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 .
The preliminary Amendment filed on 06/20/2024 is acknowledged. Claims 1-21 have been cancelled. New claims 22-40 have been added. As a result, claims 22-40 are pending. The amendment to the specification including the Abstract also acknowledged.
Drawings
The drawings received on 20 June 2024 are accepted by the Examiner.
This Office Action is Non-Final.
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on June 20, 2024 is in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statement has been considered by the examiner.
Claims rejection 35 U.S.C. 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 22-24, 30-37 and 39-40 are rejected under AIA 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Caillette et al. (US 20140370920 A1) in view of Duan et al. (US 20170091272 A1) further in view of Moore et. al. (US 20190339833 A1).
Regarding claims 22 and 39-40 Caillette discloses an information system for question answering, information retrieval, and location discovery, the information system comprising one or more processors and a memory storing instructions for execution by the one or more processors, wherein the information system is configured to:
maintain an information location map, the information location map comprising an area map (see Caillette paragraph [0006], provided is a computer-implemented method that includes for each geographic object of a geo-object set, identifying, using a computer, one or more geographic cells of a geographic mapping that each correspond to a geographic area proximate to at least a portion of a geometry of the geographic object);
carry out process A) comprising:
receive an input inquiry from an input user device, the input inquiry comprising input text corpus (see Caillette paragraph [0028], upon receiving a nearest-neighbor query specifying a given geographic location (e.g., geolocation), a cell of the geo-mapping containing the geographic location is identified, and the index is accessed to identify geo-objects corresponding to the cell. In some embodiments, the geo-objects corresponding to the cell are processed to identify one or more of the geo-objects that are closest to the geolocation),
determine, with the input context generator, an input location of the input user device on the information location map (see Caillette paragraph [0045], a geolocation (e.g., a query point) located within the cell),
determine, with a map locator, one or more points of interest on the information location map within a first predetermined distance from the input location of the input user device based on the one or more input text objects of the input inquiry metadata and the information location map (see Caillette paragraph [0045], Upon receiving a nearest-neighbor query associated with a given geographic location (e.g., a given query point), location module 102 may determine a given cell of geo-map 106 that contains the query point, access geo-object index 108 to identify the listing/subset of geo-objects corresponding to the given cell that contains the query point, process the subset of geo-objects to determine one or more geo-objects that are nearest the query point, and respond to the nearest-neighbor query with information corresponding to the one or more geo-objects nearest the query point); and
carry out process B)
detect, with an output context generator output user devices within a predetermined output distance from the one or more points of interest on the information location map (see Caillette paragraph [0031], cells proximate dense cells ("non-dense cells") are identified and processed to identify geo-objects that are nearby the non-dense cells (e.g., within a maximum distance/radius of the non-dense cell). In some embodiments, the non-dense cells are associated with one or more of the geo-objects associated with nearby dense cells. In certain embodiments, a non-dense cell may be associated with a single one of the geo-objects associated with the closest set of dense cells),
share the input inquiry with the detected output user devices within the predetermined output distance from the one or more points of interest (see Caillette paragraph [0031], in the context of a nearest-neighbor query requesting an identity and/or other information for a geo-object that is located nearest a given geo-location (e.g., a query location), a cell of a geo-map including the query location may be identified, an entry of the index tables corresponding to the cell and listing the geo-objects associated with the cell may be accessed).
Moore expressly discloses process to receive one or more responses from the detected output user devices within the predetermined output distance from the one or more points of interest (see Moore paragraph [0294], a pin or other graphical indicator may specify locations of search results as points of interest. In various embodiments, responsive to a user selection of one of these points of interest (e.g., a touch selection, such as a tap), the multifunction device is configured to display additional information about the selected point of interest including but not limited to ratings, reviews or review snippets, hours of operation, store status (e.g., open for business, permanently closed, etc.), and/or images of a storefront for the point of interest. In various embodiments, any of this information may be displayed on a graphical information card that is displayed in response to the user's selection of the point of interest), and
generate a response notification based on the one or more responses received from the detected output user devices and provide the response notification to the input user device (see Moore paragraphs [0187]-[0188], recommend applications that are relevant when the device is within a threshold distance (e.g., 50 meters, 100 meters, 1000 meters, etc.) of a particular location. For instance, an application related to coffee shops is recommended only to devices that are within a predetermined distance of a coffee shop…this threshold distance is conceptually shown as a dashed circle 2950 around the current location 2910 of the device. In this example, point of interest 2915 is a college and point of interest 2920 is a restaurant. Both points of interest are within the predetermined distance from the current location of the device (as shown by the dashed circle 2950)).
