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 . This office action is in response to an application filed on 3/13/24. Claims 1-5 and 7-8 are pending.
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement submitted on 03/13/2024 & 03/04/2025 & 09/22/2025 have been considered by the Examiner and made of record in the application.
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 1-5 and 7-8 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 101 because the claimed invention is directed to an abstract idea without significantly more.
101 Analysis – Step 1
Claims 1-5 are directed to a voice output device (i.e., a machine). Therefore, claims 1-6 are within at least one of the four statutory categories.
Claim 7 is directed to a voice output method (i.e. a method ). Therefore, claim 7 is within at least one of the four statutory categories.
Claim 9 is directed toward a non-transitory computer readable program. (i.e. a manufacture ). Therefore, claim 7 is within at least one of the four statutory categories.
101 Analysis – Step 2A, Prong I
Regarding Prong I of the Step 2A analysis in the 2019 PEG, the claims are to be analyzed
to determine whether they recite subject matter that falls within one of the follow groups of abstract ideas: a) mathematical concepts, b) certain methods of organizing human activity,
and/or c) mental processes.
Independent claim 1 includes limitations that recite an abstract idea (mental process)
and will be used as a representative claim for the remainder of the 101 rejections. Claims 1, 7, and 8 recite:
a memory configured to store instructions; and a processor configured to execute the instructions to acquire facility information including multiple information with different detail levels from basic information to detailed information; determine whether or not the voice output device or a facility subject to information provision is within a living area of a user; and output the facility information including the basic information as a first output information when the voice output device or the facility subject to the information provision is outside the living area of the user, and output the facility information that does not include the basic information as the first output information when the voice output device or the facility subject to the information provision is within the living area of the user, wherein the facility information including the basic information and the facility information that does not include the basic information include the multiple information with different detail levels.
The examiner submits that the foregoing bolded limitation(s) constitute a “mental process” because under its broadest reasonable interpretation, the claim covers performance of the limitation in the human mind. For example, “…determine whether or not the voice output device or a facility subject to information provision is within a living area of a user;” in the context of this claim encompasses a person determining whether or not the device is within a user’s living area, and essentially recognizing a distance from a house in which the user stays, which can be done with their own mental ability. Accordingly, the claim recites at least one abstract idea.
101 Analysis – Step 2A, Prong II
Regarding Prong II of the Step 2A analysis in the 2019 PEG, the claims are to be analyzed to determine whether the claim, as a whole, integrates the abstract into a practical application. As noted in the 2019 PEG, it must be determined whether any additional elements in the claim beyond the abstract idea integrate the exception into a practical application in a manner that imposes a meaningful limit on the judicial exception. The courts have indicated that additional elements merely using a computer to implement an abstract idea, adding insignificant extra solution activity, or generally linking use of a judicial exception to a particular technological environment or field of use do not integrate a judicial exception into a “practical application.”
In the present case, the additional limitations beyond the above-noted abstract idea are as follows (where the underlined portions are the “additional limitations” while the bolded portions continue to represent the “abstract idea”):
a memory configured to store instructions; and a processor configured to execute the instructions to acquire facility information including multiple information with different detail levels from basic information to detailed information; determine whether or not the voice output device or a facility subject to information provision is within a living area of a user; and output the facility information including the basic information as a first output information when the voice output device or the facility subject to the information provision is outside the living area of the user, and output the facility information that does not include the basic information as the first output information when the voice output device or the facility subject to the information provision is within the living area of the user, wherein the facility information including the basic information and the facility information that does not include the basic information include the multiple information with different detail levels.
For the following reason(s), the examiner submits that the above identified additional limitations do not integrate the above-noted abstract idea into a practical application.
