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 .
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.
Response to Amendment
This action is in response to amendment filed on 01/27/2026.
Claim(s) 1, 17, 19, 20 is/are amended.
Claim(s) 2, 4-16, 18, 28 is/are previously presented.
Claim(s) 3, 21-27 is/are cancelled.
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on 09/02/2025 is in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statement is being considered by the examiner.
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 1-2, 4-20, and 28 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 101 because the claimed inventions are directed to a judicial exception without significantly more, as determined by the Subject Matter Eligibility Test detailed below.
Step 1
Step 1 of the Subject Matter Eligibility Test entails considering whether the claimed subject matter falls within the four statutory categories of patentable subject matter identified by 35 U.S.C. 101: process, machine, manufacture, or composition of matter.
Independent claims -1, 19, and 20 are directed towards a method, an apparatus, and a non-transitory computer-readable storage medium, respectively. Therefore, each of the independent claims 1, 19, and 20, and the corresponding dependent claims 2, 4-18, and 28 are directed to a statutory category of invention under step 1.
Step 2A, Prong 1
If the claim recites a statutory category of invention, the claim requires further analysis in Step
2A. Step 2A of the Subject Matter Eligibility Test is a two-prong inquiry. In Prong 1, examiners evaluate whether the claim recites a judicial exception.
Regarding Prong 1, the claims are to be analyzed to determine whether they recite subject matter that falls within one of the following groups of abstract ideas: a) mathematical concepts, b) certain methods of organizing human activity, and/or c) mental processes.
Independent claim 1 recites abstract limitations, including those shown in bold below.
A method comprising:
at an electronic device in communication with a display generation component and one or more input devices:
while displaying, via the display generation component, a route configuration user interface, detecting, via the one or more input devices, a first user input corresponding to a request to add a first destination to a route that includes a third destination;
in response to detecting the first user input, adding the first destination to the route;
while the first destination and the third destination are included in the route,
detecting, via the one or more input devices, a second user input corresponding to a request to search for a second destination to be added to the route;
in response to detecting the second user input:
in accordance with a determination that the second user input is received prior to navigation along the route being initiated, and in accordance with a determination that the second destination is being added to the route as a destination located immediately after the first destination in the route, initiating the search for the second destination based on the second user input, wherein the search is centered on the first destination in the route; and
in accordance with a determination that the second user input is received prior to navigation along the route being initiated, and in accordance with a determination that the second destination is being added to the route as a destination located immediately after the third destination, initiating the search for the second destination based on the second user input, wherein the search is centered on the third destination in the route; and
after adding the second destination to the route, initiating, by the electronic device, navigation directions for traversing the route including the first destination, the second destination and the third destination.
These limitations, as drafted, describe a process that, under its broadest reasonable interpretation, covers performance of the limitations in the mind, or by a human using pen and paper, and therefore recites mental processes. For example, “adding the first destination to the route” may be interpreted as a thought process of mentally deciding a route one will take from one location to another (e.g., a movie theater). Additionally, “in accordance with a determination that the second user input is received prior to navigation along the route being initiated, and in accordance with a determination that the second destination is being added to the route as a destination located immediately after the first destination in the route, initiating the search for the second destination based on the second user input, wherein the search is centered on the first destination in the route” may be interpreted as a mental determination made according to observable data, such as deciding to get dinner after visiting the movie theater and choosing a spot for dinner nearby the movie theater by thinking about restaurants one knows are in the vicinity of the theater based on previous knowledge. Further, “after adding the second destination to the route, initiating… navigation directions for traversing the route including the first destination, the second destination and the third destination” may be interpreted as a mental process of remembering the determined stops along a decided route and determining the first step of traveling from a starting point to the first intersection or turn of the route. Thus, the claim recites an abstract idea.
Claims -19 and 20 recite abstract limitations analogous to those identified above with respect to claim 1, and therefore recite abstract ideas per the same analysis.
Step 2A, Prong 2
If the claim recites a judicial exception in Step 2A, Prong 1, the claim requires further analysis in Step 2A, Prong 2. In Step 2A, Prong 2, examiners evaluate whether the claim recites additional elements that integrate the exception into a practical application of that exception.
Regarding Prong 2, the claims are to be analyzed to determine whether the claim, as a whole, integrates the abstract idea into a practical application. As noted in MPEP § 2106.04(d), 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 the use of a judicial exception to a particular technological environment or field of use do not integrate a judicial exception into a “practical application”.
Claim 1 recites additional elements including those underlined below.
A method comprising:
at an electronic device in communication with a display generation component and one or more input devices:
while displaying, via the display generation component, a route configuration user interface, detecting, via the one or more input devices, a first user input corresponding to a request to add a first destination to a route that includes a third destination;
in response to detecting the first user input, adding the first destination to the route;
while the first destination and the third destination are included in the route,
detecting, via the one or more input devices, a second user input corresponding to a request to search for a second destination to be added to the route;
in response to detecting the second user input:
in accordance with a determination that the second user input is received prior to navigation along the route being initiated, and in accordance with a determination that the second destination is being added to the route as a destination located immediately after the first destination in the route, initiating the search for the second destination based on the second user input, wherein the search is centered on the first destination in the route; and
in accordance with a determination that the second user input is received prior to navigation along the route being initiated, and in accordance with a determination that the second destination is being added to the route as a destination located immediately after the third destination, initiating the search for the second destination based on the second user input, wherein the search is centered on the third destination in the route; and
after adding the second destination to the route, initiating, by the electronic device, navigation directions for traversing the route including the first destination, the second destination and the third destination.
The recitations of detecting… a first user input corresponding to a request to add a first destination to a route that includes a third destination; while the first destination and the third destination are included in the route, detecting… a second user input corresponding to a request to search for a second destination to be added to the route, amount to mere data receiving (i.e., receiving first destination data, receiving second destination data), which is a form of insignificant extra-solution activity. Furthermore, the recitation of while displaying… a route configuration user interface amounts to sending or displaying information, which is a form of insignificant extra-solution activity. The recitations of at an electronic device in communication with a display generation component and one or more input devices amount to mere instructions to implement an abstract idea or other exception on a computer. Accordingly, in combination, these additional elements do not integrate the abstract idea into a practical application because they do not impose any meaningful limits on practicing the abstract idea.
Step 2B
If the additional elements do not integrate the exception into a practical application in step 2A Prong 2, then the claim is directed to the recited judicial exception, and requires further analysis under Step 2B to determine whether it provides an inventive concept (i.e., whether the additional elements amount to significantly more than the exception itself).
As discussed above, the additional elements of an electronic device in communication with a display generation component and one or more input devices amount to mere instructions to apply the exception. Mere instructions to apply an exception using a generic computer component cannot provide an inventive concept. Use of a computer or other machinery in its ordinary capacity for economic or other tasks (e.g., to receive, store, or transmit data) or simply adding a general-purpose computer or computer components after the fact to an abstract idea does not provide significantly more. See Affinity Labs v. DirecTV, 838 F.3d 1253, 1262, 120 USPQ2d 1201, 1207 (Fed. Cir. 2016) (cellular telephone); TLI Communications LLC v. AV Auto, LLC, 823 F.3d 607, 613, 118 USPQ2d 1744, 1748 (Fed. Cir. 2016) (computer server and telephone unit).
As discussed above, detecting… a first user input corresponding to a request to add a first destination to a route that includes a third destination; while the first destination is included in the route, detecting… a second user input corresponding to a request to search for a second destination to be added to the route, amount to insignificant extra-solution activity. 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 (as it is here).
As discussed above, while displaying… a route configuration user interface amounts to insignificant extra-solution activity. MPEP 2106.05(d)(II), and the cases cited therein, including in Trading Techs. Int’l v. IBG LLC, 921 F.3d 1084, 1093 (Fed. Cir. 2019), and Intellectual Ventures I LLC v. Erie Indemnity Co., 850 F.3d 1315, 1331 (Fed. Cir. 2017), for example, indicated that the mere displaying of data (i.e., displaying a user interface) is a well understood, routine, and conventional function.
Thus, even when viewed as an ordered combination, nothing in the claims adds significantly more (i.e., an inventive concept) to the abstract idea.
Claims 19 and 20 further recite “An electronic device, comprising: one or more processors; memory; and one or more programs, wherein the one or more programs are stored in the memory and configured to be executed by the one or more processors” and “A non-transitory computer readable storage medium storing one or more programs, the one or more programs comprising instructions, which when executed by one or more processors of an electronic device, cause the electronic device to perform a method”, respectively, which amount to merely generic components which allow the abstract idea to be applied (MPEP § 2106.05(f)(2)). The examiner submits that these elements are mere computers or other machinery used as a tool to perform the existing process.
