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
This action is responsive to the application filed on 8/6/2024.
Claims 1-17 are pending in the case. Claims 1, 13, 15, 16, and 17 are independent claims.
This application claims benefit of Priority under 35 U.S.C. 119 (a)-(d) from Japan Patent Application No. JP2022-019897, filed on 2/10/2022.
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, 7-11, 13, and 16-17 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 101.
As for claim 1:
Step 1 Analysis: Is the claim to a process, machine, manufacture or composition of matter? See MPEP § 2106.03.
Yes, claim 1 is to a machine.
Step 2A Prong One Analysis: Does the claim recite an abstract idea, law of nature, or natural phenomenon? See MPEP § 2106.04(II)(A)(1).
Yes, the limitation “obtains a number of terminals in a certain area or weights of mobile objects associated with terminals in the certain area; and determines whether to generate a geofence in accordance with whether at least one of the number of terminals and the weights of the mobile objects exceeds a certain threshold.” is the abstract idea of a mental process that can practically be performed in the human mind, with or without the use of a physical aid such as pen and paper (including an observation, evaluation, judgment, opinion). See MPEP § 2106.04(a)(2)(III).
Step 2A Prong Two Analysis: Does the claim recite additional elements that integrate the judicial exception into a practical application? See MPEP § 2106.04(d).
No, the limitation “an obtainer and a processor” is an additional element that amounts to adding the words “apply it” (or an equivalent) with the judicial exception, or mere instructions to implement an abstract idea on a computer. See MPEP §§ 2106.04(d), 2106.05(f)(1).
Step 2B Analysis: Does the claim recite additional elements that amount to significantly more than the judicial exception? See MPEP § 2106.05.
No, the limitation “an obtainer and a processor” is an additional element that amounts to adding insignificant extra-solution activity to the judicial exception. See MPEP § 2106.05(g). Furthermore, the additional element is well‐understood, routine, and conventional as expressly stated by Applicant (“Processor 101 may be achieved by a processing device such as a central processing unit (CPU). Processor 101 controls overall operation (e.g., the other elements of positioning terminal 10) of positioning terminal 10. Processor 101 may also be referred to as a computer, a regulator, a calculator, a controller, or the like,” paragraph [0035]; “Processor 201 is an example of an obtainer in the present disclosure.” paragraph [0070]). See MPEP § 2106.05(d).
As for claim 7:
Step 1 Analysis: Is the claim to a process, machine, manufacture or composition of matter? See MPEP § 2106.03.
Yes, claim 7 is a machine.
Step 2A Prong One Analysis: Does the claim recite an abstract idea, law of nature, or natural phenomenon? See MPEP § 2106.04(II)(A)(1).
Yes, the limitation “changes size of the geofence in accordance with the number of terminals in the certain area or the weights of the mobile objects associated with the terminals in the certain area.” is the abstract idea of a mental process that can practically be performed in the human mind, with or without the use of a physical aid such as pen and paper (including an observation, evaluation, judgment, opinion). See MPEP § 2106.04(a)(2)(III).
Step 2A Prong Two Analysis: Does the claim recite additional elements that integrate the judicial exception into a practical application? See MPEP § 2106.04(d).
No, the limitation “the processor” is an additional element that amounts to adding the words “apply it” (or an equivalent) with the judicial exception, or mere instructions to implement an abstract idea on a computer. See MPEP §§ 2106.04(d), 2106.05(f)(1).
Step 2B Analysis: Does the claim recite additional elements that amount to significantly more than the judicial exception? See MPEP § 2106.05.
No, the limitation “a processor” is an additional element that amounts to adding insignificant extra-solution activity to the judicial exception. See MPEP § 2106.05(g). Furthermore, the additional element is well‐understood, routine, and conventional as expressly stated by Applicant (“Processor 101 may be achieved by a processing device such as a central processing unit (CPU). Processor 101 controls overall operation (e.g., the other elements of positioning terminal 10) of positioning terminal 10. Processor 101 may also be referred to as a computer, a regulator, a calculator, a controller, or the like,” paragraph [0035]). See MPEP § 2106.05(d).
As for claim 8:
Step 1 Analysis: Is the claim to a process, machine, manufacture or composition of matter? See MPEP § 2106.03.
Yes, claim 8 is a machine.
Step 2A Prong One Analysis: Does the claim recite an abstract idea, law of nature, or natural phenomenon? See MPEP § 2106.04(II)(A)(1).
Yes, the limitation “when the number of terminals in the certain area exceeds a first threshold and the weights of the mobile objects associated with the terminals in the certain area exceed a second threshold.” is a continuation of the “determines whether to generate a geofence in accordance with whether at least one of the number of terminals and the weights of the mobile objects exceeds a certain threshold.” limitation identified as an abstract idea in the parent claim.
Yes, the limitation “sets a larger geofence than when either one of the number of terminals and the weights of the mobile objects is smaller than or equal to corresponding one of the first threshold and the second threshold.” is an abstract idea of a mental process that can practically be performed in the human mind, with or without the use of a physical aid such as pen and paper (including an observation, evaluation, judgment, opinion). See MPEP § 2106.04(a)(2)(III).
Step 2A Prong Two Analysis: Does the claim recite additional elements that integrate the judicial exception into a practical application? See MPEP § 2106.04(d).
No, the limitation “the processor” is an additional element that amounts to adding the words “apply it” (or an equivalent) with the judicial exception, or mere instructions to implement an abstract idea on a computer. See MPEP §§ 2106.04(d), 2106.05(f)(1).
Step 2B Analysis: Does the claim recite additional elements that amount to significantly more than the judicial exception? See MPEP § 2106.05.
No, the limitation “a processor” is an additional element that amounts to adding insignificant extra-solution activity to the judicial exception. See MPEP § 2106.05(g). Furthermore, the additional element is well‐understood, routine, and conventional as expressly stated by Applicant (“Processor 101 may be achieved by a processing device such as a central processing unit (CPU). Processor 101 controls overall operation (e.g., the other elements of positioning terminal 10) of positioning terminal 10. Processor 101 may also be referred to as a computer, a regulator, a calculator, a controller, or the like,” paragraph [0035]). See MPEP § 2106.05(d).
As for claim 9:
Step 1 Analysis: Is the claim to a process, machine, manufacture or composition of matter? See MPEP § 2106.03.
Yes, claim 9 is a machine.
Step 2A Prong One Analysis: Does the claim recite an abstract idea, law of nature, or natural phenomenon? See MPEP § 2106.04(II)(A)(1).
Yes, the limitation “the number of terminals or the weights of the mobile objects becomes smaller than or equal to the certain threshold after the geofence is set.” is a continuation of the “obtains a number of terminals in a certain area or weights of mobile objects associated with terminals in the certain area; and that determines whether to generate a geofence in accordance with whether at least one of the number of terminals and the weights of the mobile objects exceeds a certain threshold.” limitation identified as an abstract idea in the parent claim.
Yes, the limitation “determines to cancel the setting of the geofence.” is the abstract idea of a mental process that can practically be performed in the human mind, with or without the use of a physical aid such as pen and paper (including an observation, evaluation, judgment, opinion). See MPEP § 2106.04(a)(2)(III).
Step 2A Prong Two Analysis: Does the claim recite additional elements that integrate the judicial exception into a practical application? See MPEP § 2106.04(d).
No, the limitation “the processor determines to cancel the setting of the geofence.” is an additional element that amounts to adding the words “apply it” (or an equivalent) with the judicial exception, or mere instructions to implement an abstract idea on a computer. See MPEP §§ 2106.04(d), 2106.05(f)(1).
No, the limitation “the processor determines to cancel the setting of the geofence.” is an additional element that amounts to adding insignificant extra-solution activity to the judicial exception. See MPEP §§ 2106.04(d), 2106.05(g).
Step 2B Analysis: Does the claim recite additional elements that amount to significantly more than the judicial exception? See MPEP § 2106.05.
No, the limitation “a processor” is an additional element that amounts to adding insignificant extra-solution activity to the judicial exception. See MPEP § 2106.05(g). Furthermore, the additional element is well‐understood, routine, and conventional as expressly stated by Applicant (“Processor 101 may be achieved by a processing device such as a central processing unit (CPU). Processor 101 controls overall operation (e.g., the other elements of positioning terminal 10) of positioning terminal 10. Processor 101 may also be referred to as a computer, a regulator, a calculator, a controller, or the like,” paragraph [0035]). See MPEP § 2106.05(d).
As for claim 10:
Step 1 Analysis: Is the claim to a process, machine, manufacture or composition of matter? See MPEP § 2106.03.
Yes, claim 10 is a machine.
