DETAILED ACTION
Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status
The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
Response to Arguments
The previous objections to the claims is withdrawn in light of the amendments to the claims (filed 05/14/2026).
Applicant’s arguments with respect to the rejections of the claims under 35 U.S.C. § 103 have been considered but are moot because the new ground of rejection, which is raised as necessitated by amendment, does not rely on any reference applied in the prior rejection of record for any teaching or matter specifically challenged in the argument. See rejections of claims 1-14, as presented in detail below.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(b):
(b) CONCLUSION.—The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph:
The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the applicant regards as his invention.
Claim 4 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor (or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the applicant), regards as the invention.
Claim 4 recites the limitation "the emotional expression data" in line 2. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
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.
The factual inquiries for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows:
1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art.
2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue.
3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art.
4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness.
Claims 1-2 and 5-13 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kisakye in view of Karafiath, Weldemariam, and US 2010/0207874 (hereinafter “Yuxin”).
Regarding Claim 1, Kisakye discloses an amphibious vehicle (p. 6: image of amphibious vehicle in a body of water);
at least one touch screen display (p. 5: “100 inch touch screen… 4 touchscreen computers;” p. 2: “The interactive touch screen”);
a digital whiteboard (p. 2: “The interactive touch screen… can also be used as a digital white board”);
at least one camera associated with the at least one touch screen displays (p. 2: “The interactive touch screen can be linked with cameras”) configured to:
a processor configured to communicate with the touch screen displays (p. 2: “The interactive touch screen… allow inclusive and group video conferencing;” p. 5: “touch screen computers;” Examiner notes this processor is inherent in such a system and must necessarily communicate with these interactive touch screen displays in order for the them to function as disclosed);
wherein the processor is configured to: display the information using the touch screen display (p. 2: “The Community Tablet delivers customized animations that are relevant and familiar to local communities;” Examiner further clarifies that Kisakye discloses displaying information which is relevant to the geographical location but does not explain how this information is determined. This will be addressed immediately below).
Kisakye discloses displaying information relevant to the geographical location but does not explicitly disclose how the location is determined. However, Karafiath discloses a location sensor on the amphibious vehicle (col. 6, lines 22-32: amphibious vehicle is equipped with a GPS to detect location) configured to determine a geographical location of the amphibious vehicle and configured to communicate the geographical location of the amphibious vehicle to the processor (Examiner notes the GPS must necessarily communicate with the processor for the information to be used). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the GPS of Karafiath with the system of Kisakye in order to effectively determine the location of the amphibious vehicle, which can be used in several ways, potentially including determining whether the vehicle is in water or on land (Karafiath, fig. 2; col. 8, lines 35-50) or remotely controlling the vehicle (Karafiath, col. 8, lines 8-23).
Kisakye discloses displaying information relevant to the geographical location but does not disclose how the information is determined. However, Weldemariam discloses the processor is configured to: communicate with a database to determine information relevant to the geographical location of the amphibious vehicle (par. 0052: “the profile of the geospatial context of all locations with respect to each culturally sensitive feature is stored in a geolocation database wherein each cultural feature and associated context is geotagged;” par. 0056: “A contextual educational module may be triggered to provide personalized and interactive educational content to clarify culturally sensitive concepts and terms; the content can be optionally fetched from various information sources, such as databases;” Examiner notes the processor necessarily communicates with such a database in order to successfully fetch information from it). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the system of Kisakye with the database communication of Weldemariam in order to educate and communicate in a culturally and regionally proper/respectful manner (Weldemariam, abstract, pars. 0002-0003).
