DETAILED ACTION
The action is in response to the original filing on May 31, 2024 and the Remarks and Amendments filed on April 20, 2026. Claims 1-18 & 20-21 are pending and have been considered below. Claims 1, 3, 5, 9-10, 16-18, 20, and 21 are amended accordingly.
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 .
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.
Claims 1-2, 4-13, 16, & 20-21 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Harry Snyder (U.S. Pat. Pub. App. No. US-20150012308-A1, herein after “Snyder”) in view of Takayuki Miyajima (Pat. Pub. US-20110243379-A1, herein after “Miyajima”).
Regarding claims 1, 20, and 21, Snyder teaches [a] method comprising:
identifying a plurality of devices at a live event “… a plurality of sets of instructions executable by each of a plurality of mobile devices possessed by respective ones of a plurality of attendees of at least one event at the selected one of the venues.” (Snyder, ¶ [0006]) where the devices are at an event;
determining, for each respective device of the plurality of devices at the live event, a current position of the respective device within a venue of the live event by: (Snyder, ¶ [0029])
determining an initial position of the respective device “The at least one circuit may include at least one processor unit, and may be communicatively coupled to receive location specification information include geolocation coordinates derived by a geolocation system.” (Snyder, ¶ [0029]); and
tracking, using data from one or more sensors, a current position of the respective device within the venue relative to the initial position “Alternatively or additionally, the mobile device may identify or collect the respective location information associated with various attendees or mobile device via a global positioning system receiver or via triangulation with cellular or wireless antennas or base stations if the mobile device is sufficiently equipped” (Snyder, ¶ [0066]) where this may be used in addition to determining an initial position and a current position;
for at least one device of the plurality of the devices at the live event:
based on the determined current positions of the plurality of devices, causing the plurality of devices to output signals that are coordinated to form a visual effect “In one non-limiting example, an application running on a mobile device may receive a screen control sequence which causes the mobile device screen to output light in conjunction or in combination (e.g., spatially and/or temporally) with other mobile devices at a venue during an event” (Snyder, ¶ [0063]).
Snyder fails to explicitly teach based on the tracking, determining that the data from the one or more sensors indicates a degree of change in the current position of the at least one device, as compared to a prior position of the at least one device, is outside a threshold range; and
based on the determining that the data from the one or more sensors indicates the degree of change in the current position of the at least one device that is outside the threshold range, performing recalibration of the current position of the at least one device by automatically causing the at least one device to capture an image, and analyzing the captured image.
Miyajima teaches based on the tracking, determining that the data from the one or more sensors indicates a degree of change in the current position of the at least one device “The vehicle position detection module 4 has a function of correcting the estimated vehicle position obtained by performing conventional position calculation using the GPS and performing conventional position calculation using dead reckoning navigation. The vehicle position detection module 4 corrects the estimated vehicle position based on the vehicle position determined by the scenic image recognition using the estimated vehicle position” (Miyajima, ¶ [0040]) where based on the tracking of the vehicle, a photo can be used in comparison with the surrounding environment to determine a new position, as compared to a prior position of the at least one device, is outside a threshold range “the reference data extraction range for the second reference data output unit 63b is set to a range determined based on a range over which the vehicle has traveled from a starting point” (Miyajima, ¶ [0057]) as the vehicle travels a certain range, the image-capturing method is called again; and
based on the determining that the data from the one or more sensors indicates the degree of change in the current position of the at least one device that is outside the threshold range “the reference data extraction range for the second reference data output unit 63b is set to a range determined based on a range over which the vehicle has traveled from a starting point” (Miyajima, ¶ [0057]) as the vehicle travels a certain range, the image-capturing method is called again, performing recalibration of the current position of the at least one device by automatically causing the at least one device to capture an image, and analyzing the captured image “reference data R7 (the second reference data) at the image-capturing position P7 is extracted as the matching candidate, by further searching the reference data DB 92 using the actual vehicle event as the search condition” (Miyajima, ¶ [0046]) where the image reference data is taken and used to update the current location of the vehicle.
PNG
media_image1.png
493
676
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Miyajima, Fig. 5, depicting a vehicle which has traveled a distance, which causes an image capture of the vehicle’s location, and updating its current position to be the actual position.
