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 Application
Claims 1-18 are pending.
Claims 1, 16, and 17 are independent.
Claims 1, 5, 13, 16, and 17 have been amended.
This FINAL is in response to communications received 30 March 2026.
Response to Amendment/Remarks
With respect to Applicant’s remarks filed 30 March 2026, Applicant’s “Amendments and Remarks” have been fully considered and were not wholly persuasive. Applicant’s remarks will be addressed in sequential order as they were presented.
With respect to claim objections, Applicant’s “Amendments and Remarks” have been fully considered and are persuasive. Therefore, the objection to the Claims is withdrawn.
With respect to claim rejections under 35 U.S.C. 101, Applicant’s “Amendments and Remarks” have been fully considered and are not persuasive. Therefore, the rejection is maintained. The claims encompass making a user estimate/guess their position when it can be performed on pen and paper or mentally.
With respect to claim rejections under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, second paragraph, Applicant’s “Amendments and Remarks” have been fully considered and are persuasive. Therefore, the rejection is withdrawn.
With respect to claim rejections under 35 U.S.C. 102 and/or 35 U.S.C. 103, Applicant’s “Amendments and Remarks” have been fully considered and is persuasive. Therefore, the rejection is withdrawn. However, upon further consideration, a new ground(s) of rejection is made in view of new interpretations of previously applied prior art.
Final Office Action
Claim Interpretation
During examination, claims are given the broadest reasonable interpretation consistent with the specification and limitations in the specification are not read into the claims. See MPEP §2111, MPEP §2111.01 and In re Yamamoto et al., 222 USPQ 934 10 (Fed. Cir. 1984). Under a broadest reasonable interpretation, words of the claim must be given their plain meaning, unless such meaning is inconsistent with the specification. See MPEP 2111.01 (I). It is further noted it is improper to import claim limitations from the specification, i.e., a particular embodiment appearing in the written description may not be read into a claim when the claim language is broader than the embodiment. See 15 MPEP 2111.01 (II).
A first exception to the prohibition of reading limitations from the specification into the claims is when the Applicant for patent has provided a lexicographic definition for the term. See MPEP §2111.01 (IV). Following a review of the claims in view of the specification herein, the Office has found that Applicant has not provided any lexicographic definitions, either expressly or implicitly, for any claim terms or phrases with any reasonable clarity, deliberateness and precision. Accordingly, the Office concludes that Applicant has not acted as his/her own lexicographer.
A second exception to the prohibition of reading limitations from the specification into the claims is when the claimed feature is written as a means-plus-function. See 35 U.S.C. §112(f) and MPEP §2181-2183. As noted in MPEP §2181, a three-prong test is used to determine the scope of a means-plus-function limitation in a claim:
(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"
(C) the term "means" or "step" or the generic placeholder is not modified by sufficient structure, material, or acts for performing the claimed function.
The Office has found herein that the claims do not contain limitations of means or means type language that must be analyzed under 35 U.S.C. §112 (f).
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 101
35 U.S.C. 101 reads as follows:
Whoever invents or discovers any new and useful process, machine, manufacture, or composition of matter, or any new and useful improvement thereof, may obtain a patent therefor, subject to the conditions and requirements of this title.
Claims 1-18 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 101 because the claimed invention is directed to an abstract idea without significantly more.
101 Analysis – Step 1
Claim 1 is directed to an apparatus (information processing device). Therefore, Claim 1 is within at least one of the four statutory categories.
Claim 16 is directed to a process (method). Therefore, Claim 16 is within at least one of the four statutory categories.
Claim 17 is directed to an apparatus (computer). Therefore, Claim 17 is within at least one of the four statutory categories.
101 Analysis – Step 2A, Prong I
Regarding Prong I of the Step 2A analysis in the 2019 PEG, the claims are to be analyzed to determine whether they recite subject matter that falls within one of the follow groups of abstract ideas: a) mathematical concepts, b) certain methods of organizing human activity, and/or c) mental processes.
Claims 1, 16 and 17 include limitations that recite an abstract idea (emphasized below) and Claim 16 will be used as a representative claim for the remainder of the 101 rejections.
Claim 16 recites: An information processing method performed by an information processing device including a sensor, a display, and at least one processor, the information processing method comprising:
measuring, by the sensor, a strength of a magnetic field or an electric field;
displaying, by the display, a target region;
specifying, by the at least one processor, a position of the information processing device in the target region displayed on the display;
detecting, by the at least one processor, a position of the information processing device in the target region based on an estimated position of the information processing device and the specified position of the information processing device;
and creating, by the at least one processor, distribution data to be displayed on the display indicating strengths of magnetic fields or electric fields at positions in the target region based on the strength of the magnetic field or the electric field measured by the sensor at each detected position of the information processing,
and storing the created distribution data on at least one non-transitory computer-readable storage medium,
wherein the estimated position of the information processing device is estimated according to a probability determined according to each previously specified position of the information processing device, a moving speed at each previously specified position, and a time associate with each previously specified position.
