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 .
This action is in response to application 18/825,761 filed 9/5/2024.
Claims 1-20 are presented for examination.
Double Patenting
The nonstatutory double patenting rejection is based on a judicially created doctrine grounded in public policy (a policy reflected in the statute) so as to prevent the unjustified or improper timewise extension of the “right to exclude” granted by a patent and to prevent possible harassment by multiple assignees. A nonstatutory double patenting rejection is appropriate where the claims at issue are not identical, but at least one examined application claim is not patentably distinct from the reference claim(s) because the examined application claim is either anticipated by, or would have been obvious over, the reference claim(s). See, e.g., In re Berg, 140 F.3d 1428, 46 USPQ2d 1226 (Fed. Cir. 1998); In re Goodman, 11 F.3d 1046, 29 USPQ2d 2010 (Fed. Cir. 1993); In re Longi, 759 F.2d 887, 225 USPQ 645 (Fed. Cir. 1985); In re Van Ornum, 686 F.2d 937, 214 USPQ 761 (CCPA 1982); In re Vogel, 422 F.2d 438, 164 USPQ 619 (CCPA 1970); and In re Thorington, 418 F.2d 528, 163 USPQ 644 (CCPA 1969).
A timely filed terminal disclaimer in compliance with 37 CFR 1.321(c) or 1.321(d) may be used to overcome an actual or provisional rejection based on a nonstatutory double patenting ground provided the reference application or patent either is shown to be commonly owned with this application, or claims an invention made as a result of activities undertaken within the scope of a joint research agreement. See MPEP § 717.02 for applications subject to examination under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA as explained in MPEP § 2159. See MPEP §§ 706.02(l)(1) - 706.02(l)(3) for applications not subject to examination under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA . A terminal disclaimer must be signed in compliance with 37 CFR 1.321(b).
The USPTO Internet website contains terminal disclaimer forms which may be used. Please visit www.uspto.gov/forms/. The filing date of the application in which the form is filed determines what form (e.g., PTO/SB/25, PTO/SB/26, PTO/AIA /25, or PTO/AIA /26) should be used. A web-based e-Terminal Disclaimer may be filled out completely online using web-screens. An e-Terminal Disclaimer that meets all requirements is auto-processed and approved immediately upon submission. For more information about e-Terminal Disclaimers, refer to http://www.uspto.gov/patents/process/file/efs/guidance/eTD-info-I.jsp.
Instant Application 18/825,761 independent claims 1, 10, 19 are rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over independent claims 1, 13, 17 of U.S. Patent No. 12114042 in combination with dependent claims (see table below). Instant Application 18/825,761 independent claims 1, 10, 19 are not patentably distinct from independent claims 1, 13, 17 of U.S. Patent No. 12114042, the instant claims differ from parent claims only in minor semantic variations (‘exposure’ vs. ‘focus’ / ‘attracted’) that do not constitute a patentably distinct invention, because the underlying technical steps and structure are identical (see table below).
Instant Application 18/825,761
Parent 12114042
Not Patentably Distinct
Independent Claims 1, 10, 19:
receiving, into a portable processing device at a user, audio media emitted from an audio source at a fixed location, wherein the audio media emitted by the audio source has periodic watermarking encoded in the audio media at a baseline frequency;
detecting, by the portable processing device, a change in frequency of the periodic watermarking over time; and
using the detected change in frequency of the periodic watermarking over time as a basis to evaluate user exposure to at least one item selected from the group consisting of (i) the audio media and (ii) an object collocated with the audio source.
Claims 2, 11, 20
Claims 3, 12
Claims 4, 13
Claims 5, 14
Claims 6, 15
Claim 7, 16
Claim 8, 17
Claim 9, 18
Independent Claims 1, 13, 17:
receiving, into a portable processing device carried by a user, audio media emitted from an audio source at a fixed location, wherein the audio media emitted by the audio source has periodic watermarking encoded in the audio media at a baseline frequency;
detecting, by the portable processing device, a change in frequency of the periodic watermarking over time; and
outputting, by the portable processing device, based on the detected change in frequency of the periodic watermarking over time, a report indicating that the user was attracted to at least one item selected from the group consisting of (i) the audio media and (ii) an object collocated
with the audio source.
