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 .
DETAILED ACTION
Status of the Application
Claims 1-21 have been examined in this application. This communication is the first action on the merits.
Claim Interpretation
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(f):
(f) Element in Claim for a Combination. – An element in a claim for a combination may be expressed as a means or step for performing a specified function without the recital of structure, material, or acts in support thereof, and such claim shall be construed to cover the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification and equivalents thereof.
The following is a quotation of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph:
An element in a claim for a combination may be expressed as a means or step for performing a specified function without the recital of structure, material, or acts in support thereof, and such claim shall be construed to cover the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification and equivalents thereof.
The claims in this application are given their broadest reasonable interpretation using the plain meaning of the claim language in light of the specification as it would be understood by one of ordinary skill in the art. The broadest reasonable interpretation of a claim element (also commonly referred to as a claim limitation) is limited by the description in the specification when 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is invoked.
As explained in MPEP § 2181, subsection I, claim limitations that meet the following three-prong test will be interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph:
(A) the claim limitation uses the term “means” or “step” or a term used as a substitute for “means” that is a generic placeholder (also called a nonce term or a non-structural term having no specific structural meaning) for performing the claimed function;
(B) the term “means” or “step” or the generic placeholder is modified by functional language, typically, but not always linked by the transition word “for” (e.g., “means for”) or another linking word or phrase, such as “configured to” or “so that”; and
(C) the term “means” or “step” or the generic placeholder is not modified by sufficient structure, material, or acts for performing the claimed function.
Use of the word “means” (or “step”) in a claim with functional language creates a rebuttable presumption that the claim limitation is to be treated in accordance with 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph. The presumption that the claim limitation is interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is rebutted when the claim limitation recites sufficient structure, material, or acts to entirely perform the recited function.
Absence of the word “means” (or “step”) in a claim creates a rebuttable presumption that the claim limitation is not to be treated in accordance with 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph. The presumption that the claim limitation is not interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is rebutted when the claim limitation recites function without reciting sufficient structure, material or acts to entirely perform the recited function.
Claim limitations in this application that use the word “means” (or “step”) are being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, except as otherwise indicated in an Office action. Conversely, claim limitations in this application that do not use the word “means” (or “step”) are not being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, except as otherwise indicated in an Office action.
This application includes one or more claim limitations that do not use the word “means,” but are nonetheless being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, because the claim limitation(s) uses a generic placeholder that is coupled with functional language without reciting sufficient structure to perform the recited function and the generic placeholder is not preceded by a structural modifier. Such claim limitation(s) is/are: one or more image capturing devices configured to, one or more location sensors configured to, unit configured to, interface configured to, light sensor configured to, data receiver configured to, analysis module configured to, database configured to, of claims 1-17.
Because this/these claim limitation(s) is/are being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, it/they is/are being interpreted to cover the corresponding structure described in the specification as performing the claimed function, and equivalents thereof -i.e. the claimed computing elements noted above represent generic computing elements.
If applicant does not intend to have this/these limitation(s) interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, applicant may: (1) amend the claim limitation(s) to avoid it/them being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph (e.g., by reciting sufficient structure to perform the claimed function); or (2) present a sufficient showing that the claim limitation(s) recite(s) sufficient structure to perform the claimed function so as to avoid it/them being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph.
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 1-21 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 101 because the claimed invention is directed to a judicial exception (i.e., a law of nature, a natural phenomenon, or an abstract idea) without significantly more.
Claim 1 is directed towards a device, thus meeting the Step 1 eligibility criterion. Claim 1 does recite the abstract concept of a commercial interaction, including advertising or sales activities or behaviors, business relations/activities , and fundamental economic practice, which has been identified as an abstract idea by the MPEP. The relevant claimed limitations include: capture images of the vicinity area of the display screen and the individuals in the vicinity area / capture location of the display screen / process the data captured / transmit the processed data and receive feedback / identifies the individuals viewing the advertisement and generate their profiles / receives and analyzes the processed data for measuring the effectiveness of the advertisement and provides feedback for updating the advertisement. Claim 1 also recites the abstract concept of a mental concept- i.e. mental process that can be performed in the human mind or using pen/paper, including an observation/evaluation/judgment, which has been identified as an abstract idea by the MPEP: identifies the individuals viewing the advertisement and generate their profiles. This claimed limitation, under its broadest reasonable interpretation, covers performance in the human mind but for the recitation of generic computing elements – see below, thus still being in the mental process category.
