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 .
DETAILED ACTION
This non-final office action is in response to the Application filed on 5/9/2024, with priority to provisional 63/501,369 filing date 05/10/2023.
Claim(s) 1-94 were originally filed. Claim(s) 1-21, 47-94 are canceled.
Claim(s) 22-46 are pending for examination. Claim(s) 23-29, 32-35, 37-40 are withdrawn. Claim(s) 22, 30-31, 36, 41-46 are rejected. Claim(s) 22, 45, 46 is/are independent claim(s).
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)(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) 22, 45, 46 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Sheha; Michael A. et al. US Pub. No. US 20120254804 (Sheha).
Claim 22:
Sheha teaches:
A method comprising:
at an electronic device in communication with a display generation component and one or more input devices [¶ 0345-351] (display with touch input):
while displaying a user interface of a maps application [¶ 0455-456] (main menu with map):
receiving, via the one or more input devices, an input corresponding to a request to display respective information on a map of a physical area [¶ 0295] (FIG. 56 shows an exemplary touch screen device where a user can click on an icon, and details relating to the clicked-on POI are displayed); and
in response to receiving the input:
displaying the map of the physical area with a plurality of indications of a plurality of locations corresponding to the respective information, including a first indication of a first location displayed with increased visual emphasis relative to a second indication of a second location [¶ 0655] (route highlight) [¶ 0550, 556-558] (currently selected POI in the list view is shown a balloon showing information about the POI when map is selected from the list view or detail view) [¶ 0296-297, 314-315] (pedestrian mode); and
displaying, a user interface element including information about the first location without displaying a user interface element including information about the second location [¶ 568] (Clicking on the balloon brings up the location detail screen for the selected pin).
Claim 30:
Sheha teaches:
The method of claim 22, wherein displaying the user interface element including the information about the first location includes:
in accordance with a determination that the first location has a first value for a characteristic, the information includes first information about the first location [¶ 0554, 916-921] (Custom POIs are displayed differently, a determination must be made of the type of POI, point-of-interest); and
in accordance with a determination that the first location has a second value for the characteristic different from the first value, the information includes second information about the first location different from the first information [¶ 0553-556] (POIs are represented by color pins. Different colored pins depict normal, premium, enhanced and user POIs. For example, a purple pin is used to show Regular/Custom POIs; an orange pin to show Premium POIs; and a light green pin to show Enhanced POIs).
ALTERNATE REJECTION:
Claim(s) 22, 45, 46 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Samuel; Ninis US Pub. No. 20150073698 (Samuel).
Claim 22:
Samuel teaches:
A method comprising:
at an electronic device in communication with a display generation component and one or more input devices [¶ 0011] (electronic device with map capability):
while displaying a user interface of a maps application [¶ 0033, 40] (miscellaneous dog friendly POIs along the route):
receiving, via the one or more input devices, an input corresponding to a request to display respective information on a map of a physical area [¶ 0085] (If the user taps on a map pin, a transparent `tooltip` popup opens and gives avatar and name of the selected POI); and
in response to receiving the input:
displaying the map of the physical area with a plurality of indications of a plurality of locations corresponding to the respective information, including a first indication of a first location displayed with increased visual emphasis relative to a second indication of a second location [¶ 0042] (FIG. 5 illustrates a feature which displays dog friendly points of interest (POI), as indicated by a marker such as a paw print); and
displaying, a user interface element including information about the first location without displaying a user interface element including information about the second location [¶ 0086] (If the user taps the `tooltip` a full screen popup shows with all the POI details).
Claim 30:
Samuel teaches:
The method of claim 22, wherein displaying the user interface element including the information about the first location includes:
in accordance with a determination that the first location has a first value for a characteristic, the information includes first information about the first location [¶ 0036-39] (if no dog friendly places are located the point is displayed one way); and
in accordance with a determination that the first location has a second value for the characteristic different from the first value, the information includes second information about the first location different from the first information [¶ 0040-42] (if there is a dog friendly point, then it is displayed another way) [¶ 0053] (display dog friendly points of interest and businesses nearby using special markers on a map with useful information across various categories).
Claims 45-46:
Claim(s) 45-46 is/are substantially similar to claim 22 and is/are rejected using the same prior art and the same reason, rationale and/or motivation as used above.
Claim 22 is a “method” claim, claim 45 is a “system” claim and claim 46 is a “medium” claim, but the steps or elements of each claim are essentially the same.