Claims 6-9
Claim 9
Claim 1
Claim 2
Claim 3
Claim 4
Claim 10
Claim 11
Analysis:
Same actor, same signal, same watermarking structure. No functional distinction.
Identical limitation
Both derive a user-related inference (attraction vs. exposure) from the same detected Doppler shift. Output/reporting vs. evaluation is an obvious implementation difference.
Both use Doppler-based frequency progression to infer user movement relative to the same item/source.
Same inference (stationary condition) derived from the same Doppler-frequency behavior.
Merely reframes exposure inference as ‘attraction’ without adding technical structure.
Identical limitations.
Identical functional use of watermark to extract identification data.
Identical use of watermark to identify content.
Identical signal encoding structure.
Identical definition of baseline frequency via periodicity.
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 of this title, 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 set forth in Graham v. John Deere Co., 383 U.S. 1, 148 USPQ 459 (1966), that are applied 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.
Claims 1, 7-10 and 16-19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over John D. Lord, Pat No US 10,042,038 (hereafter Lord) and further in view Russell E. Calvarese, Pat No US 8,798,923 (hereafter Calvarese).
Regarding Claim 1, Lord discloses a method for use of Doppler shift as a basis to monitor user exposure, the method comprising:
receiving, into a portable processing device at a user, audio media emitted from an audio source at a fixed location [FIG.14, col.21, lines 34-38: Discloses at 1400, a processor in the mobile device captures and buffers plural acoustic vectors of incoming sound. Preferably, the acoustic vector sensor configuration on the device has plural axes to capture audio from plural directions of arrival. This shows device-side capture of ambient sound using device sensors.], wherein the audio media emitted by the audio source has periodic watermarking encoded in the audio media at a baseline frequency [FIG.14, col.32, lines 54-59: Discloses prepare the audio signal arriving from a particular sound source for audio watermark decoding as reflected at 1406. In particular, incoming watermark audio from plural different source locations is compensated with this method and submitted for audio watermark decoding. This explicitly teaches that the captured sound contains a watermark embedded in the audio.];
Although Lord discloses re-sample to compensate for Doppler in direction of sound source [FIG.14 block 1404, col.21, lines 43-45], i.e., recognizes Doppler-related frequency change affecting watermark, Lord does not explicitly disclose detecting, by the portable processing device, a change in frequency of the periodic watermarking over time; and using the detected change in frequency of the periodic watermarking over time as a basis to evaluate user exposure to at least one item selected from the group consisting of (i) the audio media and (ii) an object collocated with the audio source. Lord further does not explicitly disclose when the microphone receives audio media emitted from an audio source at a fixed location.
However, in analogous art, Calvarese discloses detecting, by the portable processing device, a change in frequency of the periodic watermarking over time [ABSTRACT, col.4, lines 49-56: Discloses the device determines at least one peak frequency of the digital waveform, and subtracts the at least one peak frequency from each predefined frequency to determine at least one Doppler shift, which is used for correcting the dead reckoning of the mobile device. Thus, explicitly teaching detection and computation.]; Calvarese further discloses using the detected change in frequency of the periodic watermarking over time as a basis to evaluate user exposure to at least one item selected from the group consisting of (i) the audio media [col.6, lines 61-64: Discloses the actual received frequency is subtracted from the known stationary frequency to obtain the Doppler shift. The speeds towards or away from the emitters yields the mobile device's inertial navigation correction using known Doppler techniques. Frequency change over time is used to infer proximity/motion, which under BRI supports exposure evaluation.], and Calvarese further discloses and (ii) an object collocated with the audio source [col.7, lines 1-16: Discloses relationship between receiver and emitting source in an environment. Sound source proximity inherently relates to objects collocated with the source under BRI.]. And Calvarese further discloses when the microphone receives audio media emitted from an audio source at a fixed location [col.6, line 11-12: Discloses each emitter has a different known location in the environment; and col.9, lines 49, 53: Discloses receiving, by a microphone circuit of the mobile device, an ultrasonic tone from different emitters in the environment at different times, the particular time that a tone is received indicating a particular emitter in a particular location. Thus, emitters are disclosed as infrastructure-based sources with known (fixed) locations. The mobile device microphone receives audio from those fixed sources.]. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to further modify Lord with this feature, as taught by Calvarese in order to yield predictable result such as providing improve Doppler compensation accuracy in the watermark decoding system by using the known-frequency beacon-based Doppler estimation technique [Calvarese: col.4, lines 49-56].
