DETAILED ACTION
This final Office action is responsive to Applicant’s amendment filed May 1, 2026. Claims 1, 4, 10, 12, and 13 have been amended. Claims 15-19 have been added. Claims 1-19 are presented for examination.
Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status
The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed May 1, 2026 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
Preliminarily, it is noted that the previously-pending rejection of claim 13 under 35 U.S.C. § 112(b) is withdrawn in response to Applicant’s amendments to claim 13.
Regarding the rejection under 35 U.S.C. § 101, Applicant argues that the invention is related to a Cyber Physical System (CPS) which can handle a large amount of data (pages 12-13 of Applicant’s response). The claims do not present any specific technical elements and operations that provide improvements and/or unconventional approaches in handling a large amount of data. At best, the claims filter out data for analysis and display purposes; however, filtering (when claimed at a high level) has been identified by the Courts as exemplifying both a mental process and organizing human activity. Additionally, processing a smaller amount of data will necessarily require less processing time and resources regardless of if a human or machine performs the processing. This is the natural result of processing less data and does not necessarily present a technological improvement.
On pages 14-15 of the response, Applicant submits that the claimed invention would necessarily require use of a special purpose computer programmed to perform the recited operations, yet Applicant also cites paragraph 20 of the Specification of the instant application, which lists various general-purpose processors as being used to implement the invention, including a CPU, “general purpose graphics processing unit,” etc. Applicant has not provided evidence that anything more than general purpose processing devices performing generic operations are needed to implement the operations of the claimed invention.
On pages 17-29 of the response, Applicant submits that filtering results makes the claims eligible under § 101. The Examiner respectfully disagrees. Filtering information to limitedly display information (as recited in the claims at a high level) is an example of filtering content. The dependent claims largely limit information to be displayed and exclude information from being displayed, which are examples of filtering content. MPEP § 2106.04(a)(2)(II)(C) cites the following as an example of managing personal behavior, i.e., organizing human activity: “filtering content, BASCOM Global Internet v. AT&T Mobility, LLC, 827 F.3d 1341, 1345-46, 119 USPQ2d 1236, 1239 (Fed. Cir. 2016) (finding that filtering content was an abstract idea under step 2A, but reversing an invalidity judgment of ineligibility due to an inadequate step 2B analysis).” MPEP § 2106.04(a)(2)(III)(D) cites the following as an example of a mental process: “An application program interface for extracting and processing information from a diversity of types of hard copy documents – Content Extraction, 776 F.3d at 1345, 113 USPQ2d at 1356.”
On pages 30-32 of the response, Applicant makes general assertions that the functional operations of a computer are improved, yet Applicant does not point to any specific claim language that addresses operations of the computer that are particularly improved from a technical or technological standpoint.
On pages 32-41 of the response, Applicant largely reiterates the arguments that have been addressed above. Additionally, Applicant submits that the manner in which data is displayed is beneficial to a human user (pages 37-39 of the response). Limiting data to a subset of data deemed to be most useful for human consumption is a benefit that may be achieved regardless of a technical- or non-technical-based implementation. Additionally, as discussion above and in the rejection, such limiting of data is a filtering of content, which (when claimed at a high level) has been identified by the Courts as exemplifying both a mental process and organizing human activity.
Regarding the prior art rejections, Applicant submits that the cited references do not address the claim amendments. New references have been introduced into the rejections in order to help address the claim amendments.
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 1-19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 101 because the claimed invention is directed to non-statutory subject matter.
Claims 1-19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 101 because the claimed invention is directed to an abstract idea without significantly more. The claimed invention is directed to information analysis regarding a plurality of facilities and moving objects (Spec: ¶ 3) without significantly more.
Step
Analysis
1: Statutory Category?
Yes – The claims fall within at least one of the four categories of patent eligible subject matter. Process (claim 12), Apparatus (claims 1-11, 14-19), Article of Manufacture (claim 13)
Independent claims:
Step
Analysis
2A – Prong 1: Judicial Exception Recited?
Yes – Aside from the additional elements identified in Step 2A – Prong 2 below, the claims recite:
[Claims 1, 12, 13] displaying information on a moving object in a physical site including plural facilities and plural areas corresponding to the plural facilities;
display to be presented on a display;
receive a user operation;
control the display for information analysis on the physical site, based on the user operation received; and
store status information and detection information, the status information indicating a state where each facility in the plural facilities operates, and the detection information indicating a detection result of the moving object in each area in the plural areas,
control the display to display an analysis medium listing the status information on the plurality facilities and the detection information on the plural areas;
receive a status information operation on the displayed analysis medium, the status information operation being a user operation designating information on a specific facility from the status information on the plural facilities in the displayed analysis medium; and
updated the analysis screen to filter information to be displayed therein on the display limitedly from the status information on the plural facilities and the detection information on the plural areas, based on information on the specific facility designated by the status information operation.
Aside from the additional elements, the aforementioned claim details exemplify the abstract idea(s) of a mental process (since the details include concepts performed in the human mind, including an observation, evaluation, judgment, and/or opinion). As explained in MPEP § 2106(a)(2)(C)(III), “The courts consider a mental process (thinking) that ‘can be performed in the human mind, or by a human using a pen and paper’ to be an abstract idea. CyberSource Corp. v. Retail Decisions, Inc., 654 F.3d 1366, 1372, 99 USPQ2d 1690, 1695 (Fed. Cir. 2011). As the Federal Circuit explained, ‘methods which can be performed mentally, or which are the equivalent of human mental work, are unpatentable abstract ideas the ‘basic tools of scientific and technological work’ that are open to all.’’ 654 F.3d at 1371, 99 USPQ2d at 1694 (citing Gottschalk v. Benson, 409 U.S. 63, 175 USPQ 673 (1972)).” The limitations reproduced above, as drafted, are a process that, under its broadest reasonable interpretation, covers performance of the limitations in the mind but for the recitation of generic computer components. That is, other than reciting the additional elements identified in Step 2A – Prong 2 below, nothing in the claim elements precludes the steps from practically being performed in the mind and/or by a human using a pen and paper. For example, but for the recitations of generic computer and other processing components (identified in Step 2A – Prong 2 below), the respectively recited steps/functions of the claims, as drafted and set forth above, are a process that, under its broadest reasonable interpretation, covers performance of the limitations in the mind and/or with the use of pen and paper. A human user can present information for display, receive the recited information, store information, customize which limited information is presented for display, etc. If a claim limitation, under its broadest reasonable interpretation, covers performance of the limitation in the mind (and/or with pen and paper) but for the recitation of generic computer components, then it falls within the “Mental Processes” grouping of abstract ideas. Accordingly, the claims recite an abstract idea.
Aside from the additional elements, the aforementioned claim details exemplify a method of organizing human activity (since the details include examples of commercial or legal interactions, including advertising, marketing or sales activities or behaviors, and/or business relations and managing personal behavior or relationships or interactions between people, including social activities, teaching, and following rules or instructions). More specifically, the evaluated process is related to information analysis regarding a plurality of facilities and moving objects (Spec: ¶ 3), which (under its broadest reasonable interpretation) is an example of managing commercial interactions (i.e., organizing human activity); therefore, aside from the recitations of generic computer and other processing components (identified in Step 2A – Prong 2 below), the limitations identified in the more detailed claim listing above encompass the abstract idea of organizing human activity.
Filtering information to limitedly display information (as recited in the claims at a high level) is an example of filtering content. MPEP § 2106.04(a)(2)(II)(C) cites the following as an example of managing personal behavior, i.e., organizing human activity: “filtering content, BASCOM Global Internet v. AT&T Mobility, LLC, 827 F.3d 1341, 1345-46, 119 USPQ2d 1236, 1239 (Fed. Cir. 2016) (finding that filtering content was an abstract idea under step 2A, but reversing an invalidity judgment of ineligibility due to an inadequate step 2B analysis).” MPEP § 2106.04(a)(2)(III)(D) cites the following as an example of a mental process: “An application program interface for extracting and processing information from a diversity of types of hard copy documents – Content Extraction, 776 F.3d at 1345, 113 USPQ2d at 1356.”
2A – Prong 2: Integrated into a Practical Application?
No – The judicial exception(s) is/are not integrated into a practical application.
Claim 1 recites an information analysis device for displaying information on a moving object in plural areas corresponding to plural facilities, the information analysis device comprising:
a display configured to display information;
an input interface configured to receive a user operation;
a processor configured to control the display, based on the user operation received by the input interface; and
a memory configured to store status information and detection information, the status information indicating a state where each facility in the plural facilities operates, and the detection information indicating a detection result of the moving object in each area in the plural areas,
wherein the processor is configured to perform the recited operations.
Claim 1 further receives a status information operation via the input interface.
Claim 12 recites an information analysis method for causing a computer to display information on a moving object in plural areas corresponding to plural facilities, the information analysis method comprising:
causing a memory of the computer to store status information and detection information; and
causing a processor of the computer to perform the recited operations.
Claim 12 further receives a status information operation via an input interface.
Claim 13 recites a non-transitory computer-readable recording medium storing a program for causing a processor of a computer to perform the information analysis method according to claim 12.
Claims 1, 12, and 13 also display information and receive information via a screen (controlled by the processor).
The claims as a whole merely describe how to generally “apply” the abstract idea(s) in a computer environment. The claimed processing elements are recited at a high level of generality and are merely invoked as a tool to perform the abstract idea(s). Simply implementing the abstract idea(s) on a general-purpose processor is not a practical application of the abstract idea(s); Applicant’s specification discloses that the invention may be implemented using general-purpose processing elements and other generic components (Spec: ¶¶ 18-31).
The use of a processor/processing elements (e.g., as recited in all of the claims) facilitates generic processor operations. The use of a memory or machine-readable media with executable instructions facilitates generic processor operations.
The additional elements are recited at a high-level of generality (i.e., as generic processing elements performing generic computer functions) such that the incorporation of the additional processing elements amounts to no more than mere instructions to apply the judicial exception(s) using generic computer components. There is no indication in the Specification that the steps/functions of the claims require any inventive programming or necessitate any specialized or other inventive computer components (i.e., the steps/functions of the claims may be implemented using capabilities of general-purpose computer components). Accordingly, the additional elements do not integrate the abstract ideas into a practical application because they do not impose any meaningful limits on practicing the abstract idea. The claims are directed to an abstract idea(s).
The processing components presented in the claims simply utilize the capabilities of a general-purpose computer and are, thus, merely tools to implement the abstract idea(s). As seen in MPEP § 2106.05(a)(I) and § 2106.05(f)(2), the court found that accelerating a process when the increased speed solely comes from the capabilities of a general-purpose computer is not sufficient to show an improvement in computer-functionality and it amounts to a mere invocation of computers or machinery as a tool to perform an existing process (see FairWarning IP, LLC v. Iatric Sys., 839 F.3d 1089, 1095, 120 USPQ2d 1293, 1296 (Fed. Cir. 2016)).
There is no transformation or reduction of a particular article to a different state or thing recited in the claims.
Additionally, even when considering the operations of the additional elements as an ordered combination, the ordered combination does not amount to significantly more than what is present in the claims when each operation is considered separately.
2B: Claim(s) Provide(s) an Inventive Concept?
No – The claims do not include additional elements that are sufficient to amount to significantly more than the judicial exception(s). As discussed above with respect to integration of the abstract idea(s) into a practical application, the use of the additional elements to perform the steps identified in Step 2A – Prong 1 above amounts to no more than mere instructions to apply the exceptions using a generic computer component(s). Mere instructions to apply an exception using a generic computer component(s) cannot provide an inventive concept. The claims are not patent eligible.
Dependent claims:
Step
Analysis
2A – Prong 1: Judicial Exception Recited?
Yes – Aside from the additional elements identified in Step 2A – Prong 2 below, the claims recite:
[Claim 2] wherein the status information on the plural facilities includes time spans each in which each facility is a predetermined state,
wherein the information on the specific facility, which is designated by the status information operation, indicates a time span in which the specific facility is the predetermined state, and
cause the limited detection information, which is to be displayed on the display, to include the detection result of the moving object in the time span designated by the status information operation.
[Claim 3] limit the information to be displayed on the display among the detection information on the plural areas, based on the detection result of the moving object within the designated time span in each of the plural areas.
