DETAILED ACTION
Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status
The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
Notice to Applicants
This communication is in response to the Application filed on 8/21/2024
Claims 1-17, 21, and 25-26 are pending. Claims 18-20 and 22-24 are canceled.
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on 8/21/2024, 3/12/2025 and 8/21/2025 has been considered by the examiner.
Claim Objections
Claim 21 is objected to because of the following informalities: claim 21 lines 4-5 recites “the terminal acquires detect a moving body…”. Please remove either of the word “acquires” or “detect”. Appropriate correction is required.
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 1-17, 21, and 25-26 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 101 because the claimed invention is directed to a judicial exception (i.e., abstract idea – mental process) without significantly more. Claim 25 is used as an example. Claims 1 and 26 recite a system and non-transitory computer-readable medium, respectively, having a memory and a physical processor. The two-part test to identify claims that are directed to a judicial exception (Step 2A) and to then evaluate if additional elements of the claim provide an inventive concept (Step 2B) are:
(1) Are the claims directed to a process, machine, manufacture or composition of matter;
(2A) Prong One: Are the claims directed to a judicially recognized exception, i.e., a law of nature, a natural phenomenon, or an abstract idea;
Prong Two: If the claims are directed to a judicial exception under Prong One, then is the judicial exception integrated into a practical application;
(2B) If the claims are directed to a judicial exception and do not integrate the judicial exception, do the claims provide an inventive concept.
Claim 25. A monitoring method comprising, by a computer executing: (a) acquiring external appearance information relating to an external appearance of a moving body included in an image captured by a plurality of photographing apparatuses installed in a city; and (b) executing statistical processing by using the external appearance information. [emphasis added].
With regard to (1), the instant claims recite an apparatus and a method, therefore the answer is "yes".
With regard to (2A), Prong One: Yes. When viewed under the broadest most reasonable interpretation, the instant claims are directed to a Judicial Exception – an abstract idea belonging to the group of mental process – concepts that are practicably performed in the human mind (including an observation, evaluation, judgement, opinion). The steps of (a) and (b) (above in emphasized claim 1) are generically recited and nothing in these steps precludes the steps from practically being performed by a human equipped with an appropriate apparatus. It can be interpreted as merely looking at the data and determining a shape of a section in the image. There is nothing in the claim that requires more than an operation that a human, armed with the appropriate apparatus, pen and a paper, can not perform. The acquiring and executing, under its broadest reasonable interpretation, covers performance of the limitation in the mind. The claim encompasses the user looking at an outside environment and capturing an image using a generic camera. Once the image is received, attribute such as a shape or an orientation of the image can be determined/executed. This way, essentially one can present/output information about the image that represents event information, appearance of a traffic, or any other related information of a city/road. Thus, these limitations are a mental process.
With regard to (2A), Prong Two: No. The instant claims do not apply, rely on, or use the judicial exception in a manner that imposes a meaningful limit on the judicial exception of (a) “acquiring”, and therefore does not integrate the judicial exception into a practical application.
The use of a system/memory/processor to acquire an image (i.e., “data”) at a high level of generality such that said “data” can be used in the operation of the recited judicial exception (the mental step of “acquiring”). Supplying “data” does not provide for “integration” of the abstract idea into a practical application, as said data do not change the way in which said system operates. There are no specifics on how the data is received. This can be interpreted as “visualization”. Even if this step is by a “processor” that may be, for example, a camera. A camera/sensor is well known in the field, and receiving data from a camera/sensor is also well known.
This generic processor limitation is no more than mere instructions to apply the exception using a generic computer component. Accordingly, this additional element does not integrate the abstract idea into a practical application because it does not impose any meaningful limits on practicing the abstract idea. In conclusion, the claim as a whole does not provide for “integration” of the abstract idea into a practical application.
The claim is directed to the abstract idea.
With regard to (2B), as discussed with respect to Step 2A Prong Two, the additional element in the claim amounts to no more than mere instructions to apply the exception using a generic computer component. The same analysis applies here, i.e., mere instructions to apply an exception using a generic computer component cannot integrate a judicial exception into a practical application at Step 2A or provide an inventive concept in Step 2B. The pending claims do not show what is more than a routine in the art presented in the claims, i.e., the additional elements are nothing more than routine and well-known steps. There is no improvement to technology here. There is only step of (b) with additional elements of (a), and it has not been shown that the mental process allows the “technology” to do something that it previously was not able to do.
Therefore, the claims 1, 25, and 26 are ineligible.
With regard to dependent claims 2-17 and 21, similar analysis is applied and therefore does not integrate the judicial exception into a practical application – does not provide significant more than the judicial exception. These claims are similarly rejected for the same reasons discussed in view of steps recited in claim 1 and not repeated herewith.
