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 .
Preliminary Amendment
The present Office Action is based upon the original patent application filed on 03/04/2024 as modified by the preliminary amendment filed on 03/04/2024. Claims 1-13 are now pending in the present application.
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statements submitted on 03/04/2024 and 10/22/2025 have been considered by the Examiner and made of record in the application file.
CLAIM INTERPRETATION
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(f):
(f) ELEMENT IN CLAIM FOR A COMBINATION.—An element in a claim for a combination may be expressed as a means or step for performing a specified function without the recital of structure, material, or acts in support thereof, and such claim shall be construed to cover the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification and equivalents thereof.
The following is a quotation of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph:
An element in a claim for a combination may be expressed as a means or step for performing a specified function without the recital of structure, material, or acts in support thereof, and such claim shall be construed to cover the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification and equivalents thereof.
The claims in this application are given their broadest reasonable interpretation using the plain meaning of the claim language in light of the specification as it would be understood by one of ordinary skill in the art. The broadest reasonable interpretation of a claim element (also commonly referred to as a claim limitation) is limited by the description in the specification when 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is invoked.
As explained in MPEP 2181, subsection I, claim limitations that meet the following three-prong test will be interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph:
(A) the claim limitation uses the term “means” or “step” or a term used as a substitute for “means” that is a generic placeholder (also called a nonce term or a non-structural term having no specific structural meaning) for performing the claimed function;
(B) the term “means” or “step” or the generic placeholder is modified by functional language, typically, but not always linked by the transition word “for” (e.g., “means for”) or another linking word or phrase, such as "configured to" or "so that"; and
(C) the term “means” or “step” or the generic placeholder is not modified by sufficient structure, material, or acts for performing the claimed function.
Use of the word “means” (or “step”) in a claim with functional language creates a rebuttable presumption that the claim limitation is to be treated in accordance with 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph. The presumption that the claim limitation is interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is rebutted when the claim limitation recites sufficient structure, material, or acts to entirely perform the recited function.
Absence of the word “means” (or “step”) in a claim creates a rebuttable presumption that the claim limitation is not to be treated in accordance with 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph. The presumption that the claim limitation is not interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is rebutted when the claim limitation recites function without reciting sufficient structure, material or acts to entirely perform the recited function.
Claim limitations in this application that use the word “means” (or “step”) are being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, except as otherwise indicated in an Office action. Conversely, claim limitations in this application that do not use the word “means” (or “step”) are not being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, except as otherwise indicated in an Office action.
This application includes one or more claim limitations that do not use the word “means,” but are nonetheless being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, because the claim limitation(s) uses a generic placeholder that is coupled with functional language without reciting sufficient structure to perform the recited function and the generic placeholder is not preceded by a structural modifier. Such claim limitation(s) is/are:
“an acquisition unit that acquires…”, “a calculation unit that calculates…”, “an identification unit that identifies…”, and “a control unit to…”, in claim 1, “the calculation unit calculates…”, in claim 2, “an analysis unit that performs clustering …”, in claim 4, “an analysis unit adjusts …”, in claim 5, and “a service control unit that controls…”, in claims 6, 7, 8, 9, 10 and 11.
Because this/these claim limitation(s) is/are being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, it/they is/are being interpreted to cover the corresponding structure described in the specification as performing the claimed function, and equivalents thereof.
A review of the specification shows that the following appears to be the corresponding structure described in the specification for the 35 U.S.C. 112(f) limitations “an acquisition unit that acquires…”, “a calculation unit that calculates…”, “an identification unit that identifies…”, and “a control unit to…”, in claim 1, “the calculation unit calculates…”, in claim 2, “an analysis unit that performs clustering …”, in claim 4, “an analysis unit adjusts …”, in claim 5, and “a service control unit that controls…”, in claims 6, 7, 8, 9, 10 and 11, (Fig. 4, paragraphs [0050]-[0068]).