Step 2A Prong One Analysis: Does the claim recite an abstract idea, law of nature, or natural phenomenon? See MPEP § 2106.04(II)(A)(1).
Yes, the limitation “obtains identification information regarding the terminals in the certain area and obtains the weights of the mobile objects associated with the terminals in the certain area by obtaining, from information regarding weights of mobile objects stored in association with identification information regarding a plurality of terminals, information regarding the weights of the mobile objects stored in association with the obtained identification information.” is the abstract idea of a mental process that can practically be performed in the human mind, with or without the use of a physical aid such as pen and paper (including an observation, evaluation, judgment, opinion). See MPEP § 2106.04(a)(2)(III).
Step 2A Prong Two Analysis: Does the claim recite additional elements that integrate the judicial exception into a practical application? See MPEP § 2106.04(d).
No, the limitation “the obtainer” is an additional element that amounts to adding the words “apply it” (or an equivalent) with the judicial exception, or mere instructions to implement an abstract idea on a computer. See MPEP §§ 2106.04(d), 2106.05(f)(1).
Step 2B Analysis: Does the claim recite additional elements that amount to significantly more than the judicial exception? See MPEP § 2106.05.
No, the limitation “an obtainer” is an additional element that amounts to adding insignificant extra-solution activity to the judicial exception. See MPEP § 2106.05(g). Furthermore, the additional element is well‐understood, routine, and conventional as expressly stated by Applicant (“Processor 101 may be achieved by a processing device such as a central processing unit (CPU). Processor 101 controls overall operation (e.g., the other elements of positioning terminal 10) of positioning terminal 10. Processor 101 may also be referred to as a computer, a regulator, a calculator, a controller, or the like,” paragraph [0035]; “Processor 201 is an example of an obtainer in the present disclosure.” paragraph [0070]). See MPEP § 2106.05(d).
As for claim 11:
Step 1 Analysis: Is the claim to a process, machine, manufacture or composition of matter? See MPEP § 2106.03.
Yes, claim 11 is a machine.
Step 2A Prong One Analysis: Does the claim recite an abstract idea, law of nature, or natural phenomenon? See MPEP § 2106.04(II)(A)(1).
Yes, the limitation “a communicator that receives, from the terminals, positions of the terminals determined based on RTK (real-time kinematic) processing” is a continuation of the “an obtainer that obtains a number of terminals in a certain area or weights of mobile objects associated with terminals in the certain area; and a processor that determines whether to generate a geofence in accordance with whether at least one of the number of terminals and the weights of the mobile objects exceeds a certain threshold.” limitation identified as an abstract idea in the parent claim.
Yes, the limitation “a communicator that receives, from the terminals, positions of the terminals determined based on RTK (real-time kinematic) processing” is the abstract idea of a mental process that can practically be performed in the human mind, with or without the use of a physical aid such as pen and paper (including an observation, evaluation, judgment, opinion). See MPEP § 2106.04(a)(2)(III).
Step 2A Prong Two Analysis: Does the claim recite additional elements that integrate the judicial exception into a practical application? See MPEP § 2106.04(d).
No, the limitation “a communicator that receives, from the terminals, positions of the terminals determined based on RTK (real-time kinematic) processing.” is an additional element that amounts to adding the words “apply it” (or an equivalent) with the judicial exception, or mere instructions to implement an abstract idea on a computer. See MPEP §§ 2106.04(d), 2106.05(f)(1).
No, the limitation “a communicator that receives, from the terminals, positions of the terminals determined based on RTK (real-time kinematic) processing.” is an additional element that amounts to adding insignificant extra-solution activity to the judicial exception. See MPEP §§ 2106.04(d), 2106.05(g).
Step 2B Analysis: Does the claim recite additional elements that amount to significantly more than the judicial exception? See MPEP § 2106.05.
No, the limitation “a communicator that receives, from the terminals, positions of the terminals determined based on RTK (real-time kinematic) processing.” is an additional element that amounts to adding the words “apply it” (or an equivalent) with the judicial exception, or mere instructions to implement an abstract idea on a computer. See MPEP § 2106.05(f)(1).
No, the limitation “a communicator that receives, from the terminals, positions of the terminals determined based on RTK (real-time kinematic) processing.” is an additional element that amounts to adding insignificant extra-solution activity to the judicial exception. See MPEP § 2106.05(g). Furthermore, the additional element is directed to receiving or transmitting data over a network / performing repetitive calculations / electronic recordkeeping / storing and retrieving information in memory / electronically scanning or extracting data from a physical document, which the courts have recognized as well‐understood, routine, and conventional when they are claimed in a generic manner. See MPEP § 2106.05(d)(II).
As for claim 13:
Step 1 Analysis: Is the claim to a process, machine, manufacture or composition of matter? See MPEP § 2106.03.
Yes, claim 13 is a machine.
Step 2A Prong One Analysis: Does the claim recite an abstract idea, law of nature, or natural phenomenon? See MPEP § 2106.04(II)(A)(1).
Yes, the limitation “receives information indicating that the terminal has entered a geofence set based on a number of terminals in a certain area or weights of mobile objects associated with the terminals in the certain area” is the abstract idea of a mental process that can practically be performed in the human mind, with or without the use of a physical aid such as pen and paper (including an observation, evaluation, judgment, opinion). See MPEP § 2106.04(a)(2)(III).
Step 2A Prong Two Analysis: Does the claim recite additional elements that integrate the judicial exception into a practical application? See MPEP § 2106.04(d).
No, the limitation “a communicator” is an additional element that amounts to adding the words “apply it” (or an equivalent) with the judicial exception, or mere instructions to implement an abstract idea on a computer. See MPEP §§ 2106.04(d), 2106.05(f)(1).
Step 2B Analysis: Does the claim recite additional elements that amount to significantly more than the judicial exception? See MPEP § 2106.05.
No, the limitation “a communicator” is an additional element that amounts to adding insignificant extra-solution activity to the judicial exception. See MPEP § 2106.05(g). Furthermore, the additional element is directed to receiving or transmitting data over a network, which the courts have recognized as well‐understood, routine, and conventional when they are claimed in a generic manner. See MPEP § 2106.05(d)(II).
As for claim 15:
Step 1 Analysis: Is the claim to a process, machine, manufacture or composition of matter? See MPEP § 2106.03.
Yes, claim 15 is a machine.
Step 2A Prong One Analysis: Does the claim recite an abstract idea, law of nature, or natural phenomenon? See MPEP § 2106.04(II)(A)(1).
Yes, the limitation “obtaining a number of terminals in a certain area or weights of mobile objects associated with the terminals in the certain area.” is the abstract idea of a mental process that can practically be performed in the human mind, with or without the use of a physical aid such as pen and paper (including an observation, evaluation, judgment, opinion). See MPEP § 2106.04(a)(2)(III).
Yes, the limitation “determining whether to generate a geofence in accordance with whether at least one of the number of terminals and the weights of the mobile objects exceeds a certain threshold.” is the abstract idea of a mental process that can practically be performed in the human mind, with or without the use of a physical aid such as pen and paper (including an observation, evaluation, judgment, opinion). See MPEP § 2106.04(a)(2)(III).
Step 2A Prong Two Analysis: Does the claim recite additional elements that integrate the judicial exception into a practical application? See MPEP § 2106.04(d).
No, the limitation “information processing apparatus” is an additional element that amounts to adding the words “apply it” (or an equivalent) with the judicial exception, or mere instructions to implement an abstract idea on a computer. See MPEP §§ 2106.04(d), 2106.05(f)(1).
Step 2B Analysis: Does the claim recite additional elements that amount to significantly more than the judicial exception? See MPEP § 2106.05.
No, the limitation “information processing apparatus” is an additional element that amounts to adding insignificant extra-solution activity to the judicial exception. See MPEP § 2106.05(g). Furthermore, the additional element is well‐understood, routine, and conventional as taught by Reference et al. (Cite, hereinafter Reference) (“An information processing apparatus according to one example of the present disclosure includes: an obtainer that obtains a number of terminals in a certain area or weights of mobile objects associated with terminals in the certain area; and a processor that determines whether to generate a geofence in accordance with whether at least one of the number of terminals and the weights of the mobile objects exceeds a certain threshold.” paragraph [0007]). See MPEP § 2106.05(d).
As for claim 16:
Step 1 Analysis: Is the claim to a process, machine, manufacture or composition of matter? See MPEP § 2106.03.
Yes, claim 16 is a machine.
Step 2A Prong One Analysis: Does the claim recite an abstract idea, law of nature, or natural phenomenon? See MPEP § 2106.04(II)(A)(1).
