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 1-18 have been cancelled. Claims 19-38 are pending.
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on 10/24/2024 has been considered by the examiner.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
The following is a quotation of the appropriate paragraphs of 35 U.S.C. 102 that form the basis for the rejections under this section made in this Office action:
A person shall be entitled to a patent unless –
(a)(2) the claimed invention was described in a patent issued under section 151, or in an application for patent published or deemed published under section 122(b), in which the patent or application, as the case may be, names another inventor and was effectively filed before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claim(s) 19-38 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) as being anticipated by GANICK (US 2014/0280316).
Regarding claim 19,
GANICK teaches a messaging system, comprising:
a plurality of messaging units (101a-101c) disposed at different locations within a space ([0021] teaches that in some embodiments, the location is a retail environment), each of said messaging units including at least one light source (101 in fig. 4);
at least one messaging/modulation controller coupled to the light sources and configured to turn the light sources on and off so as to broadcast input digital messages([0118] teaches transmitting an encoded information from light; [0110] teaches modulator 304 interrupting power so as to turn the light ON and OFF; [0114] teaches emitted patterns of light);
a central server (703 in fig. 8) coupled to the at least one messaging/modulation controller and configured to selectively provide messages to said at least one messaging/modulation controller for broadcast by different ones of said messaging units([0134] teaches describes the server 703 interaction; FIG. 8 delves into location-specific areas 801 containing databases 802 and web services 803. The areas 801 represent a subset of databases 802 and web services 803 for individual locations where there are installed LED light sources 101; [0136] teaches that the server looks for the light IDs 901 within a specific radius of the current approximate position of the mobile device 103);
a tracking system that tracks locations of individuals within the space ([0155] teaches an environment involving a store owner that installed a light-based indoor positioning system and a customer walking around the store using a mobile device 103 capable of receiving optically transmitted information; [0166] teaches that this task is performed so that location information is constantly being collected even when modulated light is not being detected. This allows the mobile device and/or server to keep track of the mobile device's position); and
an associate device coupled to the central server and configured to display a user interface for (a) showing said locations of said individuals within the space ([0170] teaches "The client uses a password authorized login screen … Clients with administrator permissions have read/write access to light IDs 901, read access to maps 902, read/write access to content 903, and read access to analytics 904.” The "client device" inherently performs the same tasks as the claimed "associate device" as the "password authorized login screen" confirms it must have a display, satisfying the claim's "display" requirement. Providing administrators with "read access to maps 902" directly corresponds to the invention's function of "showing said locations of said individuals within the space.") and (b) displaying additional information about said individuals that is maintained by the central server, wherein said additional information includes previously manually input information(see [0130] and [0170]; [0170] teaches that the client device, when utilized by an administrator with "read/write access to content 903," meets the invention’s requirement for displaying "additional information about said individuals that is maintained by the central server, wherein said additional information includes previously manually input information." This is supported by the system's ability to generate "location data 702 which can also vary depending on user-specified criteria." The "user-specified criteria" corresponds to information that was previously input manually by a user or administrator; this input acts as the filter that selects the specific "content 903" (or "additional information") which is subsequently displayed on the client device's screen; [0147] teaches another form of "additional information" in disclosing "User-provided information 1104 contains additional data that the user manually uploads in regards to building changes, updates, or new information that is acquired. The user in this case is most likely the facility manager or staff member, but could also originate from an end user of the system who contributes via a crowd sourcing or machine learning mechanism.)
Regarding claim 20,
Ganick teaches the messaging system wherein the central server selects messages to be broadcast by individual ones of the messaging units based on said additional information ([0130] teaches that a mobile device shall receive Location data 702 which corresponds to indoor coordinates which match the ID code 701. The location data 702 can also vary depending, for example, on other criteria such as temporal criteria, historical criteria, or user-specified criteria, either/all of which corresponding to additional information).