The examiner submits that the foregoing bolded limitation(s) constitute a “mental process” because under its broadest reasonable interpretation, the claim covers performance of the limitation in the human mind. Specifically, the “specifying, detecting, and creating” steps encompass a user to gather information on a source and to map the information. Accordingly, the claim recites at least one abstract idea.
101 Analysis – Step 2A, Prong II
Regarding Prong II of the Step 2A analysis in the 2019 PEG, the claims are to be analyzed to determine whether the claim, as a whole, integrates the abstract into a practical application. As noted in the 2019 PEG, it must be determined whether any additional elements in the claim beyond the abstract idea integrate the exception into a practical application in a manner that imposes a meaningful limit on the judicial exception. The courts have indicated that additional elements merely using a computer to implement an abstract idea, adding insignificant extra solution activity, or generally linking use of a judicial exception to a particular technological environment or field of use do not integrate a judicial exception into a “practical application.”
In the present case, the additional limitations beyond the above-noted abstract idea are as follows (where the underlined portions are the “additional limitations” while the bolded portions continue to represent the “abstract idea”):
For the following reason(s), the examiner submits that the above identified additional limitations do not integrate the above-noted abstract idea into a practical application.
Regarding the additional limitations of “information processing device” and “at least one processor”, the examiner submits that these limitations are an attempt to generally link additional elements to a technological environment. In particular, the “processor” is recited at a high level of generality and merely automates the measuring, displaying, specifying, detecting, and creating steps, therefore acting as a generic computer to perform the abstract idea. Additionally, the device is claimed generically and are operating in their ordinary capacity and do not use the judicial exception in a manner that imposes a meaningful limit on the judicial exception, such that the claim is more than a drafting effort designed to monopolize the exception. The additional limitations are no more than mere instructions to apply the exception using a processor. Furthermore, the examiner submits that the recitations of measuring data, displaying data, specifying a point on the data, detecting a point on the data, and creating a distribution of data is a mere definition that does not necessarily impose any meaningful limits on performing the steps in the human mind, as it only compares data where a user could in fact perform this mentally or using paper and pencil. In addition to that, the examiner submits that measuring data and displaying it are insignificant extra-solution activities that merely use a device to perform the process. In particular, the steps are recited at a high level of generality (i.e. as a general means of gathering data for use in the measuring/detecting step), and amounts to mere data gathering, which is a form of insignificant extra-solution activity.
Thus, taken alone, the additional elements do not integrate the abstract idea into a practical application. Further, looking at the additional limitation(s) as an ordered combination or as a whole, the limitation(s) add nothing that is not already present when looking at the elements taken individually. For instance, there is no indication that the additional elements, when considered as a whole, reflect an improvement in the functioning of a device or an improvement to another technology or technical field, apply or use the above-noted judicial exception to effect a particular treatment or prophylaxis for a disease or medical condition, implement/use the above-noted judicial exception with a particular machine or manufacture that is integral to the claim, effect a transformation or reduction of a particular article to a different state or thing, or apply or use the judicial exception in some other meaningful way beyond generally linking the use of the judicial exception to a particular technological environment, such that the claim as a whole is not more than a drafting effort designed to monopolize the exception (MPEP § 2106.05). Accordingly, the additional limitation(s) do/does not integrate the abstract idea into a practical application because it does not impose any meaningful limits on practicing the abstract idea.
101 Analysis – Step 2B
Regarding Step 2B of the 2019 PEG, representative independent Claim 16 does not include additional elements (considered both individually and as an ordered combination) that are sufficient to amount to significantly more than the judicial exception for the same reasons to those discussed above with respect to determining that the claim does not integrate the abstract idea into a practical application. As discussed above with respect to integration of the abstract idea into a practical application, the additional element of the apparatus, the device amounts to nothing more than applying the exception using a generic computer component. Generally applying an exception using a generic computer component cannot provide an inventive concept. And as discussed above, the additional limitations of measuring data and displaying data, the examiner submits that these limitations are insignificant extra-solution activities.
Further, a conclusion that an additional element is insignificant extra-solution activity in Step 2A should be re-evaluated in Step 2B to determine if they are more than what is well-understood, routine, conventional activity in the field. The additional limitations of receiving the data and determining errors are well-understood, routine, and conventional activities because the background recites that the sensors from which the data is acquired/received are all conventional sensors. MPEP 2106.05(d)(II), and the cases cited therein, including Intellectual Ventures I, LLC v. Symantec Corp., 838 F.3d 1307, 1321 (Fed. Cir. 2016), TLI Communications LLC v. AV Auto. LLC, 823 F.3d 607, 610 (Fed. Cir. 2016), and OIP Techs., Inc., v. Amazon.com, Inc., 788 F.3d 1359, 1363 (Fed. Cir. 2015), indicate that mere collection or receipt of data over a network is a well‐understood, routine, and conventional function when it is claimed in a merely generic manner. Hence, Claim 16 is not patent eligible.
Further Claims 1 and 17 are not patent eligible for the same reasons.
Dependent Claims 2-15 and 18 when analyzed as a whole, are held to be patent ineligible under 35 U.S.C. 101 because the additional recited limitation(s) fail(s) to establish that the claim(s) is/are not directed to an abstract idea. The additional elements, if any, in the dependent claims are not sufficient to amount to significantly more than the judicial exception for the same reasons as with Claims 1, 16, and 17.
