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 .
Status of the Claims
Claims 1-6 are currently pending.
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement filed 7/17/2024 fails to comply with 37 CFR 1.98(a)(2), which requires a legible copy of each cited foreign patent document; each non-patent literature publication or that portion which caused it to be listed; and all other information or that portion which caused it to be listed. Applicant has only provided the abstract to NPL Citation 2. It has been placed in the application file, but the information referred to therein has not been considered.
Specification
The title of the invention is not descriptive. A new title is required that is clearly indicative of the invention to which the claims are directed.
The following title is suggested: ANIMAL BEHAVIOR HISTORY ANALYSIS SUPPORTING APPARATUS, ANALYSIS SUPPORTING METHOD, AND COMPUTER PROGRAM.
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 6 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 101 because it does not fall into any of the categories of statutory subject matter.
Claim 6 recites: “A computer program for causing a computer to function as the analysis supporting apparatus according to claim 1.” This recites software per se. Functional descriptive material such as a computer program must be structurally and functionally interrelated with a medium to allow its intended uses to be realized. Accordingly, claims directed to software per se are not within any of the four statutory categories and are not patentable subject matter. In re Warmerdam, 33 F.3d 1354, 1361, 31 USPQ2d 1754, 1760 (Fed. Cir. 1994). See MPEP § 2106.03 for further guidance and discussion on computer-related nonstatutory subject matter.
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 4 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 4 recites “information is presented to the target animal using a terminal apparatus and the behavior history information for each identified individual is acquired.” A terminal device has already been introduced in claim 1, and it is not clear if this is referencing the same or a different terminal device. Moreover, the terminal device in claim 1 is recited in the alternative, and if the devices are the same it is unclear how this step would be performed if the terminal device is not present.
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)(1) the claimed invention was patented, described in a printed publication, or in public use, on sale, or otherwise available to the public before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claims 1-3 and 5-6 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Abels, et al., U.S. Pat. Pub. No. 2020/0404883 (Reference A of the attached PTO-892).
As per claim 1, Abels teaches an analysis supporting apparatus comprising: an individual tracker configured to acquire behavior history information indicating a behavior history of each individual of a target animal, which is an animal to be analyzed, based on at least one piece of information (¶¶ 0008-10, 42) among image information obtained by an image sensor that acquires an image of the target animal, acoustic information obtained by an acoustic sensor that acquires a sound emitted by the target animal, information obtained from a wearable sensor attached to the target animal (¶ 0014), and information obtained from a terminal apparatus.
As per claim 2, Abels teaches claim 1 as above. Abels further teaches the wearable sensor is an acceleration sensor that obtains acceleration information of the target animal to which the wearable sensor is attached (¶ 0025).
As per claim 3, Abels teaches claim 1 as above. Abels further teaches the individual tracker uses individual information stored in a storage unit to identify individuals in the used information, and to acquire the behavior history information for each identified individual (¶¶ 0009, 38).
As per claim 5, Abels teaches an analysis supporting method comprising: acquiring at least one piece of information (¶¶ 0008-10, 42) among image information obtained by an image sensor that acquires an image of a target animal, which is an animal to be analyzed, acoustic information obtained by an acoustic sensor that acquires a sound emitted by the target animal, information obtained from a wearable sensor attached to the target animal (¶ 0014), and information obtained from a terminal apparatus; and acquiring behavior history information indicating a behavior history of each individual of the target animal based on the acquired information of the target animal (¶¶ 0008-10, 42).
As per claim 6, Abels teaches a computer program for causing a computer to function as the analysis supporting apparatus according to claim 1 (¶ 0051, see also citations above).
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 4 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Abels, et al. in view of Poom, U.S. Pat. Pub. No. 2013/0333633 (Reference B of the attached PTO-892).
As per claim 4, Abels teaches claim 1 as above. Abels does not explicitly teach information is presented to the target animal using a terminal apparatus and the behavior history information for each identified individual is acquired. However, this is taught by Poon (¶¶ 0027-30). It would have been prima facie obvious to incorporate this element for the same reason it is useful in Poon—namely, to test the animal’s response to particular stimuli (¶ 0032). Moreover, this is merely a combination of old elements in the art of tracking animal behavior. In the combination, no element would serve a purpose other than it already did independently, and one skilled in the art would have recognized that the combination could have been implemented through routine engineering producing predictable results.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure:
De Jesus, et al., U.S. Pat. Pub. No. 2022/0369600 (Reference C of the attached PTO-892) relates to an animal tracking an analysis system.
Betts-Laceoix, et al., U.S. Pat. Pub. No. 2018/0146644 (Reference D of the attached PTO-892) relates to an animal tracking an analysis system.
Trottier, et al., U.S. Pat. Pub. No. 2017/0196196 (Reference E of the attached PTO-892) relates to an animal tracking an analysis system.
Waymouth, U.S. Pat. Pub. No. 2016/0044897 (Reference F of the attached PTO-892) relates to an animal tracking an analysis system.
Kong, U.S. Pat. Pub. No. 2015/0359201 (Reference G of the attached PTO-892) relates to an animal tracking an analysis system.
So, U.S. Pat. Pub. No. 2015/0196011 (Reference H of the attached PTO-892) relates to an animal tracking an analysis system.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to DANIEL VETTER whose telephone number is (571)270-1366. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 9:00-6:00.
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, Shannon Campbell can be reached at 571-272-5587. 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.
/DANIEL VETTER/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3628
Prosecution Insights