Regarding the additional limitations of, “to acquire facility information including multiple information with different detail levels from basic information to detailed information”, and “and output the facility information including the basic information as a first output information when the voice output device or the facility subject to the information provision is outside the living area of the user, and output the facility information that does not include the basic information as the first output information when the voice output device or the facility subject to the information provision is within the living area of the user, wherein the facility information including the basic information and the facility information that does not include the basic information include the multiple information with different detail levels.” the examiner submits that these limitations are insignificant extra-solution activities that merely use a computer (‘device’) to perform the mental process. Each of the above cited limitations are simply further defining the mental process and explaining at what point is data collected or displaying/outputting data to the user for the determination steps and are recited at a high level of generality (i.e., as a general means of gathering position data for use in the outputting step), and amounts to mere data gathering, which is a form of insignificant extra-solution activity. Additionally the limitations of “a memory configured to store instructions; and a processor configured to” the examiner submits that these limitations are insignificant extra-solution activities that merely use a computer (‘device’) to perform the mental process. As the memory and processor used are generic computer components and the applicant does not make an attempt to improve the functioning of a computer with specialized components. The system, is recited at a high level of generality and merely automates outputting of POI data to the user.
Thus, taken alone, the additional elements do not integrate the abstract idea into a practical application. Further, looking at the additional limitation(s) as an ordered combination or as a whole, the limitation(s) add nothing that is not already present when looking at the elements taken individually. For instance, there is no indication that the additional elements, when considered as a whole, reflect an improvement in the functioning of a computer or an improvement to another technology or technical field, apply or use the above-noted judicial exception to effect a particular treatment or prophylaxis for a disease or medical condition, implement/use the above-noted judicial exception with a particular machine or manufacture that is integral to the claim, effect a transformation or reduction of a particular article to a different state or thing, or apply or use the judicial exception in some other meaningful way beyond
generally linking the use of the judicial exception to a particular technological environment, such that the claim as a whole is not more than a drafting effort designed to monopolize the exception (MPEP § 2106.05). Accordingly, the additional limitation(s) do/does not integrate the abstract idea into a practical application because it does not impose any meaningful limits on practicing the abstract idea.
101 Analysis – Step 2B
Regarding Step 2B of the 2019 PEG, representative independent claim 1 does not include additional elements (considered both individually and as an ordered combination) that are sufficient to amount to significantly more than the judicial exception for the same reasons to those discussed above with respect to determining that the claim does not integrate the abstract idea into a practical application. As discussed above, the additional limitations of “acquire facility information”, and “output the facility information” the examiner submits that these limitations are insignificant extra-solution activities.
Further, a conclusion that an additional element is insignificant extra-solution activity in
Step 2A should be re-evaluated in Step 2B to determine if they are more than what is well understood,
routine, conventional activity in the field. The additional limitations of “acquire facility information”, and “output the facility information” are well-understood, routine, and conventional activities because the specification recites that the components are all conventional computer components mounted on the vehicle, and the specification does not provide any indication that the system is anything other than what a conventional computer does within a vehicle. MPEP 2106.05(d)(II), and the cases cited therein, including Intellectual Ventures I, LLC v. Symantec Corp., 838 F.3d 1307, 1321 (Fed. Cir. 2016), TLI Communications LLC v. AV Auto. LLC, 823 F.3d 607, 610 (Fed. Cir. 2016), and OIP Techs., Inc., v. Amazon.com, Inc., 788 F.3d 1359, 1363 (Fed. Cir. 2015), indicate that mere collection or receipt of data over a network is a well‐understood, routine, and conventional function when it is claimed in a merely generic manner.