If applicant does not intend to have this/these limitation(s) interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, applicant may: (1) amend the claim limitation(s) to avoid it/them being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph (e.g., by reciting sufficient structure to perform the claimed function); or (2) present a sufficient showing that the claim limitation(s) recite(s) sufficient structure to perform the claimed function so as to avoid it/them being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
The following is a quotation of the appropriate paragraphs of 35 U.S.C. 102 that form the basis for the rejections under this section made in this Office action:
A person shall be entitled to a patent unless –
(a)(1) the claimed invention was patented, described in a printed publication, or in public use, on sale or otherwise available to the public before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claims 1-6, 8 and 12-13 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a) (1) as being anticipated by KOBAYASHI (JP 2017/157036 A, hereinafter Kobayashi).
Regarding claim 1, Kobayashi discloses an information processing device (see e.g., “the information processing device (server 15-19)”, Fig. 1, page 4, line 18) comprising:
an acquisition unit that acquires history information on a parking location where a user parked a vehicle (see e.g., “a usage history unit…”, page 2, line 16 and/or “the use history of the commercial facility is associated with the vehicle identification information regarding at least one of a vehicle that has used the parking lot in the past and a passenger of the vehicle”, page 2, lines 13-15 and/or “In accordance with the frequency of past visits to the target parking lot, it is possible to guide the entering vehicle to an appropriate parking position in the parking lot”, page 2, lines 12-13);
a calculation unit that calculates a regional prosperity level that is a prosperity level in a first extraction region extracted according to a distribution state of the parking location, based on a predetermined parameter in the first extraction region (see e.g., “parking area statistics (utilization rate of each parking area used in the past)…”, page 6, line 32 and/or “an empty parking space detection unit for detecting a parking space in an empty state in which the entrance vehicle can be parked from the parking space or the parking space group”, page 3, lines 14-15 and/or “determine a parking space or a parking area to be used by an entering vehicle that has entered the parking lot based on the past use history of commercial facilities, can be guided to a more appropriate parking position”, page 2, lines 17-19 and/or “the parking space or the parking space group used by the vehicle in the past and the use area used by the passenger are the parking positions that should be used by the entering vehicle that has entered the parking lot”, page 2, lines 23-25 and/or “when the temporarily selected parking area is in an empty state, the central server 18 selects the parking area as a recommended parking position…”, page 7, lines 11-13 and/or “entrance vehicle corresponding to “regular” with respect to the visit frequency, “concentrated used stores / intra-store flow lines” and “discrete parking areas” with respect to the usage situation…the recommended parking position is preferentially selected from the parking area including the empty parking space in the entire parking lot 3”, page 8, lines 30-33; Examiner’s note: determining an empty parking space and parking area statistics (utilization rate of each parking area used in the past) corresponds to prosperity level of the parking location); and
an identification unit that identifies a second extraction region that is a sphere of life of the user, based on the first extraction region and the regional prosperity level (see e.g., “The POS system 40 registers the use history of the rider at each store (for example, including store identification information, purchased product information, etc.) and the parking ticket identification information presented at the time of payment by the rider at each store. It can be acquired from a counter or a POS terminal. The usage history and parking ticket identification information acquired by the POS system 40 are transmitted to the central server 18…”, page 6, lines 18-22 and/or “the vehicle number, the gender and age of the passenger, the last (latest) entry and exit times, the number of visits (all Number of visits), visit frequency (number of visits in the last three months), parking area statistics (utilization rate of each parking area used in the past), use store statistics (use rate of stores used in the past), category”, page 6, lines 30-33 and/or “Further, the central server 18 stores the commercial facility use history in association with the vehicle number in the master management table for at least one of the entering vehicle and its passenger. The usage history of the commercial facility includes the past usage history of the parking lot 3 (for example, the usage rate of the parking space or the parking area) and the usage history of each store of the passenger as the facility user (for example, each At least one of store usage rate). The central server 18 can use the use history of the commercial facility when determining the recommended parking position. Thereby, it becomes possible to guide the entering vehicle to a more appropriate parking position in the parking lot 3”, page 9 , lines 1-6; Examiner’s note: purchased product information, gender, age corresponding to sphere of life of the user).
Regarding claim 2, Kobayashi discloses wherein the calculation unit calculates a predetermined parameter per unit area in the first extraction region as the regional prosperity level (see e.g., “parking area statistics (utilization rate of each parking area used in the past)…”, page 6, line 32 and/or “the congestion corresponding to the number of empty parking spaces) Level), page 5, line 30 and/or “the parking lot 3 set to include a set (parking space group) of parking spaces Ps having a size capable of parking a predetermined number (usually one) of vehicles. It is an area. Each level of the parking lot 3 is provided with a plurality of parking areas Pa, and the number of parking spaces constituting each parking area Pa (that is, the size of the parking area) can be changed as appropriate.”, page 4, lines 55-58).
