DETAILED ACTION
This non-final Office action is responsive to the application filed September 16th, 2024. Claims 1-17 are presented for examination.
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 .
Priority
Applicant’s claim for the benefit of a prior-filed application under 35 U.S.C. 119(e) or under 35 U.S.C. 120, 121, 365(c), or 386(c) is acknowledged.
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on 09/16/24 is in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statement is being considered by the examiner.
Claim Objections
Claims 1-17 are objected to because of the following informalities:
Independent claims 1, 16, and 17 recites in the limitation beginning “repeatedly performs” the following “display switching of switching the display positions” which is a typographical error that should recite “display switching of the display positions”;
Independent claims 1, 16, and 17 recites in the limitation beginning “counts a total number” the following “the next display switching” which lacks antecedent basis and should recite “a next display switching”;
Appropriate correction is required. Dependent claims 2-15 are objected due to their dependency of independent claim 1.
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. Such claim limitation(s) is/are: “attribute detector to detect an attribute” in claim 10.
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.
When looking to the specification, the hardware structure associated with the “attribute detector” is being interpreted as “attribute device,” please see at least Figs. 2 item 200a and the Ninth Embodiment of the instant specification. The corresponding algorithm of the “attribute detector” can be found in at least Fig. 2 item 200a and corresponding Ninth Embodiment of the specification. This is to be the structure and algorithm required for the claim, or 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.
Claims 1-17 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 101 because the claimed invention is directed to non-statutory subject matter;
When considering subject matter eligibility under 35 U.S.C. 101, it must be determined whether the claim is directed to one of the four statutory categories of invention, i.e., process, machine, manufacture, or composition of matter. If the claim does fall within one of the statutory categories, it must then be determined whether the claim is directed to a judicial exception (i.e., law of nature, natural phenomenon, and abstract idea), and if so, it must additionally be determined whether the claim is a patent-eligible application of the exception. If an abstract idea is present in the claim, any element or combination of elements in the claim must be sufficient to ensure that the claim amounts to significantly more than the abstract idea itself.
Step 1: Independent claims 1 (system), 16 (method), and 17 (non-transitory computer-readable record medium) and dependent claims 2-15, respectively, fall within at least one of the four statutory categories of 35 U.S.C. 101: (i) process; (ii) machine; (iii) manufacture; or (iv) composition of matter. Claim 1 is directed to a system (i.e., machine), claim 16 is directed to a method (i.e. process), and claim 17 is directed to a non-transitory computer-readable record medium (i.e. manufacture).
Step 2A Prong 1: The independent claims recite information presentation collection system comprising: a question display device to present a question; a reply candidate display device to display a plurality of reply candidates, as options for a reply to the question, at display positions different from each other in a width direction of a passage; at least one of sensors to detect people moving in the passage and to output a detection signal; and processing circuitry to measure a number of the people moving in a direction towards the reply candidate display device in each of a plurality of regions, which are set by dividing the passage in the width direction of the passage and corresponding respectively to the plurality of reply candidates, based on the detection signal; and to control operation of the information presentation collection system, wherein the processing circuitry repeatedly performs display switching of switching the display positions of the plurality of reply candidates to each other according to a predetermined schedule, counts a total number of people who selected each of the plurality of reply candidates in a plurality of information collection periods based on the number of the people measured in each information collection period from one of the display switchings to the next display switching, and outputs a value based on a ratio regarding a plurality of the total numbers as an evaluation value (Certain Method of Organizing Human Activity & Mental Process), which are considered to be abstract ideas (See PEG 2019 and MPEP 2106.05). [Examiner notes the underlined limitations above recite the abstract idea].
The steps/functions disclosed above and in the independent claims recite the abstract idea of Certain Methods of Organizing Human Activity because the claimed limitations are detecting people moving in the passage; measuring a number of the people moving in a direction towards the reply candidate display device in each of a plurality of regions; controlling the operation of the information presentation collection system; repeatedly performing display switching based on a predetermined schedule; counting a total number of people who selected each of the plurality of reply candidates in a plurality of information collection periods based on the number of people measured in each information collection period from one of the display switching to the next display switching’s, which is managing personal behavior, relationships, and interactions.