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to incorporate the teaching of Moore into the method of Caillette to have process to receive one or more responses from the detected output user devices within the predetermined output distance from the one or more points of interest. Here, combining Moore with Caillette which are both related to query processing improves Caillette by providing a method for a device to share map information with other nearby devices using peer-to-peer communication, (See Moore paragraph [0006].
Duan expressly discloses system to generate, with an input context generator, input inquiry metadata by analyzing the input text corpus, the input inquiry metadata comprising one or more input text objects generated from the input text corpus of the input inquiry (see Duan paragraph [0058], A query precision identification and extraction component 410 receives query condition 401 and context information 402. The context information 402 includes static information (e.g., road network metadata, vehicle metadata, point of interest (POI) or region of interest (ROI) metadata, etc.) and dynamic information (e.g., traffic information, vehicle trajectory patterns, driving behavior, etc.). Based on query condition 401 and context information 402, query precision identification and extraction component 410 generates precision points 411),
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to incorporate the teaching of Duan into the method of Caillette to have an input context generator, input inquiry metadata by analyzing the input text corpus. Here, combining Duan with Caillette which are both related to query processing improves Caillette by providing improved mechanisms for precision adaptive vehicle trajectory query plan optimization, (See Duan paragraph [0001].
Regarding claim 23, Caillette discloses wherein the input context generator comprises an input location detector configured to determine the input location of the input user device by one, more, or combination of the following: determine input user device GPS location; determine input user device IP address location; determine input user device cellular network location; determine the location of the input user device by deriving the location from the input inquiry or the input inquiry metadata (see Caillette paragraph [0170], computer system 2000 may include a desktop computer, a laptop computer, a tablet computer, a server device, a client device, a mobile telephone, a personal digital assistant (PDA), a mobile audio or video player, a game console, a Global Positioning System (GPS), or the like).
Regarding claim 24, Caillette discloses wherein the map locator is configured to associate the input user device to the input location on the information location map (see Caillette paragraph [0006], method that includes for each geographic object of a geo-object set, identifying, using a computer, one or more geographic cells of a geographic mapping that each correspond to a geographic area proximate to at least a portion of a geometry of the geographic object and assigning a weighting value to each of the one or more geographic cells identified as corresponding to a geographic area proximate to at least a portion of a geometry of the geographic object such that the one or more geographic cells are associated with the geo-object).
Regarding claim 30, Moore expressly discloses wherein the information system comprises a known places database, the known places database maintaining information objects, the information objects having associated area location information, map locator is configured to determine the one or more points of interest on the information location map by: comparing the one or more input text objects of the input inquiry metadata with the information objects of the known places database, determining a matching information object in the known places database based on comparing the one or more input text objects of the input inquiry metadata with the information objects of the known places database, and determining the one or more points of interest on the information location map based on the location information associated with the matching information object; or comparing the one or more primary input text objects of the primary input inquiry metadata with the information objects of the known places database, comparing the one or more secondary input text objects of the secondary input inquiry metadata with the information objects of the known places database, determining a matching information object in the known places database based on comparing the one or more primary input text objects of the primary input inquiry metadata and the one or more secondary input text objects of the secondary input inquiry metadata with the information objects of the known places database, and determining the one or more points of interest on the information location map based on the location information associated with the matching information object (see Moore paragraphs [0015]-[0016], provide application recommendations when a map is displayed on a device. For instance, when a point of interest is selected on a displayed map, popular applications related to the vicinity of the selected item are shown. The user is provided with the option to install the recommended applications (for a fee or for free). [0016] Some embodiments provide an option for businesses, points of interests, and other locations on the map to register applications for recommending to users that are near their locations. In some embodiments applications that are registered for a location are considered the most relevant and are prioritized to show as recommended applications. For instance, when a device is in or close to a grocery store and the grocery store has registered an application that offers discount coupons, the grocery store application is shown as a high priority recommendation. The device can then install the grocery store application and use the offered discount coupons).