[Claim 4] cause the updated analysis medium to display the filtered information with higher priority among the detection information on the plural areas as an incoming/outgoing frequency increases, the incoming/outgoing frequency indicating a number of times that the moving object comes to an area corresponding to the specific facility from the other areas or goes from the corresponding area to the other areas.
[Claim 5] limit the information to be displayed on the display, based on a frequency at which the moving object moves between a predetermined area and any area of the plural areas, the predetermined area being different from the plural areas corresponding to the plural facilities.
[Claim 6] store management information managing a responsible moving object for each area among the plural areas, and limit the information to be displayed on the display among the detection information on the plural areas, referring to the management information in response to the status information operation.
[Claim 7] store map information indicating positional relation between the plural facilities and the plural areas, and
limit the information to be displayed on the display among the detection information on the plural areas, based on positional relation between an area corresponding to the specific facility and the plural areas in the map information.
[Claim 8] limit the detection information to be displayed on the display by at least one of: narrowing down the detection information on the plural areas to the detection information to be displayed; or controlling a display order of the detection information to be displayed.
[Claim 9] limit the status information to be displayed on the display by excluding information on facilities other than the specific facility among the plural facilities, from the status information to be displayed on the display.
[Claim 10] receive a detection information operation on the analysis medium, the detection information operation being a user operation designating detection information on a specific area from the detection information displayed in the analysis medium on the display.
[Claim 11] wherein the status information is a first timeline indicating a state where a corresponding facility operates in chronological order, and
wherein the detection information is a second timeline indicating a detection result of the moving object in a corresponding area in chronological order.
[Claim 14] exclude non-designated status information from the status information to be displayed, the non-designated status information indicating a state of another facility than the specific facility, which is designated by the status information operation, among the plural facilities.
[Claim 15] wherein the detection information operation includes specifying a point in a timeline of the designated detection information on the specific area, and
in response to the detection information operation, compute a time point corresponding to the specified point in the timeline of the designated detection information on the specific area.
[Claim 16] compute the incoming/outgoing frequency by:
measuring a staying period for each area in the plural area, based on a trajectory of the moving object in a video captured in the physical site, the staying period indicating duration in which the moving object stays in the corresponding area;
incrementing a tentative incoming/outgoing frequency for the corresponding area when the staying period for the corresponding area is equal to or greater than a predetermined threshold; and
skipping incrementation of the tentative incoming/outgoing frequency for the corresponding area when the staying period for the corresponding area is less than the predetermined threshold.
[Claim 17] wherein the status information on the plural facilities includes time spans each in which each facility is a predetermined state,
wherein the information on the specific facility, which is designated by the status information operation, indicates a specific time span in which the specific facility is the predetermined state, and
extract, from the status information on the plural facilities, error status information on a corresponding facility other than the specific facility by detecting an error time span that indicates an error stopping the corresponding facility and is continuous to the specific time span, the error status information having the detected error time span; and
include the error status information on the corresponding facility into the filtered information to be displayed in the updated analysis medium.
[Claim 18] compute an incoming/outgoing frequency based on trajectories generated from the plural video data, the incoming/outgoing frequency indicating number of times that the moving object comes to an area corresponding to the specific facility from the other areas or goes from the corresponding area to the other areas, the trajectories each representing temporal and spatial changes of the moving object in the physical site; and
dynamically control transmission of video data from the server via the communication interface in accordance with the computed incoming/outgoing frequency, to prevent the communication interface from downloading the video data having the incoming/outgoing frequency less than a threshold among the plural video data, thereby reducing data traffic.
[Claim 19] generate the trajectories based on the plural video data, and
incoming/outgoing frequency based on the trajectories generated by the server.
The dependent claims further present details of the abstract ideas identified in regard to the independent claims.
Aside from the additional elements, the aforementioned claim details exemplify the abstract idea(s) of a mental process (since the details include concepts performed in the human mind, including an observation, evaluation, judgment, and/or opinion). As explained in MPEP § 2106(a)(2)(C)(III), “The courts consider a mental process (thinking) that ‘can be performed in the human mind, or by a human using a pen and paper’ to be an abstract idea. CyberSource Corp. v. Retail Decisions, Inc., 654 F.3d 1366, 1372, 99 USPQ2d 1690, 1695 (Fed. Cir. 2011). As the Federal Circuit explained, ‘methods which can be performed mentally, or which are the equivalent of human mental work, are unpatentable abstract ideas the ‘basic tools of scientific and technological work’ that are open to all.’’ 654 F.3d at 1371, 99 USPQ2d at 1694 (citing Gottschalk v. Benson, 409 U.S. 63, 175 USPQ 673 (1972)).” The limitations reproduced above, as drafted, are a process that, under its broadest reasonable interpretation, covers performance of the limitations in the mind but for the recitation of generic computer components. That is, other than reciting the additional elements identified in Step 2A – Prong 2 below, nothing in the claim elements precludes the steps from practically being performed in the mind and/or by a human using a pen and paper. For example, but for the recitations of generic computer and other processing components (identified in Step 2A – Prong 2 below), the respectively recited steps/functions of the claims, as drafted and set forth above, are a process that, under its broadest reasonable interpretation, covers performance of the limitations in the mind and/or with the use of pen and paper. A human user can present information for display, receive the recited information, store information, customize which limited information is presented for display, etc. If a claim limitation, under its broadest reasonable interpretation, covers performance of the limitation in the mind (and/or with pen and paper) but for the recitation of generic computer components, then it falls within the “Mental Processes” grouping of abstract ideas. Accordingly, the claims recite an abstract idea.
Aside from the additional elements, the aforementioned claim details exemplify a method of organizing human activity (since the details include examples of commercial or legal interactions, including advertising, marketing or sales activities or behaviors, and/or business relations and managing personal behavior or relationships or interactions between people, including social activities, teaching, and following rules or instructions). More specifically, the evaluated process is related to information analysis regarding a plurality of facilities and moving objects (Spec: ¶ 3), which (under its broadest reasonable interpretation) is an example of managing commercial interactions (i.e., organizing human activity); therefore, aside from the recitations of generic computer and other processing components (identified in Step 2A – Prong 2 below), the limitations identified in the more detailed claim listing above encompass the abstract idea of organizing human activity.
Filtering information to limitedly display information (as recited in the claims at a high level) is an example of filtering content. The dependent claims largely limit information to be displayed and exclude information from being displayed, which are examples of filtering content. MPEP § 2106.04(a)(2)(II)(C) cites the following as an example of managing personal behavior, i.e., organizing human activity: “filtering content, BASCOM Global Internet v. AT&T Mobility, LLC, 827 F.3d 1341, 1345-46, 119 USPQ2d 1236, 1239 (Fed. Cir. 2016) (finding that filtering content was an abstract idea under step 2A, but reversing an invalidity judgment of ineligibility due to an inadequate step 2B analysis).” MPEP § 2106.04(a)(2)(III)(D) cites the following as an example of a mental process: “An application program interface for extracting and processing information from a diversity of types of hard copy documents – Content Extraction, 776 F.3d at 1345, 113 USPQ2d at 1356.”
2A – Prong 2: Integrated into a Practical Application?
No – The judicial exception(s) is/are not integrated into a practical application.
The dependent claims include the additional elements of their independent claims, including the use of a processor and server to perform the various operations.
Claim 1 recites an information analysis device for displaying information on a moving object in plural areas corresponding to plural facilities, the information analysis device comprising:
a display configured to display information;
an input interface configured to receive a user operation;
a processor configured to control the display, based on the user operation received by the input interface; and
a memory configured to store status information and detection information, the status information indicating a state where each facility in the plural facilities operates, and the detection information indicating a detection result of the moving object in each area in the plural areas,
wherein the processor is configured to perform the recited operations.
Claim 1 further receives a status information operation via the input interface.
The processor and memory are generally applied to implement the various operations of the dependent claims as well.
Claim 10 receives a detection information operation via the input interface. Claim 10 further comprises a communication interface configured to communicate data with a server configured to store plural video data each captured by a camera located in the physical site. Claim 10 also recites “in response to the detection information operation, download specific video data among the plural video data from the server via the communication interface, the specific video data indicating a video related to a detection result of the specific area; and control the display to playback the video indicated by the specific video data downloaded from the server.”
Claim 12 recites an information analysis method for causing a computer to display information on a moving object in plural areas corresponding to plural facilities, the information analysis method comprising:
causing a memory of the computer to store status information and detection information; and
causing a processor of the computer to perform the recited operations.
Claim 12 further receives a status information operation via an input interface.
Claim 13 recites a non-transitory computer-readable recording medium storing a processor-executable program for causing a processor of a computer to perform the information analysis method according to claim 12.
Claim 15 recites “start, from the computed time point, the playback of the video indicated by the specific video data downloaded from the server.”
Claims 1, 12, and 13 also display information and receive information via a screen (controlled by the processor).
Claims 4 and 10 also receive information via a screen (controlled by the processor).
Claim 17 also displays information via a screen (controlled by the processor).
Claim 18 recites “a communication interface configured to communicate data with a server configured to store plural video data each captured by a camera arranged to monitor the moving object in the physical site” and “dynamically control transmission of video data from the server via the communication interface in accordance with the computed incoming/outgoing frequency, to prevent the communication interface from downloading the video data having the incoming/outgoing frequency less than a threshold among the plural video data, thereby reducing data traffic.”
The claims as a whole merely describe how to generally “apply” the abstract idea(s) in a computer environment. The claimed processing elements are recited at a high level of generality and are merely invoked as a tool to perform the abstract idea(s). Simply implementing the abstract idea(s) on a general-purpose processor is not a practical application of the abstract idea(s); Applicant’s specification discloses that the invention may be implemented using general-purpose processing elements and other generic components (Spec: ¶¶ 18-31).
The use of a processor/processing elements (e.g., as recited in all of the claims) facilitates generic processor operations. The use of a memory or machine-readable media with executable instructions facilitates generic processor operations.
The additional elements are recited at a high-level of generality (i.e., as generic processing elements performing generic computer functions) such that the incorporation of the additional processing elements amounts to no more than mere instructions to apply the judicial exception(s) using generic computer components. There is no indication in the Specification that the steps/functions of the claims require any inventive programming or necessitate any specialized or other inventive computer components (i.e., the steps/functions of the claims may be implemented using capabilities of general-purpose computer components). Accordingly, the additional elements do not integrate the abstract ideas into a practical application because they do not impose any meaningful limits on practicing the abstract idea. The claims are directed to an abstract idea(s).
The processing components presented in the claims simply utilize the capabilities of a general-purpose computer and are, thus, merely tools to implement the abstract idea(s). As seen in MPEP § 2106.05(a)(I) and § 2106.05(f)(2), the court found that accelerating a process when the increased speed solely comes from the capabilities of a general-purpose computer is not sufficient to show an improvement in computer-functionality and it amounts to a mere invocation of computers or machinery as a tool to perform an existing process (see FairWarning IP, LLC v. Iatric Sys., 839 F.3d 1089, 1095, 120 USPQ2d 1293, 1296 (Fed. Cir. 2016)).
There is no transformation or reduction of a particular article to a different state or thing recited in the claims.
Additionally, even when considering the operations of the additional elements as an ordered combination, the ordered combination does not amount to significantly more than what is present in the claims when each operation is considered separately.
2B: Claim(s) Provide(s) an Inventive Concept?
No – The claims do not include additional elements that are sufficient to amount to significantly more than the judicial exception(s). As discussed above with respect to integration of the abstract idea(s) into a practical application, the use of the additional elements to perform the steps identified in Step 2A – Prong 1 above amounts to no more than mere instructions to apply the exceptions using a generic computer component(s). Mere instructions to apply an exception using a generic computer component(s) cannot provide an inventive concept. The claims are not patent eligible.
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.
Claims 1-9, 11-14, and 17 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kitazumi et al. (US 2022/0215327) in view of Davidson (US 2013/0030873).
