Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status
The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
This office action is in response to amendments filed on July 10, 2024.
Claims 3-8 have been amended.
Claim 9 has been added.
Claim 1-9 are pending.
Claim Interpretation
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(f):
(f) Element in Claim for a Combination. – An element in a claim for a combination may be expressed as a means or step for performing a specified function without the recital of structure, material, or acts in support thereof, and such claim shall be construed to cover the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification and equivalents thereof.
The following is a quotation of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph:
An element in a claim for a combination may be expressed as a means or step for performing a specified function without the recital of structure, material, or acts in support thereof, and such claim shall be construed to cover the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification and equivalents thereof.
The claims in this application are given their broadest reasonable interpretation using the plain meaning of the claim language in light of the specification as it would be understood by one of ordinary skill in the art. The broadest reasonable interpretation of a claim element (also commonly referred to as a claim limitation) is limited by the description in the specification when 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is invoked.
As explained in MPEP § 2181, subsection I, claim limitations that meet the following three-prong test will be interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph:
(A) the claim limitation uses the term “means” or “step” or a term used as a substitute for “means” that is a generic placeholder (also called a nonce term or a non-structural term having no specific structural meaning) for performing the claimed function;
(B) the term “means” or “step” or the generic placeholder is modified by functional language, typically, but not always linked by the transition word “for” (e.g., “means for”) or another linking word or phrase, such as “configured to” or “so that”; and
(C) the term “means” or “step” or the generic placeholder is not modified by sufficient structure, material, or acts for performing the claimed function.
Use of the word “means” (or “step”) in a claim with functional language creates a rebuttable presumption that the claim limitation is to be treated in accordance with 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph. The presumption that the claim limitation is interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is rebutted when the claim limitation recites sufficient structure, material, or acts to entirely perform the recited function.
Absence of the word “means” (or “step”) in a claim creates a rebuttable presumption that the claim limitation is not to be treated in accordance with 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph. The presumption that the claim limitation is not interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is rebutted when the claim limitation recites function without reciting sufficient structure, material or acts to entirely perform the recited function.
Claim limitations in this application that use the word “means” (or “step”) are being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, except as otherwise indicated in an Office action. Conversely, claim limitations in this application that do not use the word “means” (or “step”) are not being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, except as otherwise indicated in an Office action.
This application includes one or more claim limitations that do not use the word “means,” but are nonetheless being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, because the claim limitation(s) uses a generic placeholder that is coupled with functional language without reciting sufficient structure to perform the recited function and the generic placeholder is not preceded by a structural modifier. Such claim limitation(s) is/are: an image acquisition unit that acquires, a dictionary storage unit that stores, a display mode storage unit that stores, a state information acquisition unit that acquires, a generation unit that generates, an association unit that associates, and an output unit that outputs in claim 1, the display mode storage unit further stores in claim 5, the display mode storage unit further stores in claim 6, and the display mode storage unit further stores in claim 7.
Because this/these claim limitation(s) is/are being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, it/they is/are being interpreted to cover the corresponding structure described in the specification as performing the claimed function, and equivalents thereof. The instant specification states an image acquisition unit, a dictionary storage unit, a display mode storage unit, a state information acquisition unit, a generation unit, an association unit, and an output unit are implemented in software “The image acquisition unit 21, the state information acquisition unit 24, the generation unit 25, the associating unit 26, and the output unit 27 are implemented when the hardware processor 201 performs computation processing ... The dictionary storage unit 22 and the display mode storage unit 23 are implemented with various data being stored in the RAM 204” ([0039]).
If applicant does not intend to have this/these limitation(s) interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, applicant may: (1) amend the claim limitation(s) to avoid it/them being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph (e.g., by reciting sufficient structure to perform the claimed function); or (2) present a sufficient showing that the claim limitation(s) recite(s) sufficient structure to perform the claimed function so as to avoid it/them being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 101
35 U.S.C. 101 reads as follows:
Whoever invents or discovers any new and useful process, machine, manufacture, or composition of matter, or any new and useful improvement thereof, may obtain a patent therefor, subject to the conditions and requirements of this title.