Regarding Claim 7, the combined teachings of Lord and Calvarese discloses the method of claim 1, and Lord further discloses wherein the periodic watermarking indicates identification information associated with the audio media, the method further comprising ascertaining an identify of the audio media based on the identification information [FIG.14 block 1406, col.32, lines 57-59: Discloses decode watermark from re-sampled sound. Incoming watermark audio from plural different source locations is compensated with this method and submitted for audio watermark decoding. Thus, decoding watermark to determine content identity.].
Regarding Claim 8, the combined teachings of Lord and Calvarese discloses the method of claim 1, and Lord further discloses wherein the periodic watermarking being encoded in the audio media at the baseline frequency comprises the periodic watermarking being modulated on the baseline frequency [Col.32, lines 56-64: Discloses watermark audio…modulated. Thus, watermark modulation techniques consistence with encoding on a baseline carrier frequency.].
Regarding Claim 9, the combined teachings of Lord and Calvarese discloses the method of claim 1, and Lord further discloses wherein the periodic watermarking being encoded in the audio media at the baseline frequency comprises the periodic watermarking occurring in the audio media with a periodicity defining the baseline frequency [FIG.7, col.22, lines7-20: Discloses periodic watermark audio. Thus, explicitly discloses that watermark is periodic, periodicity defines baseline frequency.].
Regarding Claim 10, Lord discloses a portable processing device [col.49, lines 22-25: Discloses portable processing devices.] comprising:
a microphone configured to receive audio [col.45, lines 39-41: Discloses receiving an audio signal from a microphone.];
a processor [col.50, line 9: Discloses processors.];
non-transitory data storage [col.50, line 10: Discloses storage (e.g. a disk or flash memory).]; and
program instructions stored in the non-transitory data storage [col.50, line 10-16: Discloses storage (e.g. a disk or flash memory) containing program instructions.] and executable by the processor to cause the portable processing device to carry out operations [col.50, lines 22-25: Discloses instructions for computing devices, including general purpose processor instructions for a variety of programmable processors.], wherein the audio media emitted by the audio source has periodic watermarking encoded in the audio media at a baseline frequency [FIG.14, col.32, lines 54-59: Discloses preparing the audio signal arriving from a particular sound source for audio watermark decoding as reflected at 1406. In particular, incoming watermark audio from plural different source locations is compensated with this method and submitted for audio watermark decoding.], the operations including:
Although Lord discloses re-sample to compensate for Doppler in direction of sound source [FIG.14 block 1404, col.21, lines 43-45], i.e., recognizes Doppler-related frequency change affecting watermark, Lord does not explicitly disclose detecting a change in frequency of the periodic watermarking over time, and using the detected change in frequency of the periodic watermarking over time as a basis to evaluate user exposure to at least one item selected from the group consisting of (i) the audio media and (ii) an object collocated with the audio source. Lord further does not explicitly disclose when the microphone receives audio media emitted from an audio source at a fixed location.
However, in analogous art, Calvarese discloses detecting a change in frequency of the periodic watermarking over time, and using the detected change in frequency of the periodic watermarking over time [ABSTRACT, col.4, lines 49-56: Discloses the device determines at least one peak frequency of the digital waveform, and subtracts the at least one peak frequency from each predefined frequency to determine at least one Doppler shift, which is used for correcting the dead reckoning of the mobile device. Thus, explicitly teaching detection and computation.]; Calvarese further discloses evaluate user exposure to at least one item selected from the group consisting of (i) the audio media [col.6, lines 61-64: Discloses the actual received frequency is subtracted from the known stationary frequency to obtain the Doppler shift. The speeds towards or away from the emitters yields the mobile device's inertial navigation correction using known Doppler techniques. Frequency change over time is used to infer proximity/motion, which under BRI supports exposure evaluation.], and Calvarese further discloses and (ii) an object collocated with the audio source [col.7, lines 1-16: Discloses relationship between receiver and emitting source in an environment. Sound source proximity inherently relates to objects collocated with the source under BRI.]. And Calvarese further discloses when the microphone receives audio media emitted from an audio source at a fixed location [col.6, line 11-12: Discloses each emitter has a different known location in the environment; and col.9, lines 49, 53: Discloses receiving, by a microphone circuit of the mobile device, an ultrasonic tone from different emitters in the environment at different times, the particular time that a tone is received indicating a particular emitter in a particular location. Thus, emitters are disclosed as infrastructure-based sources with known (fixed) locations. The mobile device microphone receives audio from those fixed sources.]. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to further modify Lord with this feature, as taught by Calvarese in order to yield predictable result such as providing improve Doppler compensation accuracy in the watermark decoding system by using the known-frequency beacon-based Doppler estimation technique [Calvarese: col.4, lines 49-56].
