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 .
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 16-30 are rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claims 1-5, 1-5 and 1-5 of US Pub No. 20210232835 A1 Although the claims at issue are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other because both are directed to determining helmet is worn by a rider or not worn by the rider based on image characteristics of the captured image.
Current Application
US Pub No. 20210232835 A1
Claim 16. An information processing method comprising:
detecting at least two persons in a captured image;
detecting heads of the at least one two persons in the captured image;
detecting a helmet in the captured image;
determining whether the helmet is on a head; and
in case the captured image includes a person wearing a helmet and a person not wearing a helmet, outputting a result that distinguish between the person wearing a helmet and the person not wearing a helmet.
Claim 1. A helmet wearing determination system, comprising: at least one memory storing instructions; and at least one processor executing the instructions to perform:
learning image characteristics in a case a helmet is worn and image characteristics in a case a helmet is not worn;
registering the learning results; determining, according to the learning results, whether the helmet is worn or the helmet is not worn based on image characteristics of an image captured by an imaging capturing unit.
Claim 17
Claim 2
Claim 18
Claim 3
Claim 19
Claim 4
Claim 20
Claim 5
Claim 21
Claim 1
Claim 22
Claim 2
Claim 23
Claim 3
Claim 24
Claim 4
Claim 25
Claim 5
Claim 26
Claim 1
Claim 27
Claim 2
Claim 28
Claim 3
Claim 29
Claim 4
Claim 30
Claim 5
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 16-30 would be allowable if rewritten to overcome the rejection(s) under 35 U.S.C. non-statutory double patenting, set forth in this Office action and to include all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure:
Chen et al. (US Pub No. 20200175273 A1, A method for detecting one or more objects adjacent to a vehicle includes capturing a image of an object adjacent to the vehicle; determining a driving area in the image; cutting the driving area to form an identification window; selecting an identification area in the identification window; accessing a plurality of object image data in a memory to compare the plurality of object image data with the identification area; and identifying a specific object in the identification area by the processor, Abstract).
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to PINALBEN V PATEL whose telephone number is (571)270-5872. The examiner can normally be reached M-F: 10am - 8pm.
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, Chineyere Wills-Burns can be reached at 571-272-9752. 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.
/Pinalben Patel/Examiner, Art Unit 2673
Prosecution Insights