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 .
Status of Claims
This action is in reply to the application filed on 10/25/2024.
Claims 1-6 are currently pending and have been examined.
Specification
The title of the invention is not descriptive. A new title is required that is clearly indicative of the invention to which the claims are directed. The following title is suggested: “Apparatus, Method, and Computer Readable Medium for Presenting Information to Re-boarding Passengers”.
The disclosure is objected to because of the following informalities:
Paragraph [0047] recites “The time acquisition unit 6 displays the information determined in S4 and S5 on the display devices 53 and 54 (S6)” when it appears it should recite “The display control unit 4 displays the information determined in S4 and S5 on the display devices 53 and 54 (S6)” to match the unit displaying information in the remainder of paragraph [0047]
Appropriate correction is required.
Claim Interpretation
Per MPEP 2111.04 II., “The broadest reasonable interpretation of a method (or process) claim having contingent limitations requires only those steps that must be performed and does not include steps that are not required to be performed because the condition(s) precedent are not met”. Method claim 3 recites: “acquiring a re-boarding time from disembarkation to re-boarding based on the flight information if the passenger is a re-boarding passenger; determining an activity to perform before re-boarding, which is to be suggested to the passenger, and generating information on the activity, if the passenger is a re-boarding passenger; generating information regarding re-boarding based on the flight information if the passenger is a re-boarding passenger;…displaying the information on the activity and the information regarding re-boarding on one display screen, if the passenger is a re-boarding passenger; and displaying only the information regarding re-boarding, if the re-boarding time is less than a predetermined time” (emphasis added). Accordingly, the steps of “acquiring a re-boarding time from disembarkation to re-boarding based on the flight information”, “determining an activity to perform before re-boarding, which is to be suggested to the passenger, and generating information on the activity”, “generating information regarding re-boarding based on the flight information”, and “displaying the information on the activity and the information regarding re-boarding on one display screen” are contingent on the passenger being a reboarding passenger. The limitation of “displaying only the information regarding re-boarding” is contingent on both the passenger being a re-boarding passenger and on the re-boarding time being time is less than a predetermined time.
Therefore, if the passenger is not a re-boarding passenger, none of the steps discussed above would be performed. Per MPEP 2111.04 II., none of the limitations discussed above are required in the broadest reasonable interpretation of claim 3.
Examiner notes that, even though these limitations of claim 3 are not required under the broadest reasonable interpretation of claim 3, prior art has been applied to the above limitations in the interest of compact prosecution.
Examiner notes that, while the same contingencies are present in claims 1 and 5, MPEP 2111.04 II. also states “The broadest reasonable interpretation of a system (or apparatus or product) claim having structure that performs a function, which only needs to occur if a condition precedent is met, requires structure for performing the function should the condition occur. The system claim interpretation differs from a method claim interpretation because the claimed structure must be present in the system regardless of whether the condition is met and the function is actually performed.” Accordingly, the corresponding limitations of claims 1 and 5 are required under the broadest reasonable interpretation of the claims.
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 1-6 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 101 because the claimed invention is directed to an abstract idea without significantly more. The claims recite suggesting activities to an airline passenger during a layover.
As an initial matter, claims 1-2 fall into at least the machine category of statutory subject matter. Claims 3-4 fall into at least the process category of statutory subject matter. Finally, claims 5-6 fall into at least the manufacture category of statutory subject matter. Therefore, all claims fall into at least one of the statutory categories. Eligibility analysis proceeds to Step 2A.
In claim 1, the limitation of “acquire biological information of a passenger who has disembarked from an aircraft”, under its broadest reasonable interpretation, covers performance of the limitation in the mind but for the recitation of generic computer components. That is, other than reciting “an information processing apparatus comprising: at least one memory storing instructions; and at least one processor configured to execute the instructions to,” nothing in the claim element precludes the step from practically being performed in the mind. Similarly, the limitations of “acquire flight information corresponding to the acquired biological information from a storage device in which the biological information of the passenger and the flight information of the passenger are stored in association with each other in advance; determine, based on the acquired flight information, whether the passenger is a passenger who is to re-board an aircraft after disembarking from the aircraft; acquire a re-boarding time from disembarkation to re-boarding based on the flight information if the passenger is a re-boarding passenger; determine an activity to perform before re-boarding, which is to be suggested to the passenger, based on the re-boarding time, and generate information on the activity, if the passenger is a re-boarding passenger; generate information regarding re-boarding based on the flight information if the passenger is a re-boarding passenger; display information corresponding to a determination result on a display device, display the information on the activity and the information regarding re-boarding on one display screen, if the passenger is a re-boarding passenger; and display only the information regarding re-boarding, if the re-boarding time is less than a predetermined time”, as drafted, is a process that, under its broadest reasonable interpretation, covers performance of the limitation in the mind but for the recitation of generic computer components. If a claim limitation, under its broadest reasonable interpretation, covers performance of the limitation in the mind but for the recitation of generic computer components, then it falls within the “Mental Processes” grouping of abstract ideas. Accordingly, the claims recite an abstract idea.
