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 .
Claim Status
Claims 1-5 and 7-12 are pending for examination in the application filed 12/02/2024. Claims 1-4, 7, and 9-11 are currently amended, claim 12 is new, and claim 6 has been cancelled.
Priority
Acknowledgement is made of Applicant’s claim for foreign priority under 35 U.S.C. 119 (a)-(d). The certified copy has been received in parent application JP2022-106700, filing date: 06/30/2022. Acknowledgement is additionally made of the present application as a national stage entry of PCT/JP2023/020664, international filing date: 06/02/2023.
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on 12/02/2024 has been considered by the examiner.
Claim Interpretation
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(f):
(f) Element in Claim for a Combination. – An element in a claim for a combination may be expressed as a means or step for performing a specified function without the recital of structure, material, or acts in support thereof, and such claim shall be construed to cover the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification and equivalents thereof.
The following is a quotation of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph:
An element in a claim for a combination may be expressed as a means or step for performing a specified function without the recital of structure, material, or acts in support thereof, and such claim shall be construed to cover the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification and equivalents thereof.
The claims in this application are given their broadest reasonable interpretation using the plain meaning of the claim language in light of the specification as it would be understood by one of ordinary skill in the art. The broadest reasonable interpretation of a claim element (also commonly referred to as a claim limitation) is limited by the description in the specification when 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is invoked.
As explained in MPEP § 2181, subsection I, claim limitations that meet the following three-prong test will be interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph:
(A) the claim limitation uses the term “means” or “step” or a term used as a substitute for “means” that is a generic placeholder (also called a nonce term or a non-structural term having no specific structural meaning) for performing the claimed function;
(B) the term “means” or “step” or the generic placeholder is modified by functional language, typically, but not always linked by the transition word “for” (e.g., “means for”) or another linking word or phrase, such as “configured to” or “so that”; and
(C) the term “means” or “step” or the generic placeholder is not modified by sufficient structure, material, or acts for performing the claimed function.
Use of the word “means” (or “step”) in a claim with functional language creates a rebuttable presumption that the claim limitation is to be treated in accordance with 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph. The presumption that the claim limitation is interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is rebutted when the claim limitation recites sufficient structure, material, or acts to entirely perform the recited function.
Absence of the word “means” (or “step”) in a claim creates a rebuttable presumption that the claim limitation is not to be treated in accordance with 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph. The presumption that the claim limitation is not interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is rebutted when the claim limitation recites function without reciting sufficient structure, material or acts to entirely perform the recited function.
Claim limitations in this application that use the word “means” (or “step”) are being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, except as otherwise indicated in an Office action. Conversely, claim limitations in this application that do not use the word “means” (or “step”) are not being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, except as otherwise indicated in an Office action.
This application includes one or more claim limitations that do not use the word “means,” but are nonetheless being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, because the claim limitation(s) uses a generic placeholder that is coupled with functional language without reciting sufficient structure to perform the recited function and the generic placeholder is not preceded by a structural modifier, as explained in MPEP §2181, subsection I (note that the list of generic placeholders below is not exhaustive, and other generic placeholders may invoke 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph):
A. The Claim Limitation Uses the Term “Means” or “Step” or a Generic Placeholder (A Term That Is Simply A Substitute for “Means”)
With respect to the first prong of this analysis, a claim element that does not include the term “means” or “step” triggers a rebuttable presumption that 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, does not apply. When the claim limitation does not use the term “means,” examiners should determine whether the presumption that 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, paragraph 6 does not apply is overcome. The presumption may be overcome if the claim limitation uses a generic placeholder (a term that is simply a substitute for the term “means”). The following is a list of non-structural generic placeholders that may invoke 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre- AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, paragraph 6: “mechanism for,” “module for,” “device for,” “unit for,” “component for,” “element for,” “member for,” “apparatus for,” “machine for,” or “system for.” Welker Bearing Co., v. PHD, Inc., 550 F.3d 1090, 1096, 89 USPQ2d 1289, 1293-94 (Fed. Cir. 2008); Massachusetts Inst. of Tech. v. Abacus Software, 462 F.3d 1344, 1354, 80 USPQ2d 1225, 1228 (Fed. Cir. 2006); Personalized Media,161 F.3d at 704, 48 USPQ2d at 1886–87; Mas- Hamilton Group v. LaGard, Inc., 156 F.3d 1206, 1214-1215, 48 USPQ2d 1010, 1017 (Fed. Cir.1998). This list is not exhaustive, and other generic placeholders may invoke 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, paragraph 6.
