DETAILED ACTION
Status of the Application
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 .
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 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
This action is a Final Action on the merits in response to the application filed on 10/15/2025.
Claims 1, 14, and 16 have been amended.
Claim 7 has been canceled
Claims 1-6, 8, 9, 14, and 16 remain pending in this application.
Response to Amendment
Applicant’s amendments are acknowledged.
The 35 U.S.C. 101 rejections of claims in the previous office action have been maintained.
The 35 U.S.C. 103 rejections of claims in the previous office action have been maintained.
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 1-6, 8, 9 are directed towards an apparatus, claim 14 are directed towards a method, and claim 16 are directed towards a computer-readable medium, all of which are among the statutory categories of invention.
Claims 1-6, 8, 9, 14, and 16 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 101 because the claims are directed to a judicial exception without significantly more.
Step 1: This part of the eligibility analysis evaluates whether the claim falls within any statutory category. See MPEP 2106.03. The claim recites at least one step or act, including displaying image associate with the sales data. Thus, the claim is to a process, which is one of the statutory categories of invention. (Step 1: YES).
Step 2A, Prong One: This part of the eligibility analysis evaluates whether the claim recites a judicial exception. As explained in MPEP 2106.04, subsection II, a claim “recites” a judicial exception when the judicial exception is “set forth” or “described” in the claim.
With respect to claims 1-6, 8, 9, 14, and 16, the independent claims (claims 1, 14, and 16) are directed to managing of sale data, In independent claim 1, the bolded limitations emphasized below correspond to the abstract ideas of the claimed invention:
acquiring sales data indicating, for each unit period, a value related to a sales performance of a product in a store;
generating a graph based on the sales data; and
displaying the graph on a display, and simultaneously displaying, on the display, the first image in association with the sales data corresponding to the product at the target period with at least a part of the first image overlapping with the graph, wherein
a plurality of the target periods are present, and
the operations further comprise:
determining a size of the first image on the display by use of the number of the first images displayed on the display.
these steps fall within and recite an abstract ideas because they are directed to a method of organizing human activity which includes commercial interaction such as sales activities; mental processes which includes concepts performed in the human such as observation and evaluation (i.e. determining a size of the image) (See MPEP 2106.04(a)(2), subsection II).
If a claim limitation, under its broadest reasonable interpretation, covers commercial interaction; observation and evaluation, then it falls within the “method of organizing human activity” and “mental processes” groupings of abstract ideas. Therefore, If the identified limitation(s) falls within any of the groupings of abstract ideas enumerated in the MPEP 2106, the analysis should proceed to Prong Two. (Step 2A, Prong One: YES).
Step 2A, Prong Two: This part of the eligibility analysis evaluates whether the claim as a whole integrates the recited judicial exception into a practical application of the exception or whether the claim is “directed to” the judicial exception. This evaluation is performed by (1) identifying whether there are any additional elements recited in the claim beyond the judicial exception, and (2) evaluating those additional elements individually and in combination to determine whether the claim as a whole integrates the exception into a practical application. See MPEP 2106.04(d). The claim recites the additional elements of apparatus, memory, processor, image, computer, computer-readable medium, display. The claims recite the steps are performed by the apparatus, memory, processor, image, computer, computer-readable medium, display.
The limitations of
acquiring a first image being an image captured in at least one target period being the unit period, and including a display shelf where the product is arranged; and
acquiring the first image for each of the plurality of target periods
are mere data gathering recited at a high level of generality, and thus are insignificant extra-solution activity. See MPEP 2106.05(g) (“whether the limitation is significant”). In addition, all uses of the recited judicial exceptions require such data gathering and output, and, as such, these limitations do not impose any meaningful limits on the claim. These limitations amount to necessary data gathering and outputting. See MPEP 2106.05.