Additionally, claim 1 recites the concept of suggesting activities to an airline passenger during a layover which is a certain method of organizing human activity including commercial interactions. Acquire biological information of a passenger who has disembarked from an aircraft; acquire flight information corresponding to the acquired biological information in which the biological information of the passenger and the flight information of the passenger are stored in association with each other in advance; determine, based on the acquired flight information, whether the passenger is a passenger who is to re-board an aircraft after disembarking from the aircraft; acquire a re-boarding time from disembarkation to re-boarding based on the flight information if the passenger is a re-boarding passenger; determine an activity to perform before re-boarding, which is to be suggested to the passenger, based on the re-boarding time, and generate information on the activity, if the passenger is a re-boarding passenger; generate information regarding re-boarding based on the flight information if the passenger is a re-boarding passenger; display information corresponding to a determination result, display the information on the activity and the information regarding re-boarding, if the passenger is a re-boarding passenger; and display only the information regarding re-boarding, if the re-boarding time is less than a predetermined time all, as a whole, fall under the category of commercial interactions. The claim falls into the “Certain Methods of Organizing Human Activity” grouping of abstract ideas. Mere recitation of generic computer components does not remove the claim from this grouping. Accordingly, the claim recites an abstract idea.
This judicial exception is not integrated into a practical application. In particular, the claim recites the additional elements of an information processing apparatus, at least one memory storing instructions, at least one processor configured to execute the instructions, a storage device, a display device, and one display screen. The recited additional elements are recited at a high-level of generality such that it amounts to no more than mere instructions to apply the exception using generic computer components. Accordingly, these additional elements do not integrate the abstract idea into a practical application because they do not impose any meaningful limits on practicing the abstract idea. The combination of these additional elements is also no more than mere instructions to apply the exception using generic computer components. Accordingly, even in combination, these additional elements do not integrate the abstract idea into a practical application because they do not impose any meaningful limits on practicing the abstract idea. The claim is directed to an abstract idea.
The claim does not include additional elements that are sufficient to amount to significantly more than the judicial exception. As discussed above with respect to integration of the abstract idea into a practical application, the additional elements of an information processing apparatus, at least one memory storing instructions, at least one processor configured to execute the instructions, a storage device, a display device, and one display screen amounts to no more than mere instructions to apply the exception using generic computer components. The combination of these additional elements is also no more than mere instructions to apply the exception using generic computer components. Mere instructions to apply an exception using generic computer components cannot provide an inventive concept. The claim is not patent eligible.
Claim 2 further limits the abstract idea of claim 1 while introducing the additional element of capturing the face of the passenger looking at the display device. The claim does not integrate the abstract idea into a practical application because the element of capturing the face of the passenger looking at the display device is recited at a high-level of generality such that it amounts to no more than mere instructions to apply the exception using generic computer components. Adding this new additional element into the additional element from claim 1 still amounts to no more than mere instructions to apply the exception using generic computer components. The claim also does not amount to significantly more than the abstract idea because mere instructions to apply an exception using generic computer components cannot provide an inventive concept. The claim is not patent eligible.