Such claim limitations are:
In claim 1: A monitoring support apparatus comprising: an image acquirer configured to acquire an image observed from a mobile unit and captured; an image generator configured to generate a superposed image by displaying in the image acquired by the image acquirer a picture indicating a position of a target that has brought the mobile unit to a halt during a predetermined period.
In claim 2: The monitoring support apparatus according to claim 1, comprising an identifier configured to identify the target included in the image acquired by the image acquirer, wherein the superposed image depicts in the image acquired by the image acquirer a picture indicating the position of the target during the predetermined period after the identifier identifies the target that has brought the mobile unit to a halt.
In claim 3: The monitoring support apparatus according to claim 1, wherein the superposed image depicts in the image acquired by the image acquirer a picture indicating the position of the target until the target disappears from the image acquired by the image acquirer.
In claim 4: The monitoring support apparatus according to claim 1, wherein the superposed image depicts in the image acquired by the image acquirer…
In claim 5: The monitoring support apparatus according to claim 4…
In claim 7: The monitoring support apparatus according to claim 2, wherein the identifier is configured to identify the target by the target being specified in the image acquired by the image acquirer.
In claim 8: The monitoring support apparatus according to claim 1, wherein the image generator is configured to generate an image as the superposed image by overlaying a picture of the target rendered semi-transparent onto the image acquired by the image acquirer, the picture being generated from an image of the target acquired by the image acquirer.
In claim 9: The monitoring support apparatus according to claim 2, wherein the image generator is configured to at a time that the identifier that keeps identifying the target stops identifying the target based on the image acquired by the image acquirer, generate an image depicting an object indicating a planned path of the mobile unit.
In claim 10: A monitoring support system comprising: a communicator configured to receive an image observed from a mobile unit and captured; an image acquirer configured to acquire the image received by the communicator; an image generator configured to generate a superposed image by displaying in the image acquired by the image acquirer a picture indicating a position of a target that has brought the mobile unit to a halt during a predetermined period; and a display configured to present the image generated by the image generator.
In claim 12: The monitoring support apparatus according to claim 1, wherein the image generator is configured to display in the image acquired by the image acquirer a picture indicating at least one past position of the target.
[0033] As illustrated in FIG. 2, the monitoring support apparatus 10 may include an image acquirer 11, an information acquirer 12, an identifier 13, an image generator 14, and a memory 15. A subset of functional units illustrated in FIG. 2 may be omitted from the monitoring support apparatus 10, and a functional unit other than the functional units illustrated in FIG. 2 may be added to the monitoring support apparatus 10. For example, in an embodiment, the monitoring support apparatus 10 may include the image acquirer 11, the identifier 13, and the image generator 14.
[0034] In an embodiment, the monitoring support apparatus 10 may be implemented as various electronic devices. For example, the monitoring support apparatus 10 may be a terminal designed exclusively for this purpose, a general-purpose computer, a notebook computer, or a server. The monitoring support apparatus 10 may also be a tablet computer, a smartphone, or the like.
[0025] The communicator 220 has an interface function to perform wireline or wireless communication. In an embodiment, communication performed by the communicator 220 may be based on a wireless communication standard. Examples of the wireless communication standard may include the cellular phone standards such as 2G, 3G, 4G, and 5G. Examples of the cellular phone standard include LTE (long term evolution), W-CDMA (wideband code division multiple access), CDMA 2000, PDC (personal digital cellular), GSM (registered trademark)(global system for mobile communications), and PHS (personal handy-phone system). Examples of the wireless communication standard includes WiMAX (worldwide interoperability for microwave access), IEEE 802.11, WiFi, Bluetooth (registered trademark), IrDA (infrared data association), and NFC (near field communication). The communicator 220 is able to support one or more communication standards mentioned above. The communicator 220 may include, for example, an antenna configured to transmit and receive an electromagnetic wave and an appropriate RF unit. The communicator 220 may include an interface such as a connector for wireline connection to an external apparatus. Since the communicator 220 may be implemented with a known technology for performing wireless communication, more detailed description will be omitted with regard to the hardware or the like.