Further, the limitations are recited as being performed by apparatus, memory, processor, image, computer, computer-readable medium, display. The apparatus, memory, processor, image, computer, computer-readable medium, display are recited at a high level of generality. In limitation (a), the apparatus, memory, processor, computer, computer-readable medium, display is used as a tool to perform the generic computer function of receiving data. See MPEP 2106.05(f). The apparatus, memory, processor, image, computer, computer-readable medium, display are used to perform an abstract idea, as discussed above in Step 2A, Prong One, such that it amounts to no more than mere instructions to apply the exception using a generic computer. See MPEP 2106.05(f).
Even when viewed in combination, these additional elements do not integrate the recited judicial exception into a practical application (Step 2A, Prong Two: NO), and the claim is directed to the judicial exception. (Step 2A: YES).
Step 2B: This part of the eligibility analysis evaluates whether the claim as a whole amounts to significantly more than the recited exception i.e., whether any additional element, or combination of additional elements, adds an inventive concept to the claim. See MPEP 2106.05. As explained with respect to Step 2A, Prong Two, the additional elements are the apparatus, memory, processor, image, computer, computer-readable medium, display. The additional elements were found to be insignificant extra-solution activity in Step 2A, Prong Two, because they were determined to be insignificant limitations as necessary data gathering.
However, a conclusion that an additional element is insignificant extra solution activity in Step 2A, Prong Two should be re-evaluated in Step 2B. See MPEP 2106.05, subsection I.A. At Step 2B, the evaluation of the insignificant extra-solution activity consideration takes into account whether or not the extra-solution activity is well understood, routine, and conventional in the field. See MPEP 2106.05(g). As discussed in Step 2A, Prong Two above, the recitations of
acquiring a first image being an image captured in at least one target period being the unit period, and including a display shelf where the product is arranged; and
acquiring the first image for each of the plurality of target periods, and
are recited at a high level of generality. These elements amount to receiving data and are well understood, routine, conventional activity. See MPEP 2106.05(d), subsection II. 10 As discussed in Step 2A, Prong Two above, the recitation of an apparatus, memory, processor, image, computer, computer-readable medium, display to perform limitations amounts to no more than mere instructions to apply the exception using a generic computer component. Even when considered in combination, these additional elements represent mere instructions to implement an abstract idea or other exception on a computer and insignificant extra-solution activity, which do not provide an inventive concept. (Step 2B: NO).
Dependent claims 2-6, 8, and 9 do not contain any new additional elements. Rather, these claims offer further descriptive limitations of elements found in the independent claims. In this case, the claims are rejected for the same reasons at step 2a, prong one; step 2a, prong 2; and step 2b. Thus, the claim is not patent eligible.
Regarding the dependent claims, dependent claims 6, 8, 9 recite a display for displaying images. The dependent claims 2-6, 8, and 9 recite limitations that are not technological in nature and merely limits the abstract idea to a particular environment. Claims 2-6, 8, and 9 recites apparatus, memory, processor, image, computer, computer-readable medium, display which are considered an insignificant extra-solution activities of collecting and analyzing data; see MPEP 2106.05(g). Claims 2-6, 8, and 9 recites apparatus, memory, processor, computer, display, which merely recites an instruction to apply the abstract idea using a generic computer component; MPEP 2106.05(f). Additionally, claims 2-6, 8, and 9 recite steps that further narrow the abstract idea. No additional elements are disclosed in the dependent claims that were not considered in independent claims 1, 14, and 16. Therefore claims 2-6, 8, and 9 do not provide meaningful limitations to transform the abstract idea into a patent eligible application of the abstract idea such that the claims amount to significantly more than the abstract idea itself.
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 of this title, 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 1-6, 8, 9, 14, and 16 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Japan Patent Publication JP2018010373, Kohei, et al. to hereinafter Kohei in view of Japan Patent Publication JP 2015127940, Kazuhiko, et al.
Referring to Claim 1, Kohei teaches an image display apparatus comprising:
at least one memory configured to store instructions; and at least one processor configured to execute the instructions to perform operations comprising (
Kohei: Sec. 0060, The control unit 41 of the management server 4 includes a sales information acquisition unit 71, an analysis condition setting unit 72, an evaluation unit 73, a statistical information generation unit 74, and an image acquisition unit 75. Each part of this control part 41 is implement | achieved by making the processor which comprises the control part 41 execute the program (instruction) for monitoring memorize | stored in the information storage part 42. FIG.
