DETAILED ACTION
This action is in response to the Amendment dated 04 August 2026. Claims 1, 7-11, 13, 16, 19 and 20 are amended. Claim 15 has been cancelled. Claim 21 has been added. Claims 1-14 and 16-21 remain pending and have been considered below.
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 .
Examiner’s Suggestion
Examiner suggests clarifying in independent claims 19 and 20 that the affordance display presents dynamic scheduled use information of the affordance (i.e. similar to independent claim 1) and further amending in each independent claim that the identifying information is “a unique material pattern of the support panel that covers the entirety of the support panel” (e.g. see applicant’s specification paragraph 0067). Examiner believes that an amendment in this manner would facilitate the advancement of prosecution. Examiner is available for an interview at applicant’s convenience.
Response to Amendment
Based on applicant’s amendment, the claim objection of claim 19 is withdrawn.
Based on applicant’s amendment, the 35 U.S.C. 112(b) rejection of claims 1-18 with regards to “the scheduled occupancy”, “ the space”, “the affordance representation”, and “the remaining time” is withdrawn.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(b):
(b) CONCLUSION.—The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph:
The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the applicant regards as his invention.
Claims 1-14 and 16-21 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor (or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the applicant), regards as the invention.
Claims 1, 19 and 20 recite the limitation “the panel”. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. Dependent claims 2-14 and 16-18 are rejected for incorporating the deficiencies of the base independent claim. Examiner suggests “the support panel”.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
This application currently names joint inventors. In considering patentability of the claims the examiner presumes that the subject matter of the various claims was commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the claimed invention(s) absent any evidence to the contrary. Applicant is advised of the obligation under 37 CFR 1.56 to point out the inventor and effective filing dates of each claim that was not commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the later invention in order for the examiner to consider the applicability of 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(C) for any potential 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) prior art against the later invention.
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, 2, 12-14, 16, 17 and 21 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Savage et al. (US 2016/0021233 A1) in view of Holmes et al. (US 2017/0357915 A1) and further in view of Yoganandan et al. (US 2017/0262247 A1).
As for independent claim 1, Savage teaches a system comprising:
an affordance display adjacent the affordance [(e.g. see Savage paragraph 0018) ”QR code 120 which is likely mounted against the wall or is displayed on an electronic display monitor, which can be dynamically updated to accommodate changes to the code or the monitor itself”].
an affordance identifier, the affordance identifier being unique to the affordance [(e.g. see Savage paragraph 0018) ”QR code 120 which is likely mounted against the wall or is displayed on an electronic display monitor, which can be dynamically updated to accommodate changes to the code or the monitor itself … The QR code may identify the conference room among other conference rooms”].
a scanning device including a processor, a device display and a camera including a field of view (FOV), the camera for imaging the affordance identifier to obtain affordance identifying information therefrom, the processor linked to the camera and the display and programmed to perform the steps of: [(e.g. see Savage paragraphs 0017, 0018) ”a code scanning and identification effort, such as a camera function, scanning detection via a light emitted sensor or via other image detection operations or functions hosted by the mobile device 110 … The user may engage the QR code 120 via a camera scan of the code 120 via the mobile device 110”].
recognizing identifying information obtained from the camera to identify the affordance; accessing affordance scheduling information associated with the identified affordance [(e.g. see Savage paragraphs 0018, 0019, 0025) ”Once the QR code data is received by the mobile device 110, the mobile device may automatically invoke an application for a calendar or other scheduling application … The QR code may identify the conference room among other conference rooms … the QR code may also trigger a communication session establishment message from the mobile device to a server which retrieves schedule information from a database or schedule server 130 and shares that schedule or calendar information 132 with an application on the mobile device 110. The information may include available time slots, blocked time slots or other information related to the access of that particular conference room … The QR code being accessed could trigger a digital data extraction that matches the QR identifier to a particular location stored in a database (i.e., conference room ‘A’)… the application may invoke a calendar schedule for that particular conference room … the mobile device 310 may scan a quick response (QR) code and may transmit a quick code identifier in a request message to the scheduling application 330. The request may include an application access request 352. The application may then access a database application corresponding to the quick code and identify an event status based on the quick code including a request for schedule information 354. The request may be transmitted 356 to storage 340 to identify the calendar information”].
generating a schedule representation of the affordance scheduling information and presenting the schedule representation via the display device [(e.g. see Savage paragraphs 0018, 0024) ”the QR code may also trigger a communication session establishment message from the mobile device to a server which retrieves schedule information from a database or schedule server 130 and shares that schedule or calendar information 132 with an application on the mobile device 110. The information may include available time slots, blocked time slots or other information related to the access of that particular conference room … the user interface options of the first menu 252 may illustrate a calendar of a particular conference room. As may be observed, multiple calendar entries 254-258 are illustrated as being part of the day events on the calendar for one particular conference room. This provides an authorized user to access the master calendar stored on the scheduling server and add an event time for their event. Some users may have administrative privileges so that the user can change others scheduled events based on seniority or due to scheduling conflicts. However, the default user can only add to available time slots and cannot otherwise make modifications to existing time slots”].
Savage does not specifically teach the affordance display presenting a dynamic indication of scheduled use of the affordance or [identifier] located adjacent the dynamic indication of scheduled use of the affordance. However, in the same field of invention or solving similar problems, Holmes teaches:
the affordance display presenting a dynamic indication of scheduled use of the affordance [(e.g. see Holmes paragraphs 0008, 0203 and Fig. 6A) ”displaying, on the display, a meeting space status interface that includes a status indicator indicating a current reservation status for the meeting space … the meeting status interface 605 further includes: the current time (e.g., 9:47); a status indicator 614 indicating a current availability or reservation status … causes the status indicator 614 to change (e.g., change from reserved to meeting in progress/meeting starting soon, or from available to meeting in progress”].