[0019] The mobile unit 200 may be, for example, an automobile. The mobile unit 200 may be, for example, an ordinary passenger car. The mobile unit 200 is not limited to an ordinary passenger car and may be any automobile such as a bus, a truck, an ambulance car, a fire engine, or a patrol car. The mobile unit 200 is not necessarily limited to an automobile and may be another mobile unit able to participate in a road traffic.
Because this/these claim limitation(s) is/are being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, it/they is/are being interpreted to cover the corresponding structure described in the specification as performing the claimed function, and equivalents thereof.
If applicant does not intend to have this/these limitation(s) interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, applicant may: (1) amend the claim limitation(s) to avoid it/them being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph (e.g., by reciting sufficient structure to perform the claimed function); or (2) present a sufficient showing that the claim limitation(s) recite(s) sufficient structure to perform the claimed function so as to avoid it/them being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 101
35 U.S.C. 101 reads as follows:
Whoever invents or discovers any new and useful process, machine, manufacture, or composition of matter, or any new and useful improvement thereof, may obtain a patent therefor, subject to the conditions and requirements of this title.
Claim 11 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 101 because the claimed invention is directed to non-statutory subject matter. The claim(s) does/do not fall within at least one of the four categories of patent eligible subject matter because claim 11 is directed to a program.
Per the MPEP 2106.03 Eligibility Step 1: The Four Categories of Statutory Subject Matter [R-07.2022], non-limiting examples of claims that are not directed to any of the statutory categories include:
Products that do not have a physical or tangible form, such as information (often referred to as "data per se”) or a computer program per se (often referred to as "software per se") when claimed as a product without any structural recitations; and
Transitory forms of signal transmission (often referred to as "signals per se"), such as a propagating electrical or electromagnetic signal or carrier wave; and
Subject matter that the statute expressly prohibits from being patented, such as humans per se, which are excluded under The Leahy-Smith America Invents Act (AIA ), Public Law 112-29, sec. 33, 125 Stat.284 (September 16, 2011).
Therefore, since claim 11 recites a computer program per se, it does not fall within a statutory category. Claim 11 is not eligible subject matter under 35 USC § 101.
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)(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.
(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 1-2, 7, and 10-11 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) as being anticipated by Itsumi (US20230367311A1).
Regarding claim 1, Itsumi teaches a monitoring support apparatus comprising ([0012] In order to achieve the above-described object, the present disclosure provides a remote monitoring system as a first aspect. The remote monitoring system includes: one or more moving objects configured to be capable of autonomous driving; and a remote monitoring apparatus that is used for monitoring the moving objects. [0100] In the present disclosure, the remote monitoring apparatus 110 can be formed as a computer apparatus):
an image acquirer configured to acquire an image observed from a mobile unit and captured ([0036] The image reception means 31 receives image data obtained by imaging the outside of the moving object 20 from the moving object 20 (refer to FIG. 1));
an image generator configured to generate a superposed image by displaying in the image acquired by the image acquirer a picture indicating a position of a target that has brought the mobile unit to a halt during a predetermined period ([0037] The monitoring screen display means 33 causes a display apparatus to display a monitoring screen. The monitoring screen includes a region where the image data received from the moving object 20 is displayed. [0065] The monitoring screen display apparatus 130 may surround a target such as another vehicle or a walker causing the recognized situation with a figure such as a rectangle in the image display region 301. In this case, the monitoring person can understand the position or the like of the target causing the situation in addition to the situation occurring in the moving object 200 on the screen. [0057] When the object detection unit 121 detects a crosswalk, the moving object 200 is stopped in front of the crosswalk, and a walker is crossing the crosswalk, the situation recognition unit 112 recognizes that the situation of the moving object 200 is a situation where the moving object 200 is about to departure after being stopped at the crosswalk. The situation recognition unit 112 compares the delay time measured by the image delay measurement unit 125 to a predetermined threshold (for example, 200 ms). When the delay time is the threshold or more, the situation recognition unit 112 recognizes that the image distribution is high latency).
