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 .
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect filed on 07/01/2026 have been considered but they are not persuasive.
However, examiner found the limitations are taught by references previous introduced.
In Remark page 6, lines 10-14, applicant argued that the undersigned contacted the Office to regarding this apparent error but did not receive a timely response or a corrected Office Action. For the sake of this response, because no other course seems reasonable, Applicant will treat U.S. 2025/0026306 A1 as the correctly cited publication number and refer to the publication as "McIntosh".
The examiner respectfully disagrees with Applicant’s argument. In fact, actually,
during the extend long vacation May 11, 2026 to June 19, 2026, examiner received a recorded message from applicant’s attorney on Jun 15, 2026 regarding to the issue of the reference McIntosh 2025/0026306 A1. However, examiner could not response to attorney in a short time. Therefore, on June 23, 2026, examiner has scheduled an interview with Attorney Peter Klobuchar to correct the reference McIntosh is 2025/0026305 instead of 2025/0026306 as typo mistake in the Official Action filed on 04/08/2026 and has issued a new PTO-892 with a correct reference McIntosh 2025/0026305. Examiner also confirmed that there is no changing of teaching paragraphs, and they still be used to teach the application 18/924,648 as the Official Action filed on 04/08/2026. Attorney Peter Klobuchar has reviewed the correct McIntosh 2025/0026305 in the meeting.
However, in the Applicant Arguments/Remarks filed on 07/01/2026, it did not mention the interview as well as the correction of the reference McIntosh 2025/0026305. The Arguments/Remarks still insisted that the reference McIntosh to the incorrected McIntosh 2025/0026306 and McIntosh does not teach any of the limitations attributed to it by the Office.
Examiner’s response is the combination of the correct McIntosh U.S. 2025/0026305 A1 in view of Skelly et al. (U.S. 2021/0104099 A1) can be used to teach the limitation of independent claims 1 and 7, and there is no changing for paragraphs was used in the official action filed 04/08/2026 in the claims of Final rejection filed on 07/01/2026.
Dependent claims 2-6, 8-12 depend on claims 1, 7 and the rejections to the claims are maintained.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 103 which forms the basis for all obviousness rejections set forth in this Office action:
A patent for a claimed invention may not be obtained, notwithstanding that the claimed invention is not identically disclosed as set forth in section 102 of this title, if the differences between the claimed invention and the prior art are such that the claimed invention as a whole would have been obvious before the effective fiTokitag 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.
Claims 1-2 and 7-8 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable by McIntosh et al. (U.S. 2025/0026305 A1) in view of Skelly et al. (U.S. 2021/0104099 A1).
Regarding Claim 1, McIntosh discloses a method for surveillance of a passenger cabin of an aircraft (McIntosh [0025] “method of monitoring passenger movement(s) in the main cabin”, the method comprising:
collecting seat belt condition data of passenger seats within the passenger cabin with a seat belt sensor system (McIntosh, [0093] “seat belt locking sensors, coupled with seat occupied sensors and/or seat location identifiers can be used for transferring data to a central database onboard an airplane, an attendant control panel receives the seat belt locking, seat occupied and/or seat location data and displays this information/status to the flight attendant” McIntosh teaches collecting seat belt condition (locking) within the passenger cabin with a seat belt sensor system;
