label (Paragraph [0009] teaches outputting the group where the tool was last seen; Paragraph [0036] teaches an alert and reporting module reporting missing and relocated tools).
However, Mondal does not teach, suggest, or render obvious the identified limitations.
Another relevant reference is to Nedelcu et al. (Nedelcu; US PG Pub #2019/0125486). Nedelcu teaches a network including gateways for determining locations of tagged assets (Paragraph [0082]) by establishing which gateway is the closest to the current location of the asset (Paragraph [0084]). However, this differs from the language of the identified limitations, therefore, Nedelcu does not teach, suggest, or render obvious the claimed invention.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to RYAN W SHERWIN whose telephone number is (571)270-7269. The examiner can normally be reached M-F, 9:00-5:00 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, Steven Lim can be reached at 571.270.1210. 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.
/RYAN W SHERWIN/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2688
Prosecution Insights