Kohei: Sec. 0058, The input unit 64 is used by the user to input various setting information. The display unit 65 displays a screen based on the screen information transmitted from the distribution server 5. The input unit 64 and the display unit 65 can be configured by a touch panel display. The communication unit 63 communicates with the distribution server 5, transmits user setting information input by the input unit 64 to the distribution server 5, and receives screen information transmitted from the distribution server 5. To do. The control unit 61 includes a processor and controls each unit of the user terminal 6. The information storage unit 62 stores a program executed by the control unit 61 and the like.):
acquiring sales data indicating, for each unit period, a value related to a sales performance of a product in a store (
Kohei: Sec. 0042, an example in which the evaluation regarding the operation status of the store is performed mainly based on the sales information collected by the POS system will be described
Kohei: Sec. 0090, The data reflection date display unit 103 displays the data reflection date, that is, the date of the acquired sales information (the last date of information collection).
Kohei: Sec. 0091, The analysis condition designating unit 104 is used by the user to designate analysis conditions for evaluating the performance of each day in the target period (one month). The analysis condition specifying unit 104 includes a store selection unit 111, a product type selection unit 112, an analysis index selection unit 113, a determination criterion selection unit 114, and an update button 115.);
generating a graph based on the sales data (
Kohei: Sec. 0063, The analysis condition setting unit 72 sets an analysis condition for evaluating a score related to the store operation status in accordance with a user operation input. In the present embodiment, as the analysis conditions, the target period, the target store, the target product type (sales floor) are set, and the analysis index (sales, customer unit price, number of customers, purchase rate) is set, Judgment criteria (vs. budget, vs. previous year, vs. average for all stores, vs. average for the past 4 weeks) are set. In the present embodiment, analysis conditions are designated by the user on the monthly graph analysis screen (see FIG. 6) and the daily graph analysis screen (see FIG. 8).);
acquiring a first image being an image captured in at least one target period being the unit period, and including a display shelf where the product is arranged (
Kohei: Sec. 0051, The control unit 31 is composed of a processor, and performs image processing on the camera images acquired from the camera 1. In this image processing, it performs processing to correct distortion of the camera images, which are fisheye images, and to extract area images in which a predetermined target area (such as display shelves for each product type) is captured.
Kohei: Sec. 0041, This sales information is shared between the POS terminal 11 and the POS server 12, and the POS server 12 manages sales information of all stores. In this POS system, information such as the name, type, quantity, amount, and accounting time of a product purchased by a customer is managed as sales information.
Kohei: Sec. 0042, In the present embodiment, an example in which the evaluation regarding the operation status of the store is performed mainly based on the sales information collected by the POS system will be described. However, the camera detection information, for example, the number of visitors, the display area (display shelf) Etc.) );
displaying the graph on a display, and simultaneously displaying, on the display, the first image in association with the sales data corresponding to the product at the target period with at least a part of the first image overlapping with the graph (
Kohei: Fig. 6 and 8,
Kohei: Sec. 0063, In the present embodiment, as the analysis conditions, the target period, the target store, the target product type (sales floor) are set, and the analysis index (sales, customer unit price, number of customers, purchase rate) is set, Judgment criteria (vs. budget, vs. previous year, vs. average for all stores, vs. average for the past 4 weeks) are set. In the present embodiment, analysis conditions are designated by the user on the monthly graph analysis screen (see FIG. 6) and the daily graph analysis screen (see FIG. 8).
Kohei: Sec. 0077, In this way, when the management server 4 acquires the point of interest and the area image, the information is transmitted to the distribution server 5 (display information generation unit). Based on the information acquired from the management server 4 in the distribution server 5, Display information relating to the monthly graph analysis screen (see FIG. 6) and the daily graph analysis screen (see FIG. 8) is generated,
Kohei: Sec. 0084, The monthly graph analysis screen shown in FIG. 6 is a graph (seventh day table) showing a date that is a point of interest in the target period (one month) specified by the user, and a graph showing the transition status of statistical information in the target period Are presented to the user.).