It would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the method of identifying and tracking mobile devices at an event taught by Snyder with the method of causing a device to capture an image for reference to update a new location taught by Miyajima to track a mobile device as they move through an event. The motivation to do so would be to update the user’s location to maintain a connection to the event with respect to location if GPS or seat information are unavailable.
In regards to claim 20, claim 1 is substantially similar to claim 20, hence the rejection analysis for claim 1 is also applied to claim 20. Snyder in view of Miyajima teach the additional limitations that the method, of claim 1 and 20, is “performed by a server…” (Snyder, ¶ [0089]) & (Miyajima, ¶ [0057]).
In regards to claim 21, claim 1 is substantially similar to claim 21, hence the rejection analysis for claim 1 is also applied to claim 21. Snyder in view of Miyajima teach the additional limitations of “A system comprising: a memory; a control circuitry configured to…” perform the functions laid out above in claims 1 and 21 (Snyder, ¶ [0094]) & (Miyajima, ¶ [0057]).
Regarding claim 2, Snyder in view of Miyajima teach [t]he method of claim 1, wherein the identifying the plurality of devices at the live event further comprises (Snyder, ¶ [0006]):
receiving, from the plurality of devices, a user interface input requesting to participate in the coordinated visual effect
PNG
media_image2.png
617
464
media_image2.png
Greyscale
Where the user is asked if they would like to join the mobile event Snyder, ¶ [0052].
Regarding claim 4, Snyder in view of Miyajima teach [t]he method of claim 1, wherein the signals that are coordinated to form the visual effect are caused to be output via a screen of the respective device such that the screen of the respective device provides one or more pixels of the visual effect ”This approach may advantageously control a large number of mobile devices as an ad hoc group or set, to essentially create an enormous display screen, each of the mobile devices or a subset of mobile devices (e.g., 4×4), being operated as an effective pixel in a visual or aural presentation.” (Snyder, ¶ [0062]).
Regarding claim 5, Snyder in view of Miyajima teach [t]he method of claim 4, wherein the plurality of devices correspond to a plurality of mobile devices, and wherein: (Snyder, ¶ [0007]):
performing the recalibration further comprises causing at least a first mobile device and a second mobile device of the plurality of mobile devices to communicate via peer-to-peer communication, to identify a current position of the first mobile device relative to a current position of the second mobile device; and “Once the location for each attendee is specified, mobile devices of attendees at different locations can be controlled, for example relative to each other, in conjunction or in tandem as ad hoc groups or sets.” (Snyder, ¶ [0062]) where mobile device locations can be controlled relative to each other, and each device is for an attendee, additionally, “Position can also be determined by relative position to other devices using Bluetooth or other communication mechanism or protocol” (Snyder, ¶ [0066]).
causing the plurality of mobile devices to output the signals that are coordinated to form the visual effect by causing the screen of the respective mobile device to correspond to one or more pixels of the visual effect is based at least in part on the current position of the first mobile device relative to a current position of the second mobile device “For example, the mobile devices may be controlled to produce a defined or specified pattern of output based at least in part on the locations of mobile devices. Thus, one can design a visual output pattern spanning the venue or portion thereof, operating each mobile device or groups of mobile devices as respective pixels to create a visual effect (e.g., still or moving image, text).” (Snyder, ¶ [0062]).
Regarding claim 6, Snyder in view of Miyajima teach [t]he method of claim 1, further comprising causing the plurality of devices to output audio along with the signals that are coordinated to form the visual effect “One can additionally or alternatively design an aural output pattern spanning the venue or portion thereof, operating each mobile device or groups of mobile devices to create an aural effect (e.g., still or moving sound effect)” (Snyder, ¶ [0062]).
Regarding claim 7, Snyder in view of Miyajima teach [t]he method of claim 1 wherein the captured image is a first captured image, and determining the initial position of the respective device:
causing the respective device to capture a second image of at least a portion of the venue of the live event “… the mobile device may identify or collect the respective location information associated with various attendees or mobile device via imaging of a surrounding environment …” (Snyder, ¶ [0066]) where the imaging may be multiple images of the venue;
comparing the second image to a spatial representation of the venue “… from which at least approximate location can be discerned by comparison to reference images of the venue …” (Snyder, ¶ [0066]) where the reference images act as a special representation to be compared with; and
determining the initial position of the respective device based on the comparison “… from which at least approximate location can be discerned by comparison to reference images of the venue. Such may be performed, for example by the distribution or assignment system 140.” (Snyder, ¶ [0066]) where the assignment system may process photos to determine the device location automatically.
