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 .
Specification
Applicant is reminded of the proper content of an abstract of the disclosure.
A patent abstract is a concise statement of the technical disclosure of the patent and should include that which is new in the art to which the invention pertains. The abstract should not refer to purported merits or speculative applications of the invention and should not compare the invention with the prior art.
If the patent is of a basic nature, the entire technical disclosure may be new in the art, and the abstract should be directed to the entire disclosure. If the patent is in the nature of an improvement in an old apparatus, process, product, or composition, the abstract should include the technical disclosure of the improvement. The abstract should also mention by way of example any preferred modifications or alternatives.
Where applicable, the abstract should include the following: (1) if a machine or apparatus, its organization and operation; (2) if an article, its method of making; (3) if a chemical compound, its identity and use; (4) if a mixture, its ingredients; (5) if a process, the steps.
Extensive mechanical and design details of an apparatus should not be included in the abstract. The abstract should be in narrative form and generally limited to a single paragraph within the range of 50 to 150 words in length. (Emphasis added)
See MPEP § 608.01(b) for guidelines for the preparation of patent abstracts.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(b):
(b) CONCLUSION.—The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph:
The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the applicant regards as his invention.
Claims 2-6 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor (or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the applicant), regards as the invention.
Claim 2 recites the limitation " the tracking error " in the second and forth lines. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
Claims 3-6 are rejected based on their inherited deficiencies.
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 an abstract idea without significantly more.
Under step 1, claim 1 belongs to a statutory category.
Under Step 2A prong 1, the claims as a whole are identified as being directed to a judicial exception as claim 1 and similarly 18-19 recite(s) “detecting a trajectory tracking error corresponding to a first trajectory of a first movement component; in response to detecting the trajectory tracking error corresponding to the first trajectory of the first movement component, determining a second trajectory for a second movement component different from the first movement component;” which are directed to mathematical concepts and/or mental processes per applicant’s specification, for example See Par. 83, 130 and 137.
Under Step 2A prong 2, evaluating whether the claim as a whole integrates the exception into a practical application of that exception, the judicial exception is not integrated into a practical application because “at a coordinated trajectory planning component of an electronic device”, in Claim 18 “a non-transitory computer-readable storage medium storing one or more programs configured to be executed by one or more processors of an electronic device, the one or more programs including instructions for, by a coordinated trajectory planning component” and in claim 19 “an electronic device, comprising: one or more processors; and memory storing one or more programs configured to be executed by the one or more processors, the one or more programs including instructions for, by a coordinated trajectory planning component” are considered to be generically recited computer elements do not add a meaningful limitation to the abstract idea because they amount to simply implementing the abstract idea on a computer. The elements of “providing the second trajectory to the second movement component” are considered to be data gathering steps required to use the correlation do not add a meaningful limitation to the method as they are insignificant extra-solution activity.
Under Step 2B, evaluating additional elements to determine whether they amount to an inventive concept both individually and in combination, the claim(s) does/do not include additional elements that are sufficient to amount to significantly more than the judicial exception because “at a coordinated trajectory planning component of an electronic device”, in Claim 18 “a non-transitory computer-readable storage medium storing one or more programs configured to be executed by one or more processors of an electronic device, the one or more programs including instructions for, by a coordinated trajectory planning component” and in claim 19 “an electronic device, comprising: one or more processors; and memory storing one or more programs configured to be executed by the one or more processors, the one or more programs including instructions for, by a coordinated trajectory planning component” are well-understood, routine, conventional computer functions as recognized by the court decisions listed in MPEP § 2106.05(d). The elements of “providing the second trajectory to the second movement component” are considered to be adding insignificant extra-solution activity to the judicial exception per MPEP 2106.05(g) (i or ii) and are well-understood, routine, conventional activities/elements previously known to the industry per MPEP 2106.05(d)(i).
Claims 1-14 and 16 further describe the abstract ideas cited above.
Claim 15 does not integrate the abstract idea into a practical application or amount to significantly more than the judicial exception because the elements are considered to be data gathering steps required to use the correlation do not add a meaningful limitation to the method as they are insignificant extra-solution activity and are considered to be adding insignificant extra-solution activity to the judicial exception per MPEP 2106.05(g) (i or ii) and are well-understood, routine, conventional activities/elements previously known to the industry per MPEP 2106.05(d)(i).
Claim 17 does not integrate the abstract idea into a practical application or amount to significantly more than the judicial exception because the elements are considered to be generically recited computer elements do not add a meaningful limitation to the abstract idea because they amount to simply implementing the abstract idea on a computer and are well-understood, routine, conventional computer functions as recognized by the court decisions listed in MPEP § 2106.05(d).
