CTNF 18/760,733 CTNF 79637 DETAILED ACTION Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status 07-03-aia AIA 15-10-aia The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA. Information Disclosure Statement The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on 7-31-24 is in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statement is being considered by the examiner. 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. 07-34-01 Claims 18 and 19 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 applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the applicant), regards as the invention. Regarding claim 18, the phrase " information processing method that causes a computer system to" renders the claim indefinite because it is unclear whether the limitation(s) include nonstatutory propagated signals. See MPEP § 2173.05(d). It is unclear whether the claim covers statutory storage media or nonstatutory propagated signals. Therefore, the metes and bounds are unclear or the claim encompasses nonstatutory subject matter. For purposes of examination, the examiner interprets “information processing method that causes a computer system to" to read “information processing methods to”. Appropriate correction is required. Regarding claim 19, the phrase "a program that causes a computer system to perform" renders the claim indefinite because it is unclear whether the limitation(s) include nonstatutory propagated signals. See MPEP § 2173.05(d). It is unclear whether the claim covers statutory storage media or nonstatutory propagated signals. Therefore, the metes and bounds are unclear or the claim encompasses nonstatutory subject matter. For purposes of examination, the examiner interprets “a program that causes a computer system to perform” to read “non-transitory computer-readable medium having stored thereon, computer-executable instructions which, when executed by a computer, cause the computer to execute operations, the operations comprising”. Appropriate correction is required. Double Patenting 08-30 AIA A rejection based on double patenting of the “same invention” type finds its support in the language of 35 U.S.C. 101 which states that “whoever invents or discovers any new and useful process... may obtain a patent therefor...” (Emphasis added). Thus, the term “same invention,” in this context, means an invention drawn to identical subject matter. See Miller v. Eagle Mfg. Co. , 151 U.S. 186 (1894); In re Vogel , 422 F.2d 438, 164 USPQ 619 (CCPA 1970); In re Ockert , 245 F.2d 467, 114 USPQ 330 (CCPA 1957). A statutory type (35 U.S.C. 101) double patenting rejection can be overcome by canceling or amending the claims that are directed to the same invention so they are no longer coextensive in scope. The filing of a terminal disclaimer cannot overcome a double patenting rejection based upon 35 U.S.C. 101. 08-31 AIA Claim s 1, 8, and 10-16 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 101 as claiming the same invention as that of claim s 1, 10-16 of prior U.S. Patent No. 12,055,799 . This is a statutory double patenting rejection. Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102 07-06 AIA 15-10-15 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. 07-07-aia AIA 07-07 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 – 07-08-aia AIA (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. 07-15 AIA Claim s 1-7 and 17-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102( a)(1 ) as being fully anticipated by Kaphengst et al. (US20180046058) . Re claim 1, Kaphengst et al. teaches for example in fig. 1-3, an information processing device, comprising: an acquisition section (40) that acquires information on a target region inside a glass window of a mobile object (abstract; para. 0013-0018), and information on an external environment outside the mobile object (abstract; para. 0013-0018), the information on the external environment including information on outside light incident on the glass window (abstract; para. 0013-0018); and a calculation section that calculates a light shielding region for shielding the target region from light by blocking the outside light on the glass window (abstract; para. 0013-0018), on a basis of the acquired information on the target region and the acquired information on the external environment (abstract; para. 0013-0018). Re claim 2, Kaphengst et al. further teaches for example in fig. 1-3, the information on the outside light includes information on an incident direction of the outside light relative to the mobile object, the information on the target region includes information on a position of the target region, and the calculation section calculates a position of the light shielding region on the glass window on a basis of the incident direction of the outside light and the position of the target region (abstract; para. 0013-0018). Re claim 3, Kaphengst et al. further teaches for example in fig. 1-3, the information on the target region includes information on at least one of shape or size of the target region, and the calculation section calculates at least one of shape or size of the light shielding region on a basis of at least one of the incident direction of the outside light and the shape or size of the target region (abstract; para. 0013-0018). Re claim 4, Kaphengst et al. further teaches for example in fig. 1-3, the information on the target region includes information on brightness in the target region, and the calculation section calculates transmittance of the light shielding region to the outside light on a basis of the brightness in the target region (abstract; para. 0013-0018). Re claim 5, Kaphengst et al. further teaches for