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 .
Election/Restrictions
Applicant’s election without traverse of claims 16-28 and 30 in the reply filed on 9/8/2026 is acknowledged.
Claims 1-15 and 29 are withdrawn from further consideration pursuant to 37 CFR 1.142(b) as being drawn to a nonelected invention, there being no allowable generic or linking claim. Election was made without traverse in the reply filed on 9/8/2026.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(b):
(b) CONCLUSION.—The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph:
The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the applicant regards as his invention.
Claim 16 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor (or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the applicant), regards as the invention.
Claim 16 recites the limitation "the one or more criteria" in line 9. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. The limitation appears to be referring to one or more predefined criteria, however it is not clear if it is meant to recite predefined criteria or another set of criteria.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
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 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)(2) the claimed invention was described in a patent issued under section 151, or in an application for patent published or deemed published under section 122(b), in which the patent or application, as the case may be, names another inventor and was effectively filed before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claims 16-17, 19-23, 25-28, and 30 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) as being anticipated by Laster (US 2019/0120959 A1).
Regarding claims 16 and 21, Laster discloses a fishing sonar apparatus for scanning a body of water, wherein the fishing sonar apparatus comprises a control unit configured to:
obtain a first set of instructions comprising location data of a first location [[fig. 11] receive an indication of a user input associated with the waypoint #1018];
obtain a second set of instructions comprising one or more predefined criteria [[fig. 11] receive position data from a position sensor #1024; determine a current location of the vessel based on the position data #1026; determine that the current location is within a predetermined distance threshold of the waypoint #1032];
perform at least one sonar scan in said first location by means of a sonar module comprised in the fishing sonar apparatus [[0034] sonar transducer, such as a downscan transducer for capturing sonar data in a body of water 102 (although other transducers are contemplated, such as sidescan transducers, transducers with different shapes, phased-array transducers, etc.)];
obtain sonar data associated with the at least one sonar scan in the first location [[fig. 10] receive one or more user inputs defining the event criteria #1002; compare the sonar images to the event criteria defined by the one or more user inputs #1008; [0071] sonar may be used to determine acoustic locations and/or measurements of echo characteristics for targets and objects in a body of water.], wherein the obtained sonar data comprises at least one characteristic of the first location to be compared with the one or more criteria [[0017] the event criteria type includes a fish, a fish size, a fish depth, a school of fish, a wreck, an underwater structure, a depth change exceeding a threshold depth change, or bottom density.]; and
identify, based on the sonar data and said one or more predefined criteria, one or more second location(s) being substantially comprised in the first location, wherein said sonar data comprises sonar data associated with the one or more second location [[fig. 10] determine an instance in which an event criteria is satisfied #1010; determine a location associated with the instance in which the event criteria is satisfied #1012; [0127] in order to limit or prevent missing potential sonar events of interest, the computing device may be configured to generate a waypoint 808, such as on the navigation chart 804, identifying the location of an event ( e.g., sonar event 806) and store the sonar image 802 ( e.g., a screenshot of or a video including the sonar image 802) in association with the waypoint.].
(claim 21: method performed by a fishing sonar apparatus for scanning a body of water, the method comprising: obtaining a first set of instructions comprising location data of a first location; obtaining a second set of instructions comprising one or more predefined criteria; performing at least one sonar scan in said first location by means of a sonar module comprised in the fishing sonar apparatus; obtaining sonar data associated with the at least one sonar scan in the first location; wherein the obtained sonar data comprises at least one characteristic of the first location to be compared with the one or more criteria; and- identifying , based on the sonar data and said one or more predefined criteria, one or more second location(s) being substantially comprised in the first location, wherein the sonar data comprises sonar data associated with the one or more second location [[fig. 11][0034][0071]], where the claim appears to be a method form of the system and is therefore rejected for similar reasons)
Regarding claims 17 and 22, Laster teaches the fishing sonar apparatus according to claims 16 and 21, wherein the control unit is further configured to: compare the obtained sonar data associated with the at least one sonar scan in the first location with said one or more predefined criteria [[fig. 10] compare the sonar images to the event criteria defined by the one or more user inputs]; and determine if the obtained sonar data of the one or more second location comprising at least one characteristic of the one or more second location to be compared with the one or more criteria matches the one or more predefined criteria [[fig. 10] determine a location associated with the instance in which the event criteria is satisfied], and if it is determined that the sonar data of the one or more second location matches the one or more predefined criteria, identify the one or more second location [[0127] order to limit or prevent missing potential sonar events of interest, the computing device may be configured to generate a waypoint 808, such as on the navigation chart 804, identifying the location of an event ( e.g., sonar event 806) and store the sonar image 802 ( e.g., a screenshot of or a video including the sonar image 802) in association with the waypoint.].