[Claim 1] Kitazumi discloses an information analysis device for displaying information on a moving object in a physical site including plural areas corresponding to plural facilities (¶ 34 – “The work analysis device 1 can generate a time chart representing the flow of work step processes by the worker by measuring the work time [of the worker] at each of the workstations. The work analysis device 1 analyzes whether the workstations are arranged appropriately, or whether the work step processes and the like by the worker are appropriate by comparing the time chart generated with a benchmark time chart prepared in advance. The result of the analysis by the work analysis device 1 is presented to the user. The user can use the analysis result from the work analysis device 1 to change the layout of the workstations, exchange the parts placed at a workstation, revise the benchmark time chart, or the like.”; ¶ 64 – “The determination unit 13 acquires the position information for the travel areas a to c from the process management table 12 and determines in which travel area the worker is present on the basis of the position information of the worker detected in step S21. The determination unit 13 also acquires the position information of the workstations A to G from the process management table 12 and can determine at which workstation work is being performed on the basis of information on the position and orientation of the worker detected in step S21. That is, the determination unit 13 can determine the process for which a worker is performing work. The determination unit 13 can also determine the time for a worker to transition from a process the worker is currently performing to the next process.”; NOTE: Applicant’s Specification describes facilities as areas in a workplace, as seen in Spec: ¶ 12), the information analysis device comprising:
a display configured to display information (¶ 85 – “In step S26 of FIG. 3, the output unit 17 presents the time chart generated in step S24 and the result of the analysis in step S25 on a display or the like provided to the work analysis device 1. The output unit 17 may be configured to switch between presenting the time chart and presenting the analysis result in accordance with an instruction from the user. The output unit 17 may also be configured to switch the display format of the time chart (e.g., display formats such as a table, a graph, etc.) in accordance with an instruction from the user.”);
an input interface configured to receive a user operation (¶ 85 – “The output unit 17 may also be configured to switch the display format of the time chart (e.g., display formats such as a table, a graph, etc.) in accordance with an instruction from the user.”);
a processor configured to control the display for information analysis on the physical site, based on the user operation received by the input interface (¶ 85 – “The output unit 17 may also be configured to switch the display format of the time chart (e.g., display formats such as a table, a graph, etc.) in accordance with an instruction from the user.”); and
a memory configured to store status information and detection information, the status information indicating a state where each facility in the plural facilities operates, and the detection information indicating a detection result of the moving object in each area in the plural areas (¶ 42 – “The reception unit 10 includes a function of receiving a captured image from the camera 2. The reception unit 10 transfers the captured image received to the detector unit 11. The reception unit 10 may store the captured image received in the auxiliary storage device 103.”; ¶ 44 – “The process management table 12 stores information pertaining to each process. The position information for a workstation may be stored in the process management table 12 in association with, for example, a process corresponding to aforesaid workstation. The position information for a workstation may be computed in advance in accordance with the installation position of the camera 2, and can be stored in the process management table 12. The process management table 12 also stores information pertaining to a work step that is a benchmark. Information on the benchmark processes included in a work step that is a benchmark and a standard work time (standard time) for performing the work for each benchmark process may be stored in the process management table 12.”; ¶ 63 – “The position information for workstations A to G and travel areas a to c is stored in advance in the process management table 12.”; ¶ 65 – “The determination unit 13 can count the number of frames of the captured image until the worker moves to the next step to thereby compute the work time for each process. The determination unit 13 may store the work time calculated for each process in the auxiliary storage device 103.”; ¶ 68 – “The standard time is defined in advance in accordance with the work content for each process and is stored in a process management table 12.”),
wherein the processor (fig. 1; ¶ 38 – “An example of the hardware configuration for the work analysis device 1 according to an embodiment is described with reference to FIG. 1. The work analysis device 1 is provided with a processor 101, a main storage device 102, an auxiliary storage device 103, a communication interface 104, and an output device 105. The processor 101 reads a program stored in the auxiliary storage device 103 into the main storage device 102 and executes the program to thereby implement the functional configurations described with FIG. 2 as functions.”) is configured to:
receive a status information operation via the input interface, the status information operation designating information on a specific facility in the status information on the plural facilities (¶ 51 – “The overall flow of process that analyzes a work step is described according to FIG. 3. FIG. 3 is a flowchart that is an example of work analysis processing. The work analysis processing in FIG. 3 presents an example where the captured images received from the camera 2 are parsed in order while the worker is performing a series of work steps, and a time chart generated after the worker concludes the work step. The time chart is not limited to being generated after the worker concludes the work step; the time chart may be generated in parallel with the receiving and parsing of captured images.” Work status information may be received as input from the camera.; fig. 6, ¶ 63 – “FIG. 6 is a diagram for describing a method for determining a process being performed; FIG. 6 illustrates a work area for performing a work step that includes processes A through G. Workstations corresponding to the each of the processes A through G (described below as workstations A to G, respectively) are installed in the work area. The area enclosing the workstations A to G is the travel area in which a worker moves while working. The travel area is divided into three travel areas a to c. The travel area a encloses workstation C, workstation D, and workstation E. The travel area b encloses workstation B and workstation F. The travel area c encloses workstation A and workstation G. The position information for workstations A to G and travel areas a to c is stored in advance in the process management table 12.”; Fig. 8 – Processes A through G are tracked from start to finish, with time frames measured for each respective process (which is performed at a given workstation). The nature of the processes and corresponding workstations at which the processes are performed affects which information is displayed.); and
limit information to be displayed on the display among the status information on the plural facilities and the detection information on the plural areas, based on information on the specific facility designated by the status information operation (fig. 6, ¶ 63 – “FIG. 6 is a diagram for describing a method for determining a process being performed; FIG. 6 illustrates a work area for performing a work step that includes processes A through G. Workstations corresponding to the each of the processes A through G (described below as workstations A to G, respectively) are installed in the work area. The area enclosing the workstations A to G is the travel area in which a worker moves while working. The travel area is divided into three travel areas a to c. The travel area a encloses workstation C, workstation D, and workstation E. The travel area b encloses workstation B and workstation F. The travel area c encloses workstation A and workstation G. The position information for workstations A to G and travel areas a to c is stored in advance in the process management table 12.”; Fig. 8 – Processes A through G are tracked from start to finish, with time frames measured for each respective process (which is performed at a given workstation). The nature of the processes and corresponding workstations at which the processes are performed affects which information is displayed.).
Kitazumi does not explicitly disclose:
an information analysis device for displaying information on a moving object in a physical site including plural facilities and plural areas corresponding to the plural facilities;
wherein the processor is configured to:
control the display to display an analysis screen listing the status information on the plural facilities and the detection information on the plural areas;
receiving a status information operation on the displayed analysis screen via the input interface, the status information operation being a user operation designating information on a specific facility from the status information on the plural facilities in the displayed analysis screen; and
update the analysis screen to filter information to be displayed therein on the display limitedly from the status information on the plural facilities and the detection information on the plural areas, based on information of the specific facility designated by the status information operation.
In the analogous art of assessing efficiency of a work environment’s design (Davidson: abstract), Davidson states, “The central server may be configured for evaluating telematics data received from the telematics devices and service data received from the service devices in order to assess driver efficiency, vehicle efficiency, and other logistical efficiencies. In addition, the central server may be configured for providing graphical presentations of telematics data and/or service data in efficiency-indicative formats, as well as for updating GPS-based maps based on vehicle telematics data.” (Davidson: ¶ 70) A user may specify a particular location and a particular location hub for analysis (Davidson: ¶¶ 291, 295) and information may be gathered in regard to activity within a geofence as well as activity while actually on property (Davidson: ¶ 299), thereby suggesting the ability to evaluate activity in various locations and in various areas of each location (which is analogous to the claimed physical site including plural facilities and plural areas corresponding to the plural facilities). Information may be displayed for a particular driver (Davidson: ¶ 299) and a list of drivers may be scored to reflect performance in a selected location, wherein the scores are used to rank drivers by statistics (Davidson: ¶ 293). Additionally, “the delivery vehicle 100 includes a plurality of vehicle sensors configured for generating telematics data indicative of various vehicle dynamics, such as engine ignition, engine speed, vehicle speed, vehicle location, and the status of various vehicle components.” (Davidson: ¶ 77) “Generally, the telematics data is indicative of various vehicle dynamics (e.g., vehicle location, engine speed, etc.), while the service data is indicative of driver or delivery activity (e.g., driver status, status of various deliveries).” (Davidson: ¶ 131) In other words, Davidson captures data that is analogous to Kitazumi’s worker efficiency information, including in regard to efficient movement and logistics.
The Examiner submits that it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of Applicant’s invention to modify Kitazumi to incorporate the following:
an information analysis device for displaying information on a moving object in a physical site including plural facilities and plural areas corresponding to the plural facilities;
wherein the processor is configured to:
control the display to display an analysis screen listing the status information on the plural facilities and the detection information on the plural areas;
receiving a status information operation on the displayed analysis screen via the input interface, the status information operation being a user operation designating information on a specific facility from the status information on the plural facilities in the displayed analysis screen; and
update the analysis screen to filter information to be displayed therein on the display limitedly from the status information on the plural facilities and the detection information on the plural areas, based on information of the specific facility designated by the status information operation
in order to facilitate a deeper understanding of worker efficiency, especially in regard to movement and logistics, thereby allowing for problems to be identified in order to improve overall worker efficiency (as suggested in ¶ 79 of Davidson).
[Claim 2] Kitazumi discloses wherein the status information on the plural facilities includes time spans each in which each facility is a predetermined state (¶ 66 – “The detector unit 11 (person detector unit 11A) determines whether or not the worker has completed the work step in step S23. The person detector unit 11A can determine that the worker has completed work step, for instance, when the person detector unit 11A does not detect a person in the captured image fed thereto from the reception unit 10. The person detector unit 11A may also determine that the worker has completed the work step when the worker changes orientation from the workstation G where the last process is performed to the workstation A where the first process is performed. The processing continues to step S24 when the series of work steps by the worker is completed (YES, at step S23). The processing returns to step S20 when the worker has not completed the work step (NO, at step S23). The processing from step S20 through step S22 is repeated for each frame of captured image fed in from the reception unit 10 between returning to step S20 and until the work steps are complete.”; ¶ 67 – “The time chart generation unit 14 generates a time chart in step S24 representing the flow of processes performed by the worker. The time chart generated may be presented on a display or the like, which is the output device 105. Here, an example of the time chart generation unit 14 generating a time chart is described using FIG. 7 and FIG. 8. FIG. 7 and FIG. 8 illustrate an example of a time chart where a worker X and a worker Y perform a work step that includes processes A to G.”; ¶ 68 – “The standard time is defined in advance in accordance with the work content for each process and is stored in a process management table 12. In the example in FIG. 7, the unit for the standard time is minutes. The Worker X field indicates the time the worker X needed to perform the work for each process. The Worker Y field indicates the time the worker Y needed to perform the work for each process. The time in the Worker X field and Worker Y field is indicated in minutes.” The amount of time spent performing a process at each of multiple workstations is an example of status information corresponding to time spans at each of the plurality of facilities.),
wherein the information on the specific facility, which is designated by the status information operation, indicates a time span in which the specific facility is the predetermined state (¶ 66 – “The detector unit 11 (person detector unit 11A) determines whether or not the worker has completed the work step in step S23. The person detector unit 11A can determine that the worker has completed work step, for instance, when the person detector unit 11A does not detect a person in the captured image fed thereto from the reception unit 10. The person detector unit 11A may also determine that the worker has completed the work step when the worker changes orientation from the workstation G where the last process is performed to the workstation A where the first process is performed. The processing continues to step S24 when the series of work steps by the worker is completed (YES, at step S23). The processing returns to step S20 when the worker has not completed the work step (NO, at step S23). The processing from step S20 through step S22 is repeated for each frame of captured image fed in from the reception unit 10 between returning to step S20 and until the work steps are complete.”; ¶ 67 – “The time chart generation unit 14 generates a time chart in step S24 representing the flow of processes performed by the worker. The time chart generated may be presented on a display or the like, which is the output device 105. Here, an example of the time chart generation unit 14 generating a time chart is described using FIG. 7 and FIG. 8. FIG. 7 and FIG. 8 illustrate an example of a time chart where a worker X and a worker Y perform a work step that includes processes A to G.”; ¶ 68 – “The standard time is defined in advance in accordance with the work content for each process and is stored in a process management table 12. In the example in FIG. 7, the unit for the standard time is minutes. The Worker X field indicates the time the worker X needed to perform the work for each process. The Worker Y field indicates the time the worker Y needed to perform the work for each process. The time in the Worker X field and Worker Y field is indicated in minutes.” The amount of time spent performing a process at each of multiple workstations is an example of status information corresponding to time spans at each of the plurality of facilities.), and
wherein the processor is configured to cause the limited detection information, which is to be displayed on the display, to include the detection result of the moving object in the time span designated by the status information operation (fig. 6, ¶ 63 – “FIG. 6 is a diagram for describing a method for determining a process being performed; FIG. 6 illustrates a work area for performing a work step that includes processes A through G. Workstations corresponding to the each of the processes A through G (described below as workstations A to G, respectively) are installed in the work area. The area enclosing the workstations A to G is the travel area in which a worker moves while working. The travel area is divided into three travel areas a to c. The travel area a encloses workstation C, workstation D, and workstation E. The travel area b encloses workstation B and workstation F. The travel area c encloses workstation A and workstation G. The position information for workstations A to G and travel areas a to c is stored in advance in the process management table 12.”; Fig. 8 – Processes A through G are tracked from start to finish, with time frames measured for each respective process (which is performed at a given workstation). The nature of the processes and corresponding workstations at which the processes are performed affects which information is displayed.).