Regarding claim 2, Itsumi teaches the apparatus of claim 1. Itsumi further teaches comprising an identifier configured to identify the target included in the image acquired by the image acquirer, wherein the superposed image depicts in the image acquired by the image acquirer a picture indicating the position of the target during the predetermined period after the identifier identifies the target that has brought the mobile unit to a halt ([0057] In addition, the situation recognition unit 112 recognizes the bulging of a walker to the traveling lane, for example, based on the result of tracing an object representing a person traced by the object tracing unit 122 and the detection result of the lane by the lane detection unit 124. When the object detection unit 121 detects a crosswalk, the moving object 200 is stopped in front of the crosswalk, and a walker is crossing the crosswalk, the situation recognition unit 112 recognizes that the situation of the moving object 200 is a situation where the moving object 200 is about to departure after being stopped at the crosswalk. The situation recognition unit 112 compares the delay time measured by the image delay measurement unit 125 to a predetermined threshold (for example, 200 ms). When the delay time is the threshold or more, the situation recognition unit 112 recognizes that the image distribution is high latency. [0065] The monitoring screen display apparatus 130 may surround a target such as another vehicle or a walker causing the recognized situation with a figure such as a rectangle in the image display region 301. In this case, the monitoring person can understand the position or the like of the target causing the situation in addition to the situation occurring in the moving object 200 on the screen).
Regarding claim 7, Itsumi teaches the apparatus of claim 2. Itsumi further teaches wherein the identifier is configured to identify the target by the target being specified in the image acquired by the image acquirer ([0057] In addition, the situation recognition unit 112 recognizes the bulging of a walker to the traveling lane, for example, based on the result of tracing an object representing a person traced by the object tracing unit 122 and the detection result of the lane by the lane detection unit 124. When the object detection unit 121 detects a crosswalk, the moving object 200 is stopped in front of the crosswalk, and a walker is crossing the crosswalk, the situation recognition unit 112 recognizes that the situation of the moving object 200 is a situation where the moving object 200 is about to departure after being stopped at the crosswalk. The situation recognition unit 112 compares the delay time measured by the image delay measurement unit 125 to a predetermined threshold (for example, 200 ms). When the delay time is the threshold or more, the situation recognition unit 112 recognizes that the image distribution is high latency. [0065] The monitoring screen display apparatus 130 may surround a target such as another vehicle or a walker causing the recognized situation with a figure such as a rectangle in the image display region 301. In this case, the monitoring person can understand the position or the like of the target causing the situation in addition to the situation occurring in the moving object 200 on the screen).
Regarding claim 10, Itsumi teaches a monitoring support system comprising ([0012] In order to achieve the above-described object, the present disclosure provides a remote monitoring system as a first aspect. The remote monitoring system includes: one or more moving objects configured to be capable of autonomous driving; and a remote monitoring apparatus that is used for monitoring the moving objects. [0100] In the present disclosure, the remote monitoring apparatus 110 can be formed as a computer apparatus):
a communicator configured to receive an image observed from a mobile unit and captured ([0041] The remote monitoring apparatus 110 is connected to the moving object 200 via a network 150. The network 150 includes a wireless communication network using a communication line standard such as LTE (Long Term Evolution). The network 150 may include a wireless communication network such as WiFi (registered tradename) or the fifth generation mobile communication system. [0043] FIG. 5 illustrates a configuration example of the moving object 200. The moving object 200 includes a periphery monitoring sensor 201, a vehicle sensor 202, a vehicle control ECU (Electric Control Unit) 203, a self-driving ECU 204, and a communication apparatus 205. In the moving object 200, the components are configured to be communicable with each other via an in-vehicle LAN (Local Area Network), a CAN (Controller Area Network), or the like.[0044] The periphery monitoring sensor 201 is a sensor that monitors a peripheral situation of the moving object 200. The periphery monitoring sensor 201 includes, for example, a camera, a radar, and a LiDAR (Light Detection and Ranging));
an image acquirer configured to acquire the image received by the communicator ([0036] The image reception means 31 receives image data obtained by imaging the outside of the moving object 20 from the moving object 20 (refer to FIG. 1));
an image generator configured to generate a superposed image by displaying in the image acquired by the image acquirer a picture indicating a position of a target that has brought the mobile unit to a halt during a predetermined period ([0037] The monitoring screen display means 33 causes a display apparatus to display a monitoring screen. The monitoring screen includes a region where the image data received from the moving object 20 is displayed. [0065] The monitoring screen display apparatus 130 may surround a target such as another vehicle or a walker causing the recognized situation with a figure such as a rectangle in the image display region 301. In this case, the monitoring person can understand the position or the like of the target causing the situation in addition to the situation occurring in the moving object 200 on the screen. [0057] When the object detection unit 121 detects a crosswalk, the moving object 200 is stopped in front of the crosswalk, and a walker is crossing the crosswalk, the situation recognition unit 112 recognizes that the situation of the moving object 200 is a situation where the moving object 200 is about to departure after being stopped at the crosswalk. The situation recognition unit 112 compares the delay time measured by the image delay measurement unit 125 to a predetermined threshold (for example, 200 ms). When the delay time is the threshold or more, the situation recognition unit 112 recognizes that the image distribution is high latency).