Regarding Claim 16, the combined teachings of Lord and Calvarese discloses the portable processing device of claim 10, and Lord further discloses wherein the periodic watermarking indicates identification information associated with the audio media, the operations further including ascertaining an identify of the audio media based on the identification information [FIG.14 block 1406, col.32, lines 57-59: Discloses decode watermark from re-sampled sound. Incoming watermark audio from plural different source locations is compensated with this method and submitted for audio watermark decoding. Thus, decoding watermark to determine content identity.].
Regarding Claim 17, the combined teachings of Lord and Calvarese discloses the portable processing device of claim 10, and Lord further discloses wherein the periodic watermarking being encoded in the audio media at the baseline frequency comprises the periodic watermarking being modulated on the baseline frequency [Col.32, lines 56-64: Discloses watermark audio…modulated. Thus, watermark modulation techniques consistence with encoding on a baseline carrier frequency.].
Regarding Claim 18, the combined teachings of Lord and Calvarese discloses the portable processing device of claim 10, and Lord further discloses wherein the periodic watermarking being encoded in the audio media at the baseline frequency comprises the periodic watermarking occurring in the audio media with a periodicity defining the baseline frequency [FIG.7, col.22, lines7-20: Discloses periodic watermark audio. Thus, explicitly discloses that watermark is periodic, periodicity defines baseline frequency.].
Regarding Claim 19, Lord discloses a non-transitory computer-readable medium embodying instructions executable by a processor in a portable processing device to cause the portable processing device to carry out operations, wherein the audio media emitted by the audio source has periodic watermarking encoded in the audio media at a baseline frequency [FIG.14, col.32, lines 54-59: Discloses preparing the audio signal arriving from a particular sound source for audio watermark decoding as reflected at 1406. In particular, incoming watermark audio from plural different source locations is compensated with this method and submitted for audio watermark decoding.], the operations comprising:
Although Lord discloses re-sample to compensate for Doppler in direction of sound source [FIG.14 block 1404, col.21, lines 43-45], i.e., recognizes Doppler-related frequency change affecting watermark, Lord does not explicitly disclose
detecting a change in frequency of the periodic watermarking over time, and
outputting, based on the detected change in frequency of the periodic watermarking over time, a report indicating that a user of the portable processing device was attracted to at least one item selected from the group consisting of (i) the audio media and (ii) an object collocated with the audio source. Lord further does not explicitly disclose when the portable processing device receives audio media emitted from an audio source at a fixed location.
However, in analogous art, Calvarese discloses detecting a change in frequency of the periodic watermarking over time, and using the detected change in frequency of the periodic watermarking over time [ABSTRACT, col.4, lines 49-56: Discloses the device determines at least one peak frequency of the digital waveform, and subtracts the at least one peak frequency from each predefined frequency to determine at least one Doppler shift, which is used for correcting the dead reckoning of the mobile device. Thus, explicitly teaching detection and computation.]; Calvarese further discloses evaluate user exposure to at least one item selected from the group consisting of (i) the audio media [col.6, lines 61-64: Discloses the actual received frequency is subtracted from the known stationary frequency to obtain the Doppler shift. The speeds towards or away from the emitters yields the mobile device's inertial navigation correction using known Doppler techniques. Frequency change over time is used to infer proximity/motion, which under BRI supports exposure evaluation.], and Calvarese further discloses and (ii) an object collocated with the audio source [col.7, lines 1-16: Discloses relationship between receiver and emitting source in an environment. Sound source proximity inherently relates to objects collocated with the source under BRI.]. And Calvarese further discloses when the microphone receives audio media emitted from an audio source at a fixed location [col.6, line 11-12: Discloses each emitter has a different known location in the environment; and col.9, lines 49, 53: Discloses receiving, by a microphone circuit of the mobile device, an ultrasonic tone from different emitters in the environment at different times, the particular time that a tone is received indicating a particular emitter in a particular location. Thus, emitters are disclosed as infrastructure-based sources with known (fixed) locations. The mobile device microphone receives audio from those fixed sources.]. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to further modify Lord with this feature, as taught by Calvarese in order to yield predictable result such as providing improve Doppler compensation accuracy in the watermark decoding system by using the known-frequency beacon-based Doppler estimation technique [Calvarese: col.4, lines 49-56].