In claim 3, the limitation of “an information processing method comprising: acquiring biological information of a passenger who has disembarked from an aircraft”, under its broadest reasonable interpretation, covers performance of the limitation in the mind but for the recitation of generic computer components. Similarly, the limitations of “acquiring flight information corresponding to the acquired biological information from a storage device in which the biological information of the passenger and the flight information of the passenger are stored in association with each other; determining, based on the acquired flight information, whether the passenger is a passenger who is to re-board an aircraft after disembarking from the aircraft; acquiring a re-boarding time from disembarkation to re-boarding based on the flight information if the passenger is a re-boarding passenger; determining an activity to perform before re-boarding, which is to be suggested to the passenger, and generating information on the activity, if the passenger is a re-boarding passenger; generating information regarding re-boarding based on the flight information if the passenger is a re-boarding passenger; displaying information corresponding to a determination result on a display device; displaying the information on the activity and the information regarding re-boarding on one display screen, if the passenger is a re-boarding passenger; and displaying only the information regarding re-boarding, if the re-boarding time is less than a predetermined time”, as drafted, is a process that, under its broadest reasonable interpretation, covers performance of the limitation in the mind but for the recitation of generic computer components. If a claim limitation, under its broadest reasonable interpretation, covers performance of the limitation in the mind but for the recitation of generic computer components, then it falls within the “Mental Processes” grouping of abstract ideas. Accordingly, the claims recite an abstract idea.
Additionally, claim 3 recites the concept of suggesting activities to an airline passenger during a layover which is a certain method of organizing human activity including commercial interactions. An information processing method comprising: acquiring biological information of a passenger who has disembarked from an aircraft; acquiring flight information corresponding to the acquired biological information in which the biological information of the passenger and the flight information of the passenger are stored in association with each other; determining, based on the acquired flight information, whether the passenger is a passenger who is to re-board an aircraft after disembarking from the aircraft; acquiring a re-boarding time from disembarkation to re-boarding based on the flight information if the passenger is a re-boarding passenger; determining an activity to perform before re-boarding, which is to be suggested to the passenger, and generating information on the activity, if the passenger is a re-boarding passenger; generating information regarding re-boarding based on the flight information if the passenger is a re-boarding passenger; displaying information corresponding to a determination result; displaying the information on the activity and the information regarding re-boarding, if the passenger is a re-boarding passenger; and displaying only the information regarding re-boarding, if the re-boarding time is less than a predetermined time all, as a whole, fall under the category of commercial interactions. The claim falls into the “Certain Methods of Organizing Human Activity” grouping of abstract ideas. Mere recitation of generic computer components does not remove the claim from this grouping. Accordingly, the claim recites an abstract idea.
This judicial exception is not integrated into a practical application. In particular, the claim recites the additional elements of a storage device, a display device, and one display screen. The recited additional elements are recited at a high-level of generality such that it amounts to no more than mere instructions to apply the exception using generic computer components. Accordingly, these additional elements do not integrate the abstract idea into a practical application because they do not impose any meaningful limits on practicing the abstract idea. The combination of these additional elements is also no more than mere instructions to apply the exception using generic computer components. Accordingly, even in combination, these additional elements do not integrate the abstract idea into a practical application because they do not impose any meaningful limits on practicing the abstract idea. The claim is directed to an abstract idea.
The claim does not include additional elements that are sufficient to amount to significantly more than the judicial exception. As discussed above with respect to integration of the abstract idea into a practical application, the additional elements of a storage device, a display device, and one display screen amounts to no more than mere instructions to apply the exception using generic computer components. The combination of these additional elements is also no more than mere instructions to apply the exception using generic computer components. Mere instructions to apply an exception using generic computer components cannot provide an inventive concept. The claim is not patent eligible.
Claim 4 further limits the abstract idea of claim 3 while introducing the additional element of capturing the face of the passenger looking at the display device. The claim does not integrate the abstract idea into a practical application because the element of capturing the face of the passenger looking at the display device is recited at a high-level of generality such that it amounts to no more than mere instructions to apply the exception using generic computer components. Adding this new additional element into the additional element from claim 3 still amounts to no more than mere instructions to apply the exception using generic computer components. The claim also does not amount to significantly more than the abstract idea because mere instructions to apply an exception using generic computer components cannot provide an inventive concept. The claim is not patent eligible.