and a display configured to present the image generated by the image generator ([0037] The monitoring screen display means 33 causes a display apparatus to display a monitoring screen. The monitoring screen includes a region where the image data received from the moving object 20 is displayed. [0065] The monitoring screen display apparatus 130 may surround a target such as another vehicle or a walker causing the recognized situation with a figure such as a rectangle in the image display region 301. In this case, the monitoring person can understand the position or the like of the target causing the situation in addition to the situation occurring in the moving object 200 on the screen).
Regarding claim 11, Itsumi teaches a program comprising instructions causing a computer to execute acquiring an image observed from a mobile unit and captured ([0103] The ROM 530 is a nonvolatile storage device. For example, a semiconductor storage device such as a flash memory having relatively small capacity is used for the ROM 530. Programs executed by the CPU 510 can be stored in the storage unit 520 or the ROM 530. The storage unit 520 or the ROM 530 stores various programs for realizing the functions of each unit in the remote monitoring apparatus 110. [0100] In the present disclosure, the remote monitoring apparatus 110 can be formed as a computer apparatus. [0036] The image reception means 31 receives image data obtained by imaging the outside of the moving object 20 from the moving object 20 (refer to FIG. 1));
generating a superposed image by displaying, in the image acquired by the acquiring, a picture indicating a position of a target that has brought the mobile unit to a halt during a predetermined period ([0037] The monitoring screen display means 33 causes a display apparatus to display a monitoring screen. The monitoring screen includes a region where the image data received from the moving object 20 is displayed. [0065] The monitoring screen display apparatus 130 may surround a target such as another vehicle or a walker causing the recognized situation with a figure such as a rectangle in the image display region 301. In this case, the monitoring person can understand the position or the like of the target causing the situation in addition to the situation occurring in the moving object 200 on the screen. [0057] When the object detection unit 121 detects a crosswalk, the moving object 200 is stopped in front of the crosswalk, and a walker is crossing the crosswalk, the situation recognition unit 112 recognizes that the situation of the moving object 200 is a situation where the moving object 200 is about to departure after being stopped at the crosswalk. The situation recognition unit 112 compares the delay time measured by the image delay measurement unit 125 to a predetermined threshold (for example, 200 ms). When the delay time is the threshold or more, the situation recognition unit 112 recognizes that the image distribution is high latency).
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.
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.
Claim 3 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Itsumi in view of Kawamata (US20080204208A1).
Regarding claim 3, Itsumi teaches the apparatus of claim 1. Itsumi does not explicitly teach wherein the superposed image depicts in the image acquired by the image acquirer a picture indicating the position of the target until the target disappears from the image acquired by the image acquirer.