assessing with a computer-based evaluation system a current seat occupation status of the passenger seats based on the live video feed and a current seat belt status of the passenger seats based on the seat belt condition data (McIntosh, Fig. 11, [0068] “one or more input devices 1122 are connected to the interface circuitry 1120. The input device(s) 1122 permit(s) a user to enter data and/or commands into the programmable circuitry 1112. The input device(s) 1122 can be implemented by, for example, an audio sensor, a microphone, a camera (still or video)” and [0059] “FIG. 6, positioning 600 of antennas 605, 610, 615 (e.g., radio frequency identification (RFID) antennas) throughout the flight cabin 500 to receive data from RFID transmitters located in the flight cabin seats” and [0060] “FIG.7, the attendant control panel display notifications 700 include visual indicators 705, 710, 715 showing seat belt usage status, corresponding verbal notifications 720, 725, 730 and/or flight attendant instructions 735, 740, 745” McIntosh teaches assessing with a computer-based evaluation system (a programmable circuitry platform 1100, Fig. 11) a current seat occupation status with the seat belt condition data of the passenger seats base on the video feed on the interface 1120 (control panel display notifications 700 include visual indicators 705, 710, 715 showing seat belt usage status, Fig. 7);
wirelessly transmitting the seat occupation status and the seat belt status to a portable crew device (McIntosh, [0059] “FIG. 6, positioning 600 of antennas 605, 610, 615 (e.g., radio frequency identification (RFID) antennas) throughout the flight cabin 500 to receive data from RFID transmitters located in the flight cabin seats” and [0060] “FIG.7, the attendant control panel display notifications 700 include visual indicators 705, 710, 715 showing seat belt usage status, corresponding verbal notifications 720, 725, 730 and/or flight attendant instructions 735, 740, 745” and [0064] “FIG. 11. The programmable circuitry platform 1100 can be, for example, a server, a personal computer, a workstation, a, a mobile device” and Fig. 11, [0070] The interface circuitry 1120 of the illustrated example also includes a communication device such as a transmitter, a receiver, a transceiver, a wireless access point” McIntosh teaches wirelessly transmitting the seat occupation status and the seat belt status (Fig. 7) to a portable crew device (the interface 1120 of the platform 1100, Fig. 11) and the portable crew device being a pair of smart glasses (McIntosh, Fig. 11, [0064] “FIG. 11, the programmable circuitry platform 1100 can be a digital video recorder, a headset (e.g., an augmented reality (AR) headset, a virtual reality (VR) headset” McIntosh the portable crew device being a pair of smart glasses (a AR/VR headset); and
projecting visual cabin information representing the seat occupation status and the seat belt status on the portable crew device (McIntosh, [0059] “FIG. 6, positioning 600 of antennas 605, 610, 615 (e.g., radio frequency identification (RFID) antennas) throughout the flight cabin 500 to receive data from RFID transmitters located in the flight cabin seats” and [0060] “FIG.7, the attendant control panel display notifications 700 include visual indicators 705, 710, 715 showing seat belt usage status, corresponding verbal notifications 720, 725, 730 and/or flight attendant instructions 735, 740, 745” McIntosh teaches projecting visual cabin information representing the seat occupation status and the seat belt status (notifications 705, 710, 715, Fig. 7) on the portable crew device (500) via antennas 605, 610, 615 (Fig. 6).
However, McIntosh does not explicitly teach
capturing a live video feed of the passenger cabin with a video surveillance system;
Skelly teaches capturing a live video feed of the passenger cabin with a video surveillance system (Skelly, [0023] “FIG. 1 Based on capturing high-resolution image data from cameras 124A, 124B, 124C, 124D of the landmarks/points-of-interest on the flight path of the airplane 102, real-time, 3D, interactive can be displayed to passengers” and [0039] “FIG. 6B, a passenger wearing the VR headset moves his face to the left to track a landmark/point of interest appearing (in real time) on the left of the airplane's flight path.” Skelly teaches capturing live video (real-time video) feed of passenger cabin with cameras of video surveillance system.
McIntosh and Skelly are combinable because they are from the same field of endeavor, system and method for image processing and try to solve similar problems. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention was made for modifying the method of McIntosh to combine with capturing a live video feed of the passenger cabin (as taught by Skelly) in order to capture a live video feed of the passenger cabin because Skelly can provide capturing live video (real-time video) feed of passenger cabin with cameras of video surveillance system (Skelly, Fig. 1, [0023], Fig. 6B, [0039]). Doing so, it may provide passengers with realistic, outside-world views along the flight path for a positive air travel experience (Skelly, [0021]).