Regarding claim 21,
Ganick teaches that the tracking system tracks the locations of the individuals based on broadcasts from user devices carried by said individuals([0141] teaches utilizing information about neighboring ID codes 701 which are in physical proximity of the LED light source 101 whereby each additional sensor is an input into a Bayesian model that maintains an estimation of the current smartphone position).
Regarding claim 22,
Ganick teaches that said user interface displays a map of at least a portion of the space and displays icons indicating said locations of said individuals within the space ([0126] teaches receiving data from multiple mobile devices 103a-103b in fig. 6; [0170] teaches that an administrator shall have read access to maps 902; [0361] teaches a total number of users within a space may be known and each individual located in real-time.).
Regarding claim 23,
Ganick teaches designating one of the icons causes the user interface to display an information page that includes at least a portion of the additional information about a corresponding one of the individuals ([0157] teaches that particular items, having entered by a user and thus corresponding to additional information, may be displayed with a flashing icon within an image of the store layout).
Regarding claim 24,
Ganick teaches that said user interface also displays locations of shelves on the map ([0173] teaches that the light positioning information may direct a person to the correct shelf that an item is currently on).
Regarding claim 25,
Ganick teaches that said additional information has been generated by combining information provided by a plurality of different sources ([0131] teaches that user specified criteria may include rules and content of interest for when a user is in proximity to an item of interest. In such a case, additional information is generated by combining identified items of interest with data derived from proximity sensors for determining user proximity to items of interest).
Regarding claim 26,
Ganick teaches that said additional information was collected in a plurality of different ways, using a plurality of different system components ([0147] teaches that additional information may comprise manually uploaded data as well as data received from end users via crowd sourcing).
Regarding claim 27,
Ganick teaches that at least some of said additional information was submitted by said individuals about themselves ([0130] teaches utilizing user-specified criteria for received data).
Regarding claim 28,
Ganick teaches that at least some of said additional information was generated by sensors ([0131] teaches that user-specified criteria can include how the mobile device behaves when a user is close to an item that is on sale, therefore relying on some form of sensor technology to establish the user’s location for comparison to a known location of a sales item).
Regarding claim 29,
Ganick teaches that at least some of said additional information was submitted by a person other than the individual to which it pertains ([0147] teaches that additional information may be received from end users of the system via crowd sourcing).
Regarding claim 30,
Ganick teaches that additional information is based on at least one of Web browsing history, texting history, e-mailing history or telephone use history ([0130] and [0131] teaches receiving historical criteria, also corresponding to additional data (taken into consideration by the system) which [0131] teaches includes at least internet browsing history).
Regarding claim 31,
Ganick teaches that said tracking system uses at least one of triangulation or Kalman filtering ([0303] teaches that the light positioning system may utilize Kalman filters).
Regarding claim 32,
Ganick teaches said user interface displays two types of icons: (i) a first type designating an individual who is a registered user having a user device that is in bidirectional communication with said messaging system and (ii) a second type designating an individual who is not a registered user of said messaging system ([0342] teaches that the system may be accessed via web portal 7009 by general users 7001(i) and system administrators and system developers(ii); [0240] specifically, teaches the user workflow for multiple users working in conjunction to commission a space wherein each mobile device user 4702a-4702b would maintain a synchronous representation of the current light georeferencing such that when mobile device user 4702a adds a light to the database, mobile device user 4702b would see that light location appear on their device. Because the commissioning process is not limited to only two devices, in the instance that a third or fourth individual are also added to the database, their respective light and coordinate descriptors (see [0237]-[0238]) will also be displayed on each commissioning device.)
Regarding claim 33,
Ganick teaches that portions of the additional information previously input by a current user of the associate device are highlighted relative to portions of the additional information that were not previously input by said current user ([0340] teaches a common usage scenario wherein a user is currently positioned as a particular location and the user 6902 may tap their mobile device 6904 onto a self-identifying optical transmitter 6903 placed near the point of interest. The user may then be presented with information about the user's identity, previous purchase history, demographics, and previous locations visited, where the "purchase history...and previous locations visited" correspond at least in-part to additional information. By characterizing said information a "previous", said information is thereby highlighted relative to other additional information (e.g., current location, current purchase items etc.).