This judicial exception is not integrated into a practical application. Claim 1 includes the additional elements of a display screen places in a public area / a device connected to the screen, comprising an image capturing device, a location sensor, a processing unit, a communication interface, a central hub / a network , which represent generic computing elements. The additional elements do not, alone or in combination, improve the functioning of the computing device or another technology/technical field, nor do they apply or use the judicial exception in some other meaningful way beyond generally linking its use to a particular technological environment. The claim is directed to an abstract idea.
Claim 1 does not include additional elements that are sufficient to amount to significantly more than the judicial exception, because as noted above, the claimed computing elements represent generic computing elements; they are recited at a high level of generality. The additional elements do not , alone or in combination, improve the functioning of the computing device or another technology/technical field, nor do they apply or use the judicial exception in some other meaningful way beyond generally linking its use to a particular technological environment. Therefore, Claim 1 does not amount to significantly more than the abstract idea itself. The claim is not patent eligible.
Independent claims 17, 18 are directed to a system and method for performing similar claimed limitations to those of claim 1. Claims 17, 18 perform the claimed limitations using only generic components of a networked computer system. Therefore, claims 17, 18 are directed to an abstract idea without significantly more for the reasons given in the discussion of claim 1.
Remaining dependent claims 2-16, 19-21 further recite and narrow the abstract idea of Claims 1/18. The claims further recite the abstract concept of a mathematical concept – i.e. mathematical relationships/calculations, which has been identified as an abstract idea by the MPEP: determine metrics for a costing function of the advertisement based on an expenditure and revenue. The claims further recite the additional elements of displaying data on a bag pack, a billboard or digital display board, connecting devices via a wired or wireless medium, a RGB or Infrared camera, light sensor, measuring the intensity of light in the vicinity of the display screen via the light sensor, a speaker , training data using machine learning algorithms, a central hub comprising an analysis module. Displaying data on a bag pack does no more than apply or link the use of the recited judicial exception to a particular technological environment/field of use. The billboard or digital display board / RGB or Infrared camera / speaker / central hub / light sensor represent generic computing elements that are recited at a high level of generality. Connecting devices via a wired or wireless medium does no more than apply or link the use of the recited judicial exception to a particular technological environment/field of use. Training data using ML algorithms does no more than apply or link the use of the recited judicial exception to a particular technological environment/field of use. Measuring light intensity using a sensor represents insignificant extra-solution activity – i.e. it represents a well known and commonly used process at the time of the effective filing date, as known to one of ordinary skill in the art; Kizilari (ES 2454869 T3) teaches that “The most common procedure for backlight adjustment is to use an ambient light sensor to measure the intensity of the ambient light” – para 2. The additional elements do not, alone or in combination with the other additional elements, improve the functioning of the computing device or another technology/technical field, or apply or use the judicial exception in some other meaningful way beyond generally linking its use to a particular technological environment. Therefore, the claims above do not amount to significantly more than the abstract idea itself. The claims are not patent eligible.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
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.
Claims 1 , 3, 4, 5, 8, 9 , 11 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable in view of Malik (20130342438) in further view of Obradovich (6924748 ) in even further view of Hjelm (CN 103080963 A).
As per Claim 1, Malik teaches a device comprising:
a display screen placed in a public area, wherein the device is connected to the display screen, the device comprising: (the screen/device represent generic computing elements that perform the claimed limitations. At least: para 10)
one or more image capturing devices configured to capture images of the vicinity area of the display screen and the individuals in the vicinity area; (the capturing device represents a generic computing element that performs the claimed limitations. At least: abstract, para 10)
Malik teaches a screen, and Obradovich further teaches:
one or more location sensors configured to capture location of the display screen; (the sensor represents a generic computing element that performs the claimed limitations. At least: claim 1: “
A personal digital communicator comprising: a display; a receiver for receiving GPS signals; a transceiver; input means for inputting a request for map related information; a digital processor providing, a means for determining a location of the communicator based on the GPS signals”)
It would have been obvious for someone skilled in the art at the time of the filing of the
invention to modify Malik’s existing features, with Obradovich’s feature of one or more location sensors configured to capture location of the display screen, to provide up to date information to users based on users’ location- Obradovich, col1, lines 15-25. Furthermore, the claimed invention is merely a combination of old elements, and in the combination each element merely would have performed the same function as it did separately, and one of ordinary skill in the art would have recognized that the results of the combination were predictable.