Regarding Claim 2, McIntosh discloses the method according to claim 1, wherein a current view of the passenger cabin is captured with the video surveillance system, wirelessly transmitted to the portable crew device and overlayed and projected together with the visual cabin information on the portable crew device (Fig. 11, [0070] The interface circuitry 1120 of the illustrated example also includes a communication device such as a transmitter, a receiver, a transceiver, a wireless access point” and [0059] “FIG. 6, positioning 600 of antennas 605, 610, 615 (e.g., radio frequency identification (RFID) antennas) throughout the flight cabin 500 to receive data from RFID transmitters located in the flight cabin seats” and [0060] “FIG.7, the attendant control panel display notifications 700 include visual indicators 705, 710, 715 showing seat belt usage status, corresponding verbal notifications 720, 725, 730 and/or flight attendant instructions 735, 740, 745” McIntosh teaches wirelessly transmitted to the portable crew device (the interface circuitry 1120, Fig. 11) and project together (via antennas 605, 610, 615) the visual cabin information (the seat belt usage status).
However, McIntosh does not explicitly teach wirelessly transmitted to the portable crew device and overlayed with the visual cabin information on the portable crew device;
Skelly teaches wirelessly transmitted to the portable crew device and overlayed with the visual cabin information on the portable crew device (Skelly, [0026] “FIGS. 2A and 2B show that images captured by the cameras can have overlapping fields of view. Thus, it is possible for more than one camera to capture the same image or a same portion of an image” and [0039] “FIG. 7A, high-resolution image data 754-774 captured by cameras 724A-724G. The 3D virtual environment 790 is rendered on a high-definition screen of the VR headset 795” Skelly teaches wirelessly transmitted to the portable crew device and overlayed with the visual cabin information on the portable crew device (the VR headset 795).
McIntosh and Skelly are combinable see rationale in claim 1.
Regarding Claim 7, a combination of McIntosh and Skelly discloses the aircraft (McIntosh, [0030] “FIG. 1 illustrates an example aircraft 100”) comprising:
a passenger cabin comprising a plurality of passenger seats (McIntosh, Fig. 6, [0058] “the flight cabin 500 includes a monitor 510 displaying a seat-by-seat diagram 520” McIntosh teaches the flight cabin 500 includes passenger seats, and
a cabin surveillance system (McIntosh, [0055] “A monitoring system” and [0027] “allow for monitoring of passenger movement throughout the main cabin”, the cabin surveillance system comprising:
a video surveillance system configured to capture a live video feed of the passenger cabin;
a seat belt sensor system configured to collect seat belt condition data of passenger seats within the passenger cabin;
a computer-based evaluation system configured to assess a current seat occupation status of the passenger seats based on the live video feed and a current seat belt status of the passenger seats based on the seat belt condition data and to wirelessly transmit the seat occupation status and the seat belt status; and
a portable crew device, the portable crew device being a pair of smart glasses and being configured to receive the seat occupation status and the seat belt status from the computer-based evaluation system and to project visual cabin information representing the seat occupation status and the seat belt status on the portable crew device.
Claim 7 is substantially similar to claim 1 and is rejected based on similar analyses.
Regarding Claim 8, a combination of McIntosh and Skelly discloses the aircraft according to claim 7, wherein the video surveillance system is configured to capture and wirelessly transmit a current view of the passenger cabin, wherein the portable crew device is configured to receive the current view and overlay and project the current view together with the visual cabin information on the portable crew device.
Claim 8 is substantially similar to claim 2 and is rejected based on similar analyses.
Claims 3-5 and 9-11 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable by McIntosh et al. (U.S. 2025/0026306 A1) in view of Skelly et al. (U.S. 2021/0104099 A1) and further in view of Lee et al. (U.S. 2021/0072536 A1).
Regarding Claim 3, the method according to claim 2, a combination of McIntosh and Skelly does not explicitly teach wherein the current view of the passenger cabin is a static view being independent of a current viewing direction and a current position associated with the portable crew device.