Dependent claims 2-5, do not recite any further limitations that cause the claim(s) to be patent eligible. Rather, the limitations of dependent claims are directed toward additional
aspects of the judicial exception and/or well-understood, routine and conventional additional
elements that do not integrate the judicial exception into a practical application. Claim 2 mentions “…detect a user's response to the outputted facility information…”, which would fail under Step 2A Prong one as a mental process as the device is just further configured to detect a human response to the output information, which is something a human mind is capable of doing with pen and paper which would not make claim 2 to be considered patent eligible subject matter. Claim 3 and 4 mentions “… outputs the detailed information…”, which would fail under Step 2A Prong 2 as a mere receipt and outputting of data that has been collected thus would not make claims 3 and 4 to be considered patent eligible subject matter. Claim 5 mentions “output means does not output the detailed information when the user's response is not detected” which would fail under Step 2A Prong one as a mental process as the device is just further configured to detect a human response to the output information, which is something a human mind is capable of doing with pen and paper which would not make claim 5 to be considered patent eligible subject matter.
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.
Claim 8 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Mizuno et al. (US 2015/0300836 Al).
Regarding Claim 8 Mizuno teaches A non-transitory computer-readable program causing a computer to execute processing of: (Pg. 15 – [0024] – “According to an example of the present disclosure, a non-transitory storage medium is provided as containing instructions of a program product”) acquiring facility information including multiple information with different detail levels from basic information to detailed information; (Pg. 14 – [0017] – “This configuration can provide a user with appropriate information in accordance with whether or not a facility is in a living area. That is, since a facility in the living area is seen from a road where the user frequently travels, the use may know the outline of the facility even though the user has never visited the facility. Outputting advertisement data of such a facility in the living area enables to have the user know more information. By contrast, the user does not know a facility itself in a non-living area. It is thus desirable to have the user know the outline of the facility with facility outline data. When the user is then interested in the facility, more detailed information may be provided in accordance with the user's instruction.” (equates to acquiring facility information including multiple information with different detail levels from basic information to detailed information as the quote shows the device able to output varying levels of information based on the request by the user and thus the facility information acquired is done so on varying levels based on the user’s familiarity with the facility as seen from the quote.)) determining whether or not the voice output device or a facility subject to information provision is within a living area of a user; (Pg. 14 – [0017] – “That is, since a facility in the living area is seen from a road where the user frequently travels, the use may know the outline of the facility even though the user has never visited the facility.” (equates to determining whether or not the voice output device or a facility subject to information provision is within a living area of a user; as the quote shows the facility being determined to be within the area of the user.)) and outputting the facility information including the basic information as a first output information when the voice output device or the facility subject to the information provision is outside the living area of the user, (Pg. 14 – [0017] – “By contrast, the user does not know a facility itself in a non-living area. It is thus desirable to have the user know the outline of the facility with facility outline data. When the user is then interested in the facility, more detailed information may be provided in accordance with the user's instruction.” (equates to and outputting the facility information including the basic information as a first output information when the voice output device or the facility subject to the information provision is outside the living area of the user, as the quote shows a means for provision based on the interest of the user wherein the more detailed information is provided to the user based on the facility being outside the living are of the user.)) and outputting the facility information that does not include the basic information as a first output information when the voice output device or the facility subject to the information provision is within the living area of the user. (Pg. 14 -[0016] – “In the destination proposal system according to the example, the output part may output advertisement data regarding a facility in the living area, while outputting outline data regarding a facility in the non-living area” & See Also Pg. 14 – [0017] – “When the user is then interested in the facility, more detailed information may be provided in accordance with the user's instruction” (equates to and outputting the facility information that does not include the basic information as a first output information when the voice output device or the facility subject to the information provision is within the living area of the user as the first quote shows the level of difference between the information provided within the facility based on knowing the facility to be within a living area of the user and the second quote showing the provision of data done based on a user request.)) wherein the facility information including the basic information and the facility information that does not include the basic information include the multiple information with different detail levels. (Pg. 14 – [0017] – “This configuration can provide a user with appropriate information in accordance with whether or not a facility is in a living area. That is, since a facility in the living area is seen from a road where the user frequently travels, the use may know the outline of the facility even though the user has never visited the facility. Outputting advertisement data of such a facility in the living area enables to have the user know more information. By contrast, the user does not know a facility itself in a non-living area. It is thus desirable to have the user know the outline of the facility with facility outline data. When the user is then interested in the facility, more detailed information may be provided in accordance with the user's instruction.” (equates to wherein the facility information including the basic information and the facility information that does not include the basic information include the multiple information with different detail levels as the end of the quote shows an outline being provided and based on the interest in the user “more detailed” and thus different levels of information are being provided. ))
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, 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 7 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Mizuno et al. (US 2015/0300836 Al) in view of Sun et al. (US 2018/0322206 Al).
