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 .
Continued Examination Under 37 CFR 1.114
A request for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, including the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e), was filed in this application after final rejection. Since this application is eligible for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114. Applicant's submission filed on 05/14/2026 has been entered.
Response to Amendment and Argument
Applicant’s amendment and argument with respect to pending claims 11-16 and 18-30 filed on 05/14/2026 have been fully considered but the argument has been rendered moot in view of a new ground(s) of rejection.
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.
Claim(s) 11, 18, 24, 25 and 30 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kobayashi et al. (US 20170213098 A1) in view of Cancro et al. (US 20140209687 A1).
Regarding claim 11, Kobayashi teaches a method for improving the performance of an image recognition system, the method comprising: activating an RGB function of the image recognition system (¶0017-0018: Camera 12 may capture a series of images…text recognition module 14 which may recognize the alphanumeric characters (or other written characters) in the images. ¶0020-002: In the example depicted in FIG. 2, the driver is holding up a business card to the camera, and the text is recognized by arrangement 10). Note that the activated state of the camera/text recognition module is required to perform image capturing and recognition; determining information presented on the data carrier, carried out by means of the activated RGB function of the image recognition system (¶0006, 0028: A text recognition module is communicatively coupled to the camera and recognizes text characters in the captured images); evaluating the determined information (¶0006, 0018: An electronic processor is communicatively coupled to the text recognition module and interprets the recognized text characters as text information and enters the text information into an application within the vehicle. The processor may also categorize the text information, e.g., recognize the information as address, phone number, POI, etc., based on the format, type, and metadata of entered text); and taking a measure on the basis of the evaluated information (¶0019, 0030: the user may ask processor 18 to use the mobile telephone to call a telephone number in the text. Another application may be a navigation system, and the user may ask processor 18 to use the navigation system to plan a route to a street address in the text).
Kobayashi does not explicitly disclose obtaining information about a use of a data carrier by a user; activating an RGB function of the image recognition system in response to the information indicating a use of a data carrier…and deactivating the RGB function of the image recognition system in response to one of the determining, the evaluating and the taking a measure steps.
However, Cancro teaches obtaining information about a use of a data carrier by a user (¶0047-0048, 0053: Scan indication module 750 can include programming to determine when a customer intends to scan a product… Module 750 can also monitor other factors to determine whether inputs/the user's use of the phone indicates that a scan of an item… holding of a device in an upright position and holding the device steady for a period can indicate an intent of the user to scan); activating an RGB function of the image recognition system in response to the information indicating a use of a data carrier (¶0047: Item scan module 780 monitors images captured by camera 730 and/or other inputs that can be used to indicate to a product. Item module 780, upon monitoring an indication to a product, can image recognition, barcode recognition, or other processes to index the product. ¶0048-0049: Module 750 can also monitor other factors to determine whether inputs/the user's use of the phone indicates that a scan of an item… holding of a device in an upright position and holding the device steady for a period can indicate an intent of the user to scan… Camera timeout module 770 can include programming to selectively activate and deactivate camera device 730)…and deactivating the RGB function of the image recognition system in response to one of the determining, the evaluating and the taking a measure steps (¶0032, 0047, 0049: Item scan module 780 monitors images captured by camera 730…upon monitoring an indication to a product, can image recognition, barcode recognition, or other processes to index the product….Camera timeout module 770 can include programming to selectively activate and deactivate camera device 730…a scan can be performed, the camera can be deactivated after the scan…).
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Kobayashi’s information entry system by incorporating the teaching of Cancro in order to save battery power of the system, as taught by Cancro (¶0032).
Regarding claims 18 and 25, the claim are directed to an apparatus/a non-transitory computer-readable medium claims and recite the limitation analogous to claim 11, and are rejected due to the same reason set forth above with respect to claim 11.