Regarding claim 8, Snyder in view of Miyajima teach [t]he method of claim 1, wherein the tracking the position of the respective device relative to the initial position further comprises (Snyder, ¶ [0066]):
tracking changes in at least one of an acceleration, a rotational position, or an orientation of the respective device “… additionally, the respective venue location information associated with various attendees or mobile devices may be identified or derived via user input, for instance by the user entering venue identification (e.g., name), event identification (e.g., name, date, time), seat or position information (e.g., section, row and/or seat information) via a keypad or virtual keyboard of the mobile device. Alternatively or additionally, the mobile device may identify or collect the respective location information associated with various attendees or mobile device via a global positioning system receiver or via triangulation” (Snyder, ¶ [0066] where the use of GPS or other tracking methods involves movement or acceleration.
Regarding claim 9, Snyder in view of Miyajima teach [t]he method of claim 1, wherein:
the analyzing the captured image further comprises comparing the captured image to a spatial representation of the venue; and “Alternatively or additionally, the mobile device may identify or collect the respective location information associated with various attendees or mobile device via imaging of a surrounding environment, from which at least approximate location can be discerned by comparison to reference images of the venue. Such may be performed, for example by the distribution or assignment system 140.” (Snyder, ¶ [0066]).
the performing the recalibration of the current position of the at least one device comprises updating the current position of the at least one device within the venue of the live event based on the comparison “Attendees may register their respective mobile devices with the distribution or assignment system 140, for example via a downloaded application, commonly referred to as “apps” or via a Website. For example, an attendee may actuate their mobile device to provide their respective venue location information to the distribution or assignment system 140” (Snyder, ¶ [0086]) where the assignment system reads the location information which is provided as a photo of the venue in paragraph 66, and compares it to the representation of the venue, and updates the location accordingly.
Regarding claim 10, Snyder in view of Miyajima teach [t]he method of claim 1, wherein the performing recalibration of the current position of the at least one device by causing the at least one device to capture the image further comprises:
monitoring a stability level of the at least one device, wherein the stability level is based on at least one of an acceleration, a rotational position, or an orientation of the at least one device “At the event, the mobile device may receive or sense one or more trigger or synchronization signals 134. In response, the mobile devices 160 operate according to their respective transducer activation sequences. When displayed in the air, in conjunction with other mobile devices 160 in the ad hoc group or set, the cumulative effect is a visual and/or audio show, which may extend across all or a portion of the venue during the event.” (Snyder, ¶ [0089]) where receiving or sensing a trigger or synchronization signal is synonymous to monitoring a stability level.
determining that the stability level indicates that the at least one device is stable “… the application transmits and receives all required data or information to allow the attendee and their mobile device to participate as described above. Other, non-exclusive, possibilities include receiving data associated with the event or venue from a server. Such may, for example, include receiving photographs or images from a band playing at a concert, which may be in real- or almost real-time.” (Snyder, ¶ [0089]) after displaying the user device, the application assesses data required to see if the device is active and able to participate, or stable, an image may be used to discern stability; and
causing the at least one device to capture the image based on determining that the stability level of the respective device indicates that the device is stable “Photographs or images may be received together with one or more transducer activation sequences” (Snyder, ¶ [0089]) where the transducer activation sequence may cause the device to capture a photo after determining the device is available, or stable
Regarding claim 11, Snyder in view of Miyajima teach [t]he method of claim 1, wherein the causing the plurality of devices to output the signals that are coordinated to form the visual effect further comprises:
monitoring a stability level of the respective device, wherein the stability level is based on at least one of an acceleration, a rotational position, or an orientation of the respective device “attendees may participate in an event by displaying their mobile devices, which are controlled to produce a light, sound or light and sound presentation or show via the respective displays and/or speakers of the mobile devices” (Snyder, ¶ [0061]) “When displayed in the air, in conjunction with other mobile devices … attendees may participate in and enhance an event at a venue, as well as enhancing their own experience of the event.” (Snyder, ¶ [0089]) “In response to registration, the application transmits and receives all required data or information to allow the attendee and their mobile device to participate as described above” (Snyder, ¶ [0089]) where displaying a mobile device is considered stable, or available and participating, and not displaying the device is not stable; and
based on the monitoring of the stability level, determining whether the respective device is in an active state or an inactive state, wherein the active state indicates that the respective device is currently available to output the signals, and wherein an inactive state indicates that the respective device is currently unavailable to participate in output of the signals that are coordinated to form the visual effect “The at least one processor unit may provide a grouping tool as part of the user interface, operation of which groups two or more seats as a single separable addressable unit in the light show, the sound show or the light and sound show, based at least in part on a respective attendee active participation status of the seats indicative of whether an attendee logically associated with a seat is actively participating in the light show, the sound show or the light and sound show, and the at least one processor unit may generate a respective set of instructions for each respective group of seats in the venue” (Snyder, ¶ [0007]) where displaying the device is active or stable and participating.
