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 .
Priority
Acknowledgment is made of applicant’s claim for foreign priority under 35 U.S.C. 119 (a)-(d). The certified copy has been filed in parent Application No. JP 2022-127662, filed on August 10, 2022.
Status of Claims
Amendments to all the claims have been entered.
Claim 2 is canceled.
Claims 1 and 3 – 16 are pending.
Response to Remarks
Applicant amended the claims to remove the feature of using vital data to determine correctness of the identified region and using vital data to associate the arrival direction with the identified region as claimed in the independent claims.
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 (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status.
The following is a quotation of 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)(2) the claimed invention was described in a patent issued under section 151, or in an application for patent published or deemed published under section 122(b), in which the patent or application, as the case may be, names another inventor and was effectively filed before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claim 1, 3 – 10, 12 and 14 – 16 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) as being anticipated by Andiappan (US 20230092182 A1).
As to claims 1 and 14 – 16, Andiappan discloses a vital data acquisition system comprising:
a hardware processor that:
sets a plurality of identified regions with respect to a detection object in an image taken by camera based on imaged information on the image (Fig. 7 step 702 – 704. Para. 37 “Steering of the antenna array 212 of the radar is to cause a change in azimuth and elevation of the radar to keep a maximum of transmitted power over the chest area of the subject 104.” & Para. 65 “one or more images captured by the camera 206” See also Para. 21 “multiple subjects” Fig. 1 shows multiple beams 106. Para. 100 “the camera assists the radar on the angle resolution for performance of continuous and reliable beamforming. In some examples, both the radar and the camera are rigidly connected. Based on the pixel value of a human chest point, the camera can estimate both azimuth and elevation angles of the radar beam with good resolution.” Para. 30 “more than one beam may be focused such that different beams are focused on different subjects.” Para. 21 “a display may present images of the subject in the environment that are augmented with vital sign data overlaying or embedded in the image over or near the subject.”);
acquires vital data based on, as a detection (Fig. 7 step 724), some of identified reflected waves by a sensor among reflected waves of radio waves emitted to an imaging range of the image viewed from the camera (Para. 100 as previously cited.); and
associates each of the identified regions, with an arrival direction of the identified reflected waves to the sensor (Para. 100); and
determining whether the identified region is correctly set based on a relationship between the identified region and the arrival direction of the identified reflected waves to the sensor (Fig. 7 steps 708 – 720 with feedback. The correlation determines the level of correctness and if more correctness is needed than the radar is adjusted via the feedback.).
As to claim 3, Andiappan discloses the vital data acquisition system according to claim 1 wherein the hardware processor: identifies a reflection position of the identified reflected waves in the imaging range, based on the arrival direction of the identified reflected waves, in a case that the reflection position of the identified reflected waves is within the identified region, determines that the identified region is correctly set, and in a case that the reflection position of the identified reflected waves is not within the identified region, determines that the identified region is not correctly set (Fig. 7 steps 708 – 720 & Para. 100).
As to claim 4, Andiappan discloses the vital data acquisition system according to claim 1, wherein the hardware processor: identifies a reflection position of the reflected waves in the imaging range, based on an arrival direction of the reflected waves, the reflection position of the reflected waves representing that a target reflecting the radio waves is moving, and in a case that the reflection position of the reflected waves is not within the identified region, determines that the identified region is not correctly set (Fig. 7 steps 708 – 720 & Para. 100 Para. 30 “The subjects 104 are able to move because the field of view of radar and the direction and angle of the transmission beam(s) of the radar is not fixed.”).
As to claim 5, Andiappan discloses the vital data acquisition system according to claim 3, wherein the hardware processor executes at least one of: removing the identified region that is determined not to be correctly set (Fig. 7 step 730 loops back to 702. Para. 30 makes clear that people move thus, if people move, then the regions that are no longer relevant would cease to exist), and issuing a notification of invalidity of the identified region.
