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 .
Response to Arguments
Please see Lapstun (20170195569) which teaches in pars. 349-350 and 359-361 overlapping a desired amount in a sequency of images. These share part of their content. There are defined spatial frequency ins pars. 459-461.
Applicant’s argument with regard to directly processing is not persuasive. Under the broadest reasonable interpretation, working on image reads on directly working the image. Applicant should amend the claims so that “directly” to have a meaning more than its ordinary meaning.
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 and 3-10 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over
Chen (10373335) in view of Lapstun (20170195569).
Regarding claim 1, Chen discloses determinate indoor environment by means of artificial intelligence, comprising: creation and storage of a data set of images, each uniquely associated with a respective label which defines a position of acquisition thereof in said environment (col. 9, lines 20-26);
training of at least one neural network of a processing unit which, at input, is supplied with associations of images and labels of said stored data set, in order to teach it to recognize and determine a relationship between image and position (col. 7, lines 5-30, back-propagation);
reception of an image acquired by a user by means of an image acquisition unit inside said environment (col. 7 lines 45-65, camera);
processing of the image received by means of said at least one neural network in order to recognize and identify, on the basis of said stored data set, the position corresponding with higher probability to the position of acquisition (col. 7 lines 50-65);
communication of said position identified to the user (col. 8 line 60 to col. 9 line 6).
Lapstun teaches in pars. 349-350 and 359-361 overlapping a desired amount in a sequency of images. These share part of their content. There are defined spatial frequency ins pars. 459-461.
It would have been obvious prior to the effective filing date of the invention to one of ordinary skill in the art to include in Chen the ability to capture overlapped images at defined intervals as taught by Lapstun. The reason is to allow a successive capture of images.
Regarding claim 3, see col. 7 lines 29-46.
Regarding claim 4, see col. 7 lines 10-15.
Regarding claim 5, see col. 8 line 60 to col. 9 line 6, automatically creating an new label.
Regarding claim 6, see col. 5 lines 18-35.
Regarding claim 7, see the rejection of claims 1-2 and col. 5 lines 18-35.
Regarding claims 8-9, see figure 1.
Regarding claim 10, see the rejection of claim 2.
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 HADI AKHAVANNIK whose telephone number is (571)272-8622. The examiner can normally be reached 9 AM - 5 PM Monday to Friday.
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, Henok Shiferaw can be reached at (571) 272-4637. 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.
/HADI AKHAVANNIK/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2676