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 office action is in response to correspondence 12/04/25 regarding application 18/684,367, in which claims 1, 5, and 6 were amended and claims 2-4 were cancelled. Claims 1, 5, and 6 are pending in the application and have been considered.
Response to Arguments
Amended claims 1, 5, and 6 overcome the 35 U.S.C. 101 rejections as being directed to an abstract idea without significantly more. Specifically, as amended the claims can no longer be practically performed as a mental process.
Applicant’s arguments on pages 5-6 regarding the 35 U.S.C. 103 rejections based on Gardner, Mutagi, and Ni have been considered but are moot in view of the new grounds for rejection based in part on the newly discovered reference to Fountaine (US 20180325470), which describes repeatedly making verbal inquiries to a user and alerting emergency services if they do not respond, similarly to the amended claim language. The new grounds for rejection based in part on Fountaine are necessitated by Applicant’s claim amendments.
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 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 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, 5, and 6 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Gardner et al. (US 20170069324) in view of Ni et al. (US 20180096681), in further view of Fountaine (US 20180325470).
Consider claim 1, Gardner discloses a situation awareness system for grasping a situation of a target person (understanding that a user is proximate to the oven when asking “Temperature to fry an egg” using sensors and controller, [0036]), the situation awareness system comprising:
one or more detection sensors configured to perform at least any one of detecting the target person (motion sensor detects user proximate to the oven, [0036]), detecting a state of an installation object which is installed and of which the state is changeable due to an operation of the target person (detecting that the door of the oven is in an open position, [0036]), and detecting a state of an environment (e.g. whether the door to the refrigerator, an temperature controlled environment within the kitchen, is open, [0023]);
a voice response device configured to perform a voice response including an utterance to the target person (in response to the user command “Temperature to fry an egg”, the controller responds with an audible answer through the speaker indicating to the user an appropriate temperature setting for the burners to fry an egg, [0036], [0034], [0042], for which “an utterance” is considered inherent); and
a storage section configured to store information (memory in the computer based system, [0025]),
wherein the voice response device is configured to:
perform an utterance to the target person with a content in accordance with a result of the detection by the detection sensor (controller performs audible response through the speaker in light of trigger input indicating the user is positioned proximate to and potentially using oven appliance, [0036]), and store information including a conversation content with the target person accompanying the utterance in the storage section (computer based system having memory receives audio input by microphones, and plays an audio signal in response to received user voice command, [0020], [0025]; storage of at least the recorded waveform is inherent for both speech recognition and audio playback);
grasp the situation of the target person from the conversation content, and perform corresponding processing in accordance with the grasped situation (controller performs audible response through the speaker in light of trigger input indicating the user is positioned proximate to and potentially using oven appliance, [0036]);
transmit an operation signal to a device installed, and transmit the operation signal giving an instruction for an operation in accordance with the situation to the device, as the corresponding processing (controller response by controlling the oven appliance 28 to modify a temperature setting of one of the burners to the appropriate temperature setting for such burner to fry an egg, [0036], transmission of a control signal inherent for doing so).
Gardner does not specifically mention perform the utterance to the target person in order to check a change in the situation by the operation of the device based on the operation signal, after transmitting the operation signal.
Ni discloses performing the utterance to the target person in order to check a change in the situation by the operation of the device based on the operation signal, after transmitting the operation signal (user says “I need a pick-me-up” and client device opens music playing application to a streaming music station, i.e. transmits an operation signal, and afterwards, prompts the user with “Is this what you wanted when you said you needed to pick-me-up?”, [0009]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the invention of Gardner by performing the utterance to the target person in order to check a change in the situation by the operation of the device based on the operation signal, after transmitting the operation signal in order to better handle ambiguous user voice commands, as suggested by Ni ([0077]), predictably improving device performance, as suggested by Ni ([0077]). The references cited are analogous art in the same field of speech recognition.
