DETAILED ACTION
This action is responsive to the Application filed on 06/25/2024. Claims 1-11 are pending in the case. Claims 1 and 9 are independent claims.
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 .
Priority
Acknowledgment is made of applicant’s claim for foreign priority under 35 U.S.C. 119 (a)-(d). The certified copy has been filed in parent Application No. JP2022-001723, filed on 01/07/2022.
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statements (IDS) submitted on 06/25/2024, 07/24/2024, 02/17/2025, and 12/02/2025 are in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statements are being considered by the examiner.
Specification
The title of the invention is objected to because it is not descriptive. A new title is required that is clearly indicative of the invention to which the claims are directed. See MPEP § 606.01.
Claim Objections
Claims 2-7 and 11 are objected to because of the following informalities:
Claim 2:
Lines 1-2 recites “wherein the processor is configured to” where “wherein the processor is further configured to” was apparently intended.
Claim 3:
Lines 1-2 recites “wherein the processor is configured to” where “wherein the processor is further configured to” was apparently intended.
Claim 4:
Lines 1-2 recites “wherein the processor is configured to” where “wherein the processor is further configured to” was apparently intended.
Claim 5:
Line 3 recites “wherein the processor is configured to” where “wherein the processor is further configured to” was apparently intended.
Line 6 improperly reintroduces the limitation “information” (antecedent basis for this limitation had already been established in line 4 of parent claim 1).
Claim 6:
Lines 1-2 recites “wherein the data controller is configured to” where “wherein the processor is further configured to” was apparently intended.
Claim 7:
Line 3 recites “wherein the processor is configured to” where “wherein the processor is further configured to” was apparently intended.
Claim 11:
The numbering of claims (i.e. dependent claim 11 depending on dependent claim 1) is not in accordance with 37 CFR 1.126. The presented claims must be numbered consecutively beginning with the number next following the highest numbered claims previously presented. A series of singular dependent claims is permissible in which a dependent claim refers to a preceding claim which, in turn, refers to another preceding claim. A claim which depends from a dependent claim should not be separated by any claim which does not also depend from said dependent claim. It should be kept in mind that a dependent claim may refer to any preceding independent claim. See MPEP § 608.01(n) and 37 CFR 1.75(g): “(t)he least restrictive claim should be presented as claim number 1, and all dependent claims should be grouped together with the claim or claims to which they refer…”
Appropriate correction is required.
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.
Claims 2, 4, and 5 are 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 pre-AIA the applicant regards as the invention. See, for example:
Claim 2:
Parent claim 1 recites a “user operation to adjust a parameter via the input interface” in line 12. However, line 3 of dependent claim 2 recites the same “the user operation” albeit now tied to a different functionality/intended result (“to designate a requirement for the adjusted parameter to apply in the adjacency range”). This introduces indefiniteness concerns because based on the specification, these two functionalities appeared to be triggered by distinct and independent user operations, while the claims as technically recited appear to imply that a single user operation triggers both results, making it unclear whether a single user operation or two distinct user operations were actually intended.
Claim 4:
Parent claim 1 recites a “user operation to adjust a parameter via the input interface” in line 12. However, lines 2-3 of dependent claim 4 recite the same “the user operation” albeit now tied to a different functionality/intended result (“to designate the adjacency range in the display information”). This introduces indefiniteness concerns because based on the specification, these two functionalities appeared to be triggered by distinct and independent user operations, while the claims as technically recited appear to imply that a single user operation triggers both results, making it unclear whether a single user operation or two distinct user operations were actually intended.
Claim 5:
Parent claim 1 recites a “user operation to adjust a parameter via the input interface” in line 12. However, lines 4-5 of dependent claim 4 recite the same “the user operation” albeit now tied to a different functionality/intended result (“to select a pattern from the plurality of patterns indicated by the pattern information”). This introduces indefiniteness concerns because based on the specification, these two functionalities appeared to be triggered by distinct and independent user operations, while the claims as technically recited appear to imply that a single user operation triggers both results, making it unclear whether a single user operation or two distinct user operations were actually intended.
