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 .
Response to Amendment
Applicant’s Amendments filed on 07/01/2026 has been entered and made of record.
Currently pending Claim(s):
Independent Claim(s):
Amended Claim(s):
Cancelled Claim(s):
New Claim(s):
2–9
4, 5, 6 and 7
2–7
1
8 and 9
Response to Applicant’s Arguments
This office action is responsive to Applicant’s Arguments/Remarks Made in an Amendment received on 07/01/2026.
In view of the amendments filed on 07/01/2026 to the specification, the specification objections is withdrawn.
Applicant’s Reply (July 01, 2026) includes substantive amendments to the claims. This Office action has been updated with new grounds of rejection addressing those amendments. Further Applicant’s Arguments/Remarks with respect to independent claims 4, 5, 6 and 7 have been considered but are moot because the arguments do not apply to any of the references being used in the current rejection and the arguments are now rejected by newly cited art Hyoung (KR 20120086410 A) as explained in the body of the rejection below. Examiner is incorporating Teruo (WO 2020179351 A1) to teach claims 8 and 9.
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.
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 non-obviousness.
Claims 2–7 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Makino et al. (JP 2019057041 A, hereafter, "Makino") in view of Enohara et al. (JP 2011081715 A, hereafter, "Enohara") further in view of Tsubokura et al. (JP 2014078122 A, hereafter, "Tsubokura"), and further in view of Hyoung (KR 20120086410 A, hereafter, “Hyoung”).
Regarding claim 4, Makino teaches an information processing device, (See Makino, [Abstract], To provide a monitoring system capable of mitigating a burden of monitoring work by imaging and recognizing each panel and displaying detailed information on each panel) comprising:
acquiring circuitry to acquire an image indicating a board (See Makino, ¶ [0043], See Makino, ¶ [0043], The monitoring device 10 according to the first embodiment includes an imaging unit 11 that captures an image of the panel 1, a display screen unit 12 that displays the captured image, a recognition unit 13 that recognizes display patterns such as the characters on the nameplate 3, the characters on the signboard) including a name of the board and an inspection target (See Makino, ¶ [0043], a recognition unit 13 that recognizes display patterns such as the characters on the nameplate 3, the characters on the signboard) and [a drawing indicating the board];
[generating circuitry to generate position information as information indicating a correspondence relationship among the name of the board, a position of the inspection target, and a name of the inspection target based on the drawing indicating the board];
detecting circuitry to detect the board based on the image, detect the name of the board in an image region indicating the board, and detect the position of the inspection target based on the image region indicating the board (See Makino, ¶ [0020], In other words, the recognition unit 13 recognizes the characters on the nameplate 3 and reads the name on the panel 1. Furthermore, the recognition unit 13 recognizes the angle of the needle indicating the measured value of the meter 2, as well as the lighting patterns of the red lamp 4 and the green lamp 5, as images, and reads the state of the panel 1);
[associating circuitry to associate the board and the inspection target with each other based on the name of the board, the position of the inspection target, and the position information];
state detecting circuitry to detect a state of the inspection target in the image (See Makino, ¶ [0043], recognition unit 13 that recognizes display patterns such as the characters on the nameplate 3, the characters on the signboard, and the angle of the needle of the meter 2 from the captured image and reads the name and state of the panel 1);
outputting circuitry to output an inspection result as a detection result (See Makino, ¶ [0043], display control unit 15 that acquires the detailed information 18 from the storage unit 14 according to the name and state of the panel 1 read by the recognition unit 13 and displays the detailed information 18 on the display screen unit 12);
a memory (See Makino, ¶ [0031], The memory unit 14); and
storage controlling circuitry (See Makino ¶ [0014], a storage unit 14), wherein
[the acquiring circuitry acquires information indicating that a user viewed the inspection result and information indicating an inspection target viewed by the user, and
when a target of the inspection result viewed by the user coincides with the inspection target viewed by the user based on the information indicating that the user viewed the inspection result and the information indicating the inspection target viewed by the user, the storage controlling circuitry stores information indicating that a double check has been made in the memory]
However, Makino fails to teach a drawing indicating the board; generating circuitry to generate position information as information indicating a correspondence relationship among the name of the board, a position of the inspection target, and a name of the inspection target based on the drawing indicating the board; associating circuitry to associate the board and the inspection target with each other based on the name of the board, the position of the inspection target, and the position information; the acquiring circuitry acquires information indicating that a user viewed the inspection result and information indicating an inspection target viewed by the user, and when a target of the inspection result viewed by the user coincides with the inspection target viewed by the user based on the information indicating that the user viewed the inspection result and the information indicating the inspection target viewed by the user, the storage controlling circuitry stores information indicating that a double check has been made in the memory.
