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 .
Continued Examination Under 37 CFR 1.114
A request for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, including the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e), was filed in this application after final rejection. Since this application is eligible for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114. Applicant's submission filed on 09/01/26 has been entered.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 103 which forms the basis for all obviousness rejections set forth in this Office action:
A patent for a claimed invention may not be obtained, notwithstanding that the claimed invention is not identically disclosed as set forth in section 102, if the differences between the claimed invention and the prior art are such that the claimed invention as a whole would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which the claimed invention pertains. Patentability shall not be negated by the manner in which the invention was made.
Claim(s) 1-5, 10-15, and 20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being unpatentable over ADATO (Publication No.: US 2021/0400195 A1) in view of JONES (Publication No.: US 20220335810 A1).
Regarding claim 1, 11, ADATO teaches A system for event notification in a mobile-based crowdsourcing platform, the system comprising: a server system (Figure 2) configured to communicate with and exchange data with a plurality of mobile devices via a crowdsourcing platform, the server comprising at least one processor (reference numeral 202 in Figure 2) coupled to at least one memory (reference numeral 226 in Figure 2) containing instructions executable by the processor to cause the server system to: receive, for each of the plurality of mobile devices (reference numeral 125, 145 in Figure 1; reference numeral 125F, 125G in Figure 4C; reference numeral 1204N in Figure 12), location data (e.g. via “positioning sensor” as in paragraph [0138]; e.g. “location” as in paragraph [0144]) identifying a location of the mobile device relative to a mapped environment and user identification data (e.g. “personalized profile” as in paragraph [0293]) identifying a user of the mobile device; maintain, in the at least one memory, a user profile (e.g. “personalized profile” as in paragraph [0293]) for each identified user including at least a current or last known location for the user relative to the environment based on the location data (e.g. via “positioning sensor” as in paragraph [0138]; e.g. “location” as in paragraph [0144], [0293]); receive, via the crowdsourcing platform, notification of an emergency event at an event location within the mapped environment (e.g. “fault” as in paragraph [0125]; e.g. “cleaning event, a restocking event, a rearrangement event” as in paragraph [0228]; e.g. “task” at an “emergency level” as in paragraph [0249]) ; identify, from the current or last known location of each user stored in the user profiles, a set of users within a predetermined proximity to the event location (e.g. via “positioning sensor” as in paragraph [0138]; e.g. “location” as in paragraph [0144]; e.g. “indication that the customer is near “ as in paragraph [0293]; “being close to or far away from the non-employee individual” as in paragraph [0249] ); identify an item, task, emergency event, or location within the environment (e.g. “products” “pricing” “promotions” “issues” as in paragraph [0229]; “task” “store shelf” “remote shelf” as in paragraph [0249]); and communicate to each user of the set of users, an alert (e.g. via reference numeral 206 in Figure 2; reference numeral 1201 in Figure 12; e.g. “real-time automated alerts” as in paragraph [0229]; e.g. “notification representing an offer” as in paragraph [0273]; “transmit (or push) a notification” as in paragraph [0260]; “provide the offer to two or more non-employee individuals” as in paragraph [0261]) including a rendered layout of the environment comprising an augmented reality image or virtual reality image (e.g. “a map of the specific retail store 105 with real-time indications of selected in-store execution events” “with augmented markings” as in paragraph [0229]; e.g. “include a map” as in paragraph [0273]) identifying the emergency event and location within the environment (e.g. “products” “pricing” “promotions” “issues” as in paragraph [0229]; “task” “store shelf” “remote shelf” as in paragraph [0249]; “emergency level of the task” as in paragraph [0255]), the alert further indicating that the user is in the vicinity of the emergency event (e.g. via “positioning sensor” as in paragraph [0138]; e.g. “location” as in paragraph [0144]; e.g. “indication that the customer is near “ as in paragraph [0293]; “being close to or far away from the non-employee individual” as in paragraph [0249] ) and directing the user (e.g. “provide directions to the user to travel to the location” as in paragraph [0273]) to the emergency event and event location (e.g. “products” “pricing” “promotions” “issues” as in paragraph [0229]; “task” “store shelf” “remote shelf” as in paragraph [0249]; “emergency level of the task” as in paragraph [0255]) within the environment via the augmented reality image or virtual reality image (e.g. “removing the misplaced products from the previous store shelf and placing the misplaced product on the remote store shelf” as in paragraph [0249]; “augmented markings” “more detailed information relating to the incentive and/or task” “information relating to the performance of the task” as in paragraph [0260]; “a location of the store shelf within the retail store” as in paragraph [0263]; “real-time video stream may be augmented with markings” as in paragraph [0145]; “cause an augmented reality system associated with the customer to display information” as in paragraph [0296]; e.g. “a map of the specific retail store 105 with real-time indications of selected in-store execution events” “with augmented markings” as in paragraph [0229]; e.g. “include a map” as in paragraph [0273]). ADATO differs from the claim invention in that it fails to specifically teach identifying an emergency exit for the set of users at an exit location in proximity to the emergency event location and further communicating an augmented reality image or virtual reality image identifying the emergency exit and exit location within the environment to the user. However, ADATO discloses identifying the entrance and/or exit of the retail store in proximity to a task or event (paragraph [0249]), thereby suggesting identification of an emergency exit for the retail store. Furthermore, JONES teaches identifying an emergency exit for a set of users at an exit location in proximity to the emergency event is well known in the art (e.g. “augmented reality views” “to show all emergency exits of a building” as in paragraph [0127]). One skilled in the art would have been motivated to utilize this concept in order to manage how data is shared between devices and users involved with an emergency including emergency service workers and victims of an emergency (e.g. as in paragraph [0001] of JONES). Therefore, it would have been obvious for one skilled in the art to identify an emergency exit for the set of users at an exit location in proximity to the emergency event location and further communicate an augmented reality image or virtual reality image identifying the emergency exit and exit location within the environment to the user as taught by JONES in ADATO.