Yes, the limitation “receiving information indicating that the terminal has entered a geofence set based on a number of terminals in a certain area or weights of mobile objects associated with the terminals in the certain area” is the abstract idea of a mental process that can practically be performed in the human mind, with or without the use of a physical aid such as pen and paper (including an observation, evaluation, judgment, opinion). See MPEP § 2106.04(a)(2)(III).
Step 2A Prong Two Analysis: Does the claim recite additional elements that integrate the judicial exception into a practical application? See MPEP § 2106.04(d).
No, the limitation “a terminal” is an additional element that amounts to adding the words “apply it” (or an equivalent) with the judicial exception, or mere instructions to implement an abstract idea on a computer. See MPEP §§ 2106.04(d), 2106.05(f)(1).
Step 2B Analysis: Does the claim recite additional elements that amount to significantly more than the judicial exception? See MPEP § 2106.05.
No, the limitation “a terminal” is an additional element that amounts to adding insignificant extra-solution activity to the judicial exception. See MPEP § 2106.05(g). Furthermore, the additional element is directed to receiving or transmitting data over a network performing repetitive, which the courts have recognized as well‐understood, routine, and conventional when they are claimed in a generic manner. See MPEP § 2106.05(d)(II).
As for claim 17:
Step 1 Analysis: Is the claim to a process, machine, manufacture or composition of matter? See MPEP § 2106.03.
Yes, claim 17 is a machine.
Step 2A Prong One Analysis: Does the claim recite an abstract idea, law of nature, or natural phenomenon? See MPEP § 2106.04(II)(A)(1).
Yes, the limitation “obtains a number of terminals in a certain area and weights of mobile objects associated with the terminals in the certain area.” is the abstract idea of a mental process that can practically be performed in the human mind, with or without the use of a physical aid such as pen and paper (including an observation, evaluation, judgment, opinion). See MPEP § 2106.04(a)(2)(III).
Yes, the limitation “determines whether to generate a geofence in accordance with whether at least one of the number of terminals and the weights of the mobile objects exceeds a certain threshold.” is the abstract idea of a mental process that can practically be performed in the human mind, with or without the use of a physical aid such as pen and paper (including an observation, evaluation, judgment, opinion). See MPEP § 2106.04(a)(2)(III).
Step 2A Prong Two Analysis: Does the claim recite additional elements that integrate the judicial exception into a practical application? See MPEP § 2106.04(d).
No, the limitation “information processing system” is an additional element that amounts to adding the words “apply it” (or an equivalent) with the judicial exception, or mere instructions to implement an abstract idea on a computer. See MPEP §§ 2106.04(d), 2106.05(f)(1).
Step 2B Analysis: Does the claim recite additional elements that amount to significantly more than the judicial exception? See MPEP § 2106.05.
No, the limitation “information processing system” is an additional element that amounts to adding insignificant extra-solution activity to the judicial exception. See MPEP § 2106.05(g). Furthermore, the additional element is well‐understood, routine, and conventional as taught by Reference et al. (Cite, hereinafter Reference) (“As illustrated in FIG. 1, alarm system 1 includes positioning terminals 10, host server 20, reference station data distribution server 30, and monitor device 40. Alarm system 1 may also be referred to as an information processing system or the like,” paragraph [0019]). See MPEP § 2106.05(d).
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status.
The following is a quotation of the appropriate paragraphs of 35 U.S.C. 102 that form the basis for the rejections under this section made in this Office action:
A person shall be entitled to a patent unless –
(a)(2) the claimed invention was described in a patent issued under section 151, or in an application for patent published or deemed published under section 122(b), in which the patent or application, as the case may be, names another inventor and was effectively filed before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claims 1, 7, 9, 13, and 15 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) as being anticipated by Ren et al., US Patent Application No. 20200219401, published on 7/9/2020 (hereinafter Ren).
As for independent claim 1, Ren discloses an information processing apparatus, comprising:
an obtainer (Cloud service) that obtains a number of terminals in a certain area (base station 201 sends person count 213 and reference locations 214 to cloud service 202) or weights of mobile objects associated with terminals in the certain;
(Ren paragraph [0038] discloses “Method 300 includes determining a reference location for each person included in the person count (303). For example, base station 201 can determine reference locations 214 relative to base station 201 for each person included in person count 213. Method 300 includes creating a geofence that surrounds each person included in the person count based on the person count and the reference locations (304). In one aspect, base station 201 sends person count 213 and reference locations 214 to cloud service 202. Cloud service 202 creates geofence 216 around the people carrying and/or wearing devices 211A-211E from person count 213 and reference locations 214. In another aspect, base station 201 creates geofence 216 from person count 213 and reference locations 214.”
Given the option to map to at least one of the number of terminals and the weights of mobile objects. Examiner selects to map to the number of terminals.)
and a processor (cloud service 202 is a transportation mobility cloud capable of communication with base stations, vehicles, law enforcement, emergency services) that determines whether to generate a geofence (Cloud service 202 creates a geofence from the person count and reference locations) in accordance with whether at least one of the number of terminals (geofence from the person count and reference locations) and the weights of the mobile objects exceeds a certain threshold (a geofence is created when population or population density within an area exceeds a threshold).
(Ren paragraph [0038] discloses “Method 300 includes determining a reference location for each person included in the person count (303). For example, base station 201 can determine reference locations 214 relative to base station 201 for each person included in person count 213. Method 300 includes creating a geofence that surrounds each person included in the person count based on the person count and the reference locations (304). In one aspect, base station 201 sends person count 213 and reference locations 214 to cloud service 202. Cloud service 202 creates geofence 216 around the people carrying and/or wearing devices 211A-211E from person count 213 and reference locations 214. In another aspect, base station 201 creates geofence 216 from person count 213 and reference locations 214.
Paragraph [0034] discloses “In one aspect, cloud service 202 is a transportation mobility cloud capable of communication with base stations, vehicles, law enforcement, emergency services, etc.”
Paragraph [0015] discloses “Base stations can locate personal (e.g., radio) devices (e.g., mobile phones, smart watches, other wearables, etc.) via GPS, wireless radio communication (e.g., Bluetooth, Wi-Fi, etc.), etc. to get an estimate of the total number of devices in an area as well as locations of the devices. Using count and location data, a geofence is created when population or population density within an area exceeds a threshold. New boundaries can be generated in real-time as people move around creating a dynamic geofence.”
Given the option to map to at least one of the number of terminals and the weights of mobile objects. Examiner selects to map to the number of terminals.)
As for claim 7, Ren discloses the information processing apparatus according to claim 1, wherein:
the processor (cloud-based service) changes size of the geofence (device totals and device locations in an existing geofence decrease, the existing geofence boundary can be reduced) in accordance with the number of terminals in the certain area (device totals and device locations are received new geofences can be created) or the weights of the mobile objects associated with the terminals in the certain area.
(Ren paragraph [0017] discloses “In one aspect, one or more base stations transmit device totals and device locations to a cloud-based service on an ongoing basis. The cloud-based service calculates and re-calculates geofence boundaries from the device totals and device locations. The cloud-based service can maintain a set of active geofences. As new sets of device totals and device locations are received new geofences can be created. As device totals and device locations in an existing geofence decrease, the existing geofence boundary can be reduced. Geofences that lack sufficient numbers of devices (and thus are no longer representative of a crowd) can be deleted.”
Given the option to map to the number of terminals or the weights of mobile objects. Examiner selects to map to the number of terminals.)
As for claim 9, Ren discloses the information processing apparatus according to claim 1, wherein:
when the number of terminals (the device totals and device locations) or the weights of the mobile objects becomes smaller than or equal to the certain threshold after the geofence is set (Geofences that lack sufficient numbers of devices (and thus are no longer representative of a crowd)), the processor (cloud-based service) determines to cancel the setting of the geofence (can be deleted).
(Ren paragraph [0017] discloses “In one aspect, one or more base stations transmit device totals and device locations to a cloud-based service on an ongoing basis. The cloud-based service calculates and re-calculates geofence boundaries from the device totals and device locations. The cloud-based service can maintain a set of active geofences. As new sets of device totals and device locations are received new geofences can be created. As device totals and device locations in an existing geofence decrease, the existing geofence boundary can be reduced. Geofences that lack sufficient numbers of devices (and thus are no longer representative of a crowd) can be deleted.”)