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to incorporate the teaching of Moore into the method of Caillette to have process to receive one or more responses from the detected output user devices within the predetermined output distance from the one or more points of interest. Here, combining Moore with Caillette which are both related to query processing improves Caillette by providing a method for a device to share map information with other nearby devices using peer-to-peer communication, (See Moore paragraph [0006].
Regarding claim 31, Caillette discloses wherein the output context generator comprises an output location detector configured to determine location of the output user devices by one, more, or combination of the following: determine output user device GPS location; determine output user device IP address location; determine output user device cellular network location; and determine the location of the output user device by deriving the location from the received response (see Caillette paragraph [0170], computer system 2000 may include a desktop computer, a laptop computer, a tablet computer, a server device, a client device, a mobile telephone, a personal digital assistant (PDA), a mobile audio or video player, a game console, a Global Positioning System (GPS), or the like).
Regarding claim 32 Moore expressly discloses wherein the one or more responses comprising output text corpus, and the output context generator is configured to generate output response metadata for each of the received one or more responses by analysing the output text corpus of each of the received one or more responses, the output response metadata comprising one or more output text objects generated from the output text corpus of the one or more responses, respectively (see Moore paragraph [0294], a pin or other graphical indicator may specify locations of search results as points of interest. In various embodiments, responsive to a user selection of one of these points of interest (e.g., a touch selection, such as a tap), the multifunction device is configured to display additional information about the selected point of interest including but not limited to ratings, reviews or review snippets, hours of operation, store status (e.g., open for business, permanently closed, etc.), and/or images of a storefront for the point of interest. In various embodiments, any of this information may be displayed on a graphical information card that is displayed in response to the user's selection of the point of interest; see Moore paragraphs [0187]-[0188], recommend applications that are relevant when the device is within a threshold distance (e.g., 50 meters, 100 meters, 1000 meters, etc.) of a particular location. For instance, an application related to coffee shops is recommended only to devices that are within a predetermined distance of a coffee shop…this threshold distance is conceptually shown as a dashed circle 2950 around the current location 2910 of the device. In this example, point of interest 2915 is a college and point of interest 2920 is a restaurant. Both points of interest are within the predetermined distance from the current location of the device (as shown by the dashed circle 2950)).
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to incorporate the teaching of Moore into the method of Caillette to have the output context generator is configured to generate output response metadata for each of the received one or more responses. Here, combining Moore with Caillette which are both related to query processing improves Caillette by providing a method for a device to share map information with other nearby devices using peer-to-peer communication, (See Moore paragraph [0006].
Regarding claim 33 Moore expressly discloses wherein the information system comprises a response collector, the response collector being configured to: maintain a pre-determined response score threshold, receive one or more candidate responses from the output user devices, determine a response score for each of one or more candidate responses by comparing the output text corpus of each of the one or more candidate responses with the input text corpus of the input inquiry, or the output text corpus and output response metadata of each of the one or more candidate responses with the input text corpus and input inquiry metadata of the input inquiry, compare the response score of each of the candidate responses with the pre-determined response score threshold, and based on the comparing the response collector is configured to: discard the candidate response if the response score of the candidate response is below the pre-determined response score threshold, or store the candidate response as a qualified response if the response score of the candidate response is above the pre-determined response score threshold (see Moore paragraph [0293], map service 4330 and/or other service(s) 4350 are configured to process search requests from any of the client devices. Search requests may include but are not limited to queries for businesses, addresses, residential locations, points of interest, or some combination thereof. Map service 4330 and/or other service(s) 4350 may be configured to return results related to a variety of parameters including but not limited to a location entered into an address bar or other text entry field. (including abbreviations and/or other shorthand notation), a current map view (e.g., user may be viewing one location on the multifunction device while residing in another location), current location of the user (e.g., in cases where the current map view did not include search results), and the current route (if any). In various embodiments, these parameters may affect the composition of the search results (and/or the ordering of the search results) based on different priority weightings. In various embodiments, the search results that are returned may be a subset of results selected based on specific criteria including but not limited to a quantity of times the search result (e.g., a particular point of interest) has been requested, a measure of quality associated with the search result (e.g., highest user or editorial review rating), and/or the volume of reviews for the search results (e.g., the number of times the search result has been review or rated)).
