Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status
The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
Continued Examination Under 37 CFR 1.114
A request for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, including the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e), was filed in this application after final rejection. Since this application is eligible for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114. Applicant's submission filed on April 28, 2026 has been entered.
Status of Claims
Claims 1 – 6 and 8 – 14 remain pending.
Claim 14 is new claim.
Claims 1, 3, 11 and 12 are amended.
Claim 7 is cancelled.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 04/28/2026 with respect to claims 1 – 6 and 8 – 14 have been considered but are moot because the new grounds of rejection do not rely on any reference applied in the prior rejection of record for any teaching or matter specifically challenged in the argument.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 103 which forms the basis for all obviousness rejections set forth in this Office action:
A patent for a claimed invention may not be obtained, notwithstanding that the claimed invention is not identically disclosed as set forth in section 102, if the differences between the claimed invention and the prior art are such that the claimed invention as a whole would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which the claimed invention pertains. Patentability shall not be negated by the manner in which the invention was made.
Claims 1 – 6 and 8 – 13 are rejected under 35 U.S.C 103 as being unpatentable over Fujimoto US Patent Application Publication No. US-20190394278-A1 (hereinafter Fujimoto) in view of Nagahiro Patent Application Publication No. JP-2019133259-A (hereinafter Nagahiro) and Yamamoto Patent Application Publication No. WO-2020250928-A1 (hereinafter Yamamoto) and further in view of Chiba Patent Application Publication No. JP-2014007677-A (hereinafter Chiba).
Regarding claim 1, Fujimoto discloses an information processing method in an information processing device that supports installation of an apparatus in a facility, the information processing method comprising (Fujimoto in [0035] discloses, “Installation support using an equipment installation support system 1 that supports installation of such an air conditioner will be described, taking, as an example, support of installation of a plurality of pieces of equipment, namely, the plurality of indoor units 20 b, Wi-Fi access points 70 A and 70 B, and Wi-Fi units 80 A and 80 B illustrated in FIG. 12”): by a processor of the information processing device, acquiring identification information of the apparatus (Fujimoto in [0046] discloses, “The device ID is second identification information identifying a specific piece of equipment from the other pieces of equipment”); generating installation information including an installation screen on which the installation location is indicated on the acquired structural diagram, and the acquired installation procedure; outputting the installation information (Fujimoto in [0077] discloses, “When the installation worker inputs a device ID to the tablet terminal 90 by using the input device 97 while viewing the device ID ... numbers, the CPU 91 displays the setting position of the indoor unit 20 b on the display screen 95 by using the first installation information corresponding to the device ID. For example, the first installation information includes CAD information of the n-th floor in which the indoor unit 20 b is to be installed. The tablet terminal 90 displays on the display screen 95 a sketch of the n-th floor on which the indoor unit 20 b is marked using the CAD information”); and when detecting that an installation work of the apparatus has ended up to a first procedure, outputting connection confirmation information for performing a connection confirmation work for a wire connection of the apparatus (Fujimoto in [0077] discloses, “equipment installation support system 1 may further be configured such that the server 30 has an image recognition function and the tablet terminal 90 has a GPS function, such that an image captured by the camera 98 and the position of capturing the image are transmitted from the tablet terminal 90 to the server 30 to allow the server 30 to examine whether the indoor unit 20 b has been installed at the correct position by using the device information and the first installation information”).
Fujimoto doesn’t disclose about the following limitation as further recited in the claim.
Nagahiro discloses acquiring association information associated with the acquired identification information from a memory, the association information including a structural diagram showing a structure of the facility (Nagahiro in [0022] discloses, “The floor plan storage unit 21 stores a floor plan of the building”), an installation location of the apparatus in the facility, an installation procedure of the apparatus (Nagahiro in [0023] discloses, “In the equipment table, the equipment information generated by associating the name indicating the installation location of each equipment in the building, the type of the equipment (hereinafter referred to as “equipment type”) and the identification number of the equipment is set”).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention to integrate the technique of Nagahiro into the system of Fujimoto because it will allow the user to have a clear visual for the installer to exactly where the apparatus need to be placed in the facility preventing misplacement error.
Fujimoto and Nagahiro in the combination doesn’t disclose about the following limitation as further recited in the claim.