As for independent claim 13, Ren discloses a terminal, comprising:
a communicator (Base stations) that receives information indicating that the terminal (locate personal (e.g., radio) devices (e.g., mobile phones, smart watches, other wearables, etc.) via GPS) has entered a geofence set based on a number of terminals in a certain area (Using count and location data, a geofence is created when population within an area exceeds a threshold) or weights of mobile objects associated with the terminals in the certain area; and
(Ren paragraph [0015] discloses “Base stations can locate personal (e.g., radio) devices (e.g., mobile phones, smart watches, other wearables, etc.) via GPS, wireless radio communication (e.g., Bluetooth, Wi-Fi, etc.), etc. to get an estimate of the total number of devices in an area as well as locations of the devices. Using count and location data, a geofence is created when population or population density within an area exceeds a threshold. New boundaries can be generated in real-time as people move around creating a dynamic geofence. The geometry of a geofence can be a simple shape (e.g., circular, elliptical) or more complex organic shapes based on device locations. The boundary of a geofence can grow and/or shrink based on a variety of factors, including density of people in an area, a known public event, known physical barriers, etc.”
Given the option to map to the number of terminals or the weights of mobile objects. Examiner selects to map to the number of terminals.)
an alarmer (Output device) that outputs an alarm (include one or more of: a display screen, a speaker, a tactile element, etc. that outputs massages, warnings, notifications, etc. to occupants of vehicle 403A) when the information is received (geofence processor 434 can send warning 427 to output device 428).
(Ren paragraph [0047] discloses “Output device 428 can include one or more of: a display screen, a speaker, a tactile element, etc. that outputs massages, warnings, notifications, etc. to occupants of vehicle 403A. Other components at vehicle 403A can send massages, warnings, notifications, etc. to output device 428. Output device 428 presents the massages, warnings, notifications, etc. to vehicle occupants.”
Paragraph [0059] discloses “Thus, if geofence 216 is a lower intensity geofence, geofence processor 434 can send warning 427 to output device 428. Output device 428 can output waning 427 to warn occupants of vehicle 403A about geofence 216. Movement restriction command 482 can force vehicle 403A to slow down to a graduated maximum speed. The graduated maximum speed can be lowered as vehicle 403A and geofence 416 get closer together.”)
As for independent claim 15, Ren discloses an information processing method, comprising:
obtaining, by an information processing apparatus (a cloud-based service), a number of terminals in a certain area (base stations transmit device totals and device locations) or weights of mobile objects associated with the terminals in the certain area; and
(Ren paragraph [0017] discloses “In one aspect, one or more base stations transmit device totals and device locations to a cloud-based service on an ongoing basis. The cloud-based service calculates and re-calculates geofence boundaries from the device totals and device locations. The cloud-based service can maintain a set of active geofences. As new sets of device totals and device locations are received new geofences can be created. As device totals and device locations in an existing geofence decrease, the existing geofence boundary can be reduced. Geofences that lack sufficient numbers of devices (and thus are no longer representative of a crowd) can be deleted.”
Given the option to map to the number of terminals or the weights of mobile objects. Examiner selects to map to the number of terminals.)
determining, by the information processing apparatus (cloud-based service), whether to generate a geofence (a geofence is created) in accordance with whether at least one of the number of terminals (Using count and location data) and the weights of the mobile objects exceeds a certain threshold (Using count and location data, a geofence is created when population within an area exceeds a threshold).
(Ren paragraph [0015] discloses “Base stations can locate personal (e.g., radio) devices (e.g., mobile phones, smart watches, other wearables, etc.) via GPS, wireless radio communication (e.g., Bluetooth, Wi-Fi, etc.), etc. to get an estimate of the total number of devices in an area as well as locations of the devices. Using count and location data, a geofence is created when population or population density within an area exceeds a threshold. New boundaries can be generated in real-time as people move around creating a dynamic geofence. The geometry of a geofence can be a simple shape (e.g., circular, elliptical) or more complex organic shapes based on device locations. The boundary of a geofence can grow and/or shrink based on a variety of factors, including density of people in an area, a known public event, known physical barriers, etc.”
Paragraph [0017] discloses “In one aspect, one or more base stations transmit device totals and device locations to a cloud-based service on an ongoing basis. The cloud-based service calculates and re-calculates geofence boundaries from the device totals and device locations. The cloud-based service can maintain a set of active geofences. As new sets of device totals and device locations are received new geofences can be created. As device totals and device locations in an existing geofence decrease, the existing geofence boundary can be reduced. Geofences that lack sufficient numbers of devices (and thus are no longer representative of a crowd) can be deleted.”;
Examiner’s note: Applying the broadest reasonable interpretation, the limitation “at least one of the number of terminal and the weights of the mobile objects” is interpreted as “number of terminal or the weights of the mobile objects” based on paragraph [0013] of the specification which state “According to an embodiment of the present disclosure, whether to set a geofence is switched in accordance with the number of terminals or weights of mobile objects (e.g., workers and construction vehicles associated with terminals) in a region that is a candidate where a geofence is to be set (generated).”)
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 103 which forms the basis for all obviousness rejections set forth in this Office action:
A patent for a claimed invention may not be obtained, notwithstanding that the claimed invention is not identically disclosed as set forth in section 102, if the differences between the claimed invention and the prior art are such that the claimed invention as a whole would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which the claimed invention pertains. Patentability shall not be negated by the manner in which the invention was made.
This application currently names joint inventors. In considering patentability of the claims the examiner presumes that the subject matter of the various claims was commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the claimed invention(s) absent any evidence to the contrary. Applicant is advised of the obligation under 37 CFR 1.56 to point out the inventor and effective filing dates of each claim that was not commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the later invention in order for the examiner to consider the applicability of 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(C) for any potential 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) prior art against the later invention.
Claims 2 and 16 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Ren in view of Leong et al., (US Patent Application Publication No. 20210174952), published on 7/10/2021 (hereinafter Leong).
As for claim 2, Ren discloses the information processing apparatus according to claim 1, further comprising:
a communicator that transmits (geofence processor), to a terminal (warn occupants of vehicle) in the geofence (a lower intensity geofence), a signal for causing (send warning 427 to output device 428) the terminal (warn occupants of vehicle) to output an alarm (Output device 428 can include one or more of: a display screen, a speaker, a tactile element, etc. that outputs massages, warnings, notifications, etc. to occupants of vehicle 403A), wherein:
(Ren paragraph [0059] discloses “Thus, if geofence 216 is a lower intensity geofence, geofence processor 434 can send warning 427 to output device 428. Output device 428 can output waning 427 to warn occupants of vehicle 403A about geofence 216. Movement restriction command 482 can force vehicle 403A to slow down to a graduated maximum speed. The graduated maximum speed can be lowered as vehicle 403A and geofence 416 get closer together.”
Paragraph [0047] discloses “Output device 428 can include one or more of: a display screen, a speaker, a tactile element, etc. that outputs massages, warnings, notifications, etc. to occupants of vehicle 403A. Other components at vehicle 403A can send massages, warnings, notifications, etc. to output device 428. Output device 428 presents the massages, warnings, notifications, etc. to vehicle occupants.”)
the processor determines to transmit (geofence processor), to a terminal (send warning 427 to output device 428) that (entering geofence) after the geofence is generated (a lower intensity geofence), the signal for causing (send warning 427 to output device 428) the terminal to output an alarm (Output device 428 can include one or more of: a display screen, a speaker, a tactile element, etc. that outputs massages, warnings, notifications, etc. to occupants of vehicle).
(Ren paragraph [0019] discloses “In general, connected vehicles in proximity to, within, or entering a geofence can have operations restricted. Geofences can vary in intensity with the intensity of a geofence being based on crowd density.”; Paragraph [0058] discloses “FIG. 6 illustrates example geofences of different intensities. As depicted, FIG. 6 includes lower intensity geofence 601 (reduced person density), medium intensity geofence 602 (moderate person density), and higher intensity geofence 603 (increased person density). When a vehicle approaches lower intensity geofence 601 (or vice versa), vehicle occupants can be given a warning (e.g., audible, visual, tactile, etc.)”; Paragraph [0059] discloses “Thus, if geofence 216 is a lower intensity geofence, geofence processor 434 can send warning 427 to output device 428. Output device 428 can output waning 427 to warn occupants of vehicle 403A about geofence 216. Movement restriction command 482 can force vehicle 403A to slow down to a graduated maximum speed. The graduated maximum speed can be lowered as vehicle 403A and geofence 416 get closer together.”
Paragraph [0047] discloses “Output device 428 can include one or more of: a display screen, a speaker, a tactile element, etc. that outputs massages, warnings, notifications, etc. to occupants of vehicle 403A. Other components at vehicle 403A can send massages, warnings, notifications, etc. to output device 428. Output device 428 presents the massages, warnings, notifications, etc. to vehicle occupants.)”)
Ren does not appear to explicitly disclose a terminal that enters the geofence. However, in a similar field of endeavor, Leong discloses a terminal that enters the geofence (alert individuals when they are detected to be in the geofencing area).
