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 .
Continued Examination Under 37 CFR 1.114
A request for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, including the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e), was filed in this application after final rejection. Since this application is eligible for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114. Applicant's submission filed on 04/17/2026 has been entered.
Claims 2 and 14 are cancelled.
Claims 1, 13 and 20 are amended.
Claims 1, 3-13 and 15-20 are pending.
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.
Claims 1, 3-13 and 15-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Inouchi (US 7,663,974 B2) in view of Onishi (US 20120140596 A1) and Sato (US 2019/03583765 A1).
Regarding claim 1, Inouchi teaches a signal receiver configured to receive a reflection signal from a water body[Abstract, Fig 1, 5 has ultrasound system sending pulse into water], identify one or more fish schools and individual fish based on the reflection signal[Col 11, Lines 55 -60 and Figs 6A,6B,6C and Col 13 Line 60 to Col 14 Line 25 have display based on operator specified manner such as the display of a single fish based on operator specified manner; See also Fig 2A], and determine a size and a depth associated with the one or more fish schools and the individual fish[Abstract, Fig 5 has fishfinder measuring depth and size of fish];
a data receiver configured to obtain fish information from a fish species database …..[Abstract, Fig 1, 5 has ultrasound receiver for fishfinder],
a user interface communicatively coupled to the data receiver, and configured to receive at least one user input indicating at least one target fish species and[Col 11, Lines 55 -60 and Figs 6A,6B,6C and Col 13 Line 60 to Col 14 Line 25 have display based on operator specified manner];
and processing circuitry communicatively coupled to the signal receiver, the data receiver, and the user interface[#6 in Fig 1 is a processor], wherein the processing circuity is configured to:
identify a size and a depth range of the at least one target fish species from the fish information stored in the fish species database by comparing the fish information with the at least one user input, [Abstract, Fig 5 has fishfinder measuring depth and size of fish]
after detection of the one or more fish schools and the individual fish via the signal receiver, filter the detected fish schools and individual fish based on the size range and the depth range retrieved from the fish species database for the at least one target fish species designated by the user input, thereby discriminating the at least one target fish species from the one or more fish schools and the individual fish [Col 11, Lines 55 -60 and Figs 6A,6B,6C and Col 13 Line 60 to Col 14 Line 25 have display based on operator specified manner such as the display of a single fish based on operator specified manner; Abstract, Fig 5 has fishfinder measuring depth and size of fish]
and generate a display signal based on the discriminated at least one target fish species thereby displaying only the discriminated at least one target fish species. [Abstract; Fig 2, 4, 5 has display based on depth and size of fish; See also Col 15 lines 50- Col 16 Lines 25 regarding thresholds on size of fish].
In the event that Inouchi does not explicitly teach the fish information including fish species, size ranges, and depth ranges associated with the fish species;….. one user input indicating at least one target fish species….. discriminating the at least one target fish species from the one or more fish schools and the individual fish [Abstract has identifying and marking single target fish meaning it identifies them from other multiple non target fish. Such a situation still appears to be an intended use and does not carry much patentable weight as it has been held that a recitation with respect to the manner in which a claimed apparatus is intended to be employed does not differentiate the claimed apparatus from a prior art apparatus satisfying the claimed structural limitations Ex parte Masham, 2 USPQ2d 1647 (1987)]
Onishi teaches discriminating the least one target fish species from the one or more fish school [0004 has measuring and discriminating a single fish from a school of fish]
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the filing date to have modified the fish finder in Inouchi with the fish discrimination of Onishi to identify a single preferred fish in a school of fish.
Sato teaches the fish information including fish species, size ranges, and depth ranges associated with the fish species;[ Fig 1 has processor for fish species identification; See also 0066 for user specified fish species; Fig 6, 9; 0049 and claims 10, 11 has fish species identification based on echo data and Fig 7 has fish species database; 0032, 0036, 0043-0050 has database has fish data in the database] …..one user input indicating at least one target fish species [Fig 1 has processor for fish species identification; See also 0066 for user specified fish species;]…..
identify a size and a depth range of the at least one target fish species from the fish information stored in the fish species database by comparing the fish information with the at least one user input, [0036 has database of fish 0038 has identification of fish and 0049-0050 has comparison and database use; ]
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the filing date to have modified the fishfinder of Inouchi with the species estimating of Sato in order to use echo data to identify fish species to give more information to the user.