Dependent claims 2, 4-18, and 28 do not recite any further limitations that cause the claim(s) to be patent eligible. Rather, the various limitations of dependent claims are directed toward additional aspects of the judicial exception and/or well-understood, routine, and conventional additional elements that do not integrate the judicial exception into a practical application (i.e., further characterizing the displaying of data and collection of data). Therefore, dependent claims 2, 4-18, and 28 are not patent eligible under the same rationale as provided for in the rejection of independent claims 1, 19, and 20.
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, 19, 20, 28 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over US 20190383628 A1 Quint; Jason et al. (hereinafter Quint), in view of CN 105606100 A DHAR, S et al. (hereinafter Dhar).
Regarding claim 1, Quint discloses: A method (see Quint at least [0004] A trip planning method) comprising:
at an electronic device in communication with a display generation component and one or more input devices (see Quint at least [0041] The display 26 is operably coupled to the controller module 22. The controller module 22 can provide an output causing information to be displayed on the display 26, which can be viewed by the user of the electrified vehicle 10 and [0050] The controller module 22 could monitor for inputs from the user indicating a user need. The user could, for example, input a user need through the display 26):
while displaying, via the display generation component, a route configuration user interface (see Quint at least [0130] The user can create the trip plan via an in-vehicle user interface), detecting, via the one or more input devices, a first user input corresponding to a request to add a first destination to a route (see Quint at least [0087] step 356, which requests a destination from the user. If the user inputs the destination, the method moves to a step 360);
while the first destination (see Quint at least [0080] the method 300 assesses whether or not a destination/range need for the electrified vehicle 10 is known. If yes, the method 300 moves to a step 312, which assesses whether or not the electrified vehicle 10 can reach the destination based on the amount of charge within the traction battery 12),
detecting, via the one or more input devices, a second user input corresponding to a request to search for a second destination to be added to the route (see Quint at least [0085] At a step 344, the user can utilize the checkboxes or another input mechanism to identify which amenities are desired for the at least one charging stop. The method 300 then moves to a step 348 where the method 300 searches again for at least one stop based on the identified amenities from the step 344);
in response to detecting the second user input: in accordance with a determination that the second user input is received prior to navigation along the route being initiated (see Quint at least [0005] the recommending occurs prior to departing on a drive to a destination), and in accordance with a determination that the second destination is being added to the route as a destination located immediately after the third destination, initiating the search for the second destination based on the second user input, wherein the search is centered on the third destination in the route (see Quint at least [0081] step 320 where the method 300 can, in consideration of the variables listed in step 320 for example, provide a list of at least one charging stop within range of the electrified vehicle 10); and
adding the second destination to the route (see Quint at least [0082] step 328, which calculates a route to the selected charging stop and presents the route to the user).
Quint does not teach: a first user input corresponding to a request to add a first destination to a route that includes a third destination; in response to detecting the first user input, adding the first destination to the route; while the first destination and the third destination are included in the route, in accordance with a determination that the second user input is received prior to navigation along the route being initiated, and in accordance with a determination that the second destination is being added to the route as a destination located immediately after the first destination in the route, initiating the search for the second destination based on the second user input, wherein the search is centered on the first destination in the route; after adding the second destination to the route, initiating, by the electronic device, navigation directions for traversing the route including the first destination, the second destination and the third destination.
However, Dhar teaches: a first user input corresponding to a request to add a first destination to a route that includes a third destination (see Dhar at least [0050] In step 501, the user inputs the destination (Destination 1) into the navigation system and/or into a navigation application running on the portable device and [0051] the user enters the destination (D) and point of interest data from the origin location (LOC));
in response to detecting the first user input, adding the first destination to the route (see Dhar at least [0050] In step 503, the navigation application calculates the route to the destination);
while the first destination and the third destination are included in the route (see Dhar at least [0050] may perform further processing to determine the location of the point of interest closest to the destination),
in accordance with a determination that the second user input is received prior to navigation along the route being initiated, and in accordance with a determination that the second destination is being added to the route as a destination located immediately after the first destination in the route, initiating the search for the second destination based on the second user input, wherein the search is centered on the first destination in the route (see Dhar at least [0050] the navigation processor similarly finds all specific points of interest near the destination and [0053] The navigation system can present the user with at least one route suggestion to the entered destination, as well as an optimized route from that destination to the desired point of interest); and
after adding the second destination to the route, initiating, by the electronic device, navigation directions for traversing the route including the first destination, the second destination and the third destination (see Dhar at least [0051] After providing the clustering CL and obtaining the user's consent, the navigation application provides the user with routing information to offer a valid route to the destination (D) and points of interest (POI 2 - POI 4 )).
It would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the route stop addition method disclosed by Quint to include the clustering of additional stops around a destination of Dhar. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to make this modification because designing a route with points near one another leads to more efficient route planning, as suggested by Dhar (see Dhar at least [0009] methods are proposed to process navigation data, such as points of interest that can be defined by user general terms or specific terms, and to cluster the data into groups to generate navigation routes optimized by speed and/or distance).
Regarding claim 19, Quint discloses: An electronic device (see Quint at least [0042] The controller module 22 could include multiple separate controller modules in the form of multiple hardware devices), comprising:
one or more processors (see Quint at least [0042] The controller module 22 can include, among other things, a processor);
memory (see Quint at least [0042] The controller module 22 can include, among other things, a processor and a memory portion); and
one or more programs, wherein the one or more programs are stored in the memory and configured to be executed by the one or more processors (see Quint at least [0043] [0043] The processor of the controller module 22 can be programmed to execute a program stored in the memory portion), the one or more programs including instructions for:
while displaying, via a display generation component, a route configuration user interface, detecting, via one or more input devices, a first user input corresponding to a request to add a first destination to a route (see Quint at least [0130] The user can create the trip plan via an in-vehicle user interface and [0087] step 356, which requests a destination from the user. If the user inputs the destination, the method moves to a step 360);
while the first destination (see Quint at least [0080] the method 300 assesses whether or not a destination/range need for the electrified vehicle 10 is known. If yes, the method 300 moves to a step 312, which assesses whether or not the electrified vehicle 10 can reach the destination based on the amount of charge within the traction battery 12),
in response to detecting the second user input: detecting, via the one or more input devices, a second user input corresponding to a request to search for a second destination to be added to the route (see Quint at least [0085] At a step 344, the user can utilize the checkboxes or another input mechanism to identify which amenities are desired for the at least one charging stop. The method 300 then moves to a step 348 where the method 300 searches again for at least one stop based on the identified amenities from the step 344);
in accordance with a determination that the second user input is received prior to navigation along the route being initiated (see Quint at least [0005] the recommending occurs prior to departing on a drive to a destination), and in accordance with a determination that the second destination is being added to the route as a destination located immediately after the third destination, initiating the search for the second destination based on the second user input, wherein the search is centered on the third destination in the route (see Quint at least [0081] step 320 where the method 300 can, in consideration of the variables listed in step 320 for example, provide a list of at least one charging stop within range of the electrified vehicle 10); and
adding the second destination to the route (see Quint at least [0082] step 328, which calculates a route to the selected charging stop and presents the route to the user).
Quint does not teach: a first user input corresponding to a request to add a first destination to a route that includes a third destination; in response to detecting the first user input, adding the first destination to the route; while the first destination and the third destination are included in the route; in accordance with a determination that the second user input is received prior to navigation along the route being initiated, and in accordance with a determination that the second destination is being added to the route as a destination located immediately after the first destination in the route, initiating the search for the second destination based on the second user input, wherein the search is centered on the first destination in the route; after adding the second destination to the route, initiating, by the electronic device, navigation directions for traversing the route including the first destination, the second destination and the third destination.