[identifier] located adjacent the dynamic indication of scheduled use of the affordance [(e.g. see Holmes paragraphs 0201, 0203 and Fig. 6A) ”As shown in FIG. 6A, the meeting status interface 605 includes a meeting space affordance 606, which indicates that the first device 502-A-1 corresponds to meeting space 1, building A … As shown in FIG. 6A, the meeting status interface 605 further includes: the current time (e.g., 9:47); a status indicator 614 indicating a current availability or reservation status of meeting space 1, building A”]. Examiner notes that, as depicted in Fig. 6A, the identifier of the meeting space (numeral 606) is adjacent to the area displaying the status of the meeting space (numeral 614).
Therefore, considering the teachings of Savage and Holmes, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to add the affordance display presenting a dynamic indication of scheduled use of the affordance or [identifier] located adjacent the dynamic indication of scheduled use of the affordance, as taught by Holmes, to the teachings of Savage because it provides faster and more efficient methods and interfaces for managing and interacting with meeting spaces which allows meeting spaces to be better utilized (e.g. see Holmes paragraphs 0006, 0308).
Savage and Holmes do not specifically teach comprising a support panel at least partially surrounding the affordance display or the identifying information comprising a background pattern of the panel. However, in the same field of invention or solving similar problems, Yoganandan teaches:
comprising a support panel at least partially surrounding the affordance display [(e.g. see Yoganandan paragraphs 0067, 0074) ”bezel/border of the display device 140 frames … bezel of a display device 140”].
the identifying information comprising a background pattern of the panel [(e.g. see Yoganandan paragraph 0067) ”the display devices 140 may include a spectrum of light emitting diodes (LEDs) (visual or infrared) or other physical markers on the bezel/border of the display device 140 frames, allowing distinct identification of each display device 140 using computer vision technology”].
Therefore, considering the teachings of Savage, Holmes and Yoganandan, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to add comprising a support panel at least partially surrounding the affordance display and the identifying information comprising a background pattern of the panel, as taught by Yoganandan, to the teachings of Savage and Holmes because it allows for very intuitive visual and spatially coherent interactions with display devices and provides a satisfying user experience (e.g. see Yoganandan paragraph 0064).
As for dependent claim 2, Savage, Holmes and Yoganandan teach the system as described in claim 1, but Savage and Holmes do not specifically teach wherein the processor is further programmed to present a real time video image of the affordance identifier via the display device. However, Yoganandan teaches:
wherein the processor is further programmed to present a real time video image of the affordance identifier via the display device [(e.g. see Yoganandan paragraphs 0063, 0093 and Figs. 3A-C) ”FIGS. 3A-D show an example of continuous lock of a virtual overlay 410 on the electronic device 120 for a display device 140, according to an embodiment. In one example, as the user moves around holding the electronic device 120, keeping the display device 140 within the field of view of the electronic device 120, the virtual overlay is continually matched and locked to the respective display … The AR mode loads the AR library and provides a camera view that is used to look at and interact with display devices 140. In one embodiment, when the AR mode is turned on the electronic device 120, the display devices 140 switch to a content that is conducive to one of the image based tracking technologies described above. In one embodiment, the displayed content may take the form of a pre-determined frame marker, watermarking etc., that is unique to that display device 140. In another embodiment, the currently displayed image itself might serve as an image target and for tracking. The electronic device 120 is constantly communicated with the state of all display devices 140 and is correspondingly loaded with the right pattern recognition dataset”].
The motivation to combine is the same as that used for claim 1.
As for dependent claim 12, Savage, Holmes and Yoganandan teach the system as described in claim 1 and Savage further teaches:
wherein the processor is further programmed to receive a command via the scanning device to schedule immediate use of the affordance and wherein, upon receiving a command to schedule immediate use of the affordance [(e.g. see Savage paragraph 0024) ”the user interface options of the first menu 252 may illustrate a calendar of a particular conference room. As may be observed, multiple calendar entries 254-258 are illustrated as being part of the day events on the calendar for one particular conference room. This provides an authorized user to access the master calendar stored on the scheduling server and add an event time for their event. Some users may have administrative privileges so that the user can change others scheduled events based on seniority or due to scheduling conflicts. However, the default user can only add to available time slots”].
Savage does not specifically teach the scanning device transmits a message causing the affordance display to indicate that the affordance is in use. However, Holmes teaches:
the scanning device transmits a message causing the affordance display to indicate that the affordance is in use [(e.g. see Holmes paragraphs 0217, 0218 and Figs. 6I-J) ”According to some embodiments, the status indicator 614 indicates “AVAILABLE” while the meeting space is available and the current time (e.g., 9:40) is prior to the early check-in threshold 622 for the next reservation. According to some embodiments, the claiming affordance 616 is enabled to take over a meeting space while the meeting space is available … FIG. 6I also illustrates detecting a left-to-right swipe gesture over the claiming affordance 616 with a contact 636. FIG. 6J shows that the status indicator 614 indicates “MEETING IN PROGRESS” in response to the left-to-right swipe gesture over the claiming affordance 616 in FIG. 6I. As such, the user took over/claimed meeting space 1, building A”].
The motivation to combine is the same as that used for claim 1.
As for dependent claim 13, Savage, Holmes and Yoganandan teach the system as described in claim 12, but Savage does not specifically teach the following limitation. However, Holmes teaches:
wherein the step of indicating that the affordance is in use includes indicating a remaining time during which the affordance is scheduled to be used [(e.g. see Holmes paragraphs 0268, 0426) ”the meeting status interface 1520 indicates “MEETING IN PROGRESS” due to A. Broccoli's reservation of the Ganymede meeting space until 11:00 … According to some embodiments, the countdown is displayed when the current time (e.g., 10:45) is less than 15 minutes prior to the end of the reservation”].