[Claim 3] Kitazumi discloses wherein the processor is configured to limit the information to be displayed on the display among the detection information on the plural areas, based on the detection result of the moving object within the designated time span in each of the plural areas (fig. 6, ¶ 63 – “FIG. 6 is a diagram for describing a method for determining a process being performed; FIG. 6 illustrates a work area for performing a work step that includes processes A through G. Workstations corresponding to the each of the processes A through G (described below as workstations A to G, respectively) are installed in the work area. The area enclosing the workstations A to G is the travel area in which a worker moves while working. The travel area is divided into three travel areas a to c. The travel area a encloses workstation C, workstation D, and workstation E. The travel area b encloses workstation B and workstation F. The travel area c encloses workstation A and workstation G. The position information for workstations A to G and travel areas a to c is stored in advance in the process management table 12.”; Fig. 8 – Processes A through G are tracked from start to finish, with time frames measured for each respective process (which is performed at a given workstation). The nature of the processes and corresponding workstations at which the processes are performed affects which information is displayed.).
[Claim 4] Kitazumi does not explicitly disclose wherein the processor is configured to cause the updated analysis screen to display the filtered information with higher priority among the detection information on the plural areas as an incoming/outgoing frequency increases, the incoming/outgoing frequency indicating a number of times that the moving object comes to an area corresponding to the specific facility from the other areas or goes from the corresponding area to the other areas.
In the analogous art of assessing efficiency of a work environment’s design (Davidson: abstract), Davidson states, “The central server may be configured for evaluating telematics data received from the telematics devices and service data received from the service devices in order to assess driver efficiency, vehicle efficiency, and other logistical efficiencies. In addition, the central server may be configured for providing graphical presentations of telematics data and/or service data in efficiency-indicative formats, as well as for updating GPS-based maps based on vehicle telematics data.” (Davidson: ¶ 70) A user may specify a particular location and a particular location hub for analysis (Davidson: ¶¶ 291, 295) and information may be gathered in regard to activity within a geofence as well as activity while actually on property (Davidson: ¶ 299), thereby suggesting the ability to evaluate activity in various locations and in various areas of each location (which is analogous to the claimed physical site including plural facilities and plural areas corresponding to the plural facilities). Information may be displayed for a particular driver (Davidson: ¶ 299) and a list of drivers may be scored to reflect performance in a selected location, wherein the scores are used to rank drivers by statistics (Davidson: ¶ 293). Additionally, “the delivery vehicle 100 includes a plurality of vehicle sensors configured for generating telematics data indicative of various vehicle dynamics, such as engine ignition, engine speed, vehicle speed, vehicle location, and the status of various vehicle components.” (Davidson: ¶ 77) “Generally, the telematics data is indicative of various vehicle dynamics (e.g., vehicle location, engine speed, etc.), while the service data is indicative of driver or delivery activity (e.g., driver status, status of various deliveries).” (Davidson: ¶ 131) In other words, Davidson captures data that is analogous to Kitazumi’s worker efficiency information, including in regard to efficient movement and logistics.
Furthermore, Davidson evaluates the number (i.e., frequency) of stops (Davidson: ¶ 185 – “The employee recap module 1200 then stores the retrieved data (e.g., in memory) and calculates the number of delivery stops, the number of pickup stops, the number of bills delivered, the number of bills picked up, the combined weight of packages and/or freight delivered, and the combined weight of packages picked up indicated by the retrieved data. The employee recap module 1200 also calculates a sum for the total number of stops, total number of bills, and total weight of packages and freight. The employee recap module 1200 then displays the results of these calculations in the delivery statistics table 1251, as shown in FIGS. 13 and 14. As such, the delivery statistics table 1251 indicates the number of pickup and delivery stops made, the number of bills of lading picked up and delivered, and the weight of freight and/or packages picked up or delivered by the user-selected driver on the user-selected date.”). This is analogous to the claimed incoming/outgoing frequency.
The Examiner submits that it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of Applicant’s invention to modify Kitazumi wherein the processor is configured to cause the updated analysis screen to display the filtered information with higher priority among the detection information on the plural areas as an incoming/outgoing frequency increases, the incoming/outgoing frequency indicating a number of times that the moving object comes to an area corresponding to the specific facility from the other areas or goes from the corresponding area to the other areas in order to facilitate a deeper understanding of worker efficiency, especially in regard to movement and logistics, thereby allowing for problems to be identified in order to improve overall worker efficiency (as suggested in ¶ 79 of Davidson).
[Claim 5] Kitazumi does not explicitly disclose wherein the processor is configured to limit the information to be displayed on the display, based on a frequency at which the moving object moves between a predetermined area and any area of the plural areas, the predetermined area being different from the plural areas corresponding to the plural facilities.
In the analogous art of assessing efficiency of a work environment’s design (Davidson: abstract), Davidson states, “The central server may be configured for evaluating telematics data received from the telematics devices and service data received from the service devices in order to assess driver efficiency, vehicle efficiency, and other logistical efficiencies. In addition, the central server may be configured for providing graphical presentations of telematics data and/or service data in efficiency-indicative formats, as well as for updating GPS-based maps based on vehicle telematics data.” (Davidson: ¶ 70) A user may specify a particular location and a particular location hub for analysis (Davidson: ¶¶ 291, 295) and information may be gathered in regard to activity within a geofence as well as activity while actually on property (Davidson: ¶ 299), thereby suggesting the ability to evaluate activity in various locations and in various areas of each location (which is analogous to the claimed physical site including plural facilities and plural areas corresponding to the plural facilities). Information may be displayed for a particular driver (Davidson: ¶ 299) and a list of drivers may be scored to reflect performance in a selected location, wherein the scores are used to rank drivers by statistics (Davidson: ¶ 293). Additionally, “the delivery vehicle 100 includes a plurality of vehicle sensors configured for generating telematics data indicative of various vehicle dynamics, such as engine ignition, engine speed, vehicle speed, vehicle location, and the status of various vehicle components.” (Davidson: ¶ 77) “Generally, the telematics data is indicative of various vehicle dynamics (e.g., vehicle location, engine speed, etc.), while the service data is indicative of driver or delivery activity (e.g., driver status, status of various deliveries).” (Davidson: ¶ 131) In other words, Davidson captures data that is analogous to Kitazumi’s worker efficiency information, including in regard to efficient movement and logistics.
Furthermore, Davidson evaluates the number (i.e., frequency) of stops (Davidson: ¶ 185 – “The employee recap module 1200 then stores the retrieved data (e.g., in memory) and calculates the number of delivery stops, the number of pickup stops, the number of bills delivered, the number of bills picked up, the combined weight of packages and/or freight delivered, and the combined weight of packages picked up indicated by the retrieved data. The employee recap module 1200 also calculates a sum for the total number of stops, total number of bills, and total weight of packages and freight. The employee recap module 1200 then displays the results of these calculations in the delivery statistics table 1251, as shown in FIGS. 13 and 14. As such, the delivery statistics table 1251 indicates the number of pickup and delivery stops made, the number of bills of lading picked up and delivered, and the weight of freight and/or packages picked up or delivered by the user-selected driver on the user-selected date.”). This is analogous to the claimed incoming/outgoing frequency.
The Examiner submits that it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of Applicant’s invention to modify Kitazumi wherein the processor is configured to limit the information to be displayed on the display, based on a frequency at which the moving object moves between a predetermined area and any area of the plural areas, the predetermined area being different from the plural areas corresponding to the plural facilities in order to facilitate a deeper understanding of worker efficiency, especially in regard to movement and logistics, thereby allowing for problems to be identified in order to improve overall worker efficiency (as suggested in ¶ 79 of Davidson).
[Claim 6] Kitazumi discloses wherein the memory is configured to store management information managing a responsible moving object for each area among the plural areas (¶ 42 – “The reception unit 10 includes a function of receiving a captured image from the camera 2. The reception unit 10 transfers the captured image received to the detector unit 11. The reception unit 10 may store the captured image received in the auxiliary storage device 103.”; ¶ 44 – “The process management table 12 stores information pertaining to each process. The position information for a workstation may be stored in the process management table 12 in association with, for example, a process corresponding to aforesaid workstation. The position information for a workstation may be computed in advance in accordance with the installation position of the camera 2, and can be stored in the process management table 12. The process management table 12 also stores information pertaining to a work step that is a benchmark. Information on the benchmark processes included in a work step that is a benchmark and a standard work time (standard time) for performing the work for each benchmark process may be stored in the process management table 12.”; ¶ 63 – “The position information for workstations A to G and travel areas a to c is stored in advance in the process management table 12.”; ¶ 65 – “The determination unit 13 can count the number of frames of the captured image until the worker moves to the next step to thereby compute the work time for each process. The determination unit 13 may store the work time calculated for each process in the auxiliary storage device 103.”; ¶ 68 – “The standard time is defined in advance in accordance with the work content for each process and is stored in a process management table 12.”), and
wherein the processor is configured to limit the information to be displayed on the display among the detection information on the plural areas, referring to the management information in response to the status information operation (¶ 51 – “The overall flow of process that analyzes a work step is described according to FIG. 3. FIG. 3 is a flowchart that is an example of work analysis processing. The work analysis processing in FIG. 3 presents an example where the captured images received from the camera 2 are parsed in order while the worker is performing a series of work steps, and a time chart generated after the worker concludes the work step. The time chart is not limited to being generated after the worker concludes the work step; the time chart may be generated in parallel with the receiving and parsing of captured images.” Work status information may be received as input from the camera.; fig. 6, ¶ 63 – “FIG. 6 is a diagram for describing a method for determining a process being performed; FIG. 6 illustrates a work area for performing a work step that includes processes A through G. Workstations corresponding to the each of the processes A through G (described below as workstations A to G, respectively) are installed in the work area. The area enclosing the workstations A to G is the travel area in which a worker moves while working. The travel area is divided into three travel areas a to c. The travel area a encloses workstation C, workstation D, and workstation E. The travel area b encloses workstation B and workstation F. The travel area c encloses workstation A and workstation G. The position information for workstations A to G and travel areas a to c is stored in advance in the process management table 12.”; Fig. 8 – Processes A through G are tracked from start to finish, with time frames measured for each respective process (which is performed at a given workstation). The nature of the processes and corresponding workstations at which the processes are performed affects which information is displayed.).
[Claim 7] Kitazumi discloses wherein the memory is configured to store map information indicating positional relation between the plural facilities and the plural areas (¶ 44 – “The process management table 12 stores information pertaining to each process. The position information for a workstation may be stored in the process management table 12 in association with, for example, a process corresponding to aforesaid workstation. The position information for a workstation may be computed in advance in accordance with the installation position of the camera 2, and can be stored in the process management table 12. The process management table 12 also stores information pertaining to a work step that is a benchmark. Information on the benchmark processes included in a work step that is a benchmark and a standard work time (standard time) for performing the work for each benchmark process may be stored in the process management table 12.”; ¶ 63 – “The position information for workstations A to G and travel areas a to c is stored in advance in the process management table 12.”), and
wherein the processor is configured to limit the information to be displayed on the display among the detection information on the plural areas, based on positional relation between an area corresponding to the specific facility and the plural areas in the map information (¶ 44 – “The process management table 12 stores information pertaining to each process. The position information for a workstation may be stored in the process management table 12 in association with, for example, a process corresponding to aforesaid workstation. The position information for a workstation may be computed in advance in accordance with the installation position of the camera 2, and can be stored in the process management table 12. The process management table 12 also stores information pertaining to a work step that is a benchmark. Information on the benchmark processes included in a work step that is a benchmark and a standard work time (standard time) for performing the work for each benchmark process may be stored in the process management table 12.”; ¶ 63 – “The position information for workstations A to G and travel areas a to c is stored in advance in the process management table 12.”; fig. 6, ¶ 63 – “FIG. 6 is a diagram for describing a method for determining a process being performed; FIG. 6 illustrates a work area for performing a work step that includes processes A through G. Workstations corresponding to the each of the processes A through G (described below as workstations A to G, respectively) are installed in the work area. The area enclosing the workstations A to G is the travel area in which a worker moves while working. The travel area is divided into three travel areas a to c. The travel area a encloses workstation C, workstation D, and workstation E. The travel area b encloses workstation B and workstation F. The travel area c encloses workstation A and workstation G. The position information for workstations A to G and travel areas a to c is stored in advance in the process management table 12.”; Fig. 8 – Processes A through G are tracked from start to finish, with time frames measured for each respective process (which is performed at a given workstation). The nature of the processes and corresponding workstations at which the processes are performed affects which information is displayed.).