However, Dhar teaches: a first user input corresponding to a request to add a first destination to a route that includes a third destination (see Dhar at least [0050] In step 501, the user inputs the destination (Destination 1) into the navigation system and/or into a navigation application running on the portable device and [0051] the user enters the destination (D) and point of interest data from the origin location (LOC));
in response to detecting the first user input, adding the first destination to the route (see Dhar at least [0050] In step 503, the navigation application calculates the route to the destination);
while the first destination and the third destination are included in the route (see Dhar at least [0050] may perform further processing to determine the location of the point of interest closest to the destination),
in accordance with a determination that the second user input is received prior to navigation along the route being initiated, and in accordance with a determination that the second destination is being added to the route as a destination located immediately after the first destination in the route, initiating the search for the second destination based on the second user input, wherein the search is centered on the first destination in the route (see Dhar at least [0050] the navigation processor similarly finds all specific points of interest near the destination and [0053] The navigation system can present the user with at least one route suggestion to the entered destination, as well as an optimized route from that destination to the desired point of interest); and
after adding the second destination to the route, initiating, by the electronic device, navigation directions for traversing the route including the first destination, the second destination and the third destination (see Dhar at least [0051] After providing the clustering CL and obtaining the user's consent, the navigation application provides the user with routing information to offer a valid route to the destination (D) and points of interest (POI 2 - POI 4 )).
It would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the route stop addition device disclosed by Quint to include the clustering of additional stops around a destination of Dhar. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to make this modification because designing a route with points near one another leads to more efficient route planning, as suggested by Dhar (see Dhar at least [0009] methods are proposed to process navigation data, such as points of interest that can be defined by user general terms or specific terms, and to cluster the data into groups to generate navigation routes optimized by speed and/or distance).
Regarding claim 20, Quint discloses: A non-transitory computer readable storage medium storing one or more programs, the one or more programs comprising instructions, which when executed by one or more processors of an electronic device (See Quint at least [0043] The processor of the controller module 22 can be programmed to execute a program stored in the memory portion), cause the electronic device to perform a method comprising:
while displaying, via a display generation component, a route configuration user interface (see Quint at least [0130] The user can create the trip plan via an in-vehicle user interface), detecting, via one or more input devices, a first user input corresponding to a request to add a first destination to a route (see Quint at least [0087] step 356, which requests a destination from the user. If the user inputs the destination, the method moves to a step 360);
while the first destination (see Quint at least [0080] the method 300 assesses whether or not a destination/range need for the electrified vehicle 10 is known. If yes, the method 300 moves to a step 312, which assesses whether or not the electrified vehicle 10 can reach the destination based on the amount of charge within the traction battery 12),
detecting, via the one or more input devices, a second user input corresponding to a request to search for a second destination to be added to the route (see Quint at least [0085] At a step 344, the user can utilize the checkboxes or another input mechanism to identify which amenities are desired for the at least one charging stop. The method 300 then moves to a step 348 where the method 300 searches again for at least one stop based on the identified amenities from the step 344);
in response to detecting the second user input: in accordance with a determination that the second user input is received prior to navigation along the route being initiated (see Quint at least [0005] the recommending occurs prior to departing on a drive to a destination), and in accordance with a determination that the second destination is being added to the route as a destination located immediately after the third destination, initiating the search for the second destination based on the second user input, wherein the search is centered on the third destination in the route (see Quint at least [0081] step 320 where the method 300 can, in consideration of the variables listed in step 320 for example, provide a list of at least one charging stop within range of the electrified vehicle 10); and
adding the second destination to the route (see Quint at least [0082] step 328, which calculates a route to the selected charging stop and presents the route to the user).
Quint does not teach: a first user input corresponding to a request to add a first destination to a route that includes a third destination; in response to detecting the first user input, adding the first destination to the route;
while the first destination and the third destination are included in the route, in accordance with a determination that the second user input is received prior to navigation along the route being initiated, and in accordance with a determination that the second destination is being added to the route as a destination located immediately after the first destination in the route, initiating the search for the second destination based on the second user input, wherein the search is centered on the first destination in the route; and after adding the second destination to the route, initiating, by the electronic device, navigation directions for traversing the route including the first destination, the second destination and the third destination.
However, Dhar teaches: a first user input corresponding to a request to add a first destination to a route that includes a third destination (see Dhar at least [0050] In step 501, the user inputs the destination (Destination 1) into the navigation system and/or into a navigation application running on the portable device and [0051] the user enters the destination (D) and point of interest data from the origin location (LOC));
in response to detecting the first user input, adding the first destination to the route (see Dhar at least [0050] In step 503, the navigation application calculates the route to the destination);
while the first destination and the third destination are included in the route (see Dhar at least [0050] may perform further processing to determine the location of the point of interest closest to the destination),
in accordance with a determination that the second user input is received prior to navigation along the route being initiated, and in accordance with a determination that the second destination is being added to the route as a destination located immediately after the first destination in the route, initiating the search for the second destination based on the second user input, wherein the search is centered on the first destination in the route (see Dhar at least [0050] the navigation processor similarly finds all specific points of interest near the destination and [0053] The navigation system can present the user with at least one route suggestion to the entered destination, as well as an optimized route from that destination to the desired point of interest); and
after adding the second destination to the route, initiating, by the electronic device, navigation directions for traversing the route including the first destination, the second destination and the third destination (see Dhar at least [0051] After providing the clustering CL and obtaining the user's consent, the navigation application provides the user with routing information to offer a valid route to the destination (D) and points of interest (POI 2 - POI 4 )).
It would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the route stop addition stored program disclosed by Quint to include the clustering of additional stops around a destination of Dhar. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to make this modification because designing a route with points near one another leads to more efficient route planning, as suggested by Dhar (see Dhar at least [0009] methods are proposed to process navigation data, such as points of interest that can be defined by user general terms or specific terms, and to cluster the data into groups to generate navigation routes optimized by speed and/or distance).
Regarding claim 28, Quint and Dhar disclose: The method of claim 1, wherein:
in accordance with a determination that the first destination corresponds to a first location in the route, the search is centered on the first location (see Dhar at least [0064] Figure 8C shows a simplified map display 800 according to one embodiment, illustrating the preferred (“best”) route 804 from point A to C); and
in accordance with a determination that the first destination corresponds to a second location in the route, different from the first location, the search is centered on the second location (see Dhar at least [0064] Figure 8C shows a simplified map display 800 according to one embodiment, illustrating… the secondary route 802 from point A to B).
It would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the route setting method disclosed by Quint and Dhar to include the technique of offering POI suggestions in the vicinity of first and/or second route destinations of Dhar. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to make this modification because providing multiple clusters of points of interest allow the user to select waypoints based on multiple route options, as suggested by Dhar (see Dhar at least [0064] highlighting markers (e.g., labels, pins, signs, etc.) can be used to display the primary cluster interest (POI <sub> 1 </sub>, POI <sub> 2 </sub>, POI <sub> 3 </sub>), while transparent markers, shadows, coloring, etc., can be used to make the secondary cluster interest points less visible).
Claim(s) 2, 14 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Quint, in view of Dhar, and further in view of US 20100057347 A1 Sugiyama; Kenji et al. (hereinafter Sugiyama).
Regarding claim 2, Quint and Dhar disclose: The method of claim 1.
Quint and Dhar do not teach: the method further comprising: in response to detecting the second user input: in accordance with a determination that the second user input is received while navigation along the route is in progress, initiating the search for the second destination based on the second user input, wherein the search is centered on a current location of the electronic device on the route.
However, Sugiyama teaches: the method further comprising: in response to detecting the second user input: in accordance with a determination that the second user input is received while navigation along the route is in progress, initiating the search for the second destination based on the second user input, wherein the search is centered on a current location of the electronic device on the route (see Sugiyama at least [0073] First, if an operation input for starting a vicinity search is performed by the user via the operation input portion 3 while the vehicle is travelling along a route toward a destination, the display control portion 7 will display the vicinity search screen 40 on the display 6, as shown in FIG. 2 and [0118] Here, when a user's operation finger contacts the first search condition button 87 of the current position region 91 shown in FIG. 22, for example, a search condition is set by the search condition setting portion 9 with the search method being "vicinity of the current position).
It would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the route stop addition method disclosed by Quint and Dhar to include the waypoint search near current location of Sugiyama. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to make this modification because this search strategy allows users to find waypoint options that are in a convenient area near their location, as suggested by Sugiyama (see Sugiyama at least [0013] search for a route that enables the user to stop by a facility matching the user's needs in a desired area).
Regarding claim 14, Quint and Dhar disclose: The method of claim 1, wherein initiating the search for the second destination based on the second user input includes displaying, via the display generation component, one or more list search results corresponding to the second user input including a first list search result and a second list search result (see Quint at least [0082] the method 300 can, in consideration of the variables listed in step 320 for example, provide a list of at least one charging stop within range of the electrified vehicle 10).
Quint and Dhar do not teach: wherein: the first list search result is displayed with a first user selectable option that is selectable to initiate a process to add the first list search result as a destination to the route; and the second list search result is displayed with a second user selectable option that is selectable to initiate a process to add the second list search result as a destination to the route.