Regarding Claim 1 Mizuno teaches comprising: a memory configured to store instructions; and a processor configured to execute the instructions to: (Pg. 17 – [0076] – “FIGS. 8 and 9 are flowcharts showing the operation of the destination proposal system 10 with the CPU 50 in the control circuit 20. FIG. 8 shows a flowchart showing the operation to generate living area data and user model based on the travel history data.” & See Also Pg. 17 – [0074] – “FIG. 7 illustrates a hardware configuration of the destination proposal system 10 according to the present embodiment. The destination proposal system 10 includes a CPU 50, a memory 52, a ROM 54, an external storage part 58, a keypad 60, a touch panel 62”) acquire facility information including multiple information with different detail levels from basic information to detailed information; (Pg. 14 – [0017] – “This configuration can provide a user with appropriate information in accordance with whether or not a facility is in a living area. That is, since a facility in the living area is seen from a road where the user frequently travels, the use may know the outline of the facility even though the user has never visited the facility. Outputting advertisement data of such a facility in the living area enables to have the user know more information. By contrast, the user does not know a facility itself in a non-living area. It is thus desirable to have the user know the outline of the facility with facility outline data. When the user is then interested in the facility, more detailed information may be provided in accordance with the user's instruction.” (equates to acquire facility information including multiple information with different detail levels from basic information to detailed information; as the quote shows the device able to output varying levels of information based on the request by the user and thus the facility information acquired is done so on varying levels based on the user’s familiarity with the facility as seen from the quote.)) determine whether or not the voice output device or a facility subject to information provision is within a living area of a user; (Pg. 14 – [0017] – “That is, since a facility in the living area is seen from a road where the user frequently travels, the use may know the outline of the facility even though the user has never visited the facility.” (equates to determine whether or not the voice output device or a facility subject to information provision is within a living area of a user as the quote shows the facility being determined to be within the area of the user.)) and output the facility information including the basic information when the voice output device or the facility subject to the information provision is outside the living area of the user, (Pg. 14 – [0017] – “By contrast, the user does not know a facility itself in a non-living area. It is thus desirable to have the user know the outline of the facility with facility outline data. When the user is then interested in the facility, more detailed information may be provided in accordance with the user's instruction.” (equates to output the facility information including the basic information when the voice output device or the facility subject to the information provision is outside the living area of the user as the quote shows a means for provision based on the interest of the user wherein the more detailed information is provided to the user based on the facility being outside the living are of the user.)) and output the facility information that does not include the basic information when the voice output device or the facility subject to the information provision is within the living area of the user. (Pg. 14 -[0016] – “In the destination proposal system according to the example, the output part may output advertisement data regarding a facility in the living area, while outputting outline data regarding a facility in the non-living area” & See Also Pg. 14 – [0017] – “When the user is then interested in the facility, more detailed information may be provided in accordance with the user's instruction” (equates to output the facility information that does not include the basic information when the voice output device or the facility subject to the information provision is within the living area of the user as the first quote shows the level of difference between the information provided within the facility based on knowing the facility to be within a living area of the user and the second quote showing the provision of data done based on a user request.)) wherein the facility information including the basic information and the facility information that does not include the basic information include the multiple information with different detail levels. (Pg. 14 – [0017] – “This configuration can provide a user with appropriate information in accordance with whether or not a facility is in a living area. That is, since a facility in the living area is seen from a road where the user frequently travels, the use may know the outline of the facility even though the user has never visited the facility. Outputting advertisement data of such a facility in the living area enables to have the user know more information. By contrast, the user does not know a facility itself in a non-living area. It is thus desirable to have the user know the outline of the facility with facility outline data. When the user is then interested in the facility, more detailed information may be provided in accordance with the user's instruction.” (equates to wherein the facility information including the basic information and the facility information that does not include the basic information include the multiple information with different detail levels as the end of the quote shows an outline being provided and based on the interest in the user “more detailed” and thus different levels of information are being provided. ))
Yet Mizuno fails to teach A voice output device.
