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and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114.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 10/30/2025 has been entered.
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:
“temperature detection unit” in claim 1,
“body temperature estimation unit” in claim 1,
“notification unit”, in claim 1,
“thermometer selection unit”, in claim 9,
“detection direction change unit”, in claim 10,
“disinfection execution unit”, in claim 11,
“temperature learning unit”, in claim 12.
Because these claim limitations are being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, they are being interpreted to cover the corresponding structure described in the specification as performing the claimed function, and equivalents thereof.
Claim 1: Page 3, lines 17-18, temperature detection unit is an infrared camera; Page 10, lines 28-29, temperature detection unit can also be a radiation thermometer.
Claim 1: Page 5, lines 32-34, the CPU executes the control program, functioning as a body temperature estimation unit.
Claim 1: Page 5, lines 32-34, the CPU executes the control program, functioning as a notification unit.
Claim 9: Page 11, lines 23-25, temperature measurement control unit functions as a thermometer selection unit, wherein temperature measurement control unit is part of the control unit 30 (See Fig. 5), which includes a CPU, ROM, and RAM (Page 5, lines 27-29).
Claim 10: Page 11, lines 23-25, temperature measurement control unit functions as a detection direction change unit, wherein the temperature measurement control unit, is the control unit 30, Page 10, lines 35-36, that includes a CPU, memory, and an interface with peripheral circuit, Page 5, lines 27-32.
Claim 11: Page 5, lines 32-34, the CPU executes the control program, functioning as a disinfection execution unit.
Claim 12: Fig. 1, Ref. 310, temperature learning unit is part of the control unit, Ref. 30, which includes a CPU, ROM, and RAM (Page 5, lines 27-29).
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.
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.
Claim(s) 1-3, 5-8, 11, and 15 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over JP2017029219A to “Rikimi”, in view of US2013/0342691A1 to Lewis et al. “Lewis”, further in view of US2019/0030195A1 to Hatti et al. “Hatti”, and further in view of US20190086890 to Bradley et al. “Bradley”.
Regarding claims 1, 5, and 15, Rikimi teaches a body temperature monitoring system (Page 1, Paragraph 0001, line 18) with
a temperature detection unit (Page 8, Paragraph 0017, line 296, plurality of small infrared cameras 20) configured to detect a body surface temperature of the user (Page 8, Paragraph 0019, infrared camera 20 outputs radiation temperature of the face, which reads on a body surface temperature);
a notification unit configured to make a notification of high body temperature warning information (Page 5, Paragraph 0010, line 17, “the body temperature data processing unit detects feverish patients from the body temperature data output by the image data processing unit and displays their seat positions on the seat monitors installed in the flight attendant station, and also displays on the seat monitors the body temperature history of the feverish patient while on the aircraft and the entry and exit history data of the feverish patient”) when the body temperature of the user is equal to or higher than a predetermined temperature (Page 9, Paragraph 0020; “38 degrees or higher”, which infers 38 degrees Celsius, since this is a Japanese patent application), the high body temperature warning information indicating that the body temperature of the user is equal to or higher than the predetermined temperature (Page 5, Paragraph 0010 and Page 9, Paragraph 0020, wherein the body temperature data processing unit detects the feverish patients from the body temperature data output, and displays the position and temperature of the patient to the flight attendant station, wherein the condition for a fever is a rise in temperature to 38 degrees or higher).
However, Rikimi does not explicitly teach a body temperature estimation unit configured to estimate a body temperature of the user based on the body surface temperature.
Lewis teaches a similar field of endeavor of using a monitoring system to capture thermal images (Abstract) to determine the body temperature based on radiometric data from the thermal image pixels (Paragraph 0179). Lewis teaches a singular camera housing (See Fig. 14, Ref. 1420; Paragraphs 197-98) with an infrared imaging module (Fig. 14, Ref. 1402) to obtain radiometric properties, such as surface temperature (Paragraph 0208) and determine, via a processor 1208, approximate body or core temperature of a human body by analyzing the radiometric data from the thermal image pixels (Paragraph 0179), wherein the processor 1208 would read on a body temperature estimation unit. Lewis additionally discloses the camera housing also contains a visible light module (Fig. 14, Ref. 1406).
