DETAILED ACTION
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and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114.
Response to Amendment
Applicant’s response to the last Office Action, filed on 03/30/2026 has been entered and made of record.
Claims objection due to minor informalities has been withdrawn in view of amendments.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed on 03/30/2026 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
Regarding the amendments to the independent claims, Examiner notes that Camras teaches wherein the person information further includes at least one of object information relating to an object carried by a person, a congestion degree indicating a degree of congestion of people, wheelchair information relating to a person moving by a wheelchair, and attribute information indicating an attribute of a person, and wherein the attribute information includes at least one of a gender, an age group, and whether the person is a predetermined person. (¶ 0045-0048 teach person information includes the attribute of congestion of pedestrians on the roadway. ¶ 0038 teaches using an age attribute of a person.)
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 103 which forms the basis for all obviousness rejections set forth in this Office action:
A patent for a claimed invention may not be obtained, notwithstanding that the claimed invention is not identically disclosed as set forth in section 102, if the differences between the claimed invention and the prior art are such that the claimed invention as a whole would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which the claimed invention pertains. Patentability shall not be negated by the manner in which the invention was made.
Claim(s) 1, 6-10, and 12 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Camras (US PGPub 20210383683).
Regarding claim 1, Camras discloses the street light system comprising: (Camras teaches a smart street light system which detects pedestrians walking on a cross walk or other road surface and adaptively turns on street lights to follow their movement, see ¶ 0023 and 0040.)
at least one memory configured to store instructions; and (¶ 0054)
at least one processor configured to execute the instructions to perform operations comprising: (¶ 0054)
generating person information relating to a plurality of persons included in image information by processing the image information to be generated by a camera provided in each of one or a plurality of street lights; and (See ¶ 0045 and 0052-0055 teach detecting pedestrians walking in a roadway with a camera within the light source.)
controlling a lighting state of an illumination provided in at least one of the one or the plurality of street lights by using a processing result of the image information. (¶ 0042 and 0043 teach controlling a light source in response to the detected pedestrian by turning a light on, providing a spot light, or providing a projection. Also see ¶ 0052-0055.)
wherein the person information includes people flow information being information relating to a flow of people. (¶ 0046 and 0048 teach person information includes people direction flow information. See also Fig. 3.)
wherein controlling the lighting state of the illumination includes, in a case where the person information includes a moving direction of a person, controlling the lighting state of the illumination provided in at least one of the plurality of street lights by using the person information acquired by processing image information generated by the camera of a street light located in front of or behind the person in a moving direction. (¶ 0047 teaches using multiple streetlights. ¶ 0046 and 0048 teach person information includes people direction flow information. See also Fig. 3 which shows an example of the lights behind or in front of pedestrians.)
wherein the person information further includes at least one of object information relating to an object carried by a person, a congestion degree indicating a degree of congestion of people, wheelchair information relating to a person moving by a wheelchair, and attribute information indicating an attribute of a person, and wherein the attribute information includes at least one of a gender, an age group, and whether the person is a predetermined person. (¶ 0045-0048 teach person information includes the attribute of congestion of pedestrians on the roadway. ¶ 0038 teaches using an age attribute of a person.)
Camras does not expressly disclose that all of its above-cited teachings are expressly disclosed as occurring in the same embodiment. That is, despite the reference being clear that these functions are disclosed, there is no express disclosure that the details are all found in the same embodiment. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have combined the various teachings to provide a single system capable of the variety of tasks which are disclosed. In view of these teachings, this cannot be considered a non-obvious improvement over the prior art. Using known engineering design, no “fundamental” operating principle of the teachings are changed; they continue to perform the same functions as originally taught prior to being combined.
Regarding claim 6, Camras discloses the street light system according to claim 1, further comprising detecting occurrence of a predetermined event by using sensor information from a sensor provided in each of the one or the plurality of street lights, wherein, in a case where occurrence of the event is detected, in controlling the lighting state of the illumination further controlling the lighting state of the illumination provided in at least one of the one or the plurality of street lights. (As above, ¶ 0042 and 0043 teach controlling a light source in response to the detected pedestrian by turning a light on, providing a spot light, or providing a projection. Also see ¶ 0052-0055.)
Regarding claim 7, Camras discloses the street light system according to claim 1, wherein and the plurality of street lights are grouped to a plurality of groups according to an area where each of the plurality of street lights is installed, at least one street light belonging to each of the plurality of groups is controlled in the batch manner, and controlling the lighting state of the illumination includes controlling the lighting state of the illumination provided in the at least one street light in a batch manner for each of the groups by using the processing result of the image information. (¶ 0047 teaches using multiple streetlights. See also Fig. 3 which shows an example of grouped lighting behind and in front of pedestrians. Also see ¶ 0042)
Regarding claim 8, Camras discloses the street light system according to claim 1, further comprising: controlling an output device by using the processing result of the image information, wherein the output device is provided in each of one or the plurality of street lights, and outputs at least one of an image and an audio sound. (¶ 0042 and 0043 teach projection image lighting in which text and other images are projected onto the roadway for example in conjunction with detecting a pedestrian.)