Malik in view of Obradovich further teach:
a processing unit configured to process the data captured by the image capturing devices and the location sensors; (the processing unit represents a generic computing element that performs the claimed limitations. Processor that processes data captured by the image capturing device – Malik, at least para 10, 31. Obradovich teaches a processor that processes the captured data captured by the location sensor – at least: fig3 and associated/related text, icon 21)
and a communication interface configured to transmit the processed data to a central hub via a network and receive feedback from the central hub, (the interface/central hub/network represent generic computing elements that perform the claimed limitations. Malik: at least para 13, fig 1 and associated/related text -permanent store is construed as the central hub. Communication network- Malik, at least para 11.)
wherein the central hub receives and analyses the processed data for measuring the effectiveness of the advertisement and provides feedback to the device for updating the advertisement on the display screen. (Malik, at least: para 10: “Embodiments of the invention make use of video image processing and analysis software in estimating the effectiveness of targeting or directing certain advertising on a digital sign comprising a digital display screen or device. By equipping a digital sign with a sensor, such as a front-facing camera proximate the digital display device, and video image software coupled with processors, such as Intel Core 15 and Intel Core 17 processors, digital signs according to an embodiment of the invention have the intelligence to detect the number of viewers ("viewership"), and also calculate the size of the audience or number of people that pass by the digital sign without necessarily or actually viewing an advertisement displayed on the sign. The number of people that pass by the digital sign without viewing the advertisement displayed on the sign is referred to herein as an opportunity-to-see (OTS) count. This viewership and OTS count information can be used to gauge effectiveness of advertisements and adapt advertising ("ad") content accordingly.”, para 24)
Hjelm further teaches:
wherein the processing unit identifies the individuals viewing the advertisement on the display screen and generate their profiles (at least: page 7/11 – computing processor: “FIG. 4 is a block diagram showing functions of the controller 121 . As mentioned above, the controller 121 can handle a limited number of displays and digital cameras. As the capabilities of devices and processors in the controller 121 increase, the controller 121 can handle a greater number of displays and digital cameras. Furthermore, dedicated hardware implementations are also possible. In this specification, no assumptions are made about the number of displays and digital cameras each controller can manage.
As shown in Fig. 4, each controller includes multiple logic function components, which can be implemented by hardware or software. These components are: camera signal receiver 201; image processor 202; display driver 203; interest profile builder 204; 3D compositor 205; output manager 206; cache(memory) 208; metadata parser 209; and aggregate interest profile builder 210. Therefore, the controller includes a CPU (not shown) and a memory. The CPU accesses the memory, reads out target software stored in the memory or storage device, and executes the software. The camera signal receiver 201 receives signals from the cameras 111 - 115 and sends the signals to the image processor 202 . Typically, the camera signal receiver 201is activated for each camera. The image processor 202 receives image data from the camera signal receiver 201, and collates them. If no camera angle (relative to other cameras) is provided from the camera signal receiver 201, common reference objects (such as items and currently displayed products can be used as reference objects because they are known by the controller 121) can be used, according to the received images to determine these angles. Display driver 203 manages output from controller 121 to displays 101-105. Typically, the display driver 203 is activated for each display.” Identifying viewers and generate their profiles – at least: page 2/9: “More specifically, in order to solve the above problems, according to an aspect of the present invention, an advertising system is provided, including: a local server; controller connected to the local server; displays and cameras, wherein the plurality of displays and cameras are arranged near the display products for advertising. More specifically, the local server includes: a main content storage configured to store image data representing a plurality of images corresponding to advertisement content. The controller includes: a receiver unit configured to receive image signals captured by a plurality of cameras; a processing unit configured to process the image signals received by the receiver unit to determine whether a person is represented by the image signal In the image of the person, if the person is in the image, identify the location and duration that the person is watching, and analyze the interest of the person based on the identified information; the local content storage is configured to store image data, the The image data is part of the image data stored in the main content storage of the local server, and the image data is transferred from the main content storage of the local server to the local content storage; the display output manager unit is configured to be based on the processing unit results of the analysis obtained, selecting image data suitable for display from a local content store or a master content store; and a display driver unit configured to send said display output manager unit to any one of a plurality of displays in the vicinity of the person The selected image data to dynamically change any of the displayed images according to the interest of the person.” And creating individuals’ profiles- at least page 5/11: “More specifically, the server includes: a content storage configured to store image data representing a plurality of images corresponding to advertisement content, wherein the image data is transmitted to the controller; a profile aggregation unit configured to aggregate an interest profile for each individual, and constructing an aggregate interest profile for each individual; and an interest profile database configured to store an aggregate interest profile for each individual, wherein the aggregate interest profile for each individual is based on information sent from the controller The controller receives image signals captured by a plurality of cameras, processes the image signals, identifies a person appearing in an image represented by the image signals, analyzes interests of the person, and creates an interest profile of the person.”)