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 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 1-11 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Takahata et al. (US Patent Application Pub. No. 2009/0003653, hereinafter “Takahata”).
As to claims 1, 9, and 10, Takahata shows a data analysis device [¶ 03], a data analysis method [¶ 03], and a concomitant non-transitory computer-readable recording medium [¶ 39] for controlling generation of at least one data string [e.g. a trajectory] indicating a detection result of an object detected in time sequence in a field [¶¶ 03 & 46], comprising:
a display configured to display information [¶ 38]; an input interface configured to receive a user operation [¶ 38]; and a processor configured to control a data controller that manages the detection result of the object to generate the data string [¶ 40], wherein the processor is configured to:
cause the display to display display information including an adjacency range in which ends of a plurality of fragments of the data string are adjacent to each other in the field [the display displays display information including an adjacency range (either a temporal or physical distance) in which ends of a plurality of fragments of the data string (e.g. a list of trajectories, including a coupling source trajectory and a coupling destination trajectory) are adjacent to each other in the field (¶¶ 60-62, 136-140, 148-155, & 190-194)];
receive the user operation to adjust a parameter via the input interface, the parameter indicating a condition for the plurality of fragments of the data strings to be connected to each other in the adjacency range; and control the data controller to apply the adjusted parameter in the adjacency range, according to the user operation on the input interface [A user operation may be received via the input interface and applied to adjust a parameter indicating a condition for the plurality of fragments of the data strings to be connected/coupled to each other in the adjacency range/threshold/distance (¶¶ 112-114, 138-140, 158-169, 186, & 190-194)].
As to dependent claim 2, Takahata further shows:
wherein the processor is configured to: receive, via the input interface, the user operation to designate a requirement for the adjusted parameter to apply in the adjacency range [a user operation may designate a requirement (like a coupling rule or threshold) for the adjusted parameter to apply in the adjacency range (¶¶ 112-114, 138-140, 158-169, 186, & 190-194)]; and
control the data controller not to apply the adjusted parameter when the designated requirement is not satisfied [controlling the data controller not to apply the adjusted parameter when the designated requirement/threshold is not satisfied (¶¶ 147, 150, 162-163, 186, & 190-194)], and
to apply the adjusted parameter when the designated requirement is satisfied [applying the adjusted parameter when the designated requirement/threshold is satisfied (¶¶ 147, 150, 162-163, 186, & 190-194)].
As to dependent claim 3, Takahata further shows:
wherein the processor is configured to: detect the adjacency range as a candidate for discontinuity of the data string, based on the data string generated by the data controller; and provide a notification of the detected adjacency range in the display information [“{…} the control section 26 creates a coupling destination candidate list in step 94. This list includes trajectory IDs, start point coordinates, and end point coordinates of respective pieces of edit trajectory data remaining as coupling target candidates. The trajectory IDs, the start point coordinates, and the end point coordinates are aligned in the list in ascending order of time difference. The coupling destination candidate list is displayed in the trajectory list display section 43.” (¶ 148)
“{…} in the trajectory processing apparatus 20, only edit trajectory data determined to have at least one of a start point and an end point present in a monitoring target region is displayed in the list as a trajectory that is a coupling destination. Therefore, candidates for the coupling destination trajectory are narrowed down, thereby simplifying an selecting operation.
Moreover, in the trajectory processing apparatus 20, whether an end point position of trajectory data selected as a coupling source trajectory matches with a start point position of trajectory data selected as a coupling destination trajectory is judged. Additionally, when the end point does not match with the start point, a space between the end point and the start point is automatically interpolated.
Further, there may be a case where a customer is hidden behind, e.g., a store shelf, an advertising poster of an article for sale, or a POP placed in the store so that a trajectory cannot be traced from camera images. Even in such a case, a trajectory in a section where tracing is impossible can be manually created by the marker registering function in the trajectory processing apparatus 20.” (¶¶ 192-194) | See also ¶¶ 57, 138-140, 146-155, & 169].