However, Sugiyama teaches: wherein: the first list search result is displayed with a first user selectable option that is selectable to initiate a process to add the first list search result as a destination to the route (See Sugiyama at least [0077] When a search result button 55 is selected by the user, the route information associated with that search result button 55 is displayed in the route information display portion 58. Also, when a determination input is made on a search result button 55 that has been selected by the user, that facility is set as a waypoint, and route guidance is started in accordance with the route information wherein search result button 55 includes first list search result Aoyama Oil Big Stage); and
the second list search result is displayed with a second user selectable option that is selectable to initiate a process to add the second list search result as a destination to the route (See Sugiyama at least [0077] When a search result button 55 is selected by the user, the route information associated with that search result button 55 is displayed in the route information display portion 58. Also, when a determination input is made on a search result button 55 that has been selected by the user, that facility is set as a waypoint, and route guidance is started in accordance with the route information wherein search result button 55 includes second list search result Aoyama Oil Kawagoe Hatsukari SS).
It would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the route stop addition method disclosed by Quint and Dhar to include the user selection of candidate route stops of Sugiyama. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to make this modification because when a user is presented with a candidate facility that matches their desired qualities, then they are able to select the facility to add to their route, as suggested by Sugiyama (see Sugiyama at least [0077] When a facility matching the search condition is found, the route from the current position of the vehicle to that facility is set by the route searching portion 5).
Claim(s) 4 and 13 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Quint, in view of Dhar, and further in view of US 10102221 B2 Tuukkanen; Marko Tapio (hereinafter Tuukkanen).
Regarding claim 4, Quint and Dhar disclose: The method of claim 1, wherein the search is centered on a geographic area that includes the first destination in the route in accordance with the determination that the second user input is received prior to navigation along the route being initiated, and in accordance with the determination that the second destination is being added to the route as a destination located immediately after the first destination in the route (see Dhar at least [0050] the navigation processor similarly finds all specific points of interest near the destination and [0051] After inputting one or more general terms and/or specific points of interest, the processor generates multiple points of interest information (POI 1 ~ POI 6) related to the destination region (D). After engaging in proximity processing, the points of interest (POI 2 - POI 4) that are considered to be the closest or contain the most efficient routes are clustered as (CL)).
It would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the route stop addition method disclosed by Quint and Dhar to include the clustering of additional stops around a destination of Dhar. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to make this modification because designing a route with points near one another leads to more efficient route planning, as suggested by Dhar (see Dhar at least [0009] methods are proposed to process navigation data, such as points of interest that can be defined by user general
Quint and Dhar do not teach: the method further comprising: after initiating the search centered on the geographic area including the first destination in the route and while searching for the second destination based on the second user input: detecting, via the one or more input devices, a third user input corresponding to a request to center the search on a second geographic area, different from the geographic area that includes the first destination in the route; and in response to detecting the third user input, initiating a second search for the second destination based on the second user input, wherein the second search is centered on the second geographic area.
However, Tuukkanen teaches: the method further comprising: after initiating the search centered on the geographic area (see Tuukkanen at least [col. 13, lines 8-17] In FIG. 5B, in response to initiation of the search, the optimization platform 103 acquires information regarding ice cream vendors within a defined search range. The search range corresponds to an area 507 in which results may be identified and presented with respect to the search request. Under this scenario, an ice cream parlor corresponding to point of interest 509 is identified and presented. The current location of the user serves as a reference point for centering the map view within the search area 507):
detecting, via the one or more input devices, a third user input corresponding to a request to center the search on a second geographic area, different from the geographic area that includes the first destination in the route (see Tuukkanen at least [col. 15, lines 2-3] the user swipes the map to generate map area 533b); and
in response to detecting the third user input, initiating a second search for the second destination based on the second user input, wherein the second search is centered on the second geographic area (see Tuukkanen at least [col. 15, lines 2-7] when the user swipes the map to generate map area 533b, the distance x from the location point 541 to the perimeter of the map area 533b redefines the overall shape or extent of the new search area. This corresponds to dynamic resizing and reshaping of the search area (or search radius)).
It would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the route setting method including centering the search area on the first destination disclosed by Quint and Dhar to include the shifting of the second destination search area in response to user swiping of Tuukkanen. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to make this modification because allowing a user to redefine the search area with a simple gesture allows the user to easily pick a destination that suits their needs, as suggested by Tuukkanen (see Tuukkanen at least [col. 7, lines 52-57] This contiguous search processing reduces the amount of user interaction required to conduct the search and in the case of a driver, lessens the number of distractions. The user need only select a new center point for the search by tapping on or panning the map, i.e., via a touchscreen display).
Regarding claim 13, Quint and Dhar disclose: The method of claim 1.
Quint and Dhar do not teach: wherein initiating the search for the second destination based on the second user input includes: concurrently displaying, via the display generation component: one or more list search results corresponding to the second user input; and one or more representations of the one or more list search results displayed on a virtual map.
However, Tuukkanen teaches: wherein initiating the search for the second destination based on the second user input (see Tuukkanen at least [col. 7, lines 21-23] the search results returned pursuant to the second search request are presented to the user via the user interface of the application 111) includes:
concurrently displaying, via the display generation component (see Tuukkanen at least [col. 11, lines 21-23] the user interface module presents a user with location-based information obtained as a result of a submitted search request):
one or more list search results corresponding to the second user input (see Tuukkanen at least [col. 11, lines 23-24] The search results may be presented in map form, list form or a combination thereof); and
one or more representations of the one or more list search results displayed on a virtual map (see Tuukkanen at least [col. 11, lines 23-24] The search results may be presented in map form, list form or a combination thereof).
It would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the route setting method disclosed by Quint and Dhar to include the multiple forms of displaying search results of Tuukkanen. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to make this modification because this allows users different forms of information to decide which destinations they desire in a style which suits them best, as suggested by Tuukkanen (see Tuukkanen at least [col. 7, lines 23-43] the user is presented with a list of search results where the prior search results (e.g., those which overlap) are differentiated from new ones. The results may be ordered for presentment based on this differentiation. For example, in the case where the second search request is for ice cream parlors within a given area, the prior determined search results may be ordered first in the list. The first new result within the list (e.g., the first non-overlapping search result) may be highlighted for distinguishing it from the prior results. Per this approach, the user may swipe down the list to see repeated search results or up to see the new results. Alternatively, the results may be presented in a map view rather than in list form. Per this approach, the map view may be highlighted for distinguishing the prior determined map view from the newly determined map view. Under this scenario, for instance, a user of UE 101 may swipe or scroll their screen to the right to see prior determined map view corresponding to the first search results while swiping left to see the map view corresponding to the second search result).
Claim(s) 5 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Quint, in view of Dhar, and further in view of GB 2544992 A BENEDICT RECKTENWALD (hereinafter Recktenwald).
Regarding claim 5, Quint and Dhar disclose: The method of claim 1.
Quint and Dhar do not teach: wherein the search for the second destination includes: displaying, via the display generation component, one or more search results corresponding to the second user input, wherein in accordance with a determination that one or more criteria are satisfied, the one or more search results are displayed with respective indications of additional time that would be added to the route if corresponding destinations are added as the second destination to the route.
However, Recktenwald teaches: wherein the search for the second destination includes: displaying, via the display generation component, one or more search results corresponding to the second user input, wherein in accordance with a determination that one or more criteria are satisfied (see Recktenwald at least [pg. 13, line 21-pg. 14, line 5] In addition to the first destination 1 and the second destination 2 that are within the threshold distance of an along the route algorithm, figure 3 shows three further first intermediate destinations 1 and two further second intermediate destinations 2 which fall within a larger egg-shaped area 3 containing the start position A and the final destination B, within which the method searched for the first and second intermediate destinations 1, 2), the one or more search results are displayed with respective indications of additional time that would be added to the route if corresponding destinations are added as the second destination to the route (see Recktenwald at least [pg. 14, line 21 – pg. 15, line 2] the method calculates and display screen shows the estimated time of arrival 27 at the second intermediate destination 2 on the second potential route 21 and the estimated time of arrival 28 at the first intermediate destination 1 on the second potential route 21, along with the additional time 29 that this route will take compared to travelling direct from A to B).