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Rikimi’s invention, wherein a body temperature estimation unit is configured to estimate a body temperature of the user based on the body surface temperature, as taught by Lewis, in order to have a more accurate temperature since body surface temperature in other parts of the skin, not close to the tear duct regions, are less stable, and are affected by ambient temperature (Lewis, Paragraph 0179).
However, the modification of Rikimi and Lewis do not disclose the temperature detection unit is located in an airplane lavatory.
.
Hatti teaches a similar Hatti teaches in a similar field of endeavor of an aircraft cabin system that includes an IR video camera (Paragraph 0018). Hatti teaches the sensor may be an IR video camera adapted to detect a person’s body temperature to detect the presence of a person and to identify raised body temperature associated with possible illness (Paragraph 0018). Hattie further teaches the video camera can be installed in the lavatory of the airplane (Paragraphs 0034, 0044).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the system as described by Rikimi, wherein the body monitoring system of Rikimi, and more specifically the infrared camera, is install in the lavatory of the airplane, as taught by Hatti, in order to detect the presence of person in the area (i.e. lavatory) and identify raised body temperature associated with possible illness (Paragraphs 0017 and 0018).
However, the modifications of Rikimi, Lewis, and Hatti do not teach that the IR video camera is located around a mirror from an opposite side of the mirror as the user.
Bradley teaches an intelligent mirror (Paragraph 0125), that is in a bathroom (Paragraph 0043), that includes a sensor 102 that is a temperature mapping device such as an infrared camera (Paragraph 0129, see also Fig. 11A). Further, Bradly teaches a support housing with a mirror interface 120, as seen in Figs. 14A and 14B, (Paragraph 0133) for the intelligent mirror. The support housing, also includes a sensor module 121 that contains the sensors for the mirror assembly 101 (Paragraph 0134). It appears that Figs. 14A and 14B are the back side of the mirror assembly 101, and therefore sensor module 121 with the sensors would be behind the mirror, directly opposite where a person would stand when looking into the mirror (See Fig. 11A in conjunction with Figs. 14A and 14B).
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the system as described by Rikimi, Lewis, and Hatti, wherein the IR video camera is located around a mirror in a bathroom, from an opposite side of the mirror as the user as taught by Bradley, in order to house the sensor along with the other control modules inside a support or mounting housing of the mirror (Bradley, Paragraph 0133), such that the mirror can detect a heat signature (Bradley, Paragraph 0129) of the user to determine abnormalities (Bradley, Paragraph 0127).
Regarding claim 2, the modifications of Rikimi, Lewis, Hatti, and Bradley disclose all the features of claim 1 above.
As disclosed in the claim 1 rejection above, Rikimi teaches wherein the notification unit is configured to notify the user of the high body temperature warning information (Page 5, Paragraph 0010, line 17, “the body temperature data processing unit detects feverish patients from the body temperature data output by the image data processing unit and displays their seat positions on the seat monitors installed in the flight attendant station, and also displays on the seat monitors the body temperature history of the feverish patient while on the aircraft and the entry and exit history data of the feverish patient”).
Regarding claim 3, the modifications of Rikimi, Lewis, Hatti, and Bradley disclose all the features of claim 1 above, including the mirror system in the lavatory of the airplane.
As disclosed in the claim 1 rejection above, both Rikimi and Hatti teaches the infrared cameras are placed throughout the airplane (Rikimi, Page 8, Paragraph 0017, line 296, small infrared cameras 20 is attached to the backs of seats 10 inside an aircraft; wherein the passengers are seated in the plurality of seats 10 as shown in Fig. 1, Ref. 40; Hatti, lavatory, Paragraphs 0034, 0044).
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to understand that the infrared camera in the lavatory would be used by the unspecified number of passengers, represented by the plurality of seats on the airplane, as disclosed by Rikimi, Fig. 1, Ref. 40).