Regarding claim 34,
Ganick teaches a messaging system according to claim 19, wherein the user interface displays different types of said information for different ones of said individuals, based on information previously obtained about said different ones of said individuals ([0237] - [0240] are drawn to a commissioning process via multiple individuals in a space; [0240] teaches the user workflow for multiple users working in conjunction to commission a space wherein each mobile device user 4702a-4702b would maintain a synchronous representation of the current light georeferencing such that when mobile device user 4702a adds a light to the database, mobile device user 4702b would see that light location appear on their device. Because the commissioning process is not limited to only two devices, in the instance that a third or fourth individual are also added to the database, their respective light and coordinate descriptors (see [0237]-[0238]) will also be displayed on each commissioning device.)
Regarding claim 35,
Ganick teaches a messaging system according to claim 19, wherein said additional information includes both (i) specific types of information in fields labeled as to said specific types ([0348] teaches leaving digital work orders, tagged to a physical location) and (ii) unformatted notes that were previously entered about said individuals ([0348] also teaches that location based notes (more general in topic) may be geo-tagged in the form of a digital note message, voice recording or video wherein leaving said notes may be according to user privilege levels. Since the geo-tagged notes are left by individuals, the note information is interpreted as corresponding to “about said individuals” given that they are unique to the individual who has elected to geo-tag said note).
Regarding claim 36,
Ganick teaches that the user interface also displays a proposed message for sending to a particular one of said individuals and permits said proposed message to be accepted, rejected or modified ([0347] teaches, "Almost any type of digital application can be turned into a location-based plugin... a digital assistant can be created such that when a user enters a particular area, a physical or digital representation of a remote agent is invoked on a mobile device. The representation could consist of …a chat dialogue to a real or any equivalent remote agent". A chat dialogue interface inherently requires visual prompts and messages to facilitate interaction, said visual prompts and messages corresponding to "a proposed message". Additionally, should the user elect not to initiate said chat, as follows in user interface design and interaction logic, any response other than the intended positive action ("Accept," "Yes," "Start Chat") effectively results in the prompt being dismissed or ignored. Practically speaking, the outcome is tantamount to an explicit "Reject" action i.e., the chat does not start. Absent starting said chat (i.e., acceptance), the system would move on to its next state (e.g., dismissing the prompt after a timeout, waiting for the user to move to another location, or returning to a default screen).
Regarding claim 37,
Ganick teaches that the user interface also displays a message previously sent to a particular one of said individuals ([0347] teaches that the digital application may prompt a chat dialogue to a real or remote agent. The ability to look up (display) earlier parts of the dialogue is an essential aspect of a chat "session." Without this function, the system would merely be a series of disconnected single messages, not a coherent "chat session.").
Regarding claim 38,
Ganick teaches that said associate device comprises a wireless handheld device (at least figure 47 illustrates 4703a and 4703b as handheld devices used during a commissioning process).
Double Patenting
The nonstatutory double patenting rejection is based on a judicially created doctrine grounded in public policy (a policy reflected in the statute) so as to prevent the unjustified or improper timewise extension of the “right to exclude” granted by a patent and to prevent possible harassment by multiple assignees. A nonstatutory double patenting rejection is appropriate where the conflicting claims are not identical, but at least one examined application claim is not patentably distinct from the reference claim(s) because the examined application claim is either anticipated by, or would have been obvious over, the reference claim(s). See, e.g., In re Berg, 140 F.3d 1428, 46 USPQ2d 1226 (Fed. Cir. 1998); In re Goodman, 11 F.3d 1046, 29 USPQ2d 2010 (Fed. Cir. 1993); In re Longi, 759 F.2d 887, 225 USPQ 645 (Fed. Cir. 1985); In re Van Ornum, 686 F.2d 937, 214 USPQ 761 (CCPA 1982); In re Vogel, 422 F.2d 438, 164 USPQ 619 (CCPA 1970); In re Thorington, 418 F.2d 528, 163 USPQ 644 (CCPA 1969).