Regarding claim 3, Kobayashi discloses wherein the predetermined parameter is number of predetermined facilities in the first extraction region (see e.g., “the congestion corresponding to the number of empty parking spaces) Level)”, page 5, line 30 and/or “determine a parking space or a parking area to be used by an entering vehicle that has entered the parking lot based on the past use history of commercial facilities”, page 2, lines 18-20), number of public transport services in the first extraction region, or feature information indicating a geographical feature of the first extraction region (see e.g., “in a parking lot 3 for a commercial facility 2 having a plurality of use areas (stores, game halls, etc.).”, page 4, line 16-17 and/or “the parking lot 3 set to include a set (parking space group) of parking spaces Ps having a size capable of parking a predetermined number (usually one) of vehicles. It is an area. Each level of the parking lot 3 is provided with a plurality of parking areas Pa, and the number of parking spaces constituting each parking area Pa (that is, the size of the parking area) can be changed as appropriate.”, page 4, lines 55-58).
Regarding claim 4, Kobayashi discloses an analysis unit that performs clustering on the parking location indicated by the history information, based on the regional prosperity level (see e.g., “determining a parking space or a parking space group to be used by the admission vehicle based on the frequency of arrival And generating parking guidance information for guiding…”, page 3, lines 55-56 and/or “the parking lot 3 set to include a set (parking space group) of parking spaces Ps having a size capable of parking a predetermined number (usually one) of vehicles. It is an area. Each level of the parking lot 3 is provided with a plurality of parking areas Pa, and the number of parking spaces constituting each parking area Pa (that is, the size of the parking area) can be changed as appropriate.”, page 4, lines 55-58), wherein the identification unit controls the first extraction region by performing convex hull processing on a group to which the parking location included in the first extraction region belongs, among groups of the parking location generated as a result of clustering by the analysis unit, and identifies a second extraction region that is an area after being controlled, as the sphere of life of the user (see e.g., “based on the personal characteristics (gender / age) of the passenger, the vehicle is close to a parking area with a high usage rate or a store with a high usage rate of a passenger (or facility user) having the same personal characteristics”, page 7, lines 41-43 and/or “In addition to personal characteristics such as age and gender, it is recommended to manage frequently used parking areas according to whether it is a weekday or holiday, what time zone, and weather such as sunny and rainy. It is good also as a parking position”, page 10, lines 18-20 and/or “determining a parking space or a parking space group to be used by the admission vehicle based on the frequency of arrival And generating parking guidance information for guiding…”, page 3, line 55-56).
Regarding claim 5, Kobayashi discloses wherein the analysis unit adjusts a predetermined parameter used for clustering with the regional prosperity level when performing clustering on the parking location (see e.g., “In addition to personal characteristics such as age and gender, it is recommended to manage frequently used parking areas according to whether it is a weekday or holiday, what time zone, and weather such as sunny and rainy. It is good also as a parking position”, page 10, lines 18-20 and/or “when the temporarily selected parking area is not in an empty state, Next, another high-priority parking area can be temporarily selected as a recommended parking position”, page 7, lines 13-14).
Regarding claim 6, Kobayashi discloses a service control unit that controls a service to be provided to the user, according to the second extraction region identified by the identification unit (see e.g., “based on the personal characteristics (gender / age) of the passenger, the vehicle is close to a parking area with a high usage rate or a store with a high usage rate of a passenger (or facility user) having the same personal characteristics. A recommended parking position is preferentially selected from a parking area (within a predetermined distance range).”, page 7, lines 41-44).
Regarding claim 8, Kobayashi discloses, wherein the service control unit controls such that route guidance according to a destination point set by the user and the second extraction region is provided (see e.g., “more appropriate parking guidance information can be provided to an entering vehicle (passenger) that moves along the vehicle travel route after entering from the vehicle entrance according to the movement status of the entering vehicle”, page 3, lines 25-27 and/or “It is possible to display more appropriate parking guidance information according to the movement situation on the vehicle travel route”, page 3, lines 34-35).