Sun teaches A voice output device (Pg. 19 – [0100] – “In yet another example, mobile computing device 700 incorporates input and/or output ports, such as an audio input ( e.g., a microphone jack), an audio output”) It would have been an advantageous addition to the device disclosed by Mizuno to include A voice output device as this limitation allows for a simple way of outputting information to a user in a hands free manor allowing for the user to continue with their task while easily understanding the various information being output to them.
Therefore it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to include A voice output device as this allows for a safe driving experience to be had by the user while understanding the various facilities they may be interested in while leaving or being within their living area.
Regarding Claim 2 Mizuno-Sun teaches (Mizuno discloses the following limitations:) The voice output device according to claim 1, further configured to detect a user's response to the first output information, (Pg. 14 -[0016] – “In the destination proposal system according to the example, the output part may output advertisement data regarding a facility in the living area, while outputting outline data regarding a facility in the non-living area” & See Also Pg. 14 – [0017] – “When the user is then interested in the facility, more detailed information may be provided in accordance with the user's instruction” (equates further configured to detect a user's response to the first output information, as the last quote shows how the user interest is detected and content is displayed for them based on the interest level detected.)) and wherein the processor outputs more detailed information than the first output information as a second output information from among the multiple information with different detail levels based on the user's response. (Pg. 14 – [0017] – “This configuration can provide a user with appropriate information in accordance with whether or not a facility is in a living area. That is, since a facility in the living area is seen from a road where the user frequently travels, the use may know the outline of the facility even though the user has never visited the facility. Outputting advertisement data of such a facility in the living area enables to have the user know more information. By contrast, the user does not know a facility itself in a non-living area. It is thus desirable to have the user know the outline of the facility with facility outline data. When the user is then interested in the facility, more detailed information may be provided in accordance with the user's instruction.” (equates to and wherein the processor outputs more detailed information than the first output information as a second output information from among the multiple information with different detail levels based on the user's response as the quote shows a plurality of detail levels that get provided to the user based on the living area and when the detected interest is peaked as detected by the user then more detailed output is provided thus showing multiple outputs of information based on the interest.))
Regarding Claim 3 Mizuno-Sun teaches The voice output device according to claim 2, as previously mapped above.
Yet Mizuno fails to specifically teach wherein the processor predicts a degree of user's interest based on the user's response, and outputs the second output information based on the predicted degree of user's interest.
Sun teaches wherein the processor predicts a degree of user's interest based on the user's response, (Pg. 12 – [0022] – “In an example aspect, the recommendation system is operable to dynamically and continuously detect the user's interest or lack thereof in a category or a topic. For example, the recommendation system starts to demote a category when no activity is detected for that interest/topic in that category for a predetermined period of time” (equates to wherein the processor predicts a degree of user's interest based on the user's response, as the recommendation system demotes content based on user response and a prediction about the user interest is made based on the user response provided or not provided. )) and outputs the second output information based on the predicted degree of user's interest. (Pg. 12 – [0018] – “The recommendation system then generates recommendations personalized to user-provided signals and specific to the category, as well as, a top level recommendation stream/feed that aggregates content from all the categories.” & See Also Pg. 12 – [0022] – “In an example aspect, the recommendation system is operable to dynamically and continuously detect the user's interest or lack thereof in a category or a topic. For example, the recommendation system starts to demote a category when no activity is detected for that interest/topic in that category for a predetermined period of time” (equates to and outputs the second output information based on the predicted degree of user's interest as the second quote shows the response of the user being a detection of activity with the given recommendations, and the second quote showing the same recommendation system based the recommendation on the user’s degree of interest.)) It would have been an advantageous addition to the system disclosed by Mizuno to include wherein the processor predicts a degree of user's interest based on the user's response, and outputs the second output information based on the predicted degree of user's interest as these limitations tailor the output of the recommendation device to be based on a varying and predicted degree of interest and thus allow for a spectrum of interest to be taken into account for the facility recommendation.
