DETAILED ACTION
Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status
The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
Status of Claims
Claims 9-10, 18, 21-22 have been cancelled, and Claims 24-25 has been added as new; therefore, Claims 1-8, 11-17, 19-20, and 23-25 are currently pending in application 18/100,986.
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 1-8, 12-17, 19-20, 23, and 25 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103(a) as being unpatentable over deCharms (US 2014/0368601 A1) in view of Bell et al. (US 9,390,607 B2).
As per independent Claims 1, 12, and 20, deCharms discloses a computer-implemented method/ system/ programmed apparatus of transmitting a safety notification using one or more processors (See at least Figs.1-2, 7-8; Para 0260; Claims 1, 13, and 19), comprising:
instructing, by a computer system to a first electronic device, to display on an interface of the first electronic device setting options to display the safety notification; determining, by the computer system, a user input on the interface selecting a notification option (See at least Figs. 7, 18A-18B, User system/method registration; Para 0150 and Para 0232);
receiving, by the computer system, session information associated with a data transfer session of the first electronic device transferring data with a second electronic device; determining, by the computer system, based at least in part on the session information, a location of the first electronic device associated with a user when the data was transferred and a first time when the data was transferred (See at least Para 0005, “… the verification features can include one or more of: a timestamp, a digital watermark, and location information (AE) …”; Para 0280, “In one example, a user (calling user) can send a message including a URL link through a messaging platform (email, SMS, Facebook, others) to a responder. This URL link can contain information specifying the sender, or the sender and responder, or the sender, responder. The URL link can also optionally include additional information, including information about the kind of communication being requested, the nature of the situation or topic of communication, the means of communicating, the locations of one or both users, encryption information (for example including a public key), or other information.”);
receiving, by the computer system, event data including an event location of an event, a severity of the event, and a second time of when the event occurred (See at least Para 0005, Para 0284, “Risk levels indicating the level of severity of the events can be provided with the news alerts. For example, news of a tornado around the current location of a user can be accompanied by a "high" risk level indicating that the event (tornado) posed a great risk to the health and well-being of people nearby. In another example, news of a thunderstorm with the chance to cause minor flooding can be accompanied with a "low" risk level indicating that the event (thunderstorm) posed a low risk to the health and well-being of people nearby. Risk levels can be determined manually and/or automatically, such as through keyword and/or phrase analysis, and/or natural language processing to match news alerts to predetermined event types each with one or more associated risk levels.”);
determining, by the computer system, a threshold distance from the event location based at least in part on at least one of the severity of the event (Threat Level) or the notification option (See at least Para 0260, “Additional and/or alternative data sources can be used to provide geotargeted alerts to users who are located within one or more relevant geographic locations. For example, data sources providing information about emergencies (e.g., national emergency monitoring system) and/or weather-related events (e.g., weather/ meteorological systems) can be accessed or can push information to this system and, when an event with at least a threshold predicted or occurring level of severity is identified, users that are located inside or within a selected distance from the affected area can receive an alert (e.g., message, recorded message, push notification) to inform them of the event, and people whom they have designated (for example their friends) can also receive a notification.”);
determining, by the computer system, whether the first electronic device satisfies the distance from the event location, and whether a time period between the first time and the second time satisfies a period of time; and where the location satisfies the distance and the period of time, transmitting, by the computer system to the first electronic device, the safety notification regarding the event (See at least Para 0194, “The central computer system 802 receives the incident report (814). The central computer server system 802 can provide security alerts to other users based on the incident report, as indicated by steps 815a-c. For example, the computer server system 802 can identify other users to whom the incident may be relevant and/or important (815a), such as users who are currently or are likely in the future (e.g., within a threshold period of time) to be located near where the incident occurred …”, The server operates by cross-referencing real-time/future location data against the geographical coordinates of an incident to broadcast relevant notifications).