Yamamoto discloses connection type information indicating whether the apparatus is a wired apparatus to be connected by a cable or a wireless apparatus not to be connected by the cable; and determining whether the apparatus is the wired apparatus or the wireless apparatus based on the connection type information (Yamamoto in [Page – 5, Paragraph – 9] discloses, “The data storage unit 201 in the management server 200 stores the cable connection design information (cable accommodation list) L including the information in which the surface patterns on both ends of the cable are paired and the information in which the ports of the devices performing the connection work are paired”. The system disclosed in Yamamoto stores port connection information which implies to wired apparatus information and wireless apparatus would have no port connection or information about ports), wherein the connection confirmation information to be output when the apparatus is determined to be the wired apparatus includes information urging the connection confirmation work (Yamamoto in [Page – 7, Last Paragraph] discloses, “The device identification unit 202 identifies the device (host name) from the image acquired via the network. On the other hand, the tip identification unit 203 identifies the tip of the cable from the image acquired via the network. Then, as shown in FIG. 21, the operator confirms that the cable is correctly connected according to the support information displayed on the instruction display unit 102”).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention to integrate the technique of Yamamoto into the system of Fujimoto in view of Nagahiro because it will make the installation process faster and easier while helping to prevent wiring errors.
Fujimoto, Nagahiro and Yamamoto in the combination doesn’t disclose about the following limitation as further recited in the claim.
Chiba discloses the connection confirmation information to be output when the apparatus is determined to be the wireless apparatus includes information indicating that the connection confirmation work is unnecessary (Chiba in [Page – 1, Paragraph – 4] discloses, “the current market, wireless LAN connection (hereinafter referred to as “authentication-free wireless connection”) in which the above-described authentication processing is omitted is the mainstream”).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention to integrate the technique of Chiba into the system of Fujimoto in view of Nagahiro and Yamamoto because it will reduce time and labor when installing an apparatus by skipping unnecessary confirmation steps.
Summary of Citations (Chiba)
[Page – 1, Paragraph – 4]; “the current market, wireless LAN connection (hereinafter referred to as “authentication-free wireless connection”) in which the above-described authentication processing is omitted is the mainstream”.
Summary of Citations (Fujimoto)
Paragraph [0035]; “Installation support using an equipment installation support system 1 that supports installation of such an air conditioner will be described, taking, as an example, support of installation of a plurality of pieces of equipment, namely, the plurality of indoor units 20 b, Wi-Fi access points 70 A and 70 B, and Wi-Fi units 80 A and 80 B illustrated in FIG. 12”.
Paragraph [0046]; “The device ID is second identification information identifying a specific piece of equipment from the other pieces of equipment”.
Paragraph [0077]; “When the installation worker inputs a device ID to the tablet terminal 90 by using the input device 97 while viewing the device ID ... numbers, the CPU 91 displays the setting position of the indoor unit 20 b on the display screen 95 by using the first installation information corresponding to the device ID. For example, the first installation information includes CAD information of the n-th floor in which the indoor unit 20 b is to be installed. The tablet terminal 90 displays on the display screen 95 a sketch of the n-th floor on which the indoor unit 20 b is marked using the CAD information ... equipment installation support system 1 may further be configured such that the server 30 has an image recognition function and the tablet terminal 90 has a GPS function, such that an image captured by the camera 98 and the position of capturing the image are transmitted from the tablet terminal 90 to the server 30 to allow the server 30 to examine whether the indoor unit 20 b has been installed at the correct position by using the device information and the first installation information”.
Summary of Citations (Nagahiro)
Paragraph [0022]; “The floor plan storage unit 21 stores a floor plan of the building”.
Paragraph [0023]; “In the equipment table, the equipment information generated by associating the name indicating the installation location of each equipment in the building, the type of the equipment (hereinafter referred to as “equipment type”) and the identification number of the equipment is set”.
Summary of Citations (Yamamoto)
[Page – 5, Paragraph – 9]; “The data storage unit 201 in the management server 200 stores the cable connection design information (cable accommodation list) L including the information in which the surface patterns on both ends of the cable are paired and the information in which the ports of the devices performing the connection work are paired”.
[Page – 7, Last Paragraph]; “After actually connecting the cable, the image pickup unit 101 of the terminal device 100 is used to capture an image of the tip of the cable and the port of the device after the connection work ... The device identification unit 202 identifies the device (host name) from the image acquired via the network. On the other hand, the tip identification unit 203 identifies the tip of the cable from the image acquired via the network. Then, as shown in FIG. 21, the operator confirms that the cable is correctly connected according to the support information displayed on the instruction display unit 102 ”.