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to incorporate the teaching of Moore into the method of Caillette to have a response collector, the response collector being configured to: maintain a pre-determined response score threshold. Here, combining Moore with Caillette which are both related to query processing improves Caillette by providing a method for a device to share map information with other nearby devices using peer-to-peer communication, (See Moore paragraph [0006].
Regarding claim 34 Moore expressly discloses wherein the information location map comprises the area map and information objects associated with area locations on the information location map, the map locator being configured to determine a response location on the information location map: compare the one or more output text objects of the output response metadata with the information objects of the information location map, and determine the response location on the information location map based on the comparing, the response location being associated to an information object on the information location map matching with an output text object of the output response metadata (see Moore paragraph [0293], map service 4330 and/or other service(s) 4350 are configured to process search requests from any of the client devices. Search requests may include but are not limited to queries for businesses, addresses, residential locations, points of interest, or some combination thereof. Map service 4330 and/or other service(s) 4350 may be configured to return results related to a variety of parameters including but not limited to a location entered into an address bar or other text entry field. (including abbreviations and/or other shorthand notation), a current map view (e.g., user may be viewing one location on the multifunction device while residing in another location), current location of the user (e.g., in cases where the current map view did not include search results), and the current route (if any). In various embodiments, these parameters may affect the composition of the search results (and/or the ordering of the search results) based on different priority weightings. In various embodiments, the search results that are returned may be a subset of results selected based on specific criteria including but not limited to a quantity of times the search result (e.g., a particular point of interest) has been requested, a measure of quality associated with the search result (e.g., highest user or editorial review rating), and/or the volume of reviews for the search results (e.g., the number of times the search result has been review or rated)).
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to incorporate the teaching of Moore into the method of Caillette to have determine a response location on the information location map. Here, combining Moore with Caillette which are both related to query processing improves Caillette by providing a method for a device to share map information with other nearby devices using peer-to-peer communication, (See Moore paragraph [0006].
Regarding claim 35 Moore expressly discloses, wherein characterized in that the map locator is configured to determine a response location on the information location map: compare the one or more output text objects of the output response inquiry metadata with the information objects of the known places database, determine a matching information object in the known places database based on comparing the one or more output text objects of the output response metadata with the information objects of the known places database, and determine the output location on the information location map based on the location information associated with the matching information object (see Moore paragraph [0293], map service 4330 and/or other service(s) 4350 are configured to process search requests from any of the client devices. Search requests may include but are not limited to queries for businesses, addresses, residential locations, points of interest, or some combination thereof. Map service 4330 and/or other service(s) 4350 may be configured to return results related to a variety of parameters including but not limited to a location entered into an address bar or other text entry field. (including abbreviations and/or other shorthand notation), a current map view (e.g., user may be viewing one location on the multifunction device while residing in another location), current location of the user (e.g., in cases where the current map view did not include search results), and the current route (if any). In various embodiments, these parameters may affect the composition of the search results (and/or the ordering of the search results) based on different priority weightings. In various embodiments, the search results that are returned may be a subset of results selected based on specific criteria including but not limited to a quantity of times the search result (e.g., a particular point of interest) has been requested, a measure of quality associated with the search result (e.g., highest user or editorial review rating), and/or the volume of reviews for the search results (e.g., the number of times the search result has been review or rated)).
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to incorporate the teaching of Moore into the method of Caillette to have determine a response location on the information location map. Here, combining Moore with Caillette which are both related to query processing improves Caillette by providing a method for a device to share map information with other nearby devices using peer-to-peer communication, (See Moore paragraph [0006].
