DETAILED ACTION
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 103 which forms the basis for all obviousness rejections set forth in this Office action:
A patent for a claimed invention may not be obtained, notwithstanding that the claimed invention is not identically disclosed as set forth in section 102, if the differences between the claimed invention and the prior art are such that the claimed invention as a whole would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which the claimed invention pertains. Patentability shall not be negated by the manner in which the invention was made.
The factual inquiries for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows:
1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art.
2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue.
3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art.
4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness.
Claims 1, 2, 4, 9-10, and 16-17 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Sako et al (US 20150379892 A1), and further in view of Neven (US 20120290401 A1).
RE claim 1, Sako teaches An information processing apparatus comprising at least one processor ([0064], FIG. 2), the at least one processor carrying out: a determining process of determining content to be overlaid and displayed on an image captured, the image having food shown therein; and a display control process of overlaying and displaying the content on the image (Figs 1-3, [0059]-[0061], [0070]- [0071]).
Sako is silent RE: on an image captured of at least part of a sight of a user. However Neven teaches in Abstract, [0021], [0038] in order to capture images directly at the line of sight of the user. This is readily available and implicitly indicated by Sako as capturing the food image in front of the user with the worn hmd in Fig 1, [0114] also utilizing user graze focus tracking [0121].
Thus, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to include in Sako a system and method in which the image is captured of at least part of a sight of a user, as suggested by Neven in order to effectively capture images in front of the user and thereby increasing system effectiveness and user experience.
RE claim 2, Sako teaches, the at least one processor further carries out a situation judging process of judging a meal situation of the user, the determining process being configured to determine that content in accordance with the meal situation is the content to be overlaid and displayed ([0068]- [0071]).
RE claim 4, Sako teaches, wherein the situation judging process is configured to judge a degree of progress, which is a degree to which the user makes progress on eating a meal, and the determining process is configured to determine that content in accordance with the degree of progress is the content to be overlaid and displayed (Figs 5,12-13, [0075], [0133], [0139], [0165]-[0167], [0195]).
RE claim 9, Sako teaches, the at least one processor further carries out a reference information acquiring process of acquiring reference information referred to during determination of the content, the determining process being configured to determine that content in accordance with the reference information is the content to be overlaid and displayed (Fig 4, [0070], [0123]-[0126]).
RE claim 10, Sako teaches, wherein in a case where the reference information indicates that the user is a user who wishes to cut calorific intake, the determining process is configured to determine that an image of food which contains higher calories than the food shown in the image is the content to be overlaid and displayed, and the display control process is configured to overlay and display, on the food shown in the image captured of the at least part of the sight of the user, the image determined by the determining process (Fig 7-13, [0070]-[0073] ).
Claim 16 recites limitations similar in scope with limitations of claim 1 as method and therefore rejected under the same rationale.
Claim 17 recites limitations similar in scope with limitations of claim 1 and therefore rejected under the same rationale. In addition Sako teaches A non-transitory storage medium storing a display control program ([0013]).
Claim 3 rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Sako as modified by Neven, and further in view of Connor (US 20160073886 A1).
RE claim 3, Sako as modified by Neven is silent RE: wherein the situation judging process is configured to determine a degree of concentration which is a degree to which the user concentrates on eating a meal, and the determining process is configured to determine that content in accordance with the degree of concentration is the content to be overlaid and displayed.
However Connor teaches in [0131], [0142]-[0143], [0227] etc wherein pace/speed is the degree of concentration.
Thus, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to include in Sako as modified by Neven a system and method wherein the situation judging process is configured to determine a degree of concentration which is a degree to which the user concentrates on eating a meal, and the determining process is configured to determine that content in accordance with the degree of concentration is the content to be overlaid and displayed, as suggested by Connor in order to provide the AR feedback based on the users eating behavior and history and thereby increasing system effectiveness and user experience.
Claims 5, 12 rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Sako as modified by Neven, and further in view of Rajendran et al (US 20160073886 A1).