The steps/functions disclosed above and in the independent claims recite the abstract idea of Mental Process because the claimed limitations are detecting people moving in the passage; measuring a number of the people moving in a direction towards the reply candidate display device in each of a plurality of regions; repeatedly performing display switching based on a predetermined schedule; and counting a total number of people who selected each of the plurality of reply candidates in a plurality of information collection periods based on the number of people measured in each information collection period from one of the display switching to the next display switching’s, which are observations, judgments, and evaluations in the human mind.
In addition, dependent claims 8-11 and 14 further narrow the abstract idea and recite further defining the monitoring of the congestion in the passage; setting the scheduling to mitigate the congestion; setting the schedule to increase the number of the people guided to a place where the event is currently held; detect an attribute of people advancing in the passage; setting the schedule based on the attribute; detecting at least one of temperature, humidity, wind volume, a wind direction and weather; setting the schedule based on a detection value from the environment sensor; and performing the display switching of the reply candidates when a crowd flow rate based on the detection signal from the at least one of sensors is less than a predetermined threshold value. These processes are similar to the abstract idea noted in the independent claims because they further the limitations of the independent claims which recite a certain method of organizing human activity which include managing personal behavior as well as mental processes. Accordingly, these claim elements do not serve to confer subject matter eligibility to the claims since they recite abstract ideas. Dependent claims 2-7, 12-13, and 15 will be discussed in Prong 2 analysis below.
Step 2A Prong 2: In this application, the above “information presentation collection system; present a question; display a plurality of reply candidates, as options for a reply to the question, at display positions different from each other in a width direction of a passage; outputs a value based on a ratio regarding a plurality of the total numbers as an evaluation value” steps/functions of the independent claims would not account for additional elements that integrate the judicial exception (e.g. abstract idea) into a practical application because receiving/storing data and displaying data merely add insignificant extra-solution activity and merely adds the words to apply it with the judicial exception. Also, the claimed “An information presentation collection system comprising: a question display device; a reply candidate display device; at least one of sensors; processing circuitry; a plurality of display devices; an evaluation display device; a passage monitoring device; an attribute detector; an environment sensor; a camera and an object sensor” would not account for additional elements that integrate the judicial exception (e.g. abstract idea) into a practical application because the claimed structure merely adds the words to apply it with the judicial exception and mere instructions to implement an abstract idea on a computer (See PEG 2019 and MPEP 2106.05).
In addition, dependent claims 8-11 and 14 further narrow the abstract idea and dependent claims 2-7, 9, 12-13, and 15 additionally recite “wherein a display device that includes the question display device and the reply candidate display device”; “the plurality of display devices respectively display the plurality of reply candidates”; “the plurality of display devices display the question, and the plurality of display devices respectively display the plurality of reply candidates”; “one display device among the plurality of display devices is the question display device and displays the question, and other display devices among the plurality of display devices are the reply candidate display devices and respectively display the plurality of reply candidates”; “an evaluation display device to display the evaluation value”; “the processing circuitry previously acquires schedule information regarding an event to be held in the passage”; “the processing circuitry is provided in a vicinity of or inside the display device”; “the processing circuitry is arranged in a vicinity of or inside the question display device or the reply candidate display device”; “wherein the sensor includes at least one of a camera and an object sensor arranged in the passage” which do not account for additional elements that integrate the judicial exception (e.g. abstract idea) into a practical application because receiving/storing data and displaying data merely add insignificant extra-solution activity and the claimed “a question display device; a reply candidate display device; at least one of sensors; processing circuitry; a plurality of display devices; an evaluation display device; a passage monitoring device; an attribute detector; an environment sensor; a camera and an object sensor” which do not account for additional elements that integrate the judicial exception (e.g. abstract idea) into a practical application because the claimed structure merely adds the words to apply it with the judicial exception and mere instructions to implement an abstract idea on a computer (See PEG 2019 and MPEP 2106.05).