Office Note: In order to overcome this rejection, the Office suggests further defining the limitations of the independent claims, for example linking the claimed subject matter to a non-generic device and controlling a position of a device/system capable of autonomous travel within a map. Limitations such as these suggested above would further bring the claimed subject matter out of the realm of abstract idea and into the realm of a statutory category.
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.
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.
Claims 1-10 and 15-18 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Haverinen (US 20130177208 A1) in view of Hong et al. (US 20140378166 A1), hereinafter Hong.
Regarding claim 1, Haverinen discloses:
An information processing device comprising (Fig. 2-5, measuring device and path planning/measurement; [0022], electromagnetic field (EMF) measuring device; [0035], sensor processing circuitry; [0033], memory may comprise information of the magnetic field map and the floor plan of the building, may also be used for storing measured values during the measurement path):
a sensor configured to measure a strength of a magnetic field or an electric field ([0022], device may comprise a magnetometer or any other sensor capable of measuring the EMF, in addition to the strength the magnetometer may be capable of determining a three-dimensional orientation of a measured EMF vector);
a display configured to display a target region ([0033], apparatus may comprise a cellular communication system, e.g. a computer (PC), a laptop, a tabloid computer, a cellular phone, a communicator, a smart phone, a palm computer, or any other communication device, memory may comprise information of the magnetic field map and the floor plan of the building);
and circuitry configured to ([0032], at least one processor and at least one memory including a computer program code; [0033], apparatus may comprise a combination of circuitries)
detect a position of the information processing device in the target region based on an estimated position of the information processing device and the specified position of the information processing device ([0036], location tracking (LT) circuitry may be responsible of facilitating the location discovery of a positioning device, may apply the generated EMF map and provide upon request part of the generated map to the positioning device to determine its location inside the building, may provide the entire map of the building to the positioning device, location estimate may be acquired from a non-magnetic field based system),
create distribution data to be displayed on the display, the distribution data indicating strengths of magnetic fields or electric fields at positions in the target region based on the strength of the magnetic field or the electric field measured by the sensor at each detected position of the information processing device detected by the detection unit ([0024], EMF vector measured by the positioning device may be compared to existing information, information may comprise EMF vector strength and direction in several locations within the building, positioning device may forward the measured EMF data to a database entity or server which has access to the EMF map and is capable to locate the user in the floor plan of the building; [0033], apparatus may comprise a cellular communication system, e.g. a computer (PC), a laptop, a tabloid computer, a cellular phone, a communicator, a smart phone, a palm computer, or any other communication device, memory may comprise information of the magnetic field map and the floor plan of the building),
wherein the estimated position of the information processing device is estimated according to a probability determined according to each previously specified position of the information processing device, a moving speed at each previously specified position, and a time associated with each previously specified position ([0027], the mapper may at a specific location measure the EMF vector, the measuring device may also determine parameters which affect the reliability measure, i.e. the uncertainty measure of the EMF vector; [0026], the EMF map advantageously describes not only the strength and direction of the magnetic field but also the uncertainty measure of the EMF vector at the specifc location; [0048], knowing the uncertainty for each map point is advantageous because then the algorithm used for location estimation may apply different weighting factors for different position hypothesis take the uncertainty into account; [0044], In an embodiment, the uncertainty measure for a location may be at least partly determined on the basis of time stamp of the at least one existing magnetic field vector measurement in the location. For example, when the previous EMF vector measurement for the location has been made a long time ago, the uncertainty measure may indicate that the EMF vector provided may not provide as accurate EMF vector values as if the previous EMF vector measurement had been made a short time ago. A short time in this context may be a week or even one month. A long time may refer to several months, for example; [0050], the IMU 422 may detect the movement of the person carrying the measuring device 400. This may advantageously allow the speed and direction of the person to be determined, thus resulting in determination of measuring device 400 location along the measurement path at a given time. Alternatively, an average speed determined from a measurement distance and measurement time may aid in locating the measuring device 400 along the measurement path at any given time. In yet another embodiment, the IMU 422 may detect the movement of the person so as to use the data as a fusion sensor data in location discovery/tracking which is based on EMF and on an inertial navigation system (INS) applying the IMU 422).