Regarding claim 12, Snyder in view of Miyajima teach [t]he method of claim 11, wherein the causing the plurality of devices to output the signals that are coordinated to form the visual effect further comprises:
determining a density of a section of the venue, wherein the density specifies a number of devices associated with the active state that are concentrated within the section of the venue “The authoring system 120 may use the participant information in the mapping the pixels to respective locations. For example, the authoring system 120 may group multiple seats as an effective pixel based on a relative density of participation in a general location in the venue.” (Snyder, ¶ [0081]) where more participants in a section makes a denser section.
selecting the visual effect based on the density “participation may be higher closer to the floor or stage than in more remote areas. In response, the authoring system 120 may employ a 1:1 mapping between pixels and seats on the floor of the venue, while employing a 1:8 mapping between pixels and seats in an upper deck level of the same venue for the same event” (Snyder, ¶ [0081]) where a more defined image mapping is possible with more pixels or participants, and the more defined visual effect is selected based on density detected.
Regarding claim 13, Snyder in view of Miyajima teach [t]he method of claim 12 further comprising:
based on detecting a change in the density of the section of the venue, determining an updated density for the section of the venue “participation information may represent actual participation, collected in real- or almost real-time form information provided via the applications executing on the various mobile devices” (Snyder, ¶ [0080]) where participation is relevant to a location or section, and more participation indicates a higher density;
selecting a different visual effect based on the updated density “… the authoring system 120 may move or position various effects based in indicated participation rate at various locations in the venue” (Snyder, ¶ [0081]) where the change in density is the participation rate, which may change as an event goes on, and the authoring system will alter effects accordingly; and
outputting, on devices specified as having the active state in association with the updated density in the section of the venue, signals that are coordinated to form the different visual effect “Based on the user input, the venue layout, and optionally on participation information, the authoring system 120 generates sets of instructions for each of a plurality of locations in the venue. The instructions specify when and how to actuate a transducer of a mobile device located at the respective location to produce the defined visual or aural effect or show. The locations may be individual seats or may be a group or set of seats” (Snyder, ¶ [0082]) where the participation information includes devices in an active state based on the plurality of locations at a venue, the updated density is the real time participation information, and the different visual effect is the defined visual or aural effect.
Regarding claim 16, Snyder in view of Miyajima teach [t]he method of claim 1, further comprising:
determining, based on input received from a user, a characteristic corresponding to the user of the respective device “the respective generated sets of instructions may be downloaded to a mobile device when the mobile device is used to purchase tickets to the event and the seating is determined.” (Snyder, ¶ [0067]) where the location is determined specifically to the user of the device, and the user must select the seat, which is considered an input received by the user; and
modifying the signals outputted by the respective device based on the determined characteristic “Instructions may also be downloaded to the mobile device when the event is known and before a seat or the seating is allocated by downloading sets of instructions for the seating throughout the venue for the event. This allows automatic correlation of the mobile device with a respective venue location and the respective output sequence logically associated with that respective venue location of the attendee or mobile device.” (Snyder, ¶ [0067]) where the output can be downloaded based on location within the venue, for example, the home colors for the home section and vice versa.
Claim 3 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Snyder in view of Miyajima, and further in view of Zhuochao Niu (Pat. Pub. US-20180092188-A1, herein after “Niu”)
Regarding claim 3, Snyder in view of Miyajima teach [t]he method of claim 1, wherein the signals that are coordinated to form the visual effect are caused to be output via a flashlight of the respective device, the flashlight being distinct from a screen of the device “… the set of instructions specifying a temporal sequence of instructions to actuate at least one transducer of the respective mobile devices to emit at least one of light, sound, or light and sound which in totality form at least part of the light show, the sound show or the light and sound show.” (Snyder, ¶ [0008]) where the light may be produced by the screen or a camera flash.
