CTNF 19/274,793 CTNF 87081 DETAILED ACTION Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status 07-03-aia AIA 15-10-aia The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA. Priority 02-26 AIA Receipt is acknowledged of certified copies of papers required by 37 CFR 1.55. Information Disclosure Statement The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on 21 July 2025 is being considered by the examiner. Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112 07-30-02 AIA 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. 07-34-01 Claims 1-20 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. Claim 1 defines “a distance matrix” in the preamble. The same term is defined later in the claim regarding “recording distance data”. It is not clear if applicant is attempting to refer to the matrix in the preamble or defining a second matrix. Clarification is required. Claim 8 defines “identifying a shortest path…using the calculated average walk time and the calculated physical distance associated with each path, the shortest path comprising a path having at least one of a shortest average welk time or a shortest distance between the source location and the destination location”. This limitation defines the “shortest path” as being identified via the average walk time and the physical distance. The next limitation recites that the “shortest path” comprises having at least one of the average walk time or shortest distance. It is not clear how “identifying” the shortest path is to be interpreted differently from “comprising” the shortest path when one is to have both elements and the other is to have at least one, respectively. The terms “permanent” and “temporary” in claim 12 are relative terms which render the claim indefinite. The terms are not defined by the claim, the specification does not provide a standard for ascertaining the requisite degrees, and one of ordinary skill in the art would not be reasonably apprised of the scope of the invention. It cannot be determined with certainty how to differentiate or determine the limit for what constitutes “permanent” and/or “temporary”. Claims 1, 8 and 15 define the term “welk”. It is assumed that this is a typographical error intended to be “walk”. To expedite prosecution, it will be interpreted as indicated. Dependent claims 2-7, 9-14 and 16-20 are rejected based on being dependent on a rejected independent claim. Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103 07-20-aia AIA 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. 07-23-aia AIA 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. 07-20-02-aia AIA This application currently names joint inventors. In considering patentability of the claims the examiner presumes that the subject matter of the various claims was commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the claimed invention(s) absent any evidence to the contrary. Applicant is advised of the obligation under 37 CFR 1.56 to point out the inventor and effective filing dates of each claim that was not commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the later invention in order for the examiner to consider the applicability of 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(C) for any potential 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) prior art against the later invention. 07-21-aia AIA Claim s 1-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Glaser, et al. (U.S. Patent Publication No. 2024/0144354) . For claim 1, Glaser teaches a system for dynamic distance-based routing using a distance matrix, the system comprising: a processor (see para. 0081); and a computer-readable medium storing instructions that are operative upon execution by the processor to (see para. 0081): calculate dynamic (see para. 0252) distance data (see paras. 0249) for each path (see paras. 0278, 0281) in paths (see paras. 0150-0151, 0278-0279) between a source location and a destination location (see Fig. 24). Glaser does not explicitly disclose the element of a plurality of possible paths. However, in the cited passages, it is clear that multiple routes are considered and monitored (see paras. 0150-0151, 0278-0279). When Glaser elaborates on updating such routes and distances, the same routes and distances are reconsidered. This implicitly teaches calculating distance data for a plurality of paths. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art that Glaser includes updating multiple routes, just not a single route based on the motivation to improve the field of sensor-based navigation technology to create a new and useful system and method for dynamic store feedback systems for directing users (see para. 0005). It is noted that the term “a plurality of paths” is used throughout this claimed invention. This reasoning will not be repeated for each subsequent use of the term, but should be considered as applicable to each time it is needed. Returning to the claim, Glaser further discloses the dynamic distance data comprising an average walk time (see para. 0212, traversal, agent speed) from the source location to the destination location and a distance between the source location and the destination location (see para. 0212); identify a shortest path in the plurality of possible paths using the dynamic distance data for each path (see para. 0056), the shortest path comprising a path having at least one of a shortest average welk time (see para. 0342, spatial averages) or a shortest distance between the source location and the destination location (see para. 0056); record distance data associated with the shortest path within a distance dataset (see para. 0342, 0347, 0461). Glaser does not explicitly disclose storing distance data in a “matrix”. However, Glaser teaches that distance data between destinations is stored in a “dataset”. One of ordinary skill in the art would consider a “dataset” functionally equivalent to a data “matrix” as each data entry is stored and referenced based on the other data entries. It would have been obvious at the effective date of filing to one of ordinary skill in the art that a matrix would be substitutable with a “dataset” based on a reasonable expectation of success and the motivation to improve the field of sensor-based navigation technology to create a new and useful system and method for dynamic store feedback systems for directing users (see para. 0005). It is noted that the term “matrix” is used throughout this claimed invention. This reasoning will not be repeated for each subsequent use of the term, but should be considered as applicable to each time it is needed. Continuing with the claim, Glaser further teaches generate routing instructions for traveling from the source location to the destination location along the shortest path (see paras. 0276, 0056); obtain image data associated with an obstruction within the shortest path from an image capture device (see paras. 0223-0225, 0288); calculate updated dynamic distance data for each path in the plurality of possible paths between the source location and the destination location (see paras. 0205-0206, 0230); identify an updated shortest path in the plurality of possible paths using the updated dynamic distance data (see paras. 0205-0206, 0230); and record updated distance data associated with the updated shortest path within the distance matrix (see para. 0150, 0206, 0342, 0347, dataset used to update route). As noted above for the term “matrix”, the claimed limitations regarding “updating” specific types of data is taught in Glaser by the cited passages as well as in numerous other places within the document regarding updating, revising and replacing data for routes, locations and the environment. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to update, revise and replace data based on the teachings of Glaser based on the motivation to improve the field of sensor-based navigation technology to create a new and useful system and method for dynamic store feedback systems for directing users (see para. 0005). This reasoning will not be repeated for each subsequent use of the term, but should be considered as applicable to each time the concept is recited. With reference to claim 2, Glaser further teaches wherein the instructions are further operative to: generate updated routing instructions for traveling from the source location to the destination location along the updated shortest path using the updated distance data (see para. 0150, 0206, 0342, 0347, dataset used to update route). Additionally, it is noted that updating the routes and data are generally disclosed by the initial teaching of updating the routes. However, Glaser is replete with teachings regarding updating, revising and replacing data for routes, locations and the environment. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art that the data would be updated to be considered “dynamic” and “reactionary” based on the motivation to improve the field of sensor-based navigation technology to create a new and useful system and method for dynamic store feedback systems for directing users (see para. 0005). Regarding claim 3, Glaser further teaches wherein the instructions are further operative to: generate a routing map including the shortest path (see paras. 0150, 0205-0206, 0230); and output the routing map to a user via a user interface device for routing the user to the destination location from the source location in a shortest walking distance or within a shortest transit time (see paras. 0107-0110). Pertaining to claim 4, Glaser further teaches wherein the instructions are further operative to: generate driving instructions for driving a vehicle along the shortest path (see paras. 0213, 0222, 0223); and output the driving instructions to a user device for routing the vehicle to the destination location from the source location with a shortest driving distance or within a shortest transit time (see paras. 0107-0110). Referring to claim 5, Glaser further discloses wherein the instructions are further operative to: generate instructions for directing a robotic device along the shortest path (see paras. 