Kohei describes simultaneously displaying information teaching and graphing of sales data and time period, especially at Figs. 6 and 8.
wherein a plurality of the target periods are present, and the operations further comprise acquiring the first image for each of the plurality of target periods (
Kohei: Sec. 0009, An image acquisition unit for acquiring the area image corresponding to the attention point from the plurality of area images stored in the storage unit, and a calendar for the target period in which the attention point is indicated.
Kohei: Sec. 0014, An image storage unit for storing area images, an accounting information acquisition unit for acquiring accounting information related to provision of goods or services to users, and actual values and expectations for each day in the target period based on the accounting information Get the value, compare the actual value with the expected value of each day, evaluate the performance on the operational status of the facility on each day, and acquire the date that will be the point of interest based on the evaluation result ),
and determining a size of the first image on the display by use of the number of the first images displayed on the display (
Kohei: Fig. 8, 10, and 12,
Kohei: Sec. 0042, However, the camera detection information, for example, the number of visitors, the display area (display shelf) Etc.) Based on the number of people staying for each item, the display amount, the degree of face-up, the degree of alignment, the volume, the shortage of missing items, etc. It may be. Such camera detection information can be acquired by image analysis on the captured image.
Kohei: Sec. 0095, Information detected by image analysis on captured images, for example, number of customers, number of visitors per display area, display amount, face-up level, alignment level, volume level, and shortage of missing items are selected as analysis indicators You may be able to do that.
Kohei: Sec. 0134, When the “monitoring” button 127 is operated, a monitoring screen (store comparison screen (see FIG. 12), sales floor list screen (see FIG. 13), designated time screen (see FIG. 14), all-day confirmation screen (see FIG. 15)) is displayed. Transition. The monitoring screen that is the transition destination will be described in detail later.).
Kohei describes detecting the camera information and image analyses which includes determining the display amount ( i.e. display size) that also consist of determining to increase or decrease the number of images/screens to display, which is similar to the Applicant’s spec at 0071.
Kohei and both teaches Kazuhiko determining a size of the first image on the display
Kohei does not explicitly teach with at least a part of the first image overlapping the graph.
However, Kazuhiko teaches these limitations
determining a size of the first image on the display (
Kazuhiko: Sec. 0091, This activity map is colored with a display color corresponding to the size of the moving body activity value based on the color table shown in FIG. Note that only the grid set in the target area is displayed in a display color corresponding to the moving activity value, and the grid not set in the target area is blank without a display color.)
with at least a part of the first image overlapping the graph (
Kazuhiko:, Fig. 10-16,
Kazuhiko: Sec. 0083, Next, the map display section 66 of the analysis result output screen shown in Fig. 10 to Fig. 16 will be described. In the map display section 66, an activity map that visualizes the degree of activity of a person is displayed superimposed on the captured image of the monitoring area. This activity map is colored in a display color according to the magnitude of the moving body activity value based on the color table shown in Fig. 8. Note that only the grids set in the target area are displayed in a display color according to the moving body activity value, and the grids not set in the target area are blank with no display color. ).
Kohei and Kazuhiko are both directed to the analysis of store data (See Kohei at 0040-0042, 0054, 0063; Kazuhiko at 0002, 0005). Kohei discloses that additional elements, such as the store layout can be considered (See Kohei at 0044). It would have been obvious for one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Kohei, which teaches detecting and repairing sales information in a sales environment in view of Kazuhiko, to efficiently apply analysis of store data to enhancing the capability to graph . (See Kazuhiko at 0075, 0091, 0105).
Referring to Claim 2, Kohei teaches the image display apparatus according to claim 1, wherein the value related to the sales performance includes at least one of the number of sales, the number of preparations, the number of disposals, whether the arranged product is running short, and the number of customers (
Kohei: Sec. 0061, In the present embodiment, at least one of sales amount, customer unit price, number of customers, and purchase rate can be acquired as sales information. Here, the unit price of customers is the amount paid per customer (user), the number of customers (number of payers) is the number of customers accounted for at the cashier counter (number of purchases), and the purchase rate is the purchase rate. This is the ratio of the sales amount for each product type (type of goods or services used) to the total sales amount.