Snyder in view of Miyajima fail to teach the flashlight being distinct from a screen of the device.
Niu teaches the flashlight being distinct from a screen of the device “each of the venues has a plurality of preset flash lighting patterns for the 3C client ends (10), and the venue comprises its identified data and service data which are individually saved in the database (31) and can be retrieved once the server (30) is activated” (Niu, ¶ [0025]) where the mobile device flashlight is used to make a pattern.
It would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the method of identifying and tracking mobile devices at an event taught by Snyder with the method of using the mobile device flashlight taught by Niu to have a brighter output. The motivation to do so would be to produce a display pattern that shines brighter in different lighting.
Claims 14, 15, & 18 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Snyder in view of Miyajima, and further in view of Maik Andre Lindner (U.S. Pat. Pub. App. No. US-20180063803-A1, herein after “Lindner”.
Regarding claim 14, Snyder in view of Miyajima teach [t]he method of claim 13, further comprising:
Snyder in view of Miyajima does not explicitly teach based on determining that the respective device has changed from the active state to the inactive state, transmitting a notification to the respective device prompting the at least one device to participate in output of the signals that are coordinated to form the visual effect.
Lindner teaches based on determining that the respective device has changed from the active state to the inactive state, transmitting a notification to the respective device prompting the at least one device to participate in output of the signals that are coordinated to form the visual effect “If the user closes their mobile device while on this screen the application will notify the user when the Event 101 is within seconds of starting so they can open their mobile device and position the device for experience” (Lindner, ¶ [0038]) where the device being turned off is considered inactive.
It would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the method of involving a group of devices to create a group display event by Snyder with the method of system notifications taught by Lindner to ensure participation.
The suggestion/motivation to do so would have been to remind users to participate and engage. More participation would improve the user experience, and allow for advertising or monetization (Lindner, ¶ [0041]).
Regarding claim 15, Snyder in view of Miyajima teach [t]he method of claim 1, further comprising:
Snyder in view of Miyajima does not explicitly teach outputting, at the respective device, an indication directing a user to position or move the respective device in a particular manner to form the visual effect.
Lindner teaches outputting, at the respective device, an indication directing a user to position or move the respective device in a particular manner to form the visual effect “Additional information can also be requested from the user on this page e.g., Location 102, Scene 103, Pattern 110, or Audio 111” (Lindner, ¶ [0037]) where the user can request information such as event patterns or locations to form the visual effect.
PNG
media_image3.png
583
529
media_image3.png
Greyscale
(Lindner, Figure 4)
The image above (figure 4e, 107) shows instructions outputted to the user via the display screen, alongside advertisements. These instructions may include a location, scene, pattern, or audio (Lindner, ¶ [0037]).
It would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the method of involving a group of devices to create a group display event by Snyder with the method of instructing a user to move the device taught by Lindner to create a more engaging display.
The suggestion/motivation to do so would have been to improve the visual or draw more participants in by encouraging others to become involved in the group display (Lindner, ¶ [0041]).
Regarding claim 18, Snyder in view of Miyajima teach [t]he method of claim 1, further comprising:
identifying, at a portion of a venue, a highest concentration of devices “the authoring system 120 may group multiple seats as an effective pixel based on a relative density of participation” (Snyder, ¶ [0081]) where more concentrated sections can be detected.
selecting the signals to output on the respective device corresponding to devices at the portion of the venue associated with the highest concentration of devices “participation may be higher closer to the floor or stage than in more remote areas. In response, the authoring system 120 may employ a 1:1 mapping between pixels and seats on the floor of the venue, while employing a 1:8 mapping between pixels and seats in an upper deck level” (Snyder, ¶ [0081]) where the denser section may have different signals.
Snyder in view of Miyajima does not explicitly teach identifying device output capabilities corresponding to the respective device;
based on the identifying of the device output capabilities, identifying, at a portion of a venue, a highest concentration of devices having a certain device output capability; and
selecting the signals to output on the respective device based on the certain device capabilities corresponding to devices at the portion of the venue associated with the highest concentration of devices.