Claim 9 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 101 because the claimed invention is directed to non-statutory subject matter. During examination proceedings, claims are given their broadest reasonable interpretation consistent with the specification. See In re Zletz, 893 F.2d 319 (Fed. Cir. 1989). The examiner notes that the instant specification describes examples of computer-readable storage medium “ROM 203 is a computer-readable storage medium ... The nonvolatile memory 205 is a computer-readable storage medium” ([0019] and [0021]) and does not explicitly exclude transmission media. As such, the broadest reasonable interpretation of a claim drawn to a “computer-readable storage medium” covers forms of non-transitory tangible media and transitory propagating signals per se in view of the ordinary and customary meaning of “computer-readable storage medium”. The transmission media are forms of energy, per se, and thus currently not believed to fall within a statutory category. The examiner suggests adding the term “non-transitory” to medium claim 9 to distinguish between statutory and non-statutory subject matter.
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 1-7 and 9 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable Mullins et al. (US20160055674A1) in further view of Maki et al. (US7293067B1) and Shelton et al. (US20220331047A1).
Regarding claim 1, Mullins teaches an information generation device (A device can be used to generate and display data in addition to an image captured with the device. For example, augmented reality (AR))([0002]) comprising:
an image acquisition unit that acquires an image indicating a state of an industrial machine (AR experience triggered by identified objects in the physical environment 114. The physical environment 114 may include ... a 3D physical object (e.g., a factory machine) ... The user 102 may point a camera of the head mounted device 101 to capture an image ... The reading and status of the devices 116 and 118 may be monitored through one or more head mounted device 101 ... a computer-readable medium 1322 on which is stored one or more sets of data structures and instructions 1324 (e.g., software) embodying or utilized by any one or more of the methodologies or functions described herein)([0040] and [0098]; image representative of a device status is capture);
a … storage unit that stores … (The instructions 1324 may also reside, completely or at least partially, within the main memory 1304 … or within the processor 1302 during execution)([0098]; data is stored in memory);
a state information acquisition unit that acquires the state information (The data extraction module 212 determines a current reading from the analog or digital sensing device … based on an image)([0053]; status information (e.g., current reading) is acquired);
a generation unit that generates display information for displaying the drawing information associated with the state information … based on the state information acquired by the state information acquisition unit (The AR content generator module 214 may generate AR content based on the data extracted from the sensing device using the data extraction module 212)([0057]; AR content associated with status information of a device is generated);
an associating unit that associates the display information generated by the generation unit with the image acquired by the image acquisition unit (the AR content mapping module 216 determines the position and size of the rendered object to be displayed in relation to an image or a view of the analog sensing device)([0061]; generated AR content and captured image are mapped);
and an output unit that outputs the display information and the image associated with each other by the associating unit (visualization of a 3D virtual object overlaid on (e.g., superimposed upon, or otherwise displayed in tandem with) an image of a physical object captured by a camera of the head mounted device 101 in the display 204 ... FIG. 12G is a diagram illustrating an example of a display of a head mounted device (e.g., head mounted device 101) displaying AR content identifying a reading from an analog device)([0064] and [0084]; Figure 12G – an exemplary display of a mapping of AR content and captured image is shown).
Mullins differs from the claim in that Mullins fails to teach storing a dictionary indicating control state of a machine with related visual depiction of the control state. However, storing a dictionary indicating control state of a machine with related visual depiction of the control state is taught by Maki (Each device stores icon information for various events which possibly occur in the device in a memory unit. For example, the color LBP 101 holds icon information indicating an operated state (ready), icon information indicating a paper shortage state (no paper), and icon information indicating a jam occurrence state (paper jammed) as shown in FIG. 8 ... Other devices also hold various icon information indicating the device states)(column 8 lines 11-24).
The examiner notes Mullins and Maki teach displaying status data. As such, it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Mullins to include the storing of Maki such that a dictionary indicating control state of a machine with related visual depiction of the control state is stored. One would be motivated to make such a combination to provide the advantage of mapping status information to a corresponding depiction.