Rikimi further teaches the notification unit is configured to notify a crew of the moving body of the high body temperature warning information (“the body temperature data processing unit detects feverish patients from the body temperature data output by the image data processing unit and displays their seat positions on the seat monitors installed in the flight attendant station, and also displays on the seat monitors the body temperature history of the feverish patient while on the aircraft and the entry and exit history data of the feverish patient”, Page 5, Paragraph 0010, line 179).
Regarding claim 6, the modifications of Rikimi, Lewis, Hatti, and Bradley disclose all the features of claim 5 above.
Lewis teaches wherein the body temperature estimation unit is configured to identify the head of the user on an image of the infrared camera and estimate the body temperature based on a body surface temperature at a specific portion of the head of the user (Paragraph 0179, locate and track face of infant, and obtain radiometric data from the thermal image pixels that correspond to the face, and more specifically to the tear duct regions; Paragraph 0179, processor 1208 in this embodiment may be configured to detect and track tear duct regions 1339 (e.g., inside corners of the eyes) as shown in FIG. 13, and determine an approximate body temperature by analyzing the radiometric data (e.g., temperature data) associated with thermal image pixels that correspond to the detected tear duct regions 1339).
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the system as described by Rikimi, Lewis, Hatti, and Bradley, wherein the body temperature estimation unit is configured to identify the head of the user on an image of the infrared camera and estimate the body temperature based on a body surface temperature at a specific portion of the head of the user, as taught by Lewis, in order to have a more accurate temperature since body surface temperature in other parts of the skin, not close to the tear duct regions, are less stable, and are affected by ambient temperature (Lewis, Paragraph 0179).
Regarding claim 7, the modifications of Rikimi, Lewis, Hatti, and Bradley disclose all the features of claim 5 above.
Lewis teaches the body temperature estimation unit is configured to extract body surface temperatures at a plurality of locations on a body surface of the user from an image of the infrared camera (See Fig. 13, thermal image showing distinct regions of temperature, corresponding to the eyes, Ref. 1336, oronasal region, Ref. 1337, and tear duct, Ref. 1339, also see Paragraph 0175; infrared imaging module 1202, Paragraph 0161, used to capture and process infrared/thermal images, Paragraph 0163; Processor 1208, analyzes, aggregates, and averages the temperature data of the face from the thermal image, Paragraph 0179, and thus must include extracting the body surface temperature from thermal image before the processing of analyzing, aggregating, and averaging can occur) and estimating the body temperature based on an average value of the body surface temperatures at the plurality of locations (Paragraph 0179, averaging the temperature data associated with the thermal image, which includes the different regions as shown in Fig. 13, to obtain an approximate body temperature).
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the system as described by Rikimi, Lewis, Hatti, and Bradley, wherein the body temperature estimation unit is configured to extract body surface temperatures at a plurality of locations on a body surface of the user from an image of the infrared camera and estimating the body temperature based on an average value of the body surface temperatures at the plurality of locations, as taught by Lewis, in order to normalize the extracted surface body temperature and minimize the effect of outlier data points.
Regarding claim 8, the modifications of Rikimi, Lewis, Hatti, and Bradley disclose all the features of claim 1 above.
Rikimi teaches the infrared camera 20 measures and outputs the radiation temperature (Page 8, Paragraph 0019). Using broadest reasonable interpretation, this reads on a radiation thermometer.
Regarding claim 11, the modifications of Rikimi, Lewis, Hatti, and Bradley disclose all the features of claim 1 above.