Claims 2-4, 11-13 and 20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over John D. Lord, Pat No US 10,042,038 (hereafter Lord) and further in view Russell E. Calvarese, Pat No US 8,798,923 (hereafter Calvarese) and further in view Ehud Mendelson, Pat No US 9,204,251 (hereafter Mendelson).
Regarding Claim 2, the combined teachings of Lord and Calvarese discloses the method of claim 1, the combination does not explicitly disclose wherein using the detected change in frequency of the periodic watermarking over time as a basis to evaluate user exposure to the at least one item comprises using the detected change in frequency of the periodic watermarking over time as a basis to determine whether the user (i) progressively approached and moved past the at least one item or rather (ii) approached the at least one item, stayed stationary, and then moved past the at least one item. However, in analogous art, Mendelson discloses a reliable method for identifying the path habits and the behavior that people take through an area [col.37 lines 65-67]. It gathers information on shoppers’ paths continuously and accurately [col.38 lines 48-60]. Thus, Mendelson explicitly teaching of tracking user movement over time and analyzing path behavior, which supports classifying approach, dwell-time, and pass patterns. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to further modify Lord and Calvarese with this feature, as taught by Mendelson in order to yield predictable result such as improve accuracy in evaluating user exposure events [Mendelson: col.32, lines 14-20].
Regarding Claim 3, the combined teachings of Lord and Calvarese discloses the method of claim 1, the combination does not explicitly disclose wherein using the detected change in frequency of the periodic watermarking over time as a basis to evaluate user exposure to the at least one item comprises using the detected change in frequency of the periodic watermarking over time as a basis to determine that the user was stationary in relation to the at least one item. However, in analogous art, Mendelson discloses that behavioral information such as “Where they go, where they go next, where they do what, when they do what, who does what?” is provided [col.38 lines 22-26]. Also providing a way of surveying the behavior and preferences of the "user" shopper simply by observing the signals (Bluetooth beacon ID) associate with their mobile phones and at the same time provide the shopper with a unique special application for indoor navigation and local based service for the benefit of the shopper and the business owner [col.38 lines 54-60]. Continuous monitoring of behavior distinguishes motion (dwell), supporting determinization of stationary behavior [col.42 lines 21-24]. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to further modify Lord and Calvarese with this feature, as taught by Mendelson in order to yield predictable result such as improve accuracy in evaluating user exposure events [Mendelson: col.32, lines 14-20].
Regarding Claim 4, the combined teachings of Lord and Calvarese discloses the method of claim 1, the combination does not explicitly disclose wherein using the detected change in frequency of the periodic watermarking over time as a basis to evaluate user exposure to the at least one item comprises using the detected change in frequency of the periodic watermarking over time as a basis to determine that the user was attracted to the at least one item. However, in analogous art, Mendelson discloses providing a way of surveying the behavior and preferences of the "user" shopper simply by observing the signals (encoding Bluetooth naming key) given off by their mobile phones and associate it with the proximity beacon ID which they are near [col.35 lines 21-25] and provide trend reports showing which shops are most visited and at what times [col.35 lines 32-34]. Inferring preferences and popularity from behavioral patterns supports determining user attraction or interest under BRI. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to further modify Lord and Calvarese with this feature, as taught by Mendelson in order to yield predictable result such as improve accuracy in evaluating user exposure events [Mendelson: col.32, lines 14-20].