A timely filed terminal disclaimer in compliance with 37 CFR 1.321(c) or 1.321(d) may be used to overcome an actual or provisional rejection based on nonstatutory double patenting provided the reference application or patent either is shown to be commonly owned with the examined application, or claims an invention made as a result of activities undertaken within the scope of a joint research agreement. See MPEP § 717.02 for applications subject to examination under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA as explained in MPEP § 2159. See MPEP § 2146 et seq. for applications not subject to examination under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA . A terminal disclaimer must be signed in compliance with 37 CFR 1.321(b).
The filing of a terminal disclaimer by itself is not a complete reply to a nonstatutory double patenting (NSDP) rejection. A complete reply requires that the terminal disclaimer be accompanied by a reply requesting reconsideration of the prior Office action. Even where the NSDP rejection is provisional the reply must be complete. See MPEP § 804, subsection I.B.1. For a reply to a non-final Office action, see 37 CFR 1.111(a). For a reply to final Office action, see 37 CFR 1.113(c). A request for reconsideration while not provided for in 37 CFR 1.113(c) may be filed after final for consideration. See MPEP §§ 706.07(e) and 714.13.
The USPTO Internet website contains terminal disclaimer forms which may be used. Please visit www.uspto.gov/patent/patents-forms. The actual filing date of the application in which the form is filed determines what form (e.g., PTO/SB/25, PTO/SB/26, PTO/AIA /25, or PTO/AIA /26) should be used. A web-based eTerminal Disclaimer may be filled out completely online using web-screens. An eTerminal Disclaimer that meets all requirements is auto-processed and approved immediately upon submission. For more information about eTerminal Disclaimers, refer to www.uspto.gov/patents/apply/applying-online/eterminal-disclaimer.
Claims 19 and 20 are rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claims 1 and 16 of U.S. Patent No. 9,270,627. Although the claims at issue are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other because obvious wording variations.
Regarding claim 19,
Claim 16 of U.S. Patent 9,270,627 teaches “A messaging system, comprising: a plurality of messaging units disposed at different locations within a space, each of said messaging units including at least one light source; at least one messaging/modulation controller coupled to the light sources and configured to turn the light sources on and off so as to broadcast input digital messages; a central server coupled to the at least one messaging/modulation controller and configured to selectively provide messages to said at least one messaging/modulation controller for broadcast by different ones of said messaging units; a tracking system that tracks locations of individuals within the space; and an associate device coupled to the central server and configured to display a user interface for (a) showing said locations of said individuals within the space and (b) displaying additional information about said individuals that is maintained by the central server, wherein said additional information includes previously manually input information.” Note that claim 16 recites, “…associate device to designate a location of an individual about whom the associate wishes to at least one of input or view information.”, said designation of a location in interpreted as corresponding to “a tracking system…” of claim 19.
Regarding claim 20,
Claim 1 of U.S. Patent 9,270,627 teaches, “… wherein the central server selects messages to be broadcast by individual ones of the messaging units based on said additional information.”
Claim 21-38 are rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claims 1 and 16 of U.S. Patent No. 9,270,627 (hereafter Koo’627) in view of GANICK (US 2014/0280316)
Regarding claim 21,
Claim 16 of U.S. Patent 9,270,627 teaches the messaging system according to claim 19 but fails to expressly teach that the tracking system tracks the locations of the individuals based on broadcasts from user devices carried by said individuals.