Enohara, working in the same field of endeavor, teaches: associating circuitry to associate the board and the inspection target with each other based on the name of the board, the position of the inspection target, and the position information (See Enohara, ¶ [0052], The image processing device 11 extracts information indicating the layout, meter shape, and label from the video information from the camera 10, and then refers to this table information to identify the type of meter to be monitored (the meter's measurement target). Note: Examiner is interpreting the referring to the table information as the associating and the label as the name and the layout as the position information).
Thus, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skills in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Makino’s reference to associating circuitry to associate the board and the inspection target with each other based on the name of the board, the position of the inspection target, and the position information based on the method of Enohara’s reference. The suggestion/motivation would have been to efficiently collect and inspect objects with little manpower and manual intervention (See Enohara, ¶ [0003]).
However, Makino and Enohara fail to teach a drawing indicating the board; generating circuitry to generate position information as information indicating a correspondence relationship among the name of the board, a position of the inspection target, and a name of the inspection target based on the drawing indicating the board; the acquiring circuitry acquires information indicating that a user viewed the inspection result and information indicating an inspection target viewed by the user, and when a target of the inspection result viewed by the user coincides with the inspection target viewed by the user based on the information indicating that the user viewed the inspection result and the information indicating the inspection target viewed by the user, the storage controlling circuitry stores information indicating that a double check has been made in the memory.
Tsubokura, working in the same field of endeavor, teaches: the acquiring circuitry acquires information indicating that a user viewed the inspection result and information indicating an inspection target viewed by the user (See Tsubokura, ¶ [0067], Next, in step S214 of Figure 11, the control means 44 determines whether or not a matching input has been received via the operating means 42. Here, "matching input" refers to an input selected by the inspector when the detected value, etc., shown in (A) or (B) below matches the detected value, etc., that the inspector visually reads), and
when a target of the inspection result viewed by the user coincides with the inspection target viewed by the user based on the information indicating that the user viewed the inspection result and the information indicating the inspection target viewed by the user (See Tsubokura, ¶ [0067], Next, in step S214 of Figure 11, the control means 44 determines whether or not a matching input has been received via the operating means 42. Here, "matching input" refers to an input selected by the inspector when the detected value, etc., shown in (A) or (B) below matches the detected value, etc., that the inspector visually reads), the storage controlling circuitry stores information indicating that a double check has been made in the memory (See Tsubokura, ¶ [0069], In other words, the control means 44 stores the inspection results of the equipment displayed on the display means 43 in the inspection result storage means 452 (see Figure 9) in association with the identification information of the equipment, in response to user operation).
Thus, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skills in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Makino’s and Enohara’s reference to the acquiring circuitry acquires information indicating that a user viewed the inspection result and information indicating an inspection target viewed by the user, and when a target of the inspection result viewed by the user coincides with the inspection target viewed by the user based on the information indicating that the user viewed the inspection result and the information indicating the inspection target viewed by the user, the storage controlling circuitry stores information indicating that a double check has been made in the memory based on the method of Tsubokura’s reference. The suggestion/motivation would have been to decrease the chance of human error with inspection (See Tsubokura, ¶ [0008]).
However, Makino, Enohara and Tsubokura fail to teach a drawing indicating the board; generating circuitry to generate position information as information indicating a correspondence relationship among the name of the board, a position of the inspection target, and a name of the inspection target based on the drawing indicating the board.
Hyoung, working in the same field of endeavor, teaches: a drawing indicating the board (See Hyoung, ¶ [0042], Afterwards, through the mounter file input section (303), a mounter file (or CAD XY file). Note: Examiner is interpreting the CAD file as the drawing);
generating circuitry to generate position information as information indicating a correspondence relationship among the name of the board, a position of the inspection target, and a name of the inspection target based on the drawing indicating the board (See Hyoung, ¶ [0042], Afterwards, through the mounter file input section (303), a mounter file (or CAD XY file) including the mounting name, center position and angle, component material code, and number of pads of the component mounted corresponding to the printed circuit board (PCB) is read and input and displayed on the screen).
Thus, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skills in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Makino’s, Enohara’s and Tsubokura’s reference to a drawing indicating the board; generating circuitry to generate position information as information indicating a correspondence relationship among the name of the board, a position of the inspection target, and a name of the inspection target based on the drawing indicating the board based on the method of Hyoung’s reference. The suggestion/motivation would have been to improve the productivity of product line (See Hyoung, ¶ [0022]).