Hatti teaches in a similar field of endeavor of an aircraft cabin disinfection system (Title). Hatti teaches using a controller to actuate one or more UVC radiation sources to disinfect the cabin, in a selected zone based on sensor data (Paragraph 0004). Hatti teaches the sensor may be an IR video camera adapted to detect a person’s body temperature to detect the presence of a person and to identify raised body temperature associated with possible illness (Paragraph 0018), which would read on identifying when the body temperature of the user is higher than a predetermined temperature since identifying a raised body temperature would infer a baseline or threshold from which the temperature is raised. Hatti further teaches wherein all the monitored parameters are assessed by the controller to disinfect one or more zones, or part zone of the aircraft cabin (Paragraph 0055) wherein the monitored parameters include temperature (Paragraph 0054), and the zones or partial zones include a lavatory (Paragraph 0034) wherein the UVC radiation source for disinfecting can be installed inside the lavatory (Paragraph 0034).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the system as described by Rikimi, Lewis, Hatti, and Bradley, wherein the system includes a disinfection execution unit configured to perform at least a disinfection of a portion that may have been touched by the user when the body temperature of the user is equal to or higher than the predetermined temperature, as taught by Hatti, in order to disinfect areas of the aircraft such as the lavatory (Paragraph 0013) that has been occupied by a sick passenger (Paragraph 0052). Although, Hatti does not explicitly disclose a mirror, one of ordinary skill in the art would understand that mirrors are commonly found in commercial airplane lavatory, and thus disinfecting the whole zone within the lavatory would include portions that the sick passenger has touched.
Claim(s) 4 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Rikimi, in view of Lewis, further in view of Hatti, and further in view of Bradley, as applied to claim 3 above, and further in view of US2016/0275260A1 to Nguyen et al. “Nguyen”.
Regarding claim 4, the modifications of Rikimi, Lewis, Hatti, and Bradley disclose all the features of claim 3 above.
However, the modifications of Rikimi, Lewis, Hatti, and Bradley do not disclose wherein the notification unit is configured to transmit the high body temperature warning information to a communication device installed at a place of arrival of the moving body.
Nguyen teaches wherein the notification unit is configured to transmit the high body temperature warning information to a communication device installed at a place of arrival of the moving body (Paragraph 0137, the data about the person is sent to the on-ground medical center, the data may include at least one of medical data, physiological data, mental health data or other personal data about the person; wherein sending the data about the person to the on-ground medical center infers that the on-ground medical center includes a communication device for receiving the data; Paragraph 0134, wherein the on-ground medical center is near the airport that is a destination of the flight route; wherein the medical data and physiological data is the temperature of a person, Paragraph 0126, with symptoms of a fever, Paragraph 0075).
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the system as described Rikimi, Lewis, Hatti, and Bradley, the notification unit is configured to transmit the high body temperature warning information to a communication device installed at a place of arrival of the moving body, as taught by Nguyen, in order to allow the on-ground medical center to provide treatment to the person based on the received medical and physiological data.
Claim(s) 9 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Rikimi, in view of Lewis, further in view of Hatti, and further in view of Bradley, as applied to claim 8 above, and further in view of KR101751677B1 to “Jae”, and further in view of CN108344525A to Zheng et al. “Zheng”.
Regarding claim 9, the modifications of Rikimi, Lewis, Hatti, and Bradley disclose all the features of claim 8 above, including a radiation thermometer.
As disclosed in the claim 1 rejection above, Lewis teaches a visible light camera module.
However, the modifications of Rikimi, Lewis, Hatti, and Bradley do not disclose a plurality of radiation thermometers are disposed around the mirror.
Jae teaches a similar mirror system with a plurality of body temperature measurement devices for measuring body temperature (See Fig. 3, mirror, Ref. 10; Page 21-22, Paragraph 0048, line 885, 893, temperature measuring device 30a and 30b), wherein the temperature measuring device are thermal imaging cameras with infrared array sensors (Page 13, Paragraph 0031, lines 530, 538). This reads on a plurality of radiation thermometers are disposed around the mirror.
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the system as described by Rikimi, Lewis, Hatti, and Bradley, the plurality of radiation thermometers are disposed around the mirror, as taught by Jae, so that a range of regions in front of the mirror can be accounted for (through different field of view of the temperature measurement device) to make the temperature measurements (See Page 22, Paragraph 0049).
However, the modifications of Rikimi, Lewis, Hatti, Bradley, and Jae do not disclose a thermometer selection unit configured to select, among the plurality of radiation thermometers, a radiation thermometer to be used for detecting the body surface temperature based on an image of the visible light camera.