It would have been obvious for someone skilled in the art at the time of the filing of the
invention to modify Malik’s existing features, combined with Obradovich’s existing features, with Hjelm’s feature of wherein the processing unit identifies the individuals viewing the advertisement on the display screen and generate their profiles , to select/display targeted content based on user interest – Hjelm, abstract. Furthermore, the claimed invention is merely a combination of old elements, and in the combination each element merely would have performed the same function as it did separately, and one of ordinary skill in the art would have recognized that the results of the combination were predictable.
As per Claim 3, Malik in view of Obradovich in further view of Hjelm teach:
The display screen and the device are connected at a billboard or a digital display board. (Malik, at least: abstract – digital sign, comprising a screen and device – at least: para 10)
As per Claim 4, Malik in view of Obradovich in further view of Hjelm teach:
The device and the display screen are connected via wired or wireless medium. (Malik, at least para 10 and para 11 – wired or wireless based connection)
As per Claim 5, Malik in view of Obradovich in further view of Hjelm teach:
The display screen is also configured to display public messages…or announcements to a group of people. (Malik, at least: para 2 – local announcements, para 10 – display content on the screen)
As per Claim 8, Malik in view of Obradovich in further view of Hjelm teach:
The device comprises one or more of a microphone (Obradovich, at least: col7, lines 40-60: “FIG. 3 shows a rear view of the PCD of FIG. 2. The rear of the PCD contains a microphone 34 towards one edge of the rear of the PCD and a speaker 33 towards the opposing edge. The layout of the microphone and the speaker is similar to that found in portable cellular telephones.”)
As per Claim 9, Malik in view of Obradovich in further view of Hjelm teach:
Identify the number of people in a vicinity of the display screen. (Malik, at least: para 4)
As per Claim 11, Malik in view of Obradovich in further view of Hjelm teach:
Measure the duration of advertisement watched by the individuals or any specific portion of the advertisement watched by the individuals on the display screen. (Hjelm, at least: page 4/11: “to determine whether a person is represented by the image signal In the image of the person, if the person is in the image, identify the location and duration that the person is watching”, “image, identify the location where the person is viewing and duration, and analyze the interest of the person”)
Claim 2 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable in view of Malik (20130342438) in further view of Obradovich (6924748 ) in further view of Hjelm (CN 103080963 A), in even further view of Kim (KR 20080101639 A).
As per Claim 2, Kim teaches:
The display screen and the device are connected at the back of a bag of a person. (at least: abstract , page 4/6: “As shown in FIG. 7, the playback board 32 includes a data controller 32a for controlling a data signal input from the outside, a video processor 32b for processing a video signal from the input data signal, An image processor 32c for processing an image signal from an input data signal, a color processor 32d for processing color and contrast in a video signal and an image signal, and an audio processor 32e for processing a sound signal from an input data signal It may be configured to include). In this case, a data input / output control unit 32f may be further included to control the transmission speed of the data signals input and output by the data control unit 32aand the format and length of the data signal.”)
Kim teaches a portable bag that is carried by a user; that the user is a delivery person and that the bag is a bag pack represents non-functional descriptive material that is entitled to little if any patentable weight per MPEP §2111.05. Furthermore, Kim teaches that “It is to be understood that the present invention is not limited to the above-described preferred embodiments but may be practiced in various ways without departing from the spirit of the present invention. If you grow up, you can easily understand. If the implementation by such improvement, change, replacement or addition falls within the scope of the appended claims below, the technical idea is also regarded as belonging to the present invention.” – page 5/6.
It would have been obvious for someone skilled in the art at the time of the filing of the
invention to modify Malik’s existing features, combined with Obradovich’s existing features, combined with Hjelm’s existing features, with Kim’s feature of the display screen and the device are connected at the back of a bag of a person, to use the bag as a portable advertising device – Kim, page 3/6: “
Another object of the present invention to provide a portable hard case bag with a display device that can be utilized as a portable advertising device.” Furthermore, the claimed invention is merely a combination of old elements, and in the combination each element merely would have performed the same function as it did separately, and one of ordinary skill in the art would have recognized that the results of the combination were predictable.
Claim 6 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable in view of Malik (20130342438) in further view of Obradovich (6924748 ) in further view of Hjelm (CN 103080963 A), in even further view of Neufeld (8069081).
As per Claim 6, Kim teaches:
The image capturing devices is selected from RGB cameras and Infrared cameras as well as combination thereof. (at least: col5, lines 1-10 – infrared camera.)