In claim 5, the limitation of “a non-transitory computer readable recording medium including a program recorded thereon, the program including instructions that cause a computer to carry out: acquiring biological information of a passenger who has disembarked from an aircraft”, under its broadest reasonable interpretation, covers performance of the limitation in the mind but for the recitation of generic computer components. That is, other than reciting “a non-transitory computer readable recording medium including a program recorded thereon, the program including instructions that cause a computer to carry out,” nothing in the claim element precludes the step from practically being performed in the mind. Similarly, the limitations of “acquiring flight information corresponding to the acquired biological information from a storage device in which the biological information of the passenger and the flight information of the passenger are stored in association with each other; determining, based on the acquired flight information, whether the passenger is a passenger who is to re-board an aircraft after disembarking from the aircraft; acquiring a re-boarding time from disembarkation to re-boarding based on the flight information if the passenger is a re-boarding passenger; determining an activity to perform before re-boarding, which is to be suggested to the passenger, and generating information on the activity, if the passenger is a re-boarding passenger; generating information regarding re-boarding based on the flight information if the passenger is a re-boarding passenger; displaying information corresponding to a determination result on a display device; displaying the information on the activity and the information regarding re-boarding on one display screen, if the passenger is a re-boarding passenger; and displaying only the information regarding re-boarding, if the re-boarding time is less than a predetermined time”, as drafted, is a process that, under its broadest reasonable interpretation, covers performance of the limitation in the mind but for the recitation of generic computer components. If a claim limitation, under its broadest reasonable interpretation, covers performance of the limitation in the mind but for the recitation of generic computer components, then it falls within the “Mental Processes” grouping of abstract ideas. Accordingly, the claims recite an abstract idea.
Additionally, claim 5 recites the concept of suggesting activities to an airline passenger during a layover which is a certain method of organizing human activity including commercial interactions. Acquiring biological information of a passenger who has disembarked from an aircraft; acquiring flight information corresponding to the acquired biological information in which the biological information of the passenger and the flight information of the passenger are stored in association with each other; determining, based on the acquired flight information, whether the passenger is a passenger who is to re-board an aircraft after disembarking from the aircraft; acquiring a re-boarding time from disembarkation to re-boarding based on the flight information if the passenger is a re-boarding passenger; determining an activity to perform before re-boarding, which is to be suggested to the passenger, and generating information on the activity, if the passenger is a re-boarding passenger; generating information regarding re-boarding based on the flight information if the passenger is a re-boarding passenger; displaying information corresponding to a determination result; displaying the information on the activity and the information regarding re-boarding, if the passenger is a re-boarding passenger; and displaying only the information regarding re-boarding, if the re-boarding time is less than a predetermined time all, as a whole, fall under the category of commercial interactions. The claim falls into the “Certain Methods of Organizing Human Activity” grouping of abstract ideas. Mere recitation of generic computer components does not remove the claim from this grouping. Accordingly, the claim recites an abstract idea.
This judicial exception is not integrated into a practical application. In particular, the claim recites the additional elements of a non-transitory computer readable recording medium including a program including instructions recorded thereon, a computer, a storage device, a display device, and one display screen. The recited additional elements are recited at a high-level of generality such that it amounts to no more than mere instructions to apply the exception using generic computer components. Accordingly, these additional elements do not integrate the abstract idea into a practical application because they do not impose any meaningful limits on practicing the abstract idea. The combination of these additional elements is also no more than mere instructions to apply the exception using generic computer components. Accordingly, even in combination, these additional elements do not integrate the abstract idea into a practical application because they do not impose any meaningful limits on practicing the abstract idea. The claim is directed to an abstract idea.
The claim does not include additional elements that are sufficient to amount to significantly more than the judicial exception. As discussed above with respect to integration of the abstract idea into a practical application, the additional elements of a non-transitory computer readable recording medium including a program including instructions recorded thereon, a computer, a storage device, a display device, and one display screen amounts to no more than mere instructions to apply the exception using generic computer components. The combination of these additional elements is also no more than mere instructions to apply the exception using generic computer components. Mere instructions to apply an exception using generic computer components cannot provide an inventive concept. The claim is not patent eligible.
Claim 6 further limits the abstract idea of claim 5 while introducing the additional element of capturing the face of the passenger looking at the display device. The claim does not integrate the abstract idea into a practical application because the element of capturing the face of the passenger looking at the display device is recited at a high-level of generality such that it amounts to no more than mere instructions to apply the exception using generic computer components. Adding this new additional element into the additional element from claim 5 still amounts to no more than mere instructions to apply the exception using generic computer components. The claim also does not amount to significantly more than the abstract idea because mere instructions to apply an exception using generic computer components cannot provide an inventive concept. The claim is not patent eligible.
