DETAILED ACTION
Claim Status
This action is in response to the application filed on February 26, 2026. Claim(s) 1, 4, 6, 8, 11, and 18 have been amended. Thus Claim(s) 1-6, 8-12, 15-16, and 18 are pending and have been examined.
Response to Amendments
Applicant’s remarks and amendments filed February 26, 2026, have been entered.
Applicant’s arguments regarding the 35 U.S.C. 112 (a) and (b) rejections previously set forth in the Non-Final Office Action mailed December 02, 2025, are persuasive. Accordingly, the 35 U.S.C. 112 (a) and (b) rejections are withdrawn in response.
Applicant’s arguments regarding the 35 U.S.C. 112(f) interpretations previously set forth in the Non-Final Office Action mailed December 02, 2025, are not persuasive. Accordingly, the 35 U.S.C. 112(f) interpretations are upheld in response.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments filed February 26, 2026, regarding the rejection(s) of claim(s) 1-6, 8-12, 15-16, and 18 have been fully and completely considered but are moot because the arguments do not apply to the new combination of the references, facilitated by Applicant’s newly submitted amendments, including new prior art—Xie et al, WO 2019052385—being used in the current rejection.
Claim Interpretation
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(f):
(f) Element in Claim for a Combination. – An element in a claim for a combination may be expressed as a means or step for performing a specified function without the recital of structure, material, or acts in support thereof, and such claim shall be construed to cover the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification and equivalents thereof.
The following is a quotation of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph:
An element in a claim for a combination may be expressed as a means or step for performing a specified function without the recital of structure, material, or acts in support thereof, and such claim shall be construed to cover the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification and equivalents thereof.
The claims in this application are given their broadest reasonable interpretation using the plain meaning of the claim language in light of the specification as it would be understood by one of ordinary skill in the art. The broadest reasonable interpretation of a claim element (also commonly referred to as a claim limitation) is limited by the description in the specification when 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is invoked.
As explained in MPEP § 2181, subsection I, claim limitations that meet the following three-prong test will be interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph:
(A) the claim limitation uses the term “means” or “step” or a term used as a substitute for “means” that is a generic placeholder (also called a nonce term or a non-structural term having no specific structural meaning) for performing the claimed function;
(B) the term “means” or “step” or the generic placeholder is modified by functional language, typically, but not always linked by the transition word “for” (e.g., “means for”) or another linking word or phrase, such as “configured to” or “so that”; and
(C) the term “means” or “step” or the generic placeholder is not modified by sufficient structure, material, or acts for performing the claimed function.
Use of the word “means” (or “step”) in a claim with functional language creates a rebuttable presumption that the claim limitation is to be treated in accordance with 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph. The presumption that the claim limitation is interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is rebutted when the claim limitation recites sufficient structure, material, or acts to entirely perform the recited function.
Absence of the word “means” (or “step”) in a claim creates a rebuttable presumption that the claim limitation is not to be treated in accordance with 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph. The presumption that the claim limitation is not interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is rebutted when the claim limitation recites function without reciting sufficient structure, material or acts to entirely perform the recited function.
Claim limitations in this application that use the word “means” (or “step”) are being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, except as otherwise indicated in an Office action. Conversely, claim limitations in this application that do not use the word “means” (or “step”) are not being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, except as otherwise indicated in an Office action.