RE claim 5, Sako as modified by Neven is silent RE: wherein the situation judging process is configured to judge an amount of leftovers of the user, and the determining process is configured to determine that content in accordance with the amount of leftovers is the content to be overlaid and displayed.
However Rajendran teaches in Figs 13-14, [0091]-[0092], [0094].
Thus, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to include in Sako as modified by Neven a system and method wherein the situation judging process is configured to judge an amount of leftovers of the user, and the determining process is configured to determine that content in accordance with the amount of leftovers is the content to be overlaid and displayed, as suggested by Rajendran in order to provide the AR feedback based on the users eating behavior/wastage/leftovers and thereby increasing system effectiveness and user experience.
RE claim 12, Sako as modified by Neven is silent RE: wherein in a case where the reference information indicates that the user needs to take medicine, the determining process is configured to determine that content for encouraging the user to take medicine is the content to be overlaid and displayed.
However Rajendran teaches in Fig 14b, [0052], [0095].
Thus, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to include in Sako as modified by Neven a system and method wherein in a case where the reference information indicates that the user needs to take medicine, the determining process is configured to determine that content for encouraging the user to take medicine is the content to be overlaid and displayed, as suggested by Rajendran in order to recommend taking medicine after meal and thereby increasing system effectiveness and user experience.
Claim 6 rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Sako as modified by Neven, and further in view of Ishigaki et al (US 20230058760 A1).
RE claim 6, Sako as modified by Neven is silent RE: wherein the determining process is configured to use content prediction model having undergone machine learning of a relationship between the meal situation and content to be displayed in the meal situation, to determine the content in accordance with the meal situation judged by the situation judging process.
However Ishigaki teaches in Figs 12-13, [0102], [0104], [0120] etc. to generate appropriate advice information according to user information.
Thus, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to include in Sako as modified by Neven a system and method wherein the determining process is configured to use content prediction model having undergone machine learning of a relationship between the meal situation and content to be displayed in the meal situation, to determine the content in accordance with the meal situation judged by the situation judging process, as suggested by Ishigaki in order to provide the AR feedback utilizing machine learning and thereby increasing system effectiveness and user experience.
Claims 7-8, 11 rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Sako as modified by Neven, and further in view of Sako et al (US 20150332620 A1, hereinafter Sako620).
RE claim 7, Sako as modified by Neven is silent RE: wherein the determining process is configured to determine that an image of predetermined food is the content to be overlaid and displayed, and the display control process is configured to overlay and display the image of the predetermined food on the food shown in the image captured of the at least part of the sight of the user.
However Sako620 teaches in Figs 1, 4, 6-7, [0048]-[0049] to create virtual image content from an input image to enhance user satisfaction.
Thus, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to include in Sako as modified by Neven a system and method wherein the determining process is configured to determine that an image of predetermined food is the content to be overlaid and displayed, and the display control process is configured to overlay and display the image of the predetermined food on the food shown in the image captured of the at least part of the sight of the user, as suggested by Sako620 in order to enhance user satisfaction and thereby increasing system effectiveness and user experience.
RE claim 8, Sako as modified by Neven and Sako620 teaches, wherein the predetermined food is the same as the food shown in the image except for an amount (Sako620 Figs 1, 4, 6-7, [0048]-[0049]).
RE claim 11, Sako as modified by Neven is silent RE: wherein in a case where the reference information indicates that a preference of the user, the determining process is configured to determine that an image of food which matches the preference is the content to be overlaid and displayed, and the display control process is configured to overlay and display, on the food shown in the image captured of the at least part of the sight of the user, the image determined by the determining process.
However Sako620 teaches in Figs 1, 4, 6-7, [0069], [0117], [0049] to create virtual image content from an input image to enhance user satisfaction.