Regarding claim 13, Inouchi teaches receiving a reflection signal from a water body using a signal receiver [Abstract, Fig 1, 5 has ultrasound system sending pulse into water], identifying one or more fish schools and individual fish based on the reflection signal[Col 11, Lines 55-60 and Figs 6A, 6B, 6C and Col 13 Line 60 to Col 14 Line 25 have display based on operator specified manner such as the display of a single fish based on operator specified manner, See also Fig 2A], and determining a size and a depth associated with the one or more fish schools and the individual fish[Abstract, Fig 5 has fishfinder measuring depth and size of fish];
obtaining, via a data receiver, fish information from a fish species database [Abstract, Fig 1, 5 has ultrasound receiver for fishfinder],…..
receiving at least one user input indicating at least one target fish species [Col 11, Lines 55-60 and Figs 6A,6B,6C and Col 13 Line 60 to Col 14 Line 25 have display based on operator specified manner];
identifying a size range and a depth range of the at least one target fish species from the fish information, stored in the fish species database by comparing the fish information with the at least one user input; [Abstract, Fig 5 has fishfinder measuring depth and size of fish]
after detection of the one or more fish schools and the individual fish via the signal receiver, filter the detected fish schools and individual fish based on the size range and the depth range retrieved from the fish species database for the at least one target fish species designated by the user input, thereby discriminating the at least one target fish species from the one or more fish schools and the individual fish[Col 11, Lines 55 -60 and Figs 6A,6B,6C and Col 13 Line 60 to Col 14 Line 25 have display based on operator specified manner such as the display of a single fish based on operator specified manner; Abstract, Fig 5 has fishfinder measuring depth and size of fish]
and generating a display signal based on the discriminated at least one target fish species thereby displaying only the discriminated at least one target fish species. Abstract; Fig 2, 4, 5 has display based on depth and size of fish; See also Col 15 lines 50- Col 16 Lines 25 regarding thresholds on size of fish].
In the event that Inouchi does not explicitly teach the fish information including fish species, size ranges, and depth ranges associated with the fish species;….. one user input indicating at least one target fish species….. discriminating the at least one target fish species from the one or more fish schools [Abstract has identifying and marking single target fish meaning it identifies them from other multiple non target fish. Such a situation still appears to be an intended use and does not carry much patentable weight as it has been held that a recitation with respect to the manner in which a claimed apparatus is intended to be employed does not differentiate the claimed apparatus from a prior art apparatus satisfying the claimed structural limitations. Ex parte Masham, 2 USPQ2d 1647 (1987)]
Onishi teaches discriminating of at least one target fish species from the one or more fish school [0004 has measuring and discriminating a single fish from a school of fish]
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the filing date to have modified the fish finder in Inouchi with the fish discrimination of Onishi to identify a single preferred fish in a school of fish.
Sato teaches the fish information including fish species, size ranges, and depth ranges associated with the fish species;[Fig 1 has processor for fish species identification; See also 0066 for user specified fish species; Fig 6, 9; 0049 and claims 10, 11 has fish species identification based on echo data and Fig 7 has fish species database; 0032, 0036, 0043-0050 has database has fish data in the database]….. one user input indicating at least one target fish species [Fig 1 has processor for fish species identification; See also 0066 for user specified fish species;]…..
identifying a size and a depth range of the at least one target fish species from the fish information stored in the fish species database by comparing the fish information with the at least one user input, [0036 has database of fish 0038 has identification of fish and 0049-0050 has comparison and database use; ]
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the filing date to have modified the fishfinder of Inouchi with the species estimating of Sato in order to use echo data to identify fish species to give more information to the user.
Regarding claim 20, Inouchi teaches receiving a reflection signal from a water body using a signal receiver [Abstract, Fig 1, 5 has ultrasound system sending pulse into water], identifying one or more fish schools and individual fish based on the reflection signal[Col 11, Lines 55 -60 and Figs 6A, 6B, 6C and Col 13 Line 60 to Col 14 Line 25 have display based on operator specified manner such as the display of a single fish based on operator specified manner, See also Fig 2A], and determining a size and a depth associated with the one or more fish schools and the individual fish[Abstract, Fig 5 has fishfinder measuring depth and size of fish];
obtaining, via a data receiver configured to obtain fish information from a fish species database [Abstract, Fig 1, 5 has ultrasound receiver for fishfinder],…..
receiving at least one user input indicating at least one target fish species and[Col 11, Lines 55 -60 and Figs 6A,6B,6C and Col 13 Line 60 to Col 14 Line 25 have display based on operator specified manner];
identifying a size range and a depth range of the at least one target fish species from the fish information stored in the fish species database by comparing the fish information with the at least one user input; [Abstract, Fig 5 has fishfinder measuring depth and size of fish]
after detection of the one or more fish schools and the individual fish via the signal receiver, filtering the detected fish schools and individual fish based on the size range and the depth range retrieved from the fish species database for the at least one target fish species designated by the user input, thereby discriminating the at least one target fish species from the one or more fish schools and the individual fish[Col 11, Lines 55 -60 and Figs 6A,6B,6C and Col 13 Line 60 to Col 14 Line 25 have display based on operator specified manner such as the display of a single fish based on operator specified manner; Abstract, Fig 5 has fishfinder measuring depth and size of fish]
and generating a display signal based on the discriminated at least one target fish species thereby displaying only the discriminated at least one target fish species. Abstract; Fig 2, 4, 5 has display based on depth and size of fish; See also Col 15 lines 50- Col 16 Lines 25 regarding thresholds on size of fish].