The claimed “An information presentation collection system comprising: a question display device; a reply candidate display device; at least one of sensors; processing circuitry; a plurality of display devices; an evaluation display device; a passage monitoring device; an attribute detector; an environment sensor; a camera and an object sensor” are recited so generically (no details whatsoever are provided other than that they are general purpose computing components and regular office supplies) that they represent no more than mere instructions to apply the judicial exception on a computer. These limitations can also be viewed as nothing more than an attempt to generally link the use of the judicial exception to the technological environment of a computer. Even when viewed in combination, the additional elements in the claims do no more than use the computer components as a tool. There is no change to the computers and other technology that is recited in the claim, and thus the claims do not improve computer functionality or other technology (See PEG 2019).
Step 2B: When analyzing the additional element(s) and/or combination of elements in the claim(s) other than the abstract idea per se the claim limitations amount(s) to no more than: a general link of the use of an abstract idea to a particular technological environment and merely amounts to the application or instructions to apply the abstract idea on a computer (See MPEP 2106.05 and PEG 2019). Further, method claim 16; system claims 1-15; and non-transitory computer-readable record medium claim 17 recite “An information presentation collection system comprising: a question display device; a reply candidate display device; at least one of sensors; processing circuitry; a plurality of display devices; an evaluation display device; a passage monitoring device; an attribute detector; an environment sensor; a camera and an object sensor”; however, these elements merely facilitate the claimed functions at a high level of generality and they perform conventional functions and are considered to be general purpose computer components which is supported by Applicant’s specification in Page 10 Paragraph 2, Page 11 Paragraph 2, and Figures 1, 4, 6, 9-12, 15, 18, 21, 24, 26, and 28. The Applicant’s claimed additional elements are mere instructions to implement the abstract idea on a general purpose computer and generally link of the use of an abstract idea to a particular technological environment. Also, the above “information presentation collection system; present a question; display a plurality of reply candidates, as options for a reply to the question, at display positions different from each other in a width direction of a passage; outputs a value based on a ratio regarding a plurality of the total numbers as an evaluation value” steps/functions of the independent claims would not account for significantly more than the abstract idea because receiving data and displaying/presenting data (See MPEP 2106.05) have been identified as well-known, routine, and conventional steps/functions to one of ordinary skill in the art. When viewed as a whole, these additional claim element(s) do not provide meaningful limitation(s) to transform the abstract idea into a patent eligible application of the abstract idea such that the claim(s) amounts to significantly more than the abstract idea itself.
In addition, claims 8-11 and 14 further narrow the abstract idea identified in the independent claims. The Examiner notes that the dependent claims merely further define the data being analyzed and how the data is being analyzed. Similarly, claims 2-7, 9, 12-13, and 15 additionally recite “wherein a display device that includes the question display device and the reply candidate display device”; “the plurality of display devices respectively display the plurality of reply candidates”; “the plurality of display devices display the question, and the plurality of display devices respectively display the plurality of reply candidates”; “one display device among the plurality of display devices is the question display device and displays the question, and other display devices among the plurality of display devices are the reply candidate display devices and respectively display the plurality of reply candidates”; “an evaluation display device to display the evaluation value”; “the processing circuitry previously acquires schedule information regarding an event to be held in the passage”; “the processing circuitry is provided in a vicinity of or inside the display device”; “the processing circuitry is arranged in a vicinity of or inside the question display device or the reply candidate display device”; “wherein the sensor includes at least one of a camera and an object sensor arranged in the passage” which do not account for additional elements that amount to significantly more than the abstract idea because receiving data and displaying/presenting data (See MPEP 2106.05) have been identified as well-known, routine, and conventional steps/functions to one of ordinary skill in the art and the claimed “a question display device; a reply candidate display device; at least one of sensors; processing circuitry; a plurality of display devices; an evaluation display device; a passage monitoring device; an attribute detector; an environment sensor; a camera and an object sensor” which do not account for additional elements that amount to significantly more than the abstract idea because the claimed structure merely amounts to the application or instructions to apply the abstract idea on a computer and does not move beyond a general link of the use of an abstract idea to a particular technological environment (See MPEP 2106.05). The additional limitations of the independent and dependent claim(s) when considered individually and as an ordered combination do not amount to significantly more than the abstract idea. The examiner has considered the dependent claims in a full analysis including the additional limitations individually and in combination as analyzed in the independent claim(s). Therefore, the claim(s) are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 101 as being directed to non-statutory subject matter.