Gardner and Ni do not specifically mention a residence; and performing emergency contact processing in response to determining, based on at least one of the grasped situation and a lack of response from the target person to the utterance, that emergency contact is necessary.
Fountaine discloses a residence (house where a user is receiving homecare, [0044]); and performing emergency contact processing in response to determining, based on at least one of the grasped situation and a lack of response from the target person to the utterance, that emergency contact is necessary (emergency service 150 determines that contacting caregiver is necessary upon e.g. more than five instances of non-response event, e.g. to the verbal status query “Did you take your medicine this morning?”, [0049-0051]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the invention of Gardner and Ni by utilizing the techniques in a residence; and performing emergency contact processing in response to determining, based on at least one of the grasped situation and a lack of response from the target person to the utterance, that emergency contact is necessary in order to provide assistance in a case where the user may have difficulty getting to a communication device, as suggested by Fountaine ([0003]), predictably resulting reduced risk of injury or death, as suggested by Fountaine ([0003]. The references cited are analogous art in the same field of speech recognition (Fountaine, [0022]).
Consider claim 5, Gardner discloses voice response device configured to perform a voice response including an utterance to a target person (in response to the user command “Temperature to fry an egg”, the controller responds with an audible answer through the speaker indicating to the user an appropriate temperature setting for the burners to fry an egg, [0036], [0034], [0042], for which “an utterance” is considered inherent), the voice response device comprising:
one or more detection sensors configured to: perform at least any one of detecting the target person (motion sensor detects user proximate to the oven, [0036]), detecting a state of an installation object which is installed e and of which the state is changeable due to an operation of the target person (detecting that the door of the oven is in an open position, [0036]), and detecting a state of an environment (e.g. whether the door to the refrigerator, an temperature controlled environment within the kitchen, is open, [0023]); and
a storage section configured to store information (memory in the computer based system, [0025]),
wherein the voice response device is configured to:
perform an utterance to the target person with a content in accordance with a result of the detection by the detection sensor (in response to the user command “Temperature to fry an egg”, the controller responds with an audible answer through the speaker indicating to the user an appropriate temperature setting for the burners to fry an egg, [0036], [0034], [0042], for which “an utterance” is considered inherent), and store information including a conversation content with the target person accompanying the utterance in the storage section (computer based system having memory receives audio input by microphones, and plays an audio signal in response to received user voice command, [0020], [0025]; storage of at least the recorded waveform is inherent for both speech recognition and audio playback);
grasp the situation of the target person from the conversation content, and perform corresponding processing in accordance with the grasped situation (controller performs audible response through the speaker in light of trigger input indicating the user is positioned proximate to and potentially using oven appliance, [0036]);
transmit an operation signal to a device installed, and transmit the operation signal giving an instruction for an operation in accordance with the situation to the device, as the corresponding processing (controller response by controlling the oven appliance 28 to modify a temperature setting of one of the burners to the appropriate temperature setting for such burner to fry an egg, [0036], transmission of a control signal inherent for doing so).
Gardner does not specifically mention perform the utterance to the target person in order to check a change in the situation by the operation of the device based on the operation signal, after transmitting the operation signal.
Ni discloses: perform the utterance to the target person in order to check a change in the situation by the operation of the device based on the operation signal, after transmitting the operation signal (user says “I need a pick-me-up” and client device opens music playing application to a streaming music station, i.e. transmits an operation signal, and afterwards, prompts the user with “Is this what you wanted when you said you needed to pick-me-up?”, [0009]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the invention of Gardner by performing the utterance to the target person in order to check a change in the situation by the operation of the device based on the operation signal, after transmitting the operation signal for reasons similar to those for claim 1.
Gardner and Ni do not specifically mention a residence; and performing emergency contact processing in response to determining, based on at least one of the grasped situation and a lack of response from the target person to the utterance, that emergency contact is necessary.