(Leong paragraph [0160] discloses “the system may generate a geofencing area with a boundary corresponding to such work zone and alert individuals when they are detected to be in the geofencing area with prolonged exposure that is beyond healthy exposure limits. “)
Accordingly, it would have been obvious to person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine Leong with Ren and Lan for the benefit of having an apparatus to monitor the geofence and raise an alert when a terminal entered the geofence. Further benefit to combine is to effectively determine the terminal enter the geofence base on the location and boundary of the geofence.
As for independent claim 16, Ren discloses an alarm method, comprising:
receiving, by a terminal (cloud service 202 can notify vehicles 403 about geofence 216), information indicating that (about geofence 216) (Base station 201 can continually re-calculate person count 213 and reference locations 214) or weights of mobile objects associated with the terminals in the certain area; and
(Ren paragraph [0039] discloses “Method 300 can also include notifying one or more vehicles of the geofence. For example, cloud service 202 can notify vehicles 403 about geofence 216. Alternately, base station 201 can notify vehicles 403 about geofence 216. The boundary geometry of geofence 216 can be a simple shape (e.g., circular, elliptical, etc.) or more complex organic shapes based on locations of devices 211A-211E.”
Paragraph [0041] discloses “Further, devices 211A-211E can continually communicate with base station 201 as people carrying and/or wearing devices 211A-211E move around. Base station 201 can continually re-calculate person count 213 and reference locations 214. As person count 213 and reference locations 214 change, base station 201 can generate a new boundary for geofence 216. Alternately, base station 201 can send person count 213 and reference locations 214 to cloud service 202. As person count 213 and reference locations 214 change, cloud service 202 can generate a new boundary for geofence 216. Thus, base station 201 or cloud service 202 can change the boundary of geofence 216 dynamically and essentially in real time as people move around. The boundary of geofence 216 can grow, shrink, change shape, etc.”;
Given the option to map to the number of terminals or the weights of mobile objects. Examiner selects to map to the number of terminals.)
outputting, by the terminal (Output device 428 can output waning 427 to warn occupants of vehicle 403A about geofence 216), an alarm when the information is received (geofence processor 434 can send warning 427 to output device 428).
(Ren [0059] discloses “Thus, if geofence 216 is a lower intensity geofence, geofence processor 434 can send warning 427 to output device 428. Output device 428 can output waning 427 to warn occupants of vehicle 403A about geofence 216. Movement restriction command 482 can force vehicle 403A to slow down to a graduated maximum speed. The graduated maximum speed can be lowered as vehicle 403A and geofence 416 get closer together.”)
Ren does not appear to explicitly disclose a terminal has entered the geofence set. However, in a similar field of endeavor, Leong discloses a terminal has entered the geofence set (alert individuals when they are detected to be in the geofencing area).
(Leong paragraph [0160] discloses “the system may generate a geofencing area with a boundary corresponding to such work zone and alert individuals when they are detected to be in the geofencing area with prolonged exposure that is beyond healthy exposure limits. “)
Accordingly, it would have been obvious to person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine Leong with Ren for the benefit of having an apparatus to monitor the geofence and raise an alert when a terminal entered the geofence. Further benefit to combine is to effectively determine the terminal enters the geofence base on the location and boundary of the geofence.
Claims 3-4, and 14 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Ren in view of Lan in view of Leong et al., (US Patent Application Publication No. 20210174952), published on 7/10/2021 (hereinafter Leong).
As for claim 3, Ren discloses the information processing apparatus according to claim 2, wherein:
the processor (geofence processor) a terminal (output device) (output waning 427 to warn occupants of vehicle 403A about geofence 216).
(Ren paragraph [0019] discloses “In general, connected vehicles in proximity to, within, or entering a geofence can have operations restricted. Geofences can vary in intensity with the intensity of a geofence being based on crowd density.”
Ren paragraph [0059] discloses “Thus, if geofence 216 is a lower intensity geofence, geofence processor 434 can send warning 427 to output device 428. Output device 428 can output waning 427 to warn occupants of vehicle 403A about geofence 216. Movement restriction command 482 can force vehicle 403A to slow down to a graduated maximum speed. The graduated maximum speed can be lowered as vehicle 403A and geofence 416 get closer together.”
Ren discloses connected vehicles in proximity to, within, or entering a geofence can have operations restricted. Geofence is being based on crowd intensity. Ren failed to discloses the vehicle outside of the geofence to not raise an alarm.)
Ren does not appear to explicitly disclose determines not to cause a terminal that has been present in the area set as the geofence before the geofence is set. However, in a similar field of endeavor, Lan discloses determines not to cause a terminal (user equipment) that has been present in the area set as the geofence before the geofence is set (user equipment 230 positioned in the transmission coverage area 210, user equipment 230 is not located within the geofenced area).
(Lan [Col 6, Line 3-12] discloses “In FIG. 2B, the example environment 200 includes the user equipment 230 positioned in the transmission coverage area 210. In this example, the user equipment 230 receives the WEA alert, but does not output the WEA alert since the user equipment 230 is not located within the geofence area 220 of the WEA alert. The user equipment 230 receives the WEA alert and compares its geographical location with that of the geofenced area 220. When the user equipment 230 determines it is not located within the geofenced area 220, it does not output the WEA alert.”)
Leong also discloses apparatus wherein the processor determines not to cause a terminal (user equipment) that has been present in the area set as the geofence before the geofence is set to output the alarm (Leong paragraph [0168] discloses after geofence is created, an alert may be sent to individuals entering the geofence area if they are not permitted, however, Leong is silent as to alert being is sent to anyone already in the geofence area)
Accordingly, it would have been obvious to person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine Leong with Lan and Ren for the benefit of having an alert that provides the effective geofence for terminal to validate before raising an alarm. Further benefit to combine is for terminal to efficiently raise alarm only when it is in the affected geofence.
As for claim 4, Ren discloses the information processing apparatus according to claim 2, wherein:
the processor (geofence 434 processor) (a measure of the response level to any vehicles within or in proximity to the geofence) , .
(Ren paragraph [0019] discloses “In general, connected vehicles in proximity to, within, or entering a geofence can have operations restricted. Geofences can vary in intensity with the intensity of a geofence being based on crowd density.”
Paragraph [0057] discloses “In one aspect, a geofence defines a geofence intensity. Movement restriction command 482 can be more or less restrictive based on the geofence intensity. As such, the geofence intensity is essentially defined as a measure of the response level to any vehicles within or in proximity to the geofence. Geofence intensity can vary and can correspond to crowd density.”
Ren discloses vehicles in proximity to, within, or entering a geofence can have operations restricted.)
Ren does not appear to explicitly disclose determines not to cause, among terminals that have been present in the area set as the geofence before the geofence is set, to output the alarm.
However, Lan discloses determines not to cause, among terminals that have been present in the area set as the geofence before the geofence is set (outside of the geofenced area), (the user equipment would not output the alert) and determines to cause to output the alarm.
(Lan [Col 2, Line 30-41] discloses “In some situations, the user equipment can be located within the geofenced area when the WEA alert is transmitted, so the user device can be expected to promptly output the alert when the WEA alert is received by the user equipment. In other situations, the user equipment can receive the WEA alert transmission and be outside of the geofenced area, so the user equipment would not output the alert. However, user equipment located initially outside of the geofenced area of the WEA alert can transit into the geofenced area after the WEA alert has been transmitted and while the WEA alert is still active, so the user equipment would be expected to output the alert.”
Lan discloses the output of the alert only occurs when the user equipment is in the geofence and the WEA alert is active. Therefore, the user equipment in a geofence will not generate an alert if the WEA alert is inactive.)
Ren and Lan do not appear to explicitly disclose not to cause, a terminal permitted in advance to stay in the area to output the alarm; to cause a terminal that is not permitted to stay in the area to output the alarm;
However, in a similar field of endeavor, Leong discloses not to cause, a terminal permitted in advance to stay in the area to output the alarm (when an individual enters a geofenced zone, they are authorized to work in this area); to cause a terminal that is not permitted to stay in the area to output the alarm (individual is not authorized to enter, an alert may be sent);
(Leong paragraph [0168] discloses “Geofence may be created around the work zones and displayed on the supervisory dashboard 2103. Once created, the geofence may be activated and can detect personnel entering the geofenced zone. In some cases, when an individual enters a geofenced zone, the system may detect it and determine whether they are authorized to work in this area based on the permitted work within the area and the permission to work of the individual. If the individual is not authorized to enter, an alert may be sent to the individual's wearable device 2105 to alert them that it is a hazardous area and they should leave.”
Leong discloses the alert may be sent to individual who not authorized to enter, but no alert for individual who is authorized to enter.)