Regarding claim 36 Moore expressly discloses wherein the information system comprises the response collector, the response collector being configured to: maintain a first pre-determined response number threshold, keep tally of received responses or qualified responses, and if the number of received responses or qualified responses is above the first pre-determined response number threshold, generate the response notification based on the received responses or qualified responses and provide the response notification to the input user device, or if the number of received responses or qualified responses is below the first pre-determined response number threshold, the information system is configured to: determine, with the map locator, subsequent one or more points of interest on the information location map within the predetermined distance from the previous point of interest based on the one or more input text objects of the input inquiry metadata and the information location map, and carry out process B) detect, with the output context generator output user devices within the predetermined output distance from the subsequent one or more points of interest, share the input inquiry with the detected output user devices within the predetermined output distance from the subsequent one or more points of interest, receive one or more responses from the output user devices within the predetermined output distance from the subsequent one or more points of interest, generate the response notification based on the one or more responses received from the output user devices, and provide the response notification to the input user device (see Moore paragraph [0293], map service 4330 and/or other service(s) 4350 are configured to process search requests from any of the client devices. Search requests may include but are not limited to queries for businesses, addresses, residential locations, points of interest, or some combination thereof. Map service 4330 and/or other service(s) 4350 may be configured to return results related to a variety of parameters including but not limited to a location entered into an address bar or other text entry field. (including abbreviations and/or other shorthand notation), a current map view (e.g., user may be viewing one location on the multifunction device while residing in another location), current location of the user (e.g., in cases where the current map view did not include search results), and the current route (if any). In various embodiments, these parameters may affect the composition of the search results (and/or the ordering of the search results) based on different priority weightings. In various embodiments, the search results that are returned may be a subset of results selected based on specific criteria including but not limited to a quantity of times the search result (e.g., a particular point of interest) has been requested, a measure of quality associated with the search result (e.g., highest user or editorial review rating), and/or the volume of reviews for the search results (e.g., the number of times the search result has been review or rated)).
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to incorporate the teaching of Moore into the method of Caillette to have maintain a first pre-determined response number threshold, keep tally of received responses or qualified responses. Here, combining Moore with Caillette which are both related to query processing improves Caillette by providing a method for a device to share map information with other nearby devices using peer-to-peer communication, (See Moore paragraph [0006].
Regarding claim 37 Moore expressly discloses, wherein the information system comprises the response collector, the response collector being configured to: to detect the cluster of response locations on the information map by comparing the response locations of the received responses or qualified responses, and if a cluster of response locations is detected on the information location map, generating the response notification based on the responses associated with the cluster and providing the response notification to the input user device, or if a cluster of response locations is not detected on the information location map, the information system is configured to: determine, with the map locator, a subsequent one or more points of interest on the information location map within the predetermined distance from the previous one or more points of interest based on the one or more input text objects of the input inquiry metadata and the information location map, and carry out process B) detect, with the output context generator, output user devices within the predetermined output distance from the subsequent one or more points of interest, share the input inquiry with the detected output user devices within the predetermined output distance from the subsequent one or more points of interest, receive one or more responses from the output user devices within the predetermined output distance from the subsequent one or more points of interest, generate a response notification based on the one or more responses received from the output user devices, and provide the response notification to the input user device (see Moore paragraphs [0187]-[0188], recommend applications that are relevant when the device is within a threshold distance (e.g., 50 meters, 100 meters, 1000 meters, etc.) of a particular location. For instance, an application related to coffee shops is recommended only to devices that are within a predetermined distance of a coffee shop. [0188] In FIG. 29, this threshold distance is conceptually shown as a dashed circle 2950 around the current location 2910 of the device. In this example, point of interest 2915 is a college and point of interest 2920 is a restaurant. Both points of interest are within the predetermined distance from the current location of the device (as shown by the dashed circle 2950). The recommended application 2935 is an application that shows the daily specials for the restaurant 2920. Application 2940 shows information about different extra curriculum programs provided by the college 2915).