Lindner teaches identifying device output capabilities corresponding to the respective device
“Several other functional elements are connected to the Processor 202 by the Bus 203 that can help establish interaction with the group experience in real-time. These include but are not limited to the Accelerometer 206, Microphone 207, Cell Transceiver 208, WiFi Transceiver 209, GPS Receiver 210, Bluetooth Transceiver 211, Nearfield Transceiver 212, Clock/Timer 213. Additional elements include the Display 214, Touch Screen 215, Flash 216, Speaker(s) 217, Thermometer 218, Vibrator 219, Auxiliary I/O 220, and Camera 221” (Lindner, ¶ [0039]) where all the functional elements may or may not be used for the event, but additional elements can be included, detecting these attributes allows for establishing capabilities “they help establish or modify the Event 101 attributes based on detecting information that can be interpreted for attribute values” (Lindner, ¶ [0039]);
selecting the signals to output on the respective device based on the certain device output capabilities corresponding to devices “GPS Satellites 252, Cell Tower Transceivers 253, WiFi Transceivers 254, Proximity Beacons 255, Voice Recognition 256, Noise Levels 257, Information from other Mobile Devices 258, Audio Speakers 259, Photographic Flash 260, and Touch Screen Input 261. This complex network of stimulation sources can be used to gather timing and other Event 101 attributes” (Lindner, ¶ [0040]) where the available network and stimulation sources can be selected to enrich group event participation.
It would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the method of detecting regions of the event with more participants taught by Snyder with the method of identifying device capabilities taught by Lindner to assess what sections of the crowd can output different effects, and controlling the crowd output based on concentration.
The suggestion/motivation to do so would have been to use outputs the device is capable of to improve the group display visuals, and include more methods of output based on availability (Lindner, ¶ [0040]).
Claim 17 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Snyder in view of Miyajima, and further in view of John Stitzinger Et. Al. (U.S. Pat. Pub. App. No. US-20140193037-A1, herein after “Stitzinger”).
Regarding claim 17, Snyder in view of Miyajima teach [t]he method of claim 1, wherein: the
plurality of devices are associated with a plurality of spectators at the venue “… a plurality of sets of instructions executable by each of a plurality of mobile devices possessed by respective ones of a plurality of attendees of at least one event at the selected one of the venues…” (Snyder, ¶ [0006]);
the plurality of devices correspond to a plurality of mobile devices “… a plurality of sets of instructions executable by each of a plurality of mobile devices possessed by respective ones of a plurality of attendees of at least one event at the selected one of the venues…” (Snyder, ¶ [0006]) where the devices are mobile devices;
determining the initial position of the respective device further comprises “The at least one circuit may include at least one processor unit, and may be communicatively coupled to receive location specification information include geolocation coordinates derived by a geolocation system.” (Snyder, ¶ [0029]):
Snyder does not explicitly teach one or more cameras in the venue, distinct from the plurality of mobile devices, are configured to capture a plurality of images of the plurality of spectators;
causing the respective mobile device to output an initial output, wherein the initial output comprises a pattern unique to the respective mobile device;
identifying portions of the plurality of images which depict the initial output; and
determining the initial position of the respective mobile device with respect to the plurality of mobile devices based at least in part on the portions of the plurality of images which depict the initial output.
Stitzinger teaches one or more cameras in the venue, distinct from the plurality of mobile devices, are configured to capture a plurality of images of the plurality of spectators “Imaging device(s) 410 may include one or more cameras, and may be configured to capture images displayed by display devices 440. In certain implementations, multiple imaging device(s) 410 may be used to capture display devices 440. Imaging device(s) 410 may additionally include 2D camera(s) and/or 3D camera(s), and may be configured to determine the distance to an object in the imaging device(s) 410 field of view” (Stitzinger, ¶ [0018]) where cameras are used to capture objects. It is noted that the display device may be a phone, and that the process may be performed in a stadium. (Stitzinger, ¶ [0023] & [0050]);
causing the respective mobile device to output an initial output, wherein the initial output comprises a pattern unique to the respective mobile device “Processing unit(s) 420 may receive signals from imaging device(s) 410 and/or one or more display devices 440 for processing, and may further transmit image signals to one or more of display devices 440 for displaying” (Stitzinger, ¶ [0019]) where a unique output is sent to the display device to be captured by the imaging device;
identifying portions of the plurality of images which depict the initial output “An overall display image may be divided into a multitude of display device specific images once the location of each display device is determined. This mechanism may be applied to identify the position of display devices in many different types of locations” (Stitzinger, ¶ [0036]) where unique images can be output from the display device to identify its location; and
determining the initial position of the respective mobile device with respect to the plurality of mobile devices based at least in part on the portions of the plurality of images which depict the initial output “one or more of the display devices could be located anywhere within the field of view of one or more imaging devices. According to some of the various embodiments, one or more of the display devices could be located on roughly planar surface(s) …” (Stitzinger, ¶ [0036]) the position of the devices is determined using the photos of the imaging devices, and the unique outputs which are within the imaging device’s field of view are used to locate each display device.