The motivation to combine is the same as that used for claim 1.
As for dependent claim 14, Savage, Holmes and Yoganandan teach the system as described in claim 1 and Savage further teaches:
wherein the scanning device is a portable computing device [(e.g. see Savage paragraph 0018) ”The user may engage the QR code 120 via a camera scan of the code 120 via the mobile device 110”].
As for dependent claim 16, Savage, Holmes and Yoganandan teach the system as described in claim 1 and Savage further teaches:
wherein the pattern includes a unique set of marks [(e.g. see Savage paragraph 0020 and Fig. 1 numeral 120) ”standard for QR code identification and protocol establishment … The conference room schedule uniform resource locator (URL) is generally static … the URL will not need to be changed and the QR code will function as required”].
As for dependent claim 17, Savage, Holmes and Yoganandan teach the system as described in claim 1, but Savage does not specifically teach the following limitation. However, Holmes teaches:
wherein the affordance is a first space, the affordance display is a first affordance display, and the affordance identifier is a first affordance identifier, wherein a second affordance is proximate the first affordance, the system including a second affordance display adjacent the second affordance, the second affordance display presenting a second dynamic indication of the scheduled use of the second affordance, a second affordance identifier located adjacent the dynamic indication of the scheduled use of the second affordance [(e.g. see Holmes paragraphs 0008, 0201, 0194 and Figs. 5A-B and 6A) ”the first devices 502-A-1, . . . , 502-A-X and 502-N-1, 502-N-Y are collectively referred to as first devices 502. For ease of reference … the first devices 502 are located outside of the door to the corresponding meeting spaces … a meeting space status interface that includes a status indicator indicating a current reservation status for the meeting space … the meeting status interface 605 includes a meeting space affordance 606”].
The motivation to combine is the same as that used for claim 1.
Savage and Holmes do not specifically teach wherein the camera images each of the first and second affordance identifiers at the same time and uses that information to identify each of the first and second affordances. However, Yoganandan teaches:
wherein the camera images each of the first and second affordance identifiers at the same time and uses that information to identify each of the first and second affordances [(e.g. see Yoganandan paragraphs 0063, 0067, 0093 and Figs. 3A-D and 4B) ”FIGS. 3A-D show an example of continuous lock of a virtual overlay 410 on the electronic device 120 for a display device 140, according to an embodiment. In one example, as the user moves around holding the electronic device 120, keeping the display device 140 within the field of view of the electronic device 120, the virtual overlay is continually matched and locked to the respective display … The AR mode loads the AR library and provides a camera view that is used to look at and interact with display devices 140. In one embodiment, when the AR mode is turned on the electronic device 120, the display devices 140 switch to a content that is conducive to one of the image based tracking technologies described above. In one embodiment, the displayed content may take the form of a pre-determined frame marker, watermarking etc., that is unique to that display device 140. In another embodiment, the currently displayed image itself might serve as an image target and for tracking. The electronic device 120 is constantly communicated with the state of all display devices 140 and is correspondingly loaded with the right pattern recognition dataset … the display devices 140 may include a spectrum of light emitting diodes (LEDs) (visual or infrared) or other physical markers on the bezel/border of the display device 140 frames, allowing distinct identification of each display device 140 using computer vision technology”].
The motivation to combine is the same as that used for claim 1.
As for dependent claim 21, Savage, Holmes and Yoganandan teach the system as described in claim 1, but Savage does not specifically teach the following limitation. However, Holmes teaches:
wherein the affordance display includes a display edge that is configured to provide a visual indicator of a status of the affordance [(e.g. see Holmes paragraphs 0203, 0204 and Fig. 6A) ”a status indicator 614 indicating a current availability or reservation status of meeting space 1, building A … the status indicator 614 indicates “RESERVED””]. Examiner notes that the status indicator (numeral 614) can be displayed near the edge of the display. All of Savage, Holmes, and Yoganandan show the display of specific information to the user and Holmes teaches the display of a current reservation status. Given that there are a finite number of display positions, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, namely a software developer, to try any available display position for the status indicator that would achieve a desired presentation, with reasonable success (i.e. alerting the user of the affordance status). A person of ordinary skill has good reason to pursue the known options within his or her technical grasp. If this leads to the anticipated success, it is likely the product not of invention but of ordinary skill and common sense. See MPEP 2143(I)(E) – KSR: “Obvious to Try”
Claims 3 and 5-11 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Savage et al. (US 2016/0021233 A1) in view of Holmes et al. (US 2017/0357915 A1) and further in view of Yoganandan et al. (US 2017/0262247 A1), as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Anguiano (US 2018/0192149 A1).
As for dependent claim 3, Savage, Holmes, Yoganandan and Anguiano teach the system as described in claim 2, but Savage, Holmes and Yoganandan do not specifically teach wherein the step of presenting the schedule representation includes presenting the schedule representation as an overlay over the video image of the affordance identifier. However, in the same field of invention or solving similar problems, Anguiano teaches:
wherein the step of presenting the schedule representation includes presenting the schedule representation as an overlay over the video image of the affordance identifier [(e.g. see Anguiano paragraph 0085) ”Certain embodiments may utilize the captured image data and gathered content to generate and present augmented reality on the computing device 116 to display the actor and/or object with an augmented reality overlay 316 of content on images currently captured with the camera of the computing device. The user-selectable options 318 presented with the overlay 316 may allow for taking actions pertinent to the recognized actors and/or objects … the computing device 116 may communicate with the television receiver 110 to pull information (e.g., electronic programming guide information and/or other schedule information) and generate and present an augmented reality overlay 316 based at least in part on the pulled information”].