As to dependent claim 4, Takahata further shows:
wherein the processor is configured to receive, via the input interface, the user operation to designate the adjacency range in the display information, and cause the display to display detailed information on a fragment of the data string of which an end is located in the designated adjacency range [“{…} when the customer is hidden behind the store shelf, his/her movement cannot be traced. In this case, the operator specifies a section where tracing has failed. Further, a trajectory corresponding to movement of the customer in this section is created in the trajectory display section 42 based on dot marking. Then, edit trajectory data of this trajectory is registered in the edit trajectory database 33. This edit trajectory data is determined as a coupling destination trajectory with respect to the coupling source trajectory. Therefore, the control section 26 advances to coupling definition processing in step 18 when the marker registration processing is terminated.” (¶ 169)
“When a user creates a trajectory as a coupling destination candidate for himself/herself, he/she clicks the marker registration icon 45 to declare marker registration. When the marker registration icon 45 is clicked, the control section 26 determines that marker registration has been declared in step 16. In this case, the control section 26 executes marker registration processing in step 17. A flowchart of FIG. 14 shows a processing procedure of this marker registration processing.
{…} the control section 26 waits for a dot to be marked in the trajectory display section 41 in step 104 (a trajectory input acceptance section). The operator operates the tool to mark the dot at a position that becomes a start point of a trajectory as a coupling destination candidate in the trajectory display section 41.
When the dot is marked, the control section 26 acquires an in-store coordinate (x, y) of this dot in step 105. Furthermore, it calculates a distance between this in-store coordinate (x, y) and an end coordinate (Xn, Yn) of the coupling source trajectory.” (¶¶ 158-161)].
As to dependent claim 5, Takahata further shows:
a memory [¶¶ 39-40] storing pattern information including a plurality of patterns in which the object is not detected in the field [a memory (¶¶ 39-40) stores pattern information including a plurality of patterns/trajectory fragment representations in which the object is not detected in the field (¶¶ 138-140, 169, & 192-194)],
wherein the processor is configured to: receive, via the input interface, the user operation to select a pattern from the plurality of patterns indicated by the pattern information [“{…} the control section 26 creates a trajectory list showing trajectory IDs, start point coordinates, and end point coordinates of the respective pieces of extracted edit trajectory data. The trajectory list is displayed in the trajectory list display section 43.
Then, the control section 26 waits until a coupling source trajectory data is selected from the trajectory list in step 7 (a first trajectory selecting section).
An operator manipulates the input section 21 to select an ID of a trajectory as a coupling source trajectory data from the trajectory list. When the trajectory ID is selected, the control section 26 stores this selected trajectory ID as an ID of the coupling source trajectory in step 8.” (¶¶ 112-114)]; and
cause the display to display information that prompts a user to adjust the parameter according to the selected pattern [“{…} when the customer is hidden behind the store shelf, his/her movement cannot be traced. In this case, the operator specifies a section where tracing has failed. Further, a trajectory corresponding to movement of the customer in this section is created in the trajectory display section 42 based on dot marking. Then, edit trajectory data of this trajectory is registered in the edit trajectory database 33. This edit trajectory data is determined as a coupling destination trajectory with respect to the coupling source trajectory. Therefore, the control section 26 advances to coupling definition processing in step 18 when the marker registration processing is terminated.” (¶ 169)
“When a user creates a trajectory as a coupling destination candidate for himself/herself, he/she clicks the marker registration icon 45 to declare marker registration. When the marker registration icon 45 is clicked, the control section 26 determines that marker registration has been declared in step 16. In this case, the control section 26 executes marker registration processing in step 17. A flowchart of FIG. 14 shows a processing procedure of this marker registration processing.
{…} the control section 26 waits for a dot to be marked in the trajectory display section 41 in step 104 (a trajectory input acceptance section). The operator operates the tool to mark the dot at a position that becomes a start point of a trajectory as a coupling destination candidate in the trajectory display section 41.
When the dot is marked, the control section 26 acquires an in-store coordinate (x, y) of this dot in step 105. Furthermore, it calculates a distance between this in-store coordinate (x, y) and an end coordinate (Xn, Yn) of the coupling source trajectory.” (¶¶ 158-161)].