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to incorporate the teaching of Moore into the method of Caillette to have maintain a first pre-determined response number threshold, keep tally of received responses or qualified responses. Here, combining Moore with Caillette which are both related to query processing improves Caillette by providing a method for a device to share map information with other nearby devices using peer-to-peer communication, (See Moore paragraph [0006].
Claim 25 is rejected under AIA 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Caillette et al. (US 20140370920 A1) in view of Duan et al. (US 20170091272 A1) further in view of Moore et. al. (US 20190339833 A1) further in view of McCormick et al. (US 11423208 B1).
Regarding claim 25, McCormick expressly discloses wherein the input context generator comprises an input context detector configured to generate primary input inquiry metadata, the primary input inquiry metadata comprising one or more primary input text objects generated from the input text corpus of the input inquiry, the input context detector is configured to carry out one or more of the following: detect the language of the input text corpus, divide the input text corpus to n-grams, the one or more primary input text objects comprising the n-grams, and identify keywords in the input text corpus, the one or more primary input text objects comprising the keywords (see McCormick col. 3, lines 62-67 , a text encoding issue detection component 130 could divide each word within the document into a plurality of n-grams and could determine a probability that each n-gram appears within a plurality of recognized languages. For example, the text encoding issue detection component 130 could divide the word “mÃ[AltContent: rect]s” into three bigrams “mÔ).
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to incorporate the teaching of McCormick into the method of Caillette to have an input context generator, input inquiry metadata by analyzing the input text corpus. Here, combining McCormick with Caillette which are both related to query processing improves Caillette by providing improved mechanisms that are easily scalable and practical for processing a large corpus of documents and to support a large number of language models and encoding formats, (See McCormick col. 1, lines 35-45.
Claim 26 is rejected under AIA 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Caillette et al. (US 20140370920 A1) in view of Duan et al. (US 20170091272 A1) further in view of Moore et. al. (US 20190339833 A1) further in view of McCormick et al. (US 11423208 B1) further in view of Singh et al. (US 20210304749 A1).
Regarding claim 26 Singh expressly discloses wherein the input context generator comprises an input context enhancer configured to generate secondary input inquiry metadata, the secondary input inquiry metadata comprising one or more secondary input text objects generated from the one or more primary input text objects of the primary inquiry metadata, the input context enhancer is configured to carry out one or more of the following: determine synonyms for the n-grams in the primary input inquiry metadata, and determine synonyms for the keywords in the primary input inquiry metadata (see Singh paragraph [0008], pre-processing the plurality of resolved raw text, wherein the pre-processing comprises at least one of tokenizing, part of speech (POS) tagging, filtering punctuations, filtering stop-words, filtering any excluded POS tags, lemmatizing, filtering domain specific words. The method further includes extracting a basic set of key-terms and a frequency score corresponding to each of the basic set of key-terms from the pre-processed text based on a key-term extraction technique, wherein the extracted basic set of key-terms includes a plurality of keywords and a plurality of key-phrases comprising of a plurality of an n-gram terms).
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to incorporate the teaching of Singh into the method of Caillette to have an input context enhancer. Here, combining Singh with Caillette which are both related to query processing improves Caillette by providing improved mechanisms that provides a significant performance in terms of relevancy of key terms extracted, (See Singh paragraph [0004]).
Claims 27- 29 are rejected under AIA 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Caillette et al. (US 20140370920 A1) in view of Duan et al. (US 20170091272 A1) further in view of Moore et. al. (US 20190339833 A1) further in view of Singh et al. (US 20210304749 A1).