Regarding claim 24, Kobayashi in view of Cancro teaches the non-transitory computer-readable medium of claim 18. Cancro further teaches the computer-readable medium further comprising instructions which, when executed on a controller cause the controller to: deactivate the RGB function of the image recognition system after the information presented on the data carrier has been determined (¶0032, 0047, 0049: Item scan module 780 monitors images captured by camera 730…upon monitoring an indication to a product, can image recognition, barcode recognition, or other processes to index the product…Camera timeout module 770 can include programming to selectively activate and deactivate camera device 730…a scan can be performed, the camera can be deactivated after the scan…).
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Kobayashi’s information entry system by incorporating the teaching of Cancro in order to save battery power of the system, as taught by Cancro (¶0032).
Regarding claim 30, the claim recites the limitation analogous to claim 24, and is rejected due to the same reason set forth above with respect to claim 24.
Claim(s) 12, 19 and 26 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kobayashi et al. (US 20170213098 A1) in view of Cancro et al. (US 20140209687 A1) as applied to claim 11, and further in view of Rosen (US 20150054639 A1).
Regarding claim 12, Kobayashi in view of Cancro does not explicitly disclose wherein the obtainment of the information about a use comprises determination by means of an infrared camera.
However, Rosen teaches wherein the obtainment of the information about a use comprises determination by means of an infrared camera (Figs. 8-9, ¶0101, 0112: infrared cameras may capture images of the vehicle which show the location of warm objects inside the vehicle, such as people. If only one warm object is detected in the vehicle, the system may be operative to determine and/or indicate that the vehicle includes only one occupant that is both driving the vehicle and using a mobile phone).
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Kobayashi’s information entry system by incorporating the teaching of Rosen as noted above, in order to make a determination such as mobile phone usage while driving, using an infrared camera in cases when it is too dark to capture images of the occupants of the vehicle with a visible light camera (Rosen: ¶0101).
Regarding claims 19 and 26, the claims are directed to a non-transitory computer-readable medium claims and recite the limitation analogous to claims 12 and 13, and are rejected due to the same reason set forth above with respect to claims 12 and 13.
Claim(s) 13, 15, 20, 22 and 28 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kobayashi et al. (US 20170213098 A1) in view of Cancro et al. (US 20140209687 A1) as applied to claim 11, and further in view of Pedersen (US 9919648 B1).
Regarding claim 13, Kobayashin in view of Cancro do not explicitly teach wherein the obtainment of the information about a use comprises determination of a position of the data carrier relative to the image recognition system.
However, Pedersen teaches wherein the obtainment of the information about a use comprises determination of a position of the data carrier relative to the image recognition system (col. 19, lines 21-25; col. 20, line 64 to col. 21, line 5: when the driver (1001) is using the telecommunication device or cellular telephone for texting, the actual device may be positioned at the location indicated for device (1004) shown in FIG. 10. In some cases, the combination of the audio signals received from the directional beamforming antenna array discussed above together with the image captured by the camera may be conclusive evidence that the driver (1001) is indeed talking over these telecommunications device or cellular telephone (1003)).
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Kobayashi’s information entry system by incorporating the teaching of Pedersen, in order to detect possible use of such electronic devices by a driver (col. 17, lines 13-20).
Regarding claim 15, Kobayashin in view of Cancro do not explicitly teach wherein the obtainment of the information about a use comprises determination of an alignment of the data carrier relative to the image recognition system.
However, Pedersen teaches wherein the obtainment of the information about a use comprises determination of an alignment of the data carrier relative to the image recognition system (col. 19, lines 21-25; col. 20, line 64 to col. 21, line 5: when the driver (1001) is using the telecommunication device or cellular telephone for texting, the actual device may be positioned at the location indicated for device (1004) shown in FIG. 10. In some cases, the combination of the audio signals received from the directional beamforming antenna array discussed above together with the image captured by the camera may be conclusive evidence that the driver (1001) is indeed talking over these telecommunications device or cellular telephone (1003)).