This application includes one or more claim limitations that do not use the word “means,” but are nonetheless being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, because the claim limitation(s) uses a generic placeholder that is coupled with functional language without reciting sufficient structure to perform the recited function and the generic placeholder is not preceded by a structural modifier. Such claim limitation(s) is/are:
“first image collector” in independent claim 1, dependent claim 4, independent claim 6, independent claim 8, dependent claim 9, dependent claim 11 and dependent claim 15
With respect to the first prong of this analysis, a claim element that does not include the term “means” or “step” triggers a rebuttable presumption that 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, does not apply. When the claim limitation does not use the term “means,” examiners should determine whether the presumption that 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, paragraph 6 does not apply is overcome. The presumption may be overcome if the claim limitation uses a generic placeholder (a term that is simply a substitute for the term “means”). The following is a list of non-structural generic placeholders that may invoke 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, paragraph 6: “mechanism for,” “module for,” “device for,” “unit for,” “component for,” “element for,” “member for,” “apparatus for,” “machine for,” or “system for.” Welker Bearing Co., v. PHD, Inc., 550 F.3d 1090, 1096, 89 USPQ2d 1289, 1293-94 (Fed. Cir. 2008); Massachusetts Inst. of Tech. v. Abacus Software, 462 F.3d 1344, 1354, 80 USPQ2d 1225, 1228 (Fed. Cir. 2006); Personalized Media, 161 F.3d at 704, 48 USPQ2d at 1886–87; Mas-Hamilton Group v. LaGard, Inc., 156 F.3d 1206, 1214-1215, 48 USPQ2d 1010, 1017 (Fed. Cir. 1998). This list is not exhaustive, and other generic placeholders may invoke 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, paragraph 6.
The claims independent claim 1, dependent claim 4, independent claim 6, independent claim 8, dependent claim 9, dependent claim 11 and dependent claim 15, as per MPEP §2181 recite the generic placeholder, modified by functional language, and the generic placeholder is not modified by sufficient structure, material, or acts for performing the claimed function invoking interpretation under §112(f).
Because this/these claim limitation(s) is/are being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, it/they is/are being interpreted to cover the corresponding structure described in the specification as performing the claimed function, and equivalents thereof.
If applicant does not intend to have this/these limitation(s) interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, applicant may: (1) amend the claim limitation(s) to avoid it/them being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph (e.g., by reciting sufficient structure to perform the claimed function); or (2) present a sufficient showing that the claim limitation(s) recite(s) sufficient structure to perform the claimed function so as to avoid it/them being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 103 which forms the basis for all obviousness rejections set forth in this Office action:
A patent for a claimed invention may not be obtained, notwithstanding that the claimed invention is not identically disclosed as set forth in section 102, if the differences between the claimed invention and the prior art are such that the claimed invention as a whole would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which the claimed invention pertains. Patentability shall not be negated by the manner in which the invention was made.
Claim(s) 1-6, 8-12, 16, and 18 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable Xie et al, WO 2019052385 in view of Zhang et al., CN108702602.
Regarding claim 1, Xie teaches
An information processing method (see Xie, Paragraph [0006], “In view of this, one or more embodiments of the present specification provide a method and an apparatus for obtaining social information”),
performed by a first wearable device, wherein the first wearable device comprises a first image collector (see Xie, Fig. 1 and Paragraph [0049], “such as a mobile phone 131, a user equipment 13 such as a smart glasses 132,” and Paragraph [0056], “the user is photographed through a camera assembled on the user equipment to obtain the face information of the user”), the method comprising:
capturing a second face image of a user actually wearing a second wearable device using the first image collector (see Xie, Fig. 5 and Paragraph [0082], “FIG. 5 is a schematic diagram of collecting and recognizing face information according to an exemplary embodiment. Assuming that the user A turns on the face recognition function through the client 1 running on the mobile phone 131, when the client 1 has the right to use the camera assembled on the mobile phone 131, the camera can be used for shooting. For example, the client 1 May present a face recognition interface 500 as shown in FIG. 5 on the mobile phone 131, and the face recognition interface 500 includes a photographed object when the camera performs photographing, for example, the photographed object may be the foregoing user B,” Fig. 1 and Paragraph [0049], “a mobile phone 141, a user equipment 14 such as a smart glasses 142, etc,” smart glasses 142 is considered to be a second wearable device and user B is considered to be a user actually wearing a second wearable device)
and receiving a stored first face image from the second wearable device (see Xie, Paragraph [0094], “It is assumed that the user B performs a registration operation through the mobile phone 141, and the client 2 running on the mobile phone 141 May register and guide the user B. For example, as shown in FIG. 9, the client 2 May guide the user B to collect the face information of the client 2 by showing "please refer to your face alignment here", "click screen start identification" and other prompt information 900, so that the client 2 implements face recognition (the client 2 May locally store the face information library, information about the social operation bound to each face information), or the client 2 uploads the face information to the server (the server may maintain the face information library mentioned above, and information about the social operation bound to each face information) to implement face recognition”)
and processing first target information comprising a request from the second wearable device, when the first face image matches the second face image indicating that the user actually wearing the second wearable device is the registered user (see Xie, Paragraph [0100], “When the user B has completed registration, after the user A collects and identifies the face information of the user B through the mobile phone 131, the social operation interface 1400 shown in FIG. 14 or the social operation interface 1500 shown in FIG. 15 May be shown”, and Paragraph [0103], “since the user A has not become a friend with the user B, the social operation interface 1400 May include adding a friend option 1405, so that when the user B triggers the addition of the friend option 1405, a friend relationship may be established between the user A and the user B, or a friend application is initiated by the user B corresponding to the user A, a friend relationship is established between the two after the user A agrees to the friend application, or a friend relationship is established between the user A and the user B based on other manners”).