Regarding claim 12, Kobayashi discloses an information processing method performed by an information processing device (see e.g., “the information processing device (server 15-19)”, Fig. 1, page 4, line 18) the information processing method comprising:
acquiring history information on a parking location where a user parked a vehicle (see e.g., “a usage history unit…”, page 2, line 16 and/or “the use history of the commercial facility is associated with the vehicle identification information regarding at least one of a vehicle that has used the parking lot in the past and a passenger of the vehicle”, page 2, lines 13-15 and/or “In accordance with the frequency of past visits to the target parking lot, it is possible to guide the entering vehicle to an appropriate parking position in the parking lot”, page 2, lines 12-13);
calculating a regional prosperity level that is a prosperity level in a first extraction region extracted according to a distribution state of the parking location, based on a predetermined parameter in the first extraction region (see e.g., “parking area statistics (utilization rate of each parking area used in the past)…”, page 6, line 32 and/or “an empty parking space detection unit for detecting a parking space in an empty state in which the entrance vehicle can be parked from the parking space or the parking space group”, page 3, lines 14-15 and/or “determine a parking space or a parking area to be used by an entering vehicle that has entered the parking lot based on the past use history of commercial facilities, can be guided to a more appropriate parking position”, page 2, lines 17-19 and/or “the parking space or the parking space group used by the vehicle in the past and the use area used by the passenger are the parking positions that should be used by the entering vehicle that has entered the parking lot”, page 2, lines 23-25 and/or “when the temporarily selected parking area is in an empty state, the central server 18 selects the parking area as a recommended parking position…”, page 7, lines 11-13 and/or “entrance vehicle corresponding to “regular” with respect to the visit frequency, “concentrated used stores / intra-store flow lines” and “discrete parking areas” with respect to the usage situation…the recommended parking position is preferentially selected from the parking area including the empty parking space in the entire parking lot 3”, page 8, lines 30-33; Examiner’s note: determining an empty parking space and parking area statistics (utilization rate of each parking area used in the past) corresponds to prosperity level of the parking location); and
identifying a second extraction region that is a sphere of life of the user, based on the first extraction region and the regional prosperity level (see e.g., “The POS system 40 registers the use history of the rider at each store (for example, including store identification information, purchased product information, etc.) and the parking ticket identification information presented at the time of payment by the rider at each store. It can be acquired from a counter or a POS terminal. The usage history and parking ticket identification information acquired by the POS system 40 are transmitted to the central server 18…”, page 6, lines 18-22 and/or “the vehicle number, the gender and age of the passenger, the last (latest) entry and exit times, the number of visits (all Number of visits), visit frequency (number of visits in the last three months), parking area statistics (utilization rate of each parking area used in the past), use store statistics (use rate of stores used in the past), category”, page 6, lines 30-33 and/or “Further, the central server 18 stores the commercial facility use history in association with the vehicle number in the master management table for at least one of the entering vehicle and its passenger. The usage history of the commercial facility includes the past usage history of the parking lot 3 (for example, the usage rate of the parking space or the parking area) and the usage history of each store of the passenger as the facility user (for example, each At least one of store usage rate). The central server 18 can use the use history of the commercial facility when determining the recommended parking position. Thereby, it becomes possible to guide the entering vehicle to a more appropriate parking position in the parking lot 3”, page 9 , lines 1-6; Examiner’s note: purchased product information, gender, age corresponding to sphere of life of the user).