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(s) 1-13 and 15-17 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Smith (U.S 2015/0178742 A1) in view of Tsuchida (U.S 2021/0304257 A1).
Claims 1, 16, and 17
Regarding Claim 1, Smith discloses the following:
An information presentation collection system comprising [see at least Paragraph 0046 for reference to systems, methods, and computer program products for facilitating customer and employee and other stakeholder engagement with a business, enterprise, or other stakeholder engagement with a business, enterprise, or other institution through such systems, methods, and computer program products; Figure 1 and related text regarding the system and method of the present invention; Figure 13 and related text regarding an exemplary computer system useful for implementing the present invention; Figure 14 and related text regarding an exemplary system for facilitating user engagement through managed electronic devices]
a question display device to present a question [see at least Paragraph 0102 for reference to Business analysis & Interaction section including visual representation, data interaction, and customer interaction; Paragraph 0132 for reference to an initial list of questions and options are statistically defined for display on device where the displayed options are from a statically defined pool; Paragraph 0134 for reference to in initial question set and order is presented via one or more devices or an initial question set and order is presented over all devices at multiple stores; Figure 1 and related text regarding item 210 ‘Business analysis and interaction section’, 214 ‘visual representation’, 216 ‘data interaction’, and 218 ‘customer interaction’; Figure 3 and related text regarding item 312 ‘single electronic devices’; Figure 5 and related text regarding step 503 ‘Present initial question set to customers’]
a reply candidate display device to display a plurality of reply candidates, as options for a reply to the question, at display positions different from each other in a width direction of a passage [see at least Paragraph 0118 for reference to individuals, such as customers or employees interact with devices by, for example, answering presented questions about their experiences by tapping pre-programmed answers to on-screen questions, or by typing or drawing answers in short responses or free flowing format; Paragraph 0119 for reference to organization and analytics of responses occurring in another device; Figure 3 and related text regarding step 303 ‘Customers and/or employees interact with devices’; Figure 5 and related text regarding step 505 ‘Analyze responses to initial questions presented’]
processing circuitry to measure a number of the people corresponding respectively to the plurality of reply candidates [see at least Paragraph 0091 for reference analyzing user input provided to the Business including the number of user inputs for each point in time and the total number of user inputs for that date range]
to control operation of the information presentation collection system [see at least Paragraph 0140 for reference to devices connected to controlling and managing portion of system in order to receive updates and provide responses for analysis; Figure 1 and related text regarding item 210, 214 ‘visual representation’, 216 ‘data interaction’, and 218 ‘customer interaction’; Figure 2 and related text regarding facilitating creating and publishing of one or more questions or other content (e.g., set of questions, follow up questions) for presentation via device]
wherein the processing circuitry repeatedly performs display switching of switching the display positions of the plurality of reply candidates to each other according to a predetermined schedule [see at least Paragraph 0048 for reference to publishing of content occurring in real-time or on a scheduled basis; Paragraph 0132 for reference to systems, methods, and computer program products for changing what questions are presented on an individual or group basis; Paragraph 0132 for reference to changes being implemented across one or many locations and/or devices; Paragraph 0146 for reference to theme changes being scheduled, delivered, and applied based on timing and duration rules]
counts a total number of people who selected each of the plurality of reply candidates in a plurality of information collection periods based on the number of the people measured in each information collection period from one of the display switchings to the next display switching [see at least Paragraph 0091 for reference analyzing user input provided to the Business including the number of user inputs for each point in time and the total number of user inputs for that date range; Paragraph 0120 for reference to the system providing reporting of the information received, trends identified, recommendations and the like; Figure 3 and related text regarding item 307 ‘Reporting organized by organization hierarchy’]
outputs a value based on a ratio regarding a plurality of the total numbers as an evaluation value [see at least Paragraph 0091 for reference to the report including Customer Pulse (graphical representation of the hour-by-hour or day by-day or week-by-week average customer experience (“CE) over a selected range of time) and number of user inputs for each point in time as well as the average CE Score for the chosen date range plus the total number of user inputs for that date range; Paragraph 0120 for reference to the system providing reporting of the information received, trends identified, recommendations and the like; Figure 3 and related text regarding item 307 ‘Reporting organized by organization hierarchy’]
While Smith discloses the limitations above, it does not disclose at least one of sensors to detect people moving in the passage and to output a detection signal; and processing circuitry to measure a number of the people moving in a direction towards the reply candidate display device in each of a plurality of regions, which are set by dividing the passage in the width direction of the passage and corresponding respectively to the plurality of reply candidates, based on the detection signal.