Therefore, considering the teachings of Savage, Holmes, Yoganandan and Anguiano, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to add wherein the step of presenting the schedule representation includes presenting the schedule representation as an overlay over the video image of the affordance identifier, as taught by Anguiano, to the teachings of Savage, Holmes and Yoganandan because it allows the user to quickly and easily take actions pertinent to the recognized objects in the content (e.g. see Anguiano paragraphs 0002, 0085).
As for dependent claim 5, Savage, Holmes, Yoganandan and Anguiano teach the system as described in claim 3 and Savage further teaches:
wherein the schedule representation includes information indicating a current reservation state of the affordance [(e.g. see Savage paragraphs 0018, 0024) ”retrieves schedule information from a database or schedule server 130 and shares that schedule or calendar information 132 with an application on the mobile device 110. The information may include available time slots, blocked time slots or other information related to the access of that particular conference room … the user interface options of the first menu 252 may illustrate a calendar of a particular conference room. As may be observed, multiple calendar entries 254-258 are illustrated as being part of the day events on the calendar for one particular conference room. This provides an authorized user to access the master calendar stored on the scheduling server and add an event time for their event. Some users may have administrative privileges so that the user can change others scheduled events based on seniority or due to scheduling conflicts. However, the default user can only add to available time slots and cannot otherwise make modifications to existing time slots”].
As for dependent claim 6, Savage, Holmes, Yoganandan and Anguiano teach the system as described in claim 3 and Savage further teaches:
wherein the schedule representation includes information indicating a current state of use of the affordance [(e.g. see Savage paragraphs 0018, 0024) ”retrieves schedule information from a database or schedule server 130 and shares that schedule or calendar information 132 with an application on the mobile device 110. The information may include available time slots, blocked time slots or other information related to the access of that particular conference room … the user interface options of the first menu 252 may illustrate a calendar of a particular conference room. As may be observed, multiple calendar entries 254-258 are illustrated as being part of the day events on the calendar for one particular conference room. This provides an authorized user to access the master calendar stored on the scheduling server and add an event time for their event. Some users may have administrative privileges so that the user can change others scheduled events based on seniority or due to scheduling conflicts. However, the default user can only add to available time slots and cannot otherwise make modifications to existing time slots”].
As for dependent claim 7, Savage, Holmes, Yoganandan and Anguiano teach the system as described in claim 3, but Savage does not specifically teach the following limitation. However, Holmes teaches:
wherein the affordance identifier identifies a facility space and wherein the processor is further programmed to, subsequent to identifying the facility space, access affordance information related to other affordances located within the facility space, generate a space affordance representation and present the space affordance representation via the device display [(e.g. see Holmes paragraph 0232, 0233 and Fig. 6T) ”In FIG. 6T, the find-a-space interface 6105 displays a plan view of the first floor of building A and an indicator 6106 of the location of the device 502-A-1. According to some embodiments, the user of the device 502-A-1 is able to navigate the plan view by pinching to zoom in or out and dragging to pan east, west, north or south … As shown in FIG. 6T, the find-a-space interface 6105 also includes a first plurality of unavailable meeting space 6112a and 6112b (collectively referred to as “unavailable meeting spaces 6112”) with a first appearance (e.g., a first shading pattern). For example, meeting space 1, building A corresponds to unavailable meeting space 6112a. As shown in FIG. 6T, the find-a-space interface 6105 also includes a second plurality of available meeting space 6114a, 6114b, and 6114c (collectively referred to as “available meeting spaces 6114”) with a second appearance (e.g., a second shading pattern)”].
The motivation to combine is the same as that used for claim 1.
As for dependent claim 8, Savage, Holmes, Yoganandan and Anguiano teach the system as described in claim 7, but Savage does not specifically teach the following limitation. However, Holmes teaches:
wherein the space affordance representation includes an image of the facility space [(e.g. see Holmes paragraph 0232 and Fig. 6T) ”In FIG. 6T, the find-a-space interface 6105 displays a plan view of the first floor of building A and an indicator 6106 of the location of the device 502-A-1. According to some embodiments, the user of the device 502-A-1 is able to navigate the plan view by pinching to zoom in or out and dragging to pan east, west, north or south”].
The motivation to combine is the same as that used for claim 1.
As for dependent claim 9, Savage, Holmes, Yoganandan and Anguiano teach the system as described in claim 8, but Savage does not specifically teach the following limitation. However, Holmes teaches;
wherein the space affordance representation is presented simultaneously with the schedule representation [(e.g. see Holmes paragraph 0236 and Fig. 6V) ”FIG. 6U also illustrates detecting a contact 6118 at a location corresponding to the available meeting space 6114c. FIG. 6V illustrates displaying a path 6126 from the indicator 6106 to the door of the available meeting space 6114c overlaid on the plan view of the first floor of building A in response to selection of the available meeting space 6114c in FIG. 6U. FIG. 6V also illustrates displaying a menu 6120 associated with the available meeting space 6114c in response to selection of the available meeting space 6114c in FIG. 6U. As shown in FIG. 6V, the menu 6120 includes attributes of the available meeting space 6114c such the occupancy limit of the available meeting space 6114c (e.g., six people) and icons corresponding to the equipment included in the available meeting space 6114c (e.g., a display, videoconferencing equipment, and a projector). As shown in FIG. 6V, the menu 6120 also includes a takeover affordance 6122, which, when activated (e.g., with a contact), causes the available meeting space 6114c to be taken over until 11:00 by the user of the device 502-A-1”].
The motivation to combine is the same as that used for claim 1.