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, 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.
Claims 1-6 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Beaven et al. (U.S. Pre-Grant Publication No. 2017/0351470, hereafter known as Beaven) in view of Liu et al. (WIPO Publication No. 2018/014349, hereafter known as Liu), Anderson et al. (U.S. Pre-Grant Publication No. 2018/0330294, hereafter known as Anderson), and Bundick et al. (U.S. Pre-Grant Publication No. 2019/0124165, hereafter known as Bundick).
Regarding claim 1, Beaven teaches:
An information processing apparatus comprising: at least one memory storing instructions; and at least one processor configured to execute the instructions to (see Fig. 7 smart sign 102 and [0119] "Memory 704 may include one or more various types of non-volatile and/or volatile storage technologies...Memory 704 may be utilized to store information, including computer-readable instructions that are utilized by processor 722 to perform actions, including at least some embodiments described herein" and [0118] "Processor 722 includes one or more processing devices that execute instructions to perform actions, including at least some embodiments described herein. In various embodiments, the processor 722 may include one or more central processing units (CPUs)" for the smart sign having a processor executing instructions stored in memory)
acquire (see [0082] "The mobile communication device may be broadcasting the device-specific information itself or it may be broadcasting its identifier such that the smart sign can respond to the mobile communication device" and [0093] "the smart sign may receive a mobile communication device identifier from each mobile communication device that it communicates with and store it while the mobile communication device is within the proximity of the smart sign" for receiving an identifier of the passenger. See [0064] "the smart sign determines the second user's flight has landed" for determining that a passenger was on a flight that landed)
acquire flight information corresponding to the acquired (see [0060] "the smart sign detects that a first mobile communication device in its proximity and obtains first device-specific information from the first mobile communication device. For example, assume the first device-specific information includes boarding pass information" and [0082] for the identifier of the passenger mobile communication device. See [0128] "Memory 754 may have stored thereon various programs 756 and device-specific information 758...The device-specific information 758 includes information, settings, or parameters about the mobile communication device 108, programs 756, or other stored information about a user of the mobile communication device 108" for acquiring a passenger's flight information from the user device's memory in which the identifier of the mobile device and the user's flight information are stored together)
determine, based on the acquired flight information, whether the passenger is a passenger who is to (see [0042] "The smart sign may receive the boarding pass information for the user from his mobile communication device. The smart sign can look up the gate information associated with the flight information in the boarding pass" and [0060] "assume the first device-specific information includes boarding pass information...By comparing this information to known information about the airport, the smart sign determines the gate of departure for the first user's flight" for determining the passenger is to board an aircraft based on acquired boarding pass information matching departure gate information of the airport where the smart sign is located. See [0064] “by comparing this information to known information about the airport, the smart sign determines the second user's flight has landed" for determining that the airport is not a departure location for the boarding pass information of a second user)
acquire a (see [0108] “the smart sign may generate a new content window showing information about the gate, such as departure time and status”)
determine an activity to perform before (see Fig. 3A and [0042] "The smart sign then displays the location of the gate on the map and fastest route to the gate from the smart sign, i.e., the user's current location, such as is illustrated in FIG. 3A. The smart sign might also receive information from the mobile communication device that the mobile communication device has the Coffee_A application installed and can share information. The smart sign can determine where there is a Coffee_A location in the airport terminal, and if there is a location, the map can be updated to include an icon showing where the coffeehouse is in the terminal" for visiting a coffee shop being a suggested activity before boarding and displaying a current location of the passenger as the star on Fig. 3A, coffee shop location 312a as the meeting place of the activity, a boarding gate 314, and a route 308 from the current location to the boarding gate)
generate information regarding (see [0042] “The smart sign can look up the gate information associated with the flight information in the boarding pass. The smart sign then displays the location of the gate on the map and fastest route to the gate from the smart sign, i.e., the user's current location, such as is illustrated in FIG. 3A”)
