DETAILED ACTION
This action is in response to the initial filing filed on December 2, 2024, claim 1-20 have been examined this application.
Information Disclosure Statement
The Information Disclosure Statement (IDS) filed on 12/2/2024 and 7/17/2026 have been acknowledged.
Priority
Receipt is acknowledged of certified copies of papers required by 37 CFR 1.55.
Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status
The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
The following is a quotation of the appropriate paragraphs of 35 U.S.C. 102 that form the basis for the rejections under this section made in this Office action:
A person shall be entitled to a patent unless –
(a)(1) the claimed invention was patented, described in a printed publication, or in public use, on sale, or otherwise available to the public before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claim(s) 1, 15, 17, and 19-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102 (a)(1) as being anticipated by Ponsford et al (US 2014/0210658 A1).
Regarding Claim 1, Ponsford discloses a ship information sharing device, comprising processing circuitry configured to [0049 for domain extension device on each vessel may function as a network node in one or more self-organizing network (processing means on a ship)]:
serially acquire navigational data according to navigation of a ship, the navigational data detected by a detection apparatus mounted on the ship [0028 for radar for generating own-ship radar track data (serial navigation) indicative of detectable targets located within the detection rage of the radar and 0048];
acquire a channel capacity of a channel to a ship information gathering device [0057 for determine each channel's available capacity and determine the number and frequency of radar track data that are being transmitted with claim 15];
change, according to the channel capacity, a frequency to include the navigational data into a transmission data set serially transmitted to the ship information gathering device [0057 for adaptively determine the number and the frequency of the radar track data to be transmitted and/or received based on the available capacity];
and transmit the transmission data set to the ship information gathering device [0058 for participating vessels in the second type of network is further configured transmit the generated common operating picture].
Regarding Claim 15, Ponsford discloses the processing circuitry: acquires a plurality of types of navigational data detected by a plurality of types of detection apparatuses [0040 for using both radar and AIS];
and with respect to a frequency to include a given type of navigational data among the plurality of types of navigational data, reduces a frequency to include other types of navigational data into the transmission data set, as the channel capacity decreases [0054 for only priority radar track information may be transmitted using the AIS modem].
Regarding Claim 17, Ponsford disclose the processing circuitry: acquires the-ship data according to the ship itself [0040 for radar for own ship],
and another-ship data according to another ship other than the ship, as the navigational data [0044 for tracking other ships];
and reduces a frequency to include the the-ship data into the transmission data set with respect to a frequency to include the another-ship data, as the channel capacity decreases [0054-0057 for adaptively determine the number and the frequency of the radar track data to be transmitted and/or received based on the available capacity, the rate or frequency of transmission of radar track data associated with a target].
Regarding Claim 19, Ponsford discloses a ship information sharing method, comprising steps of [0049 for domain extension device on each vessel may function as a network node in one or more self-organizing network (processing means on a ship)]:
serially acquiring navigational data according to navigation of a ship, the navigational data detected by a detection apparatus mounted on the ship [0028 for radar for generating own-ship radar track data (serial navigation) indicative of detectable targets located within the detection rage of the radar and 0048];
acquiring a channel capacity of a channel to a ship information gathering device [0057 for determine each channel's available capacity and determine the number and frequency of radar track data that are being transmitted with claim 15];
changing, according to the channel capacity, a frequency to include the navigational data into a transmission data set serially transmitted to the ship information gathering device [0057 for adaptively determine the number and the frequency of the radar track data to be transmitted and/or received based on the available capacity];
and transmitting the transmission data set to the ship information gathering device [0058 for participating vessels in the second type of network is further configured transmit the generated common operating picture].
Regarding Claim 20, Ponsford discloses a ship information sharing system, comprising [0049 for domain extension device on each vessel may function as a network node in one or more self-organizing network (processing means on a ship)]:
a ship information gathering device; a detection apparatus mounted on a ship and configured to serially generate navigational data according to navigation of the ship [0028 for radar for generating own-ship radar track data (serial navigation) indicative of detectable targets located within the detection rage of the radar and 0048];
a ship information sharing device configured to acquire a channel capacity of a channel to the ship information gathering device [0057 for determine each channel's available capacity and determine the number and frequency of radar track data that are being transmitted with claim 15],
and change, according to the channel capacity, a frequency to include the navigational data into a transmission data set serially transmitted to the ship information gathering device [0057 for adaptively determine the number and the frequency of the radar track data to be transmitted and/or received based on the available capacity];
and a communication apparatus configured to transmit the transmission data set to the ship information gathering device [0058 for participating vessels in the second type of network is further configured transmit the generated common operating picture].
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 2 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Ponsford et al (US 2014/0210658 A1) as applied to Claim 1 above, in view of Xu (CN 102062855 A).