However, Haverinen does not specifically state:
specify a position of the information processing device in the target region displayed on the display,
and store the created distribution data on at least one non-transitory computer-readable storage medium,
Hong teaches:
specify a position of the information processing device in the target region displayed on the display ([0008], Since the location recognition by the GPS is impossible indoors, the reference location should be input manually. For example, the data collector collects data by displaying its location on an indoor map, and measuring and recording an RF signal, by itself. Necessary data can be automatically collected in an outdoor area where a GPS signal is received while a data collector moves with a vehicle, so that a database can be built within a relatively short time. However, since a reference location should be manually input in an area such as an indoor area where the GPS signal is not received, costs, such as time, manpower, etc., greatly increase for building of the database. Further, since location-based services provided in the indoor area rather than the outdoor area requires relatively accurate location information, data should be collected with respect to denser points within a service area, so that costs increase more. As a new RF signal is added, an existing RF signal is removed, or the location is changed, with a passing of time, the RF signal information requires continuous maintenance, so that costs continuously increase),
and store the created distribution data on at least one non-transitory computer-readable storage medium ([0014], In accordance with another aspect of the present invention, a server comprising a non-transitory machine-readable storage medium for storing a program for executing a method of implementing a location-based service within a building is provided; [0073], Further, the server 200 stores the generated RF signal map in an RF signal DB 250),
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to incorporate the teachings of Hong into the invention of Haverinen to include specifying a position of the device on a display as Hong discloses with a reasonable expectation of success. One would be motivated to incorporate aspects of the cited prior art to create a more robust system that can correct erroneous measurement data with user input data for estimating location and store mapped information. Additionally, the claimed invention is merely a combination of old, well-known elements of measuring changes in electromagnetic field to estimate a current location of a user device as disclosed by Haverinen and specifying a location of a user device on a map shown on a display of the user device as taught by Hong. The combination each element merely would have performed the same function as it did separately, and one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention would have recognized that the results of the combination would have been predictable.
Regarding claim 2, Haverinen in view of Hong teaches:
wherein the estimated position of the information processing device is estimated further according to sensor outputs of an acceleration sensor and an angular velocity sensor (Haverinen: [0033], there may be various other sensors or functional entities comprised in the measuring device which may include an inertial measurement unit (IMU), an odometer, a radio frequency identification (RFID), a GPS sensor, a radio frequency (RF) based location tracking sensor, at least one camera, for example; [0050], the IMU may comprise at least one acceleration sensor, gyroscope, angular velocity sensor).
Regarding claim 3, Haverinen in view of Hong teaches:
wherein the estimated position of the information processing device is obtained by estimating an amount of change in position from a predetermined reference position of the information processing device based on the sensor outputs of the acceleration sensor and the angular velocity sensor (Haverinen: [0033], there may be various other sensors or functional entities comprised in the measuring device which may include an inertial measurement unit (IMU), an odometer, a radio frequency identification (RFID), a GPS sensor, a radio frequency (RF) based location tracking sensor, at least one camera, for example; [0050], the IMU may comprise at least one acceleration sensor, gyroscope, angular velocity sensor, allow speed and a direction of the person to be determined, average speed determined by a measured distance and time may aid in locating the device along a measurement path at a given time; [0041], the IMU may provide information on the local motion of the measuring device).
Regarding claim 4, Haverinen in view of Hong teaches:
wherein the circuitry specifies the position of the information processing device when the information processing device moves in the target region and reaches a corner area (Haverinen: [0050], the IMU may comprise at least one acceleration sensor, gyroscope, angular velocity sensor, allow speed and a direction of the person to be determined, average speed determined by a measured distance and time may aid in locating the device along a measurement path at a given time; [0041], the IMU may provide information on the local motion of the measuring device; [0084], the floor plan of the building is known beforehand from a corresponding database, the floor plan may be formed by the measuring device as the EMF vectors are measured and movement data is acquired to indicate length of a moved segment and whether the measuring device turned along the segment, may aid to locate the cross corridors with respect to the new segments).
Regarding claim 5, Haverinen in view of Hong teaches:
wherein the circuitry specifies the position of the information processing device when the information processing device moves a predetermined distance in the target region (Haverinen: [0050], the IMU may comprise at least one acceleration sensor, gyroscope, angular velocity sensor, allow speed and a direction of the person to be determined, average speed determined by a measured distance and time may aid in locating the device along a measurement path at a given time; [0041], the IMU may provide information on the local motion of the measuring device).
Regarding claim 6, Haverinen in view of Hong teaches:
wherein the circuitry is further configured to correct the estimated position of the information processing device with the specified position of the information processing device specified by the input unit (Haverinen: Fig. 4-5, and 9, calibration and correction circuitry; [0033], a calibration and correction circuitry may be for performing calibration and/or correction related to the functions of the apparatus such as for the measurement of the EMF vector by the magnetometer).
Regarding claim 7, Haverinen in view of Hong teaches:
wherein the circuitry is further configured to correct the estimated position of the information processing device to the specified position of the information processing device by changing the specified position of the information processing device to the reference position (Haverinen: Fig. 4-5, and 9, calibration and correction circuitry; [0033], a calibration and correction circuitry may be for performing calibration and/or correction related to the functions of the apparatus such as for the measurement of the EMF vector by the magnetometer).