example in fig. 1-3, the target region is set around an occupant who is in a space inside the glass window of the mobile object (abstract; para. 0013-0018). Re claim 6, Kaphengst et al. further teaches for example in fig. 1-3, the target region is set to at least one of an eye of the occupant, a hand of the occupant, or a terminal device used by the occupant (abstract; para. 0013-0018). Re claim 7, Kaphengst et al. further teaches for example in fig. 1-3, the target region is fixedly set near the occupant (abstract; para. 0013-0018). Re claim 17, Kaphengst et al. further teaches for example in fig. 1-3, the calculation section calculates the light shielding region in such a manner that the light shielding region includes predetermined display information (abstract; para. 0013-0018). Re claim 18, Kaphengst et al. teaches for example in fig. 1-3, an information processing method that causes a computer system (para. 0029) to: acquire information on a target region inside a glass window of a mobile object (abstract; para. 0013-0018), and information on an external environment outside the mobile object (abstract; para. 0013-0018), the information on the external environment including information on outside light incident on the glass window (abstract; para. 0013-0018); and calculate a light shielding region for shielding the target region from light by blocking the outside light on the glass window (abstract; para. 0013-0018), on a basis of the acquired information on the target region and the acquired information on the external environment (abstract; para. 0013-0018). Re claim 19, Kaphengst et al. teaches for example in fig. 1-3, a program that causes a computer system to perform (para. 0029): a step of acquiring information on a target region inside a glass window of a mobile object (abstract; para. 0013-0018), and information on an external environment outside the mobile object (abstract; para. 0013-0018), the information on the external environment including information on outside light incident on the glass window (abstract; para. 0013-0018); and a step of calculating a light shielding region for shielding the target region from light by blocking the outside light on the glass window (abstract; para. 0013-0018), on a basis of the acquired information on the target region and the acquired information on the external environment (abstract; para. 0013-0018). Re claim 20, Kaphengst et al. teaches for example in fig. 1-3, a mobile object (10), comprising: a glass window that divides at least a portion of an interior space from an outside of the mobile object (para. 0003); an acquisition section that acquires information on a target region in the interior space (abstract; para. 0013-0018), and information on an external environment outside the mobile object (abstract; para. 0013-0018), the information on the external environment including information on outside light incident on the glass window (abstract; para. 0013-0018); a calculation section that calculates a light shielding region for shielding the target region from light by blocking the outside light on the glass window (abstract; para. 0013-0018), on a basis of the acquired information on the target region and the acquired information on the external environment (abstract; para. 0013-0018); and a light shielding unit that is disposed on the glass window to generate the calculated light shielding region (para. 0010) . Allowable Subject Matter Claim 9 is objected to as being dependent upon a base claim rejected under the judicially created doctrine of statutory double patenting, but would be allowable under appropriate corrections made. 13-03-01 AIA The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter: the prior art taken alone or in combination fails to anticipate or fairly suggest the limitations of the claims, in such a manner that a rejection would be proper. The prior art fails to teach a combination of all the claimed features, including intervening claims , as presented in dependent claim 9 (emphasis added) . Specifically regarding claim 9, Kaphengst et al. (US20180046058) teaches the state of the art of an information processing device. But, Kaphengst et al. fails to explicitly teach a combination of all the claimed features including the calculation section selects a light shielding pattern with a tag related to the scenery information from among a plurality of the light shielding patterns with tags related to scenery, as claimed . 07-43-03 AIA As allowable subject matter has been indicated, applicant's reply must either comply with all formal requirements or specifically traverse each requirement not complied with. See 37 CFR 1.111(b) and MPEP § 707.07(a). Conclusion Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JOSEPH P MARTINEZ whose telephone number is (571)272-2335. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Thursday 9am to 7pm PACIFIC. 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, Bumsuk Won can be reached at (571) 272-2713. 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. /Joseph P Martinez/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2872 5-6-26 Application/Control Number: 18/760,733 Page 2 Art Unit: 2872 Application/Control Number: 18/760,733 Page 3 Art Unit: 2872 Application/Control Number: 18/760,733 Page 4 Art Unit: 2872 Application/Control Number: 18/760,733 Page 5 Art Unit: 2872 Application/Control Number: 18/760,733 Page 6 Art Unit: 2872 Application/Control Number: 18/760,733 Page 7 Art Unit: 2872 Application/Control Number: 18/760,733 Page 8 Art Unit: 2872 Application/Control Number: 18/760,733 Page 9 Art Unit: 2872 Application/Control Number: 18/760,733 Page 10 Art Unit: 2872
Prosecution Insights