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 .
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.
Claims 19-38 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 101 because the claimed invention is directed to a judicial exception (abstract idea) and fails to recite significantly more than the abstract idea. The claims are directed to are directed to non-statutory subject matter. The claims are directed to an abstract idea, and when considered as a whole, do not include an inventive concept sufficient to transform the abstract idea into a patent-eligible invention. The following is an analysis of how the office arrives at this conclusion.
Step 2A (Abstract Idea):
The claims are directed to the abstract idea of "collecting data, analyzing it, and deciding whether to process it further" or "managing information" based on criteria.
1. “Obtaining one or more images of a fish; determining one or more features” constitutes collecting information using conventional imaging techniques and could be done by a human.
2. Determining that the features do not satisfy criteria: This constitutes mental processes, mathematical concepts, or organizing human activity (comparing data to a threshold could be done by a human with eyes on and pencil/paper) such has human mental process.
3. Bypassing performing additional processing... to estimate health/biomass: This is the result or functional outcome of the determination, which does not recite a specific technical improvement in the functioning of the computer itself, but rather a business or data management decision to stop processing to save resources.
Step 2B (Inventive Concept/Significantly More):
The claim elements, individually and as an ordered combination, do not provide an inventive concept "significantly more" than the abstract idea itself.
"Generic Computer Components": The steps are implemented using generic, routine computer components (cameras, processors, image analysis software, computer-implemented method) as well other than “computer-implemented “ and only as the action/method steps.
"Routine Activity": Obtaining images and comparing them to thresholds is well-understood, routine, and conventional activity in the field of image processing. The “obtaining of the images” which can be routine.
"Lack of Specific Improvement": The claim does not teach how the features are determined in a new, inventive way, nor how the computer itself is improved. Instead, it merely applies standard image analysis techniques to a new field such as fish assessment which a human can do with their own eyes and not mentioning further structure.
"Functional Result": The steps are described functionally ("bypassing") rather than by a specific technical implementation that solves a computing problem.
In conclusion, the claims merely recite the abstract concept of filtering data based on quality metrics and instructs a computer to "apply it." Also, without mentioning any structures in the claim language. This is not a patent-eligible application.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
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 19-38 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Bailey (US 2015/0055827).
As per claims 19, 28 and 37, Bailey teaches, a computer-implemented method, non-transitory computer-readable media and system comprising: obtaining one or more images of a fish (Bailey, ¶ [0010] “FIG. 2 illustrates using a three dimensional scanner to capture fishing data in accordance with various implementations described herein.” This represents obtaining one or more images of a fish); determining one or more features of the one or more images of the fish (Bailey, fig.2 40cm, 3lb is a feature of the fish); determining that the one or more features of the one or more images of the fish do not satisfy criteria associated with performing additional processing of the one or more images to estimate a health or biomass of the fish (Bailey, ¶[0030] “[0030] At block 310, method 300 may receive motion capture data recorded during a fishing trip. The motion capture data may be recorded using a motion capture device 110, as illustrated in FIG. 1. The motion capture data may include motions performed by a fisherman during a fishing trip, such as casting, making catches, or any other motions performed by the fisherman during the fishing trip.” The scanning keeps on going and skipping anything without the features of that fish for example another fishing motion); and in response to determining that the one or more features of the one or more images of the fish do not satisfy criteria associated with performing the additional processing of the one or more images to estimate the health or biomass of the fish, bypassing performing the additional processing of the one or more images to estimate the health or biomass of the fish (Bailey, Fig.3 and ¶[0033] “In another example, if a catch is detected at block 330, the species of the caught fish may be detected, the length of fight may be detected, or the length of the caught fish may be detected at block 340.” When a catch is detected then information for this gets stored, if something else this would be considered not satisfy criteria as claimed, and keeping with capturing images with the trip 310).
As per claims 20, 29 and 38, Bailey teaches, the method of claim 19, wherein the criteria include elevation angle criteria (Bailey, fig.1 clearly 101 has a set angle and elevation criteria to be able to capture the fish at a particular set angle/elevation as shown).
As per claims 21 and 30, Bailey teaches, the method of claim 19, wherein the criteria include fish pose criteria (Bailey, fig.1 130 pose of a fish ).