It would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the route setting method disclosed by Quint and Dhar to include the displaying of additional travel time resulting from the inclusion of candidate destinations of Recktenwald. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to make this modification because the time added to a route may be a metric that a user would like to know in order to decide their preferred route or stops along a route, as suggested by Recktenwald (see Recktenwald at least [pg. 15, lines 19-21] the user may choose the first potential route 12 over the second potential route 13 simply because the additional time taken (+5 min) is less than for the second potential route 13 (+6 min)).
Claim(s) 6 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Quint, in view of Dhar, further in view of Recktenwald, and further in view of KR 100913670 B1 Park Yong Kwan et al. (hereinafter Park).
Regarding claim 6, Quint, Dhar, and Recktenwald disclose: The method of claim 5.
Quint, Dhar, and Recktenwald do not teach: wherein the one or more criteria include a criterion that is satisfied when the second user input is received while navigation along the route is in progress, and the search for the second destination includes: in accordance with a determination that the one or more criteria are not satisfied, the one or more search results are not displayed with the respective indications of additional time that would be added to the route if the corresponding destinations are added as the second destination to the route.
However, Park teaches: wherein the one or more criteria include a criterion that is satisfied when the second user input is received while navigation along the route is in progress, and the search for the second destination includes: in accordance with a determination that the one or more criteria are not satisfied (see Park at least [pg. 4, para. 9, beginning with “In figure 2”] if the input to the route search command for a plurality of destinations over the navigation icon (75) in order to navigate to the path via a plurality of points of interest corresponding to the destination list, and then provides the route search result screen (S25) (S26) and [pg. 5, para. 1, beginning with “The guide starts”] The guide starts when you enter the command, the guide starts with an icon (85) on the path search results screen, perform the route guidance via the set point to multiple destinations (S27) (S28). Thus, navigation has not yet begun and the criterion is unsatisfied while the destinations are being selected), the one or more search results are not displayed with the respective indications of additional time that would be added to the route if the corresponding destinations are added as the second destination to the route (see Park at least [pg. 4, para. 5, beginning with “the user moves”] The search query input menu (not shown) to enter the relevant search terms that the user is looking for the point of interest as shown in Figure 6. When the search execution menu 51 on the search screen, including the entered search terms or the query search for points of interest matching with the search and provides the search results screen that includes a list of points of interest (61) and Fig. 6 Fig. 6 shows search results 61 (there happens to be only one search result), but does not display any time information relating to the search results).
It would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the route setting method disclosed by Quint, Dhar, and Recktenwald to include the not displaying added travel time when adding additional route stops of Park. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to make this modification because displaying this information at each stop addition may become overwhelming, since the process of adding stops to a route may continue through many iterations, as suggested by Park (see Park at least [pg. 4, para. 7, beginning with “Route setting screen”] Repeat the above process can be continuously set to the plurality of destination when the destination routing through additional icons (45).).
Claim(s) 7 and 8 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Quint, in view of Dhar, and further in view of US 20140129143 A1 Dave; Swapnil R. et al. (hereinafter Dave).
Regarding claim 7, Quint and Dhar disclose The method of claim 1.
Quint and Dhar do not teach: the method further comprising: receiving, via the one or more input devices, an indication that the route has been modified at a second electronic device that is different from the electronic device; and after receiving the indication, updating the route at the electronic device.
However, Dave teaches: the method further comprising: receiving, via the one or more input devices, an indication that the route has been modified at a second electronic device that is different from the electronic device (see Dave at least [0057] In some instances in which a user of system 100 is following another person or device along a particular route, the leader of that route might change the route… when such a change in route occurs, a notification may be provided to a user who is following the route and [0060] a change in route may, in some embodiments, be detected by a user device (e.g., system 100) based on navigation information received from another user device); and
after receiving the indication, updating the route at the electronic device (see Dave at least [0062] the user device (e.g., system 100) may recalculate and/or otherwise update the directions and/or other navigation instructions being provided to reflect the new route).
It would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the route setting method disclosed by Quint and Dhar to include the sharing of route updates between multiple relevant electronic devices of Dave. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to make this modification because there may be multiple vehicles or users traveling together on the same route, and this modification allows users in different vehicles to all be appropriately apprised of up-to-date route information when directly communicating with one another is difficult or distracting, as suggested by Dave (see Dave at least [0005] For example, the drivers might need to call each other (e.g., individually using their cell phones) to keep in touch about new waypoints and different route segments to be taken during the road trip. This can be difficult and inconvenient for the travelers, particularly when some people are traveling alone in a vehicle or more than two vehicles are involved in the trip).
Regarding claim 8, Quint, Dhar, and Dave disclose: The method of claim 7, wherein the modification of the route at the second electronic device includes addition of a respective destination to the route (see Dave at least [0057] Such a change may, for instance, include a change in destination, the addition or deletion of a waypoint, or simply a change in the roads, freeways, and/or other segments that make up the route), and updating the route at the electronic device includes updating the route to include the respective destination (see Dave at least [0062] the user device (e.g., system 100) may recalculate and/or otherwise update the directions and/or other navigation instructions being provided to reflect the new route).
It would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the route setting method disclosed by Quint, Dhar, and Dave to include the sharing of route updates between multiple relevant electronic devices of Dave. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to make this modification because there may be multiple vehicles or users traveling together on the same route, and this modification allows users in different vehicles to all be appropriately apprised of up-to-date route information when directly communicating with one another is difficult or distracting, as suggested by Dave (see Dave at least [0005] For example, the drivers might need to call each other (e.g., individually using their cell phones) to keep in touch about new waypoints and different route segments to be taken during the road trip. This can be difficult and inconvenient for the travelers, particularly when some people are traveling alone in a vehicle or more than two vehicles are involved in the trip).
Claim(s) 9 and 10 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Quint, in view of Dhar, further in view of US 20100174483 A1 KIM; Hee Woon et al. (hereinafter Kim), and further in view of US 20220120569 A1 Gerrese; Alexander Willem et al. (hereinafter Gerrese).
Regarding claim 9, Quint and Dhar disclose: The method of claim 1.
Quint and Dhar do not teach: the method further comprising: while navigating along the route and displaying the route that includes the first destination and the second destination located immediately after the first destination, detecting that a location of the electronic device is within a threshold distance of the first destination; and in response to detecting that the location of the electronic device is within the threshold distance of the first destination, initiating a process to pause the navigation along the route prior to initiating navigation along the route from the first destination to the second destination.
However, Kim teaches: the method further comprising: while navigating along the route and displaying the route that includes the first destination and the second destination located immediately after the first destination (see Kim at least [0078] The controller 170, in step 420, may control the display unit 154 to display the requested road guide map), detecting that a location of the electronic device is within a threshold distance of the first destination (see Kim at least [0078] The controller 170, in step 450, may determine whether the mobile terminal is located within a range of the destination using information about the current location of the mobile terminal).
It would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the route setting method disclosed by Quint and Dhar to include the navigation device nearing its destination determination of Kim. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to make this modification because determination of arrival to a stop on the route is necessary in order to notify a user that they are reaching a location, as suggested by Kim (see Kim at least [0081] If the mobile terminal is located within a range of an intermediate location, the controller 170, in step 470, may control the display unit 154 to display an arrival notice image indicating that the user has arrived at the intermediate location).
Quint, Dhar, and Kim do not teach: in response to detecting that the location of the electronic device is within the threshold distance of the first destination, initiating a process to pause the navigation along the route prior to initiating navigation along the route from the first destination to the second destination.
However, Gerrese teaches: in response to detecting that the location of the electronic device is within the threshold distance of the first destination, initiating a process to pause the navigation along the route prior to initiating navigation along the route from the first destination to the second destination (see Gerrese at least [0082] the central computing system is further configured to provide a user interface for selection between: pausing a ride at the waypoint while the first autonomous vehicle charges and continuing the route request with the first autonomous vehicle, and switching, at the waypoint, to the second autonomous vehicle for the portion of the route request).
It would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the route setting and waypoint-arrival detection method disclosed by Quint, Dhar, and Kim to include the process of pausing navigation between stops of Gerrese. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to make this modification because pausing between route stops is a more cost-effective travel option for users, as suggested by Gerrese (see Gerrese at least [0061] allows the user to select between a speed-optimized route (button 606) and a price-optimized route (button 608)).
Regarding claim 10, Quint, Dhar, Kim, and Gerrese disclose: The method of claim 9, wherein initiating the process to pause the navigation along the route includes displaying a first selectable option that is selectable to pause the navigation along the route, and a second selectable option that is selectable to initiate the navigation along the route from the first destination to the second destination without pausing the navigation along the route (see Gerrese at least [0082] the central computing system is further configured to provide a user interface for selection between: pausing a ride at the waypoint while the first autonomous vehicle charges and continuing the route request with the first autonomous vehicle, and switching, at the waypoint, to the second autonomous vehicle for the portion of the route request).