wherein the first face image depicts a face of a registered user that is registered with an application on the second wearable device (see Xie, Paragraph [0094], “It is assumed that the user B performs a registration operation through the mobile phone 141, and the client 2 running on the mobile phone 141 May register and guide the user B. For example, as shown in FIG. 9, the client 2 May guide the user B to collect the face information of the client 2”);
Xie does not expressively teach
when the first wearable device and the second wearable device are in a preset positional relationship,
However, Zhang in a similar invention in the same field of endeavor teaches
when the first wearable device and the second wearable device are in a preset positional relationship (see Zhang, Paragraph [0013], “If the first electronic device determines that the signal strength of the first wireless link is weakening, and the signal strength weakens to be less than or equal to a preset strength threshold, which indicates that the distance between the first electronic device and the second electronic device is increasing, the first electronic device can automatically terminate step S407 of sharing the image,” the preset strength threshold is based on the distance between the first electronic device and the second electronic device this is considered to be a preset positional relationship and Paragraph [0038], “the electronic device may be a portable electronic device that also includes other functions such as a personal digital assistant and/or a music player function, such as a mobile phone, a tablet computer, a wearable device with wireless communication function (such as a smart watch), etc” ),
The combination of Xie and Zhang are analogous art because they are both in the same field of endeavor of communication technology and data transmission. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, for the wearable devices to be within a preset positional relationship; to transmit files as taught in the method of Zhang in the method of Xie to improve efficiency of image electronic device sharing and processing image intelligent electronic device capability and user experience (see Zhang, Abstract).
Regarding claim 2, Xie in view of Zhang further teaches the method according to claim 1,
wherein the preset positional relationship comprises: a distance between the first wearable device and the second wearable device is less than or equal to a preset distance (see Zhang, Paragraph [0013], “If the first electronic device determines that the signal strength of the first wireless link is weakening, and the signal strength weakens to be less than or equal to a preset strength threshold, which indicates that the distance between the first electronic device and the second electronic device is increasing, the first electronic device can automatically terminate step S407 of sharing the image,” less than or equal to a preset strength threshold which indicates the distance is increasing between the first and second electronic device is considered to be less than or equal to a preset distance).
The rationale applied to the rejection of Claim 1 has been incorporated herein.
Regarding claim 3, Xie in view of Zhang further teaches the method according to claim 1,
wherein the processing the first target information from the second wearable device comprises: when the request is a file transfer request, storing a file corresponding to the file transfer request (see Zhang, Paragraph [0040], “the three electronic devices can transmit files (such as pictures, videos, documents, etc.) to each other via the wireless local area network,” and Paragraph [0072], “Step S408: The second electronic device receives and stores the image sent by the first electronic device,” the first electronic device is considered to be the second wearable device);
and when the request is a request for adding a first account as a friend, adding the first account as the friend, wherein the first account is an account corresponding to the first face image (see Xie, Paragraph [0103], “since the user A has not become a friend with the user B, the social operation interface 1400 May include adding a friend option 1405, so that when the user B triggers the addition of the friend option 1405, a friend relationship may be established between the user A and the user B, or a friend application is initiated by the user B corresponding to the user A, a friend relationship is established between the two after the user A agrees to the friend application, or a friend relationship is established between the user A and the user B based on other manners”).