Kohei: Sec. 0103, The evaluation result is displayed on the calendar display unit 107. At this time, each day is evaluated based on the statistical information and the disposal information on the analysis index (sales, customer unit price, number of customers, purchase rate) selected by the analysis index selection unit 113, and the evaluation result of each day Is displayed in the cell 116 of each day of the calendar display unit 107. In addition, the evaluation on the analysis index selected by the analysis index selection unit 113 and the evaluation on the disposal information are separately performed, and each evaluation result is aggregated (statistical processing) to obtain one evaluation result.
Kohei: Sec. 0042, an example in which the evaluation regarding the operation status of the store is performed mainly based on the sales information collected by the POS system will be described. However, the camera detection information, for example, the number of visitors, the display area (display shelf) Etc.) Based on the number of people staying for each item, the display amount, the degree of face-up, the degree of alignment, the volume, the shortage of missing items, etc.
Kohei: Sec. 0095, the sales, customer unit price, number of customers, and purchase rate that can be acquired from the sales information acquired from the POS system are selected as analysis indexes. However, in addition to this, camera detection information, that is, , Information detected by image analysis on captured images, for example, number of customers, number of visitors per display area, display amount, face-up level, alignment level, volume level, and shortage of missing items are selected as analysis indicators You may be able to do that.).
Referring to Claim 3, Kohei teaches the image display apparatus according to claim 1, wherein the operations further comprise determining the target period by use of the sales data (
Kohei: Sec. 0014, An image storage unit for storing area images, an accounting information acquisition unit for acquiring accounting information related to provision of goods or services to users, and actual values and expectations for each day in the target period based on the accounting information
Kohei: Sec. 0069, The budget is evaluated based on this year's budget. When the budget is selected, the sales target value (planned value) per day recorded in this year's budget is set as the expected value, and the target period The result value of each evaluation date and the sales target value are compared, and the result of each evaluation date is evaluated.
Kohei: Sec. 0074, the actual value of each day related to the specified analysis index is acquired for the specified target period (one month) for the sales floor of the specified store. Moreover, the actual value for every time zone of the designated day is acquired.).
Referring to Claim 4, Kohei teaches the image display apparatus according to claim 3, wherein the operations further comprise setting the target period to the unit period in which the value satisfies a criterion (
Kohei: Sec. 0096, The criterion selection unit 114 is used by the user to select a criterion for evaluating the performance of each day. When the criterion selection unit 114 is operated, a criterion selection menu (list box) is displayed as shown in FIG. In this determination criterion selection menu, it is possible to select each determination criterion for the budget, the previous year, the average for all stores, and the average for the past four weeks.).
Referring to Claim 5, Kohei teaches the image display apparatus according to claim 3, wherein the operations further comprise acquiring a criterion value of the value for each of a plurality of the unit periods (
Kohei: Sec. 0096, The criterion selection unit 114 is used by the user to select a criterion for evaluating the performance of each day. When the criterion selection unit 114 is operated, a criterion selection menu (list box) is displayed as shown in FIG. In this determination criterion selection menu, it is possible to select each determination criterion for the budget, the previous year, the average for all stores, and the average for the past four weeks.), and
setting the target period to the unit period in which a difference between the value indicated by the sales data and the criterion value is equal to or more than a previously determined value (
Kohei: Sec. 0070, In addition, the year-on-year evaluation is based on the same day of the evaluation date, that is, the actual value on the same day of the previous year and the same day of the same month. It is set, and the performance value of each day is evaluated by comparing the actual value of each evaluation day in the target period with the actual value of the same day of the previous year.
Kohei: Sec. 0073, It is advisable to select a day having a large difference between the expected value and the expected value as a point of interest and narrow down the date as the point of interest. For example, if the standard deviation σ of the set of actual values extracted under the required conditions is acquired, and the difference between the actual value and the expected value of each evaluation date in the target period exceeds the standard deviation σ, select it as the point of interest You may make it do.).