As to claim 6, Andiappan discloses the vital data acquisition system according to claim 1 wherein the hardware processor: identifies a reflection position of the identified reflected waves in the imaging range, based on the arrival direction of the identified reflected waves, in a case that the reflection position of the identified reflected waves is outside of the identified region, determines that the identified region is not correctly set, and executes at least one of: newly setting another identified region internally including the reflection position of the identified reflected waves, and adjusting a range of the identified region so as to internally include the reflection position of the identified reflected waves (Para. 30 “refocusing”).
As to claim 7, Andiappan discloses the vital data acquisition system according to claim 1, wherein the hardware processor: supplies the sensor with sensor control information to control an operation of the sensor, and supplies the sensor with, as the sensor control information, setting region information of the identified region to exclude, from a target of a detection process by the sensor, the reflected waves reflected outside of the identified region that is determined to be correctly set (Para. 44 “removes ghost effect”).
As to claim 8, Andiappan discloses the vital data acquisition system according to claim 1, wherein the hardware processor supplies the sensor with sensor control information to control an operation of the sensor, the sensor is configured such that a detection distance of the sensor is adjustable, and the hardware processor supplies the sensor with, as the sensor control information, distance information on a distance from the sensor to the identified region to adjust the detection distance (Para. 30 “field of view of radar … is not fixed.” Para. 43 “beamforming … focus on the location of the subject 104. Para. 66 “The non-contact vital signs sensing circuitry 200 may perform tracking of the subject in the environment for example as the subject moves about the environment, …”).
As to claim 9, Andiappan discloses the vital data acquisition system according to claim 1, wherein the sensor is a radar that transmits and receives radio waves, and serves as a distance meter (Para. 42 Fig 5).
As to claim 10, Andiappan discloses the vital data acquisition system according to claim 1, wherein upon determining that the identified region is correctly set, the hardware processor records the vital data, based on the identified reflected waves reflected at an inside of the identified region, in association with the identified region (Para. 70 and Fig. 7 item 720 – 724. The radar is adjusted to be correct before extracting vital signs.).
As to claim 12, Andiappan discloses the vital data acquisition system according to claim 1, wherein the hardware processor sets the identified region with respect to the detection object in the imaging range, based on a recognition result of the detection object by a machine learning model achieved through machine learning using detection object information pertaining to the detection object (Para. 69).
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 103 which forms the basis for all obviousness rejections set forth in this Office action:
A patent for a claimed invention may not be obtained, notwithstanding that the claimed invention is not identically disclosed as set forth in section 102, if the differences between the claimed invention and the prior art are such that the claimed invention as a whole would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which the claimed invention pertains. Patentability shall not be negated by the manner in which the invention was made.
Claim 13 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being obvious over Andiappan in view of Jeon (US 20200116854 A1).
As to claim 13, Andiappan does not disclose the vital data acquisition system according to claim 1, wherein upon determining that the identified region is not correctly set, the hardware processor issues a notification of a result of the determination.
Jeon aligns radar based off of camera as shown in Fig. 6. Jeon further teaches “the output device may output a visual alarm through the display, may output an audible alarm through the speaker, or may output a tactile alarm through the haptic module, thereby providing notification of the misaligned state of the radar sensor (Para. 148).”
In view of Jeon, it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before filing to notify user that radar is not aligning to the targets of interests as indicated by the camera thus allowing user an opportunity to access the radar to ensure the radar is properly functioning such as being aligned correctly.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claim 11 is objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
Andiappan shows step 724 of extracting vital signs as occurring after the correcting steps 708 – 720. So Andiappan’s correction would not be based on vital signs.
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 MICHAEL W JUSTICE whose telephone number is (571)270-7029. The examiner can normally be reached 7:30 - 5:30 M-F.
Examiner interviews are available via telephone, in-person, and video conferencing using a USPTO supplied web-based collaboration tool. To schedule an interview, applicant is encouraged to use the USPTO Automated Interview Request (AIR) at http://www.uspto.gov/interviewpractice.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Vladimir Magloire can be reached at 571-270-5144. 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.
/MICHAEL W JUSTICE/Examiner, Art Unit 3648