Zheng teaches a similar temperature measurement system (adaptive body temperature monitoring system, Paragraph 0006), with image acquisition device(s) (such as Figs. 2 and 7, Ref. 100), that reads on a visible light camera, to acquire images of the monitored area and the monitored objects (Paragraph 0008), and determining the positions (Paragraph 0008), key facial features and facial posture (Paragraph 0009) of the monitored objects. Zeng additionally teaches multiple infrared thermometers 200, and according to the current position of the monitored object and the direction of its face, a suitable infrared thermometer 200 is selected to measure its available temperature measurement area (Paragraph 0131). The steps of the method are carried out by a server (Paragraph 0065), and since the current position and direction of the face of the monitored object (i.e. the facial posture) is determined from the image acquired from the image acquisition device 100, the server would read on the claimed thermometer selection unit configured to select among the plurality of radiation thermometers, a radiation thermometer to be used for detecting the body surface temperature based on an image of the visible light camera.
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the system as described by Rikimi, Lewis, Hatti, Bradley, and Jae, wherein the system includes a thermometer selection unit configured to select, among the plurality of radiation thermometers, a radiation thermometer to be used for detecting the body surface temperature based on an image of the visible light camera, as taught by Zheng, in order to provide greater freedom and comprehensiveness in capturing the body temperature of an object/person (Zheng, Paragraph 0131).
Claim(s) 10 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Rikimi, in view of Lewis, further in view of Hatti, and further in view of Bradley, as applied to claim 8 above, and further in view of Zheng.
Regarding claim 10, the modifications of Rikimi, Lewis, Hatti, and Bradley disclose all the features of claim 8 above, including a radiation thermometer.
As disclosed in the claim 1 rejection above, Lewis teaches a visible light camera module.
However, the modifications of Rikimi, Lewis, Hatti, and Bradley do not disclose wherein the radiation thermometer comprises an oscillating mechanism that can change a temperature detection direction, and a detection direction change unit configured to change the temperature detection direction of the radiation thermometer based on an image of a visible light camera.
Zheng teaches wherein the radiation thermometer comprises an oscillating mechanism that can change a temperature detection direction (a mechanical control device, Paragraph 0063; adaptive body temperature system includes a mechanical control device for controlling the rotation of the temperature measuring head of the infrared thermometer, Paragraph 0092).
Zheng further teaches a detection direction change unit (server in communication with the mechanical control device, Paragraphs 0065, 0092) configured to change the temperature detection direction of the radiation thermometer based on an image of the visible light camera (Paragraph 0121, collecting images of the selected monitored object, wherein the images are obtained from the image acquisition device, Paragraphs 0008, 0085, that reads on visible light camera; determine the position of the monitored object from the image and determines the facial posture of the monitored object in the image according to the position of the key facial features in the head image, Paragraphs 0065, 0085, 0086; adjusting the scanning angle of the infrared thermometer so that the temperature measuring head of the infrared thermometer is aligned with the available temperature measuring area of the monitored object, Paragraph 0089, wherein the adjusting is performed by mechanical control device, Paragraph 0092).
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the system as described by Rikimi, Lewis, Hatti, and Bradley, wherein the radiation thermometer comprises an oscillating mechanism that can change a temperature detection direction, and a detection direction change unit configured to change the temperature detection direction of the radiation thermometer based on an image of the visible light camera, as taught by Zheng, in order to align the available temperature measuring area of the monitored objected (i.e. such as the face of a person) with the measuring head of the temperature measuring device (Paragraph 00067).
Claim(s) 12 and 14 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Rikimi, in view of Lewis, further in view of Hatti, and further in view of Bradley, as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of US2007/0153871A1 to “Fraden”.
Regarding claim 12, the modifications of Rikimi, Lewis, Hatti, and Bradley disclose all the features of claim 1 above.