Regarding claim 27 Singh expressly discloses, wherein the input inquiry comprises image data or video data, and the information system is upon receiving the input inquiry configured to: generate an image text description from the image data or video data and incorporate the image text description generated from the image data or video data to the input text corpus; or carry out optical character recognition to the image data or video data, generate an image text description of the image data or video data based on the optical character recognition, and incorporate the image text description generated from the image data or video data to the input text corpus, or generate an image text description from the image data or video data and incorporate the image text description generated from the image data or video data to the input text corpus, and carry out optical character recognition to the image data or video data, generate an image text description of the image data or video data based on the optical character recognition, and incorporate the image text description generated from the image data or video data to the input text corpus (see Singh paragraph [0072], For detecting lane markings, cameras with clear sensors or color filtered sensors are used [1]. For LDW and LKA applications, a vision sensor, i.e., camera is mounted in front of the vehicle to capture the road images. The camera is an assembly of a CMOS/CCD sensor of size VGA or HD used along with a lens of horizontal field of view (FOV) around 45 degree and vertical FOV of around 30 degree. The lane markings may vary in color (white and yellow for India, USA, Europe; Blue for South Korea), width and shape (solid and dashed). Different techniques to detect lanes include edge detection and line approximations to the edges and using global segmentation techniques. Wang et al. [2] proposed dividing the image region into sub regions and fitting Hough lines to the edges in each sub regions and therefore determining the vanishing point. Borkar [3] and Taubel et al. [4] suggested inverse perspective mapping of the image, detecting the lane marks by thresholding and then fitting Hough lines).
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to incorporate the teaching of Singh into the method of Caillette to have wherein the input inquiry comprises image data or video data. Here, combining Singh with Caillette which are both related to query processing improves Caillette by providing improved mechanisms that provides a significant performance in terms of relevancy of key terms extracted, (See Singh paragraph [0004]).
Regarding claim 28 Singh expressly discloses wherein the input inquiry comprises audio data, and the information system is upon receiving the input inquiry configured to: generate an audio text description from the audio data and incorporate the audio text description generated from the audio data to the input text corpus; or carry out speech recognition to the audio data and generate an audio text description based on the speech recognition and incorporate the audio text description to the input text corpus; or generate an audio text description from the audio data and incorporate the audio text description generated from the audio data to the input text corpus, and carry out speech recognition to the audio data and generate an audio text description based on the speech recognition and incorporate the audio text description to the input text corpus (see Singh paragraph [0008], a pre-processor configured for pre-processing the plurality of resolved raw text, wherein the pre-processing comprises at least one of tokenizing, part of speech (POS) tagging, filtering punctuations, filtering stop-words, filtering any excluded POS tags, lemmatizing, filtering domain specific words. The system further comprises a domain language model that comprises exhaustive vocabulary data to be used during key-term extraction and synonym extraction, wherein the exhaustive vocabulary data is a vector representation of semantic meaning of a term or a word. The system further comprises a key-term extractor that further includes a basic key-term module configured for extracting a basic set of key-terms and a frequency score corresponding to each of the basic set of key-terms from the pre-processed text based on a key-term extraction technique. The system further comprises a revised key-term module configured for determining a revised set of key-terms from the basic set of key-terms and a relevancy score from the frequency score corresponding to each of the revised set of key-terms using a reconciliation techniques based on the domain language model and a final key-term module configured for identifying a final set of key-terms from the revised set of key-terms based on the relevancy score, wherein the revised set of key-terms are sorted based on the relevancy score to generate the final set of key-terms. The system further comprises a synonym module for configured determining a set of synonyms for the identified final set of key-terms based on the domain language model or a language model. The system further comprises a display module for configured displaying the final set of key-terms and the set of synonyms for the identified final set of key-terms).
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to incorporate the teaching of Singh into the method of Caillette to have wherein the input inquiry comprises audio data. Here, combining Singh with Caillette which are both related to query processing improves Caillette by providing improved mechanisms that provides a significant performance in terms of relevancy of key terms extracted, (See Singh paragraph [0004]).