However, Lee teaches the current view of the passenger cabin is a static view being independent of a current viewing direction and a current position associated with the portable crew device (Lee, [0164] “The electronic device may be provided in the form of smart glasses. The glass-type electronic device may be shaped to be worn on the head of the user” and [0175] As shown in FIG. 5, the electronic device may operate so that if the controller 200 projects light about an image onto one side of the display unit 300, the light is emitted to the other side of the display unit, and the image generated by the controller 200 is shown to the user and [0176] the user may see the image generated by the controller 200 while seeing the external environment simultaneously through the opening of the frame 100” Lee teaches a static view from one fixed position(s) is provided on the smart glass (a portable crew device) and is independent on the direction of the person wearing a smart glass e.g., user’s view is on a direction (generated by the controller 200) at the object 300, current position, Fig. 5).
McIntosh, Skelly and Lee are combinable because they are from the same field of endeavor, system and method for image processing and try to solve similar problems. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention was made for modifying the method of McIntosh to combine with static/dynamic view associated with the portable crew device (as taught by Lee) in order to apply the static/dynamic view associated with the portable crew device because Lee can provide a static view from one fixed position(s) is provided on the smart glass (a portable crew device) and is independent on the direction of the person wearing a smart glass e.g., user’s view is on a direction (generated by the controller 200) at the object 300, current position, Fig. 5) (Lee, Fig. 5, [0175], [0176]). Doing so, it may provide the VR electronic device (the smart glass) includes multiple position tracking device that that maximize the span of location-aware space, for example, at positions facing each other in the diagonal direction (Lee, [0158]).
Regarding Claim 4, the method according to claim 2, a combination of McIntosh and Skelly does not explicitly teach wherein the current view of the passenger cabin is a dynamic view being adapted according to a current viewing direction associated with the portable crew device.
However, Lee teaches the current view of the passenger cabin is a dynamic view being adapted according to a current viewing direction associated with the portable crew device (Lee, [0164] “The electronic device may be provided in the form of smart glasses. The glass-type electronic device may be shaped to be worn on the head of the user” and [0136] “FIG. 4 illustrates a situation in which the VR electronic device of FIG. 3 is used” and Fig. 4, [0158] “The position tacking system may be implemented by installing one or more position tracking device 50 (50a, 50b) in a closed, specific space. A plurality of position tracking devices 50 may be installed at such positions that maximize the span of location-aware space, for example, at positions facing each other in the diagonal direction” and [0160] Also, the electronic device 30 may perform wired/wireless communication with an external device 60 . The electronic device 30 may receive images of the virtual world stored in the connected external device 60 and display the received image to the user” Lee teaches a dynamic view (projection) is provided on the smart glasses (a portable crew device) and is adapted on the direction of the person wearing a smart glass e.g., user’s view is on a direction of tracking object 50b, or user’s view is on a direction of tracking object 50a, facing each other in the diagonal direction, Fig. 4.
McIntosh, Skelly and Lee are combinable see rationale in claim 3.
Regarding Claim 5, the method according to claim 1, a combination of McIntosh and Skelly does not explicitly teach wherein the visual cabin information is projected on the portable crew device as augmented reality images.
However, Lee teaches the visual cabin information is projected on the portable crew device as augmented reality images (Lee, [0004] Augmented reality (AR) refers to the technology that makes a virtual object” and [0163] “FIG. 5, the electronic device include a frame 100, controller 200, and display unit 300” and [0216] “the user may still clearly see the real world by overlapping an augmented reality image provided by the controller 200” Lee teaches image (referred to as a visual cabin information) is projected on the portable crew device (the small glass 100, Fig. 5) as augmented reality images.
McIntosh, Skelly and Lee are combinable see rationale in claim 3.
Regarding Claim 9, a combination of McIntosh, Skelly and Lee discloses the aircraft according to claim 8, wherein the current view of the passenger cabin is a static view being independent of a current viewing direction and a current position associated with the portable crew device.
Claim 9 is substantially similar to claim 3 and is rejected based on similar analyses.