Accordingly, it would have been obvious to person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine Leong with Ren and Lan for the benefit of having an alert that provides the effective geofence for terminal to validate before raising an alarm. Further benefit to combine is for terminal to efficiently raise an alarm only when it is in the affected geofence while silent the alarm when terminal is authorized to enter the affected geofence.
As for claim 14, Ren discloses the terminal according to claim 13,
wherein the terminal (output device) even [terminal does not output alarm]
(Ren paragraph [0019] discloses “In general, connected vehicles in proximity to, within, or entering a geofence can have operations restricted. Geofences can vary in intensity with the intensity of a geofence being based on crowd density.”
Paragraph [0059] discloses “Thus, if geofence 216 is a lower intensity geofence, geofence processor 434 can send warning 427 to output device 428. Output device 428 can output waning 427 to warn occupants of vehicle 403A about geofence 216. Movement restriction command 482 can force vehicle 403A to slow down to a graduated maximum speed. The graduated maximum speed can be lowered as vehicle 403A and geofence 416 get closer together.”
Ren discloses vehicles in proximity to, within, or entering a geofence can have operations restricted.)
Ren does not appear to explicitly disclose terminal does not output the alarm when the terminal has been present in the area set as the geofence before the geofence is set. However, in a similar field of endeavor, Lan discloses terminal does not output the alarm (the user equipment would not output the alert) when the terminal has been present in the area set as the geofence before the geofence is set (outside of the geofenced area).
(Lan [Col 2, Line 30-41] discloses “In some situations, the user equipment can be located within the geofenced area when the WEA alert is transmitted, so the user device can be expected to promptly output the alert when the WEA alert is received by the user equipment. In other situations, the user equipment can receive the WEA alert transmission and be outside of the geofenced area, so the user equipment would not output the alert. However, user equipment located initially outside of the geofenced area of the WEA alert can transit into the geofenced area after the WEA alert has been transmitted and while the WEA alert is still active, so the user equipment would be expected to output the alert.”
Lan discloses the output of the alert only occurs when the user equipment is in the geofence and the WEA alert is active. Therefore, the user equipment in a geofence will not generate an alert if the WEA alert is inactive.)
Ren does not appear to explicitly disclose terminal does not output the alarm when the terminal receives the information indicating that the terminal has entered the geofence. However, in a similar field of endeavor, Leong discloses terminal does not output the alarm (individual is not authorized to enter, an alert may be sent) when the terminal receives the information indicating that the terminal has entered the geofence (when an individual enters a geofenced zone).
(Leong paragraph [0168] discloses “Geofence may be created around the work zones and displayed on the supervisory dashboard 2103. Once created, the geofence may be activated and can detect personnel entering the geofenced zone. In some cases, when an individual enters a geofenced zone, the system may detect it and determine whether they are authorized to work in this area based on the permitted work within the area and the permission to work of the individual. If the individual is not authorized to enter, an alert may be sent to the individual's wearable device 2105 to alert them that it is a hazardous area and they should leave.”
Leong discloses the alert may be sent to individual who not authorized to enter, but no alert for individual who is authorized to enter.)
Accordingly, it would have been obvious to person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine Leong with Ren and Lan for the benefit of having an alert that provides the effective geofence for terminal to validate before raising an alarm. Further benefit to combine is for terminal to efficiently raise an alarm only when it is in the affected geofence while silent the alarm when terminal is authorized to enter the affected geofence.
Claim 5 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Ren in view of Leong in view of Bestor et al., (US Patent Application No. 20180184239), published on 6/28/2028 (hereinafter Bestor).
As for claim 5, Ren discloses the information processing apparatus according to claim 2, wherein:
the processor (cloud-based service) changes (geofence boundaries from the device totals and device locations) or the weights of the mobile objects associated with the terminals in the certain area.
(Ren paragraph [0017] discloses “In one aspect, one or more base stations transmit device totals and device locations to a cloud-based service on an ongoing basis. The cloud-based service calculates and re-calculates geofence boundaries from the device totals and device locations. The cloud-based service can maintain a set of active geofences. As new sets of device totals and device locations are received new geofences can be created. As device totals and device locations in an existing geofence decrease, the existing geofence boundary can be reduced. Geofences that lack sufficient numbers of devices (and thus are no longer representative of a crowd) can be deleted.”
Examiner choose to map the number of terminals in a certain area.)
Ren does not appear to explicitly disclose intensity of an alarm to be output. However, in a similar field of endeavor, Bestor discloses intensity of an alarm to be output (vary in intensity based on a severity of the change in geofence size).
Bestor paragraph [0010] discloses “FIG. 6 illustrates a flow chart setting forth process steps for electronically maintaining one or more criminal organization geofences as various electronically detected patterns-of-conduct of one or more criminal organization associates is or are detected, in accordance with some embodiments.”
Paragraph [0139] discloses “Outputting the notification at the target computing device(s) may additionally or alternatively include providing an audio or haptic output relative to the change in geofence, such as providing a text-to-speech output of some or all of the changes (e.g., announcing neighborhoods or street names associated with the area expanded into or contracted from, and the identity of the criminal organization affected, among other possibilities), providing a vibration alert that may vary in intensity based on a severity of the change in geofence size or based on a priority of the underlying criminal organization or criminal organization associate, or some other output relative to the update.”)
Accordingly, it would have been obvious to person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine Bestor with Ren and Leong for the benefit of having an apparatus capable to increase the intensity level of an alarm according to the boundary of the geofence. Further benefit to combine to support an ability to notify different level of management to mitigate the condition within the geofence.
Claim 6 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Ren in view Leong in view of Bestor in view of Diendorf et al., US Patent Publication No. 20060047419, published date 3/2/2006 (hereinafter Diendorf).
As for claim 6, Ren discloses the information processing apparatus according to claim 2, wherein:
when the number of terminals (the total number of devices in an area) in the certain area exceeds a first threshold(geofence is created when population within an area exceeds a threshold) (when population within an area exceeds a threshold) threshold.
(Ren paragraph [0015] discloses “Base stations can locate personal (e.g., radio) devices (e.g., mobile phones, smart watches, other wearables, etc.) via GPS, wireless radio communication (e.g., Bluetooth, Wi-Fi, etc.), etc. to get an estimate of the total number of devices in an area as well as locations of the devices. Using count and location data, a geofence is created when population or population density within an area exceeds a threshold. New boundaries can be generated in real-time as people move around creating a dynamic geofence. The geometry of a geofence can be a simple shape (e.g., circular, elliptical) or more complex organic shapes based on device locations. The boundary of a geofence can grow and/or shrink based on a variety of factors, including density of people in an area, a known public event, known physical barriers, etc.”
Paragraph [0037] discloses “Method 300 includes receiving radio communication from a plurality of devices (301). For example, base station 201 can receive radio communication from each of devices 211A-211E. Method 300 includes calculating a person count based on the plurality of devices and proximity of the plurality of devices to one another (302). For example, base station 201 can calculate person count 213 estimating the number of people associated with devices 211A-211E. Base station 201 can consider any devices detected within a specified distance of one another (e.g., 20 cm) to be carried/worn by the same person. Thus, an estimate of people in an area (or crowd density) can be based on an average number of devices per person.”
Paragraph [0043] discloses “Base station 201 or cloud service 202 can also adjust the intensity of geofence 216 as crowd density in an area change. If crowd density decreases, geofence intensity can be correspondingly lowered. On the other hand, if crowd density increases, geofence intensity can be correspondingly raised.”
Current application defines weights of mobile objects (e.g., workers and construction vehicles associated with terminals) in a region that is a candidate where a geofence is to be set (generated). Ren discloses crowd density can be based on an average number of devices per person.)
Ren does not appear to explicitly disclose output a more intense alarm. However, in a similar field of endeavor, Bestor discloses output a more intense alarm (vary in intensity based on a severity of the change in geofence size)
(Bestor paragraph [0010] discloses “FIG. 6 illustrates a flow chart setting forth process steps for electronically maintaining one or more criminal organization geofences as various electronically detected patterns-of-conduct of one or more criminal organization associates is or are detected, in accordance with some embodiments.”
Paragraph [0139] discloses “Outputting the notification at the target computing device(s) may additionally or alternatively include providing an audio or haptic output relative to the change in geofence, such as providing a text-to-speech output of some or all of the changes (e.g., announcing neighborhoods or street names associated with the area expanded into or contracted from, and the identity of the criminal organization affected, among other possibilities), providing a vibration alert that may vary in intensity based on a severity of the change in geofence size or based on a priority of the underlying criminal organization or criminal organization associate, or some other output relative to the update.”)
Ren does not appear to explicitly disclose the weights of the mobile objects associated with the terminals in the certain area exceed a second threshold. However, in a similar field of endeavor, Diendorf discloses the weights of the mobile objects associated with the terminals (loaded weight from the mobile shipping unit) in the certain area (location of a mobile transport unit) exceed a second threshold (loaded weight has changed by more than a predetermined amount).