Fountaine discloses a residence (house where a user is receiving homecare, [0044]); and performing emergency contact processing in response to determining, based on at least one of the grasped situation and a lack of response from the target person to the utterance, that emergency contact is necessary (emergency service 150 determines that contacting caregiver is necessary upon e.g. more than five instances of non-response event, e.g. to the verbal status query “Did you take your medicine this morning?”, [0049-0051]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the invention of Gardner and Ni by utilizing the techniques in a residence; and performing emergency contact processing in response to determining, based on at least one of the grasped situation and a lack of response from the target person to the utterance, that emergency contact is necessary for reasons similar to those for claim 1.
Consider claim 6, Gardner discloses situation awareness method of grasping a situation of a target person by a voice response device (understanding that a user is proximate to the oven when asking “Temperature to fry an egg” using sensors and controller, [0036]), the situation awareness method comprising:
performing at least any one of detecting the target person (motion sensor detects user proximate to the oven, [0036]), detecting a state of an installation object that is installed and of which the state is changeable due to an operation of the target person (detecting that the door of the oven is in an open position, [0036]), and detecting a state of an environment (e.g. whether the door to the refrigerator, an temperature controlled environment within the kitchen, is open, [0023]);
performing an utterance to the target person with a content in accordance with a result of the detection (in response to the user command “Temperature to fry an egg”, the controller responds with an audible answer through the speaker indicating to the user an appropriate temperature setting for the burners to fry an egg, [0036], [0034], [0042], for which “an utterance” is considered inherent), and storing information including a conversation content with the target person accompanying the utterance in a storage section (computer based system having memory receives audio input by microphones, and plays an audio signal in response to received user voice command, [0020], [0025]; storage of at least the recorded waveform is inherent for both speech recognition and audio playback).
grasping the situation of the target person from the conversation content, and performing corresponding processing in accordance with the grasped situation (controller performs audible response through the speaker in light of trigger input indicating the user is positioned proximate to and potentially using oven appliance, [0036]);
transmitting an operation signal to a device installed, and transmitting the operation signal giving an instruction for an operation in accordance with the situation to the device, as the corresponding processing (controller response by controlling the oven appliance 28 to modify a temperature setting of one of the burners to the appropriate temperature setting for such burner to fry an egg, [0036], transmission of a control signal inherent for doing so).
Gardner does not specifically mention performing the utterance to the target person in order to check a change in the situation by the operation of the device based on the operation signal, after transmitting the operation signal.
Ni discloses performing the utterance to the target person in order to check a change in the situation by the operation of the device based on the operation signal, after transmitting the operation signal (user says “I need a pick-me-up” and client device opens music playing application to a streaming music station, i.e. transmits an operation signal, and afterwards, prompts the user with “Is this what you wanted when you said you needed to pick-me-up?”, [0009]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the invention of Gardner by performing the utterance to the target person in order to check a change in the situation by the operation of the device based on the operation signal, after transmitting the operation signal for reasons similar to those for claim 1.
Gardner and Ni do not specifically mention a residence; and performing emergency contact processing in response to determining, based on at least one of the grasped situation and a lack of response from the target person to the utterance, that emergency contact is necessary.
Fountaine discloses a residence (house where a user is receiving homecare, [0044]); and performing emergency contact processing in response to determining, based on at least one of the grasped situation and a lack of response from the target person to the utterance, that emergency contact is necessary (emergency service 150 determines that contacting caregiver is necessary upon e.g. more than five instances of non-response event, e.g. to the verbal status query “Did you take your medicine this morning?”, [0049-0051]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the invention of Gardner and Ni by utilizing the techniques in a residence; and performing emergency contact processing in response to determining, based on at least one of the grasped situation and a lack of response from the target person to the utterance, that emergency contact is necessary for reasons similar to those for claim 1.
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 Jesse Pullias whose telephone number is 571/270-5135. The examiner can normally be reached on M-F 8:00 AM - 4:30 PM. The examiner’s fax number is 571/270-6135.
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, Andrew Flanders can be reached on 571/272-7516.
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.
/Jesse S Pullias/
Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2655 12/19/25
Prosecution Insights