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Kobayashi’s information entry system by incorporating the teaching of Pedersen, in order to detect possible use of such electronic devices by a driver (col. 17, lines 13-20).
Regarding claim 20, the claim is directed to a non-transitory computer-readable medium claims and recite the limitation analogous to claim 13, and is rejected due to the same reason set forth above with respect to claim 13.
Regarding claims 22 and 28, the claim recite the limitation analogous to claim 15, and is rejected due to the same reason set forth above with respect to claim 15.
Claim(s) 14, 21 and 27 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kobayashi et al. (US 20170213098 A1) in view of Cancro et al. (US 20140209687 A1) and of Pedersen (US 9919648 B1) as applied to claim 13, and further in view of Hariri et al. (US 20180290627 A1).
Regarding claim 14, Kobayashi in view of Cancro and Pedersen teaches the method as claimed in claim 13. Kobayashi further teaches wherein the image recognition system comprises a plurality of RGB cameras and wherein the activation of the RGB function of the image recognition system results in one RGB camera of the plurality of RGB cameras of the image recognition system being activated (¶0020: Camera 12 may be in the form of a camera mounted in the rear-view mirror within the passenger compartment. This camera, which may be used for scanning the text information, can be the same rear facing camera (or any other camera or cameras used inside vehicle) that is used for driver monitoring…). Note that the cameras in Kobayashin required to be activated to capture image.
Kobayashi in view of Cancro and Pedersen do not teach the method further comprising: determining said one RGB camera that is to be activated in the image recognition system on the basis of the determined position of the data carrier.
However, Hariri teaches the method further comprising: determining said one RGB camera that is to be activated in the image recognition system on the basis of the determined position of the data carrier (0030: For example, in some embodiments, the detection of an authorized mobile device 80 may initiate controller 100 to activate camera(s) 32. ¶0036: Predictive model 200 may include a first field 202 having data indicating movement trajectory data of mobile device 80…If the recorded pathway sufficiently matches trajectory 3-9, controller 100 may be configured to generate and transmit a signal to turn on receiver 30 and/or camera 32 located at rear end 42 of vehicle 10).
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Kobayashi’s information entry system by incorporating the teaching of Hariri, in order to conserve battery power by selectively activation the cameras (¶0052).
Regarding claims 21 and 27, the claim recite the limitation analogous to claim 14, and is rejected due to the same reason set forth above with respect to claim 14.
Claim(s) 16, 23 and 29 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kobayashi et al. (US 20170213098 A1) in view of Cancro et al. (US 20140209687 A1) as applied to claim 11, and further in view of Choi et al. (US 20140078311 A20.
Regarding claim 16, Kobayashi in view of Cancro does not explicitly disclose wherein the taking of a measure comprises output of information about a required position and/or alignment of the data carrier for improved determination of the information of the data carrier. However, Choi teaches wherein the taking of a measure comprises output of information about a required position and/or alignment of the data carrier for improved determination of the information of the data carrier (Figs. 1-3, 033, 0036-0039: Multimedia apparatus 200 subsequently outputs user guidance information, based on the determined location of the controller 215 [may be a mobile terminal, such as a remote controller, a sensor band, a mobile phone, a smart phone], through at least one of the screen, a speaker, and a vibration device).
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Kobayashi’s information entry system by incorporating the teaching of Choi in order to obtain a system which guide a user of a mobile terminal a to move within the recognizable range of a camera (¶0027, 0033).
Regarding claims 23 and 29, the claims are directed to a non-transitory computer- readable medium claims and recite the limitation analogous to claim 16, and are rejected due to the same reason set forth above with respect to claim 16.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to NATHNAEL AYNALEM whose telephone number is (571)270-1482. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 9AM-5:30 PM 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, SATH PERUNGAVOOR can be reached at 571-272-7455. 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.
/NATHNAEL AYNALEM/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2488
Prosecution Insights