However, Tsuchida discloses the following:
at least one of sensors to detect people moving in the passage and to output a detection signal [see at least Paragraph 0068 for reference to a motion sensor being used as part of the detection unit wherein any detection principle may be employed as the motion sensor, such as an infrared sensor or an ultrasonic sensor, as long as the detection principle is provided with the capability of detecting a person approaching the sensor; Paragraph 0076 for reference to motion sensor includes the predetermined range in front of the display unit 260 in a detection region, and provides, as part of the detection information, a person detection signal indicating whether the person in the detection region is detected; Figure 2 and related text regarding item 224 ‘person detection unit’]
processing circuitry to measure a number of the people moving in a direction towards the reply candidate display device in each of a plurality of regions, which are set by dividing the passage in the width direction of the passage and corresponding respectively to the plurality of reply candidates, based on the detection signal [see at least Paragraph 0031 for reference to terminal device 20 may be installed in a location that is passed by a large number of unspecified people and that can be easily spotted by those people; Paragraph 0067 for reference to person detection unit 224 determines whether a person present within a predetermined range from the display unit 260 is detected, based on the detection information input from the detection unit; Paragraph 0102 for reference to the number of persons detected on the basis of the detection information is not limited to one, and may be a plurality of persons]
Before the effective filing date, it would have been obvious to one or ordinary skill in the art to modify the reporting method of Smith to include the sensor measurement of the number of people of Tsuchida. Doing so would provide information in which a user has greater interest, as stated by Tsuchida (Paragraph 0008).
Regarding claims 16 and 17, the claims recite limitations already addressed by the rejection of claim 1. Regarding claim 16, Smith teaches an information presentation collection method [Paragraph 0046]. Regarding claim 17, Smith teaches a non-transitory computer-readable record medium storing an information presentation collection program to be executed by an information processing device [Paragraph 0046 & Figure 13 item 1310]. Therefore, claims 16 and 17 are rejected as being unpatentable over the combination of Smith and Tsuchida.
Claim 2
While the combination of Smith and Tsuchida disclose the limitations above, regarding Claim 2, Smith discloses the following:
wherein a display device that includes the question display device and the reply candidate display device [see at least Paragraph 0132 for reference to an initial list of questions and options are statistically defined for display on device where the displayed options are from a statically defined pool; Paragraph 0134 for reference to in initial question set and order is presented via one or more devices or an initial question set and order is presented over all devices at multiple stores; Figure 3 and related text regarding item 312 ‘single electronic devices’]
Claim 3
While the combination of Smith and Tsuchida disclose the limitations above, regarding Claim 3, Smith discloses the following:
comprising a plurality of display devices, wherein the plurality of display devices respectively display the plurality of reply candidates [see at least Paragraph 0118 for reference to individuals, such as customers or employees interact with devices by, for example, answering presented questions about their experiences by tapping pre-programmed answers to on-screen questions, or by typing or drawing answers in short responses or free flowing format; Paragraph 0119 for reference to organization and analytics of responses occurring in another device; Figure 3 and related text regarding step 303 ‘Customers and/or employees interact with devices’; Figure 5 and related text regarding step 505 ‘Analyze responses to initial questions presented’]
Claim 4
While the combination of Smith and Tsuchida disclose the limitations above, regarding Claim 4, Smith discloses the following:
comprising a plurality of display devices, wherein the plurality of display devices display the question, and the plurality of display devices respectively display the plurality of reply candidates [see at least Paragraph 0102 for reference to Business analysis & Interaction section including visual representation, data interaction, and customer interaction; Paragraph 0118 for reference to individuals, such as customers or employees interact with devices by, for example, answering presented questions about their experiences by tapping pre-programmed answers to on-screen questions, or by typing or drawing answers in short responses or free flowing format; Paragraph 0119 for reference to organization and analytics of responses occurring in another device; Paragraph 0132 for reference to an initial list of questions and options are statistically defined for display on device where the displayed options are from a statically defined pool; Paragraph 0134 for reference to in initial question set and order is presented via one or more devices or an initial question set and order is presented over all devices at multiple stores; Figure 3 and related text regarding item 312 ‘single electronic devices’; Figure 5 and related text regarding step 503 ‘Present initial question set to customers’]
Claim 5
While the combination of Smith and Tsuchida disclose the limitations above, Smith does not disclose wherein the at least one of sensors includes a plurality of sensors, and the plurality of display devices respectively include the plurality of sensors.