Regarding Claim 11, the combined teachings of Lord and Calvarese discloses the portable processing device of claim 10, the combination does not explicitly disclose wherein using the detected change in frequency of the periodic watermarking over time as a basis to evaluate user exposure to the at least one item comprises using the detected change in frequency of the periodic watermarking over time as a basis to determine whether a user of the portable processing device (i) progressively approached and moved past the at least one item or rather (ii) approached the at least one item, stayed stationary, and then moved past the at least one item. However, in analogous art, Mendelson discloses a reliable method for identifying the path habits and the behavior that people take through an area [col.37 lines 65-67]. It gathers information on shoppers’ paths continuously and accurately [col.38 lines 48-60]. Thus, Mendelson explicitly teaching of tracking user movement over time and analyzing path behavior, which supports classifying approach, dwell-time, and pass patterns. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to further modify Lord and Calvarese with this feature, as taught by Mendelson in order to yield predictable result such as improve accuracy in evaluating user exposure events [Mendelson: col.32, lines 14-20].
Regarding Claim 12, the combined teachings of Lord and Calvarese discloses the portable processing device of claim 10, the combination does not explicitly disclose wherein using the detected change in frequency of the periodic watermarking over time as a basis to evaluate user exposure to the at least one item comprises using the detected change in frequency of the periodic watermarking over time as a basis to determine that a user of the portable processing device was stationary in relation to the at least one item. However, in analogous art, Mendelson discloses that behavioral information such as “Where they go, where they go next, where they do what, when they do what, who does what?” is provided [col.38 lines 22-26]. Also providing a way of surveying the behavior and preferences of the "user" shopper simply by observing the signals (Bluetooth beacon ID) associate with their mobile phones and at the same time provide the shopper with a unique special application for indoor navigation and local based service for the benefit of the shopper and the business owner [col.38 lines 54-60]. Continuous monitoring of behavior distinguishes motion (dwell), supporting determinization of stationary behavior [col.42 lines 21-24]. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to further modify Lord and Calvarese with this feature, as taught by Mendelson in order to yield predictable result such as improve accuracy in evaluating user exposure events [Mendelson: col.32, lines 14-20].
Regarding Claim 13, the combined teachings of Lord and Calvarese discloses the portable processing device of claim 10, the combination does not explicitly disclose wherein using the detected change in frequency of the periodic watermarking over time as a basis to evaluate user exposure to the at least one item comprises using the detected change in frequency of the periodic watermarking over time as a basis to determine that a user of the portable processing device was attracted to the at least one item. However, in analogous art, Mendelson discloses providing a way of surveying the behavior and preferences of the "user" shopper simply by observing the signals (encoding Bluetooth naming key) given off by their mobile phones and associate it with the proximity beacon ID which they are near [col.35 lines 21-25] and provide trend reports showing which shops are most visited and at what times [col.35 lines 32-34]. Inferring preferences and popularity from behavioral patterns supports determining user attraction or interest under BRI. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to further modify Lord and Calvarese with this feature, as taught by Mendelson in order to yield predictable result such as improve accuracy in evaluating user exposure events [Mendelson: col.32, lines 14-20].
Regarding Claim 20, the combined teachings of Lord and Calvarese discloses the non-transitory computer-readable medium of claim 19, the combination does not explicitly disclose wherein using the detected change in frequency of the periodic watermarking over time as a basis to evaluate user exposure to the at least one item comprises using the detected change in frequency of the periodic watermarking over time as a basis to determine whether a user of the portable processing device (i) progressively approached and moved past the at least one item or rather (ii) approached the at least one item, stayed stationary, and then moved past the at least one item. However, in analogous art, Mendelson discloses a reliable method for identifying the path habits and the behavior that people take through an area [col.37 lines 65-67]. It gathers information on shoppers’ paths continuously and accurately [col.38 lines 48-60]. Thus, Mendelson explicitly teaching of tracking user movement over time and analyzing path behavior, which supports classifying approach, dwell-time, and pass patterns. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to further modify Lord and Calvarese with this feature, as taught by Mendelson in order to yield predictable result such as improve accuracy in evaluating user exposure events [Mendelson: col.32, lines 14-20].
Claims 5-6 and 14-15 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over John D. Lord, Pat No US 10,042,038 (hereafter Lord) and further in view Russell E. Calvarese, Pat No US 8,798,923 (hereafter Calvarese) and further in view Cornaby et al, Pat No US 9,451,406 (hereafter Cornaby).