[Claim 8] Kitazumi discloses wherein the processor is configured to limit the detection information to be displayed on the display by at least one of: narrowing down the detection information on the plural areas to the detection information to be displayed; or controlling a display order of the detection information to be displayed (¶ 44 – “The process management table 12 stores information pertaining to each process. The position information for a workstation may be stored in the process management table 12 in association with, for example, a process corresponding to aforesaid workstation. The position information for a workstation may be computed in advance in accordance with the installation position of the camera 2, and can be stored in the process management table 12. The process management table 12 also stores information pertaining to a work step that is a benchmark. Information on the benchmark processes included in a work step that is a benchmark and a standard work time (standard time) for performing the work for each benchmark process may be stored in the process management table 12.”; ¶ 63 – “The position information for workstations A to G and travel areas a to c is stored in advance in the process management table 12.”; fig. 6, ¶ 63 – “FIG. 6 is a diagram for describing a method for determining a process being performed; FIG. 6 illustrates a work area for performing a work step that includes processes A through G. Workstations corresponding to the each of the processes A through G (described below as workstations A to G, respectively) are installed in the work area. The area enclosing the workstations A to G is the travel area in which a worker moves while working. The travel area is divided into three travel areas a to c. The travel area a encloses workstation C, workstation D, and workstation E. The travel area b encloses workstation B and workstation F. The travel area c encloses workstation A and workstation G. The position information for workstations A to G and travel areas a to c is stored in advance in the process management table 12.”; Fig. 8 – Processes A through G are tracked from start to finish, with time frames measured for each respective process (which is performed at a given workstation). The nature of the processes and corresponding workstations at which the processes are performed affects which information is displayed.).
[Claim 9] Kitazumi discloses wherein the processor is configured to limit the status information to be displayed on the display by excluding information on facilities other than the specific facility among the plural facilities, from the status information to be displayed on the display (¶ 44 – “The process management table 12 stores information pertaining to each process. The position information for a workstation may be stored in the process management table 12 in association with, for example, a process corresponding to aforesaid workstation. The position information for a workstation may be computed in advance in accordance with the installation position of the camera 2, and can be stored in the process management table 12. The process management table 12 also stores information pertaining to a work step that is a benchmark. Information on the benchmark processes included in a work step that is a benchmark and a standard work time (standard time) for performing the work for each benchmark process may be stored in the process management table 12.”; ¶ 63 – “The position information for workstations A to G and travel areas a to c is stored in advance in the process management table 12.”; fig. 6, ¶ 63 – “FIG. 6 is a diagram for describing a method for determining a process being performed; FIG. 6 illustrates a work area for performing a work step that includes processes A through G. Workstations corresponding to the each of the processes A through G (described below as workstations A to G, respectively) are installed in the work area. The area enclosing the workstations A to G is the travel area in which a worker moves while working. The travel area is divided into three travel areas a to c. The travel area a encloses workstation C, workstation D, and workstation E. The travel area b encloses workstation B and workstation F. The travel area c encloses workstation A and workstation G. The position information for workstations A to G and travel areas a to c is stored in advance in the process management table 12.”; Fig. 8 – Processes A through G are tracked from start to finish, with time frames measured for each respective process (which is performed at a given workstation). The nature of the processes and corresponding workstations at which the processes are performed affects which information is displayed. In other words, information that is not relevant (e.g., information related to processes and corresponding workstations not detected) is not displayed (i.e., it is excluded from the display).).
[Claim 11] Kitazumi discloses wherein the status information is a first timeline indicating a state where a corresponding facility operates in chronological order (¶ 85 – “In step S26 of FIG. 3, the output unit 17 presents the time chart generated in step S24 and the result of the analysis in step S25 on a display or the like provided to the work analysis device 1. The output unit 17 may be configured to switch between presenting the time chart and presenting the analysis result in accordance with an instruction from the user. The output unit 17 may also be configured to switch the display format of the time chart (e.g., display formats such as a table, a graph, etc.) in accordance with an instruction from the user.”; figs. 7, 8, 9, 11, ¶¶ 26-28, 30 – Various display formats are available, including to present data in a chronological order, and a user can select which display format to view.), and
wherein the detection information is a second timeline indicating a detection result of the moving object in a corresponding area in chronological order (¶ 85 – “In step S26 of FIG. 3, the output unit 17 presents the time chart generated in step S24 and the result of the analysis in step S25 on a display or the like provided to the work analysis device 1. The output unit 17 may be configured to switch between presenting the time chart and presenting the analysis result in accordance with an instruction from the user. The output unit 17 may also be configured to switch the display format of the time chart (e.g., display formats such as a table, a graph, etc.) in accordance with an instruction from the user.” figs. 7, 8, 9, 11, ¶¶ 26-28, 30 – Various display formats are available, including to present data in a chronological order, and a user can select which display format to view.).
[Claim 14] Kitazumi discloses wherein the processor is configured to exclude non-designated status information from the status information to be displayed, the non-designated status information indicating a state of another facility than the specific facility, which is designated by the status information operation, among the plural facilities (¶ 63 – “FIG. 6 is a diagram for describing a method for determining a process being performed; FIG. 6 illustrates a work area for performing a work step that includes processes A through G. Workstations corresponding to the each of the processes A through G (described below as workstations A to G, respectively) are installed in the work area. The area enclosing the workstations A to G is the travel area in which a worker moves while working. The travel area is divided into three travel areas a to c. The travel area a encloses workstation C, workstation D, and workstation E. The travel area b encloses workstation B and workstation F. The travel area c encloses workstation A and workstation G. The position information for workstations A to G and travel areas a to c is stored in advance in the process management table 12.” In other words, the system knows which workstations are of interest in light of the processes being tracked and the corresponding information is what is presented on a display.; Fig. 8 – Processes A through G are tracked from start to finish, with time frames measured for each respective process (which is performed at a given workstation). The nature of the processes and corresponding workstations at which the processes are performed affects which information is displayed. In other words, information that is not relevant (e.g., information related to processes and corresponding workstations not detected) is not displayed (i.e., it is excluded from the display).).
[Claim 12] Kitazumi discloses an information analysis method for causing a computer to display information on a moving object in a physical site including plural areas corresponding to plural facilities (¶ 34 – “The work analysis device 1 can generate a time chart representing the flow of work step processes by the worker by measuring the work time [of the worker] at each of the workstations. The work analysis device 1 analyzes whether the workstations are arranged appropriately, or whether the work step processes and the like by the worker are appropriate by comparing the time chart generated with a benchmark time chart prepared in advance. The result of the analysis by the work analysis device 1 is presented to the user. The user can use the analysis result from the work analysis device 1 to change the layout of the workstations, exchange the parts placed at a workstation, revise the benchmark time chart, or the like.”; ¶ 64 – “The determination unit 13 acquires the position information for the travel areas a to c from the process management table 12 and determines in which travel area the worker is present on the basis of the position information of the worker detected in step S21. The determination unit 13 also acquires the position information of the workstations A to G from the process management table 12 and can determine at which workstation work is being performed on the basis of information on the position and orientation of the worker detected in step S21. That is, the determination unit 13 can determine the process for which a worker is performing work. The determination unit 13 can also determine the time for a worker to transition from a process the worker is currently performing to the next process.”; NOTE: Application’s Specification describes facilities as areas in a workplace, as seen in Spec: ¶ 12), the information analysis method comprising:
causing a memory of the computer to store status information and detection information, the status information indicating a state where each facility in the plural facilities operates, and the detection information indicating a detection result of the moving object in each area in the plural areas (¶ 42 – “The reception unit 10 includes a function of receiving a captured image from the camera 2. The reception unit 10 transfers the captured image received to the detector unit 11. The reception unit 10 may store the captured image received in the auxiliary storage device 103.”; ¶ 44 – “The process management table 12 stores information pertaining to each process. The position information for a workstation may be stored in the process management table 12 in association with, for example, a process corresponding to aforesaid workstation. The position information for a workstation may be computed in advance in accordance with the installation position of the camera 2, and can be stored in the process management table 12. The process management table 12 also stores information pertaining to a work step that is a benchmark. Information on the benchmark processes included in a work step that is a benchmark and a standard work time (standard time) for performing the work for each benchmark process may be stored in the process management table 12.”; ¶ 63 – “The position information for workstations A to G and travel areas a to c is stored in advance in the process management table 12.”; ¶ 65 – “The determination unit 13 can count the number of frames of the captured image until the worker moves to the next step to thereby compute the work time for each process. The determination unit 13 may store the work time calculated for each process in the auxiliary storage device 103.”; ¶ 68 – “The standard time is defined in advance in accordance with the work content for each process and is stored in a process management table 12.”); and
causing a processor of the computer (¶ 85 – “The output unit 17 may also be configured to switch the display format of the time chart (e.g., display formats such as a table, a graph, etc.) in accordance with an instruction from the user.”) to:
receive a status information operation via an input interface, the status information operation designating information on a specific facility in the status information on the plural facilities (¶ 51 – “The overall flow of process that analyzes a work step is described according to FIG. 3. FIG. 3 is a flowchart that is an example of work analysis processing. The work analysis processing in FIG. 3 presents an example where the captured images received from the camera 2 are parsed in order while the worker is performing a series of work steps, and a time chart generated after the worker concludes the work step. The time chart is not limited to being generated after the worker concludes the work step; the time chart may be generated in parallel with the receiving and parsing of captured images.” Work status information may be received as input from the camera.; fig. 6, ¶ 63 – “FIG. 6 is a diagram for describing a method for determining a process being performed; FIG. 6 illustrates a work area for performing a work step that includes processes A through G. Workstations corresponding to the each of the processes A through G (described below as workstations A to G, respectively) are installed in the work area. The area enclosing the workstations A to G is the travel area in which a worker moves while working. The travel area is divided into three travel areas a to c. The travel area a encloses workstation C, workstation D, and workstation E. The travel area b encloses workstation B and workstation F. The travel area c encloses workstation A and workstation G. The position information for workstations A to G and travel areas a to c is stored in advance in the process management table 12.”; Fig. 8 – Processes A through G are tracked from start to finish, with time frames measured for each respective process (which is performed at a given workstation). The nature of the processes and corresponding workstations at which the processes are performed affects which information is displayed.); and
limit information to be displayed on a display among the status information on the plural facilities and the detection information on the plural areas, based on information on the specific facility designated by the operation in the status information (fig. 6, ¶ 63 – “FIG. 6 is a diagram for describing a method for determining a process being performed; FIG. 6 illustrates a work area for performing a work step that includes processes A through G. Workstations corresponding to the each of the processes A through G (described below as workstations A to G, respectively) are installed in the work area. The area enclosing the workstations A to G is the travel area in which a worker moves while working. The travel area is divided into three travel areas a to c. The travel area a encloses workstation C, workstation D, and workstation E. The travel area b encloses workstation B and workstation F. The travel area c encloses workstation A and workstation G. The position information for workstations A to G and travel areas a to c is stored in advance in the process management table 12.”; Fig. 8 – Processes A through G are tracked from start to finish, with time frames measured for each respective process (which is performed at a given workstation). The nature of the processes and corresponding workstations at which the processes are performed affects which information is displayed.).