As for dependent claim 10, Savage, Holmes, Yoganandan and Anguiano teach the system as described in claim 8 and Savage further teaches:
wherein the processor determines if the facility space is currently unscheduled and wherein the schedule representation includes a selectable button for reserving the space for a current period [(e.g. see Savage paragraphs 0019, 0024) ” then the calendar application may access the preferences/history and identify an earliest time available for that conference room associated with the QR code … FIG. 2B illustrates an example user interface of the scheduling application on the user device (e.g., smartphone), according to example embodiments. Referring to FIG. 2B, the user interfaces 250 include a set of menu options related to scheduling a conference room … the default user can only add to available time slots”].
As for dependent claim 11, Savage, Holmes, Yoganandan and Anguiano teach the system as described in claim 7 and Savage further teaches:
wherein the space affordance representation includes a list of affordances associated with the facility space [(e.g. see Savage paragraph 0021) ” the system 150 includes a schedule database 152, which may store schedule information and provide information to the logic modules or scripts used to identify the current schedule 154 … the available rooms 156”].
Claim 4 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Savage et al. (US 2016/0021233 A1) in view of Holmes et al. (US 2017/0357915 A1) and further in view of Yoganandan et al. (US 2017/0262247 A1) and further in view of Anguiano (US 2018/0192149 A1), as applied to claim 3 above, and further in view of Matsubara (US 2015/0221115 A1).
As for dependent claim 4, Savage, Holmes, Yoganandan and Anguiano teach the system as described in claim 3, but do not specifically teach wherein the processor is further programmed to continue presenting the schedule representation via the device display as the camera is moved away from being aimed at the affordance identifier. However, in the same field of invention or solving similar problems, Matsubara teaches:
wherein the processor is further programmed to continue presenting the schedule representation via the device display as the camera is moved away from being aimed at the affordance identifier [(e.g. see Matsubara paragraphs 0028, 0029) ”When the AR object 81 is displayed, the application 12b displays a Pause button 61 at a lower right portion of the screen. The Pause button 61 is for instructing a pause or a stop of movement of the AR object 81 being displayed, that is, the Pause button 61 is for instructing stationarily keeping of the display. When a touch operation (what is called a tapping operation) is performed on the Pause button 61, the application 12b freezes the display of the AR object 81. In the case where the display of the AR object 81 is paused, even when detection of a marker corresponding to the AR object 81 has ceased, that is, even when the AD object 81 becomes out of the display region of the LCD 16, the application 12b keeps displaying the AR object 81 without causing a stationary AR object 81 to disappear … thereafter the MFP 100 falls outside an image taking area of the image taking device 21, and consequently as illustrated in FIG. 2B an image taken by the image taking device 21 is a captured image 52 not including the marker corresponding to the AR object 81 being in a stationary displaying state (may be referred to as "stationary AR object 81"), for example. Thus, the user can view the AR object 81 without continuing taking the marker”].
Therefore, considering the teachings of Savage, Holmes, Yoganandan, Anguiano and Matsubara, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to add wherein the processor is further programmed to continue presenting the schedule representation via the device display as the camera is moved away from being aimed at the affordance identifier, as taught by Matsubara, to the teachings of Savage, Holmes, Yoganandan and Anguiano because it allows the user to easily view necessary information (e.g. see Matsubara paragraph 0070).
Claims 18 and 19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Savage et al. (US 2016/0021233 A1) in view of Holmes et al. (US 2017/0357915 A1) and further in view of Yoganandan et al. (US 2017/0262247 A1), as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Wingfield et al. (US 2016/0046300 A1).
As for dependent claim 18, Savage, Holmes, Yoganandan and Wingfield teach the system as described in claim 17, but Savage, Holmes and Yoganandan do not specifically teach wherein the processor is further programmed to perform the steps of, upon identifying each of the first and second affordances, accessing scheduling information for the first and second affordances and determine if a user of the scanning device is scheduled to use either one of the first and second affordances, the step of presenting the scheduled representation including indicating one of the first and second affordances on the device display. However, in the same field of invention or solving similar problems, Wingfield teaches:
wherein the processor is further programmed to perform the steps of, upon identifying each of the first and second affordances, accessing scheduling information for the first and second affordances and determine if a user of the scanning device is scheduled to use either one of the first and second affordances, the step of presenting the scheduled representation including indicating one of the first and second affordances on the device display [(e.g. see Wingfield paragraphs 0017, 0018, 0019, 0041, 0044 and Fig. 5) ”The central server 130 indicates that the shared vehicle 101 is reserved for the current user and removes it from the rental selection of other users … an augmented reality location indicator feature is selected, a camera of the personal device may be automatically activated. The user may then use the camera to scan a parking area and/or vicinity. The application running on the personal device may be communicatively coupled to the central server of the shared vehicle rental system and may therefore have details about the vehicle being rented by the user. Therefore, when the user scans the parking space and a tagged rental vehicle appears within the range or display of the smartphone, the application may indicate the location of the tagged vehicle to the driver via a highlighted augmented reality based display … while scanning an area, the display may indicate that the user's requested sedan is the white Ford Fusion located adjacent to a blue SUV … the details may include the make, model, color, and identifying feature (e.g. a license plate) of the shared vehicle 101 … the vehicle prominently marked (e.g., highlighted in a different color)”].
Therefore, considering the teachings of Savage, Holmes, Yoganandan and Wingfield, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to add wherein the processor is further programmed to perform the steps of, upon identifying each of the first and second affordances, accessing scheduling information for the first and second affordances and determine if a user of the scanning device is scheduled to use either one of the first and second affordances, the step of presenting the scheduled representation including indicating one of the first and second affordances on the device display, as taught by Wingfield, to the teachings of Savage, Holmes and Yoganandan because it allows a user to more easily locate a rental (e.g. see Wingfield paragraph 0015).