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
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.
Claim(s) 1-19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Tan (US 20070010940 A1).
In claim 1, Tan discloses a method, comprising: at a coordinated trajectory planning component (Figs. 4 400, Par. 53) of an electronic device (Fig. 4, 400/420 Par. 42 “the navigation computer 400 and error correction module 420 can be combined”): detecting a trajectory tracking error (Fig. 4, 408, Par. 50 “data for calibration to module 408, and resulting errors are detected”) corresponding to a first trajectory (Fig. 4, 402, Par. 41) of a first movement component (Fig. 4, 402-405-408-410, Examiner considers the signal from the path 402 to 410 to be said first movement component); in response to detecting the trajectory tracking error corresponding to the first trajectory of the first movement component (Par. 41 “if the primary-trajectory data from 402 is accurate, and if not resorts to include the secondary trajectory generator 404”), determining a second trajectory (Fig. 4, 404) for a second movement component different from the first movement component (Fig. 4 404-405-408-410, Examiner considers the signal from the path 404 to 410 to be said second movement component); and providing the second trajectory to the second movement component (Fig. 4, 404 feeds into the calibrated trajectory generator to generate the second movement component).
In claim 2, Tan Further discloses wherein determining the second trajectory includes: in accordance with a determination that the tracking error corresponds to a first tracking characteristic (Par. 41 “if the primary-trajectory data from 402 is accurate”), the second trajectory includes a first movement characteristic (Par. 41 “past trajectory includes the past position data”); and in accordance with a determination that the tracking error corresponds to a second tracking characteristic different from the first tracking characteristic (Par. 41 “if not resorts to include the secondary trajectory generator 404” Examiner notes if 402 is inaccurate, a second movement characteristic is included from the second position sensor), the second trajectory includes a second movement characteristic different from the first movement characteristic (see claim 3, ‘second sensor providing… acceleration data’).
In claim 3, Tan discloses all of claim 2. Tan further discloses wherein determining the second trajectory includes determining a change to a set of one or more movement characteristics (Par. 28 “calibrated trajectory from step 110 is compared with the past trajectory from database 104 to identify position errors”).
In claim 4, Tan discloses all of claim 3. Tan further discloses wherein the set of one or more movement characteristics includes a velocity characteristic (Claim 3 “velocity data”).
In claim 5, Tan discloses all of claim 3. Tan further discloses wherein the set of one or more movement characteristics includes a position characteristic (Par. 36 “position”).
In claim 6, Tan discloses all of claim 3. Tan further discloses wherein the set of one or more movement characteristics includes an acceleration characteristic (Claim 3 “acceleration data”).
In claim 7, Tan Further discloses in response to detecting the trajectory tracking error corresponding to the first trajectory of the first movement component, determining a third trajectory for the first movement component different from the first trajectory (Fig. 4, 112-116-104, Par. 46 “calibrated trajectory” examiner considers the calibrated trajectory of the first movement component to be said third trajectory).
In claim 8, Tan Further discloses before detecting the trajectory tracking error corresponding to the first trajectory of the first movement component: determining the first trajectory for the first movement component (Fig. 4, 402); and providing the first trajectory to the first movement component (Fig. 4, 402 feeds into the calibrated trajectory generator via Fig. 4, 402-405-408-410 to generate the second movement component).
In claim 9, Tan Further discloses before detecting the trajectory tracking error corresponding to the first trajectory of the first movement component: determining a third trajectory for the second movement component (Fig. 4, 104, “past trajectroy” examiner considers the calibrated trajectory of the second movement component to be said third trajectory), wherein the third trajectory is different from the second trajectory (Examiner notes that the past trajectory is different from the second trajectory as it has been modified by past error correction 116); and providing the third trajectory to the second movement component (Fig. 4 406-408).
In claim 10, Tan Further discloses after providing the second trajectory to the second movement component, receiving an indication that the second movement component moved according to an actual trajectory different from the second trajectory (Par. 39, “A trajectory can be determined in step 318 using mathematical filters or estimation formulas that better determine subsequent positions when position errors potentially occur” “compare the calibrated trajectory with the past trajectory” examiner considers the result of the comparison to be said indication).
In claim 11, Tan discloses all of claim 10. Tan further discloses Tan Further discloses in response to receiving the indication that the second movement component moved according to the actual trajectory, updating a set of one or more characteristics corresponding to the second movement component based on the indication (Par. 39 “updates the position data”).
In claim 12, Tan discloses all of claim 10. Tan further discloses in response to receiving the indication that the second movement component moved according to the actual trajectory, updating a set of one or more characteristics corresponding to the second movement component based on the indication (Par. 39 “updates the position data”).