In the event that Inouchi does not explicitly teach the fish information including fish species, size ranges, and depth ranges associated with the fish species;….. one user input indicating at least one target fish species….. discriminating the at least one target fish species from the one or more fish schools [Abstract has identifying and marking single target fish meaning it identifies them from other multiple non target fish. Such a situation still appears to be an intended use and does not carry much patentable weight as it has been held that a recitation with respect to the manner in which a claimed apparatus is intended to be employed does not differentiate the claimed apparatus from a prior art apparatus satisfying the claimed structural limitations. Ex parte Masham, 2 USPQ2d 1647 (1987)]
Onishi teaches discriminating of at least one target fish species from the one or more fish school [0004 has measuring and discriminating a single fish from a school of fish]
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the filing date to have modified the fish finder in Inouchi with the fish discrimination of Onishi to identify a single preferred fish in a school of fish.
Sato teaches the fish information including fish species, size ranges, and depth ranges associated with the fish species;[Fig 1 has processor for fish species identification; See also 0066 for user specified fish species; Fig 6, 9; 0049 and claims 10, 11 has fish species identification based on echo data and Fig 7 has fish species database; 0032, 0036, 0043-0050 has database has fish data in the database]….. one user input indicating at least one target fish species [Fig 1 has processor for fish species identification; See also 0066 for user specified fish species;]…..
identifying a size and a depth range of the at least one target fish species from the fish information stored in the fish species database by comparing the fish information with the at least one user input, [0036 has database of fish 0038 has identification of fish and 0049-0050 has comparison and database use; ]
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the filing date to have modified the fishfinder of Inouchi with the species estimating of Sato in order to use echo data to identify fish species to give more information to the user.
Regarding claims 3 and 15, Inouchi, as modified, teaches wherein the signal receiver corresponds to a transducer configured to transmit and receive the reflection signal from the water body. [Fig 1, Abstract has pulses into the water].
Regarding claims 4 and 16, Inouchi, as modified, teaches does not explicitly teach wherein the data receiver corresponds to a memory having the fish species database which is configured to store the fish information. [Col 7, Lines 5-15 have processor with memory]
Sato also teaches that wherein the data receiver corresponds to a memory having a fish species database which is configured to store the fish information. [0032, 0036, 0043-0050 has fish data in the database].
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the filing date to have modified the fishfinder of Inouchi with the fish species database of Sato in order to use the database of fish information to identify species.
Regarding claims 5 and 17, Inouchi does not explicitly teach wherein the fish species database is further configured to contain at least one of: a specific fish icon corresponding to the fish species; water temperature information at which the fish species live; area information where the fish species live; and bottom sediment discrimination information where the fish species live.
Sato teaches that wherein the fish species database is further configured to contain at least one of: a specific fish icon corresponding to the fish species[Fig 12, 0064 has different mark or color for fish species]; water temperature information at which the fish species live[0031-0033 has water temperature data]; area information where the fish species live[0067, Fig 13 has area of fish found being stored]; and bottom sediment discrimination information where the fish species live. [Fig 12 has seafloor being shown 060-0062 has it and other data being stored in the database].
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the filing date to have modified the fishfinder display of Inouchi with different icons of Sato in order to different icons identify species use echo data and to store data on where fish live.
Regarding claims 6 and 18, Inouchi does not explicitly teach wherein the data receiver corresponds to a communicator configured to receive the fish information from the fish species database via a network.
Sato teaches that wherein the data receiver corresponds to a communicator configured to receive the fish information from the fish species database via a network. [0026 -0027, 0041 has use of internet and database being remote meaning network].
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the filing date to have modified the fishfinder of Inouchi with the networked database of Sato in order to communicate from a remote location.
Regarding claim 7, Incuchi does not explicitly teach wherein the network is at least one of Long Term Evolution (LTE), 5G, 6G, National Marine Electronics Association (NMEA) bus, Controller Area Network (CAN) Bus, Local Area Network (LAN), Internet, Wireless Fidelity (Wi- Fi), and satellite communication.
Sato teaches that wherein the network is at least one of Long Term Evolution (LTE), 5G, 6G, National Marine Electronics Association (NMEA) bus, Controller Area Network (CAN) Bus, Local Area Network (LAN), Internet, Wireless Fidelity (Wi- Fi), and satellite communication. [0026-0027, has use of internet and database being remote meaning network as well as 0041 having satellite communication].
Regarding claim 8, Inocuchi does not explicitly teach wherein the fish species database is configured to be updated periodically, automatically, or randomly, using artificial intelligence or machine learning technology.