Regarding Claim 5, the combined teachings of Lord and Calvarese discloses the method of claim 1, the combination does not explicitly disclose wherein the object collocated with the audio source is a commercial object. However, in analogous art, Cornaby discloses a beacon may be placed in a produce aisle of the supermarket, and may serve to activate an audio watermark detector that extracts a watermark payload from background music [col.2 lines 15-18] and if one store has a surplus of Jif peanut butter, the watermark signal in that store can serve to trigger presentation of a coupon for Jif peanut butter [col.4 lines 44-47]. Supermarket aisles, stores, and product-specific examples (e.g., peanut butter) are commercial environments and commercial objects. The audio source (background music carrying watermark) is deployed in a retail commercial setting collocated with commercial objects. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to further modify Lord and Calvarese with this feature, as taught by Cornaby in order to yield predictable result such as improving association between detected audio watermarks and commercial objects collocated with the audio source [Cornaby: col.2 lines 15-22].
Regarding Claim 6, the combined teachings of Lord, Calvarese and Cornaby discloses the method of claim 5, and Cornaby further discloses wherein the periodic watermarking indicates identification information associated with the commercial object, the method further comprising ascertaining the identification information from the periodic watermarking [col.2 lines 16-18: Discloses activate an audio watermark detector that extracts a watermark payload from background music; and col.3 lines 66-67, col.4 lines 1: Discloses the watermark payload can convey data that replaces some or all of the data in the beacon's payload memory; and col.4 lines 45-47: Discloses the watermark signal in that store can serve to trigger presentation of a coupon for Jif peanut butter. Thus, Cornaby teaching extracting a watermark payload (ascertaining information from the watermark) and that the extracted data is associated with specific commercial products, demonstrating identification information linked to a commercial object.]. This claim is rejected on the same grounds as claim 5.
Regarding Claim 14, the combined teachings of Lord and Calvarese discloses the portable processing device of claim 10, the combination does not explicitly disclose wherein the object collocated with the audio source is a commercial object. However, in analogous art, Cornaby discloses a beacon may be placed in a produce aisle of the supermarket, and may serve to activate an audio watermark detector that extracts a watermark payload from background music [col.2 lines 15-18] and if one store has a surplus of Jif peanut butter, the watermark signal in that store can serve to trigger presentation of a coupon for Jif peanut butter [col.4 lines 44-47]. Supermarket aisles, stores, and product-specific examples (e.g., peanut butter) are commercial environments and commercial objects. The audio source (background music carrying watermark) is deployed in a retail commercial setting collocated with commercial objects. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to further modify Lord and Calvarese with this feature, as taught by Cornaby in order to yield predictable result such as improving association between detected audio watermarks and commercial objects collocated with the audio source [Cornaby: col.2 lines 15-22].
Regarding Claim 15, the combined teachings of Lord, Calvarese and Cornaby discloses the portable processing device of claim 14, and Cornaby further discloses wherein the periodic watermarking indicates identification information associated with the commercial object, the operations further including ascertaining the identification information from the periodic watermarking [col.2 lines 16-18: Discloses activate an audio watermark detector that extracts a watermark payload from background music; and col.3 lines 66-67, col.4 lines 1: Discloses the watermark payload can convey data that replaces some or all of the data in the beacon's payload memory; and col.4 lines 45-47: Discloses the watermark signal in that store can serve to trigger presentation of a coupon for Jif peanut butter. Thus, Cornaby teaching extracting a watermark payload (ascertaining information from the watermark) and that the extracted data is associated with specific commercial products, demonstrating identification information linked to a commercial object.]. This claim is rejected on the same grounds as claim 5.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
MacIntosh et al., (US 2013/0308818) – Discloses digital watermarks may be used in combination with the above methods for synchronization. Digital watermarks in the audio or video provide various forms of information that can be extracted from ambient capture of the audio output or video display, or in-line detection from the electronic video or audio signal in a video or audio receiver. [para.0071]. Claim 5 discloses tracking is used to detect a discontinuity in a user's exposure to a program.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ADIL OCAK whose telephone number is (571) 272-2774. The examiner can normally be reached on M-F 8:00 AM - 5:00 PM.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Nasser Goodarzi can be reached on 571-272-4195. 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). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative or access to the automated information system, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
/ADIL OCAK/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2426