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(s) 31, 36 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Sheha; Michael A. et al. US Pub. No. US 20120254804 (Sheha) in view of Hajj; Usama M. et al. US Pub. No. 20160358471 (Hajj).
Claim 31:
Sheha teaches all the elements of the claims as shown above.
Sheha does not appear to explicitly disclose “mode of transportation”.
However, the disclosure of Hajj teaches:
The method of claim 30, wherein the input corresponding to the request to display respective information includes a request to display navigation routes to a destination location, the plurality of indications of a plurality of locations corresponding to the respective information include a plurality of indications of the navigation routes to the destination location [¶ 0406-4101, 412-414] (Figs 35-36; display alternative routes for a transit leg of a transit trip), and the user interface element including the information about the first location is a user interface element including information about a first navigation route to the destination location including:
in accordance with a determination that the first navigation route uses a first mode of transportation, the first information corresponding to the first mode of transportation [¶ 0134, 137] (representations for different transit vehicles of different lines); and
in accordance with a determination that the first navigation route uses a second mode of transportation different from the first mode of transportation, the second information corresponding to the second mode of transportation [¶ 0139-140] (best identified transit route now includes two different bus legs 555 and 565, a walking leg 560, and a subway leg 570) [¶ 0428-437] (transit navigation presentation on a watch).
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the method of navigation display in Sheha and the method of route display in Hajj, with a reasonable expectation of success.
The motivation for doing so would have been the use of known technique to improve similar devices (methods, or products) in the same way; (See KSR Int’l Co. v. Teleflex Inc., 550 US 398, 82 USPQ2d 1385, 1396 (U.S. 2007) and MPEP § 2143(D)).
The know technique of displaying alternate routes in Hajj could be applied to the navigation display in Sheha. Sheha and Hajj are similar devices because both provide navigation routes. One of ordinary skill in the art would have recognized that applying the known technique would improve the similar devices and resulted in an improved system, with a reasonable expectation of success, in order to “provides a comprehensive and efficient transit navigation” [Hajj: ¶ 0082].
Claim 36:
The combination of Sheha and Hajj discloses the limitations recited in the parent claim(s) for the reasons discussed above. In addition, the present claim would be further obvious using the same reason, rationale and/or motivation as used above, over the disclosure of Hajj, which teaches:
The method of claim 22, wherein the first location is a location of a transit station, and the user interface element including the information about the first location includes a plurality of indications of a first plurality of transit lines available at a station, and the method further comprises:
receiving, via the one or more input devices, an input selecting the user interface element including the information about the first location [¶ 0412-419] (Fig. 36, modifying a selected transit route in a navigation list view); and
in response to receiving the input selecting the user interface element including the information about the first location, displaying second indications of the first plurality of transit lines available at the station and a second plurality of transit lines available at the station [¶ 0420-423] (replace a particular leg of a transit route with a different route) [¶ 0428-437] (transit navigation presentation on a watch).
Claim(s) 41-42 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Sheha; Michael A. et al. US Pub. No. US 20120254804 (Sheha) in view of Sharifi; Matthew US Pub. No. US 20240011789 (Sharifi).
Claim 41:
Sheha teaches all the elements of the claims as shown above.
Sheha does not appear to explicitly disclose “increased visual emphasis”.
However, the disclosure of Sharifi teaches:
The method of claim 22, wherein the input corresponding to the request to display the respective information on the map of the physical area includes a request to display navigation directions to a destination location, and the plurality of indications of the plurality of locations corresponding to the respective information include a plurality of indications of a plurality of available navigation routes to the destination location including the first indication of a first navigation route displayed with increased visual emphasis relative to the second indication of a second navigation route [¶ 0080-84] (suggested route with the best, or highest score, may be highlighted as the best potential route).
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the method of navigation display in Sheha and the method of route display in Sharifi, with a reasonable expectation of success.
The motivation for doing so would have been the use of known technique to improve similar devices (methods, or products) in the same way; (See KSR Int’l Co. v. Teleflex Inc., 550 US 398, 82 USPQ2d 1385, 1396 (U.S. 2007) and MPEP § 2143(D)).
The known technique of displaying alternate routes in Sharifi could be applied to the navigation display in Sheha. Sheha and Sharifi are similar devices because both provide navigation routes. One of ordinary skill in the art would have recognized that applying the known technique would improve the similar devices and resulted in an improved system, with a reasonable expectation of success, in order to provide “more efficient” routes [Sharifi: ¶ 0079-81].