It would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the route setting and waypoint-arrival detection method disclosed by Quint, Dhar, Kim, and Gerrese to include the user options of pausing navigation between stops or continuing of Gerrese. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to make this modification because this allows users to choose an option that best suits their values, as suggested by Gerrese (see Gerrese at least [0061] allows the user to select between a speed-optimized route (button 606) and a price-optimized route (button 608)).
Claim(s) 11 and 12 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Quint, in view of Dhar, further in view of Kim, further in view of Gerrese, and further in view of US 20210267115 A1 Fjelstad; Stephen Filip et al. (hereinafter Fjelstad).
Regarding claim 11, Quint, Dhar, Kim, and Gerrese disclose: The method of claim 9.
Quint, Dhar, Kim, and Gerrese do not teach: wherein initiating the process to pause the navigation along the route includes selectively pausing the navigation along the route automatically, without user input to pause the navigation along the route.
However, Fjelstad teaches: wherein initiating the process to pause the navigation along the route includes selectively pausing the navigation along the route automatically, without user input to pause the navigation along the route (see Fjelstad at least [0151] a comparator configured to compare an agricultural vehicle position of the agricultural vehicle with swath departure and arrival locations; and an interswath turning element configured to automatically toggle the turn and swath guidance systems between activated and paused configurations according to the compared agricultural vehicle position and the swath departure and arrival locations).
It would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the route setting method disclosed by Quint, Dhar, Kim, and Gerrese to include the automatic traveling guidance pausing of Fjelstad. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to make this modification because under certain circumstances, pausing is necessary even without driver intervention in order to operate more smoothly, as suggested by Fjelstad (see Fjelstad at least [0012] Accordingly, the guidance assembly described herein seamlessly hands off control of the autonomous agricultural vehicle throughout operation within a field including operations along swaths and between swaths (e.g., interswath operations or turning)).
Regarding claim 12¸ Quint, Dhar, Kim, Gerrese, and Fjelstad disclose: The method of claim 11, wherein selectively pausing the navigation along the route automatically is based on one or more of: a type of destination of the first destination; or a location of the first destination (see Fjelstad at least [0151] a comparator configured to compare an agricultural vehicle position of the agricultural vehicle with swath departure and arrival locations; and an interswath turning element configured to automatically toggle the turn and swath guidance systems between activated and paused configurations according to the compared agricultural vehicle position and the swath departure and arrival locations).
It would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the route setting method disclosed by Quint, Dhar, Kim, Gerrese, and Fjelstad to include the automatic traveling guidance pausing of Fjelstad. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to make this modification because under certain circumstances, the user experience is streamlined if the vehicle automatically detects the particular type of transition point at which navigation should be paused, as suggested by Fjelstad (see Fjelstad at least [0012] Accordingly, the guidance assembly described herein seamlessly hands off control of the autonomous agricultural vehicle throughout operation within a field including operations along swaths and between swaths (e.g., interswath operations or turning)).
Claim(s) 15 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Quint, in view of Dhar, and further in view of CA 2794253 A1 CAMPBELL CHERYL ANN et al. (hereinafter Campbell).
Regarding claim 15, Quint and Dhar disclose: The method of claim 1, wherein initiating the search for the second destination based on the second user input includes displaying, via the display generation component, one or more representations of one or more search results corresponding to the second user input displayed on a representation of a map (see Dhar at least [0010] the processor can further construct the identified point of interest data to cluster and present it on the navigation map simultaneously).
It would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the route setting method disclosed by Quint and Dhar to include the mapped display of search results of Dhar. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to make this modification because displaying searched points of interest on a map is a way to help users identify options that meet their requirements, as suggested by Dhar (see Dhar at least [0004] navigation processing for effectively identifying and/or clustering points of interest (POIs) on navigation maps).
Quint and Dhar do not teach: the method further comprising: while displaying the one or more representations of the one or more search results corresponding to the second user input displayed on the representation of the map, receiving, via the one or more input devices, a third user input corresponding to selection of a first representation of a first search result of the one or more representations of the one or more search results; and in response to receiving the third user input, displaying, via the display generation component, a user interface corresponding to the first search result, wherein the user interface corresponding to the first search result includes a user selectable option that is selectable to initiate a process to add the first search result as a destination to the route.
However, Campbell teaches: the method further comprising: while displaying the one or more representations of the one or more search results corresponding to the second user input displayed on the representation of the map (see Campbell at least [0058] At step 1000 of FIG. 10, the build itinerary page is displayed with a list of locations and a map of the area showing icons for locations in the list), receiving, via the one or more input devices, a third user input corresponding to selection of a first representation of a first search result of the one or more representations of the one or more search results (see Campbell at least [0060] The alternative means for selecting a location is to select one of the map icons and Fig. 10 block 1006: Map icon is selected); and
in response to receiving the third user input, displaying, via the display generation component, a user interface corresponding to the first search result, wherein the user interface corresponding to the first search result includes a user selectable option that is selectable to initiate a process to add the first search result as a destination to the route (see Campbell at least [0061] After step 1004 or 1006, a location pop-up is opened at step 1008 that contains location details for the selected location. FIG. 11 provides an example of a location pop-up 1100 on build itinerary page 900 after the selection of a location indicated by location icon 1102. Pop-up 1100 includes a name for the location 1104, an address for the location 1106, a phone number for the location 1108, hours of operation 1110, a date the location was opened 1112, a website for the location 1114, a short description of the location 1116, an image of the outside of the location 1118, an Add to Itinerary button 1120, and a Close button 1122).
It would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the route setting method disclosed by Quint and Dhar to include the map icon destination selection method of Campbell. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to make this modification because displaying interactive map icons allows a more visually stimulating route selection process for users, including a changing of icon color after addition to the route, as suggested by Campbell (see Campbell at least [0062] If the user selects Add to Itinerary button 1120 at step 1110, a location entry is placed at the bottom of build itinerary page 900 at step 1012 and the color of the location icon on map 900 is changed at step 1014).
Claim(s) 16 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Quint, in view of Dhar, and further in view of US 20170089718 A1 Bostick; James E. et al. (hereinafter Bostick).
Regarding claim 16, Quint and Dhar disclose: The method of claim 1.
Quint and Dhar do not teach: the method further comprising: displaying, via the display generation component in a map browsing user interface, one or more suggested destinations for a navigation route based at least in part on: one or more prior routes navigated by the electronic device;
one or more calendar events accessible on the electronic device; one or more recent searches performed on the electronic device; or one or more events in a messaging application of the electronic device.
However, Bostick teaches: the method further comprising: displaying, via the display generation component in a map browsing user interface, one or more suggested destinations for a navigation route (see Bostick at least [0074] The stop suggestion mechanism 450 determines a Quick Stop convenience store is a suggested stop along the route as shown in FIG. 14, and displays the location of the quick stop convenience store as a suggested stop on the displayed map) based at least in part on:
one or more prior routes navigated by the electronic device;
one or more calendar events accessible on the electronic device (see Bostick at least [0074] the user's historical data 1200 combined with the user's calendar 1100 and the Valley View Tennis Club page 1300 clearly indicate the purpose of the journey is to travel to the Valley View Tennis Club for a tennis match. Based on the historical data 1200, the journey purpose mechanism 430 determines the user stops at a 7-11 convenience store on the way to Fair Acres Tennis Club, and can determine a suggested stop for the user at a 7-11 convenience store. But for this example, we assume there are no 7-11 convenience store along the route to the Valley View Tennis Club. The stop suggestion mechanism 450 can determine that absent a 7-11 convenience store, a stop at a different convenience store is a suggested stop);
one or more recent searches performed on the electronic device; or
one or more events in a messaging application of the electronic device.
It would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the route setting method disclosed by Quint and Dhar to include the displaying of calendar event-based destination suggestions of Bostick. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to make this modification because this consideration of the user’s calendar in recommending destinations anticipates locations the user is likely to search, but makes the user’s experience easier by offering suggestions with no search necessary, as suggested by Bostick (see Bostick at least [0074] the map mechanism can display a suggested stop at the Quick Stop convenience store based on determining the user is traveling to Valley View for a tennis match, without the user taking any action to indicate an interest in tennis clubs or convenience stores).