Thus, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to include in Sako as modified by Neven a system and method wherein in a case where the reference information indicates that a preference of the user, the determining process is configured to determine that an image of food which matches the preference is the content to be overlaid and displayed, and the display control process is configured to overlay and display, on the food shown in the image captured of the at least part of the sight of the user, the image determined by the determining process, as suggested by Sako620 in order to enhance user satisfaction and thereby increasing system effectiveness and user experience.
Claim 13 rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Sako as modified by Neven, and further in view of Chandrashekar et al (US 20230004339 A1).
RE claim 13, Sako teaches wherein in a case where the reference information indicates a result of identification of the food shown in the image ([0085], [0090]- [0091]).
Sako as modified by Neven is silent RE: the determining process is configured to determine that a background image in accordance with the result of identification is the content to be overlaid and displayed, and the display control process is configured to overlay and display the background image on a background of the food shown in the image captured of the at least part of the sight of the user.
However Chandrashekar teaches in Figs 5-6, [0005], [0057]-[0059] etc as replacing the background to enhance viewer experience.
Thus, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to include in Sako as modified by Neven a system and method wherein the determining process is configured to determine that a background image in accordance with the result of identification is the content to be overlaid and displayed, and the display control process is configured to overlay and display the background image on a background of the food shown in the image captured of the at least part of the sight of the user, as suggested by Chandrashekar in order to enhance user experience.
Claim 14 rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Sako as modified by Neven, and further in view of Gibbs (US 20160035248 A1).
RE claim 14, Sako as modified by Neven is silent RE: wherein the determining process is configured to determine that an image of a person or a character is the content to be overlaid and displayed, and the display control process is configured to overlay and display the image of the person or the character on the image captured of the at least part of the sight of the user.
However Gibbs teaches in Fig 14D, [0036] to present a visual indicia as a recommendation.
Thus, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to include in Sako as modified by Neven a system and method wherein the determining process is configured to determine that an image of a person or a character is the content to be overlaid and displayed, and the display control process is configured to overlay and display the image of the person or the character on the image captured of the at least part of the sight of the user, as suggested by Gibbs in order to present a visual indicia as a recommendation and thereby increasing system effectiveness and user experience.
Claim 15 rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Sako as modified by Neven, and further in view of Chandrashekar et al
RE claim 15, Sako as modified by Neven is silent RE: wherein the determining process is configured to determine that an image of a container or a dish which is different in size from a container or a dish which holds the food is the content to be overlaid and displayed, and the display control process is configured to overlay and display the image of the container or the dish on a background of the food shown in the image captured of the at least part of the sight of the user.
However Sako620 teaches wherein the determining process is configured to determine that an image of a container or a dish which is different in size from a container or a dish which holds the food is the content to be overlaid and displayed, and the display control process is configured to display the image of the container or the dish in Figs 1, 6-7, [0102]-[0103] to create virtual image content from an input image to enhance user satisfaction. In addition However Chandrashekar teaches generating an overlay from an input image replacing the background in Figs 5-6, [0005], [0057]-[0059] etc to enhance viewer experience. The teaching of Sako620 and Chandrashekar can be combined and applied to generate the virtual image and adding the virtual image as a background of the captured food image to display as a visual indication related to the food item to enhance user satisfaction, as readily recognized by one of ordinary skill in the art.
Thus, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to include in Sako as modified by Neven a system and method wherein the determining process is configured to determine that an image of a container or a dish which is different in size from a container or a dish which holds the food is the content to be overlaid and displayed, and the display control process is configured to overlay and display the image of the container or the dish on a background of the food shown in the image captured of the at least part of the sight of the user, as set forth above applying Sako620 and Chandrashekar in order to enhance user satisfaction and thereby increasing system effectiveness and user experience.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure (see attached 892).
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to SULTANA MARCIA ZALALEE whose telephone number is (571)270-1411. The examiner can normally be reached Monday- Friday 8:00am-4:30pm.
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, Kent Chang can be reached at (571)272-7667. 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.
/Sultana M Zalalee/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2614
Prosecution Insights