Kitazumi does not explicitly disclose:
an information analysis method for causing a computer to display information on a moving object in a physical site including plural facilities and plural areas corresponding to the plural facilities;
causing a processor of the computer to:
control a display to display an analysis screen listing the status information on the plural facilities and the detection information on the plural areas;
receive a status information operation on the displayed analysis screen via an input interface, the status information operation being a user operation designating information on a specific facility from the status information on the plural facilities in the displayed analysis screen; and
update the analysis screen to filter information to be displayed therein on the display limitedly from the status information on the plural facilities and the detection information on the plural areas, based on information of the specific facility designated by the operation in the status information operation.
In the analogous art of assessing efficiency of a work environment’s design (Davidson: abstract), Davidson states, “The central server may be configured for evaluating telematics data received from the telematics devices and service data received from the service devices in order to assess driver efficiency, vehicle efficiency, and other logistical efficiencies. In addition, the central server may be configured for providing graphical presentations of telematics data and/or service data in efficiency-indicative formats, as well as for updating GPS-based maps based on vehicle telematics data.” (Davidson: ¶ 70) A user may specify a particular location and a particular location hub for analysis (Davidson: ¶¶ 291, 295) and information may be gathered in regard to activity within a geofence as well as activity while actually on property (Davidson: ¶ 299), thereby suggesting the ability to evaluate activity in various locations and in various areas of each location (which is analogous to the claimed physical site including plural facilities and plural areas corresponding to the plural facilities). Information may be displayed for a particular driver (Davidson: ¶ 299) and a list of drivers may be scored to reflect performance in a selected location, wherein the scores are used to rank drivers by statistics (Davidson: ¶ 293). Additionally, “the delivery vehicle 100 includes a plurality of vehicle sensors configured for generating telematics data indicative of various vehicle dynamics, such as engine ignition, engine speed, vehicle speed, vehicle location, and the status of various vehicle components.” (Davidson: ¶ 77) “Generally, the telematics data is indicative of various vehicle dynamics (e.g., vehicle location, engine speed, etc.), while the service data is indicative of driver or delivery activity (e.g., driver status, status of various deliveries).” (Davidson: ¶ 131) In other words, Davidson captures data that is analogous to Kitazumi’s worker efficiency information, including in regard to efficient movement and logistics.
The Examiner submits that it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of Applicant’s invention to modify Kitazumi to incorporate the following:
an information analysis method for causing a computer to display information on a moving object in a physical site including plural facilities and plural areas corresponding to the plural facilities;
causing a processor of the computer to:
control a display to display an analysis screen listing the status information on the plural facilities and the detection information on the plural areas;
receive a status information operation on the displayed analysis screen via an input interface, the status information operation being a user operation designating information on a specific facility from the status information on the plural facilities in the displayed analysis screen; and
update the analysis screen to filter information to be displayed therein on the display limitedly from the status information on the plural facilities and the detection information on the plural areas, based on information of the specific facility designated by the operation in the status information operation
in order to facilitate a deeper understanding of worker efficiency, especially in regard to movement and logistics, thereby allowing for problems to be identified in order to improve overall worker efficiency (as suggested in ¶ 79 of Davidson).
[Claim 13] Claim 13 recites limitations already addressed by the rejection of claim 12 above; therefore, the same rejection applies.
Furthermore, Kitazumi discloses a non-transitory computer-readable recording medium storing a processor-executable program for causing a processor of a computer to perform the information analysis method according to claim 12 (¶ 38, claim 8).
[Claim 17] Kitazumi does not explicitly disclose:
wherein the status information on the plural facilities includes time spans each in which each facility is a predetermined state,
wherein the information on the specific facility, which is designated by the status information operation, indicates a specific time span in which the specific facility is the predetermined state, and
wherein the processor is configured to:
extract, from the status information on the plural facilities, error status information on a corresponding facility other than the specific facility by detecting an error time span that indicates an error stopping the corresponding facility and is continuous to the specific time span, the error status information having the detected error time span; and include the error status information on the corresponding facility into the filtered information to be displayed in the updated analysis screen.
In the analogous art of assessing efficiency of a work environment’s design (Davidson: abstract), Davidson states, “The central server may be configured for evaluating telematics data received from the telematics devices and service data received from the service devices in order to assess driver efficiency, vehicle efficiency, and other logistical efficiencies. In addition, the central server may be configured for providing graphical presentations of telematics data and/or service data in efficiency-indicative formats, as well as for updating GPS-based maps based on vehicle telematics data.” (Davidson: ¶ 70) A user may specify a particular location and a particular location hub for analysis (Davidson: ¶¶ 291, 295) and information may be gathered in regard to activity within a geofence as well as activity while actually on property (Davidson: ¶ 299), thereby suggesting the ability to evaluate activity in various locations and in various areas of each location (which is analogous to the claimed physical site including plural facilities and plural areas corresponding to the plural facilities). Information may be displayed for a particular driver (Davidson: ¶ 299) and a list of drivers may be scored to reflect performance in a selected location, wherein the scores are used to rank drivers by statistics (Davidson: ¶ 293). Additionally, “the delivery vehicle 100 includes a plurality of vehicle sensors configured for generating telematics data indicative of various vehicle dynamics, such as engine ignition, engine speed, vehicle speed, vehicle location, and the status of various vehicle components.” (Davidson: ¶ 77) “Generally, the telematics data is indicative of various vehicle dynamics (e.g., vehicle location, engine speed, etc.), while the service data is indicative of driver or delivery activity (e.g., driver status, status of various deliveries).” (Davidson: ¶ 131) In other words, Davidson captures data that is analogous to Kitazumi’s worker efficiency information, including in regard to efficient movement and logistics.
Furthermore, in Davidson, hours in which a driver is not actively working and/or is idle are taken into account when reporting statistics (Davidson: ¶ 296 – “Beginning at step 1902, the location hours module 1900 displays a location hours view of the central server user interface 800. For example, FIG. 30 shows a location hours view 800H of the central server user interface 800 according to one embodiment. In the illustrated embodiment, the location hours view 800H displays a time statistics table 1952, which indicates some or all of the following time statistics for each driver in the user-selected driver group on the user-selected date: the driver's geofence on property time, the driver's actual on property time, the difference between the geofence and actual on property time, the planned on property time, the excess on property time, the difference between the geofence on property time and planned on property time, the driver's total non-travel time to stop time, the driver's total delay code time, and the driver's total lunch time”). Like the claimed error status information, inactive or idle time for a driver is an example of downtime for a worker and/or business.
The Examiner submits that it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of Applicant’s invention to modify Kitazumi wherein the status information on the plural facilities includes time spans each in which each facility is a predetermined state,
wherein the information on the specific facility, which is designated by the status information operation, indicates a specific time span in which the specific facility is the predetermined state, and
wherein the processor is configured to:
extract, from the status information on the plural facilities, error status information on a corresponding facility other than the specific facility by detecting an error time span that indicates an error stopping the corresponding facility and is continuous to the specific time span, the error status information having the detected error time span; and include the error status information on the corresponding facility into the filtered information to be displayed in the updated analysis screen
in order to facilitate a deeper understanding of worker efficiency, especially in regard to movement and logistics as well as downtime that may affect worker efficiency, thereby allowing for problems to be identified in order to improve overall worker efficiency (as suggested in ¶ 79 of Davidson).
Claims 10, 15-16, and 18-19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kitazumi et al. (US 2022/0215327) in view of Davidson (US 2013/0030873), as applied to claim 1 above, in view of Sachdeva et al. (US 2022/0101016).
[Claim 10] Kitazumi discloses wherein the processor is configured to:
receive a detection information operation via the input interface, the detection information operation designating detection information on a specific area in the detection information displayed on the display (¶ 51 – “The overall flow of process that analyzes a work step is described according to FIG. 3. FIG. 3 is a flowchart that is an example of work analysis processing. The work analysis processing in FIG. 3 presents an example where the captured images received from the camera 2 are parsed in order while the worker is performing a series of work steps, and a time chart generated after the worker concludes the work step. The time chart is not limited to being generated after the worker concludes the work step; the time chart may be generated in parallel with the receiving and parsing of captured images.” Work status information may be received as input from the camera.; fig. 6, ¶ 63 – “FIG. 6 is a diagram for describing a method for determining a process being performed; FIG. 6 illustrates a work area for performing a work step that includes processes A through G. Workstations corresponding to the each of the processes A through G (described below as workstations A to G, respectively) are installed in the work area. The area enclosing the workstations A to G is the travel area in which a worker moves while working. The travel area is divided into three travel areas a to c. The travel area a encloses workstation C, workstation D, and workstation E. The travel area b encloses workstation B and workstation F. The travel area c encloses workstation A and workstation G. The position information for workstations A to G and travel areas a to c is stored in advance in the process management table 12.”; Fig. 8 – Processes A through G are tracked from start to finish, with time frames measured for each respective process (which is performed at a given workstation). The nature of the processes and corresponding workstations at which the processes are performed affects which information is displayed.); and
limit information to be displayed on the display among the status information on the plural facilities and the detection information on the plural areas, based on information on the specific facility designated by the status information operation (fig. 6, ¶ 63 – “FIG. 6 is a diagram for describing a method for determining a process being performed; FIG. 6 illustrates a work area for performing a work step that includes processes A through G. Workstations corresponding to the each of the processes A through G (described below as workstations A to G, respectively) are installed in the work area. The area enclosing the workstations A to G is the travel area in which a worker moves while working. The travel area is divided into three travel areas a to c. The travel area a encloses workstation C, workstation D, and workstation E. The travel area b encloses workstation B and workstation F. The travel area c encloses workstation A and workstation G. The position information for workstations A to G and travel areas a to c is stored in advance in the process management table 12.”; Fig. 8 – Processes A through G are tracked from start to finish, with time frames measured for each respective process (which is performed at a given workstation). The nature of the processes and corresponding workstations at which the processes are performed affects which information is displayed.); and
cause the display to display predetermined information related to a detection result of the specific area, in response to the detection information operation (¶ 51 – “The overall flow of process that analyzes a work step is described according to FIG. 3. FIG. 3 is a flowchart that is an example of work analysis processing. The work analysis processing in FIG. 3 presents an example where the captured images received from the camera 2 are parsed in order while the worker is performing a series of work steps, and a time chart generated after the worker concludes the work step. The time chart is not limited to being generated after the worker concludes the work step; the time chart may be generated in parallel with the receiving and parsing of captured images.” Work status information may be received as input from the camera.; fig. 6, ¶ 63 – “FIG. 6 is a diagram for describing a method for determining a process being performed; FIG. 6 illustrates a work area for performing a work step that includes processes A through G. Workstations corresponding to the each of the processes A through G (described below as workstations A to G, respectively) are installed in the work area. The area enclosing the workstations A to G is the travel area in which a worker moves while working. The travel area is divided into three travel areas a to c. The travel area a encloses workstation C, workstation D, and workstation E. The travel area b encloses workstation B and workstation F. The travel area c encloses workstation A and workstation G. The position information for workstations A to G and travel areas a to c is stored in advance in the process management table 12.”; Fig. 8 – Processes A through G are tracked from start to finish, with time frames measured for each respective process (which is performed at a given workstation). The nature of the processes and corresponding workstations at which the processes are performed affects which information is displayed.); and
limit information to be displayed on the display among the status information on the plural facilities and the detection information on the plural areas, based on information on the specific facility designated by the status information operation (fig. 6, ¶ 63 – “FIG. 6 is a diagram for describing a method for determining a process being performed; FIG. 6 illustrates a work area for performing a work step that includes processes A through G. Workstations corresponding to the each of the processes A through G (described below as workstations A to G, respectively) are installed in the work area. The area enclosing the workstations A to G is the travel area in which a worker moves while working. The travel area is divided into three travel areas a to c. The travel area a encloses workstation C, workstation D, and workstation E. The travel area b encloses workstation B and workstation F. The travel area c encloses workstation A and workstation G. The position information for workstations A to G and travel areas a to c is stored in advance in the process management table 12.”; Fig. 8 – Processes A through G are tracked from start to finish, with time frames measured for each respective process (which is performed at a given workstation). The nature of the processes and corresponding workstations at which the processes are performed affects which information is displayed.).
Kitazumi does not explicitly disclose:
a communication interface configured to communicate data with a server configured to store plural video data each captured by a camera located in the physical site,
wherein the processor is configured to:
receive a detection information operation on the analysis screen via the input interface, the detection information operation being a user operation designating detection information on a specific area from the detection information displayed in the analysis screen on the display;
in response to the detection information operation, download specific video data among the plural video data from the server via the communication interface, the specific video data indicating a video related to a detection result of the specific area; and
control the display to playback the video indicated by the specific video data downloaded from the server.