Further, one skilled in the art could have combined the elements as described above by known method with no change in their respective functions, and the combination would have yielded nothing more than predictable results.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to combine Hyoung with Makino, Enohara and Tsubokura to obtain the invention as specified in claim 4.
Regarding claim 2, Makino teaches the information processing device according to claim 4, further comprising: a camera to capture an image of the board (See Makino, ¶ [0018], The imaging unit 11 is a camera incorporated into a mobile terminal and has optical components such as a lens and a light-receiving element such as a CMOS (neither of which are shown)); and a display device to display the inspection result (See Makino, ¶ [0035], The display control unit 15 obtains detailed information 18 from the storage unit 14 according to the panel information read by the recognition unit 13).
Regarding claim 3, Makino teaches the information processing device according to claim 4, wherein the storage controlling circuitry stores the inspection result in the memory (See Makino, ¶ [0031], The memory unit 14 stores detailed information 18 of the disc 1 in advance, in association with the disc information read by the recognition unit 13).
Regarding claim 5, claim 5 is rejected the same as claim 1 and the arguments similar to that presented above for claim 1 are equally applicable to the claim 5, and all of the other limitations similar to claim 1 are not repeated herein, but incorporated by reference. Furthermore, Makino teaches a support system comprising: a mobile terminal including a camera to capture an image of a board including a name of the board and an inspection target; and an information processing device, wherein the information processing device includes (See Makino, ¶ [0018], The imaging unit 11 is a camera incorporated into a mobile terminal and has optical components such as a lens and a light-receiving element such as a CMOS (neither of which are shown)).
Regarding claim 6, claim 6 is rejected the same as claim 1 and the arguments similar to that presented above for claim 1 are equally applicable to the claim 6, and all of the other limitations similar to claim 1 are not repeated herein, but incorporated by reference. Furthermore, Makino teaches a support method performed by an information processing device including a memory, the support method comprising (See Makino, ¶ [0031], The memory unit 14).
Regarding claim 7, claim 7 is rejected the same as claim 1 and the arguments similar to that presented above for claim 1 are equally applicable to the claim 7, and all of the other limitations similar to claim 1 are not repeated herein, but incorporated by reference. Furthermore, Makino teaches an information processing device comprising: a processor to execute a program; and a memory to store the program which, when executed by the processor, performs processes of (See Makino, ¶ [0031], The memory unit 14. ¶ [0015], Furthermore, this embodiment can also be understood as a program for controlling an information terminal, or as a computer-readable storage medium on which said program is recorded).
Claims 8 and 9 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Makino et al. (JP 2019057041 A, hereafter, "Makino") in view of Enohara et al. (JP 2011081715 A, hereafter, "Enohara"), Tsubokura et al. (JP 2014078122 A, hereafter, "Tsubokura"), Hyoung (KR 20120086410 A, hereafter, “Hyoung”), and further in view of Teruo (WO 2020179351 A1, hereafter, “Teruo”).
Regarding claim 8, Makino in view of Enohara, Tsubokura and Hyoung teaches the information processing device according to claim 4, [wherein the storage controlling circuitry stores the information when the user views the inspection circuit for a predetermined period of time].
However, Makino, Enohara, Tsubokura and Hyoung fail to teach wherein the storage controlling circuitry stores the information when the user views the inspection circuit for a predetermined period of time.
Teruo, working in the same field of endeavor, teaches: wherein the storage controlling circuitry stores the information when the user views the inspection circuit for a predetermined period of time (See Teruo, ¶ [0041], The logical determination unit 45 includes a gaze movement determination unit 46, a target proximity determination unit 47, and a gaze determination unit 48. ¶ [0048], Specifically, the gaze determination unit 48 calculates the standard deviation of each component (x, y, z) of the most recent predetermined number (15 in this embodiment) of gaze information in the gaze information log, and determines that the gaze has remained near the predetermined coordinate position for a predetermined time. ¶ [0065], Furthermore, if the collision detection unit 41 and the logical determination unit 45 determine that the subject has seen the target, they record the time from when the measurement target is displayed until the subject sees it as the reaction time in the storage device 55. Note: this device takes into account if the user has gazed at the position for predetermined amount of time to determine if it is viewing a target and then stores the reaction time in the storage which the Examiner is interpreting the storing of the reaction time as storing the information).
Thus, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skills in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Makino’s, Enohara’s, Tsubokura’s and Hyoung’s reference to wherein the storage controlling circuitry stores the information when the user views the inspection circuit for a predetermined period of time based on the method of Teruo’s reference. The suggestion/motivation would have been to accurately determine whether a user is viewing a target on a display (See Teruo, ¶ [0001–0008]).