Regarding claim 29 Singh expressly discloses, wherein the information location map comprises the area map and information objects associated with area locations on the information location map, the map locator being configured to determine the one or more points of interest: compare the one or more input text objects of the input inquiry metadata with the information objects of the information location map, and determine the one or more points of interest on the information location map based on the comparing, the one or more points of interest being associated with an information object on the information location map matching with an input text object of the input inquiry metadata; or compare the one or more primary input text objects of the primary input inquiry metadata with the information objects of the information location map, compare the one or more secondary input text objects of the secondary input inquiry metadata with the information objects of the information location map, and determine the one or more points of interest based on the comparing, the one or more points of interest being associated to an information object matching with a primary input text object in the primary input inquiry metadata, or with a secondary input text object in the secondary input inquiry metadata, or with a primary input text object in the primary input inquiry metadata and with a secondary input text object in the secondary input inquiry metadata (see Singh paragraphs [0065]-[0067], the method (300) includes identifying a set of similar terms from the domain language model based on cosine similarity techniques. In an embodiment, a pre-defined value of “0.5” estimated based on cosine similarity techniques) is used as threshold value for identifying a set of similar terms from the domain language model.
[0066] At the next step (308), the method (300) includes comparing and removing the similar terms that are found to be same as the stemmed version and the determined antonym of the key-terms to obtain the set of synonyms.
[0067] In one embodiment, is an exemplary flow diagram for determining a set of synonyms for the identified final set of key-terms during availability of the language model implemented by the system of FIG. 1 and includes the following steps).
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to incorporate the teaching of Singh into the method of Caillette to have compare the one or more input text objects of the input inquiry metadata with the information objects of the information location map. Here, combining Singh with Caillette which are both related to query processing improves Caillette by providing improved mechanisms that provides a significant performance in terms of relevancy of key terms extracted, (See Singh paragraph [0004]).
Claim 38 is rejected under AIA 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Caillette et al. (US 20140370920 A1) in view of Duan et al. (US 20170091272 A1) further in view of Moore et. al. (US 20190339833 A1) further in view of Donaker et al. (US 20180336249 A1).
Regarding claim 38 Donaker expressly discloses, wherein the information system comprises a response aggregator, the response aggregator being configured to: aggregate the one or more received responses into a single response, determine an aggregated response location for the single response based on the response locations of the received responses, and associate the aggregated response location with the single response; or aggregate the qualified responses into a single response, determine an aggregated response location for the single response based on the response locations of the qualified responses, associate the aggregated response location with the single response; or aggregate the one or more responses associated with the cluster into a single response, determine an aggregated response location for the single response based on the response locations of the responses associated with the cluster, and associate the aggregated response location with the single response (see Donaker paragraphs [0043]-[0044], the responsiveness score for a given search result can be a score for the search result received from the search engine that identified the search result. The system aggregates the individual scores of the search results in the set, or for some pre-determined number of results in the set, e.g., the top ten ranked search results, to determine responsiveness scores for the set of search results as a whole. For example the system can sum or average the individual scores.
[0044] The clustering score for a results set is a measure of how geographically clustered entities associated with the results set are. The system considers either all of the search results in the results set, or a number of top-scoring search results, for example, according to the scores used by a search engine to rank the search results. The system then derives the clustering score from the distribution of the physical locations of entities corresponding to the search results. For example, the clustering score could be the percentage of search results for entities physically located within a pre-determined radius of each other, or the radius needed to encompass a pre-determined percentage of the entities associated with the search results. Other conventional metrics of the degree of clustering of the locations can alternatively be used. In some implementations, the system derives a clustering score for the global set of search results and does not derive a clustering score for any of the location-specific sets of search results. In other implementations, the system derives a clustering score for all of the sets of search results).
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to incorporate the teaching of Donaker into the method of Caillette to have maintain a first pre-determined response number threshold, keep tally of received responses or qualified responses. Here, combining Donaker with Caillette which are both related to query processing improves Caillette by providing a map-based search user interface, and presenting the primary set of search results in the map-based user interface, (See Donaker paragraph [0005].
Remarks
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. Borghei et al. (US 20160286349 A1) discloses Methods, systems, and computer-readable media for forming and tracking a location-sharing group are disclosed. The location-sharing group can be performed ad hoc without the assistance of a central server. A geofence can be defined that encloses the current locations of the participating devices in the location-sharing group.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to DINKU W GEBRESENBET whose telephone number is (571)270-1636. The examiner can normally be reached between 8:00AM-5:00PM.
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, Amy Ng can be reached on 571- 270-1698. 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.
/DINKU W GEBRESENBET/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2164
Prosecution Insights