However, Sachdeva evaluates worker metrics (including based on average step times) and allows video to be captured and clips to be played using timestamp information, as seen in ¶¶ 111-112:
[0111] In some implementations, responsive to a query, the search engine presents a set of query results. The presentation of the query results may vary based on one or more of the implementation and user-selected options. For example, a result search for a given product type (e.g., 2WD transmission) over a period may be presented as a list of video clips from camera devices at work stations that worked on that product type (i.e., 2WD transmission in this example). Those results may be sorted chronologically based on timestamps from the video, grouped by product ID (e.g., so that all clips for 2WD transmission A are presented or together), grouped by worker or workstation, etc.
[0112] In some implementations, metrics are presented with, or as part of, a query result set. For example, assume that the search was for 2WD transmissions in the last 24 hours, in some implementations, the tracing module 217 may present for display metrics regarding average step times, average cycle times, number of faults (e.g., skipped steps, line stoppages, etc.) in the last 24 hours. As another example, when a video clip associated with the result set is selected, so that the user may view the recorded video, supplemental metrics may be presented (e.g. time it took the worker in the recording to perform the step(s) or cycle recorded, statistics for the recorded worker to complete the step(s) or cycle (e.g. box plot showing the worker's performance distribution for the step or cycle, a box plot showing performance distribution across all workers, etc.), a label (e.g. “Good”), detected faults (e.g. “failed to drill bolt 3”), suggestions (e.g. move drill to left-hand side of table and have worker drill with left hand), etc.
The camera devices are integrated via the server (Sachdeva: ¶ 114), which suggests that video may be made available through the server.
As discussed in the rejection of the independent claim above, the Kitazumi-Davidson combination addresses the ability to evaluate and view specific, limited subsets of information on an analysis screen on a display.
The Examiner submits that it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of Applicant’s invention to modify Kitazumi to incorporate:
a communication interface configured to communicate data with a server configured to store plural video data each captured by a camera located in the physical site,
wherein the processor is configured to:
receive a detection information operation on the analysis screen via the input interface, the detection information operation being a user operation designating detection information on a specific area from the detection information displayed in the analysis screen on the display;
in response to the detection information operation, download specific video data among the plural video data from the server via the communication interface, the specific video data indicating a video related to a detection result of the specific area; and
control the display to playback the video indicated by the specific video data downloaded from the server
in order to allow for worker performance to be reviewed in retrospect so that feedback may be provided to improve performance, including through the use of documented identification of best practices (as suggested in ¶ 122 of Sachdeva).
[Claim 15] Kitazumi does not explicitly disclose:
wherein the detection information operation includes specifying a point in a timeline of the designated detection information on the specific area, and
wherein the processor is configured to:
in response to the detection information operation, compute a time point corresponding to the specified point in the timeline of the designated detection information on the specific area; and
start, from the computed time point, the playback of the video indicated by the specific video data downloaded from the server.
However, Sachdeva evaluates worker metrics (including based on average step times) and allows video to be captured and clips to be played using timestamp information, as seen in ¶¶ 111-112:
[0111] In some implementations, responsive to a query, the search engine presents a set of query results. The presentation of the query results may vary based on one or more of the implementation and user-selected options. For example, a result search for a given product type (e.g., 2WD transmission) over a period may be presented as a list of video clips from camera devices at work stations that worked on that product type (i.e., 2WD transmission in this example). Those results may be sorted chronologically based on timestamps from the video, grouped by product ID (e.g., so that all clips for 2WD transmission A are presented or together), grouped by worker or workstation, etc.
[0112] In some implementations, metrics are presented with, or as part of, a query result set. For example, assume that the search was for 2WD transmissions in the last 24 hours, in some implementations, the tracing module 217 may present for display metrics regarding average step times, average cycle times, number of faults (e.g., skipped steps, line stoppages, etc.) in the last 24 hours. As another example, when a video clip associated with the result set is selected, so that the user may view the recorded video, supplemental metrics may be presented (e.g. time it took the worker in the recording to perform the step(s) or cycle recorded, statistics for the recorded worker to complete the step(s) or cycle (e.g. box plot showing the worker's performance distribution for the step or cycle, a box plot showing performance distribution across all workers, etc.), a label (e.g. “Good”), detected faults (e.g. “failed to drill bolt 3”), suggestions (e.g. move drill to left-hand side of table and have worker drill with left hand), etc.
The camera devices are integrated via the server (Sachdeva: ¶ 114), which suggests that video may be made available through the server.
As discussed in the rejection of the independent claim above, the Kitazumi-Davidson combination addresses the ability to evaluate and view specific, limited subsets of information on an analysis screen on a display.
The Examiner submits that it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of Applicant’s invention to modify Kitazumi:
wherein the detection information operation includes specifying a point in a timeline of the designated detection information on the specific area, and
wherein the processor is configured to:
in response to the detection information operation, compute a time point corresponding to the specified point in the timeline of the designated detection information on the specific area; and
start, from the computed time point, the playback of the video indicated by the specific video data downloaded from the server
in order to allow for worker performance to be reviewed in retrospect so that feedback may be provided to improve performance, including through the use of documented identification of best practices (as suggested in ¶ 122 of Sachdeva).
[Claim 18] Kitazumi does not explicitly disclose:
a communication interface configured to communicate data with a server configured to store plural video data each captured by a camera arranged to monitor the moving object in the physical site,
wherein the processor is configured to:
compute an incoming/outgoing frequency based on trajectories generated from the plural video data, the incoming/outgoing frequency indicating number of times that the moving object comes to an area corresponding to the specific facility from the other areas or goes from the corresponding area to the other areas, the trajectories each representing temporal and spatial changes of the moving object in the physical site; and
dynamically control transmission of video data from the server via the communication interface in accordance with the computed incoming/outgoing frequency, to prevent the communication interface from downloading the video data having the incoming/outgoing frequency less than a threshold among the plural video data, thereby reducing data traffic.
In the analogous art of assessing efficiency of a work environment’s design (Davidson: abstract), Davidson states, “The central server may be configured for evaluating telematics data received from the telematics devices and service data received from the service devices in order to assess driver efficiency, vehicle efficiency, and other logistical efficiencies. In addition, the central server may be configured for providing graphical presentations of telematics data and/or service data in efficiency-indicative formats, as well as for updating GPS-based maps based on vehicle telematics data.” (Davidson: ¶ 70) A user may specify a particular location and a particular location hub for analysis (Davidson: ¶¶ 291, 295) and information may be gathered in regard to activity within a geofence as well as activity while actually on property (Davidson: ¶ 299), thereby suggesting the ability to evaluate activity in various locations and in various areas of each location (which is analogous to the claimed physical site including plural facilities and plural areas corresponding to the plural facilities). Information may be displayed for a particular driver (Davidson: ¶ 299) and a list of drivers may be scored to reflect performance in a selected location, wherein the scores are used to rank drivers by statistics (Davidson: ¶ 293). Additionally, “the delivery vehicle 100 includes a plurality of vehicle sensors configured for generating telematics data indicative of various vehicle dynamics, such as engine ignition, engine speed, vehicle speed, vehicle location, and the status of various vehicle components.” (Davidson: ¶ 77) “Generally, the telematics data is indicative of various vehicle dynamics (e.g., vehicle location, engine speed, etc.), while the service data is indicative of driver or delivery activity (e.g., driver status, status of various deliveries).” (Davidson: ¶ 131) In other words, Davidson captures data that is analogous to Kitazumi’s worker efficiency information, including in regard to efficient movement and logistics.
Furthermore, Davidson evaluates the number (i.e., frequency) of stops (Davidson: ¶ 185 – “The employee recap module 1200 then stores the retrieved data (e.g., in memory) and calculates the number of delivery stops, the number of pickup stops, the number of bills delivered, the number of bills picked up, the combined weight of packages and/or freight delivered, and the combined weight of packages picked up indicated by the retrieved data. The employee recap module 1200 also calculates a sum for the total number of stops, total number of bills, and total weight of packages and freight. The employee recap module 1200 then displays the results of these calculations in the delivery statistics table 1251, as shown in FIGS. 13 and 14. As such, the delivery statistics table 1251 indicates the number of pickup and delivery stops made, the number of bills of lading picked up and delivered, and the weight of freight and/or packages picked up or delivered by the user-selected driver on the user-selected date.”). This is analogous to the claimed incoming/outgoing frequency.
Frequency and other factors over or under a user-selected threshold may be used to filter information for review (Davidson: ¶ 281 – “In addition, a user may select to show work area data for any combination of drivers, trips, over-under threshold, distance threshold, plan hours total threshold, total stop threshold, delivery stops, driver release stops, pickup stops, next day air stops, delivery package threshold, pickup package threshold, plan delivery hours threshold, planned pickup hours threshold, planned travel hours threshold, and break hours threshold.”).
Additionally, Sachdeva evaluates worker metrics (including based on average step times) and allows video to be captured and clips to be played using timestamp information, as seen in ¶¶ 111-112:
[0111] In some implementations, responsive to a query, the search engine presents a set of query results. The presentation of the query results may vary based on one or more of the implementation and user-selected options. For example, a result search for a given product type (e.g., 2WD transmission) over a period may be presented as a list of video clips from camera devices at work stations that worked on that product type (i.e., 2WD transmission in this example). Those results may be sorted chronologically based on timestamps from the video, grouped by product ID (e.g., so that all clips for 2WD transmission A are presented or together), grouped by worker or workstation, etc.
[0112] In some implementations, metrics are presented with, or as part of, a query result set. For example, assume that the search was for 2WD transmissions in the last 24 hours, in some implementations, the tracing module 217 may present for display metrics regarding average step times, average cycle times, number of faults (e.g., skipped steps, line stoppages, etc.) in the last 24 hours. As another example, when a video clip associated with the result set is selected, so that the user may view the recorded video, supplemental metrics may be presented (e.g. time it took the worker in the recording to perform the step(s) or cycle recorded, statistics for the recorded worker to complete the step(s) or cycle (e.g. box plot showing the worker's performance distribution for the step or cycle, a box plot showing performance distribution across all workers, etc.), a label (e.g. “Good”), detected faults (e.g. “failed to drill bolt 3”), suggestions (e.g. move drill to left-hand side of table and have worker drill with left hand), etc.
The camera devices are integrated via the server (Sachdeva: ¶ 114), which suggests that video may be made available through the server.
As discussed in the rejection of the independent claim above, the Kitazumi-Davidson combination addresses the ability to evaluate and view specific, limited subsets of information on an analysis screen on a display.
The Examiner submits that it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of Applicant’s invention to modify Kitazumi to incorporate the following:
a communication interface configured to communicate data with a server configured to store plural video data each captured by a camera arranged to monitor the moving object in the physical site,
wherein the processor is configured to:
compute an incoming/outgoing frequency based on trajectories generated from the plural video data, the incoming/outgoing frequency indicating number of times that the moving object comes to an area corresponding to the specific facility from the other areas or goes from the corresponding area to the other areas, the trajectories each representing temporal and spatial changes of the moving object in the physical site; and
dynamically control transmission of video data from the server via the communication interface in accordance with the computed incoming/outgoing frequency, to prevent the communication interface from downloading the video data having the incoming/outgoing frequency less than a threshold among the plural video data, thereby reducing data traffic
in order to facilitate a deeper understanding of worker efficiency, especially in regard to movement and logistics, thereby allowing for problems to be identified in order to improve overall worker efficiency (as suggested in ¶ 79 of Davidson) and in order to allow for worker performance to be reviewed in retrospect so that feedback may be provided to improve performance, including through the use of documented identification of best practices (as suggested in ¶ 122 of Sachdeva). Additionally, the reduction in data traffic is the natural result of processing a smaller amount of data. By filtering information to download and/or present, there would naturally be a reduction in data traffic compared to if all available (i.e., unfiltered) information were downloaded and presented.
[Claim 16] Kitazumi does not explicitly disclose wherein the processor is configured to compute the incoming/outgoing frequency by:
measuring a staying period for each area in the plural area, based on a trajectory of the moving object in a video captured in the physical site, the staying period indicating duration in which the moving object stays in the corresponding area;
incrementing a tentative incoming/outgoing frequency for the corresponding area when the staying period for the corresponding area is equal to or greater than a predetermined threshold; and
skipping incrementation of the tentative incoming/outgoing frequency for the corresponding area when the staying period for the corresponding area is less than the predetermined threshold.