As for independent claim 19, Savage teaches a system comprising:
a plurality of affordances within a facility [(e.g. see Savage paragraph 0018) ”conference rooms”].
each affordance identifier being unique to an associated one of the affordances [(e.g. see Savage paragraphs 0018, 0019) ”QR code 120 which is likely mounted against the wall or is displayed on an electronic display monitor, which can be dynamically updated to accommodate changes to the code or the monitor itself … The QR code may identify the conference room among other conference rooms … The QR code being accessed could trigger a digital data extraction that matches the QR identifier to a particular location stored in a database (i.e., conference room ‘A’)”].
a scanning device including a processor, a device display and a camera having a field of view (FOV), the camera for obtaining images within the facility, the processor linked to the camera and the display and programmed to perform the steps of: [(e.g. see Savage paragraphs 0017, 0018) ”a code scanning and identification effort, such as a camera function, scanning detection via a light emitted sensor or via other image detection operations or functions hosted by the mobile device 110 … The user may engage the QR code 120 via a camera scan of the code 120 via the mobile device 110”].
receiving images generated by the camera; examining the images to identify affordance identifiers, identifying an affordance associated with the identified affordance identifier [(e.g. see Savage paragraphs 0018, 0019, 0025) ”Once the QR code data is received by the mobile device 110, the mobile device may automatically invoke an application for a calendar or other scheduling application … The QR code may identify the conference room among other conference rooms … the QR code may also trigger a communication session establishment message from the mobile device to a server which retrieves schedule information from a database or schedule server 130 and shares that schedule or calendar information 132 with an application on the mobile device 110. The information may include available time slots, blocked time slots or other information related to the access of that particular conference room … The QR code being accessed could trigger a digital data extraction that matches the QR identifier to a particular location stored in a database (i.e., conference room ‘A’)… the application may invoke a calendar schedule for that particular conference room … the mobile device 310 may scan a quick response (QR) code and may transmit a quick code identifier in a request message to the scheduling application 330. The request may include an application access request 352. The application may then access a database application corresponding to the quick code and identify an event status based on the quick code including a request for schedule information 354. The request may be transmitted 356 to storage 340 to identify the calendar information”].
Savage does not specifically teach a separate affordance identifier located adjacent each of the plurality of affordances within the facility. However, in the same field of invention or solving similar problems, Holmes teaches:
a separate affordance identifier located adjacent each of the plurality of affordances within the facility [(e.g. see Holmes paragraphs 0008, 0201, 0194 and Figs. 5A-B and 6A) ”the first devices 502-A-1, . . . , 502-A-X and 502-N-1, 502-N-Y are collectively referred to as first devices 502. For ease of reference … the first devices 502 are located outside of the door to the corresponding meeting spaces … a meeting space status interface that includes a status indicator indicating a current reservation status for the meeting space … the meeting status interface 605 includes a meeting space affordance 606”].
Therefore, considering the teachings of Savage and Holmes, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to add a separate affordance identifier located adjacent each of the plurality of affordances within the facility, as taught by Holmes, to the teachings of Savage because it provides faster and more efficient methods and interfaces for managing and interacting with meeting spaces which allows meeting spaces to be better utilized (e.g. see Holmes paragraphs 0006, 0308).
Savage and Holmes do not specifically teach comprising a support panel at least partially surrounding an affordance display of each of the plurality of affordances, presenting the images generated by the camera via the device display or [identify...] based on a pattern of the panel. However, in the same field of invention or solving similar problems, Yoganandan teaches:
and comprising a support panel at least partially surrounding an affordance display of each of the plurality of affordances [(e.g. see Yoganandan paragraphs 0067, 0074) ”bezel/border of the display device 140 frames … bezel of a display device 140”].
presenting the images generated by the camera via the device display [(e.g. see Yoganandan paragraphs 0063, 0067, 0093 and Figs. 3A-D and 4B) ”FIGS. 3A-D show an example of continuous lock of a virtual overlay 410 on the electronic device 120 for a display device 140, according to an embodiment. In one example, as the user moves around holding the electronic device 120, keeping the display device 140 within the field of view of the electronic device 120, the virtual overlay is continually matched and locked to the respective display … The AR mode loads the AR library and provides a camera view that is used to look at and interact with display devices 140. In one embodiment, when the AR mode is turned on the electronic device 120, the display devices 140 switch to a content that is conducive to one of the image based tracking technologies described above. In one embodiment, the displayed content may take the form of a pre-determined frame marker, watermarking etc., that is unique to that display device 140. In another embodiment, the currently displayed image itself might serve as an image target and for tracking. The electronic device 120 is constantly communicated with the state of all display devices 140 and is correspondingly loaded with the right pattern recognition dataset … the display devices 140 may include a spectrum of light emitting diodes (LEDs) (visual or infrared) or other physical markers on the bezel/border of the display device 140 frames, allowing distinct identification of each display device 140 using computer vision technology”].
[identify...] based on a pattern of the panel [(e.g. see Yoganandan paragraph 0067) ”the display devices 140 may include a spectrum of light emitting diodes (LEDs) (visual or infrared) or other physical markers on the bezel/border of the display device 140 frames, allowing distinct identification of each display device 140 using computer vision technology”].
Therefore, considering the teachings of Savage, Holmes and Yoganandan, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to add comprising a support panel at least partially surrounding an affordance display of each of the plurality of affordances, presenting the images generated by the camera via the device display and [identify...] based on a pattern of the panel, as taught by Yoganandan, to the teachings of Savage and Holmes because it allows for very intuitive visual and spatially coherent interactions with display devices and provides a satisfying user experience (e.g. see Yoganandan paragraph 0064).