Regarding claim 8, Haverinen in view of Hong teaches:
wherein the circuitry is configured to control the display to display, in the displayed target region, a measurement path along which the information processing device is moved (Hong: [0018], In accordance with another aspect of the present invention, an electronic device for implementing a location-based service within a building is provided. The electronic device includes a communication unit configured to detect wireless signals and to perform data communication; a display unit configured to display a screen; a controller configured to generate at least one data set indicating information of wireless signals measured for each time or for each location within the building through the communication unit, to request data for calculating a location of the electronic device from the server through the communication unit, to receive the data for calculating the location of the electronic device from the server through the communication unit, to calculate the location of the electronic device based on the received data, and to provide a service based on the calculated location to a user through the display unit).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to incorporate the additional teachings of Hong into the invention of Haverinen as modified by Hong to include displaying a detected position of a user device as Hong discloses with a reasonable expectation of success. One would be motivated to incorporate aspects of the cited prior art to create a more robust system that can recognize a location of an electronic device (Hong: [0005]). Additionally, the claimed invention is merely a combination of old, well-known elements of measuring changes in electromagnetic field to estimate a current location of a user device as disclosed by Haverinen in view of Hong and showing a location of the user device on a display as taught by Hong. The combination each element merely would have performed the same function as it did separately, and one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention would have recognized that the results of the combination would have been predictable.
Regarding claim 9, Haverinen in view of Hong teaches:
wherein the circuitry is configured to control the display to display, in the displayed target region, a measurement path along which the information processing device is moved (Haverinen: Fig. 4, 6A, 6B, and 10; [0033], apparatus may comprise a cellular communication system, e.g. a computer (PC), a laptop, a tabloid computer, a cellular phone, a communicator, a smart phone, a palm computer, or any other communication device, memory may comprise information of the magnetic field map and the floor plan of the building, determine a measurement path or area which is to be measured).
Regarding claim 10, Haverinen in view of Hong teaches:
wherein the circuitry is further configured to control the display to display, in the displayed target region, a position of the information processing device to be specified when the information processing device reaches the position (Haverinen: Fig. 4, 6A, 6B, and 10; [0033], apparatus may comprise a cellular communication system, e.g. a computer (PC), a laptop, a tabloid computer, a cellular phone, a communicator, a smart phone, a palm computer, or any other communication device, memory may comprise information of the magnetic field map and the floor plan of the building, determine a measurement path or area which is to be measured; [0027], the mapper may at a specified location determine the EMF vector).
Regarding claim 15, Haverinen in view of Hong teaches:
wherein when the specified position of the information processing device is a position where a person is not allowed to be located, the circuitry is further configured to correct the position of the specified information processing device to a position where a person is allowed to be located (Haverinen: Fig. 4, 6A, 6B, and 10; [0033], apparatus may comprise a cellular communication system, e.g. a computer (PC), a laptop, a tabloid computer, a cellular phone, a communicator, a smart phone, a palm computer, or any other communication device, memory may comprise information of the magnetic field map and the floor plan of the building, determine a measurement path or area which is to be measured; [0027], the mapper may at a specified location determine the EMF vector; Fig. 4-5, and 9, calibration and correction circuitry; [0033], a calibration and correction circuitry may be for performing calibration and/or correction related to the functions of the apparatus such as for the measurement of the EMF vector by the magnetometer; [0050], the IMU may comprise at least one acceleration sensor, gyroscope, angular velocity sensor, allow speed and a direction of the person to be determined, average speed determined by a measured distance and time may aid in locating the device along a measurement path at a given time).
Regarding claim 16, Haverinen discloses:
An information processing method performed by an information processing device including a sensor, a display, and at least one processor, the information processing method comprising (Fig. 2-5, measuring device and path planning/measurement; [0022], electromagnetic field (EMF) measuring device; [0035], sensor processing circuitry; [0033], memory may comprise information of the magnetic field map and the floor plan of the building, may also be used for storing measured values during the measurement path):
measuring, by the sensor, a strength of a magnetic field or an electric field ([0022], device may comprise a magnetometer or any other sensor capable of measuring the EMF, in addition to the strength the magnetometer may be capable of determining a three-dimensional orientation of a measured EMF vector);
displaying, by the display, a target region ([0033], apparatus may comprise a cellular communication system, e.g. a computer (PC), a laptop, a tabloid computer, a cellular phone, a communicator, a smart phone, a palm computer, or any other communication device, memory may comprise information of the magnetic field map and the floor plan of the building);
detecting, by the at least one processor, a position of the information processing device in the target region based on an estimated position of the information processing device and the specified position of the information processing device ([0036], location tracking (LT) circuitry may be responsible of facilitating the location discovery of a positioning device, may apply the generated EMF map and provide upon request part of the generated map to the positioning device to determine its location inside the building, may provide the entire map of the building to the positioning device, location estimate may be acquired from a non-magnetic field based system);
and creating, by the at least one processor, distribution data to be displayed on the display indicating strengths of magnetic fields or electric fields at positions in the target region based on the strength of the magnetic field or the electric field measured by the sensor at each detected position of the information processing ([0024], EMF vector measured by the positioning device may be compared to existing information, information may comprise EMF vector strength and direction in several locations within the building, positioning device may forward the measured EMF data to a database entity or server which has access to the EMF map and is capable to locate the user in the floor plan of the building),
wherein the estimated position of the information processing device is estimated according to a probability determined according to each previously specified position of the information processing device, a moving speed at each previously specified position, and a time associate with each previously specified position ([0027], the mapper may at a specific location measure the EMF vector, the measuring device may also determine parameters which affect the reliability measure, i.e. the uncertainty measure of the EMF vector; [0026], the EMF map advantageously describes not only the strength and direction of the magnetic field but also the uncertainty measure of the EMF vector at the specifc location; [0048], knowing the uncertainty for each map point is advantageous because then the algorithm used for location estimation may apply different weighting factors for different position hypothesis take the uncertainty into account; [0044], In an embodiment, the uncertainty measure for a location may be at least partly determined on the basis of time stamp of the at least one existing magnetic field vector measurement in the location. For example, when the previous EMF vector measurement for the location has been made a long time ago, the uncertainty measure may indicate that the EMF vector provided may not provide as accurate EMF vector values as if the previous EMF vector measurement had been made a short time ago. A short time in this context may be a week or even one month. A long time may refer to several months, for example; [0050], the IMU 422 may detect the movement of the person carrying the measuring device 400. This may advantageously allow the speed and direction of the person to be determined, thus resulting in determination of measuring device 400 location along the measurement path at a given time. Alternatively, an average speed determined from a measurement distance and measurement time may aid in locating the measuring device 400 along the measurement path at any given time. In yet another embodiment, the IMU 422 may detect the movement of the person so as to use the data as a fusion sensor data in location discovery/tracking which is based on EMF and on an inertial navigation system (INS) applying the IMU 422).