(Diendorf paragraph [0006] discloses “In a further embodiment, the invention is a method to minimize environmental contamination during transportation; the method comprising the steps of: monitoring the current loaded weight and location of a mobile transport unit, wherein the unit contains a potentially environmentally hazardous material; communicating at scheduled intervals data comprising the location and loaded weight from the mobile shipping unit to a processing system that is remote from the mobile transport unit; comparing the current loaded weight of the mobile shipping unit with a target loaded weight, the target loaded weight being an average of previously communicated loaded weights, the immediately previously communicated loaded weight, or an original loaded weight; determining if the mobile transport unit is within a predetermined geofence (virtual geographic boundary), the geofence defining a boundary around a station for loading or unloading the material from the mobile transport unit; communicating an alert message if both (1) the comparison of the current loaded weight with the target loaded weight determines that the loaded weight has changed by more than a predetermined amount and (2) the mobile unit is not within a geofence, are true”)
Accordingly, it would have been obvious to person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine Diendorf with Leong and Ren for the benefit of having an apparatus capable to increase the intensity level of an alarm according to the boundary of the geofence based on the count and weight associated with a terminal. Further benefit to combine to support an ability to notify different level of management to mitigate the condition within the geofence when passing at least one of the thresholds for count and weight of associated terminal.
Claims 8 and 17 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Ren in view of Diendorf et al., US Patent Publication No. 20060047419, published date 3/2/2006 (hereinafter Diendorf).
As for claim 8, Ren discloses the information processing apparatus according to claim 1, wherein:
when the number of in the certain area exceeds a first threshold (a geofence is created when population within an area exceeds a threshold) and (population density within an area exceeds a threshold) than when (population within an area exceeds a threshold) is smaller than or equal to the first threshold.
(Ren paragraph [0015] discloses “Base stations can locate personal (e.g., radio) devices (e.g., mobile phones, smart watches, other wearables, etc.) via GPS, wireless radio communication (e.g., Bluetooth, Wi-Fi, etc.), etc. to get an estimate of the total number of devices in an area as well as locations of the devices. Using count and location data, a geofence is created when population or population density within an area exceeds a threshold. New boundaries can be generated in real-time as people move around creating a dynamic geofence. The geometry of a geofence can be a simple shape (e.g., circular, elliptical) or more complex organic shapes based on device locations. The boundary of a geofence can grow and/or shrink based on a variety of factors, including density of people in an area, a known public event, known physical barriers, etc.”
Paragraph [0017] discloses “In one aspect, one or more base stations transmit device totals and device locations to a cloud-based service on an ongoing basis. The cloud-based service calculates and re-calculates geofence boundaries from the device totals and device locations. The cloud-based service can maintain a set of active geofences. As new sets of device totals and device locations are received new geofences can be created. As device totals and device locations in an existing geofence decrease, the existing geofence boundary can be reduced. Geofences that lack sufficient numbers of devices (and thus are no longer representative of a crowd) can be deleted.”
Paragraph [0043] discloses “Base station 201 or cloud service 202 can also adjust the intensity of geofence 216 as crowd density in an area change. If crowd density decreases, geofence intensity can be correspondingly lowered. On the other hand, if crowd density increases, geofence intensity can be correspondingly raised.”
Given the option to map to either one of the number of terminals and the weights of mobile objects. Examiner selects to map to the number of terminals.)
Ren does not appear to explicitly disclose the weights of the mobile objects associated with the terminals in the certain area exceed a second threshold. However, in a similar field of endeavor, Diendorf discloses the weights of the mobile objects associated with the terminals (loaded weight from the mobile shipping unit) in the certain area (location of a mobile transport unit) exceed a second threshold (loaded weight has changed by more than a predetermined amount).
(Diendorf paragraph [0006] discloses “In a further embodiment, the invention is a method to minimize environmental contamination during transportation; the method comprising the steps of: monitoring the current loaded weight and location of a mobile transport unit, wherein the unit contains a potentially environmentally hazardous material; communicating at scheduled intervals data comprising the location and loaded weight from the mobile shipping unit to a processing system that is remote from the mobile transport unit; comparing the current loaded weight of the mobile shipping unit with a target loaded weight, the target loaded weight being an average of previously communicated loaded weights, the immediately previously communicated loaded weight, or an original loaded weight; determining if the mobile transport unit is within a predetermined geofence (virtual geographic boundary), the geofence defining a boundary around a station for loading or unloading the material from the mobile transport unit; communicating an alert message if both (1) the comparison of the current loaded weight with the target loaded weight determines that the loaded weight has changed by more than a predetermined amount and (2) the mobile unit is not within a geofence, are true”)
Accordingly, it would have been obvious to person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine Diendorf with Ren for the benefit of having an apparatus that can increase geofence boundary based on the density of the population and the loaded weight changed more than a predetermine amount. Further benefit to combine is to make the apparatus more accurate in modifying the boundary of a geofence by using multiple thresholds being crossed by the terminal.
As for independent claim 17, Ren discloses an information processing system, comprising:
a plurality of terminals, wherein:
the information processing system (Base stations) obtains a number of terminals in a certain area (get an estimate of the total number of devices in an area as well as locations of the devices) and determines whether to generate a geofence in accordance with whether at least one of the number of terminals (Using count and location data, a geofence is created when population within an area exceeds a threshold) exceeds a certain threshold.
(Ren paragraph [0015] discloses “Base stations can locate personal (e.g., radio) devices (e.g., mobile phones, smart watches, other wearables, etc.) via GPS, wireless radio communication (e.g., Bluetooth, Wi-Fi, etc.), etc. to get an estimate of the total number of devices in an area as well as locations of the devices. Using count and location data, a geofence is created when population or population density within an area exceeds a threshold. New boundaries can be generated in real-time as people move around creating a dynamic geofence. The geometry of a geofence can be a simple shape (e.g., circular, elliptical) or more complex organic shapes based on device locations. The boundary of a geofence can grow and/or shrink based on a variety of factors, including density of people in an area, a known public event, known physical barriers, etc.”
Paragraph [0037] discloses “Method 300 includes receiving radio communication from a plurality of devices (301). For example, base station 201 can receive radio communication from each of devices 211A-211E. Method 300 includes calculating a person count based on the plurality of devices and proximity of the plurality of devices to one another (302). For example, base station 201 can calculate person count 213 estimating the number of people associated with devices 211A-211E. Base station 201 can consider any devices detected within a specified distance of one another (e.g., 20 cm) to be carried/worn by the same person. Thus, an estimate of people in an area (or crowd density) can be based on an average number of devices per person.”
Current application defines weights of mobile objects (e.g., workers and construction vehicles associated with terminals) in a region that is a candidate where a geofence is to be set (generated). Ren discloses crowd density can be based on an average number of devices per person. Given the option to map at least one of the number of terminals and the weights of mobile objects. Examiner selects to map to the number of terminals.)
Ren does not appear to explicitly disclose weights of mobile objects associated with the terminals in the certain area. However, in a similar field of endeavor, Diendorf discloses weights of mobile objects (loaded weight) associated with the terminals (mobile shipping unit) in the certain area (location of a mobile transport unit).
(Diendorf paragraph [0006] discloses “In a further embodiment, the invention is a method to minimize environmental contamination during transportation; the method comprising the steps of: monitoring the current loaded weight and location of a mobile transport unit, wherein the unit contains a potentially environmentally hazardous material; communicating at scheduled intervals data comprising the location and loaded weight from the mobile shipping unit to a processing system that is remote from the mobile transport unit; comparing the current loaded weight of the mobile shipping unit with a target loaded weight, the target loaded weight being an average of previously communicated loaded weights, the immediately previously communicated loaded weight, or an original loaded weight; determining if the mobile transport unit is within a predetermined geofence (virtual geographic boundary), the geofence defining a boundary around a station for loading or unloading the material from the mobile transport unit; communicating an alert message if both (1) the comparison of the current loaded weight with the target loaded weight determines that the loaded weight has changed by more than a predetermined amount and (2) the mobile unit is not within a geofence, are true”)
Accordingly, it would have been obvious to person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine Diendorf with Ren for the benefit of having an apparatus that can increase geofence boundary based on the density of the population and the loaded weight changed more than a predetermine amount. Further benefit to combine is to make the apparatus more accurate in modifying the boundary of a geofence by using multiple thresholds being crossed by the terminal.
Claim 10 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Ren in view Leong in view of Diendorf et al., US Patent Publication No. 20060047419, published date 3/2/2006 (hereinafter Diendorf).