Claim 42:
The combination of Sheha and Sharifi discloses the limitations recited in the parent claim(s) for the reasons discussed above. In addition, the present claim would be further obvious using the same reason, rationale and/or motivation as used above, over the disclosure of Sharifi, which teaches:
The method of claim 41, further comprising:
while displaying the map of the physical area with the plurality of indications of the plurality of available navigation routes to the destination location including the first indication of the first navigation route displayed with increased visual emphasis relative to the second indication of the second navigation route [¶ 0080-84] (suggested route with the best, or highest score, may be highlighted as the best potential route):
displaying, via the display generation component, a selectable option that, when selected, causes the electronic device to initiate navigation using the first navigation route [¶ 0105] (navigation system may provide the at least one route indicating each of the first and second segments. In examples where two or more routes are provided, the routes may be ranked based on route preferences); and
receiving, via the one or more input devices, an input corresponding to selection of the selectable option; and in response to receiving the input corresponding to selection of the selectable option, initiating navigation to the destination location using the first navigation route [¶ 0029, 84] (user selects route).
Claim(s) 43 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Sheha; Michael A. et al. US Pub. No. US 20120254804 (Sheha) in view of Sharifi; Matthew US Pub. No. US 20240011789 (Sharifi) in view of Silverman; Scott et al. US Pub. No. 20200160264 (Silverman).
Claim 43:
Sheha and Sharifi teach all the elements of the claims as shown above.
Sheha and Sharifi does not appear to explicitly disclose “relatively high priority”.
However, the disclosure of Silverman teaches:
The method of claim 41, wherein the plurality of indications of available navigation routes to the destination location include indications of navigation segments with relatively high priority used in the available navigation routes displayed with increased visual emphasis and indications of navigation segments with relatively low priority used in the available navigation routes displayed with decreased visual emphasis [¶ 0125] (the most relevant portion of an arrival plan (e.g., based on the deliverer location or activity) is displayed more prominently (e.g., highlighted, enlarged)) [¶ 0168] (FIG. 3E, a segment of a route can be colored, highlighted or otherwise marked apart from a remainder of the route, to illustrate the portion of the route which will likely cause a noteworthy or significant amount of exertion).
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the method of navigation display in Sheha and the method of route display in Sharifi and the method of priority display in Silverman, with a reasonable expectation of success.
The motivation for doing so would have been the use of known technique to improve similar devices (methods, or products) in the same way; (See KSR Int’l Co. v. Teleflex Inc., 550 US 398, 82 USPQ2d 1385, 1396 (U.S. 2007) and MPEP § 2143(D)).
The known technique of route priority in Silverman could be applied to displaying alternate routes in Sharifi and the navigation display in Sheha. Silverman, Sheha and Sharifi are similar devices because each provide navigation routes. One of ordinary skill in the art would have recognized that applying the known technique would improve the similar devices and resulted in an improved system, with a reasonable expectation of success, in order to provide “more efficient” routes [Silverman: ¶ 0079-81].
Claim(s) 44 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Sheha; Michael A. et al. US Pub. No. US 20120254804 (Sheha) in view of Sharifi; Matthew US Pub. No. US 20240011789 (Sharifi) in view of Hajj; Usama M. et al. US Pub. No. 20160358471 (Hajj).
Claim 44:
Sheha and Sharifi teach all the elements of the claims as shown above.
Sheha and Sharifi does not appear to explicitly disclose “relatively high priority”.
However, the disclosure of Hajj teaches:
The method of claim 41, wherein displaying the map of the physical area with the plurality of indications of the plurality of available navigation routes to the destination location including the first indication of the first navigation route displayed with increased visual emphasis relative to the second indication of the second navigation route is in accordance with a determination that the input corresponding to the request to display the navigation directions to the destination location is a request to display the navigation directions to the destination location using a first mode of transportation (taught by Sharifi above in claim 41), and the method further comprises:
receiving, via the one or more input devices, a second input corresponding to a request to display navigation directions to the destination location using a second mode of transportation different from the first mode of transportation; and in response to receiving the second input [¶ 0263-268] (labeling the directions of a transit vehicle differently in different localities):
displaying a visual indication of a navigation route using the first mode of transportation without displaying a map of a physical area with a plurality of indications of available navigation routes to the destination location using the first mode of transportation [¶ 0420-423] (replace a particular leg of a transit route with a different route) [¶ 0412-419] (Fig. 36, modifying a selected transit route in a navigation list view) [¶ 0428-437] (transit navigation presentation on a watch).
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the method of navigation display in Sheha and the method of route display in Sharifi and the method of route display in Hajj, with a reasonable expectation of success.