Sato teaches that wherein the fish species database is configured to be updated periodically, automatically, or randomly, using artificial intelligence or machine learning technology [Abstract, 0005-0007, 0037-0045 has machine learning in the database].
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the filing date to have modified the fishfinder of Inouchi with the machine learning Sato in order to machine learning to improve species identification and the database.
Regarding claim 9, Inocuchi does not explicitly teach wherein the fish species database is configured to be updated manually based at least on a user input via the network.
Sato teaches that wherein the fish species database is configured to be updated manually based at least on a user input via the network. [0026 -0027, 0041 has use of disc or memory card or updating when ship returns meaning there is manual input]
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the filing date to have modified the fishfinder of Inouchi with the manual updating of Sato in order to use update the database whenever a user desires.
Regarding claims 10 and 19, Inouchi, as modified, teaches, wherein the at least one user input comprises a depth and/or size of the at least one target fish species [Col 11, Lines 55-60 and Figs 6A, 6B, 6C and Col 13 Line 65 to Col 14 Line 15 have display based on operator specified manner].
In the event that Inouchi implies but does not explicitly teach the discriminating of at least one target fish from among the multiple fishes[Abstract has identifying and marking single target fish meaning it identifies them from other multiple non target fish. Such a situation still appears to be an intended use and does not carry much patentable weight as it has been held that a recitation with respect to the manner in which a claimed apparatus is intended to be employed does not differentiate the claimed apparatus from a prior art apparatus satisfying the claimed structural limitations. Ex parte Masham, 2 USPQ2d 1647 (1987). ]
Onishi teaches teach the discriminating of at least one target fish from among the multiple fishes[0004 has measuring and discriminating a single fish from a school of fish]
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the filing date to have modified the fish finder in Inouchi with the fish discrimination of Onishi to identify a single preferred fish in a school of fish.
Regarding claim 11, Inouchi, as modified, teaches a fish finder or a Sound navigation and Ranging (SONAR). [Title, Abstract is a fishfinder]
Regarding claim 12, Inouchi does not explicitly teach configured to perform learning process for discriminating the fish species and identifying the fish species.
Sato teaches that configured to perform learning process for discriminating the fish species and identifying the fish species. [Fig 6, 9; 0049 and claims 10, 11 has fish species identification based on echo data; Abstract, 0005-0007, 0037-0045 has machine learning in the database]
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the filing date to have modified the fishfinder of Inouchi with the species estimating of Sato in order to use echo data to identify fish species to give more information to the user.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 04/17/2026 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
In response to applicant's arguments against the references individually, one cannot show nonobviousness by attacking references individually where the rejections are based on combinations of references. See In re Keller, 642 F.2d 413, 208 USPQ 871 (CCPA 1981); In re Merck & Co., 800 F.2d 1091, 231 USPQ 375 (Fed. Cir. 1986). Specifically on pages 9-11 of the remarks, applicant is reading Inouchi, Onishi and Sato overly narrowly and in isolation regarding fish and depth and size. It is the combination as the fish species identification of Sato combined with the size and depth tracking of schools or single fish in Inouchi and discrimination of fish in Onishi and the combination of the art that renders the claim obvious.
Applicant is merely stating the prior art is different from the claims without explaining and distinguishing them as well as reading the prior art overly narrow with regards to what they show.
Moreover it would be obvious to use a database as comparison of the signals necessarily requires something to compare it to in order to identify anything. Moreover the basic identification based on size or depth or species requires a user input as any system that identifies based on any parameters is necessarily taking a user input. Overall applicant appears to be claiming that having user specified targets based on size or depth thresholds and comparing the sonar returns to find fish that fit the required parameters would not be obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art of fishfinding.
Moreover other pertinent art also exists that read on the applicant's claim as below.
Arbuckle (US 20170255200 A1) at 0033 has fish discrimination of single fish or a school of fish as well tracking.
Berumen (US 20160041255 A1) at 0055 has fish discrimination of single fish or a school of fish as well tracking of individual fish within school of fish.
Shiraki(US 20130343151 Al) at Abstract, Fig 4 and 0033 has fish species discrimination and single or school of fish as well as size and depth.
Applicant's remaining arguments amount to a general allegation that the claims define a patentable invention without specifically pointing out how the language of the claims patentably distinguishes them from the references. Rejections are maintained – and no allowable subject matter can be identified at this time.
Conclusion
Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a). Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a).
A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of the advisory action. In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the mailing date of this final action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to VIKAS NMN ATMAKURI whose telephone number is (571)272-5080. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 7:30am-5:30pm.
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, Isam Alsomiri can be reached at (571)272-6970. 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.
/VIKAS ATMAKURI/Examiner, Art Unit 3645
/JAMES R HULKA/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3645
Prosecution Insights