DETAILED ACTION
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 Claims
Claims 1-5, 8-12 are pending.
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 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.
The factual inquiries for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows:
1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art.
2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue.
3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art.
4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness.
Claim(s) 1-14 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Fujie [US 20050179553] in view of Sakai [US 20200068084].
As to claim 1. Fujie discloses An information processing apparatus comprising:
at least one memory storing instructions, [fig. 2, 0036] processing device 6 implements the steps of the flow chart, which requires a memory to store the instructions; and
at least one processor configured to execute the instructions, [fig. 1, 0033] processing device 6, to:
acquire first characteristic information of a person, [fig. 2, 0036] acquire identification data of a person of interest, and second characteristic information of the person obtained after the first characteristic information from a sensor, [fig. 2, 0036] acquire transmitted image data of a person of interest from sensor devices 1a-n;
generate an event for generating an alert in accordance with a first value indicating a relationship between the first characteristic information and data for identifying whether the person is an authorized person, [fig. 2, 0036] determine whether or not the identification data coincides with previously registered data, [0033] indicating an authorized person; and
before generating the alert, delete the event generated in accordance with a second value being higher than a predetermined threshold, the second value, [0036] compare the person’s data with a registered data to determine if the data matches; [0035] wherein comparison resulting in no difference between the registered data and the generated data indicates a match; wherein the “a difference therebetween not detected” is interpreted to be the same as similarity above a predetermined threshold, indicating a relationship between the second characteristic information and the data for identifying the person, [fig. 2, 0035, 0038] and delete the sensor data if it is determined that both determinations result in a match based on no difference between the two data detected, which indicates a likelihood of the person being an authorized person, [fig. 2, 0035] comparison resulting in no difference between the registered data and the generated data indicates similarity of the two data being higher than a predetermined threshold.
Fujie fails to explicitly disclose wherein the deletion is performed within a predetermined period.
Sakai teaches an image processing system and method for authenticating a person, [0047]; wherein the system deletes the acquired image within a predetermined period of time after authenticating the user, [fig. 9, 0095, 0097].
It would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the filing of the claimed invention to combine the teachings of Fujie with that of Sakai so that the system can avoid storing restricted images.
As to claim 2. Fujie discloses The information processing apparatus according to claim 1, wherein the at least one processor is further configured to execute the instructions to issue the alert based on the event when the event is not deleted within the predetermined period, [fig. 2, 0036] alert issued when the sensor data does not match with the stored identification data.
As to claim 3. Fujie discloses The information processing apparatus according to claim 2, wherein the alert is issued in a form of voice or in a visually recognizable manner, [0037].
As to claim 4. Fujie discloses The information processing apparatus according to claim 1, wherein the event includes the first characteristic information acquired from the sensor, [fig. 2, 0036] image of a person of interest.
As to claim 5. Fujie discloses The information processing apparatus according to claim 1, wherein the at least one processor is further configured to execute the instructions to generate the event when the first value is lower than a threshold, [fig. 2, 0036] S2 determine if the image data matches previously registered identification data, [0035] based on a comparison result indicating no difference between the two data; wherein the “a difference therebetween not detected” is interpreted to be the same as similarity above a predetermined threshold.
As to claims 8-12 are rejected using the same prior arts as to that of claims 1-5, respectively.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 03/23/2026 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
Argument 1: The prior arts on file do not teach the newly amended limitations of the claims.
Response 1: The Office Action has been amended to address the newly presented scope as detailed above.
Conclusion
Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a). Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a).
A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of the advisory action. In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the mailing date of this final action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to BENYAM HAILE whose telephone number is (571)272-2080. The examiner can normally be reached 7:00 AM - 5:30 PM Mon. - Thur..
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, Steven Lim can be reached at (571)270-1210. 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.
/Benyam Haile/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2688