It would have been obvious for someone skilled in the art at the time of the filing of the
invention to modify Malik’s existing features, combined with Obradovich’s existing features, combined with Hjelm’s existing features, with Neufeld’s feature of an infrared camera, since the camera can be configured to capture images – Neufeld, col5, lines 1-10. Furthermore, the claimed invention is merely a combination of old elements, and in the combination each element merely would have performed the same function as it did separately, and one of ordinary skill in the art would have recognized that the results of the combination were predictable.
Claim 7 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable in view of Malik (20130342438) in further view of Obradovich (6924748 ) in further view of Hjelm (CN 103080963 A), in even further view of Han (KR 20150057122 A).
As per Claim 7, Han teaches:
Comprising a light sensor configured to measure the intensity of light in the vicinity of the display screen. (at least: page5/8: “The sensor module 917 may include a biosensor 919, an illuminance sensor 921, a gyro sensor 923, an acceleration sensor 925, a camera module 927, and a gaze tracker 929. The illuminance sensor 921 may measure a brightness value (illuminance) of light with respect to the surrounding environment of the electronic device 100and output the measured brightness value of the light to the control module 901.”)
It would have been obvious for someone skilled in the art at the time of the filing of the
invention to modify Malik’s existing features, combined with Obradovich’s existing features, combined with Hjelm’s existing features, with Han’s feature of a light sensor configured to measure the intensity of light in the vicinity of the display screen, since the claimed invention is merely a combination of old elements, and in the combination each element merely would have performed the same function as it did separately, and one of ordinary skill in the art would have recognized that the results of the combination were predictable.
Claim 10 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable in view of Malik (20130342438) in further view of Obradovich (6924748 ) in further view of Hjelm (CN 103080963 A), in even further view of Saurabh (10296936).
As per Claim 10, Saurabh teaches:
determine the facial expressions of the individuals viewing the advertisement on the display screen to determine their interest pattern in an advertised product. (at least: fig11 and associated/related text, col10, lines 55-67)
It would have been obvious for someone skilled in the art at the time of the filing of the
invention to modify Malik’s existing features, combined with Obradovich’s existing features, combined with Hjelm’s existing features, with Saurabh’s feature of determine the facial expressions of the individuals viewing the advertisement on the display screen to determine their interest pattern in an advertised product, to measure effectiveness of a marketing campaign- Saurabh, abstract.
Furthermore, the claimed invention is merely a combination of old elements, and in the combination each element merely would have performed the same function as it did separately, and one of ordinary skill in the art would have recognized that the results of the combination were predictable.
Claim 12 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable in view of Malik (20130342438) in further view of Obradovich (6924748 ) in further view of Hjelm (CN 103080963 A), in even further view of Tengler (20130265178).
As per Claim 12, Malik in view of Obradovich in further view of Hjelm teach identifying individuals watching content on a display screen, as noted above, Tengler teaches:
The processing may be trained to identify the individuals and their attributes using Machine Learning (ML) algorithms. (at least: para 90)
It would have been obvious for someone skilled in the art at the time of the filing of the
invention to modify Malik’s existing features, combined with Obradovich’s existing features, combined with Hjelm’s existing features, with Tengler’s feature of may be trained to identify the individuals and their attributes using Machine Learning (ML) algorithms, since the claimed invention is merely a combination of old elements, and in the combination each element merely would have performed the same function as it did separately, and one of ordinary skill in the art would have recognized that the results of the combination were predictable.
Claim 13 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable in view of Malik (20130342438) in further view of Obradovich (6924748 ) in further view of Hjelm (CN 103080963 A), in even further view of Lee (20140051354).
As per Claim 13, Malik in view of Obradovich in view of Hjelm teach individuals viewing the ad on the display screen, and Lee further teaches:
Send promotional offers to the individuals (at least: para 165)
It would have been obvious for someone skilled in the art at the time of the filing of the
invention to modify Malik’s existing features, combined with Obradovich’s existing features, combined with Hjelm’s existing features, with Lee’s feature of send promotional offers to the individuals, to transmit discounts to users’ mobile terminals – Lee, para 165. Furthermore, the claimed invention is merely a combination of old elements, and in the combination each element merely would have performed the same function as it did separately, and one of ordinary skill in the art would have recognized that the results of the combination were predictable.
Claims 14, 15 , 16 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable in view of Malik (20130342438) in further view of Obradovich (6924748 ) in further view of Hjelm (CN 103080963 A), in even further view of Altberg (20080275785).