Kawamata, in the same field of endeavor of vehicle image analysis, teaches wherein the superposed image depicts in the image acquired by the image acquirer a picture indicating the position of the target until the target disappears from the image acquired by the image acquirer ([0073] Here, the object frame 71 continues to be displayed until the object 61 is no longer detected in step ST2, as shown in FIGS. 4 and 5. [0053] More specifically, in this first example embodiment, a frame that surrounds the detected object (hereinafter referred to as "object frame") is generated by the notifying information generating means 23. The display processing means 24 then displays this object frame on the combiner 32 as notifying information).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the time of filing to modify the apparatus of Itsumi with the teachings of Kawamata to indicate the position of the target until it disappears because it "eliminates needless annoyance to the driver" [0026].
Claim 4 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Itsumi in view of Hirakawa (US20250069235A1).
Regarding claim 4, Itsumi teaches the apparatus of claim 1. Itsumi does not explicitly teach wherein the superposed image depicts in the image acquired by the image acquirer pictures indicating the position of the target at predetermined intervals.
Hirakawa, in the same field of endeavor of image object monitoring, teaches wherein the superposed image depicts in the image acquired by the image acquirer pictures indicating the position of the target at predetermined intervals ([0148] As shown in FIG. 12, the display control unit 105 may superimpose a trajectory based on the latest position of the object while displaying the latest image as well as a past image. [Abstract] A video image processing device detects a tracking target object, acquires a first image which is an image obtained by cutting out the tracking target object from a video image, including the tracking target object, taken at a first time, acquires a second image which is an image obtained by cutting out the tracking target object from a video image, including the tracking target object, taken at a second time, acquires a first display image displaying the first image, acquires a second display image displaying the second image, displays motions of the tracking target object, displays the first image and the second image on corresponding positions in a trajectory of the tracking target, and displays an image corresponding to the first time or the second time on a display unit depending on a request of selecting the first display image or the second display image. [0059] For example, the video image analysis device 2 may acquire the position of the object at each time point in the input video image).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the time of filing to modify the apparatus of Itsumi with the teachings of Hirakawa to depict pictures indicating the position of the target at predetermined intervals because "With this arrangement, the user can constantly recognize the latest elapsed time and the state of the object" [0097].
Claim 5 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Itsumi in view of Hirakawa and Holz (US20140376773A1).
Regarding claim 5, Itsumi and Hirakawa teach the apparatus of claim 4. Itsumi does not explicitly teach wherein the predetermined intervals are determined depending on a type of the target or a moving speed of the target.
Holz, in the same field of endeavor of moving target image analysis, teaches wherein the predetermined intervals are determined depending on a type of the target or a moving speed of the target ([0043] In some implementations, the motion-capture system can operate in intermediate modes with different rates of image capture and image analysis. For example, the system can "throttle" the rate of image capture based on the speed of the detected motion and/or the time interval between successive motions, or the rate can be reset in real time by the user, in order to maximally conserve power).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the time of filing to modify the apparatus of Itsumi with the teachings of Holz to determine predetermined intervals depending on a moving speed of the target because "Upon detecting the slow movement and/or long time intervals between successive motions, the system 100 can "throttle" the rate of image capture to one of the intermediate-power modes of operation (e.g., at a frame rate of 10 frames per second) to maximally conserve power" [0094].
Claim 8 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Itsumi in view of Yuda (US20100315215A1).
Regarding claim 8, Itsumi teaches the apparatus of claim 1. Itsumi does not explicitly teach wherein the image generator is configured to generate an image as the superposed image by overlaying a picture of the target rendered semi-transparent onto the image acquired by the image acquirer, the picture being generated from an image of the target acquired by the image acquirer.
Yuda, in the same field of endeavor of vehicle image analysis, teaches wherein the image generator is configured to generate an image as the superposed image by overlaying a picture of the target rendered semi-transparent onto the image acquired by the image acquirer, the picture being generated from an image of the target acquired by the image acquirer ([0154] As illustrated in FIG. 12, when the own-vehicle viewpoint image generating unit 909 that captures video from the viewpoint of the own vehicle is included in the configuration of Embodiment 1, a display unit 908 may display, on the display, the image of a blind spot in a color obtained by semi-transparently superimposing (i) the pixel color at a blind spot corresponding point to be allocated to the display coordinates on (ii) the pixel color corresponding to the display coordinates in the image generated by the own-vehicle viewpoint image generating unit 909. An example of the own-vehicle viewpoint image generating unit 909 is a camera that is installed in the own vehicle 301 and that captures the front view of the own vehicle 301. In other words, the pixel color of the object in the blind spot generated through the coordinate transformation is semi-transparently superimposed over the video of the front view captured by the camera of the own vehicle 301).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the time of filing to modify the apparatus of Itsumi with the teachings of Yuda to generate an image as the superposed image by overlaying a picture of the target rendered semi-transparent because "Thereby, the driver can intuitively recognize the situation of an intersection having a blind spot and the situation of an area that cannot be seen by the blind spot at a glance" [0154].