Referring to Claim 6, Kohei teaches the image display apparatus according claim 1, wherein the unit period is a time period, the target period is the unit period in which the number of disposals of the products satisfies a criterion, or the unit period in which the arranged product is running short (
Kohei: Sec. 0085, The monthly graph analysis screen includes a main menu 101, a site map display unit 102, a data reflection date display unit 103, an analysis condition designation unit 104, a target month display change unit 105, and a monthly statistical information display unit. 106, a calendar display unit 107, a graph display unit 108, and a discard information addition designation unit 109 are provided.
Kohei: Sec. 0103, The evaluation result is displayed on the calendar display unit 107. At this time, each day is evaluated based on the statistical information and the disposal information on the analysis index (sales, customer unit price, number of customers, purchase rate) selected by the analysis index selection unit 113, and the evaluation result of each day Is displayed in the cell 116 of each day of the calendar display unit 107. In addition, the evaluation on the analysis index selected by the analysis index selection unit 113 and the evaluation on the disposal information are separately performed, and each evaluation result is aggregated (statistical processing) to obtain one evaluation result.
Kohei: Sec. 0042, an example in which the evaluation regarding the operation status of the store is performed mainly based on the sales information collected by the POS system will be described. However, the camera detection information, for example, the number of visitors, the display area (display shelf) Etc.) Based on the number of people staying for each item, the display amount, the degree of face-up, the degree of alignment, the volume, the shortage of missing items, etc.), and
the operations further comprise acquiring a second image being an image capturing the display shelf before the first image, and displaying the second image on the display (
Kohei: Sec. 0051, In this image processing, distortion correction of a camera image, which is a fisheye image, and processing for extracting an area image in which a predetermined target area (such as a display shelf for each product type) is extracted are performed.
Kohei: Sec. 0088, The display report screen presents to the user the result of evaluating the display state of the product in the display area (display shelf, etc.) in the store. The display report setting screen is used by the user to specify analysis conditions for evaluating the display state of a product.).
Referring to Claim 8, Kohei teaches the image display apparatus according to claim 1, wherein a size of the graph is variable on the display, and
the operations further comprise changing a size (See Kazuhiko) of the first image displayed on the display within a previously determined range according to a size of the graph (
Kohei: Sec. 0087, Further, when a display report is selected from the main menu 101, the display changes to a display report screen (not shown). Further, when display report setting is selected on the main menu 101, a transition is made to a display report setting screen (not shown). Further, when POS import is selected in the main menu 101, a transition is made to a POS import screen (see FIG. 11). When logout is selected in the main menu 101, the displayed screen is closed and the login screen (see FIG. 5) is restored.
Kohei: Sec. 0082, When the top is selected in the main menu 201, the screen changes to a store comparison screen (see FIG. 12) which is the top screen of the monitoring function.
Kohei: Sec. 0085, This monthly graph analysis screen has a main menu 101, a site map display section 102, a data reflection date display section 103, an analysis condition designation section 104, a target month display change section 105, ).
Kohei does not explicitly teach changing a size.
However, Kazuhiko teaches changing a size (
Kazuhiko: Sec. 0091, This activity map is colored with a display color corresponding to the size of the moving body activity value based on the color table shown in FIG. Note that only the grid set in the target area is displayed in a display color corresponding to the moving activity value, and the grid not set in the target area is blank without a display color.)
Kohei and Kazuhiko are both directed to the analysis of store data (See Kohei at 0040-0042, 0054, 0063; Kazuhiko at 0002, 0005). Kohei discloses that additional elements, such as the store layout can be considered (See Kohei at 0044). It would have been obvious for one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Kohei, which teaches detecting and repairing sales information in a sales environment in view of Kazuhiko, to efficiently apply analysis of store data to enhancing the capability to graph . (See Kazuhiko at 0075, 0091, 0105).