Claim(s) 17 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Quint, in view of Dhar, further in view of KR 20140055009 A YU HYUN JOONG et al. (hereinafter Yu), further in view of US 20190063934 A1 Napier; Parhys L. (hereinafter Napier), and further in view of Recktenwald.
Regarding claim 17, Quint and Dhar disclose: The method of claim 1.
Quint and Dhar do not teach: the method further comprising: a first selectable option that is selectable to remove the first destination from the route that is displayed in association with the first representation; a second selectable option that is selectable to remove the second destination from the route that is displayed in association with the second representation; while navigating along the route, receiving, via the one or more input devices, a third user input corresponding to a request to display a navigation tray that includes one or more selectable options for interacting with the route; and in response to receiving the third user input, displaying, via the display generation component, the navigation tray, wherein the navigation tray includes: representations of destinations included in the route, including a first representation of the first destination and a second representation of the second destination; a first indication of an estimated time for reaching the first destination displayed in association with the first representation; and a second indication of an estimated time for reaching the second destination displayed in association with the second representation.
However, Yu teaches: the method further comprising: a first selectable option that is selectable to remove the first destination from the route that is displayed in association with the first representation (see Yu at least [pg. 5, para. 7, beginning with “In another embodiment”] For example, as shown in FIG. 10, the route guidance apparatus 1100 (or the display section 1130) may display a check box on the touch display that allows selection of each item included in the list. At this time, the route guidance apparatus 1100 (or the list management unit 1140) can delete the selected item from the list when the user checks the check box and selects the "OK" button 1020); and
a second selectable option that is selectable to remove the second destination from the route that is displayed in association with the second representation (see Yu at least [pg. 4, para. 8, beginning with “10 is a diagram”] If the user selects the "OK" button 1020 after checking the check box 1010 associated with the second destination as shown in FIG. 10, the second destination in the currently set route may be deleted).
It would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the route setting method disclosed by Quint and Dhar to include the option to remove selected route stops of Yu. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to make this modification because it would be inconvenient for a user to need to completely erase and restart their route search if they decided to remove one stop, as suggested by Yu (see Yu at least [pg. 2, para. 3, beginning with “Further, when there are”] when there are a plurality of destinations (including waypoints), the user has to input each destination and inconvenience that the destinations must be re-entered from the beginning to change the order of the destination and [pg. 3, para. 4, beginning with “In this specification”] method capable of setting a route more effectively).
Quint, Dhar, and Yu do not teach: while navigating along the route, receiving, via the one or more input devices, a third user input corresponding to a request to display a navigation tray that includes one or more selectable options for interacting with the route; and in response to receiving the third user input, displaying, via the display generation component, the navigation tray, wherein the navigation tray includes: representations of destinations included in the route, including a first representation of the first destination and a second representation of the second destination; a first indication of an estimated time for reaching the first destination displayed in association with the first representation; and a second indication of an estimated time for reaching the second destination displayed in association with the second representation.
However, Napier teaches: while navigating along the route (see Napier at least [0017] (a) displaying, on a first display section of the display screen, a route guidance mode including driving directions and an ETA area), receiving, via the one or more input devices, a third user input corresponding to a request to display a navigation tray that includes one or more selectable options for interacting with the route (see Napier at least [0017] (b) detecting a user input on the first touch section, wherein the touchpad includes a first touch section and a second touch section, and wherein the user input is a user click on the touchpad in an area corresponding to the ETA area of the route guidance mode); and
in response to receiving the third user input, displaying, via the display generation component, the navigation tray (see Napier at least [0017] (c) activating a route overview mode based on the user input; (d) displaying, in the first display section, the route overview mode including the list of the plurality of destinations), wherein the navigation tray includes:
representations of destinations included in the route, including a first representation of the first destination and a second representation of the second destination (See Napier at least [0051] Route overview mode also includes a route map 416 of the waypoints, showing an overview of the route that will be taken based on the waypoint listings 408, 410, and 412, the destination 414, and the order that the waypoints are in. Route map 416 includes visual representations of the route segments 418, the waypoints 420, the starting location 422 (or current location), and the ending location 424 (or final destination)).
It would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the route setting method disclosed by Quint, Dhar, and Yu to include the navigation tray display including representations of points along the route of Napier. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to make this modification because displaying this overview information in one easily digestible screen allows a user to easily, safely interact with the navigation system, as suggested by Napier (see Napier at least [0017] The resulting technical effect is that a user is able to more safely operate a route navigation system in a vehicle).
Quint, Dhar, Yu, and Napier do not teach: wherein the navigation tray includes: a first indication of an estimated time for reaching the first destination displayed in association with the first representation; and a second indication of an estimated time for reaching the second destination displayed in association with the second representation.
However, Recktenwald teaches: wherein the navigation tray includes: a first indication of an estimated time for reaching the first destination displayed in association with the first representation (see Recktenwald at least [pg. 14, lines 20-21] Figure 4 shows the image displayed on the display screen 206 with the two potential routes 12 and 13 and Fig. 4 See representations of first destination 1 and second destination 2 in route 12 of Fig. 4); and
a second indication of an estimated time for reaching the second destination displayed in association with the second representation (see Recktenwald at least [pg. 14, line 21 – pg. 15, line 1] In addition to showing the routes, the method calculates and the display screen shows the estimated time of arrival 14 at the first intermediate destination 1 on the first potential route 12 and the estimated time of arrival 15 at the second intermediate destination 2 on the first potential route 12).
It would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the route setting method disclosed by Quint, Dhar, Yu, and Napier to include the display of estimated time to reach each destination along a route of Recktenwald. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to make this modification because navigation system users can be highly motivated by the amount of time it takes to reach their destinations, and as such it is beneficial to display this information, as suggested by Recktenwald (see Recktenwald at least [pg. 15, lines 19-21] the user may choose the first potential route 12 over the second potential route 13 simply because the additional time taken (+5 min) is less than for the second potential route 13 (+6 min)).
Claim(s) 18 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Quint, in view of Dhar, further in view of Recktenwald, further in view of CA 2820249 A1 RASMUSSEN LARS ELISTRUP et al. (hereinafter Rasmussen), and further in view of CN 107430007 A NAGY, A et al. (hereinafter Nagy).
Regarding claim 18, Quint and Dhar disclose: The method of claim 1, the method further comprising:
after adding the first destination and the second destination to the route, and prior to navigation along the route being initiated, displaying, via the display generation component, one or more route lines corresponding to the route overlaid on a representation of a virtual map (see Dhar at least [0061] Figure 7C shows a simplified map display 700 according to one embodiment, illustrating a preferred (“best”) route 702 from point A to B to destination 706, and a secondary route 704 from point C to D).
It would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the route setting method disclosed by Quint and Dhar to include the display of route line(s) of Dhar. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to make this modification because such a display can present the user with a visual representation of preferred and less preferred route options, as suggested by Dhar (see Dhar at least [0061] the primary route 702 can be highlighted to distinguish it from the secondary route 704).
Quint and Dhar do not teach: wherein: in accordance with a determination that a current zoom level of the virtual map is a first zoom level: the virtual map is displayed with a first route line from a current location of the electronic device to the first destination and a second route line from the first destination to the second destination, the first route line is displayed in association with a first visual indication of an estimated length of the route from the current location of the electronic device to the first destination, and the second route line is displayed in association with a second visual indication of an estimated length of the route from the first destination to the second destination; and in accordance with a determination that the current zoom level of the virtual map is a second zoom level, less than the first zoom level: the representation of the virtual map is displayed with a third route line from a current location of the electronic device to the second destination, and the third route line is displayed in association with a third visual indication of an estimated length of the route from the current location of the electronic device to the second destination.
However, Rasmussen teaches: wherein: in accordance with a determination that a current zoom level of the virtual map is a first zoom level: the virtual map is displayed with a first route line (see Rasmussen at least [0054] location markers and routes can be overlaid on top of the pre-rendered map tiles, for example in response to user requests for driving directions and [0085] assigns each non-eliminated data point to a "group" that defines the zoom level at which the point becomes visually relevant (e.g., data points in group "A" may be required to be displayed at every zoom level, while data points in group "B" are not required to be displayed until the zoom level has increased past the zoom level corresponding to a city-level view or finer, etc.). and [0086] In one embodiment, initially, after a user enters a driving directions query, the map image 805 displays an overview of the entire selected route. The user may then zoom in to parts of the route to get more detailed views); and
in accordance with a determination that the current zoom level of the virtual map is a second zoom level, less than the first zoom level: the representation of the virtual map is displayed with a third route line with less detail than the first route line (see Rasmussen at least [0085] assigns each non-eliminated data point to a "group" that defines the zoom level at which the point becomes visually relevant (e.g., data points in group "A" may be required to be displayed at every zoom level, while data points in group "B" are not required to be displayed until the zoom level has increased past the zoom level corresponding to a city-level view or finer, etc.). and [0086] In one embodiment, initially, after a user enters a driving directions query, the map image 805 displays an overview of the entire selected route. The user may then zoom in to parts of the route to get more detailed views.).