Regarding claim 9, Camras discloses the street light system according to claim 8, wherein the output device projects the image on a projection plane by using a road or another street light, as the projection plane. (As above, ¶ 0042 and 0043 teach projection image lighting in which text and other images are projected onto the roadway for example in conjunction with detecting a pedestrian.)
Regarding claim 21, Camras discloses the street light system according to claim 1, wherein the controlling the lighting state of the illumination includes controlling the illumination in front of the person in a moving direction. (¶ 0042-0044)
Claims 10 and 22 are the street light corresponding to the street light system of claims 1 and 21. Remaining limitations are rejected similarly. See detailed analysis above.
Claims 12 and 23 are the non-transitory computer readable medium corresponding to the street light system of claims 1 and 21. ¶ 0054 discloses a non-transitory computer readable medium. Remaining limitations are rejected similarly. See detailed analysis above.
Claim(s) 4, 15 and 19 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Camras (US PGPub 20210383683) in view of Marman (US PGPub 2009/0262189)
Regarding claim 4, Camras discloses the street light system according to claim 1, wherein in generating the person information, further generating vehicle information relating to movement of a vehicle included in the image information by processing the image information, and, (See ¶ 0052-0055 and especially 0054 on detection of oncoming vehicle.)
In the field of intelligent streetlighting Marmas teaches what Camras does not expressly disclose, namely, in the case where the person information includes a moving direction of a person, in controlling the lighting state of the illumination based on a subset of the vehicle information acquired by processing image information generated by a camera of a street light located in a predetermined range from the person, and controlling the lighting state of the illumination provided in at least one of the one or the plurality of street lights by using the subset of the vehicle information. (Marman teaches an intelligent street lighting system based on video analytics processing. ¶ 0036 and 0043 teach controlling the lighting state based on detected vehicles and them being within a predetermined range.)
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have combined Camras’ intelligent streetlighting with Marman’s intelligent streetlighting. Camras teaches controlling the lighting state based on detected pedestrians and also teaches detecting vehicles. Marman provides a more detailed disclosure regarding controlling the lighting state based on detected vehicles and them being within a predetermined range. The combination constitutes the repeatable and predictable result of simply applying detected vehicle lighting control in a context in which intelligent lighting control is already being performed and oncoming vehicles are already being detected. This cannot be considered a non-obvious improvement in view of the relevant prior art here. Using known engineering design, no “fundamental” operating principle of the teachings are changed; they continue to perform the same functions as originally taught prior to being combined.
Claims 15 is the street light corresponding to the street light system of claim 4. Remaining limitations are rejected similarly. See detailed analysis above.
Claims 19 is the non-transitory computer readable medium corresponding to the street light system of claims 4. ¶ 0054 discloses a non-transitory computer readable medium. Remaining limitations are rejected similarly. See detailed analysis above.
Claim(s) 24 and 25 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Camras (US PGPub 20210383683) in view of Liu (US PGPub 2019/0026882)
Regarding claim 24, Camras discloses the street light system according to claim 21, wherein controlling the illumination in front of the person in a moving direction (See rejection of claims 1 and 21.)
In the field of pedestrian behavior recognition Liu discloses what the above combination does not expressly disclose, namely, triggering based on detecting a second person in front of or behind the person in a moving direction. (Liu teaches using surveillance cameras to detect a person stalking/following a second person, see Fig. 3A and ¶ 0041-0042.)
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have combined Camras’ intelligent pedestrian surveillance with Liu’s intelligent pedestrian surveillance. Camras teaches controlling the lighting state based on detected pedestrians in order to provide increased safety by improving lighting. Liu teaches using surveillance cameras to detect a person stalking/following a second person. The combination constitutes the repeatable and predictable result of simply applying Liu’s technique here of detecting a person following another in order to trigger the lighting Camras is already triggering after recognizing other pedestrian behaviors. This cannot be considered a non-obvious improvement in view of the relevant prior art here. Using known engineering design, no “fundamental” operating principle of the teachings are changed; they continue to perform the same functions as originally taught prior to being combined.
Regarding claim 25, the above combination discloses the street light system according to claim 24, wherein the second person is a suspicious person. (See rejection of claim 24.)
Examiner’s note
Examiner notes that the claimed lists must be interpreted disjunctively in light of the specification, which is consistent with Fujifilm Corp. v. Motorola Mobility LLC, No. 12-CV-03587-WHO, 2015 WL 1265009 (N.D. Cal. Mar 19, 2015) which explained that, unlike the “’at least one of” phrase in SuperGuide Corp. v. DirecTV Enters., Inc., 358 F.3d 870 (Fed. Cir. 2004), which concerned a list of categories of many possible values that users must choose, the lists in the instant case involves modes of operation. As such, the phrases such as “one or more of” must be understood as “one or more of the following.”
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Raphael Schwartz whose telephone number is (571)270-3822. The examiner can normally be reached Monday to Friday 9am-5pm CT.
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, Vincent Rudolph can be reached at (571) 272-8243. 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.
/RAPHAEL SCHWARTZ/ Examiner, Art Unit 2671
Prosecution Insights