As to dependent claim 6, Takahata further shows:
wherein the data controller is configured to: manage detection results from an image recognition model that detects the object, based on a captured image of the field; and generate the data string by sequentially connecting the detection results from the image recognition model based on the parameter [“According to one aspect of the present invention, there is provided a trajectory processing apparatus comprising: a trajectory database configured to store a position coordinate of a movable body detected from a camera image in association with data that specifies the camera image from which the movable body is detected; a camera image database configured to store the camera image; a data acquisition section configured to fetch the position coordinate of the movable body and the specifying data of the camera image from which the movable body is detected from the trajectory database; a trajectory display section configured to display the position coordinate of the movable body fetched by the data acquisition section as a trajectory of the movable body; a camera image acquisition section configured to acquire a camera image specified by the specifying data fetched by the data acquisition section from the camera image database; and a camera image display section configured to display the camera image acquired by the camera image acquisition section.” (¶ 09)
“The trajectory display section 41 shows a plan view of an in-store map based on image data stored in the in-store map database 37. A scroll bar 46 is provided in the trajectory display section 41. The scroll bar 46 is synchronized with a shooting time of each of the cameras CA1 to CA6. When the operator slides the scroll bar 46 from a left end toward a right end in the screen, a shooting time passes. Furthermore, a coordinate of a movable body detected from frame images shot by the respective cameras CA1 to CA6 is superimposed and displayed on the in-store map as a trajectory.
The camera image display section 42 shows images shot by the respective cameras CA1 to CA6 within a time specified by the scroll bar 46. As shown in the drawing, images of the six cameras CA1 to CA6 can be simultaneously displayed in alignment. Moreover, one or more camera images selected from these images can be expanded to be displayed.” (¶¶ 61-62)].
As to dependent claim 7, Takahata further shows:
a communication interface configured to communicate data with the data controller [¶ 38], wherein the processor is configured to: receive the data string from the data controller via the communication interface; and transmit the adjusted parameter to the data controller via the communication interface [the data string/trajectory is received from the data controller via the communication interface and the adjusted parameter is transmitted to the data controller via the communication interface (¶¶ 37-42)].
As to dependent claim 8, Takahata further shows:
wherein the data string includes at least one of a trajectory indicating the detection result of the object moved on a map showing the field, or a timeline indicating the detection result of the object in time order [the data string/trajectory includes at least one of a trajectory indicating the detection result of the object moved on a map showing the field, or a timeline indicating the detection result of the object in time order (¶¶ 09, 61, & 67)].
As to dependent claim 11, Takahata further shows:
wherein the at least one data string includes a plurality of data strings indicating detection results of a plurality of objects detected in the field [the at least one data string/trajectory includes a plurality of data strings/trajectories indicating detection results of a plurality of objects detected in the field (¶¶ 61, 191, & 223)].
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to Applicant’s disclosure. Applicants are required under 37 C.F.R. § 1.111(c) to consider these references fully when responding to this action.
Inventor
Document ID
Relevance
KONISHI; Yusuke
US 20200342609 A1
“receive the user operation to adjust a parameter via the input interface, the parameter indicating a condition for the plurality of fragments of the data strings to be connected to each other in the adjacency range; and control the data controller to apply the adjusted parameter in the adjacency range, according to the user operation on the input interface”
Iwasaki; Masahiro et al.
US 20110228987 A1
“receive the user operation to adjust a parameter via the input interface, the parameter indicating a condition for the plurality of fragments of the data strings to be connected to each other in the adjacency range; and control the data controller to apply the adjusted parameter in the adjacency range, according to the user operation on the input interface”
Yoshida; Satoshi et al.
US 20240304020 A1
“receive the user operation to adjust a parameter via the input interface, the parameter indicating a condition for the plurality of fragments of the data strings to be connected to each other in the adjacency range; and control the data controller to apply the adjusted parameter in the adjacency range, according to the user operation on the input interface”
Takahata; Masami et al.
US 20090003653 A1
“receive the user operation to adjust a parameter via the input interface, the parameter indicating a condition for the plurality of fragments of the data strings to be connected to each other in the adjacency range; and control the data controller to apply the adjusted parameter in the adjacency range, according to the user operation on the input interface”
MARUYAMA; Ayako et al.