GANICK teaches that the tracking system tracks the locations of the individuals based on broadcasts from user devices carried by said individuals ([0141] teaches utilizing information about neighboring ID codes 701 which are in physical proximity of the LED light source 101 whereby each additional sensor is an input into a Bayesian model that maintains an estimation of the current smartphone position).
Before the effective filing date of the invention, it would have been obvious to modify the system of Koo’627 (as described in claim 16 of Koo’627), per the teachings of Ganick, for at least the purpose of making the system cost-effective and easier to implement through its use of pre-existing user devices (e.g., smartphones with Wi-Fi, Bluetooth Low Energy (BLE), or cameras) as the tracking hardware.
Regarding claim 22,
Ganick teaches that said user interface displays a map of at least a portion of the space and displays icons indicating said locations of said individuals within the space ([0126] teaches receiving data from multiple mobile devices 103a-103b in fig. 6; [0170] teaches that an administrator shall have read access to maps 902; [0361] teaches a total number of users within a space may be known and each individual located in real-time.).
Regarding claim 23,
Ganick teaches designating one of the icons causes the user interface to display an information page that includes at least a portion of the additional information about a corresponding one of the individuals ([0157] teaches that particular items, having entered by a user and thus corresponding to additional information, may be displayed with a flashing icon within an image of the store layout).
Regarding claim 24,
Ganick teaches that said user interface also displays locations of shelves on the map ([0173] teaches that the light positioning information may direct a person to the correct shelf that an item is currently on).
Regarding claim 25,
Ganick teaches that said additional information has been generated by combining information provided by a plurality of different sources ([0131] teaches that user specified criteria may include rules and content of interest for when a user is in proximity to an item of interest. In such a case, additional information is generated by combining identified items of interest with data derived from proximity sensors for determining user proximity to items of interest).
Regarding claim 26,
Ganick teaches that said additional information was collected in a plurality of different ways, using a plurality of different system components ([0147] teaches that additional information may comprise manually uploaded data as well as data received from end users via crowd sourcing).
Regarding claim 27,
Ganick teaches that at least some of said additional information was submitted by said individuals about themselves ([0130] teaches utilizing user-specified criteria for received data).
Regarding claim 28,
Ganick teaches that at least some of said additional information was generated by sensors ([0131] teaches that user-specified criteria can include how the mobile device behaves when a user is close to an item that is on sale, therefore relying on some form of sensor technology to establish the user’s location for comparison to a known location of a sales item).
Regarding claim 29,
Ganick teaches that at least some of said additional information was submitted by a person other than the individual to which it pertains ([0147] teaches that additional information may be received from end users of the system via crowd sourcing).
Regarding claim 30,
Ganick teaches that additional information is based on at least one of Web browsing history, texting history, e-mailing history or telephone use history ([0130] and [0131] teaches receiving historical criteria, also corresponding to additional data (taken into consideration by the system) which [0131] teaches includes at least internet browsing history).
Regarding claim 31,
Ganick teaches that said tracking system uses at least one of triangulation or Kalman filtering ([0303] teaches that the light positioning system may utilize Kalman filters).
Regarding claim 32,
Ganick teaches said user interface displays two types of icons: (i) a first type designating an individual who is a registered user having a user device that is in bidirectional communication with said messaging system and (ii) a second type designating an individual who is not a registered user of said messaging system ([0342] teaches that the system may be accessed via web portal 7009 by general users 7001(i) and system administrators and system developers(ii); [0240] specifically, teaches the user workflow for multiple users working in conjunction to commission a space wherein each mobile device user 4702a-4702b would maintain a synchronous representation of the current light georeferencing such that when mobile device user 4702a adds a light to the database, mobile device user 4702b would see that light location appear on their device. Because the commissioning process is not limited to only two devices, in the instance that a third or fourth individual are also added to the database, their respective light and coordinate descriptors (see [0237]-[0238]) will also be displayed on each commissioning device.)