display information corresponding to a determination result on a display device, display the information on the activity and the information regarding (see [0042] "The smart sign then displays the location of the gate on the map and fastest route to the gate from the smart sign, i.e., the user's current location, such as is illustrated in FIG. 3A. The smart sign might also receive information from the mobile communication device that the mobile communication device has the Coffee_A application installed and can share information. The smart sign can determine where there is a Coffee_A location in the airport terminal, and if there is a location, the map can be updated to include an icon showing where the coffeehouse is in the terminal" for displaying a gate information and activity information upon determining the user has a departing flight. See Figs. 3A and 3B for displaying boarding gate location and route to boarding gate on one screen along with locations of activities)
As discussed above, Beaven teaches the smart sign acquiring information regarding a passenger via communication with a device of the passenger. Beaven also teaches determining whether a user has a departing flight from an airport or whether the user has arrived at their destination airport as discussed above. However, Beaven does not explicitly teach acquiring biological information of the passenger and then acquiring flight information corresponding to the acquired biological information from a storage device in which the biological information of the passenger and the flight information of the passenger are stored in association with each other in advance. While Beaven teaches determining whether users have arrived at their destination or have a departing plane to catch, Beaven also does not explicitly teach the passengers identified as those who are re-boarding an aircraft after disembarking from an aircraft, determining a re-boarding time from disembarkation to re-boarding, determining the activity based on the re-boarding time, and displaying only the information regarding re-boarding if the re-boarding time is less than a predetermined time. However, Liu teaches:
acquire biological information of a passenger who has disembarked from an aircraft (see [0026] "In addition to the touch display screen, the aerial display screen device in the embodiments of the present invention further has an image acquisition device, i.e. a camera, for acquiring a face image; and having a calculation processing component capable of performing calculation such as image processing. In this way, in addition to the existing functions, the aerial display screen device can further obtain, in the case of obtaining the face image, the face feature data of the passenger who obtains the query information from the face image and then sends the face feature data to the computing system 2" and [0025] "The face feature processing system 22 is configured to store a correspondence between the face feature data of the passenger and the flight number of the passenger, and determine a flight number corresponding to the face feature data sent by the navigation display screen device according to the correspondence”)
acquire flight information corresponding to the acquired biological information from a storage device in which the biological information of the passenger and the flight information of the passenger are stored in association with each other in advance (see [0027] "when the passenger uses the navigation display screen device to query information, the face of the face close to the navigation display screen device is close to the camera of the navigation display screen device, so that the navigation display screen device obtains the face image of the person, and then the face feature data of the passenger is obtained from the face image through calculation processing and then sent to the computing system. After the computing system receives, the flight number corresponding to the face feature data can be determined according to the correspondence, and then the flight information corresponding to the flight number is sent to the navigation display screen device, so that the navigation display screen device can present the flight information on the display screen, for example, a flight number, a boarding gate number, and the like")
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to incorporate the facial recognition of the smart airport display of Liu into the smart airport sign of Beaven. As Liu states in [0031] “According to the technical solution of the embodiment of the present invention, by associating the face feature of the passenger with the flight number of the passenger, the passenger does not need to input information by the mobile phone, and only needs to align the face with the camera on the navigation display screen device, so that the flight information can be conveniently seen on the screen of the navigation display screen device”. Therefore, by incorporating the facial recognition of Liu, the resulting combination would increase the convenience over the smart sign of Beaven alone as the use of mobile devices would no longer be required to show passenger-specific information.