0213, 0222, 0223); and transmit the instructions to the robotic device via a network, wherein the instructions route the robotic device along the shortest path from the source location to the destination location with a shortest distance or within a shortest transit time (see paras. 0213, 0222-0226, shortest path implicit as equivalent to best, most efficient, obstruction avoided, etc.). Regarding claim 6, Glaser further teaches wherein the instructions are further operative to: calculate the average walk time between the source location and the destination location using historical distance data associated with walkable distances between a pair of reference points (see para. 0212, traversal, agent speed). With respect to claim 7, Glaser teaches that the distance is calculated in feet (see para. 0158). For claim 8, Glaser teaches a method for dynamic distance-based routing using a distance matrix, the method comprising: calculating an average walk time from a source location to a destination location associated with each path (see para. 0212, traversal, agent speed) in a plurality of possible paths between the source location and the destination location using per-store distance data (see paras. 0205, 0212), the per-store distance data comprising historical distance data (see para. 0212); calculating a physical distance between the source location and the destination location using a set of coordinates for the source location and a set of coordinates for the destination location (see paras. 0056, 0249); identifying a shortest path in the plurality of possible paths (see paras. 0249, 0150-0151, 0278-0279) using the calculated average walk time (see para. 0212, traversal, agent speed, average distances determined; yield average walk time) and the calculated physical distance associated with each path (see para. 0212), the shortest path comprising a path having at least one of a shortest average welk time or a shortest distance between the source location and the destination location (see paras. 0212, 0249, 0150-0151, 0278-0279); generating routing instructions for traveling from the source location to the destination location along the shortest path, wherein the routing instructions are presented to a user via a user interface device (see paras. 0276, 0056); obtaining real-time image data associated with a new obstruction within the shortest path from an image capture device (see paras. 0223-0225, 0288); calculating updated average walk time and an updated physical distance associated with each path dynamic distance data for each path in the plurality of possible paths between the source location and the destination location using the real-time image data (see paras. 0205-0206, 0230, 0212, 0249, 0251, 0150-0151, 0278-0279); identifying an updated shortest path in the plurality of possible paths using the updated average walk time and the updated physical distance associated with each path (see paras. 0205-0206, 0230, 0212, 0249, 0251, 0150-0151, 0278-0279; updating and identifying revised routes is embodied in entire disclosure); and recording updated distance data associated with the updated shortest path within the distance matrix (see para. 0342, 0347, 0461). With reference to claim 9, Glaser further teaches generating updated routing instructions for traveling from the source location to the destination location along the updated shortest path (see paras. 0205-0206, 0230, 0212, 0249, 0251, 0150-0151, 0278-0279); updating and identifying revised routes is embodied in entire disclosure), the updated routing instructions including a map (see paras. 0150, 0205-0206, 0230); and presenting the map to a user via a user interface device (see paras. 0276, 0056), wherein the map includes a graphic representation of the updated shortest path directing the user to travel from the source location to the destination location along the updated shortest path (see paras. 0150, 0205-0206, 0230, 0276). With respect to claim 10, Glaser further teaches performing computer vision analysis by a machine Learning model to identify the new obstruction using the real-time image data (see para. 0251, 0117, 0411). Pertaining to claim 11, Glaser further teaches identifying a plurality of source-to-destination pairs (see para. 0278); calculating the average walk time and physical distance between each path in a plurality of paths corresponding to each source-to-destination pair in the plurality of source-to-destination pairs (see para. 0249); selecting a shortest path from the plurality of paths for each source-to-destination pair in the plurality of source-to-destination pairs (see paras. 0205-0206, 0230, 0212, 0249, 0251, 0150-0151, 0278-0279); and recording the average walk time and the physical distance associated with the selected shortest path for each source-to-destination pair in the distance matrix (see para. 0249, travel score recorded in dataset). Referring to claim 12, Glaser further discloses obtaining image data from a plurality of image capture devices associated with a plurality of robotic devices (see paras. 0222-0223), wherein the image data is analyzed to identify permanent obstructions and temporary obstructions (see paras. 