Claim 9 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Itsumi in view of Hara (JP2016052835A).
Regarding claim 9, Itsumi teaches the apparatus of claim 2. Itsumi does not explicitly teach wherein the image generator is configured to at a time that the identifier that keeps identifying the target stops identifying the target based on the image acquired by the image acquirer, generate an image depicting an object indicating a planned path of the mobile unit.
Hara, in the same field of endeavor of vehicle image analysis, teaches wherein the image generator is configured to at a time that the identifier that keeps identifying the target stops identifying the target based on the image acquired by the image acquirer, generate an image depicting an object indicating a planned path of the mobile unit ([pg. 5 para. 8] Further, the tracking unit 32 determines that the current position of the moving object detected from the latest sensor signal is not included in a predetermined allowable range from the predicted position of the moving object for a predetermined number of times. When it is continuous (for example, 2 to 5 times), it is determined that the moving object has moved out of the monitoring target area. Then, the tracking unit 32 stops tracking the moving object that has been determined to have moved out of the monitoring target area, and additionally registers the trajectory information representing the trajectory of the moving object in the trajectory database. [pg. 12 para. 10] Further, the selection unit 33 of the roadside machine 2 selects, for each moving object currently being tracked, trajectory information representing the trajectory of the past moving object that is similar to the path of the moving object from the trajectory database (step S103). ). And the prediction information generation part 34 of the roadside machine 2 produces | generates the prediction information showing the presence probability of a moving object for every area on the planned path | route of the vehicle 3 based on the selected locus information at a predetermined time interval ( Step S104). Then, the control unit 23 of the roadside machine 2 transmits the prediction information to the automatic driving device 4 of the vehicle 3 via the communication unit 24).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the time of filing to modify the apparatus of Itsumi with the teachings of Hara to generate an image depicting an object indicating a planned path of the mobile unit when the identifier that keeps identifying the target stops identifying the target because "this automatic driving support system uses the trajectory of the past moving object, which is similar to the path of the moving object being tracked, to move the moving object at each position on the planned route of the vehicle…the automatic driving support system controls the vehicle so that the vehicle does not collide with the moving object based on the existence probability of the moving object at each position on the planned route" [pg. 14 para. 1].
Claim 12 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Itsumi in view of Park (US20130300872A1).
Regarding claim 12, Itsumi teaches the apparatus of claim 1. Itsumi does not explicitly teach wherein the image generator is configured to display in the image acquired by the image acquirer a picture indicating at least one past position of the target.
Park, in the same field of endeavor of vehicle image analysis, teaches wherein the image generator is configured to display in the image acquired by the image acquirer a picture indicating at least one past position of the target ([0080] That is, the control unit 130 displays a current position of an object and a past position of the object on a current image and sets a difference value between the two objects as a movement distance between the two objects using a distance that the vehicle has moved).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the time of filing to modify the apparatus of Itsumi with the teachings of Park to display at least one past position of the target because "the image for display may be one image captured at a specific point of time t+1, may be an image obtained by merging an image captured at the specific point of time t+1 and an image captured at a previous point of time t, or may be an image obtained by merging the image captured at the specific point of time t+1, the image captured at the previous point of time t, and an image captured at a point of time t-1 prior to the previous point of time t in order to display a blind spot not seen by a camera using the past image" [0059].
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Oba (US20230017970A1) teaches a remote vehicle monitoring support apparatus.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Jacqueline R Zak whose telephone number is (571)272-4077. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 9-5.
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, Emily Terrell can be reached at (571) 270-3717. 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.
/JACQUELINE R ZAK/Examiner, Art Unit 2666
/EMILY C TERRELL/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2666
Prosecution Insights