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 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)(1) the claimed invention was patented, described in a printed publication, or in public use, on sale or otherwise available to the public before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claims 1-11, 13-17, 21 and 25-26 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by US 2021/0012649 to Yusa.
With regard to claim 1 Yusa discloses a monitoring apparatus (Figs. 1-2) comprising: at least one memory configured to store instructions (memory 151); and at least one processor configured to execute the instructions to (processor 152): acquire external appearance information relating to an external appearance of a moving body included in an image captured by a plurality of photographing apparatuses installed in a city (camera and acquisition unit 2, paragraph [0014]); and execute statistical processing by using the external appearance information (paragraphs [0015-0016]; analysis unit 3 generates statistical information about the traffic on the road from the video image data acquired by the camera video image acquisition unit 2).
With regard to claim 2 Yusa discloses wherein the moving body includes at least one of a person and a vehicle (vehicles and passengers of the vehicles; paragraphs [0015-0016, 0027]).
With regard to claim 3 Yusa discloses wherein the external appearance information includes the image, and the at least one processor configured further to execute the instructions to: acquire an external appearance feature value of the moving body by analyzing the image included in the external appearance information (analysis unit 102 and calculation unit uses the value of the total number of passengers obtained by the analysis processing performed by the analysis unit 102, paragraph [0045]; paragraph [0051] where related emission amount calculation, a value is used as the amount emitted from one vehicle); and execute the statistical processing by using the external appearance feature value being acquired (paragraphs [0045-0046, 0051, 0056, 0073, etc.).
With regard to claim 4 Yusa discloses wherein the at least one processor configured further to execute the instructions to: acquire an attribute of the moving body by analyzing the image included in the external appearance information; and execute the statistical processing by further using the attribute of the moving body (attribute as a speed of vehicle, paragraphs [0023-0024, 0029, 0032, 0056, 0058]).
With regard to claim 5 Yusa discloses wherein the external appearance information includes an external appearance feature value of the moving body (analysis unit 102 and calculation unit uses the value of the total number of passengers obtained by the analysis processing performed by the analysis unit 102, paragraph [0045]; paragraph [0051] where related emission amount calculation, a value is used as the amount emitted from one vehicle).
With regard to claim 6 Yusa discloses wherein the external appearance information further includes an attribute of the moving body (analysis unit 102 and calculation unit uses the value of the total number of passengers obtained by the analysis processing performed by the analysis unit 102, paragraph [0045, 0051]).
With regard to claim 7 Yusa discloses wherein the external appearance feature value includes a feature value relating to at least one of an external appearance attribute, a pose, and a movement of the moving body (analysis unit 102 and calculation unit uses the value of the total number of passengers (i.e., movement of the moving body) obtained by the analysis processing performed by the analysis unit 102, paragraph [0045, 0051]).
With regard to claim 8 Yusa discloses wherein the feature value relating to the movement of the moving body includes at least one of a flow line and a moving speed (video being captured throughout the reference is continuous of a moving body and speed; paragraphs [0015, 0020, 0023-0024, 0029, etc.).
With regard to claim 9 Yusa discloses wherein the at least one processor configured further to execute the instructions to: execute the statistical processing, based on at least one of an attribute of a location at which the image is captured, a time zone in which the image is captured, and an attribute of a moving body included in the image (paragraphs [0015-0018, 0023-0024, 0040, 0058, etc.).
With regard to claim 10 Yusa discloses wherein the attribute of the location includes at least one of a feature of passage of the moving body and an area (intersection of the road, paragraphs [0020, 0029, 0056, 0091, etc.]).
With regard to claim 11 Yusa discloses detect a moving body relevant to an event being set in advance, based on a result of analyzing the image included in the external appearance information (paragraphs [0017-0018] where the degree of the disadvantage is set in advance of determining degree of the need).
With regard to claim 13 Yusa discloses to acquire detection information indicating a detection result of a moving body relevant to an event being set in advance (paragraphs [0017-0018, 0053-0059]).
With regard to claim 14 Yusa discloses to transmit, to a terminal, event information relating to the event being set in advance (event being the need of infrastructure improvement, paragraph [0054, 0060]).
With regard to claim 15 Yusa discloses to execute the statistical processing by using a detection result of a moving body relevant to the event being set in advance (paragraphs [0014-0018]).
With regard to claim 16 Yusa discloses wherein the event relates to at least one of a pose, a movement, an attribute of a moving body (paragraphs [0014-0018]).