However, Haverinen does not specifically state:
specifying a position of the information processing device displayed in the target region;
and storing the created distribution data on at least one non-transitory computer-readable storage medium,
Hong teaches:
specifying a position of the information processing device displayed in the target region ([0008], Since the location recognition by the GPS is impossible indoors, the reference location should be input manually. For example, the data collector collects data by displaying its location on an indoor map, and measuring and recording an RF signal, by itself. Necessary data can be automatically collected in an outdoor area where a GPS signal is received while a data collector moves with a vehicle, so that a database can be built within a relatively short time. However, since a reference location should be manually input in an area such as an indoor area where the GPS signal is not received, costs, such as time, manpower, etc., greatly increase for building of the database. Further, since location-based services provided in the indoor area rather than the outdoor area requires relatively accurate location information, data should be collected with respect to denser points within a service area, so that costs increase more. As a new RF signal is added, an existing RF signal is removed, or the location is changed, with a passing of time, the RF signal information requires continuous maintenance, so that costs continuously increase);
and storing the created distribution data on at least one non-transitory computer-readable storage medium ([0014], In accordance with another aspect of the present invention, a server comprising a non-transitory machine-readable storage medium for storing a program for executing a method of implementing a location-based service within a building is provided; [0073], Further, the server 200 stores the generated RF signal map in an RF signal DB 250),
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to incorporate the teachings of Hong into the invention of Haverinen to include specifying a position of the device on a display as Hong discloses with a reasonable expectation of success. One would be motivated to incorporate aspects of the cited prior art to create a more robust system that can correct erroneous measurement data with user input data for estimating location and store mapped information. Additionally, the claimed invention is merely a combination of old, well-known elements of measuring changes in electromagnetic field to estimate a current location of a user device as disclosed by Haverinen and specifying a location of a user device on a map shown on a display of the user device as taught by Hong. The combination each element merely would have performed the same function as it did separately, and one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention would have recognized that the results of the combination would have been predictable.
Regarding claim 17, Haverinen discloses:
A non-transitory computer-readable storage medium having embodied thereon a program, which when executed by a computer causes the computer to execute a method, the method comprising ([0032], at least one processor and at least one memory including a computer program code; [0033], apparatus may comprise a combination of circuitries; [0094], corresponding computer program code for carrying out the embodiments of the invention):
measuring, by a sensor, a strength of a magnetic field or an electric field ([0022], device may comprise a magnetometer or any other sensor capable of measuring the EMF, in addition to the strength the magnetometer may be capable of determining a three-dimensional orientation of a measured EMF vector);
displaying, by a display, a target region ([0033], apparatus may comprise a cellular communication system, e.g. a computer (PC), a laptop, a tabloid computer, a cellular phone, a communicator, a smart phone, a palm computer, or any other communication device, memory may comprise information of the magnetic field map and the floor plan of the building);
detecting the position of the information processing device in the target region based on the estimated position of the information processing device and the specified position of the information processing device ([0036], location tracking (LT) circuitry may be responsible of facilitating the location discovery of a positioning device, may apply the generated EMF map and provide upon request part of the generated map to the positioning device to determine its location inside the building, may provide the entire map of the building to the positioning device, location estimate may be acquired from a non-magnetic field based system);
and creating distribution data to be displayed indicating strengths of magnetic fields or electric fields at positions in the target region based on the strength of the magnetic field or the electric field measured by the sensor at each position of the information processing device ([0024], EMF vector measured by the positioning device may be compared to existing information, information may comprise EMF vector strength and direction in several locations within the building, positioning device may forward the measured EMF data to a database entity or server which has access to the EMD map and is capable to locate the user in the floor plan of the building),
wherein the estimated position of the information processing device is estimated according to a probability determined according to each previously specified position of the information processing device, and a moving speed at each previously specified position, and a time associated with each previously specified position ([0027], the mapper may at a specific location measure the EMF vector, the measuring device may also determine parameters which affect the reliability measure, i.e. the uncertainty measure of the EMF vector; [0026], the EMF map advantageously describes not only the strength and direction of the magnetic field but also the uncertainty measure of the EMF vector at the specific location; [0048], knowing the uncertainty for each map point is advantageous because then the algorithm used for location estimation may apply different weighting factors for different position hypothesis take the uncertainty into account; [0044], In an embodiment, the uncertainty measure for a location may be at least partly determined on the basis of time stamp of the at least one existing magnetic field vector measurement in the location. For example, when the previous EMF vector measurement for the location has been made a long time ago, the uncertainty measure may indicate that the EMF vector provided may not provide as accurate EMF vector values as if the previous EMF vector measurement had been made a short time ago. A short time in this context may be a week or even one month. A long time may refer to several months, for example; [0050], the IMU 422 may detect the movement of the person carrying the measuring device 400. This may advantageously allow the speed and direction of the person to be determined, thus resulting in determination of measuring device 400 location along the measurement path at a given time. Alternatively, an average speed determined from a measurement distance and measurement time may aid in locating the measuring device 400 along the measurement path at any given time. In yet another embodiment, the IMU 422 may detect the movement of the person so as to use the data as a fusion sensor data in location discovery/tracking which is based on EMF and on an inertial navigation system (INS) applying the IMU 422).