In the analogous art of assessing efficiency of a work environment’s design (Davidson: abstract), Davidson states, “The central server may be configured for evaluating telematics data received from the telematics devices and service data received from the service devices in order to assess driver efficiency, vehicle efficiency, and other logistical efficiencies. In addition, the central server may be configured for providing graphical presentations of telematics data and/or service data in efficiency-indicative formats, as well as for updating GPS-based maps based on vehicle telematics data.” (Davidson: ¶ 70) A user may specify a particular location and a particular location hub for analysis (Davidson: ¶¶ 291, 295) and information may be gathered in regard to activity within a geofence as well as activity while actually on property (Davidson: ¶ 299), thereby suggesting the ability to evaluate activity in various locations and in various areas of each location (which is analogous to the claimed physical site including plural facilities and plural areas corresponding to the plural facilities). Information may be displayed for a particular driver (Davidson: ¶ 299) and a list of drivers may be scored to reflect performance in a selected location, wherein the scores are used to rank drivers by statistics (Davidson: ¶ 293). Additionally, “the delivery vehicle 100 includes a plurality of vehicle sensors configured for generating telematics data indicative of various vehicle dynamics, such as engine ignition, engine speed, vehicle speed, vehicle location, and the status of various vehicle components.” (Davidson: ¶ 77) “Generally, the telematics data is indicative of various vehicle dynamics (e.g., vehicle location, engine speed, etc.), while the service data is indicative of driver or delivery activity (e.g., driver status, status of various deliveries).” (Davidson: ¶ 131) In other words, Davidson captures data that is analogous to Kitazumi’s worker efficiency information, including in regard to efficient movement and logistics.
Furthermore, Davidson evaluates the number (i.e., frequency) of stops (Davidson: ¶ 185 – “The employee recap module 1200 then stores the retrieved data (e.g., in memory) and calculates the number of delivery stops, the number of pickup stops, the number of bills delivered, the number of bills picked up, the combined weight of packages and/or freight delivered, and the combined weight of packages picked up indicated by the retrieved data. The employee recap module 1200 also calculates a sum for the total number of stops, total number of bills, and total weight of packages and freight. The employee recap module 1200 then displays the results of these calculations in the delivery statistics table 1251, as shown in FIGS. 13 and 14. As such, the delivery statistics table 1251 indicates the number of pickup and delivery stops made, the number of bills of lading picked up and delivered, and the weight of freight and/or packages picked up or delivered by the user-selected driver on the user-selected date.”). This is analogous to the claimed incoming/outgoing frequency.
Also, Davidson incorporates various types of staying periods of time in its analysis (Davidson: ¶ 189 – “Next, the employee recap module 1200 calculates and displays the driver's "to from hours" based on the earlier identified instances. In various embodiments, to from hours generally represent the amount of time the driver and vehicle were traveling from the property of the shipping hub to a predefined delivery area (e.g., prior to completing any delivery or pickup stops) and from a predefined delivery area to the property of the shipping hub (e.g., after completing delivery and pickup stops). Accordingly, in one embodiment, the employee recap module 1200 determines the to from hours for the driver by calculating the total time elapsed between the ending of the first identified On Property segment and the beginning of the first identified On Area segment, as well as the total time elapsed between the ending of the last identified On Area segment and the time beginning of the last identified On Property segment.”).
Frequency and other factors over or under a user-selected threshold may be used to filter information for review (Davidson: ¶ 281 – “In addition, a user may select to show work area data for any combination of drivers, trips, over-under threshold, distance threshold, plan hours total threshold, total stop threshold, delivery stops, driver release stops, pickup stops, next day air stops, delivery package threshold, pickup package threshold, plan delivery hours threshold, planned pickup hours threshold, planned travel hours threshold, and break hours threshold.”).
Additionally, Sachdeva evaluates worker metrics (including based on average step times) and allows video to be captured and clips to be played using timestamp information, as seen in ¶ 112:
[0111] In some implementations, responsive to a query, the search engine presents a set of query results. The presentation of the query results may vary based on one or more of the implementation and user-selected options. For example, a result search for a given product type (e.g., 2WD transmission) over a period may be presented as a list of video clips from camera devices at work stations that worked on that product type (i.e., 2WD transmission in this example). Those results may be sorted chronologically based on timestamps from the video, grouped by product ID (e.g., so that all clips for 2WD transmission A are presented or together), grouped by worker or workstation, etc.
[0112] In some implementations, metrics are presented with, or as part of, a query result set. For example, assume that the search was for 2WD transmissions in the last 24 hours, in some implementations, the tracing module 217 may present for display metrics regarding average step times, average cycle times, number of faults (e.g., skipped steps, line stoppages, etc.) in the last 24 hours. As another example, when a video clip associated with the result set is selected, so that the user may view the recorded video, supplemental metrics may be presented (e.g. time it took the worker in the recording to perform the step(s) or cycle recorded, statistics for the recorded worker to complete the step(s) or cycle (e.g. box plot showing the worker's performance distribution for the step or cycle, a box plot showing performance distribution across all workers, etc.), a label (e.g. “Good”), detected faults (e.g. “failed to drill bolt 3”), suggestions (e.g. move drill to left-hand side of table and have worker drill with left hand), etc.
The camera devices are integrated via the server (Sachdeva: ¶ 114), which suggests that video may be made available through the server.
As discussed in the rejection of the independent claim above, the Kitazumi-Davidson combination addresses the ability to evaluate and view specific, limited subsets of information on an analysis screen on a display.
The Examiner submits that it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of Applicant’s invention to modify Kitazumi to incorporate the following:
wherein the processor is configured to compute the incoming/outgoing frequency by:
measuring a staying period for each area in the plural area, based on a trajectory of the moving object in a video captured in the physical site, the staying period indicating duration in which the moving object stays in the corresponding area;
incrementing a tentative incoming/outgoing frequency for the corresponding area when the staying period for the corresponding area is equal to or greater than a predetermined threshold; and
skipping incrementation of the tentative incoming/outgoing frequency for the corresponding area when the staying period for the corresponding area is less than the predetermined threshold
in order to facilitate a deeper understanding of worker efficiency, especially in regard to movement and logistics, thereby allowing for problems to be identified in order to improve overall worker efficiency (as suggested in ¶ 79 of Davidson) and in order to allow for worker performance to be reviewed in retrospect so that feedback may be provided to improve performance, including through the use of documented identification of best practices (as suggested in ¶ 122 of Sachdeva).
[Claim 19] Kitazumi does not explicitly disclose wherein the server is configured to generate the trajectories based on the plural video data, and
the processor is configured to compute the incoming/outgoing frequency based on the trajectories generated by the server.
In the analogous art of assessing efficiency of a work environment’s design (Davidson: abstract), Davidson states, “The central server may be configured for evaluating telematics data received from the telematics devices and service data received from the service devices in order to assess driver efficiency, vehicle efficiency, and other logistical efficiencies. In addition, the central server may be configured for providing graphical presentations of telematics data and/or service data in efficiency-indicative formats, as well as for updating GPS-based maps based on vehicle telematics data.” (Davidson: ¶ 70) A user may specify a particular location and a particular location hub for analysis (Davidson: ¶¶ 291, 295) and information may be gathered in regard to activity within a geofence as well as activity while actually on property (Davidson: ¶ 299), thereby suggesting the ability to evaluate activity in various locations and in various areas of each location (which is analogous to the claimed physical site including plural facilities and plural areas corresponding to the plural facilities). Information may be displayed for a particular driver (Davidson: ¶ 299) and a list of drivers may be scored to reflect performance in a selected location, wherein the scores are used to rank drivers by statistics (Davidson: ¶ 293). Additionally, “the delivery vehicle 100 includes a plurality of vehicle sensors configured for generating telematics data indicative of various vehicle dynamics, such as engine ignition, engine speed, vehicle speed, vehicle location, and the status of various vehicle components.” (Davidson: ¶ 77) “Generally, the telematics data is indicative of various vehicle dynamics (e.g., vehicle location, engine speed, etc.), while the service data is indicative of driver or delivery activity (e.g., driver status, status of various deliveries).” (Davidson: ¶ 131) In other words, Davidson captures data that is analogous to Kitazumi’s worker efficiency information, including in regard to efficient movement and logistics.
Furthermore, Davidson evaluates the number (i.e., frequency) of stops (Davidson: ¶ 185 – “The employee recap module 1200 then stores the retrieved data (e.g., in memory) and calculates the number of delivery stops, the number of pickup stops, the number of bills delivered, the number of bills picked up, the combined weight of packages and/or freight delivered, and the combined weight of packages picked up indicated by the retrieved data. The employee recap module 1200 also calculates a sum for the total number of stops, total number of bills, and total weight of packages and freight. The employee recap module 1200 then displays the results of these calculations in the delivery statistics table 1251, as shown in FIGS. 13 and 14. As such, the delivery statistics table 1251 indicates the number of pickup and delivery stops made, the number of bills of lading picked up and delivered, and the weight of freight and/or packages picked up or delivered by the user-selected driver on the user-selected date.”). This is analogous to the claimed incoming/outgoing frequency.
Frequency and other factors over or under a user-selected threshold may be used to filter information for review (Davidson: ¶ 281 – “In addition, a user may select to show work area data for any combination of drivers, trips, over-under threshold, distance threshold, plan hours total threshold, total stop threshold, delivery stops, driver release stops, pickup stops, next day air stops, delivery package threshold, pickup package threshold, plan delivery hours threshold, planned pickup hours threshold, planned travel hours threshold, and break hours threshold.”).
Additionally, Sachdeva evaluates worker metrics (including based on average step times) and allows video to be captured and clips to be played using timestamp information, as seen in ¶ 112:
[0111] In some implementations, responsive to a query, the search engine presents a set of query results. The presentation of the query results may vary based on one or more of the implementation and user-selected options. For example, a result search for a given product type (e.g., 2WD transmission) over a period may be presented as a list of video clips from camera devices at work stations that worked on that product type (i.e., 2WD transmission in this example). Those results may be sorted chronologically based on timestamps from the video, grouped by product ID (e.g., so that all clips for 2WD transmission A are presented or together), grouped by worker or workstation, etc.
[0112] In some implementations, metrics are presented with, or as part of, a query result set. For example, assume that the search was for 2WD transmissions in the last 24 hours, in some implementations, the tracing module 217 may present for display metrics regarding average step times, average cycle times, number of faults (e.g., skipped steps, line stoppages, etc.) in the last 24 hours. As another example, when a video clip associated with the result set is selected, so that the user may view the recorded video, supplemental metrics may be presented (e.g. time it took the worker in the recording to perform the step(s) or cycle recorded, statistics for the recorded worker to complete the step(s) or cycle (e.g. box plot showing the worker's performance distribution for the step or cycle, a box plot showing performance distribution across all workers, etc.), a label (e.g. “Good”), detected faults (e.g. “failed to drill bolt 3”), suggestions (e.g. move drill to left-hand side of table and have worker drill with left hand), etc.
The camera devices are integrated via the server (Sachdeva: ¶ 114), which suggests that video may be made available through the server.
As discussed in the rejection of the independent claim above, the Kitazumi-Davidson combination addresses the ability to evaluate and view specific, limited subsets of information on an analysis screen on a display.
The Examiner submits that it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of Applicant’s invention to modify Kitazumi to incorporate the following:
wherein the server is configured to generate the trajectories based on the plural video data, and
the processor is configured to compute the incoming/outgoing frequency based on the trajectories generated by the server
in order to facilitate a deeper understanding of worker efficiency, especially in regard to movement and logistics, thereby allowing for problems to be identified in order to improve overall worker efficiency (as suggested in ¶ 79 of Davidson) and in order to allow for worker performance to be reviewed in retrospect so that feedback may be provided to improve performance, including through the use of documented identification of best practices (as suggested in ¶ 122 of Sachdeva).
Conclusion
Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a). Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a).
A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of the advisory action. In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the mailing date of this final action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to SUSANNA M DIAZ whose telephone number is (571)272-6733. The examiner can normally be reached M-F, 8 am-4:30 pm.
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, Brian Epstein can be reached at (571) 270-5389. 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.
/SUSANNA M. DIAZ/
Primary Examiner
Art Unit 3625A
Prosecution Insights