0222-0223, 0251). Pertaining to claim 13, Glaser further discloses generating distance data associated with a plurality of shortest paths for traveling from a selected source location to a plurality of different destination locations (see para. 0202, 0278); and updating the distance matrix with the distance data for each source-to-destination pair associated with the source location and the plurality of different destination locations (see paras. 0205-0206, 0230, 0212, 0249, 0251, 0150-0151, 0278-0279), wherein the distance data comprises the average walk time and the physical distance calculated for each source-to-destination pair (see para. 0249, travel score recorded in dataset). With respect to claim 14, Glaser further discloses generating distance data associated with a plurality of shortest paths for traveling from a plurality of different source locations to a selected destination location (see para. 0203-0204); and updating the distance matrix with the distance data for each source-to- destination pair associated with the plurality of different source locations and the selected destination location (see paras. 0205-0206, 0230, 0212, 0249, 0251, 0150-0151, 0278-0279), wherein the distance data comprises the average walk time and the physical distance calculated for each source-to-destination pair (see para. 0249, travel score recorded in dataset). Claim 15 defines elements and subject matter that is substantially similar to the elements and subject matter of claims 1 and 8. Accordingly, the citations and reasoning outlined above for claims 1 and 8 are applicable to reject the similar limitations of claim 15. With regards to claim 16, Glaser further teaches obtaining updated image data associated with a new obstruction within the shortest path from an image capture device (see paras. 0223-0225, 0288); calculating updated dynamic distance data for each path in the plurality of possible paths between the source location and the destination location (see paras. 0203-0206, 0230, 0212, 0249, 0251, 0150-0151, 0278-0279); identifying an updated shortest path in the plurality of possible paths using the updated dynamic distance data (see paras. 0205-0206, 0230, 0212, 0249, 0251, 0150-0151, 0278-0279); and recording updated distance data associated with the updated shortest path within the distance matrix (see para. 0342, 0347, 0461). With respect to claim 17, Glaser teaches calculating the distance between the source location and the destination location in feet using coordinate data for the source location and the destination location (see para. 0158). Regarding claim 18, Glaser further teaches calculating the average walktime between the source location and the destination location using historical distance data associated with walkable distances between a pair of reference points (see para. 0212, traversal, agent speed). Pertaining to claim 19, Glaser further teaches generating driving instructions for driving a vehicle along the shortest path (see paras. 0213, 0222, 0223); and presenting the driving instructions to a user device for routing the vehicle to the destination location from the source location with a shortest driving distance or within a shortest transit time (see paras. 0107-0110). Regarding claim 20, Glaser further teaches generating a routing map including the shortest path (see paras. 0150, 0205-0206, 0230); and presenting the driving instructions to a user device for routing the vehicle to the destination location from the source location with a shortest driving distance or within a shortest transit time (see paras. 0107-0110). Conclusion Examiner would like to point out that any reference/citation to specific figures, columns and lines should not be considered limiting in any way. The entire cited reference, as well as any secondary teaching reference(s), are to be included in considerations of relevant disclosure relating to the claimed invention. Applicant is herein considered to have implicit knowledge of all cited teachings of the prior art of record. Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ADAM D TISSOT whose telephone number is (571)270-3439. The examiner can normally be reached 8:00-4:30. 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, Angela Ortiz can be reached at (571) 272-1206. 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. /ADAM D TISSOT/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3663 Application/Control Number: 19/274,793 Page 2 Art Unit: 3663 Application/Control Number: 19/274,793 Page 3 Art Unit: 3663 Application/Control Number: 19/274,793 Page 4 Art Unit: 3663 Application/Control Number: 19/274,793 Page 5 Art Unit: 3663 Application/Control Number: 19/274,793 Page 6 Art Unit: 3663 Application/Control Number: 19/274,793 Page 7 Art Unit: 3663 Application/Control Number: 19/274,793 Page 8 Art Unit: 3663 Application/Control Number: 19/274,793 Page 9 Art Unit: 3663 Application/Control Number: 19/274,793 Page 10 Art Unit: 3663 Application/Control Number: 19/274,793 Page 11 Art Unit: 3663 Application/Control Number: 19/274,793 Page 12 Art Unit: 3663
Prosecution Insights