Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status
The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
DETAILED ACTION
Information Disclosure Statement
1. The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on 03/14/2024 has been considered by Examiner and made of record in the application file.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC §103
2. 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.
3. Claims 1-4 and 9-11 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Hamid et al. (U.S PAT. 9,922,265, hereinafter “Hamid”) in view of Kottenstette et al. (U.S PAT. 10,311,302, hereinafter “Kottenstette”).
Consider claim 1, Hamid teaches an information processing apparatus comprising: at least one memory configured to store program code (col. 5, lines 46-65); and at least one processor configured to operate as instructed by the program code (col. 5, lines 46-65), the program code including: acquisition code configured to cause at least one of the at least one processor to acquire a satellite image (Fig. 13, col. 9, lines 24-46); estimation code configured to cause at least one of the at least one processor to estimate, in the satellite image, an open area with a spatial extent where base station placement for wireless communication is possible (col. 7, line 50 through col. 8, line 5); calculation code configured to cause at least one of the at least one processor to calculate openness of the open area using rays virtually cast from a predetermined position in the open area (col. 10, line 38-53 and col. 12, lines 1-20, while it’s not explicitly disclose “virtual rays”, spatial pooling, geometric analysis, and region based spatial computation are well known techniques in remote sensing. Calculating openness using ray casting is a predictable variation of known spatial analysis once open areas are identified).
Hamid does not explicitly show that determination code configured to cause at least one of the at least one processor to determine, based on the openness, whether or not the open area is a site appropriate for base station placement.
In the same field of endeavor, Kottenstette teaches determination code configured to cause at least one of the at least one processor to determine, based on the openness, whether or not the open area is a site appropriate for base station placement (col. 2, line 17-37, determining whether a classified open area is suitable for a particular purpose (such as base station placement) is an obvious use of the analysis results).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention was made to use, determination code configured to cause at least one of the at least one processor to determine, based on the openness, whether or not the open area is a site appropriate for base station placement, as taught by Kottenstette, in order to provide for remote sensing, deep learning, and detecting object.
Consider claim 2, Hamid further teaches wherein the estimation code is configured to cause at least one of the at least one processor to estimate the open area using a learning model for machine learning (col. 10, line 58 through col. 11, line 6).
Consider claim 3, Hamid further teaches wherein the open area is a parking area (col. 13, lines 19-25).
Consider claim 4, Hamid further teaches wherein the open area is a building roof (col. 13, line 60 through col. 14, line 2).
Consider claim 9, Hamid further teaches wherein the program code further comprises: an output code configured to cause at least one of the at least one processor to output a result of the determination (col. 12, lines 39-48).
Consider claim 10, the subject-matter of independent claim 10 relates to an information processing method executed by an information processing apparatus with features fully corresponding to the characteristics of claim 1. Therefore, the same argumentation presented in relation to claim 1 is, mutatis mutandis, of application to claim 10.
Consider claim 11, the subject-matter of independent claim 11 relates to a non-transitory computer readable storage medium storing a program with features fully corresponding to the characteristics of claim 1. Therefore, the same argumentation presented in relation to claim 1 is, mutatis mutandis, of application to claim 11.
Allowable Subject Matter
4. Claims 5-8 objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
Conclusion
5. Any response to this action should be mailed to:
Mail Stop_________ (Explanation, e.g., Amendment or After-final, etc.)
Commissioner for Patents
P.O. Box 1450
Alexandria, VA 22313-1450
Facsimile responses should be faxed to:
(571) 273-8300
Hand-delivered responses should be brought to:
Customer Service Window
Randolph Building
401 Dulany Street
Alexandria, VA 22313
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Tuan H. Nguyen whose telephone number is (571) 272-8329. The examiner can normally be reached on 8:00Am - 5:00Pm.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Pan Yuwen can be reached on (571) 272-7855. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is (571) 273-8300.
Information regarding the status of an application may be obtained from the Patent Application Information Retrieval (PAIR) system. Status information for published applications may be obtained from either Private PAIR or Public PAIR.
Status information for unpublished applications is available through Private PAIR only. For more information about the PAIR system, see http://pair-direct.uspto.gov. Should you have questions on access to the Private PAIR system, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free).
/TUAN H NGUYEN/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2649