Further, one skilled in the art could have combined the elements as described above by known method with no change in their respective functions, and the combination would have yielded nothing more than predictable results.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to combine Teruo with Makino, Enohara, Tsubokura and Hyoung to obtain the invention as specified in claim 8.
Regarding claim 8, Makino in view of Enohara, Tsubokura and Hyoung teaches the information processing device according to claim 4, [wherein acquiring circuitry acquires sight line information indicating a user's line of sight, wherein the detection circuitry detects that the user has viewed the inspection target based on the acquired sight line information, and the storage controlling circuitry stores the information when the detection circuitry detects that the user has viewed the inspection target].
However, Makino, Enohara, Tsubokura and Hyoung fail to teach wherein acquiring circuitry acquires sight line information indicating a user's line of sight, wherein the detection circuitry detects that the user has viewed the inspection target based on the acquired sight line information, and the storage controlling circuitry stores the information when the detection circuitry detects that the user has viewed the inspection target.
Teruo, working in the same field of endeavor, teaches: wherein acquiring circuitry acquires sight line information indicating a user's line of sight (See Teruo, ¶ [0041], The logical determination unit 45 includes a gaze movement determination unit 46, a target proximity determination unit 47, and a gaze determination unit 48),
wherein the detection circuitry detects that the user has viewed the inspection target based on the acquired sight line information (See Teruo, ¶ [0048], Specifically, the gaze determination unit 48 calculates the standard deviation of each component (x, y, z) of the most recent predetermined number (15 in this embodiment) of gaze information in the gaze information log, and determines that the gaze has remained near the predetermined coordinate position for a predetermined time), and
the storage controlling circuitry stores the information when the detection circuitry detects that the user has viewed the inspection target (See Teruo, ¶ [0065], Furthermore, if the collision detection unit 41 and the logical determination unit 45 determine that the subject has seen the target, they record the time from when the measurement target is displayed until the subject sees it as the reaction time in the storage device 55. Note: this device takes into account if the user has gazed at the position for predetermined amount of time to determine if it is viewing a target and then stores the reaction time in the storage which the Examiner is interpreting the storing of the reaction time as storing the information).
Thus, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skills in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Makino’s, Enohara’s, Tsubokura’s and Hyoung’s reference to wherein acquiring circuitry acquires sight line information indicating a user's line of sight, wherein the detection circuitry detects that the user has viewed the inspection target based on the acquired sight line information, and the storage controlling circuitry stores the information when the detection circuitry detects that the user has viewed the inspection target based on the method of Teruo’s reference. The suggestion/motivation would have been to accurately determine whether a user is viewing a target on a display (See Teruo, ¶ [0001–0008]).
Further, one skilled in the art could have combined the elements as described above by known method with no change in their respective functions, and the combination would have yielded nothing more than predictable results.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to combine Teruo with Makino, Enohara, Tsubokura and Hyoung to obtain the invention as specified in claim 9.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Namgoong et al. (US 20180232955 A1) teaches an electronic device and method are disclosed herein. The electronic device includes a communication circuit, a memory and a processor. The processor implements the method including: receiving first data of a first quality, and second data of a second quality, the second quality different from the first quality, controlling a display device to display the first data and the second data, the first data corresponding to a first field of view of a user, transmitting information indicating a second field of view of the user through the communication circuit to the external electronic device, receiving third data of the second quality corresponding to the first field of view and fourth data of the first quality corresponding to the second field of view from the external electronic device, and controlling the display device to display the fourth data corresponding to the second field of view of the user.
Kruglick (US 9489739 B2) teaches technologies related to scene analysis for improved eye tracking are generally described. In some examples, detected gaze targets may be derived from gaze direction information from an eye-facing sensor. Detected gaze target positions and/or motion may be improved by capturing and analyzing digital scene information from a scene visible by the eye. Digital scene information captured by a digital camera may be analyzed to identify potential gaze targets, such as stationary gaze targets, moving gaze targets, and/or accelerating gaze targets. Detected gaze targets may be modified to positions of selected gaze targets.
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 DION J SATCHER whose telephone number is (703)756-5849. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Thursday 5:30 am - 2:30 pm, Friday 5:30 am - 9:30 am PST.
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, Henok Shiferaw can be reached at (571) 272-4637. 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.
/DION J SATCHER/ Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2676
/SHEFALI D GORADIA/ Primary Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2676
Prosecution Insights