Regarding claim 2, the combination of Fujimoto in view of Nagahiro, Yamamoto and further in view Chiba as a whole teaches claim 1, and Fujimoto teaches claim 2 for the same grounds of rejection from the Final Office Action of 01/28/2026.
Regarding claim 3, Yamamoto in the combination the information processing method according to claim 1, wherein the connection confirmation work, when the apparatus is the wired apparatus, includes an imaging work of capturing an image of the wire connection of the apparatus with an imaging device (Yamamoto in [Page – 7, Last Paragraph] discloses, “After actually connecting the cable, the image pickup unit 101 of the terminal device 100 is used to capture an image of the tip of the cable and the port of the device after the connection work”), and the method further comprises acquiring a wire connection image captured in the imaging work (Yamamoto in [Page – 7, Last Paragraph] discloses, “The device identification unit 202 identifies the device (host name) from the image acquired via the network. On the other hand, the tip identification unit 203 identifies the tip of the cable from the image acquired via the network. Then, as shown in FIG. 21, the operator confirms that the cable is correctly connected according to the support information displayed on the instruction display unit 102”).
Summary of Citations (Yamamoto)
[Page – 7, Last Paragraph]; “After actually connecting the cable, the image pickup unit 101 of the terminal device 100 is used to capture an image of the tip of the cable and the port of the device after the connection work ... The device identification unit 202 identifies the device (host name) from the image acquired via the network. On the other hand, the tip identification unit 203 identifies the tip of the cable from the image acquired via the network. Then, as shown in FIG. 21, the operator confirms that the cable is correctly connected according to the support information displayed on the instruction display unit 102 ”.
Regarding claims 4 – 6, the combination of Fujimoto in view of Nagahiro, Yamamoto and further in view of Chiba as a whole teaches claim 1, and Yamamoto teaches claims 4 – 6 for the same grounds of rejection from the Final Office Action of 01/28/2026.
Regarding claim 8, the combination of Fujimoto in view of Nagahiro, Ushiyama and further in view Yamamoto as a whole teaches claim 1, and Nagahiro teaches claim 8 for the same grounds of rejection from the Final Office Action of 01/28/2026.
Regarding claims 9 and 10, the combination of Fujimoto in view of Nagahiro, Ushiyama and further in view Yamamoto as a whole teaches claim 1, and Fujimoto teaches claims 9 and 10 for the same grounds of rejection from the Final Office Action of 01/28/2026.
Regarding claim 11, is a non-transitory computer readable storage medium claim
corresponds to method claim 1. Therefore, the rejection analysis of claim 1 is applied in claim 11.
Regarding claim 12, apparatus claim 12 corresponds to method claim 1. Therefore, the rejection analysis and motivation to combine of claim 1 is applicable to claim 12.
Regarding claim 13, the combination of Fujimoto in view of Nagahiro, Ushiyama and further in view Yamamoto as a whole teaches claim 1, and Fujimoto and Yamamoto teaches claim 13 for the same grounds of rejection from the Final Office Action of 01/28/2026.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claim 14 is objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter.
Regarding claim 14, the prior art references taken individually or in combination fail to particularly disclose, fairly suggest, or render obvious the limitations as further recited. The applied prior arts Fujimoto, Nagahiro, Ushiyama, Yamamoto and Chiba doesn’t disclose the limitation, the information indicating that the connection confirmation is unnecessary includes a message indicating unnecessity of the connection confirmation work with a camera. Chiba in [Page – 1, Paragraph – 4] discloses about connection confirmation or authentication is not necessary for a wireless device and Ushiyama in [Page – 10, Paragraph – 5] discloses about the system determining the connection confirmation is not necessary. But none of the prior art in the combination discloses about a message indicating unnecessity of the connection confirmation work with a camera.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner
should be directed to ZAID MUHAMMAD SALEH whose telephone number is (703)756-1684.
The examiner can normally be reached M-F 8 am - 5 pm ET. 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, Vu Le can be
reached on (571)272-7332. 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.
/ZAID MUHAMMAD SALEH/
Examiner, Art Unit 2668
05/15/2026
/VU LE/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2668
Prosecution Insights