Referring to Claim 9, Kohei teaches the image display apparatus according to claim 1, Kohei does not explicitly teach wherein the operations further comprise providing the display with an image display region being a region that does not overlap with the graph and displaying the first image; and,
when the first image overlapping with the graph is selected, displaying the first image in the image display region
Kohei does not explicitly teach these limitations
wherein the operations further comprise providing the display with an image display region being a region that does not overlap with the graph and displaying the first image (
Kazuhiko:, Fig. 17, 21), and,
when the first image overlapping with the graph is selected, displaying the first image in the image display region (
Kazuhiko:, Fig. 10-16).
Kohei and Kazuhiko are both directed to the analysis of store data (See Kohei at 0040-0042, 0054, 0063; Kazuhiko at 0002, 0005). Kohei discloses that additional elements, such as the store layout can be considered (See Kohei at 0044). It would have been obvious for one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Kohei, which teaches detecting and repairing sales information in a sales environment in view of Kazuhiko, to efficiently apply analysis of store data to enhancing the capability to graph . (See Kazuhiko at 0075, 0091, 0105).
Claim 14 recite limitations that stand rejected via the art citations and rationale applied to claim 1.
Claim 16 recite limitations that stand rejected via the art citations and rationale applied to claim 1. Regarding a non-transitory computer-readable medium storing a program for causing a computer to:
perform operations comprising:(
Kohei: Sec. 0049, The information storage unit 23 stores a program executed by the control unit 22 and a captured image output from the imaging unit 21.)
acquiring sales data indicating, for each unit period, a value related to a sales performance of a product in a store (
an example in which the evaluation regarding the operation status of the store is performed mainly based on the sales information collected by the POS system will be described);
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments filed 10/15/2025 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive. Applicant’s arguments will be addressed hereinbelow in the order in which they appear in the response filed 10/15/2025.
Regarding the 35 U.S.C. 101 rejection, at pg. 8-10 Applicant argues with respect to claims at issue are not directed to an abstract idea
In response to the 35 USC § 101 claim rejection argument, the Examiner respectfully disagrees. The Examiner did consider each claim and every limitation both individually and as a whole, since the grounds of rejection clearly indicates that an abstract idea has been identified from elements recited in the claims. Using the two-part analysis, the Office has determined there are no elements, in the claim sufficient enough to ensure that the claims amounts to significantly more than the abstract idea itself. As recited, the claims are directed towards:
an image display apparatus comprising:
at least one memory configured to store instructions; and
at least one processor configured to execute the instructions to perform operations comprising:
acquiring sales data indicating, for each unit period, a value related to a sales performance of a product in a store;
generating a graph based on the sales data;
acquiring a first image being an image captured in at least one target period being the unit period, and including a display shelf where the product is arranged; and
displaying the graph on a display, and simultaneously displaying, on the display, the first image in association with the sales data corresponding to the product at the target period with at least a part of the first image overlapping with the graph, wherein
a plurality of the target periods are present, and
the operations further comprise:
acquiring the first image for each of the plurality of target periods, and
determining a size of the first image on the display by use of the number of the first images displayed on the display.
The claim(s) does not include additional elements that are sufficient to amount to significantly more than the judicial exception because the computer as recited is a generic computer component that performs functions.
Examiner finds the claim recite concepts which are now described in the 2019 PEG as certain methods of organizing human activity. In particular the claims recites limitations for managing of sale data, which constitutes methods related to commercial interaction such as sales activities which are still considered an abstract idea under the 2019 PEG. The display is comprised of generic computer elements to perform an existing business process. Examiner finds the claims recite mere instructions to implement the abstract idea on a computer and uses the computer as a tool to perform the abstract idea without reciting any improvements to a technology, technological process or computer-related technology.
Regarding, the steps at pg. 9 and 10 that Applicant points to as practical application are merely narrowing the abstract idea to a particular technological environment, which has been found to be ineffective to render an abstract idea eligible. Furthermore, the Examiner respectfully disagrees because the steps of:
“For instance, the claims address the technical problem that conventional data presentation tools are often inefficient, requiring users to manually sift through data, select appropriate benchmarks, and perform mental calculations to derive meaningful insights. One or more example embodiments consistent with the claims solve this problem by providing an apparatus that:
1. Acquires specific data types: the number of sales, the number of preparations, the number of disposals, whether the arranged product is running short, and the number of customers.