It would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the methods of considering crowd location to display a group image taught by Snyder with the teachings of Stitzinger to detect the location of an individual device, based on a specific output pattern. The suggestion/motivation to do so would have been to monitor the device’s location within an event or large-scale setting with multiple devices.
Response to Arguments
The Examiner appreciates the Applicant’s patience, cooperation, and clarification regarding the application. Applicant’s arguments with respect to claims 1, 3, 5, 9-10, 16-18, 20, and 21 have been considered but are moot because the new ground of rejection does not rely on any reference applied in the prior rejection of record for any teaching or matter specifically challenged in the argument.
Beginning on page 9 of the Remarks, Applicant argues that Snyder fails to disclose the aspect of amended independent claim 1. Applicant’s amendments add clarification regarding the tracking and its significance, claiming that the capture of an image is caused by the device leaving a threshold distance, and the photo recalibrates the device’s current location.
Applicant’s arguments, see Remarks, Page 9, filed April 20th, 2026, with respect to the rejections of claims 1, 20, and 21 under 35 U.S.C. § 102(a)(1) have been fully considered and are persuasive. Therefore, the rejection has been withdrawn. However, upon further consideration, a new ground of rejection is made in view of Miyajima.
The new grounds of rejection under 35 U.S.C. 103 with Snyder in view of Miyajima teach the amended claims and make a point of obviousness, Miyajima discloses capturing an image after a vehicle travels a distance, and using the photo to reference a new current position.
Beginning on page 10 of the Remarks, Applicant argues that Snyder fails to disclose the aspect of amended dependent claim 3. Applicant’s amendments add clarification regarding the output of light is to be from the mobile device’s flashlight, as opposed to a screen.
Applicant’s arguments, see Remarks, Page 10, filed April 20th, 2026, with respect to the rejection of claim 3 under 35 U.S.C. § 102(a)(1) have been fully considered and are persuasive. Therefore, the rejection has been withdrawn. However, upon further consideration, a new ground of rejection is made in view of Niu.
The new grounds of rejection under 35 U.S.C. 103 with Snyder in view of Niu teach the amended claims and make a point of obviousness, Niu discloses the synchronization of phone flash lights to make a display at an event.
Beginning on page 11 of the Remarks, Applicant argues that Snyder fails to disclose the aspect of dependent claim 5. Applicant argues the feature of peer-to-peer communication is not taught by Snyder.
Applicant’s arguments, see Remarks, Page 11, filed April 20th, 2026, with respect to the rejection of claim 5 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
The Examiner would like to make note of Snyder, ¶ [0066] (not previously cited) which teaches methods of discerning a mobile device’s location. Location may be determined by “relative position to other devices”, such as through the use of Bluetooth, which is a known method of peer-to-peer communication.
Beginning on page 11 of the Remarks, Applicant argues that Snyder in view of Tatrai fails to disclose the aspect of amended dependent claim 17. Applicant argues the feature of locating a mobile device by detecting a unique output is not taught by Snyder in view of Tatrai.
Applicant’s arguments, see Remarks, Page 11, filed April 20th, 2026, with respect to the rejection of claim 17 under 35 U.S.C. § 103 have been fully considered and are persuasive. Therefore, the rejection has been withdrawn. However, upon further consideration, a new ground of rejection is made in view of Stitzinger.
The new grounds of rejection under 35 U.S.C. 103 with Snyder in view of Stitzinger teach the amended claims and make a point of obviousness, Stitzinger discloses a method of outputting a unique pattern to a camera to collect location information.
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 CAIDEN ALEXANDER USSERY whose telephone number is (571)272-1192. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday* 7:30AM - 5PM.
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, Tammy Goddard can be reached at (571) 272-7773. 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.
/C.A.U./Examiner, Art Unit 2611
/TAMMY GODDARD/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2611
Prosecution Insights