Kisakye implies assessing responses of users to detect efficacy (p. 2: “while also collecting vital data to demonstrate how well a message has been understood”) but does not explicitly disclose explain how this process is done. However, Yuxin discloses at least one camera configured to: assess responses of an audience to a user-defined event in displayed information (par. 0038: “The modified display content can include a prompt for collaborative action on the part of the audience. In that case, the system again captures an audience view (step 52) and analyzes that view to determine what subsequent change to make in the display content”); wherein the at least one camera is configured to capture long distance mass hand gesture response from the audience (fig. 3: camera 12 configured to capture long-distance hand gesture responses from audience/group 14; par. 0039: “a method for visually detecting group gestures in connection with a digital signage system or other content delivery system, to enable group interaction. The system can collect a response from an audience (e.g. a majority response, or multiple simultaneous collaborative gestures) to displayed content and measure the level of audience interest;” par. 0033: “One type of collaborative gesture can be the raising of hands in the audience, and detecting this gesture using gesture recognition technologies. This can include the raise of one hand or two hands to deliver feedback from the audience regarding the displayed content, or a finger pointing gesture performed by multiple people at the same time”), wherein the captured gesture response is used to determine a rating of an overall positive or negative understanding and/or reaction of the audience to benchmark an effectiveness of the displayed information (par. 0037: “feedback regarding the content or effectiveness of the display content. This allows the system to provide a direct indication of the effectiveness or impact of advertising, entertainment, political messages, etc. Again, the feedback can be in the form of a simple yes/no indication, or it can be a more relative measure of effectiveness, such as an impact score as a distribution or percentage (e.g. 14% very positive reaction, 20% positive reaction, 23% negative reaction, 15% very negative, 28% no discernable reaction)”). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the long-distance mass gesture recognition of Yuxin with the information-displaying method of Kisakye in order to offer a practical method to measure the effectiveness of the displayed information (Yuxin, pars. 0001, 0037).
Regarding Claim 2, Kisakye further discloses the touch screen display comprises a fully interactive touch-sensitive screen, wherein the touch screen display is configured to detect user input and communicate the user input to the processor (p. 5: “100 inch touch screen… 4 touchscreen computers;” p. 2: “The interactive touch screen… allow inclusive and group video conferencing;” Examiner further notes the touch screen being “interactive” or being referred to as “[a] touch screen computer” inherently means the display must necessarily be able to detect this input and communicate it to a processor; otherwise, nothing would happen upon user input).
Regarding Claim 5, Kisakye modified by Yuxin further discloses a digital whiteboard portion of the mobile classroom display system equipped to display location specific information (Kisakye, p. 2: “The interactive touch screen… can also be used as a digital white board… delivers customized animations that are relevant and familiar to local communities) supported by a camera to capture long distance mass gesture recognition either through head gestures or hand gestures (Yuxin, fig. 3: camera 12 configured to capture long-distance hand gesture responses from audience/group 14; par. 0039: “a method for visually detecting group gestures in connection with a digital signage system or other content delivery system, to enable group interaction. The system can collect a response from an audience (e.g. a majority response, or multiple simultaneous collaborative gestures) to displayed content and measure the level of audience interest;” par. 0033: “One type of collaborative gesture can be the raising of hands in the audience, and detecting this gesture using gesture recognition technologies. This can include the raise of one hand or two hands to deliver feedback from the audience regarding the displayed content, or a finger pointing gesture performed by multiple people at the same time”),
wherein the head gestures or hand gestures comprise: captured gestures and calculated responses to rate the overall positive or negative understanding and/or reaction of the audience (Yuxin, par. 0037: “feedback regarding the content or effectiveness of the display content. This allows the system to provide a direct indication of the effectiveness or impact of advertising, entertainment, political messages, etc. Again, the feedback can be in the form of a simple yes/no indication, or it can be a more relative measure of effectiveness, such as an impact score as a distribution or percentage (e.g. 14% very positive reaction, 20% positive reaction, 23% negative reaction, 15% very negative, 28% no discernable reaction)”).
Regarding Claim 6, Kisakye further discloses a power supply assembly comprising solar panels coupled to a roof of the amphibious vehicle (p. 5: image depicts solar energy source placed on roof of amphibious vehicle; p. 2: “The Community Tablet is… powered by solar panels”).