2. Generates a graph: a graph that includes the specific sales data types relating to various products over a specific period of time.
3. Displays the data in a specific, structured format: the graph including sales data
relating to a product and images of said product presented simultaneously, where the images that depict the product overlap the graph at a position corresponding to sales data of the product at the time that the image was taken. ”
seems to describe a “particular way” of managing of sale data. “ The Applicant is basically relying on the system elements such as displaying and interfaces as integrating the abstract idea into a practical application but those system elements aren't really utilized in any particular manner, and the specification indicates that at 0091 " FIG. 8 is a diagram illustrating a hardware configuration example of the image display apparatus 10. The image display apparatus 10 includes a bus 1010, a processor 1020, a memory 1030, a storage device 1040, an input/output interface 1050, and a network interface 1060."; 0092, “The bus 1010 is a data transmission path through which the processor 1020, the memory 1030, the storage device 1040, the input/output interface 1050, and the network interface 1060 transmit and receive data to and from each other.” which indicates the lack of particularity in the application to the technological environment. These citations are a strong indicator that the technical application is NOT particular, and furthermore the claim invention does not “improves the functioning of a computer or improves another technology or technical field.” or “an improvement to another technology or technical field. Then at pg. 9 the Applicant admission that the application is directed to improving the user’s experience and not the computer itself
(at pg.9 “The claims are not directed to these alleged abstract ideas themselves, but rather to a specific, improved computer-based tool that solves a technical problem inherent in computerized sales data analysis-namely, how to efficiently process and display complex sales and disposal data in a manner that enables a store clerk to make immediate, informed operational decisions.”)
As, the claims are clear steps for sharing managing of sale data and not the improvement of the interface or display.
Additionally, the Examiner would like to point the Applicant to the 2019 PEG, in which managing of sale data will fall under. The 2019 PEG which states:
Adding the words “apply it” (or an equivalent) with the judicial exception, or mere instructions to implement an abstract idea on a computer, or merely uses a computer as a tool to perform an abstract idea - see MPEP 2106.05(f).
Adding insignificant extra-solution activity to the judicial exception - see MPEP 2106.05(g)
Generally linking the use of the judicial exception to a particular technological environment or field of use – see MPEP 2106.05(h)
The amendments have been considered but are insufficient to overcome the 101 rejection. Additionally, please refer above to the 35 U.S.C. 101 rejection for further explanation and rationale.
Regarding the 35 U.S.C. 103 rejection, at pg. 12 Applicant argues “Kohei are both silent regarding determining a number of times that the first image is displayed and thus fails to disclose "determining a size of the first image on the display by use of the number of the first images displayed on the display"”.
In response, the Examiner respectfully disagrees. Kohei describes detecting the camera information and image analyses which includes determining the display amount ( i.e. display size) that also consist of determining to increase or decrease the number of images/screens to display, which is similar to the Applicant’s spec at 0071.
Additionally, it seems the Applicant is arguing Kohei does not describe does multiple images to be displayed. However, the claim does not require multiple images to be displayed. As such, the arguments are not persuasive.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Grimaud et al., U.S. Pub. 20130300729, (discussing the processing of sales performance data).
Condea et al., RFID-Enabled Shelf Replenishment With Backroom Monitoring In Retail Stores, https://cocoa.ethz.ch/downloads/2014/06/None_AUTOIDLABS-WP-BIZAPP-063.pdf, Decision Support Systems, 2012 (discussing the monitoring of various sale data.).
THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. 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 UCHE BYRD whose telephone number is (571)272-3113. The examiner can normally be reached Mon.-Fri..
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, Patricia Munson can be reached at (571) 270-5396. 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.
/UCHE BYRD/ Examiner, Art Unit 3624
/HAMZEH OBAID/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3624 February 5, 2026