As per Claim 14, Altberg further teaches:
Analyses the data to determine metrics to a costing function of the advertisement based on an expenditure on displaying the advertisement and revenue generated from the display of the advertisement. (at least: para 225)
It would have been obvious for someone skilled in the art at the time of the filing of the
invention to modify Malik’s existing features, combined with Obradovich’s existing features, combined with Hjelm’s existing features, with Altberg’s feature of analyses the data to determine metrics to a costing function of the advertisement based on an expenditure on displaying the advertisement and revenue generated from the display of the advertisement, since tracking ads allows for improving the cost effectiveness of the system in advertising – Altberg, para 182. Furthermore, the claimed invention is merely a combination of old elements, and in the combination each element merely would have performed the same function as it did separately, and one of ordinary skill in the art would have recognized that the results of the combination were predictable.
As per Claim 15, Malik in view of Obradovich in further view of Hjelm in even further view of Altberg teach:
The metrics is used to determine different business parameters associated with the advertisement. (Altberg, at least: para 275)
As per Claim 16, Malik in view of Obradovich in further view of Hjelm in even further view of Altberg teach:
The updating of the advertisement on the display screen is based on the metrics. (Altberg, at least: para 275)
Claim 17 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable in view of Malik (20130342438) in further view of Zheng (20090096870) in further view of Obradovich (6924748 ).
As per Claim 17, Malik teaches a device comprising:
a display screen placed in a public area configured to display advertisements and promotional offers (the screen/device represent generic computing elements that perform the claimed limitations. At least: para 10)
Zheng further teaches:
A smart box detachable connected , the smart box comprising: one or more image capturing devices…one or more location sensors…a processing unit (at least: para 10, 15, 16)
It would have been obvious for someone skilled in the art at the time of the filing of the
invention to modify Malik’s existing features, with Zheng’s feature of a smart box detachable connected , the smart box comprising: one or more image capturing devices…one or more location sensors…a processing unit , to provide a GPS camera system – Zheng, para 10. Furthermore, the claimed invention is merely a combination of old elements, and in the combination each element merely would have performed the same function as it did separately, and one of ordinary skill in the art would have recognized that the results of the combination were predictable.
Malik in view of Zheng further teach:
one or more image capturing devices configured to capture images of the vicinity area of the display screen and the individuals in the vicinity area; (the capturing device represents a generic computing element that performs the claimed limitations. Malik, At least: abstract, para 10)
Malik teaches a screen, and Obradovich further teaches:
one or more location sensors configured to capture location of the display screen; (the sensor represents a generic computing element that performs the claimed limitations. At least: claim 1: “
A personal digital communicator comprising: a display; a receiver for receiving GPS signals; a transceiver; input means for inputting a request for map related information; a digital processor providing, a means for determining a location of the communicator based on the GPS signals”)
It would have been obvious for someone skilled in the art at the time of the filing of the
invention to modify Malik’s existing features, combined with Zheng’s existing features, with Obradovich’s feature of one or more location sensors configured to capture location of the display screen, to provide up to date information to users based on users’ location- Obradovich, col1, lines 15-25. Furthermore, the claimed invention is merely a combination of old elements, and in the combination each element merely would have performed the same function as it did separately, and one of ordinary skill in the art would have recognized that the results of the combination were predictable.
Malik in view of Zheng in further view of Obradovich further teach:
a processing unit configured to process the data captured by the image capturing devices and the location sensors; (the processing unit represents a generic computing element that performs the claimed limitations. Processor that processes data captured by the image capturing device – Malik, at least para 10, 31. Obradovich teaches a processor that processes the captured data captured by the location sensor – at least: fig3 and associated/related text, icon 21)
a communication interface ; a central hub connected to the smart box device through a network, the central hub comprising: (the interface/central hub/network represent generic computing elements that perform the claimed limitations. Malik: at least para 13, fig 1 and associated/related text -permanent store is construed as the central hub. Communication network- Malik, at least para 11. Zheng teaches the smart box device, as noted above)
the central hub comprising: a data receiver configured to receive the processed data from the smart box device, an analysis module configured to analyze the processed data for measuring the effectiveness of the advertisement being displayed on the display screen and generating feedback for updating the advertisement on the display screen (the data receiver/analysis module represent generic computing elements that perform the claimed limitations. Zheng teaches the smart box device, as noted above. Malik, at least: para 10: “Embodiments of the invention make use of video image processing and analysis software in estimating the effectiveness of targeting or directing certain advertising on a digital sign comprising a digital display screen or device. By equipping a digital sign with a sensor, such as a front-facing camera proximate the digital display device, and video image software coupled with processors, such as Intel Core 15 and Intel Core 17 processors, digital signs according to an embodiment of the invention have the intelligence to detect the number of viewers ("viewership"), and also calculate the size of the audience or number of people that pass by the digital sign without necessarily or actually viewing an advertisement displayed on the sign. The number of people that pass by the digital sign without viewing the advertisement displayed on the sign is referred to herein as an opportunity-to-see (OTS) count. This viewership and OTS count information can be used to gauge effectiveness of advertisements and adapt advertising ("ad") content accordingly.”, para 24)
a delivery database configured to store the analyzed data and the generated feedback and transmitting the feedback to the display screen for running the advertisement. (The database represents a generic computing element that performs the claimed limitations. Malik, at least: para 10, para 11- server [database])
Claims 18 , 19, 20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable in view of Malik (20130342438) in further view of Zheng (20090096870) in further view of Obradovich (6924748 ) in even further view of Hjelm (CN 103080963 A).