Regarding claim 13, Kobayashi discloses non-transitory computer- readable storage medium storing an information processing program that causes a computer to execute a process (see e.g., “the information processing device (server 15-19)”, Fig. 1, page 4, line 18 and/or “The central server 18 is a server device having known hardware, and is a processor 51 that centrally executes parking guidance processing based on a predetermined control program, and a volatile memory that functions as a work area of the processor 51 and the like. A RAM (Random Access Memory) 52”, Fig. 9, page 9, lines 27-29) including:
acquiring history information on a parking location where a user parked a vehicle (see e.g., “a usage history unit…”, page 2, line 16 and/or “the use history of the commercial facility is associated with the vehicle identification information regarding at least one of a vehicle that has used the parking lot in the past and a passenger of the vehicle”, page 2, lines 13-15 and/or “In accordance with the frequency of past visits to the target parking lot, it is possible to guide the entering vehicle to an appropriate parking position in the parking lot”, page 2, lines 12-13);
calculating a regional prosperity level that is a prosperity level in a first extraction region extracted according to a distribution state of the parking location, based on a predetermined parameter in the first extraction region (see e.g., “parking area statistics (utilization rate of each parking area used in the past)…”, page 6, line 32 and/or “an empty parking space detection unit for detecting a parking space in an empty state in which the entrance vehicle can be parked from the parking space or the parking space group”, page 3, lines 14-15 and/or “determine a parking space or a parking area to be used by an entering vehicle that has entered the parking lot based on the past use history of commercial facilities, can be guided to a more appropriate parking position”, page 2, lines 17-19 and/or “the parking space or the parking space group used by the vehicle in the past and the use area used by the passenger are the parking positions that should be used by the entering vehicle that has entered the parking lot”, page 2, lines 23-25 and/or “when the temporarily selected parking area is in an empty state, the central server 18 selects the parking area as a recommended parking position…”, page 7, lines 11-13 and/or “entrance vehicle corresponding to “regular” with respect to the visit frequency, “concentrated used stores / intra-store flow lines” and “discrete parking areas” with respect to the usage situation…the recommended parking position is preferentially selected from the parking area including the empty parking space in the entire parking lot 3”, page 8, lines 30-33; Examiner’s note: determining an empty parking space and parking area statistics (utilization rate of each parking area used in the past) corresponds to prosperity level of the parking location); and
identifying a second extraction region that is a sphere of life of the user, based on the first extraction region and the regional prosperity level (see e.g., “The POS system 40 registers the use history of the rider at each store (for example, including store identification information, purchased product information, etc.) and the parking ticket identification information presented at the time of payment by the rider at each store. It can be acquired from a counter or a POS terminal. The usage history and parking ticket identification information acquired by the POS system 40 are transmitted to the central server 18…”, page 6, lines 18-22 and/or “the vehicle number, the gender and age of the passenger, the last (latest) entry and exit times, the number of visits (all Number of visits), visit frequency (number of visits in the last three months), parking area statistics (utilization rate of each parking area used in the past), use store statistics (use rate of stores used in the past), category”, page 6, lines 30-33 and/or “Further, the central server 18 stores the commercial facility use history in association with the vehicle number in the master management table for at least one of the entering vehicle and its passenger. The usage history of the commercial facility includes the past usage history of the parking lot 3 (for example, the usage rate of the parking space or the parking area) and the usage history of each store of the passenger as the facility user (for example, each At least one of store usage rate). The central server 18 can use the use history of the commercial facility when determining the recommended parking position. Thereby, it becomes possible to guide the entering vehicle to a more appropriate parking position in the parking lot 3”, page 9 , lines 1-6; Examiner’s note: purchased product information, gender, age corresponding to sphere of life of the user).
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 103(a) which forms the basis for all obviousness rejections set forth in this Office action:
(a) A patent may not be obtained though the invention is not identically disclosed or described as set forth in section 102 of this title, if the differences between the subject matter sought to be patented and the prior art are such that the subject matter as a whole would have been obvious at the time the invention was made to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which said subject matter pertains. Patentability shall not be negatived by the manner in which the invention was made.
The factual inquiries set forth in Graham v. John Deere Co., 383 U.S. 1, 148 USPQ 459 (1966), that are applied 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.
This application currently names joint inventors. In considering patentability of the claims the examiner presumes that the subject matter of the various claims was commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the claimed invention(s) absent any evidence to the contrary. Applicant is advised of the obligation under 37 CFR 1.56 to point out the inventor and effective filing dates of each claim that was not commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the later invention in order for the examiner to consider the applicability of 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(C) for any potential 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) prior art against the later invention.
Claims 7, 9 and 11 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103(a) as being unpatentable over Kobayashi, in view of, NOMURA et al. (US 2019/0075426 Al, hereinafter Nomura).
Regarding Claim 7, Kobayashi fails to explicitly disclose wherein the service control unit controls such that an advertising content related to a predetermined facility in the second extraction region is provided to the user.