Therefore it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to include herein wherein the processor predicts a degree of user's interest based on the user's response, and outputs the second output information based on the predicted degree of user's interest as these limitations allows for a degree and range of interest to be considered when recommending content to the user rather only a general “interested” state of the user being taken into consideration.
Regarding Claim 4 Mizuno-Sun teaches The voice output device according to claim 3, as previously mapped above.
Yet Mizuno fails to specifically teach wherein the processor outputs the second output information when it is predicted that the degree of user's interest is high.
Sun teaches wherein the processor outputs the second output information when it is predicted that the degree of user's interest is high.. (Pg. 12 – [0018] – “The recommendation system then generates recommendations personalized to user-provided signals and specific to the category, as well as, a top level recommendation stream/feed that aggregates content from all the categories.” & See Also Pg. 12 – [0022] – “In an example aspect, the recommendation system is operable to dynamically and continuously detect the user's interest or lack thereof in a category or a topic. For example, the recommendation system starts to demote a category when no activity is detected for that interest/topic in that category for a predetermined period of time” (equates to wherein the processor outputs the second output information when it is predicted that the degree of user's interest is high as the quotes provided show a degree of interest being taken into consideration based on activity of the user and the recommendation system being provided to recommend content based on the personalized interest levels of the user n question.)) It would have been an advantageous addition to the system disclosed by Mizuno to include wherein the processor outputs the second output information when it is predicted that the degree of user's interest is high as this limitation allows for a spectrum of interest to be taken into account by the device and output information accordingly.
Therefore it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to include wherein the processor outputs the second output information when it is predicted that the degree of user's interest is high as these limitations allows for a degree and range of interest to be considered when recommending content to the user rather only a general “interested” state of the user being taken into consideration.
Regarding Claim 5 Mizuno-Sun teaches (Mizuno discloses the following limitations:) The voice output device according to any one of claim 2, wherein the processor does not output information more detailed than the first output information when the user's response is not detected. (Pg. 14 – [0017] – “This configuration can provide a user with appropriate information in accordance with whether or not a facility is in a living area. That is, since a facility in the living area is seen from a road where the user frequently travels, the use may know the outline of the facility even though the user has never visited the facility. Outputting advertisement data of such a facility in the living area enables to have the user know more information. By contrast, the user does not know a facility itself in a non-living area. It is thus desirable to have the user know the outline of the facility with facility outline data. When the user is then interested in the facility, more detailed information may be provided in accordance with the user's instruction.” (equates to wherein the processor does not output information more detailed than the first output information when the user's response is not detected as the quote shows detailed information only being sent when the user is detected to be interested and thus by contrast when the user is not detected as interested the user would not be sent said information..))