As per claims 22 and 31, Bailey teaches, the method of claim 19, wherein the criteria include flatness criteria (Bailey, ¶[0036] “FIG. 4 is a flow diagram for a method of using a three dimensional scan of a fish to record fishing data in accordance with implementations of various techniques described herein.” In order to create the 3D model this would have to include a flatness criteria).
As per claims 23 and 32, Bailey teaches, the method of claim 19, wherein the criteria include perpendicularity criteria (Bailey, ¶ [0036] FIG. 4 is a flow diagram for a method of using a three-dimensional scan of a fish to record fishing data in accordance with implementations of various techniques described herein. In one implementation, method 400 may be performed by any computer system 600, including a portable computer system, a smart phone device, a remote server, a marine electronics device 700, a cloud server and the like.” One needs perpendicular lines to be able to do a 3D model and being able to discard if not a fish for example would represent the bypassing and starting over).
As per claims 24 and 33, Bailey teaches, the method of claim 19, wherein the criteria include occlusion criteria (Bailey, fig.1 as seen if there is any occlusion then the system would not be able to tell it is a fish therefore would stop recording this event as such).
As per claims 25 and 34, Bailey teaches, the method of claim 19, wherein the criteria include distance criteria (Bailey, ¶[0024] “For example, if a fisherman is fishing in front of the motion capture device 110, the motion data may include the distance from the motion capture device 110 to the fisherman.” This would represent distance as a criteria).
As per claims 26 and 35, Bailey teaches, the method of claim 19, wherein the criteria include fish track criteria (Bailey, ¶[0024] “In one implementation, the motion capture device 110 may monitor a plurality of tracking points located on a body, a fishing rod, or points on a fish.” This represents a fish track criteria).
As per claims 27 and 36, Bailey teaches, the method of claim 19, wherein the criteria include three-dimensional model criteria (Bailey, ¶[0026] “In one implementation, the motion capture device 110 may be used to capture data of a fish 130. In FIG. 1, the motion capture device 110 is performing a three dimensional scan of the fish 130.” This represents having the criteria be a 3D model if that image does not meet the criteria for a fish and it is other motion then no more processing happens in terms of different fish features).
Conclusion
Remarks: Double Patenting analysis was done with regards to all the continuations in this case. Analysis was done with regards to the claimed word “bypass” as it is not used in the current specification or in the continuation applications. It was concluded that fig.3B and description teach this “bypassing” limitation in step S340 “More data requested” then to “End” would be the bypassing.
Close prior art references and pertinent prior art:
Jones (US 2015/0294641) fig.5 showing phone of the fish being taken and the data of the fish being detected and being able to accept or decline according to all of these features could also read on the claimed limitations. Not accepting the image is a form of bypassing further processing.
Pettersen (US 2019/0037865) Abstract “A fish handling unit for processing live fish is provided. Such fish handling unit includes an inspection system configured to inspect a plurality of live fish. A conveyor assembly transports the live fish to the inspection system. At least one robotic cell is in communication with the inspection system. The robotic cell has a controller configured to control operation thereof. An end effector is operably engaged with the robotic cell. The end effector interacts with the live fish moving along the conveyor assembly, based on information determined by the inspection system and received by the controller. The end effector may optionally be an integrated gripper and injection assembly capable of orientation and injection of the live fish. Associated devices and methods are also provided.” Any of the images not up to control would then be rejected also reading on the claimed limitation in part.
Howe (US 2020/0288680) Abstract “A method for external fish parasite monitoring in aquaculture, comprising the steps of: submerging a camera in a sea pen comprising fish; capturing images of the fish with the camera; and identifying external fish parasite on the fish by analyzing the captured images, characterized by the steps of: distinguishing between at least two different classes of external fish parasite which differ in the difficulty of recognizing the external fish parasite; calculating quality metrics for each captured image, the quality metrics permit-ting to identify the classes of external fish parasite for which the quality of the image is sufficient for lice detection.” This prior art also monitors the fish and is able to be able to tell two types of fish apart and discard those that do not fit a profile.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to SANTIAGO GARCIA whose telephone number is (571)270-5182. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 9:30am-5:30pm.
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, Chineyere Wills-Burns can be reached at (571) 272-9752. 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.
/SANTIAGO GARCIA/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2673
/SG/
Prosecution Insights