In claim 13, Tan discloses all of claim 12. Tan further discloses blending a set of one or more aspects of the second trajectory with a different trajectory to generate the third trajectory (Fig. 2, 216-218, Par. 39 “calibration step 216 is used to modify the criteria and data segments for the post processed trajectory fitting” Par. 31 “fitting the post processed trajectory by calibrating parameters to better match the calibrated trajectory to the selected segments of trustworthy past real-time trajectories” examiner considers the trustworthy trajectories to be said “different trajectory”).
In claim 14, Tan further discloses wherein detecting the trajectory tracking error includes detecting that a progress of the first movement component does not match the first trajectory (Par. 47 “past trajectories are determined to have errors greater than acceptable limits”).
In claim 15, Tan further discloses outputting an indication of the trajectory tracking error (Par. 42 “provide error information to a reporting module 422 and warning module 424”).
In claim 16, Tan further discloses wherein the second trajectory corresponds to a substitute movement with respect to the trajectory tracking error (Par. 47 “If the past trajectories are determined to have errors greater than acceptable limits in step 502, the calibrated trajectory from step 110 is used in step 506 to provide corrected data to the position inventory 101 and to the event trajectory database 504”).
In claim 17, Tan further discloses wherein the coordinated trajectory planning component coordinates the second trajectory with one or more output trajectories for one or more physical output components of the following: one or more display generation components; one or more audio output components; one or more movement components; one or more light output components; and one or more opacity control components (Par. 47 “provide corrected data to the position inventory 101” Par. 42 “position inventory can be connected to a user interface to allow viewing of the data as described previously” examiner considers the user interface to be said “one or more display generation components”).
In claim 18, Tan discloses a non-transitory computer-readable storage medium storing one or more programs (Par. 37 “memory”) configured to be executed by one or more processors (see abstract “processor”) of an electronic device (Fig. 4, 400/420 Par. 42 “the navigation computer 400 and error correction module 420 can be combined”), the one or more programs including instructions for, by a coordinated trajectory planning component (Figs. 4 400): detecting a trajectory tracking error (Fig. 4, 408, Par. 50 “data for calibration to module 408, and resulting errors are detected”) corresponding to a first trajectory (Fig. 4, 402) of a first movement component (Fig. 4, 402-405-408-410, Examiner considers the signal from the path 402 to 410 to be said first movement component); in response to detecting the trajectory tracking error corresponding to the first trajectory of the first movement component (Par. 41 “if the primary-trajectory data from 402 is accurate, and if not resorts to include the secondary trajectory generator 404”), determining a second trajectory (Fig. 4, 404) for a second movement component different from the first movement component (Fig. 4 404-405-408-410, Examiner considers the signal from the path 404 to 410 to be said second movement component); and providing the second trajectory to the second movement component (Fig. 4, 404 feeds into the calibrated trajectory generator to generate the second movement component).
In claim 19, Tan discloses an electronic device (Fig. 4, 400/420 Par. 42 “the navigation computer 400 and error correction module 420 can be combined”), comprising: one or more processors (see abstract “processor”); and memory storing one or more programs (Par. 37 “memory”) configured to be executed by the one or more processors, the one or more programs including instructions for, by a coordinated trajectory planning component (Figs. 4 400): detecting a trajectory tracking error (Fig. 4, 408, Par. 50 “data for calibration to module 408, and resulting errors are detected”) corresponding to a first trajectory (Fig. 4, 402) of a first movement component (Fig. 4, 402-405-408-410, Examiner considers the signal from the path 402 to 410 to be said first movement component); in response to detecting the trajectory tracking error corresponding to the first trajectory of the first movement component (Par. 41 “if the primary-trajectory data from 402 is accurate, and if not resorts to include the secondary trajectory generator 404”), determining a second trajectory (Fig. 4, 404) for a second movement component different from the first movement component (Fig. 4 404-405-408-410, Examiner considers the signal from the path 404 to 410 to be said second movement component); and providing the second trajectory to the second movement component (Fig. 4, 404 feeds into the calibrated trajectory generator to generate the second movement component).
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. US 10801841 B1, Trajectory Prediction Via A Feature Vector Approach; US 6868338 B1 Method And Apparatus For Recording And Synthesizing Position Data.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to BRANDON J BECKER whose telephone number is (571)431-0689. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 9:30-5:30.
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, Shelby Turner can be reached at (571) 272-6334. 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.
/B.J.B/ Examiner, Art Unit 2857
/KYLE R QUIGLEY/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2857