US 20140344853 A1
“receive the user operation to adjust a parameter via the input interface, the parameter indicating a condition for the plurality of fragments of the data strings to be connected to each other in the adjacency range; and control the data controller to apply the adjusted parameter in the adjacency range, according to the user operation on the input interface”
CITERIN; JOHANN et al.
US 20170177947 A1
“receive the user operation to adjust a parameter via the input interface, the parameter indicating a condition for the plurality of fragments of the data strings to be connected to each other in the adjacency range; and control the data controller to apply the adjusted parameter in the adjacency range, according to the user operation on the input interface”
OSHIMA; Akiko
US 20200057892 A1
“receive the user operation to adjust a parameter via the input interface, the parameter indicating a condition for the plurality of fragments of the data strings to be connected to each other in the adjacency range; and control the data controller to apply the adjusted parameter in the adjacency range, according to the user operation on the input interface”
BALU; Raghavendran et al.
US 20210271995 A1
“receive the user operation to adjust a parameter via the input interface, the parameter indicating a condition for the plurality of fragments of the data strings to be connected to each other in the adjacency range; and control the data controller to apply the adjusted parameter in the adjacency range, according to the user operation on the input interface”
Kim; Tae Hoon
US 20230007985 A1
“receive the user operation to adjust a parameter via the input interface, the parameter indicating a condition for the plurality of fragments of the data strings to be connected to each other in the adjacency range; and control the data controller to apply the adjusted parameter in the adjacency range, according to the user operation on the input interface”
Moriguchi; Yukie et al.
US 20150019161 A1
“receive the user operation to adjust a parameter via the input interface, the parameter indicating a condition for the plurality of fragments of the data strings to be connected to each other in the adjacency range; and control the data controller to apply the adjusted parameter in the adjacency range, according to the user operation on the input interface”
BALU; RAGHAVENDRAN et al.
US 20210269057 A1
“receive the user operation to adjust a parameter via the input interface, the parameter indicating a condition for the plurality of fragments of the data strings to be connected to each other in the adjacency range; and control the data controller to apply the adjusted parameter in the adjacency range, according to the user operation on the input interface”
Nobori; Kunio et al.
US 20110002509 A1
“receive the user operation to adjust a parameter via the input interface, the parameter indicating a condition for the plurality of fragments of the data strings to be connected to each other in the adjacency range; and control the data controller to apply the adjusted parameter in the adjacency range, according to the user operation on the input interface”
Taguchi; Shinya
US 20120020518 A1
“receive the user operation to adjust a parameter via the input interface, the parameter indicating a condition for the plurality of fragments of the data strings to be connected to each other in the adjacency range; and control the data controller to apply the adjusted parameter in the adjacency range, according to the user operation on the input interface”
It is noted that any citation to specific pages, columns, lines, or figures in the prior art references and any interpretation of the references should not be considered to be limiting in any way. A reference is relevant for all it contains and may be relied upon for all that it would have reasonably suggested to one having ordinary skill in the art. In re Heck, 699 F.2d 1331, 1332-33, 216 U.S.P.Q. 1038, 1039 (Fed. Cir. 1983) (quoting In re Lemelson, 397 F.2d 1006, 1009, 158 U.S.P.Q. 275, 277 (C.C.P.A. 1968)).
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ALVARO R CALDERON IV whose telephone number is (571) 272-1818. The examiner can normally be reached on Monday - Friday (8:30am - 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, Kieu Vu can be reached on (571) 272-4057. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300.
Information regarding the status of an application may be obtained from the Patent Application Information Retrieval (PAIR) system. Status information for published applications may be obtained from either Private PAIR or Public PAIR. Status information for unpublished applications is available through Private PAIR only. For more information about the PAIR system, see http://pair-direct.uspto.gov. Should you have questions on access to the Private PAIR system, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative or access to the automated information system, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
/ALVARO R CALDERON IV/
Examiner, Art Unit 2171
/KIEU D VU/ Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2171
Prosecution Insights