Regarding claims 19 and 25, Laster teaches the fishing sonar apparatus according to claims 16 and 21, wherein the control unit is further configured to obtain the first and the second set of instructions by retrieving said first and said second set of instructions from a memory of the fishing sonar apparatus and/or by receiving from a wireless device, a wireless signal comprising said first and said second set of instructions [[0010] marine electronics system also includes a marine electronics device including a user interface comprising a display, a processor, and a memory including computer program code. The computing program code is configured to, with the processor, cause the marine electronics device to receive the sonar returns from the transducer element at a location, generate a sonar image based on the sonar returns, determine, based on at least one of the sonar returns or the sonar image, an instance in which an event criteria is satisfied, determine the location associated with the instance in which the event criteria is satisfied; [0047] network may include various types of communication networks and/or cloud based networks, including wired networks and/or wireless networks.].
Regarding claim 20, Laster teaches the fishing sonar apparatus according to claim 16, wherein the fishing sonar apparatus is comprised in a vessel or in a castable enclosure [[0034] body of water 102 using sonar data and then auto-recording sonar data received from a sonar transducer mounted to a vessel, e.g., a boat, and alternatively, using a castable sonar transducer.].
Regarding claim 23, Laster teaches the method according to claim 21, wherein the one or more predefined criteria comprises a set of characteristics comprising any one of a predefined shape, a predefined size, a predefined water depth, a predefined water depth alteration profile, a predefined sea-bottom profile, a predefined species of fish, a temperature parameter of the water, a salinity parameter of the water, and a thermocline depth parameter of the water [[0008] event-related icon may indicate an event criteria type, such as a fish, a fish size, a fish depth, a school of fish, a wreck, an underwater structure, a depth change exceeding a threshold depth change, bottom density, water temperature, water temperature change exceeding a threshold temperature change, or the like. In some example embodiments the event criteria may be defined by user input, such as a fish size threshold and a fish depth threshold].
Regarding claim 26, Laster teaches the method according to claim 25, wherein the method further comprises: - transmitting at least one of the at least one sonar scan performed in the first and/or in the one or more second location, the sonar data associated with the at least one sonar scan performed in the first and/or in the one or more second location, the identified one or more second location, and the at least one characteristic of the identified one or more second location to the wireless device [[0062] computing device 404 may automatically upload the sonar data to a remote server and/or database via a wired or wireless network. For instance, the computing device 404 may be configured to interface and communicate with at least one network server (e.g., cloud server) via at least one network (e.g., cloud based network). The computing device 404 may include a network interface 416, such as a wired or wireless device configured to interface and communicate with various types of network communication protocols].
Regarding claim 27, Laster teaches the method according claim 21, wherein the method further comprises: - maneuvering the vessel to said first location based on the obtained first set of instructions comprising the location data of the first location and instructions to maneuver the vessel to the first location [[0013] marine electronics system also includes an autopilot configured to control one or more propulsion systems of the vessel.].
Regarding claim 28, Laster teaches a computer program carrier carrying one or more computer programs configured to be executed by one or more processors of a processing system comprised in a control unit, the one or more programs comprising instructions for performing the method according claim 21, and wherein the computer program carrier is one of an electronic signal, optical signal, radio signal or a computer-readable storage medium [[0010] marine electronics system also includes a marine electronics device including a user interface comprising a display, a processor, and a memory including computer program code. The computing program code is configured to, with the processor, cause the marine electronics device to receive the sonar returns from the transducer element at a location, generate a sonar image based on the sonar returns].
Regarding claim 30, Laster teaches a vessel for scanning a body of water, the vessel comprising: a perception system for monitoring a surrounding environment of the vessel such as the body of water; a localization system configured to monitor a geographical position and heading of the vessel; and a fishing sonar apparatus according to claim 16 [[0047] computing device 220 may include a geo-positioning transceiver for receiving global positioning system data 206 (i.e., GPS data). As such, in some implementations, the computing device 220 may be configured to receive and associate geo-coordinate data, such as the GPS data 206, to one or more of the sonar data 202 and the sensor data 204 at any time, including prior to upload].
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.
Claims 18 and 24 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Laster (US 2019/0120959 A1) as applied to claims 16 and 22 above, and further in view of Shi (CN 113744166 A).
Regarding claims 18 and 24, Laster does not explicitly teach and yet Shi teaches the fishing sonar apparatus according claims 16 and 22, wherein the control unit is further configured to: determine if the sonar data of the one or more second location matches the one or more predefined criteria, by calculating a loss function comprising one or more similarity parameter indicative of an agreement between the at least one characteristic of the one or more second location and the one or more predefined criteria; and if an output of the calculated loss function falls below a predetermined threshold value, identify the one or more second location [[0001] more specifically to a method for enhancing images of fish in turbid water; [0110] Cross-entropy can measure the similarity between y and Y1. Using binary cross-entropy as the loss function to calculate the difference can not only accurately reflect the differences between data distributions, but also control the learning rate of the network by controlling the learning rate.].
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the invention with a reasonable expectation of success, to modify the sonar imaging as taught by Laster, with the comparison of images using a loss function to measure similarity as taught by Shi so that a learning model can be trained to correctly identify fish.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JONATHAN D ARMSTRONG whose telephone number is (571)270-7339. The examiner can normally be reached M - F 9am-5pm.
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, Isam Alsomiri can be reached at 571-272-6970. 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.
/JONATHAN D ARMSTRONG/ Examiner, Art Unit 3645