As per Claim 18, Malik teaches a method comprising:
A display screen placed in a public area (At least: para 10)
Zheng further teaches:
Connecting a smart box to the display screen (at least: para 10, 15, 16)
It would have been obvious for someone skilled in the art at the time of the filing of the
invention to modify Malik’s existing features, with Zheng’s feature of connecting a smart box to the display screen, to provide a GPS camera system – Zheng, para 10. Furthermore, the claimed invention is merely a combination of old elements, and in the combination each element merely would have performed the same function as it did separately, and one of ordinary skill in the art would have recognized that the results of the combination were predictable.
Malik in view of Zheng further teach:
capturing images of the vicinity area of the display screen and the individuals in the vicinity area through one or more image capturing devices of the smart box device (the capturing device represents a generic computing element that performs the claimed limitations. Malik, At least: abstract, para 10. Zheng teaches the smart box comprising an image capturing device – at least para 10, 15, 16)
Malik teaches a screen, Zheng teaches the smart box device comprising a location sensor – at least para 10, 15, 16. Obradovich further teaches:
Capturing location of the display screen through one or more location sensors (the sensor represents a generic computing element that performs the claimed limitations. At least: claim 1: “
A personal digital communicator comprising: a display; a receiver for receiving GPS signals; a transceiver; input means for inputting a request for map related information; a digital processor providing, a means for determining a location of the communicator based on the GPS signals”)
It would have been obvious for someone skilled in the art at the time of the filing of the
invention to modify Malik’s existing features, combined with Zheng’s existing features, with Obradovich’s feature of capturing location of the display screen through one or more location sensors , to provide up to date information to users based on users’ location- Obradovich, col1, lines 15-25. Furthermore, the claimed invention is merely a combination of old elements, and in the combination each element merely would have performed the same function as it did separately, and one of ordinary skill in the art would have recognized that the results of the combination were predictable.
Hjelm further teaches:
Monitoring engagement of individuals with the display screen by identifying the individuals viewing the advertisement being displayed on the display screen; generating profiles of the individuals viewing the advertisement (at least: page 7/11 – computing processor: “FIG. 4 is a block diagram showing functions of the controller 121 . As mentioned above, the controller 121 can handle a limited number of displays and digital cameras. As the capabilities of devices and processors in the controller 121 increase, the controller 121 can handle a greater number of displays and digital cameras. Furthermore, dedicated hardware implementations are also possible. In this specification, no assumptions are made about the number of displays and digital cameras each controller can manage.