However, Haverinen does not specifically state:
specifying a position of the information processing device displayed in the target region;
and storing the created distribution data on at least one non-transitory computer-readable storage medium,
Hong teaches:
specifying a position of the information processing device displayed in the target region ([0008], Since the location recognition by the GPS is impossible indoors, the reference location should be input manually. For example, the data collector collects data by displaying its location on an indoor map, and measuring and recording an RF signal, by itself. Necessary data can be automatically collected in an outdoor area where a GPS signal is received while a data collector moves with a vehicle, so that a database can be built within a relatively short time. However, since a reference location should be manually input in an area such as an indoor area where the GPS signal is not received, costs, such as time, manpower, etc., greatly increase for building of the database. Further, since location-based services provided in the indoor area rather than the outdoor area requires relatively accurate location information, data should be collected with respect to denser points within a service area, so that costs increase more. As a new RF signal is added, an existing RF signal is removed, or the location is changed, with a passing of time, the RF signal information requires continuous maintenance, so that costs continuously increase);
and storing the created distribution data on at least one non-transitory computer-readable storage medium ([0014], In accordance with another aspect of the present invention, a server comprising a non-transitory machine-readable storage medium for storing a program for executing a method of implementing a location-based service within a building is provided; [0073], Further, the server 200 stores the generated RF signal map in an RF signal DB 250),
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to incorporate the teachings of Hong into the invention of Haverinen to include specifying a position of the device on a display as Hong discloses with a reasonable expectation of success. One would be motivated to incorporate aspects of the cited prior art to create a more robust system that can correct erroneous measurement data with user input data for estimating location and store mapped information. Additionally, the claimed invention is merely a combination of old, well-known elements of measuring changes in electromagnetic field to estimate a current location of a user device as disclosed by Haverinen and specifying a location of a user device on a map shown on a display of the user device as taught by Hong. The combination each element merely would have performed the same function as it did separately, and one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention would have recognized that the results of the combination would have been predictable.
Regarding claim 18, Haverinen in view of Hong teaches:
wherein the probability is determined according to a plurality of previously specified positions of the information processing device (Haverinen: [0027], the mapper may at a specific location measure the EMF vector, the measuring device may also determine parameters which affect the reliability measure, i.e. the uncertainty measure of the EMF vector; [0026], the EMF map advantageously describes not only the strength and direction of the magnetic field but also the uncertainty measure of the EMF vector at the specific location; [0048], knowing the uncertainty for each map point is advantageous because then the algorithm used for location estimation may apply different weighting factors for different position hypothesis take the uncertainty into account; [0044], In an embodiment, the uncertainty measure for a location may be at least partly determined on the basis of time stamp of the at least one existing magnetic field vector measurement in the location. For example, when the previous EMF vector measurement for the location has been made a long time ago, the uncertainty measure may indicate that the EMF vector provided may not provide as accurate EMF vector values as if the previous EMF vector measurement had been made a short time ago. A short time in this context may be a week or even one month. A long time may refer to several months, for example).
Claims 11-14 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Haverinen in view of Hong, and further in view of Moraleda et al. (US 20150061938 A1), hereinafter Moraleda.
Regarding claim 11, Haverinen in view of Hong does not specifically state:
wherein when a position of the information processing device is not specified, the circuitry is further configured to issue a prompt notification to prompt for specifying the position of the information processing device.