Regarding Claim 7, Kisakye further discloses a power supply comprising a battery electrically connected to a solar panel for supplying power to the processor, display and/or location sensor when the solar power is not supplying power (p. 3: “with the solar kits, consisting of a five 250w solar panels, one 3kW hybrid inverter, four 200AH batteries and accessories including circuit breakers, plugs, and terminals, the Community Tablets are being converted to solar power”).
Regarding Claim 8, Kisakye further discloses a trailer frame including a wheel assembly (p. 5: image at lower right depicts a trailer frame with wheel assembly), wherein the trailer frame is removably coupled to a motor vehicle, non-motor vehicle, or boat for transport (p. 2: “The Community Tablet is a container… transported by trailer, which can be attached to anything – from a motor vehicle to a donkey”).
Regarding Claim 9, Kisakye modified by Karafiath further discloses a small self-propelled motor that enables short distance travel from land to water (Karafiath, Fig. 2: the amphibious vehicle transitions from land to water; col. 7, line 58 - col. 8, line 7: “design can be optimized for providing for propulsion and maneuverability. For instance, two marine propellers 30 and two marine rudders 31 can be provided for wheels-up operation, and a marine jet (e.g., water-jet) propulsion unit 40 can be provided for wheels-down operation;” col. 7, lines 31-44: “an amphibious wheeled vehicle that can function as a marine vessel when in the water, and as a wheeled motor vehicle when on land”).
Regarding Claim 10, Kisakye further discloses a network communication module configured to communicate wirelessly using one or more of: a satellite communication channel; and a packet-switched cellular telecommunications network (p. 2: “For connectivity, the tablet is linked to the internet network via the Global System for Mobile Communications (GSM) or by satellite”).
Regarding Claim 11, Kisakye modified by Karafiath further discloses the processor is configured to detect contact points with water (Karafiath, col. 8, lines 35-50: “If the inventive vehicle is initially right-side up (wheels down) on upon situation in water, the inventive vehicle is caused to turn upside down (wheels up)… an onboard computer 76, situated in inventive vehicle 20, can afford autonomous control of inventive vehicle 20;” Examiner notes the ability of the vehicle to automatically convert to its wheels-up mode indicates there is data which indicates whether the system is travelling in water; Examiner additionally notes that because the location data is found via GPS, that data can inherently be used to also determine whether the current location or nearby locations are within mapped bodies of water).
Regarding Claim 12, Kisakye modified by Karafiath further discloses predetermined data that includes at least one of data indicating when the mobile classroom system is immersed or travelling in water (Karafiath, col. 8, lines 35-50: “If the inventive vehicle is initially right-side up (wheels down) on upon situation in water, the inventive vehicle is caused to turn upside down (wheels up)… an onboard computer 76, situated in inventive vehicle 20, can afford autonomous control of inventive vehicle 20;” Examiner notes the ability of the vehicle to automatically convert to its wheels-up mode indicates there is data which indicates whether the system is travelling in water; Examiner additionally notes that because the location data is found via GPS, that data can inherently be used to also determine whether the current location is within a body of water).
Regarding Claim 13, Kisakye modified by Weldemariam further discloses a database that is queried by the processor in order to determine information that is relevant to a particular location (Weldemariam, par. 0052: “the profile of the geospatial context of all locations with respect to each culturally sensitive feature is stored in a geolocation database wherein each cultural feature and associated context is geotagged;” par. 0056: “A contextual educational module may be triggered to provide personalized and interactive educational content to clarify culturally sensitive concepts and terms; the content can be optionally fetched from various information sources, such as databases;” Examiner notes the processor necessarily queries the database in order to retrieve said relevant information).
Claims 3-4 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kisakye in view of Karafiath, Weldemariam, and Yuxin as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Najafirad.