It would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the route setting method disclosed by Quint and Dhar to include the variation in amount of route detail displayed based on map zoom level of Rasmussen. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to make this modification because this displays only the most relevant pieces of information at each zoom level, allowing the user to choose what zoom level and what information they desire to view, as suggested by Rasmussen (see Rasmussen at least [0081] the user may interact with these textual directions by zooming into portions of the route (e.g., by clicking on or otherwise selecting specific driving maneuvers) to obtain additional textual or graphical details).
Quint, Dhar, and Rasmussen do not teach: the virtual map is displayed with a first route line from a current location of the electronic device to the first destination and a second route line from the first destination to the second destination, the first route line is displayed in association with a first visual indication of an estimated length of the route from the current location of the electronic device to the first destination, and the second route line is displayed in association with a second visual indication of an estimated length of the route from the first destination to the second destination, and a third route line from a current location of the electronic device to the second destination, and the third route line is displayed in association with a third visual indication of an estimated length of the route from the current location of the electronic device to the second destination.
However, Recktenwald teaches: the virtual map is displayed with a first route line from a current location of the electronic device to the first destination and a second route line from the first destination to the second destination (see Recktenwald at least Fig. 4 Fig. 4 shows a first route line connecting starting point A with first destination 1 and a second route line connecting first destination 1 and second destination 2),
the first route line is displayed in association with a first visual indication of an estimated length of the route from the current location of the electronic device to the first destination (see Recktenwald at least [pg. 14, line 22-23] the display screen shows the estimated time of arrival 14 at the first intermediate destination 1 and [pg. 15, lines 9-10] Further information, such as the distance to each intermediate destination may be displayed together with the estimated time of arrival), and
the second route line is displayed in association with a second visual indication of an estimated length of the route from the first destination to the second destination (see Recktenwald at least [pg. 14, line 22 – pg. 15, line 1] the display screen shows… the estimated time of arrival 15 at the second intermediate destination and [pg. 15, lines 9-10] Further information, such as the distance to each intermediate destination may be displayed together with the estimated time of arrival).
It would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the route setting method disclosed by Quint, Dhar, and Rasmussen to include the displaying of a route in segments between each location along with time estimates of Recktenwald. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to make this modification because a driver may then use the route segment information in addition to the timing information to determine which route best suits their particular circumstances, as suggested by Recktenwald (see Recktenwald at least [pg. 15, lines 14-18] Using the information displayed, the user may decide which route suits his personal requirements. For example, in the example given, the user may have little petrol left in the tank and therefore choose the second potential route 13, on the basis that he will reach the petrol station 1 sooner by following that route and is therefore less likely to run out of petrol. Alternatively, if he has sufficient petrol in the tank, he may prefer to use more of it before filling up and select, via the input device 204 to follow the first potential route 12).
Quint, Dhar, Rasmussen, and Recktenwald do not teach: a third route line from a current location of the electronic device to the second destination, and the third route line is displayed in association with a third visual indication of an estimated length of the route from the current location of the electronic device to the second destination.
However, Nagy teaches: a third route line from a current location of the electronic device to the second destination (see Nagy at least [pg. 4, para. 6, beginning with “2A and 2B illustrate”] The user interface includes a map 201 illustrating the starting point 203, the destination point 205, and the illustrated route between the starting point 203 and the destination point 205.), and the third route line is displayed in association with a third visual indication of an estimated length of the route from the current location of the electronic device to the second destination (see Nagy at least [pg. 4, para. 6, beginning with “2A and 2B illustrate”] The user interface also displays metric information for the route, including the distance 209 from the starting point 203 to the destination point 205 and the estimated time of arrival (ETA) 211).
It would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the route setting method disclosed by Quint, Dhar, Rasmussen, and Recktenwald to include the start-to-end display of route and timing of Nagy. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to make this modification because this display gives an overview of the entire trip, allowing users to view a general level of detail in order to choose their desired route, as suggested by Nagy (see Nagy at least [pg. 5, para. 3, beginning with “For this purpose”] Once the users choose to match their preferred route, they select the "Start" button 221 on the user interface and the manual / automated navigation is activated).
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 01/27/2026 have been fully considered.
Regarding the arguments provided with respect to the 35 U.S.C. §103 rejections of claims 1-20 and 28 (remarks pages 12-14), Applicant’s arguments 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.
Regarding the arguments provided for the 35 U.S.C. §101 rejection of claims 1-20 and 28 (remarks pages 11-12), the applicant's arguments have been considered but are not persuasive.
(A) applicant argues, " Applicant respectfully submits that the claims do not recite an abstract idea and, even under the Office Action's characterizations, the claims integrate any alleged abstract concept into a practical application. The Office Action analogizes the limitations to mental steps, e.g., "choosing a spot for dinner nearby the movie theater" and concludes that the limitations can be performed mentally. Applicant respectfully disagrees. When viewed as a whole, the claims address a specific technological problem in computer-implemented navigation - specifically, how to configure a multi-stop route in accordance with determinations that the second user input is received prior to navigation being initiated and that the second destination is being added immediately after the first destination. When those determinations are satisfied, the device centers the search on the first destination in the route. The complementary branch, as amended, centers the search on the third destination when the device determines that the insertion is immediately after a third destination that precedes the second destination. These operations necessarily require the device to apply a deterministic centering rule based on route ordering and input being received prior to navigation being initiated, and automatically initiate a bounded search centered on that destination. A human "thinking about a nearby restaurant" does not (and practically cannot while configuring a multi-stop itinerary) perform these computations or the automatic centering of the search to a particular, previously added route stop. The claims thus recite more than data collection and display; they recite how and when the device must conduct the search. The pending claims already implement a concrete, device-level improvement that integrates any alleged abstract idea into a practical application, as explained above. However, to advance prosecution, claim 1 has been further amended to recite, "after adding the second destination to the route, initiating, by the electronic device, navigation directions for traversing the route including the first destination, the second destination and the third destination." Under Step 2A, Prong 2, the claimed determinations constrain the search and ordering, and the electronic device then initiates "navigation directions for traversing the route" without further human intervention, thereby tying the claimed computations to machine-implemented route guidance. For at least these reasons, Applicant asserts the claims are patent-eligible under 35 U.S.C. § 101 because they do not recite an abstract idea but instead provide a technological solution to a technological problem, and are accordingly directed to a practical application. Applicant respectfully requests reconsideration and withdrawal of the proffered 35 U.S.C. § 101 rejection of the pending claims 1-20 and 28."
As to point (A), Examiner respectfully disagrees. Examiner notes that ordering items (in this case, ordering stops along a planned route) is a step that encompasses mental processes. Additionally, the determination to focus a search on a specific area is something that, although performed by a device as claimed, can be performed by a human mind given proper background information. The method of searching, as broadly claimed, is not limited to a process that can only be performed by a computer. For instance, many people have enough familiarity with a city in which they live or work that they could mentally devise a multi-stop route around town while considering proximity of various stops to one another. Even though the process has several steps and determinations, these details do not preclude many steps of the process from being carried out in the human mind. Additionally, while the claimed invention does recite physical elements such as an electronic device, a display generation component, and input device(s), these physical components act simply to send data, receive data, and/or computerize a process that could be carried out by the human mind. Examiner appreciates the effort to overcome the rejection with the inclusion of an electronic device initiating navigation directions. However, the claimed invention lacks either an application of the judicial exceptions or a characterization of the processing steps that could not be performed by the human mind. As such, the rejection under 35 U.S.C. § 101 remains.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
US 20210381844 A1 Baig; Haroon et al. discloses identifying candidate intermediate destinations within the vicinity of a final destination
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ELLE ROSE KNUDSON whose telephone number is (703)756-1742. The examiner can normally be reached 1000-1700 ET M-F.
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, Hitesh Patel can be reached on (571) 270-5442. 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.
/ELLE ROSE KNUDSON/Examiner, Art Unit 3667
/Hitesh Patel/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3667
3/13/26