Regarding Claim 10, a combination of McIntosh, Skelly and Lee discloses the aircraft according to claim 8, wherein the current view of the passenger cabin is a dynamic view being adapted according to a current viewing direction associated with the portable crew device.
Claim 10 is substantially similar to claim 4 and is rejected based on similar analyses.
Regarding Claim 11, a combination of McIntosh, Skelly and Lee discloses the aircraft according to claim 7, wherein the portable crew device is configured to project the visual cabin information on the portable crew device as augmented reality images.
Claim 11 is substantially similar to claim 5 and is rejected based on similar analyses.
Claims 6 and 12 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable by McIntosh et al. (U.S. 2025/0026305 A1) in view of Skelly et al. (U.S. 2021/0104099 A1) and further in view of Garing et al. (U.S. 2017/0283086 A1).
Regarding Claim 6, the method according to claim 1, a combination of McIntosh and Skelly does not explicitly teach wherein the computer-based evaluation system assesses a passenger status within the passenger cabin based on the captured live video feed, the passenger status including information on whether a passenger is seated or standing, wherein a corresponding passenger status is projected on the portable crew device as part of the visual cabin information.
However, Garing teaches the computer-based evaluation system assesses a passenger status within the passenger cabin including information on whether a passenger is seated or standing, wherein a corresponding passenger status is projected on the portable crew device as part of the visual cabin information (Garing, [0083] “FIG. 6. A triple passenger seating arrangement of a vehicle seat sensor subsystem 600 includes three passengers 605a, 605b and 605c. The three passengers 605a, 605b and 605c are seated in passenger seats 610a, 610b and 610c” and [0048] FIG. 1A depicts a member of a flight crew interfacing with an exemplary weight sensor system. Aboard an aircraft, a weight sensor system 100 includes a user interface 105, illustrated as being monitored by a flight attendant 110. The user interface 105, for example, may communicate with an aircraft computing system 170, , which is electrically connected to, and receives signals from, a collection of seat sensors 186 such as seat sensor 115 of FIG. 1A” Garing teaches a computer-based evaluation system (a weight sensor system 100 includes a user interface 105, illustrated as being monitored by a flight attendant 110) assesses a passenger status within the passenger cabin including information on whether a passenger is seated (passenger 125, Fig. 1A) is projected on the portable crew device (the monitor 105, Fig. 1A).
McIntosh, Skelly and Garing are combinable because they are from the same field of endeavor, system and method for image processing and try to solve similar problems. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention was made for modifying the method of McIntosh to combine with monitoring the current status of passenger in an aircraft cabin (as taught by Garing) in order to monitor the current status seat or stand of passenger in an aircraft cabin because Garing can provide a computer-based evaluation system (a weight sensor system 100 includes a user interface 105, illustrated as being monitored by a flight attendant 110) assesses a passenger status within the passenger cabin including information on whether a passenger is seated (passenger 125, Fig. 1A) is projected on the portable crew device (the monitor 105, Fig. 1A) (Garing, Fig. 6, [0083], Fig. 1A, [0048]). Doing so, it may provide to Crew member notifications may advantageously report the specific nonconforming issue and seat or bin position (Garing, [0005]).
Regarding Claim 12, a combination of McIntosh, Skelly and Garing discloses the aircraft according to claim 7, wherein the computer-based evaluation system is further configured to assess a passenger status within the passenger cabin based on the captured live video feed, the passenger status including information on whether a passenger is seated or standing, wherein the portable crew device is further configured to project a corresponding passenger status on the portable crew device as part of the visual cabin information.
Claim 12 is substantially similar to claim 6 and is rejected based on similar analyses.
Conclusion
THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a).
A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of the advisory action. In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the mailing date of this final action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to KHOA VU whose telephone number is (571)272-5994. The examiner can normally be reached 8:00- 4:00.
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, Kee Tung can be reached at 571-272-7794. 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.
/KHOA VU/Examiner, Art Unit 2611
/KEE M TUNG/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2611
Prosecution Insights