Regarding Claim 3, modified Kisakye does not disclose selecting an individual of interest. However, Najafirad discloses a first selection by a user of at least one individual of interest in the audience (figs. 2A-2B: user may select anywhere between one individual and all individuals in the audience; par. 0031: “The individual extracted faces are then monitored over time to determine facial expressions for processing at step 105”) and a second selection of at least one metric of emotional expression of interest (fig. 4: one or multiple parts of individual’s expression can be analyzed to determine individual’s emotional state out of several emotions; par. 0029: “Facial Action Coding System (FACS) uses physical, visual changes in the face called action units (AUs) to encode facial expressions. FACS encoding can combine basic facial actions to represent complex human facial expressions. Each facial expression can have one or many AUs associated with it. Unique facial AUs are a result of one or more facial muscle movements. Thus, FACS in a high level is encoding subtle facial muscle movements into discrete action units. For example, AUs 1, 4, and 15 together correlate to a ‘sad’ emotion. In other words, the emotion ‘sad’ is encoded using FACS by combining AUs 1-Inner Brow Raiser, 4-Brow Lowered, 15-Lip Corner Depressor”). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the selection of an individual of interest as disclosed by Najafirad with the mass hand gesture detection method of modified Kisakye in order to determine the efficacy of the data display to a particular user—in addition to the aggregated data of the whole crowd (Najafirad, abstract; par. 0031).
Regarding Claim 4, modified Kisakye does not disclose identifying frames or an emotional expression database. However, Najafirad discloses identified frames to extract the emotional expression data (figs. 2B, 3-4: identified frames used to extract emotional expression data; par. 0029: “Facial Action Coding System (FACS) uses physical, visual changes in the face called action units (AUs) to encode facial expressions. FACS encoding can combine basic facial actions to represent complex human facial expressions”) comprising: extracting from the database, emotional expression data associated with at least one selected emotional metric for at least one selected user and/or individual of interest (par. 0008: “facial expression image database… the neural network is provided with actual data and ground truths to learn from;” par. 0033: “The stored data consists of a timestamp of the capture, number of faces extracted, and attributes extracted for each face. This database provides a treasure trove of information and can be used for various data analytic tasks, such as finding the number of users attended, general emotional orientation of the group of users, etc.”). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine these emotional expression extraction steps of Najafirad with the information-displaying and mass hand gesture detection method of modified Kisakye in order to more accurately identify the emotional data (pars. 0008, 0033) and also to determine the efficacy of the data display to a particular user—in addition to the aggregated data of the whole crowd (Najafirad, abstract; par. 0031).
Claim 14 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kisakye in view of Karafiath, Weldemariam, and Yuxin as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Wakefield and McPherson.
Regarding Claim 14, modified Kisakye does not explicitly disclose a loudspeaker. However, Wakefield discloses a loudspeaker (p. 8: loudspeaker to left of trailer), wherein the processor is configured to communicate with the loudspeaker (Examiner notes the processor must necessarily communicate with the loudspeaker to work as intended, i.e. play sound that corresponds to the presentation, which is also in communication with the processor), and wherein the loudspeaker system may be self-stored when the amphibious vehicle is in transit (fig. 8: loudspeaker is of a small size, and is capable of fitting inside the amphibious trailer while in transit for storage). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the loudspeaker of Wakefield with the system of Kisakye in order to provide audio along with the presented video (Wakefield, p. 8).
Kisakye modified by Wakefield does not explicitly disclose the loudspeaker is waterproof. However, McPherson discloses a waterproof loudspeaker ((abstract: “The speaker further includes a waterproof loudspeaker”). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to use a waterproof speaker such as the one disclosed by McPherson as the loudspeaker of Kisakye modified by Wakefield in order to allow the speaker to be used in various weather conditions (McPherson, par. 0018).
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure:
US 2015/0235128 (Mate) teaches a method for displaying information to a group and extracting various context data from both individuals and the group via a camera
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 JULIE DOSHER whose telephone number is (571) 272-4842. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday, 10 a.m. - 6 p.m. ET.
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, Dmitry Suhol can be reached at (571) 272-4430. 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.
/J.G.D./Examiner, Art Unit 3715
/DMITRY SUHOL/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3715
Prosecution Insights