The rationale applied to the rejection of Claim 1 has been incorporated herein.
Regarding claim 4, Xie in view of Zhang further teaches the method according to claim 1, wherein after capturing the second face image of the user actually wearing the second wearable device using the first image collector and receiving the stored first face image from the second wearable device, the method further comprises:
when the first face image does not match the second face image, skipping processing the first target information from the second wearable device, or processing second target information sent by the second wearable device, wherein that the first face image does not match the second face image indicates: the registered user depicted by the first face image received by the first wearable device is not the user actually wearing the second wearable device or although the user actually wearing the second wearable device is the registered user, the first face image and the second face image do not match (see Zhang, “step S508: when the first electronic device determines that the second matching result is the matching information fails and the third matching result is matching success information, first electronic device sends the third electronic device by the fourth wireless link corresponding to the face feature information of the image this shows that the user of the second electronic device is not in the image of the person,” when the first electronic device (considered to be second wearable device) determines the second matching result is the matching information fails and first device (second wearable device) sends the third electronic device face feature information which is considered to skip the processing the first target information from the second wearable device or processing second target information sent by the second wearable device ).
The rationale applied to the rejection of Claim 1 has been incorporated herein.
Regarding claim 5, Xie in view of Zhang further teaches the method according to claim 1,
wherein the second target information comprises a third face image (see Xie, Paragraph [0086], “the client 1 May perform statistics on the unregistered user identified by the face of the user A, for example, the content shown in FIG. 6 "has accumulated the 10 mystery of mystery" indicates that the user A has performed the face recognition for 10 unregistered users,” face recognition for 10 unregistered users means there is a third face image),
and the processing the second target information sent by the second wearable device comprises: when the second target information is a request for adding a second account as a friend, adding the second account as the friend in response to the request for adding the second account as the friend, wherein the second account is an account corresponding to the third face image, and the third face image matches the second face image (see Xie, Paragraph [0103], “since the user A has not become a friend with the user B, the social operation interface 1400 May include adding a friend option 1405, so that when the user B triggers the addition of the friend option 1405, a friend relationship may be established between the user A and the user B, or a friend application is initiated by the user B corresponding to the user A, a friend relationship is established between the two after the user A agrees to the friend application, or a friend relationship is established between the user A and the user B based on other manners,” there are 10 other unregistered users, the process to add a friend does not change therefore, instead of user B sending a third user C may send a friend request).
Regarding claim 6, Xie teaches an information processing method, performed by a
a second wearable device, the method comprising (see Xie, Fig. 1 and Paragraph [0049], “a mobile phone 141, a user equipment 14 such as a smart glasses 142, etc,” smart glasses 142 is considered to be a second wearable device):
sending first target information comprising a request and a stored first face image to a first wearable device (see Xie, Paragraph [0100], “When the user B has completed registration, after the user A collects and identifies the face information of the user B through the mobile phone 131, the social operation interface 1400 shown in FIG. 14 or the social operation interface 1500 shown in FIG. 15 May be shown”, and Paragraph [0103], “since the user A has not become a friend with the user B, the social operation interface 1400 May include adding a friend option 1405, so that when the user B triggers the addition of the friend option 1405, a friend relationship may be established between the user A and the user B, or a friend application is initiated by the user B corresponding to the user A, a friend relationship is established between the two after the user A agrees to the friend application, or a friend relationship is established between the user A and the user B based on other manners”)
wherein the first face image depicts a face of a registered user that is registered with an application on the second wearable device (see Xie, Paragraph [0094], “It is assumed that the user B performs a registration operation through the mobile phone 141, and the client 2 running on the mobile phone 141 May register and guide the user B. For example, as shown in FIG. 9, the client 2 May guide the user B to collect the face information of the client 2”),
wherein the first target information is processed by the first wearable device when the first face image matches a second face image indicating that a user actually wearing the second wearable device is the registered user (see Xie, Paragraph [0100], “When the user B has completed registration, after the user A collects and identifies the face information of the user B through the mobile phone 131, the social operation interface 1400 shown in FIG. 14 or the social operation interface 1500 shown in FIG. 15 May be shown”, and Paragraph [0103], “since the user A has not become a friend with the user B, the social operation interface 1400 May include adding a friend option 1405, so that when the user B triggers the addition of the friend option 1405, a friend relationship may be established between the user A and the user B, or a friend application is initiated by the user B corresponding to the user A, a friend relationship is established between the two after the user A agrees to the friend application, or a friend relationship is established between the user A and the user B based on other manners”),
Xie does not expressively teach
when the second wearable device and the first wearable device are in a preset positional relationship,
wherein the second face image depicts a face of the user actually wearing the second wearable device, and wherein the preset positional relationship comprises at least one of the following: the second wearable device being in a focus area of a first image collector of the first wearable device; or a distance between the first wearable device and the second wearable device being less than or equal to a preset distance.