However, Moraleda teaches:
wherein when a position of the information processing device is not specified, the circuitry is further configured to issue a prompt notification to prompt for specifying the position of the information processing device ([0055], the mobile device collects Wi-Fi signature data and prompts the user to accept or discard the data; [0054], as the displayed path drifts from the expected path, the user can fix it at any point by marking the user's actual position on the map).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to incorporate the teachings of Moraleda into the invention of Haverinen in view of Hong to include a prompt to the user to accept captured environmental data as Moraleda discloses with a reasonable expectation of success. One would be motivated to incorporate aspects of the cited prior art to create a more robust system that is able to take and provide feedback that a position measurement is correct (Moraleda, [0054]). Additionally, the claimed invention is merely a combination of old, well-known elements of an indoor positioning device using electromagnetic fields as a positioning source as disclosed by Haverinen in view of Hong and issuing a prompt to a user to accept measured radio frequency signals to indoor positioning as taught by Moraleda. The combination each element merely would have performed the same function as it did separately, and one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention would have recognized that the results of the combination would have been predictable.
Regarding claim 12, Haverinen in view of Hong does not specifically state:
wherein the circuitry is further configured to prompt for re-input when the specified position of the information processing device is incorrect.
However, Moraleda teaches:
wherein the circuitry is further configured to prompt for re-input when the specified position of the information processing device is incorrect ([0055], the mobile device collects Wi-Fi signature data and prompts the user to accept or discard the data; [0054], as the displayed path drifts from the expected path, the user can fix it at any point by marking the user's actual position on the map).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to incorporate the teachings of Moraleda into the invention of Haverinen in view of Hong to include a prompt to the user to accept captured environmental data as Moraleda discloses with a reasonable expectation of success. One would be motivated to incorporate aspects of the cited prior art to create a more robust system that is able to take and provide feedback that a position measurement is correct (Moraleda, [0054]). Additionally, the claimed invention is merely a combination of old, well-known elements of an indoor positioning device using electromagnetic fields as a positioning source as disclosed by Haverinen in view of Hong and issuing a prompt to a user to accept measured radio frequency signals to indoor positioning as taught by Moraleda. The combination each element merely would have performed the same function as it did separately, and one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention would have recognized that the results of the combination would have been predictable.
Regarding claim 13, Haverinen in view of Hong and Moraleda teaches:
wherein the circuitry is further configured to determine that the position is incorrect when the specified position that is away from a last previously specified position of the information processing device by a predetermined distance or more according to an elapsed time from the time associated with the last previously specified position of the information processing device (Haverinen: Fig. 4, 6A, 6B, and 10; [0033], apparatus may comprise a cellular communication system, e.g. a computer (PC), a laptop, a tabloid computer, a cellular phone, a communicator, a smart phone, a palm computer, or any other communication device, memory may comprise information of the magnetic field map and the floor plan of the building, determine a measurement path or area which is to be measured; [0027], the mapper may at a specified location determine the EMF vector; Fig. 4-5, and 9, calibration and correction circuitry; [0033], a calibration and correction circuitry may be for performing calibration and/or correction related to the functions of the apparatus such as for the measurement of the EMF vector by the magnetometer; [0050], the IMU may comprise at least one acceleration sensor, gyroscope, angular velocity sensor, allow speed and a direction of the person to be determined, average speed determined by a measured distance and time may aid in locating the device along a measurement path at a given time; [0044], In an embodiment, the uncertainty measure for a location may be at least partly determined on the basis of time stamp of the at least one existing magnetic field vector measurement in the location. For example, when the previous EMF vector measurement for the location has been made a long time ago, the uncertainty measure may indicate that the EMF vector provided may not provide as accurate EMF vector values as if the previous EMF vector measurement had been made a short time ago. A short time in this context may be a week or even one month. A long time may refer to several months, for example).
Regarding claim 14, Haverinen in view of Hong and Moraleda teaches:
wherein the circuitry is further configured to determine that the position is incorrect when the specified position of the information processing device is away from the detected current position of the information processing device by a predetermined distance or more (Haverinen: Fig. 4, 6A, 6B, and 10; [0033], apparatus may comprise a cellular communication system, e.g. a computer (PC), a laptop, a tabloid computer, a cellular phone, a communicator, a smart phone, a palm computer, or any other communication device, memory may comprise information of the magnetic field map and the floor plan of the building, determine a measurement path or area which is to be measured; [0027], the mapper may at a specified location determine the EMF vector; Fig. 4-5, and 9, calibration and correction circuitry; [0033], a calibration and correction circuitry may be for performing calibration and/or correction related to the functions of the apparatus such as for the measurement of the EMF vector by the magnetometer; [0050], the IMU may comprise at least one acceleration sensor, gyroscope, angular velocity sensor, allow speed and a direction of the person to be determined, average speed determined by a measured distance and time may aid in locating the device along a measurement path at a given time).
Documents Considered but Not Relied Upon
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant’s disclosure.
Cho et al. (US 20130197799 A1) discloses determining indoor collection points and measurement information to map an interior of a building. Chodhury et al. (US 20150281910 A1) discloses a system and method for unsupervised indoor localization estimation using a carried device.
Conclusion
THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. 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 IZCALLI ANDRE RIOS-AGUIRRE whose telephone number is (571)272-0790. The examiner can normally be reached Monday through Friday 8:30 - 17:00 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, Scott A. Browne can be reached at (571) 270-0151. 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.
/I.A.R./ Examiner, Art Unit 3666
/SCOTT A BROWNE/ Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3666
Prosecution Insights