Savage, Holmes and Yoganandan do not specifically teach determining that a user of the scanning device is scheduled to use the identified affordance or while the identified affordances is located within the camera FOV, visually distinguishing the identified affordance from other affordances that appear within the field of view. However, in the same field of invention or solving similar problems, Wingfield teaches:
determining that a user of the scanning device is scheduled to use the identified affordance [(e.g. see Wingfield paragraphs 0017, 0041 and Fig. 5) ”an augmented reality location indicator feature is selected, a camera of the personal device may be automatically activated. The user may then use the camera to scan a parking area and/or vicinity. The application running on the personal device may be communicatively coupled to the central server of the shared vehicle rental system and may therefore have details about the vehicle being rented by the user. Therefore, when the user scans the parking space and a tagged rental vehicle appears within the range or display of the smartphone, the application may indicate the location of the tagged vehicle to the driver via a highlighted augmented reality based display … The central server 130 indicates that the shared vehicle 101 is reserved for the current user”].
and while the identified affordances is located within the camera FOV, visually distinguishing the identified affordance from other affordances that appear within the field of view [(e.g. see Wingfield paragraphs 0017, 0018, 0019, 0044 and Fig. 5) ”an augmented reality location indicator feature is selected, a camera of the personal device may be automatically activated. The user may then use the camera to scan a parking area and/or vicinity. The application running on the personal device may be communicatively coupled to the central server of the shared vehicle rental system and may therefore have details about the vehicle being rented by the user. Therefore, when the user scans the parking space and a tagged rental vehicle appears within the range or display of the smartphone, the application may indicate the location of the tagged vehicle to the driver via a highlighted augmented reality based display … while scanning an area, the display may indicate that the user's requested sedan is the white Ford Fusion located adjacent to a blue SUV … the details may include the make, model, color, and identifying feature (e.g. a license plate) of the shared vehicle 101 … the vehicle prominently marked (e.g., highlighted in a different color)”].
Therefore, considering the teachings of Savage, Holmes, Yoganandan and Wingfield, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to add determining that a user of the scanning device is scheduled to use the identified affordance and while the identified affordances is located within the camera FOV, visually distinguishing the identified affordance from other affordances that appear within the field of view, as taught by Wingfield, to the teachings of Savage, Holmes and Yoganandan because it allows a user to more easily locate a rental (e.g. see Wingfield paragraph 0015).
Claim 20 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Savage et al. (US 2016/0021233 A1) in view of Yoganandan et al. (US 2017/0262247 A1) and further in view of Anguiano (US 2018/0192149 A1) and further in view of Matsubara (US 2015/0221115 A1).
As for independent claim 20, Savage teaches a system comprising:
an affordance identifier located adjacent an affordance, the affordance identifier being unique to the affordance [(e.g. see Savage paragraph 0018) ”the user 102 may initiate a mobile device 110 access operation by accessing the QR code 120 which is likely mounted against the wall or is displayed on an electronic display monitor, which can be dynamically updated to accommodate changes to the code or the monitor itself … a user may be attempting to setup a time to access a conference room that is identified by the QR code. The QR code may identify the conference room among other conference rooms”].
a scanning device including a processor, a device display and a camera having a field of view (FOV), the processor linked to the camera and the display and programmed to perform the steps of: [(e.g. see Savage paragraphs 0017, 0018) ”a code scanning and identification effort, such as a camera function, scanning detection via a light emitted sensor or via other image detection operations or functions hosted by the mobile device 110 … The user may engage the QR code 120 via a camera scan of the code 120 via the mobile device 110”].
identifying the affordance identifier within the images generated by the camera; using identifying information obtained from the affordance identifier to identify the affordance; accessing affordance scheduling information associated with the identified affordance [(e.g. see Savage paragraphs 0018, 0019, 0025) ”Once the QR code data is received by the mobile device 110, the mobile device may automatically invoke an application for a calendar or other scheduling application … The QR code may identify the conference room among other conference rooms … the QR code may also trigger a communication session establishment message from the mobile device to a server which retrieves schedule information from a database or schedule server 130 and shares that schedule or calendar information 132 with an application on the mobile device 110. The information may include available time slots, blocked time slots or other information related to the access of that particular conference room … The QR code being accessed could trigger a digital data extraction that matches the QR identifier to a particular location stored in a database (i.e., conference room ‘A’)… the application may invoke a calendar schedule for that particular conference room … the mobile device 310 may scan a quick response (QR) code and may transmit a quick code identifier in a request message to the scheduling application 330. The request may include an application access request 352. The application may then access a database application corresponding to the quick code and identify an event status based on the quick code including a request for schedule information 354. The request may be transmitted 356 to storage 340 to identify the calendar information”].
generating a schedule representation of the affordance scheduling information [(e.g. see Savage paragraphs 0018, 0024) ”the QR code may also trigger a communication session establishment message from the mobile device to a server which retrieves schedule information from a database or schedule server 130 and shares that schedule or calendar information 132 with an application on the mobile device 110. The information may include available time slots, blocked time slots or other information related to the access of that particular conference room … the user interface options of the first menu 252 may illustrate a calendar of a particular conference room. As may be observed, multiple calendar entries 254-258 are illustrated as being part of the day events on the calendar for one particular conference room. This provides an authorized user to access the master calendar stored on the scheduling server and add an event time for their event. Some users may have administrative privileges so that the user can change others scheduled events based on seniority or due to scheduling conflicts. However, the default user can only add to available time slots and cannot otherwise make modifications to existing time slots”].