The combination of Mullins-Maki fails to teach storing display mode for controlling depiction of state information. However, storing display mode for controlling depiction of state information is taught by Shelton (the present disclosure provides onscreen displays of visual information ... to selectively activate onscreen displays such as icons surrounding the screen option to manage a wealth of visual information ... comprises a transition between display modes such as, for example, a static, or passive, display mode and a dynamic, or active, display mode ... data initially assigned 6012 a low display priority value can be displayed, or overlaid onto a livestream ... later transitioned into an active display mode due to an increase in the display priority value)([0237] and [0380]; active/dynamic and passive/static display modes are stored).
The examiner notes Mullins, Maki, and Shelton teach displaying status data. As such, it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Mullins-Maki to include the storing of Shelton such that display mode for controlling depiction of state information is stored. One would be motivated to make such a combination to provide the advantage of managing display of information based on display modes.
Regarding claim 2, Mullins-Maki-Shelton teach the information generation device according to claim 1, wherein the state information includes at least any one of information indicating a state of a signal, information indicating a state of a macro variable, information indicating a state of a shared variable, information indicating a setup state of a parameter, and information indicating a setup state of an offset (Mullins - The level identifier module 406 identifies a measured level or a current reading from the sensing device. For example, the level identifier module 406 identifies a position of a needle or hand)([0056]).
Regarding claim 3, Mullins-Maki-Shelton teach the information generation device according to claim 1, wherein the display mode includes at least any one of a color, a size, a display position, a display time, an animation format, and a drawing method (Shelton - the static display mode differs from the active display mode in one or more of size, shape, display time, display location, display three dimensional arrangement ... display blinking, highlighting, and/or font, for example)([0381]).
Regarding claim 4, Mullins-Maki-Shelton teach the information generation device according to claim 2, wherein the display mode includes at least any one of a color, a size, a display position, a display time, an animation format, and a drawing method (Shelton - the static display mode differs from the active display mode in one or more of size, shape, display time, display location, display three dimensional arrangement ... display blinking, highlighting, and/or font, for example)([0381]).
Regarding claim 5, Mullins-Maki-Shelton teach the information generation device according to claim 1, wherein the display mode storage unit further stores the display mode in association with at least any one of a level of a value indicated by the state information and a change rate of the value indicated by the state information (Shelton - Various operational parameters ... can initially be presented in the dynamic display mode, then transitioned into the static display mode, as the significance level of such parameters changes)([0383]).
Regarding claim 6, Mullins-Maki-Shelton teach the information generation device according to claim 1, wherein the display mode storage unit further stores display priority in association with the type of the state information (Shelton - the assigned 6012 display priority values comprise various levels of display priority such as, for example, a low display priority level, a medium display priority level, and/or a high display priority level)([0318]).
Regarding claim 7, Mullins-Maki-Shelton teach the information generation device according to claim 1, wherein the display mode storage unit further stores information indicating whether the drawing information is displayed or hidden in association with a manner of a change of the state information (Shelton - may display information only for devices which are actively being used ... inactive device displays are hidden)([0986]).
Regarding computer-readable store medium claim 9, the claim generally corresponds to device claim 1, and recites similar features in computer-readable store medium form; therefore, the claim is rejected under similar rationale.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claim 8 is allowed.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record on form PTO-892 and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. Applicant is required under 37 C.F.R. § 1.111(c) to consider the reference fully when responding to this action. The document cited therein and enumerated below teaches a method and apparatus for recognizing and displaying machine state.
US20090319058A1
US20170090196A1
US20180253876A1
US20200336707A1
US20210027485A1
US20210181707A1
US20220108262A1
US8830267B2
US10410424B1
US11443133B2
US11528582B2
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Yongjia Pan whose telephone number is (571)270-1177. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday, 9:00 AM - 5:00 PM EST.
Examiner interviews are available via telephone, in-person, and video conferencing using a USPTO supplied web-based collaboration tool. To schedule an interview, applicant is encouraged to use the USPTO Automated Interview Request (AIR) at http://www.uspto.gov/interviewpractice.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Scott Baderman can be reached at 571-272-3644. 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.
/YONGJIA PAN/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2118
Prosecution Insights