The combination of Beaven and Liu still does not explicitly teach identifying that the passenger is a passenger is one who is to re-board an aircraft after disembarking an aircraft, acquiring a re-boarding time from disembarking to re-boarding if the passenger is to re-board, determining the activity based on the re-boarding time, and displaying only the information regarding re-boarding if the re-boarding time is less than a predetermined time. However, Anderson teaches:
determine, based on the acquired flight information, whether the passenger is a passenger who is to re-board an aircraft after disembarking from the aircraft (see [0054] "a traveler arrives at an airport terminal transport hub from an airplane which arrives at gate A1 (e.g. arrival location) at 11:00 am. He has a connecting flight at gate B3 (e.g. the departure location) which begins boarding at 12:30 pm and leaves at 1:00 pm...The personal travel assistance system will aid the traveler by analyzing his personal data, his travel data and the transport hub data. Information will include how long he can spend at the lounge before he receives an alert on his smart phone to head towards departure gate B3" for passengers at an airport that have a departing flight being passengers that have arrived on an incoming plane and the travel assistance system determining how long the layover at the airport is. In combination with Beaven and Liu, passengers using the facial recognition smart sign who have arrived at their destination airport would be directed to baggage claim because of the lack of further flight information while passengers with a further flight from the airport would be directed to their departure gate)
acquire a re-boarding time from disembarkation to re-boarding based on the flight information if the passenger is a re-boarding passenger (see [0054] "a traveler arrives at an airport terminal transport hub from an airplane which arrives at gate A1 (e.g. arrival location) at 11:00 am. He has a connecting flight at gate B3 (e.g. the departure location) which begins boarding at 12:30 pm and leaves at 1:00 pm...The personal travel assistance system will aid the traveler by analyzing his personal data, his travel data and the transport hub data. Information will include how long he can spend at the lounge before he receives an alert on his smart phone to head towards departure gate B3" for determining a time that can be spent between getting off of the incoming flight and re-boarding the connecting flight)
determine an activity to perform before re-boarding, which is to be suggested to the passenger, based on the re-boarding time, and generate information on the activity, if the passenger is a re-boarding passenger; generate information regarding re-boarding based on the flight information if the passenger is a re-boarding passenger; display the information on the activity and the information regarding re-boarding on one display screen, if the passenger is a re-boarding passenger (see [0052] "Each person can add or change individual preferences to his travel data. The updated travel data can be stored and updated in one or more memories/databases on the smart phone, the IoT devices, or in the computing cloud or network... another person may prefer to go to a cocktail lounge to relax" and [0054] "Information will include how long he can spend at the lounge before he receives an alert on his smart phone to head towards departure gate B3. In this particular example, the traveler prefers to arrive at the departure gate 10 minutes before the boarding time, and the walk from the lounge to the departure gate is 15 minutes" for determining an activity of visiting a lounge during the layover based on the time until a passenger is to re-board an aircraft and generating a required walking time to reach the departure gate. See [0044] and [0046] for using an average speed at which the passenger can walk. See [0057] for determining a route from current location of the passenger to the departure gate)
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to incorporate the detection of connecting passenger flight information and provision of information to connecting passengers of Anderson to the combination of Beaven and Liu. As Anderson states in [0002] “A person traveling through a transport hub has many options of routes, travel times and other parameters effecting his traversal throughout the transport hub and effecting his ability and likelihood of arriving at a destination location on time. Accordingly, there is a need for improved systems and methods to assist the person in traveling throughout the transport hub”. While Beaven explicitly considers passengers who are departing from an airport and passengers arriving at their destination airport, incorporating the teachings of Anderson in order to consider passengers who are connecting between flights allows the combined system to provide information to these passengers so they can make it to their connecting flights on time.
While the combination of Beaven, Liu, and Anderson teaches displaying information on the activity and information regarding re-boarding on one screen if the passenger is a re-boarding passenger, and Anderson teaches determining a re-boarding time and how much time a re-boarding passenger has to partake in an activity before needing to head to their next departure gate, the combination does not explicitly teach displaying only the re-boarding information if the re-boarding time is less than a predetermined time. Bundick teaches:
and display only the information regarding re-boarding, if the re-boarding time is less than a predetermined time (see [0118] “The computing system 115 may also determine, using received travel information, that the user of the user account associated with the electronic device 110 is to board an airplane through a second gate at the transportation facility 150 minutes from the current time. The computing system 115 may generate, for display on a display screen associated with the electronic device 110, a travel notification suggesting one or more merchant stores within the transportation facility that the user of the user account associated with the electronic device 110 has time to visit while still having time to board the airplane at the second gate before the airplane departs from the second gate. In certain embodiments, the one or more suggested merchant stores may be located along the route between the first gate of the transportation facility and the second gate of the transportation facility” for showing both re-boarding information and activity information based on a re-boarding