Regarding Claim 5, Tsuchida discloses the following:
wherein the at least one of sensors includes a plurality of sensors, and the plurality of display devices respectively include the plurality of sensors [see at least Paragraph 0030 for reference to detection information is input to the terminal device from the detection unit, and the terminal device detects whether a person is approaching on the basis of the detection information; Paragraph 0068 for reference to a motion sensor being used as part of the detection unit wherein any detection principle may be employed as the motion sensor, such as an infrared sensor or an ultrasonic sensor, as long as the detection principle is provided with the capability of detecting a person approaching the sensor; Paragraph 0076 for reference to motion sensor includes the predetermined range in front of the display unit 260 in a detection region, and provides, as part of the detection information, a person detection signal indicating whether the person in the detection region is detected; Figure 2 and related text regarding item 224 ‘person detection unit’]
Before the effective filing date, it would have been obvious to one or ordinary skill in the art to modify the display devices of Smith to include the sensor measurements of Tsuchida. Doing so would provide information in which a user has greater interest, as stated by Tsuchida (Paragraph 0008).
Claim 6
While the combination of Smith and Tsuchida disclose the limitations above, regarding Claim 6, Smith discloses the following:
comprising a plurality of display devices, wherein one display device among the plurality of display devices is the question display device and displays the question [see at least Paragraph 0102 for reference to Business analysis & Interaction section including visual representation, data interaction, and customer interaction; Paragraph 0132 for reference to an initial list of questions and options are statistically defined for display on device where the displayed options are from a statically defined pool; Paragraph 0134 for reference to in initial question set and order is presented via one or more devices or an initial question set and order is presented over all devices at multiple stores; Figure 1 and related text regarding item 210 ‘Business analysis and interaction section’, 214 ‘visual representation’, 216 ‘data interaction’, and 218 ‘customer interaction’; Figure 3 and related text regarding item 312 ‘single electronic devices’; Figure 5 and related text regarding step 503 ‘Present initial question set to customers’]
other display devices among the plurality of display devices are the reply candidate display devices and respectively display the plurality of reply candidates [see at least Paragraph 0118 for reference to individuals, such as customers or employees interact with devices by, for example, answering presented questions about their experiences by tapping pre-programmed answers to on-screen questions, or by typing or drawing answers in short responses or free flowing format; Paragraph 0119 for reference to organization and analytics of responses occurring in another device; Figure 3 and related text regarding step 303 ‘Customers and/or employees interact with devices’; Figure 5 and related text regarding step 505 ‘Analyze responses to initial questions presented’]
Claim 7
While the combination of Smith and Tsuchida disclose the limitations above, regarding Claim 7, Smith discloses the following:
The information presentation collection system according to claim 1, comprising an evaluation display device to display the evaluation value [see at least Paragraph 0061 for reference to a central web-based portal is used for content management and user input reporting and analytics; Paragraph 0120 for reference to the system providing reporting of the information received, trends identified, recommendations and the like; Figure 3 and related text regarding item 307 ‘Reporting organized by organization hierarchy’]
Claim 8
While the combination of Smith and Tsuchida disclose the limitations above, regarding Claim 8, Smith discloses the following:
further comprising a passage monitoring device to monitor congestion in the passage [see at least Paragraph 0056 for reference to dynamic ordering and presentation being performed using on-site modules based on internal sources of data including foot traffic data; Paragraph 0132 for reference to the system altering content based on external sources including foot traffic data]
wherein the processing circuitry sets the schedule so as to mitigate the congestion [see at least Paragraph 0132 for reference to changes being implemented across one or many locations and/or devices, thereby enabling low traffic devices to utilize questions and ordering developed from high traffic devices]
Claim 9
While the combination of Smith and Tsuchida disclose the limitations above, regarding Claim 9, Smith discloses the following:
wherein the processing circuitry previously acquires schedule information regarding an event to be held in the passage and sets the schedule so as to increase the number of the people guided to a place where the event is currently held [see at least Paragraph 0057 for reference to animations, audio elements, video elements and other graphical elements may be changed, including to emphasis certain seasons or special events; Paragraph 0098 for reference to the system publishing the content on the devices in each Managed Device Group either in real-time or on a scheduled basis]