However, the modifications of Rikimi, Lewis, Hatti, and Bradley do not disclose a temperature learning unit configured to separately set the predetermined temperature based on at least one of an age, a body type, a gender, a race, an ambient temperature, an eating history, and a body temperature history of the user.
Fraden teaches a temperature learning unit (see claim language of claim 1, “fever threshold generator”; Paragraph 0033, computational means 25 that incorporates a threshold generator) configured to separately set the predetermined temperature based on at least one of an age, a body type, a gender, a race, an ambient temperature, an eating history, and a body temperature history of the user (Paragraph 0044, skin fever threshold is adjusted by the ambient temperature Ta; claim language of claim 4, fever threshold generator generates a threshold in relation to ambient temperature).
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the system as described by Rikimi, Lewis, Hatti, and Bradley, wherein the system includes a temperature learning unit configured to separately set the predetermined temperature based on at least one of an age, a body type, a gender, a race, an ambient temperature, an eating history, and a body temperature history of the user, as taught by Fraden, in order to improve the accuracy of detection (Paragraph 0044) of detecting a fever (Paragraph 0043).
Regarding claim 14, the modifications of Rikimi, Lewis, Hatti, Bradley, and Fraden disclose all the features of claim 12 above.
Fraden teaches wherein the ambient temperature is determined based on an air conditioning set temperature or a temperature obtained from a thermometer (Paragraph 0044, skin fever threshold is adjusted by the ambient temperature Ta; claim language of claim 4, fever threshold generator generates a threshold in relation to ambient temperature; wherein the ambient temperature is of an air conditioned room set to a range from 20 to 22°C, Paragraph 0026).
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the system as described by Rikimi, Lewis, Hatti, Bradley, and Fraden, wherein the ambient temperature is determined based on an air conditioning set temperature or a temperature obtained from a thermometer, as taught by Fraden, in order to perform the fever detection such that everyone undergoes the same procedure, and is at least initially subjected to the same ambient temperatures.
Claim(s) 13 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Rikimi, in view of Lewis, further in view of Hatti, further in view of Bradley, and further in view of Fraden, as applied to claim 12 above, and further in view of US2015/0265159A1 to Lane et al. “Lane”.
Regarding claim 13, the modifications of Rikimi, Lewis, Hatti, Bradley, and Fraden disclose all the features of claim 12 above.
As disclosed in the As disclosed in the claim 1 rejection above, Lewis teaches a visible light camera module.
However, Lewis does not teach wherein at least one of the age, the body type, the gender, and the race of the user is estimated based on an image of the user captured by a visible light camera.
Lane teaches wherein at least one of the age, the body type, the gender, and the race of the user is estimated based on an image of the user captured by a visible light camera configured to capture an image (Paragraph 0027, images from imaging device 15 may be used by the image processor to determine a distance between a first location and a second location, and a distance between a second location and a third location on a patient’s face to determine a length, width, height, or any other dimension related to the patient, and one or more such attributes may be used to determine the age, gender, ethnicity of the patient).
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the system as described by Rikimi, Lewis, Hatti, Bradley, and Fraden, wherein at least one of the age, the body type, the gender, and the race of the user is estimated based on an image of the user captured by a visible light camera, as taught by Lane, in order to automatically select the one or more algorithms , look-up tables, neural networks, and/or other like temperature termination components or protocols for use (Lane, Paragraph 0027).
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to claim(s) 1-15 have been considered but are moot because the new ground of rejection does not rely on any reference applied in the prior rejection of record for any teaching or matter specifically challenged in the argument. Examiner notes that although the majority of the prior art used have been previously presented, previous primary prior art to Hirota is no longer used, and Rikimi is now used as the primary prior art. Since applicant’s arguments filed on 10/30/2025 is directed to Hirota and combining with the various other prior art, these arguments are moot.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Milton Truong whose telephone number is (571)272-2158. The examiner can normally be reached 9AM - 5PM, MON-FRI.
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, Keith Raymond can be reached at (571) 270-1790. 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.
/MT/Examiner, Art Unit 3798
/KEITH M RAYMOND/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3798