Regarding claim 33,
Ganick teaches that portions of the additional information previously input by a current user of the associate device are highlighted relative to portions of the additional information that were not previously input by said current user ([0340] teaches a common usage scenario wherein a user is currently positioned as a particular location and the user 6902 may tap their mobile device 6904 onto a self-identifying optical transmitter 6903 placed near the point of interest. The user may then be presented with information about the user's identity, previous purchase history, demographics, and previous locations visited, where the "purchase history...and previous locations visited" correspond at least in-part to additional information. By characterizing said information a "previous", said information is thereby highlighted relative to other additional information (e.g., current location, current purchase items etc.).
Regarding claim 34,
Ganick teaches a messaging system according to claim 19, wherein the user interface displays different types of said information for different ones of said individuals, based on information previously obtained about said different ones of said individuals ([0237] - [0240] are drawn to a commissioning process via multiple individuals in a space; [0240] teaches the user workflow for multiple users working in conjunction to commission a space wherein each mobile device user 4702a-4702b would maintain a synchronous representation of the current light georeferencing such that when mobile device user 4702a adds a light to the database, mobile device user 4702b would see that light location appear on their device. Because the commissioning process is not limited to only two devices, in the instance that a third or fourth individual are also added to the database, their respective light and coordinate descriptors (see [0237]-[0238]) will also be displayed on each commissioning device.)
Regarding claim 35,
Ganick teaches a messaging system according to claim 19, wherein said additional information includes both (i) specific types of information in fields labeled as to said specific types ([0348] teaches leaving digital work orders, tagged to a physical location) and (ii) unformatted notes that were previously entered about said individuals ([0348] also teaches that location based notes (more general in topic) may be geo-tagged in the form of a digital note message, voice recording or video wherein leaving said notes may be according to user privilege levels. Since the geo-tagged notes are left by individuals, the note information is interpreted as corresponding to “about said individuals” given that they are unique to the individual who has elected to geo-tag said note).
Regarding claim 36,
Ganick teaches that the user interface also displays a proposed message for sending to a particular one of said individuals and permits said proposed message to be accepted, rejected or modified ([0347] teaches, "Almost any type of digital application can be turned into a location-based plugin... a digital assistant can be created such that when a user enters a particular area, a physical or digital representation of a remote agent is invoked on a mobile device. The representation could consist of …a chat dialogue to a real or any equivalent remote agent". A chat dialogue interface inherently requires visual prompts and messages to facilitate interaction, said visual prompts and messages corresponding to "a proposed message". Additionally, should the user elect not to initiate said chat, as follows in user interface design and interaction logic, any response other than the intended positive action ("Accept," "Yes," "Start Chat") effectively results in the prompt being dismissed or ignored. Practically speaking, the outcome is tantamount to an explicit "Reject" action i.e., the chat does not start. Absent starting said chat (i.e., acceptance), the system would move on to its next state (e.g., dismissing the prompt after a timeout, waiting for the user to move to another location, or returning to a default screen).
Regarding claim 37,
Ganick teaches that the user interface also displays a message previously sent to a particular one of said individuals ([0347] teaches that the digital application may prompt a chat dialogue to a real or remote agent. The ability to look up (display) earlier parts of the dialogue is an essential aspect of a chat "session." Without this function, the system would merely be a series of disconnected single messages, not a coherent "chat session.").
Regarding claim 38,
Ganick teaches that said associate device comprises a wireless handheld device (at least figure 47 illustrates 4703a and 4703b as handheld devices used during a commissioning process).
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to DIONNE PENDLETON whose telephone number is (571)272-7497. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 9a-5pm.
Examiner interviews are available via telephone, in-person, and video conferencing using a USPTO supplied web-based collaboration tool. To schedule an interview, applicant is encouraged to use the USPTO Automated Interview Request (AIR) at http://www.uspto.gov/interviewpractice.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Davetta Goins can be reached at 571-272-2957. 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.
/DIONNE PENDLETON/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2689