With regard to claim 17 Yusa discloses a system comprising an apparatus of claim 1, and at least one terminal to be connected to the plurality of photographing apparatuses, wherein the at least one terminal comprises: at least one processor configures to cause to: transmit the external appearance information to the monitoring apparatus (Fig. 5, paragraph [0054, 0060]).
With regard to claim 21 Yusa discloses at least one middle apparatus being used at a predetermined institution, wherein the terminal acquires, detect a moving body relevant to an event, based on event information relating to the event being set in advance and a result of analyzing the image, and transmits, to the middle apparatus, detection information relating to the moving body being detected, the at least one processor comprised in the monitoring apparatus configured to execute the instructions to: acquire dispatch information relating to dispatch in a case of the dispatch from the institution, and transmit, to the terminal, update information for updating the event information, based on the dispatch information being acquired (Fig. 2 where apparatus are illustrated within the system of Fig. 1 and 5, for example; see similar citations from claim 1; dispatch information is related to traffic infrastructure throughout the reference).
With regard to claims 25-26, claims 25-26 are rejected same as claim 1 and the arguments similar to that presented above for claim 1 are equally applicable to claims 25-26, and all of the other limitations similar to claim 1 are not repeated herein, but incorporated by reference.
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 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 of this title, if the differences between the claimed invention and the prior art are such that the claimed invention as a whole would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which the claimed invention pertains. Patentability shall not be negated by the manner in which the invention was made.
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.
Claim 12 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over US 2021/0012649 to Yusa in combination with JP2015-228626A (JP6437217B2) to Hiroshi et al. (hereafter, “Hiroshi”).
With regard to claim 12 Yusa discloses the monitoring apparatus according to claim 1. Yusa fails to discloses in a case where a moving body relevant to a notification event being decided in advance is detected from the event, notify a notification destination of detection of the notification event, the notification destination being decided in advance in association with the notification event. Hiroshi teaches in a case where a moving body relevant to a notification event being decided in advance is detected from the event, notify a notification destination of detection of the notification event, the notification destination being decided in advance in association with the notification event (first paragraph on page 13).
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Yusa’s reference to have a notification event of Hiroshi’s reference. The suggestion/motivation for doing so would have been to confirm the results of a match or mismatch of detection results, as suggested by Hiroshi on pages 12-13.
Further, one skilled in the art could have combined the elements as described above by known method with no change in their respective functions, and the combination would have yielded nothing more than predictable results.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to combine Hiroshi with Yusa to obtain the invention as specified in claim 12.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
US 2023/0036188 discloses wireless network, systems and methods, wherein each passenger-carrying rideable vehicle deployed in the system includes: a modular construction consisting of a lightweight body driven by an electric-battery driven motor, and specially adapted for receiving a customizable ornamental body having the appearance and personality of a particular or an inanimate object; motorized and/or animated elements disposed beneath the animal character skin covering for enabling animal behaviors and/or expressions that promote a fun and entertaining ride experience; an audio-transducers mounted within the animal character body for playing music from smartphone applications and animated animal character body portions to provide a sense of realism and excitement as the electric entertainment vehicle is ridden through an amusement facility.
US 2019/0354774 discloses suspicious activity detection methods and systems serve to notify persons of suspicious activity, including potential threats. According to one embodiment, a video processing system (VPS) receives video data in real time or near real time from at least one video camera. Each video camera captures images of a respective video capture area proximate a person. The VPS determines whether received data representing a first set of video frames includes data representing one or more predefined patterns. If so, the VPS tracks the predefined pattern(s) within the video data, and determines whether data representing a second set of later-in-time video frames includes data representing the one or more predefined patterns. If the second set of video frames includes data representing the one or more predefined patterns, the VPS determines whether the one or more tracked patterns have changed position in a suspicious manner. If so, the VPS communicates an alert.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to SHEFALI D. GORADIA whose telephone number is (571)272-8958. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Thursday 8AM-6PM, Friday 8AM-12PM.
Examiner interviews are available via telephone, in-person, and video conferencing using a USPTO supplied web-based collaboration tool. To schedule an interview, applicant is encouraged to use the USPTO Automated Interview Request (AIR) at http://www.uspto.gov/interviewpractice.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Henok Shiferaw can be reached at 571-272-4637. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300.
Information regarding the status of published or unpublished applications may be obtained from Patent Center. Unpublished application information in Patent Center is available to registered users. To file and manage patent submissions in Patent Center, visit: https://patentcenter.uspto.gov. Visit https://www.uspto.gov/patents/apply/patent-center for more information about Patent Center and https://www.uspto.gov/patents/docx for information about filing in DOCX format. For additional questions, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
SHEFALI D. GORADIA
Primary Patent Examiner
Art Unit 2676
/SHEFALI D GORADIA/Primary Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2676
Prosecution Insights