In the same field of endeavor, Nomura discloses wherein the service control unit controls such that an advertising content related to a predetermined facility in the second extraction region is provided to the user (see e.g., “determine that one of the users of the mobile terminals who viewed the advertisement and are specified by the advertisement viewing user specifying unit visited the physical shop, when determining that the vehicle boarded by the one user was parked within a range of a parking space of the physical shop,”, [0029] and/or “the case where the vehicle boarded by the user of the mobile terminal who viewed the advertisement was parked in a parking space of the physical shop”, [0030] and/or “the users of the mobile terminals 4 who actually visited a physical shop where the goods or services as a subject of an advertisement are sold or provided, after viewing the advertisement, from among the users of the mobile terminals 4 specified by the advertisement viewing user specifying unit 626”, [0209]).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine teachings of Kobayashi with Nomura, in order to deliver advertising information, recommendations, or the like, to the mobile terminal of user according to the preference or taste of the user, or a destination for which the vehicle is presumed to be heading (please see Nomura, para. [0004]).
Regarding Claim 9, Kobayashi and Nomura combined discloses wherein the service control unit controls a route provided as route guidance to a destination point set by the user, according to whether the destination point is in the second extraction region (see Nomura e.g., “These kinds of information may include information (guidance destination information) concerning a guidance destination (such as a physical shop at which the goods, etc. as a subject of the advertisement are sold) to which the user is led by the advertisement, characteristic information (user characteristic target information) of target users as a target of the advertisement, information (location target information) concerning the location (e.g., a POI at which many target users gather, area close to the guidance destination”, [0202]).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine teachings of Kobayashi with Nomura, in order to deliver advertising information, recommendations, or the like, to the mobile terminal of user according to the preference or taste of the user, or a destination for which the vehicle is presumed to be heading (please see Nomura, para. [0004]).
Regarding Claim 11, Kobayashi and Nomura combined discloses wherein when a search request is made by the user, the service control unit controls a search result corresponding to the search request, according to whether a location where the search request is made is in the sphere of life (see Nomura e.g., “the boarded vehicle picking unit 524 specifically determines whether there is any trip information of the vehicle 3 which matches the time-series data group of the terminal movement information. For example, the boarded vehicle picking unit 524 searches for trip information of the vehicle 3 which matches the time-series data group of the terminal movement information of the mobile terminal 4, based on whether the stay history condition and the synchronous movement condition are both satisfied…”, [0140])
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine teachings of Kobayashi with Nomura, in order to deliver advertising information, recommendations, or the like, to the mobile terminal of user according to the preference or taste of the user, or a destination for which the vehicle is presumed to be heading (please see Nomura, para. [0004]).
Claim 10 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103(a) as being unpatentable over Kobayashi, in view of, NOMURA, and further in view of Mukherjee et al. (US 2016/0092469 Al, hereinafter Mukherjee).
Regarding Claim 10, Kobayashi and Nomura fails to explicitly disclose wherein the service control unit controls such that notification is made according to whether the predetermined danger area is included in the second extraction region, to a notification control system that notifies presence of a predetermined danger area in advance in route guidance.
In the same field of endeavor, Mukherjee discloses wherein the service control unit controls such that notification is made according to whether the predetermined danger area is included in the second extraction region, to a notification control system that notifies presence of a predetermined danger area in advance in route guidance (see e.g., “system may be used to warn a driver when he is entering an area where crime is high, or parking in a lot where burglary from and/or theft of vehicles are common.”, [0031] and/or “Demographic data may also be used, for example, to calculate the value of an individual as a target. For example, in an area where kidnapping is a danger, a wealthy person, or relative of a wealthy person, may have a high monetary value and therefore be a more lucrative target for a kidnapping”, 0150]).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine teachings of Kobayashi and Nomura with Mukherjee, in order to provide a context-aware reputation of a place, such as in relation to a human user...The device may communicate with a server to receive globalized safety intelligence. When the user enters a zone. (please see Mukherjee, para. [0014]).
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to FARID SEYEDVOSOGHI whose telephone number is (571)272-9679. The examiner can normally be reached Mon - Fri 8:00-5:00.
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, Anthony S. Addy can be reached on 5712727795. 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.
/FARID SEYEDVOSOGHI/ Examiner, Art Unit 2645