While deCharms does disclose determining, by the computer system, whether the first electronic device satisfies the distance from the event location, and whether a time period between the first time and the second time satisfies a period of time; and where the location satisfies the distance and the period of time, transmitting, by the computer system to the first electronic device, the safety notification regarding the event (See at least Para 0194, See rejection above); deCharms fails to expressly disclose determining, by the computer system, whether the first electronic device satisfies the threshold distance from the event location, and whether a time period between the first time and the second time satisfies a threshold period of time; and where the location satisfies the threshold distance and the threshold period of time, transmitting, by the computer system to the first electronic device, the safety notification regarding the event.
However, the analogous prior art of Bell discloses determining, by the computer system, whether the first electronic device satisfies the threshold distance from the event location, and whether a time period between the first time and the second time satisfies a threshold period of time; and where the location satisfies the threshold distance and the threshold period of time, transmitting, by the computer system to the first electronic device, the safety notification regarding the event (See at least C6L63-C7L17, “In one embodiment, risk analyzer module 350 computes a risk value (e.g., a risk probability) based upon area parameters and user preferences. Area parameters include, in one embodiment, historical crime statistics 315 provided by crime data distribution system 310, which includes crime information such as the type of crime, the time of crimes, the crime locations, and victim demographics. User preferences 360 includes, in one embodiment, risk tolerance thresholds configured by the user. In one embodiment, the user may configure several situational risk tolerance thresholds based upon particular situations, such as when the user is with a group of people, when the user is jogging, when the user is listening to music, etc. In yet another embodiment, smart device 300 may compute a risk tolerance threshold based upon user demographics, such as whether the user is disabled, elderly, etc. When the computed risk value reaches a risk tolerance threshold, risk analyzer module 350 generates alert 380 that may be, for example, an audible alert and/or a visual alert that displays a graphical depiction of the risk and risk reduction options (e.g., displaying bus route locations, calling 911, etc., see FIG. 6 and corresponding text for further details).”; Claim 3, “… wherein the set of area parameters include one or more historical crime statistics, and wherein at least one of the one or more historical crime statistics is selected from the group consisting of a crime type, a crime time, a crime location, and a victim demographic.”; Claim 4, “… identifying a risk avoidance distance included in the one or more user preferences; determining that one or more risk areas are located within the risk avoidance distance from the current location, wherein the one or more risk areas are identified based upon the one or more historical crime statistics; and displaying the current location and the one or more risk areas located within the risk avoidance distance.”; and Claim 5, “… determining whether a time-based risk corresponds to the risk area by comparing a current time with one or more of the crime times included in the historical crime statistics; determining whether a demographic-based risk corresponds to the user by comparing one or more user demographics included in the user preferences to the one or more victim demographics; and utilizing the time-based risk and the demographic-based risk during the calculation of the risk value.”; See also C8L18-25).
Therefore, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, it would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art to have included determining, by the computer system, whether the first electronic device satisfies the threshold distance from the event location, and whether a time period between the first time and the second time satisfies a threshold period of time; and where the location satisfies the threshold distance and the threshold period of time, transmitting, by the computer system to the first electronic device, the safety notification regarding the event, as disclosed by Bell in the system disclosed by deCharms, for the advantage of providing a method/system of transmitting a safety notification, with the ability to increase efficiency and effectiveness of the system/ method by incorporating a variety of trigger limits to control the type and quantity of safety notifications a user receives (decreasing the chances of information overload) (See KSR [127 S Ct. at 1739] “The combination of familiar elements according to known methods is likely to be obvious when it does no more than yield predictable results.”).
As per Claims 2 (1) and 13 (12), deCharms discloses wherein the event comprises one of a crime, traffic, emergency, or weather (See at least Para 0191-0196, Para 0260).
As per Claims 3-8 and 14-19, all of the claims depend on either Claim 2 or Claim 13 respectively, and under Broad Reasonable Interpretation (BRI) of claims 2 and 13, either traffic, emergency, and/or weather are selected as the event disclosed in the method/ system (See at least Para 0282). Therefore, the sited prior art of deCharms reads on the invention as disclosed by Applicant in Claims 3-11 and 14-19.