Regarding claim 2, 12, the combination of references and ADATO in particular teaches The system of claim 1, wherein the mobile device comprises a tablet computer, a laptop computer, a notebook computer, a mobile computing device, a smart phone, or a cellular telephone ((paragraph [0125]).
Regarding claim 3, 13, ADATO teaches The system of claim 1, wherein the location data includes data captured by one or more sensors of the mobile device (e.g. “sensors” as in paragraph [0114], [0131], [0138] and throughout).
Regarding claim 4, 14, ADATO teaches The system of claim 3, wherein the one or more sensors are configured to capture data related to at least one of motion or position of the mobile device (paragraph [0138]) , signals transmitted from or to the mobile device, and direct user input with the mobile device.
Regarding claim 5, 15, ADATO teaches The system of claim 4, wherein the one or more sensors are selected from the group consisting of a motion sensor (paragraph [0138]), a received signal strength (RSS) sensor, a global positioning satellite (GPS) sensor (paragraph [0138]), and a touch sensor.
Regarding claim 10, 20, ADATO teaches The system of claim 1, wherein the instructions further cause the server system to detect users in proximity to the set of users (e.g. via “positioning sensor” as in paragraph [0138]; e.g. “location” as in paragraph [0144]; e.g. “crowd sourcing” as in paragraph [0146]; e.g. “indication that the customer is near“ as in paragraph [0293]).
Claim(s) 8-9 and 18-19 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over ADATO in view of JONES, as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of McSheffrey (Publication No.: US 2009/0237239 A1) .
Regarding claim 8, 9, 18, 19 ADATO teaches The system of claim 1, but fails to specifically teach identifying a medical device or a fire extinguisher in proximity to the event location and directing a user to a location of the medical device or a fire extinguisher in the rendered layout. However, ADATO suggests as much via disclosure of detection and identification of inanimate objects (paragraph [0159]) in an effort to map all objects in a retail store. Furthermore, McSheffrey teaches that identifying a fire extinguisher or a medical device as objects tracked within an environment is well known in the art (e.g. “fire extinguisher” “defibrillator” paragraph [0017] and throughout). Therefore, it would have been obvious for one skilled in the art to select the identified item as one of a fire extinguisher or a medical device.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 09/01/26 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive. As noted in the amended office action, examiner asserts that the combined teachings of ADATO and JONES obviates the newly amended claim language. Specifically, ADATO clearly identifies all objects and users within a store, identifies an emergency event and its location within the store, locates users in close proximity to the emergency event, identifies the proximity of the emergency event to the entrance/exit of the store, and guides a user to the location of the emergency event via real-time maps augmented with markings to address the situation. The only thing ADATO fails to do is identify an emergency exit of the store which may or may not be one in the same with the main entrance/exit of the store. However, as previously noted, JONES teaches that this concept is well known in the art by providing augmented reality views that to show all emergency exits of a building. Given the overlap of the art of providing augmented reality maps to a user of an indoor positioning system, disclosure by ADATO of identifying a store entrance/exit, and an explicit teaching by JONES of identifying emergency exits with motivation for doing so, examiner maintains that the combination of teachings obviates the claimed invention.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to AGUSTIN BELLO whose telephone number is (571)272-3026. The examiner can normally be reached Monday through Friday, 9 AM - 5 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, David Payne can be reached at (571)272-3024. 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.
/AGUSTIN BELLO/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2635