However, Zhang in a similar invention in the same field of endeavor teaches
when the second wearable device and the first wearable device are in a preset positional relationship (see Zhang, Paragraph [0013], “If the first electronic device determines that the signal strength of the first wireless link is weakening, and the signal strength weakens to be less than or equal to a preset strength threshold, which indicates that the distance between the first electronic device and the second electronic device is increasing, the first electronic
device can automatically terminate step S407 of sharing the image,” the preset strength threshold is based on the distance between the first electronic device and the second electronic device this is considered to be a preset positional relationship and Paragraph [0038], “the electronic device may be a portable electronic device that also includes other functions such as a personal digital assistant and/or a music player function, such as a mobile phone, a tablet computer, a wearable device with wireless communication function (such as a smart watch), etc”),
wherein the second face image depicts a face of the user actually wearing the second wearable device, and wherein the preset positional relationship comprises at least one of the following: the second wearable device being in a focus area of a first image collector of the first wearable device; or a distance between the first wearable device and the second wearable device being less than or equal to a preset distance (see Zhang, Paragraph [0013], “If the first electronic device determines that the signal strength of the first wireless link is weakening, and the signal strength weakens to be less than or equal to a preset strength threshold, which indicates that the distance between the first electronic device and the second electronic device is increasing, the first electronic device can automatically terminate step S407 of sharing the image,” less than or equal to a preset strength threshold which indicates the distance is increasing between the first and second electronic device is considered to be less than or equal to a preset distance).
The combination of Xie and Zhang are analogous art because they are both in the same field of endeavor of communication technology and data transmission. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, for the wearable devices to be within a preset positional relationship; to transmit files as taught in the method of Zhang in the method of Xie to improve efficiency of image electronic device sharing and processing image intelligent electronic device capability and user experience (see Zhang, Abstract).
As per claim 8, Claim 8 claims an electronic device, wherein the electronic device is a first wearable device comprising a first image collector, and the electronic device comprises: a memory storing a computer program; and a processor coupled to the memory and configured to execute the computer program to perform operations comprising the same limitations as Claim 1 therefore, the rejection and rationale are analogous to that made in Claim 1.
Regarding claim 8, Xie further teaches
an electronic device, wherein the electronic device is a first wearable device comprising a first image collector, and the electronic device comprises (see Xie, Fig. 1 and Paragraph [0049], “such as a mobile phone 131, a user equipment 13 such as a smart glasses 132,” Paragraph [0051], “In addition to the foregoing mobile phone and smart glasses, the user equipment 13-14 May further use an electronic device such as the following types: a tablet device, a notebook computer, a palmtop computer (PDAs), a wearable device (in addition to smart glasses, may further include a smart wristband, a smart watch, etc.), etc. and one or more embodiments of the present specification are not limited thereto.,” and Paragraph [0056], “the user is photographed through a camera assembled on the user equipment to obtain the face information of the user”):
a memory storing a computer program; and a processor coupled to the memory and configured to execute the computer program to perform operations(see Xie, Paragraph [0106], “FIG. 16 is a schematic structural diagram of an electronic device according to an exemplary embodiment. Referring to FIG. 16, at a hardware level, the electronic device includes a processor 1602, an internal bus 1604, a network interface 1606, a memory 1608, and a non-volatile memory 1610, of course, possibly hardware required by other services. The processor 1602 reads the corresponding computer program from the non-volatile memory 1610 into the memory 1608 and then runs to form the social information acquisition device at the logical level”):
As per claim 9, Claim 9 claims the same limitation as Claim 2 and is dependent on a similarly rejected independent claim. Therefore the rejection and rationale is analogous to that made in Claim 2.