As per Claims 3 (2) and 14 (13), deCharms discloses wherein the event comprises a crime, the event data comprises crime data, and the event location comprises a crime location (See at least Para 0191-0196).
As per Claims 4 (1) and 15 (12), deCharms discloses wherein the session information includes geolocation data (See at least Para 0280).
As per Claim 5 (3), deCharms discloses wherein the crime data is received from a public database (See at least Para 0147-0148; See also Para 0191-0196, Para 0247).
As per Claims 6 (3) and 16 (14), deCharms discloses wherein the safety notification comprises at least one of a distance, a type of crime, recommended safety precaution, or elapsed time since the crime (See at least Para 0191-0196, Para 0260, Para 0284).
As per Claim 7 (3), deCharms discloses determining a distance between the crime location and the location; and wherein transmitting the safety notification is based at least in part on the distance being less than the threshold distance (See at least Para 0191-0196, Para 0260, Para 0284).
As per Claim 8 (7), Ding discloses wherein the threshold distance is based at least in part on at least one of a type of the crime or severity of the crime (See at least Para 0191-0196, Para 0260, Para 0284).
As per Claim 17 (14), deCharms discloses wherein: the memory comprises additional computer-executable instructions and the processor is further configured to determine a distance between the crime location and the location; transmitting the safety notification is based at least in part on the distance being less than the threshold distance; and the threshold distance is based at least in part on at least one of a type and severity of crime of the crime (See at least Para 0191-0196, Para 0260, Para 0284).
As per Claim 19 (14), deCharms discloses wherein the crime data comprises a time of the crime; the memory comprises additional computer-executable instructions and the processor is further configured to: determine a period of time between determining the location and the time of the crime; and transmit the safety notification comprises transmitting the safety notification when the period of time is less than a threshold period of time (See at least Para 0194).
As per Claim 23 (1), deCharms discloses wherein the session information includes location information provided as an input in the data transfer session (See at least Para 0280).
As per new Claim 25, deCharms discloses wherein determining the threshold distance includes adjusting the threshold distance based at least in part on the severity (Para 0260 and 0284-0286).
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 11 and 24 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.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments filed on 5/22/2026, with respect to Claims 1-8, 12-17, 19-20, 23, and 25, have been considered but are moot based on the new grounds of rejection.
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.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure can be found in the PTO-892 Notice of References Cited. The Examiner suggests the applicant review all of these documents before submitting any amendments.
White et al. (US 8,219,110 B1) – See at least C6L5-24, “In addition to alerting events to mobile devices based on geographical location, alert messages may be sent based on time periods spent by mobile users in a particular geographical location. For example, alert messages may be sent only to mobile devices that have passed through or are registered with a service provider site within a certain period of time. Examples of periods of time include months, weeks, days, hours, minutes, and the like. In this way, alerts may be sent to mobile devices that are within the reach of a service provider site for a specific period of time. For example, if an accident occurred in a particular geographical location half an hour ago, alert messages may be sent to mobile device that have passed through or are registered with a service provider site located within a certain distance of the event for the past half hour, such that mobile users in the vicinity of the accident may take preventative action to avoid the scene. In order to identify mobile devices based on a period of time, it is preferable to store mobile identification numbers (MINs) associated with each service provider site for a period of time in the service provider site, a repository, or a database.”.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JONATHAN P OUELLETTE whose telephone number is (571)272-6807. The examiner can normally be reached on M-F 8am-6pm.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Lynda C Jasmin, can be reached at telephone number (571) 272-6782. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300.
Information regarding the status of an application may be obtained from Patent Center. Status information for published applications may be obtained from Patent Center. Status information for unpublished applications is available through Patent Center for authorized users only. Should you have questions about access to Patent Center, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free).
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) Form at https://www.uspto.gov/patents/uspto-automated- interview-request-air-form.
June 29, 2026
/JONATHAN P OUELLETTE/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3629
Prosecution Insights