DETAILED ACTION
Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status
The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status.
The following is a quotation of the appropriate paragraphs of 35 U.S.C. 102 that form the basis for the rejections under this section made in this Office action:
A person shall be entitled to a patent unless –
(a)(1) the claimed invention was patented, described in a printed publication, or in public use, on sale or otherwise available to the public before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claims 1-3, 5 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being unpatentable by Saavedra et al. (U.S. Patent Application Number: 2010/0248746).
Consider claim 1; Saavedra discloses an information processing device comprising:
a control unit [e.g. controller (par. 37, line 1)] configured to
acquire a first geographical range (e.g. predetermined distance) based on position information on a first Point Of Interest (POI) and on information on movement of a mobile terminal (par. 25, line 5 – par. 26, line 9), the first geographical range (e.g. predetermined distance) being a range in which provision of information on the first POI to a user of the mobile terminal is effective (par. 26, lines 5-9), and
provide the information on the first POI to the user of the mobile terminal when the mobile terminal is within the first geographical range [e.g. predetermined distance (par. 25, line 5 – par. 26, line 9)].
Consider claim 2; Saavedra discloses the information on the movement of the mobile terminal includes information on at least one of a speed, a traveling direction, a route, and a type of road on which the mobile terminal is travelling (par. 42, lines 2-7).
Consider claim 3; Saavedra discloses the information processing device is a server; (par. 26) and the control unit is configured to cause the mobile terminal to provide the information on the first POI to the user of the mobile terminal when the mobile terminal is positioned within the first geographical range by sending the information on the first POI (par. 26, lines 5-16), and the first geographical range to the mobile terminal (par. 26, lines 5-16).
Consider claim 5; Saavedra discloses a method comprising:
acquiring a first geographical range (e.g. predetermined distance) based on position information on a first Point Of Interest (POI) and on information on movement of a mobile terminal (par. 25, line 5 – par. 26, line 9), the first geographical range (e.g. predetermined distance) being a range in which provision of information on the first POI to a user of the mobile terminal is effective (par. 26, lines 5-9), and
sending, by the server (par. 26, lines 5-16), the information on the first POI to the user of the mobile terminal when the mobile terminal is within the first geographical range [e.g. predetermined distance (par. 25, line 5 – par. 26, line 9)];
and outputting (par. 26, lines 5-9; par. 57, lines 1-2), by the mobile terminal (par. 26, lines 5-9; par. 57, lines 1-2), the information on the first POI when the mobile terminal is positioned within the first geographical range (par. 26, lines 5-9).
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 of this title, if the differences between the claimed invention and the prior art are such that the claimed invention as a whole would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which the claimed invention pertains. Patentability shall not be negated by the manner in which the invention was made.
Claim 4 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Saavedra et al. (U.S. Patent Application Number: 2010/0248746) in view of Ganesan et al. (U.S. Patent Application Number: 2021/0092218).
Consider claim 4, as applied in claim 1; Saavedra discloses the information processing device is the mobile terminal (par. 26, lines 5-16); and the control unit (par. 47, lines 1-5) is configured to acquire the information on the first POI (par. 26, lines 5-16), and the first geographical range by receiving from another device [e.g. a server (par. 26, lines 5-16)]; store the information on the first POI in a storage unit (par. 54, lines 1-6); provide the information on the first POI when the mobile terminal is not in a predetermined movement state (e.g. based on temporal relevancy, that is, the mobile device is there longer) and the mobile terminal is positioned within the first geographical range (par. 52, lines 1-10; par. 73, lines 1-3); suspend providing the information on the first POI when the mobile terminal is in the predetermined movement state (e.g. based on temporal and geographical relevancy, that is, the mobile device is not there for long) (par. 36, lines 2-7; par. 52, lines 1-10; par. 73, lines 1-3). Saavedra discloses the claimed invention except: delete the information on the first POI from the storage unit when the mobile terminal has passed through the first geographical range without providing the information on the first POI.
In an analogous art Ganesan discloses delete the information on the first POI from the storage unit when the mobile terminal has passed through the first geographical range without providing the information on the first POI (par. 42, lines 1-12).
It is an object of Saavedra’s invention to provide a method for location tracking. It is an object of Ganesan’s invention to provide geographically based actions and interactions using mobile devices. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the teaching of Saavedra by including deleting or erasing POI, as taught by Ganesan, for the purpose of efficiently providing services in a telecommunications network.
Yoo is another reference that discloses the inventive concept.
Conclusion
Any response to this Office Action should be faxed to (571) 273-8300 or mailed to:
Commissioner for Patents
P.O. Box 1450
Alexandria, VA 22313-1450
Hand-delivered responses should be brought to
Customer Service Window
Randolph Building
401 Dulany Street
Alexandria, VA 22314
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the Examiner should be directed to Joel Ajayi whose telephone number is (571) 270-1091. The Examiner can normally be reached on Monday-Friday from 7:30am to 5:00pm.
If attempts to reach the Examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the Examiner’s supervisor, Matthew Anderson can be reached on (571) 272-4177. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is (571) 273-8300.
Information regarding the status of an application may be obtained from the Patent Application Information Retrieval (PAIR) system. Status information for published applications may be obtained from either Private PAIR or Public PAIR. Status information for unpublished applications is available through Private PAIR only. For more information about the PAIR system, see http://pair-direct.uspto.gov. Should you have questions on access to the Private PAIR system, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free) or 703-305-3028.
Any inquiry of a general nature or relating to the status of this application or proceeding should be directed to the receptionist/customer service whose telephone number is (571) 272-2600.
/JOEL AJAYI/
Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2646