Savage does not specifically teach comprising a support panel at least partially surrounding an affordance display of the affordance, presenting a dynamic real time image captured by the camera via the device display or [identifying…] based on a pattern of the panel. However, in the same field of invention, Yoganandan teaches:
and comprising a support panel at least partially surrounding an affordance display of the affordance [(e.g. see Yoganandan paragraphs 0067, 0074) ”bezel/border of the display device 140 frames … bezel of a display device 140”].
presenting a dynamic real time image captured by the camera via the device display [(e.g. see Yoganandan paragraphs 0063, 0093 and Figs. 3A-D) ”FIGS. 3A-D show an example of continuous lock of a virtual overlay 410 on the electronic device 120 for a display device 140, according to an embodiment. In one example, as the user moves around holding the electronic device 120, keeping the display device 140 within the field of view of the electronic device 120, the virtual overlay is continually matched and locked to the respective display … The AR mode loads the AR library and provides a camera view that is used to look at and interact with display devices 140. In one embodiment, when the AR mode is turned on the electronic device 120, the display devices 140 switch to a content that is conducive to one of the image based tracking technologies described above. In one embodiment, the displayed content may take the form of a pre-determined frame marker, watermarking etc., that is unique to that display device 140. In another embodiment, the currently displayed image itself might serve as an image target and for tracking. The electronic device 120 is constantly communicated with the state of all display devices 140 and is correspondingly loaded with the right pattern recognition dataset”].
[identifying…] based on a pattern of the panel [(e.g. see Yoganandan paragraph 0067) ”the display devices 140 may include a spectrum of light emitting diodes (LEDs) (visual or infrared) or other physical markers on the bezel/border of the display device 140 frames, allowing distinct identification of each display device 140 using computer vision technology”].
Therefore, considering the teachings of Savage and Yoganandan, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to add comprising a support panel at least partially surrounding an affordance display of the affordance, presenting a dynamic real time image captured by the camera via the device display and [identifying…] based on a pattern of the panel, as taught by Yoganandan, to the teachings of Savage because it allows for very intuitive visual and spatially coherent interactions with display devices and provides a satisfying user experience (e.g. see Yoganandan paragraph 0064).
Savage and Yoganandan do not specifically teach while the affordance identifier remains within the camera FOV, presenting the schedule representation as an augmented reality overlay over the image including the affordance identifier. However, in the same field of invention or solving similar problems, Anguiano teaches:
while the affordance identifier remains within the camera FOV, presenting the schedule representation as an augmented reality overlay over the image including the affordance identifier [(e.g. see Anguiano paragraph 0085) ”Certain embodiments may utilize the captured image data and gathered content to generate and present augmented reality on the computing device 116 to display the actor and/or object with an augmented reality overlay 316 of content on images currently captured with the camera of the computing device. The user-selectable options 318 presented with the overlay 316 may allow for taking actions pertinent to the recognized actors and/or objects … the computing device 116 may communicate with the television receiver 110 to pull information (e.g., electronic programming guide information and/or other schedule information) and generate and present an augmented reality overlay 316 based at least in part on the pulled information”].
Therefore, considering the teachings of Savage, Yoganandan and Anguiano, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to add while the affordance identifier remains within the camera FOV, presenting the schedule representation as an augmented reality overlay over the image including the affordance identifier, as taught by Anguiano, to the teachings of Savage and Yoganandan because it allows the user to quickly and easily take actions pertinent to the recognized objects in the content (e.g. see Anguiano paragraphs 0002, 0085).
Savage, Yoganandan and Anguiano do not specifically teach providing a hold button via the scanning device and upon activation of the hold button, persistently presenting the schedule representation via the device display irrespective of whether or not the affordance identifier remains within the camera FOV. However, in the same field of invention or solving similar problems, Matsubara teaches:
providing a hold button via the scanning device and upon activation of the hold button, persistently presenting the schedule representation via the device display irrespective of whether or not the affordance identifier remains within the camera FOV [(e.g. see Matsubara paragraphs 0028, 0029) ”When the AR object 81 is displayed, the application 12b displays a Pause button 61 at a lower right portion of the screen. The Pause button 61 is for instructing a pause or a stop of movement of the AR object 81 being displayed, that is, the Pause button 61 is for instructing stationarily keeping of the display. When a touch operation (what is called a tapping operation) is performed on the Pause button 61, the application 12b freezes the display of the AR object 81. In the case where the display of the AR object 81 is paused, even when detection of a marker corresponding to the AR object 81 has ceased, that is, even when the AD object 81 becomes out of the display region of the LCD 16, the application 12b keeps displaying the AR object 81 without causing a stationary AR object 81 to disappear … thereafter the MFP 100 falls outside an image taking area of the image taking device 21, and consequently as illustrated in FIG. 2B an image taken by the image taking device 21 is a captured image 52 not including the marker corresponding to the AR object 81 being in a stationary displaying state (may be referred to as "stationary AR object 81"), for example. Thus, the user can view the AR object 81 without continuing taking the marker”].
Therefore, considering the teachings of Savage, Yoganandan, Anguiano and Matsubara, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to add providing a hold button via the scanning device and upon activation of the hold button, persistently presenting the schedule representation via the device display irrespective of whether or not the affordance identifier remains within the camera FOV, as taught by Matsubara, to the teachings of Savage, Yoganandan and Anguiano because it allows the user to easily view necessary information (e.g. see Matsubara paragraph 0070).
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments, filed 04 August 2026, have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
Applicant argues that [“Savage in view of Holmes fails to render [amended] claim 1 obvious … Savage in view of Holmes and Wingfield fails to teach or suggests all elements of [amended] claim 19 … Savage in view of Anguiano and Matsubara fails to teach or suggests all elements of [amended] claim 20” (Pages 9-11).].
The argument described above, in paragraph number 16, with respect to the newly added limitations to the independent claims has been considered, but is moot in view of the new grounds of rejection.
Conclusion
Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a). 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 CHRISTOPHER J FIBBI whose telephone number is (571)-270-3358. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Thursday (8am-6pm).
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, William Bashore can be reached at (571)-272-4088. 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.
/CHRISTOPHER J FIBBI/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2174