time, and see [0105] “the computing system 115 may populate the map 1002 and the list 1204 of the user interface map display 1000 when the computing system 115 determines that the electronic device 110 is located at a distance that is no greater than a predetermined distance from a transportation facility (e.g., within the transportation facility) and when the determined duration of time is no greater than a first threshold duration of time and no less than a second threshold duration of time. The user interface map display 1000 may be used by used by a user of a user account associated with the electronic device 110 to identify and locate one or more merchant stores within a transportation facility at or a near a gate or along a route between a location of the electronic device 110 and a gate” (emphasis added) for generating the map with both the activity and the re-boarding information only when the time duration until re-boarding is not less than a threshold time. See [0088] “the computing system 115 may not populate (or provide a link where applicable) at least one of…the suggestion message display 628, or the activities selection link icon 630 when the duration of time between the current time and the one or more received schedules travel times is less than a threshold time and the distance between the current location of the electronic device 110 and gate 10 at Washington Dulles International is greater than a threshold distance” for not providing activity suggestion information when the duration of time is less than a threshold time)
One of ordinary skill in the art would have recognized that applying the known technique of only displaying information regarding reboarding if the time to reboarding is less than a predetermined time of Bundick to the combination of Beaven, Liu, and Anderson would have yielded predictable results and resulted in an improved system. It would have been recognized that applying the technique of Bundick to the teaching of the combination of Beaven, Liu, and Anderson would have yielded predictable results because the level of ordinary skill in the art demonstrated by the references applied shows the ability to incorporate such only displaying information regarding reboarding if the time to reboarding is less than a predetermined time. Further, applying only displaying information regarding reboarding if the time to reboarding is less than a predetermined time to the combination of Beaven, Liu, and Anderson would have been recognized by one of ordinary skill in the art as resulting in an improved system that would allow more efficient presentation of information to the passenger. Particularly, by only providing reboarding information to passengers whose boarding times are approaching, the combined system does not distract the passenger with information on activities that are unavailable to the passenger because they would cause the passenger to miss their next flight. Instead, the combined system would only provide the pertinent reboarding information to allow a passenger to get to their connecting flight before takeoff.
Regarding claim 2, the combination of Beaven, Liu, Anderson, and Bundick teaches all of the limitations of claim 1 above. As discussed above, Beaven does not explicitly teach the acquisition of biological information. Accordingly, Beaven does not explicitly teach the acquired biological information including face image data obtained by capturing the face of the passenger looking at the display device. Liu further teaches:
wherein the biological information includes face image data obtained by capturing the face of the passenger looking at the display device (see [0027] "when the passenger uses the navigation display screen device to query information, the face of the face close to the navigation display screen device is close to the camera of the navigation display screen device, so that the navigation display screen device obtains the face image of the person, and then the face feature data of the passenger is obtained from the face image through calculation processing and then sent to the computing system. After the computing system receives, the flight number corresponding to the face feature data can be determined according to the correspondence, and then the flight information corresponding to the flight number is sent to the navigation display screen device, so that the navigation display screen device can present the flight information on the display screen, for example, a flight number, a boarding gate number, and the like")
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to incorporate the facial recognition of the smart airport display of Liu into the smart airport sign of Beaven. As Liu states in [0031] “According to the technical solution of the embodiment of the present invention, by associating the face feature of the passenger with the flight number of the passenger, the passenger does not need to input information by the mobile phone, and only needs to align the face with the camera on the navigation display screen device, so that the flight information can be conveniently seen on the screen of the navigation display screen device”. Therefore, by incorporating the facial recognition of Liu, the resulting combination would increase the convenience over the smart sign of Beaven alone as the use of mobile devices would no longer be required to show passenger-specific information.
Regarding claim 3, Beaven teaches:
An information processing method comprising (see Fig. 4 and [0074]-[0098] for the method overall. See Fig. 7 and [0117]-[0119] for the smart sign executing instructions stored in memory to perform the disclosed methods)
For the remaining limitations of claim 3, see the rejection of claim 1 above.
Regarding claim 4, the combination of Beaven, Liu, Anderson, and Bundick teaches all of the limitations of claim 3 above. Regarding the limitations introduced in claim 4, see the rejection of claim 2 above.
Regarding claim 5, Beaven teaches:
A non-transitory computer readable recording medium including a program recorded thereon, the program including instructions that cause a computer to carry out (see Fig. 7 and [0119]-[0121] "Memory 704 may include one or more various types of non-volatile and/or volatile storage technologies. Examples of memory 704 include, but are not limited to, flash memory, hard disk drives, optical drives, solid-state drives, various types of random access memory (RAM), various types of read-only memory (ROM), other computer-readable storage media (also referred to as processor-readable storage media), or other memory technologies, or any combination th