As per claim 10, Claim 10 claims the same limitation as Claim 3 and is dependent on a similarly rejected independent claim. Therefore the rejection and rationale is analogous to that made in Claim 3.
As per claim 11, Claim 11 claims the same limitation as Claim 4 and is dependent on a similarly rejected independent claim. Therefore the rejection and rationale is analogous to that made in Claim 4.
As per claim 12, Claim 12 claims the same limitation as Claim 5 and is dependent on a similarly rejected independent claim. Therefore the rejection and rationale is analogous to that made in Claim 5.
Regarding claim 16, Xie in view of Zhang further teaches the method according to claim 4,
wherein the first target information is sent to the first wearable device according to a communication identifier of the first wearable device (see Xie, Paragraph [0052], “The network 12 interacting between the user equipment 13-14 and the server 11 May comprise multiple types of wired or wireless networks. In an embodiment, the network 12 May include a Public Switched Telephone Network (PSTN) and the Internet. In addition, electronic devices such as user devices 13-14 May also communicate with each other through the network 12,” communication identifier is defined in the applicant’s Specification as [0063] In an exemplary implementation, the first wearable device and the second wearable device can perform wireless communication, for example: Bluetooth communication, and the communication identifier can be a Bluetooth name or a Bluetooth connection address or the like. Different wearable devices correspond to different communication identifiers. In this way, different wearable devices can be distinguished through the communication identifiers.).
The rationale applied to the rejection of Claim 4 has been incorporated herein.
Regarding claim 18, Xie in view of Zhang further teaches the method according to claim 4,
wherein the registered user is an owner of the second wearable (see Xie, Paragraph [0094], “It is assumed that the user B performs a registration operation through the mobile phone 141, and the client 2 running on the mobile phone 141 May register and guide the user B.”).
The rationale applied to the rejection of Claim 1 has been incorporated herein.
Claim(s) 15 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Xie et al, WO 2019052385 in view of Zhang et al., CN 108702602 in view of Papineau et al, US 20200250445.
Regarding claim 15, Xie in view of Zhang does not expressively teach the method according to claim 4,
wherein the preset positional relationship comprises: the second wearable device being in a focus area of the first image collector.
However, Papineau in a similar invention in the same field of endeavor teaches
wherein the preset positional relationship comprises: the second wearable device being in a focus area of the first image collector (see Papineau, Paragraph [0045], “The system collects image data as the camera focuses, prior to taking a photograph, and compares a frame with a subsequent frame to determine if the human head, or heads, framed in the image are moving relative to one another over time,” and Paragraph [0060], “136, if the number of smart devices reported is equal to the number of occupants registered for the trip, and all respondents are determined to be within a set distance that indicates they are close enough to the driver that they are within the passenger compartment of the driver's vehicle, the RideFlag® system may still at 144 request a face count for all occupants of the vehicle to comply with any external requirements for award eligibility and grant”).
The combination of Cui, Zhang, and Papineau are analogous art because they are all in the same field of endeavor of data transmission. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, for a camera to detect smart devices within a certain distance considered to be a focus area as taught in the method of Papineau in the method of Xie in view of Zhang to indicate the person is close enough to the driver (see Papineau Paragraph [0060]).
Allowable Subject Matter
Claim 7 and 17 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.
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 DOMINIQUE JAMES whose telephone number is (703)756-1655. The examiner can normally be reached 9:00 am - 6:00 pm 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, Emily Terrell can be reached on (571)270-3717. 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.
/DOMINIQUE JAMES/Examiner, Art Unit 2666
/MING Y HON/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2666
Prosecution Insights