Regarding Claim 7 Mizuno teaches comprising: acquiring facility information including multiple information with different detail levels from basic information to detailed information; (Pg. 14 – [0017] – “This configuration can provide a user with appropriate information in accordance with whether or not a facility is in a living area. That is, since a facility in the living area is seen from a road where the user frequently travels, the use may know the outline of the facility even though the user has never visited the facility. Outputting advertisement data of such a facility in the living area enables to have the user know more information. By contrast, the user does not know a facility itself in a non-living area. It is thus desirable to have the user know the outline of the facility with facility outline data. When the user is then interested in the facility, more detailed information may be provided in accordance with the user's instruction.” (equates to comprising: acquiring facility information including multiple information with different detail levels from basic information to detailed information; as the quote shows the device able to output varying levels of information based on the request by the user and thus the facility information acquired is done so on varying levels based on the user’s familiarity with the facility as seen from the quote.)) determining whether or not the voice output device or a facility subject to information provision is within a living area of a user; (Pg. 14 – [0017] – “That is, since a facility in the living area is seen from a road where the user frequently travels, the use may know the outline of the facility even though the user has never visited the facility.” (equates to determining whether or not the voice output device or a facility subject to information provision is within a living area of a user; as the quote shows the facility being determined to be within the area of the user.)) and outputting the facility information including the basic information as the first output information when the voice output device or the facility subject to the information provision is outside the living area of the user, (Pg. 14 – [0017] – “By contrast, the user does not know a facility itself in a non-living area. It is thus desirable to have the user know the outline of the facility with facility outline data. When the user is then interested in the facility, more detailed information may be provided in accordance with the user's instruction.” (equates to and outputting the facility information including the basic information when the voice output device or the facility subject to the information provision is outside the living area of the user, as the quote shows a means for provision based on the interest of the user wherein the more detailed information is provided to the user based on the facility being outside the living are of the user.)) and outputting the facility information that does not include the basic information as the first output information when the voice output device or the facility subject to the information provision is within the living area of the user. (Pg. 14 -[0016] – “In the destination proposal system according to the example, the output part may output advertisement data regarding a facility in the living area, while outputting outline data regarding a facility in the non-living area” & See Also Pg. 14 – [0017] – “When the user is then interested in the facility, more detailed information may be provided in accordance with the user's instruction” (equates to and outputting the facility information that does not include the basic information when the voice output device or the facility subject to the information provision is within the living area of the user as the first quote shows the level of difference between the information provided within the facility based on knowing the facility to be within a living area of the user and the second quote showing the provision of data done based on a user request.)) wherein the facility information including the basic information and the facility information that does not include the basic information include the multiple information with different detail levels. (Pg. 14 – [0017] – “This configuration can provide a user with appropriate information in accordance with whether or not a facility is in a living area. That is, since a facility in the living area is seen from a road where the user frequently travels, the use may know the outline of the facility even though the user has never visited the facility. Outputting advertisement data of such a facility in the living area enables to have the user know more information. By contrast, the user does not know a facility itself in a non-living area. It is thus desirable to have the user know the outline of the facility with facility outline data. When the user is then interested in the facility, more detailed information may be provided in accordance with the user's instruction.” (equates to wherein the facility information including the basic information and the facility information that does not include the basic information include the multiple information with different detail levels as the end of the quote shows an outline being provided and based on the interest in the user “more detailed” and thus different levels of information are being provided. ))
Yet Mizuno fails to teach A voice output method executed by a voice output device.
Sun teaches A voice output method executed by a voice output device. (Pg. 1 – Abstract – “Methods and systems for providing targeted recommendations are provided.” & See Also Pg. 19 – [0100] – “In yet another example, mobile computing device 700 incorporates input and/or output ports, such as an audio input ( e.g., a microphone jack), an audio output”) It would have been an advantageous addition to the method disclosed by Mizuno to include A voice output method executed by a voice output device as this limitation allows for a simple way of outputting information to a user in a hands free manor allowing for the user to continue with their task while easily understanding the various information being output to them.
Therefore it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to include A voice output method executed by a voice output device as this allows for a safe driving experience to be had by the user while understanding the various facilities they may be interested in while leaving or being within their living area.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to REECE ANTHONY WAKELY whose telephone number is (571)272-3783. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday 8:30am-6:00pm EST.
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, Hitesh Patel can be reached at (571) 270-5442. 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.
/R.A.W./Examiner, Art Unit 3667
/Hitesh Patel/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3667
10/21/25