As shown in Fig. 4, each controller includes multiple logic function components, which can be implemented by hardware or software. These components are: camera signal receiver 201; image processor 202; display driver 203; interest profile builder 204; 3D compositor 205; output manager 206; cache(memory) 208; metadata parser 209; and aggregate interest profile builder 210. Therefore, the controller includes a CPU (not shown) and a memory. The CPU accesses the memory, reads out target software stored in the memory or storage device, and executes the software. The camera signal receiver 201 receives signals from the cameras 111 - 115 and sends the signals to the image processor 202 . Typically, the camera signal receiver 201is activated for each camera. The image processor 202 receives image data from the camera signal receiver 201, and collates them. If no camera angle (relative to other cameras) is provided from the camera signal receiver 201, common reference objects (such as items and currently displayed products can be used as reference objects because they are known by the controller 121) can be used, according to the received images to determine these angles. Display driver 203 manages output from controller 121 to displays 101-105. Typically, the display driver 203 is activated for each display.” Identifying viewers and generate their profiles – at least: page 2/9: “More specifically, in order to solve the above problems, according to an aspect of the present invention, an advertising system is provided, including: a local server; controller connected to the local server; displays and cameras, wherein the plurality of displays and cameras are arranged near the display products for advertising. More specifically, the local server includes: a main content storage configured to store image data representing a plurality of images corresponding to advertisement content. The controller includes: a receiver unit configured to receive image signals captured by a plurality of cameras; a processing unit configured to process the image signals received by the receiver unit to determine whether a person is represented by the image signal In the image of the person, if the person is in the image, identify the location and duration that the person is watching, and analyze the interest of the person based on the identified information; the local content storage is configured to store image data, the The image data is part of the image data stored in the main content storage of the local server, and the image data is transferred from the main content storage of the local server to the local content storage; the display output manager unit is configured to be based on the processing unit results of the analysis obtained, selecting image data suitable for display from a local content store or a master content store; and a display driver unit configured to send said display output manager unit to any one of a plurality of displays in the vicinity of the person The selected image data to dynamically change any of the displayed images according to the interest of the person.” And creating individuals’ profiles- at least page 5/11: “More specifically, the server includes: a content storage configured to store image data representing a plurality of images corresponding to advertisement content, wherein the image data is transmitted to the controller; a profile aggregation unit configured to aggregate an interest profile for each individual, and constructing an aggregate interest profile for each individual; and an interest profile database configured to store an aggregate interest profile for each individual, wherein the aggregate interest profile for each individual is based on information sent from the controller The controller receives image signals captured by a plurality of cameras, processes the image signals, identifies a person appearing in an image represented by the image signals, analyzes interests of the person, and creates an interest profile of the person.”)
It would have been obvious for someone skilled in the art at the time of the filing of the
invention to modify Malik’s existing features, combined with Zheng’s existing features, combined with Obradovich’s existing features, with Hjelm’s feature of monitoring engagement of individuals with the display screen by identifying the individuals viewing the advertisement being displayed on the display screen; generating profiles of the individuals viewing the advertisement, to select/display targeted content based on user interest – Hjelm, abstract. Furthermore, the claimed invention is merely a combination of old elements, and in the combination each element merely would have performed the same function as it did separately, and one of ordinary skill in the art would have recognized that the results of the combination were predictable.
Malik in view of Zheng in further view of Obradovich in even further view of Hjelm further teach:
Analyzing the engagement of individuals with the display screen and the generated profiles for measuring the effectiveness of the advertisement being displayed; running the advertisement on the display screen based on the measured effectiveness. (Hjelm teaches identifying the individuals and generating profiles, as noted above. Malik further teaches analyzing the effectiveness of ads and adapting the advertising content based on the analyzed data – at least para 10)
As per Claim 19, Malik in view of Zheng in further view of Obradovich in even further view of Hjelm teach:
Transmitting the engagement of individuals and the generated profiles to an analysis module of a central hub. (Malik in view of Zheng in further view of Obradovich in even further view of Hjelm teach the engagement of individuals and the generated profiles, as noted above. The central hub including the module represents a generic computing elements. Malik: at least para 13, fig 1 and associated/related text -permanent store is construed as the central hub.)
As per Claim 20, Malik in view of Zheng in further view of Obradovich in even further view of Hjelm teach:
Receiving feedback by the smart box device from a central hub. (The central hub including the module represents a generic computing elements. Malik: at least para 13, fig 1 and associated/related text -permanent store is construed as the central hub. Communication network- Malik, at least para 11. Zheng teaches the smart box device, as noted above)
Claim 21 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable in view of Malik (20130342438) in further view of Zheng (20090096870) in further view of Obradovich (6924748 ) in further view of Hjelm (CN 103080963 A), in even further view of Altberg (20080275785).
As per Claim 21, Altberg further teaches:
Determining metrics for a costing function of the advertisement based on an expenditure on displaying the advertisement and revenue generated from the display of the advertisement. (at least: para 225)
It would have been obvious for someone skilled in the art at the time of the filing of the
invention to modify Malik’s existing features, combined with Zheng’s existing features, combined with Obradovich’s existing features, combined with Hjelm’s existing features, with Altberg’s feature of analyses the data to determine metrics to a costing function of the advertisement based on an expenditure on displaying the advertisement and revenue generated from the display of the advertisement, since tracking ads allows for improving the cost effectiveness of the system in advertising – Altberg, para 182. Furthermore, the claimed invention is merely a combination of old elements, and in the combination each element merely would have performed the same function as it did separately, and one of ordinary skill in the art would have recognized that the results of the combination were predictable.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Alexandru Cirnu whose telephone number is (571) 272-7775. The examiner can normally be reached on 8:00 AM - 5:00 PM. 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, Ilana Spar can be reached on (571) 270-7537. 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).
/Alexandru Cirnu/
Primary Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3622
4/21/2026
Prosecution Insights