As for claim 10, Ren discloses the information processing apparatus according to claim 1, wherein:
the obtainer (base stations) obtains (identity of the individual, title, or permission level) regarding the terminals (device totals and device locations to a cloud-based service) in the certain area and by obtaining, information regarding a plurality of terminals (a person count based on the plurality of devices), information regarding the (calculating a person count based on the plurality of devices and proximity of the plurality of devices to one another) with the obtained
(Ren paragraph [0017] discloses “In one aspect, one or more base stations transmit device totals and device locations to a cloud-based service on an ongoing basis. The cloud-based service calculates and re-calculates geofence boundaries from the device totals and device locations. The cloud-based service can maintain a set of active geofences. As new sets of device totals and device locations are received new geofences can be created. As device totals and device locations in an existing geofence decrease, the existing geofence boundary can be reduced. Geofences that lack sufficient numbers of devices (and thus are no longer representative of a crowd) can be deleted.”
Paragraph [0037] discloses “Method 300 includes receiving radio communication from a plurality of devices (301). For example, base station 201 can receive radio communication from each of devices 211A-211E. Method 300 includes calculating a person count based on the plurality of devices and proximity of the plurality of devices to one another (302). For example, base station 201 can calculate person count 213 estimating the number of people associated with devices 211A-211E.”
Ren discloses cloud-based service calculates and re-calculates geofence boundaries from the device totals and device locations.)
Ren does not appear to explicitly disclose identification information; from information regarding weights of mobile objects stored in association with identification information. However, in a similar field of endeavor, Leong discloses identification information (identity of the individual, title, or permission level of the individual); from information regarding with identification information (The dashboard may display the real-time location of the devices and the associated individuals at the worksite).
(Leong paragraph [0144] discloses “FIG. 14 shows an example GUI displaying a dashboard. In the example, the dashboard may display real-time information about the worksite (e.g., vessel), one or more local devices (e.g., wearable devices, mobile device, user devices) in the local network and locations of the devices at the worksite. The dashboard may display the real-time location of the devices and the associated individuals at the worksite. For example, identity of the individual, title, or permission level of the individual may be viewed through the dashboard. This may beneficially show the real-time condition such as an occurrence of emergency event, status of operations and individuals on the vessel.”
Leong discloses the dashboard may display real-time information about the worksite (e.g., vessel), one or more local devices (e.g., wearable devices, mobile device, user devices) in the local network and locations of the devices at the worksite.)
Ren does not appear to explicitly disclose obtains the weights of the mobile objects associated with the terminals in the certain area. However, in a similar field of endeavor, Diendorf discloses obtains the weights of the mobile objects associated with the terminals (loaded weight from the mobile shipping unit) in the certain area (location of a mobile transport unit).
(Diendorf paragraph [0006] discloses “In a further embodiment, the invention is a method to minimize environmental contamination during transportation; the method comprising the steps of: monitoring the current loaded weight and location of a mobile transport unit, wherein the unit contains a potentially environmentally hazardous material; communicating at scheduled intervals data comprising the location and loaded weight from the mobile shipping unit to a processing system that is remote from the mobile transport unit; comparing the current loaded weight of the mobile shipping unit with a target loaded weight, the target loaded weight being an average of previously communicated loaded weights, the immediately previously communicated loaded weight, or an original loaded weight; determining if the mobile transport unit is within a predetermined geofence (virtual geographic boundary), the geofence defining a boundary around a station for loading or unloading the material from the mobile transport unit; communicating an alert message if both (1) the comparison of the current loaded weight with the target loaded weight determines that the loaded weight has changed by more than a predetermined amount and (2) the mobile unit is not within a geofence, are true”)
Accordingly, it would have been obvious to person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine Diendorf with Leong and Ren for the benefit of having an apparatus that can associate a device with the identification information to the terminal and weight associated with a terminal. Further benefit to combine for the apparatus to efficiently extract the weight or identity associate with the terminal to better recalculate and sizing of the geofence.
Claims 11-12 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Ren in view of Lyzen et al., (US Patent Application Publication No. 20210070356), published on 3/11/2021 (herein after Lyzen).
As for claim 11, Ren discloses the information processing apparatus according to claim 1, further comprising:
a communicator (Base stations) that receives, from the terminals (personal (e.g., radio) devices (e.g., mobile phones, smart watches, other wearables, etc.), positions (device locations) of the terminals determined based on
(Ren [0015] Base stations can locate personal (e.g., radio) devices (e.g., mobile phones, smart watches, other wearables, etc.) via GPS, wireless radio communication (e.g., Bluetooth, Wi-Fi, etc.), etc. to get an estimate of the total number of devices in an area as well as locations of the devices. Using count and location data, a geofence is created when population or population density within an area exceeds a threshold. New boundaries can be generated in real-time as people move around creating a dynamic geofence. The geometry of a geofence can be a simple shape (e.g., circular, elliptical) or more complex organic shapes based on device locations. The boundary of a geofence can grow and/or shrink based on a variety of factors, including density of people in an area, a known public event, known physical barriers, etc.)
Ren does not appear to explicitly disclose RTK (real-time kinematic). However, in a similar field of endeavor, Lyzen discloses RTK (real-time kinematic).
(Lyzen paragraph [0008] discloses “In some disclosed embodiments, real time kinematic (RTK) terrestrial positioning correction data can be utilized to correct global positioning system (GPS) satellite-based positioning data. RTK-corrected GPS data can facilitate very high position accuracy for the power equipment device, minimizing deviation from calculated path vectors. Accordingly, parallel pathing can be highly accurate, achieving good visual results for a mowing power equipment device, as one example among others.”)
Accordingly, it would have been obvious to person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine Ren with Lyzen for the benefit of having an apparatus capable to support RTK for positioning measurement of the terminal. Further benefit to combine because RTK-corrected GPS data can facilitate very high position accuracy for the power equipment device.
As for claim 12, The information processing apparatus according to claim 1, wherein:
the processor (Base stations) determines positions (can locate personal (e.g., radio) devices (e.g., mobile phones, smart watches, other wearables, etc.) via GPS) of the terminals
(Ren paragraph [0015] discloses “Base stations can locate personal (e.g., radio) devices (e.g., mobile phones, smart watches, other wearables, etc.) via GPS, wireless radio communication (e.g., Bluetooth, Wi-Fi, etc.), etc. to get an estimate of the total number of devices in an area as well as locations of the devices. Using count and location data, a geofence is created when population or population density within an area exceeds a threshold. New boundaries can be generated in real-time as people move around creating a dynamic geofence. The geometry of a geofence can be a simple shape (e.g., circular, elliptical) or more complex organic shapes based on device locations. The boundary of a geofence can grow and/or shrink based on a variety of factors, including density of people in an area, a known public event, known physical barriers, etc.”)
Ren does not appear to explicitly disclose positions of the terminals based on RTK processing. However, in a similar field of endeavor, Lyzen discloses positions of the terminals based on RTK processing.
(Lyzen paragraph [0008] discloses “In some disclosed embodiments, real time kinematic (RTK) terrestrial positioning correction data can be utilized to correct global positioning system (GPS) satellite-based positioning data. RTK-corrected GPS data can facilitate very high position accuracy for the power equipment device, minimizing deviation from calculated path vectors. Accordingly, parallel pathing can be highly accurate, achieving good visual results for a mowing power equipment device, as one example among others.”)
Accordingly, it would have been obvious to person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine Ren with Lyzen for the benefit of having an apparatus capable to support RTK for positioning measurement of the terminal. Further benefit to combine because RTK-corrected GPS data can facilitate very high position accuracy for the power equipment device.
Conclusion
Below are references not relied upon but are pertinent to applicant’s disclosure:
Rajendran et al., US Patent Application Publication No. 20150326624
Create/delete/merge geofence based on common social interest. Paragraph [0056]
Nicolas Schulman, US Patent Application Publication No. 20170171717
Schulman discloses an ability to enable/disable alarm on a device to allow individual to enter a geofence. Paragraph [0004] [0016]
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JOSEPH K NGUYEN whose telephone number is (571)467-6390. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 8am-5pm.
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, Jeanette J Parker can be reached at 571-270-3647. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300.
Information regarding the status of published or unpublished applications may be obtained from Patent Center. Unpublished application information in Patent Center is available to registered users. To file and manage patent submissions in Patent Center, visit: https://patentcenter.uspto.gov. Visit https://www.uspto.gov/patents/apply/patent-center for more information about Patent Center and https://www.uspto.gov/patents/docx for information about filing in DOCX format. For additional questions, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
/JOSEPH KHANH NGUYEN/Examiner, Art Unit 2646
/JEANETTE J PARKER/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2646
Prosecution Insights