The motivation for doing so would have been the use of known technique to improve similar devices (methods, or products) in the same way; (See KSR Int’l Co. v. Teleflex Inc., 550 US 398, 82 USPQ2d 1385, 1396 (U.S. 2007) and MPEP § 2143(D)).
The know technique of displaying alternate routes in Hajj could be applied to displaying alternate routes in Sharifi and the navigation display in Sheha. Hajj, Sheha and Sharifi are similar devices because each provide navigation routes. One of ordinary skill in the art would have recognized that applying the known technique would improve the similar devices and resulted in an improved system, with a reasonable expectation of success, in order to “provides a comprehensive and efficient transit navigation” [Hajj: ¶ 0082].
Prior Art
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Please See PTO-892: Notice of References Cited.
Evidence of the level skill of an ordinary person in the art for Claim 1:
Campbell; Cheryl Ann et al. US 20130219334 teaches: a location pop-up is opened at step 1008 that contains location details for the selected location. FIG. 11 provides an example of a location pop-up 1100.
Gerdes; Arati et al. US 20090287408 alternative routes from a starting location to a destination location by taking into consideration route segments including public transportation route segments and road network route segments
Dubielzyk; Jon Øvrebø et al. US 20190186943 multi-modal travel directions, route highlighted, each segment of the route may include an indication of a respective mode of transportation for the corresponding segment, dashed line for walking, solid line for driving
Newlin; Meghan et al. US 20160298977 teaches displaying data related to multiple modes of transportation on a single graphical user interface (GUI).
Savvopoulos; Christos US 20150176996 teaches routes from each list are combined to generate a combined list of routes for each of the two or more different modes of transportation. The combined list of routes is sorted to generate a sorted list of routes based, at least in part, on the durations and penalized durations of the routes. routes having the shortest duration(s), can be more prominently featured.
Moore; Bradford et al. US 20130103313 teaches: Each route may be highlighted in a different color; unselected routes may be removed, faded, made smaller, or otherwise de-emphasized; Navigation mode button 134 provides the user with an easy way to switch between available navigation modes (i.e., driving, transit, and walking modes).
Lyle; Ruthie et al. US 11015952 teaches: fig. 3b; dynamically updates graphical user interfaces with different modes of transportation to travel.
Dunnette; Robert US 20200041291 teaches: multi-modal route corresponding to a type of public transport (e.g., train, bus, ferry) and another segment corresponding to a type of private transport (e.g., ride share).
Citations to Prior Art
A reference to specific paragraphs, columns, pages, or figures in a cited prior art reference is not limited to preferred embodiments or any specific examples. It is well settled that a prior art reference, in its entirety, must be considered for all that it expressly teaches and fairly suggests to one having ordinary skill in the art. Stated differently, a prior art disclosure reading on a limitation of Applicant's claim cannot be ignored on the ground that other embodiments disclosed were instead cited. Therefore, the Examiner's citation to a specific portion of a single prior art reference is not intended to exclusively dictate, but rather, to demonstrate an exemplary disclosure commensurate with the specific limitations being addressed. In re Heck, 699 F.2d 1331, 1332-33,216 USPQ 1038, 1039 (Fed. Cir. 1983) (quoting In re Lemelson, 397 F.2d 1006, 1009, 158 USPQ 275, 277 (CCPA 1968". In re: Upsher-Smith Labs. v. Pamlab, LLC, 412 F.3d 1319, 1323,75 USPQ2d 1213,1215 (Fed. Cir. 2005); In re Fritch, 972 F.2d 1260, 1264,23 USPQ2d 1780, 1782 (Fed. Cir. 1992); Merck & Co. v. Biocraft Labs., Inc., 874 F.2d 804, 807,10 USPQ2d 1843, 1846 (Fed. Cir. 1989); In re Fracalossi, 681 F.2d 792,794 n.1, 215 USPQ 569, 570 n.1 (CCPA 1982); In re Lamberti, 545 F.2d 747, 750, 192 USPQ 278, 280 (CCPA 1976); In re Bozek, 416 F.2d 1385,1390,163 USPQ 545, 549 (CCPA 1969).
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to BENJAMIN J SMITH whose telephone number is (571)270-3825. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday 11:00 - 7:30 EST.
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, ADAM QUELER can be reached at (571) 272-4140. 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.
/Benjamin Smith/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2172 Direct Phone: 571-270-3825
Direct Fax: 571-270-4825
Email: benjamin.smith@uspto.gov