Claim 10
While the combination of Smith and Tsuchida disclose the limitations above, Smith does not disclose further comprising an attribute detector to detect an attribute of people advancing in the passage wherein the processing circuitry sets the schedule based on the attribute.
Regarding Claim 10, Tsuchida discloses the following:
further comprising an attribute detector to detect an attribute of people advancing in the passage [see at least Paragraph 0027 for reference to the information processing device determining an attribute of an approaching person; Paragraph 0036 for reference to person determination unit determines an attribute of the detected interested person; Paragraph 0074 for reference to detection unit is installed in association with the display unit, and detects a person in the predetermined range in front of the display unit and information used for determining a degree of interest and the attribute of the person]
wherein the processing circuitry sets the schedule based on the attribute [see at least Paragraph 0028 for reference to display content is configured, for example, as a guidance screen including information used for information provision, advertising, publicity, and the like targeting a large number of unspecified people wherein related content information is information indicating related content related to candidate content for each set of the candidate content and the attribute of the person, the candidate content being a candidate of the display content. The information processing device 10 outputs the related content data indicating the selected related content to the terminal device 20, which is a transmission source of the acquired detection information]
Before the effective filing date, it would have been obvious to one or ordinary skill in the art to modify the schedule generation of Smith to include the attribute measurements of Tsuchida. Doing so would provide information in which a user has greater interest, as stated by Tsuchida (Paragraph 0008).
Claim 11
While the combination of Smith and Tsuchida disclose the limitations above, regarding Claim 11, Smith discloses the following:
further comprising an environment sensor to detect at least one of temperature, humidity, wind volume, a wind direction and weather [see at least Paragraph 0056 for reference to dynamic ordering and presentation being performed using on-site modules based on internal sources of data including weather and weather forecasts; Paragraph 0091 for reference to reporting including analysis of correlation between CE Score and other exogenous data including transaction data, loyalty data, demographic data and weather related data]
wherein the processing circuitry sets the schedule based on a detection value from the environment sensor [see at least Paragraph 0048 for reference to publishing of content occurring in real-time or on a scheduled basis; Paragraph 0132 for reference to systems, methods, and computer program products for changing what questions are presented on an individual or group basis; Paragraph 0132 for reference to changes being implemented across one or many locations and/or devices; Paragraph 0146 for reference to theme changes being scheduled, delivered, and applied based on timing and duration rules]
Claim 12
While the combination of Smith and Tsuchida disclose the limitations above, regarding Claim 12, Smith discloses the following:
wherein the processing circuitry is provided in a vicinity of or inside the display device [see at least Paragraph 0099 for reference to one or more computer storage media having stored thereon multiple instructions that facilitate user engagement by, when executed by one or more processors of a computing device, causing the one or more processors to: display content on an electronic device; Paragraph 0132 for reference to an initial list of questions and options are statistically defined for display on device where the displayed options are from a statically defined pool; Paragraph 0134 for reference to in initial question set and order is presented via one or more devices or an initial question set and order is presented over all devices at multiple stores; Figure 3 and related text regarding item 312 ‘single electronic devices’]
Claim 13
While the combination of Smith and Tsuchida disclose the limitations above, regarding Claim 13, Smith discloses the following:
wherein the processing circuitry is arranged in a vicinity of or inside the question display device or the reply candidate display device [see at least Paragraph 0099 for reference to one or more computer storage media having stored thereon multiple instructions that facilitate user engagement by, when executed by one or more processors of a computing device, causing the one or more processors to: display content on an electronic device; Paragraph 0118 for reference to individuals, such as customers or employees interact with devices by, for example, answering presented questions about their experiences by tapping pre-programmed answers to on-screen questions, or by typing or drawing answers in short responses or free flowing format; Paragraph 0119 for reference to organization and analytics of responses occurring in another device; Figure 3 and related text regarding step 303 ‘Customers and/or employees interact with devices’]
Claim 15
While the combination of Smith and Tsuchida disclose the limitations above, Smith does not disclose wherein the sensor includes at least one of a camera and an object sensor arranged in the passage.
Regarding Claim 15, Tsuchida discloses the following:
wherein the sensor includes at least one of a camera and an object sensor arranged in the passage [see at least Paragraph 0027 for reference to the detection unit is, for example, a camera that captures an image as the detection information; Paragraph 0068 for reference to detection principle may be employed as the motion sensor, such as an infrared sensor or an ultrasonic sensor, as long as the detection principle is provided with the capability of detecting a person approaching the sensor]
Before the effective filing date, it would have been obvious to one or ordinary skill in the art to modify the display devices of Smith to include the sensor measurements of Tsuchida. Doing so would provide information in which a user has greater interest, as stated by Tsuchida (Paragraph 0008).
Claim(s) 14 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Smith (U.S 2015/0178742 A1) in view of Tsuchida (U.S 2021/0304257 A1), as applied in claim 1, in view of Carbonell (U.S 2012/0092492 A1).
Claim 14
While the combination of Smith and Tsuchida disclose the limitations above, they do not disclose wherein the processing circuitry performs the display switching of the reply candidates when a crowd flow rate based on the detection signal from the at least one of sensors is less than a predetermined threshold value.
Regarding Claim 14, Carbonell discloses the following:
wherein the processing circuitry performs the display switching of the reply candidates when a crowd flow rate based on the detection signal from the at least one of sensors is less than a predetermined threshold value [see at least Paragraph 0008 for reference to threshold values can be established to trigger notifications based on traffic flow metrics wherein, when traffic flow volume is greater than a threshold value, personnel can be notified that a region is experiencing long wait times; Paragraph 0039 for reference to Trigger criteria can include, but is not limited to, one or more threshold values, customer flow rate through an identified region, customer flow rate through multiple identified regions, customer flow density over an interval, and the like; Paragraph 0048 for reference to an internal counter can be assigned for each region 312 which can be compared against a threshold value (e.g., queue size) to determine an event occurrence]
Before the effective filing date, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to modify the display switching of Smith to include the crowd flow rate determination of Carbonell. Doing so would monitor traffic flow within a customer service area to improve customer experience, as stated by Carbonell (Paragraph 0008).
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Matzler, Kurt, et al. "Switching experience, customer satisfaction, and switching costs in the ICT industry." Journal of Service Management 26.1 (2015): 117-136.
DOCUMENT ID
INVENTOR(S)
TITLE
US 2020/0050873 A1
Ikeda, Hiroo
PEOPLE FLOW ESTIMATION DEVICE, DISPLAY CONTROL DEVICE, PEOPLE FLOW ESTIMATION METHOD, AND RECORDING MEDIUM
KR20010113661A
Method and apparatus for detecting moving objects in video conferencing and other applications
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to KRISTIN ELIZABETH GAVIN whose telephone number is (571)270-7019. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 7:30-4:30 PM EST.
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, Jerry O'Connor can be reached at 571-272-6787. 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.
/KRISTIN E GAVIN/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3624
Prosecution Insights