Regarding Claim 2, Ponsford teaches the processing circuitry acquires another-ship data indicative of a position of another ship existing around the ship, as the navigational data [0040 for the domain extension device also receives other-ship radar track data and associated other-ship location values from one or more other participating vessels from the AIS modem]
wherein another-ship data of another ship of which a distance from the ship is a threshold or above is not included into the transmission data set [0046 for priority for transmittal will be given to radar track data that is determined to be a potential threat].
Ponsford fails to explicitly teach and wherein the processing circuitry changes the threshold according to the channel capacity.
Xu has radar echo compression/decompression algorithm based on run-length difference coding (abstract) and teaches and wherein the processing circuitry changes the threshold according to the channel capacity [page 5, first paragraph for dynamically adjusting the lossy compression method rate to adapt to the requirement of little Channel Transmission bandwidth].
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the applicant’s invention for modifying the data transfer techniques, as disclosed by Ponsford, further including the channel calculations as taught by Xu for the purpose to adapt to channel bandwidth requirements (Xu, page 5, first paragraph).
Claims 3-4 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Ponsford et al (US 2014/0210658 A1) as applied to Claim 1 above, in view of Xu (CN 102062855 A) and Watanabe (US 2021/0358309 A1).
Regarding Claim 3 and 4, Ponsford teaches the processing circuitry acquires another-ship data indicative of a position of another ship existing around the ship, as the navigational data [0040 for the domain extension device also receives other-ship radar track data and associated other-ship location values from one or more other participating vessels from the AIS modem].
Ponsford fails to explicitly teach and wherein the processing circuitry changes the threshold according to the channel capacity.
Xu has radar echo compression/decompression algorithm based on run-length difference coding (abstract) and teaches and wherein the processing circuitry changes the threshold according to the channel capacity [page 5, first paragraph for dynamically adjusting the lossy compression method rate to adapt to the requirement of little Channel Transmission bandwidth].
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the applicant’s invention for modifying the data transfer techniques, as disclosed by Ponsford, further including the channel calculations as taught by Xu for the purpose to adapt to channel bandwidth requirements (Xu, page 5, first paragraph).
Ponsford fails to explicitly teach wherein the processing circuitry is further configured to calculate a collision risk of the ship with the another ship, wherein another-ship data of another ship of which the collision risk is a threshold or below is not included into the transmission data set, and wherein the processing circuitry changes the threshold according to the channel capacity.
Watanabe has a collision risk calculation method for a computer to execute a process (abstract) and teaches wherein the processing circuitry is further configured to calculate a collision risk of the ship with the another ship [0101 for a base risk value between the vessel X and the vessel Y reaches a local maximum is represented by a circle],
wherein another-ship data of another ship of which the collision risk is a threshold or below is not included into the transmission data set [0096 for base risk value matches the base risk value corresponding to the date and time]
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the applicant’s invention for modifying the data transfer techniques, as disclosed by Ponsford, further including the collision calculations as taught by Watanabe for the purpose to calculate avoidance maneuvering (Watanabe, 0106).
Claim 5 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Ponsford et al (US 2014/0210658 A1) as applied to Claim 1 above, in view of ITU (ITU, 2001).
Regarding Claim 5, Ponsford teaches the processing circuitry: acquires the position and a ship speed of the ship as the navigational data [0032 for generates a location value indicative of a geographical location of the vessel].
Ponsford fails to explicitly teach and changes a frequency to include the position of the ship into the transmission data set according to the ship speed.
ITU has requirement for a universal shipborne automatic identification system (page 1, first paragraph) and teaches and changes a frequency to include the position of the ship into the transmission data set according to the ship speed [page 71, Section 4.3.1.1 for Rr should be affected by changes of speed].
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the applicant’s invention for modifying the data transfer techniques, as disclosed by Ponsford, further including the speed calculations as taught by ITU for the purpose to have a higher update rate when the ship changes course (ITU, page 71, Section 4.3.1.2).
Claim 6 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Ponsford et al (US 2014/0210658 A1) in view of Xu (CN 102062855 A) as applied to Claim 2 above, and in further view of ITU (ITU, 2001).
Regarding Claim 6, Ponsford teaches the processing circuitry: acquires the position and a ship speed of the ship as the navigational data [0032 for generates a location value indicative of a geographical location of the vessel].
Ponsford fails to explicitly teach and changes a frequency to include the position of the ship into the transmission data set according to the ship speed.
ITU has requirement for a universal shipborne automatic identification system (page 1, first paragraph) and teaches and changes a frequency to include the position of the ship into the transmission data set according to the ship speed [page 71, Section 4.3.1.1 for Rr should be affected by changes of speed].
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the applicant’s invention for modifying the data transfer techniques, as disclosed by Ponsford, further including the speed calculations as taught by ITU for the purpose to have a higher update rate when the ship changes course (ITU, page 71, Section 4.3.1.2).
Claim 7 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Ponsford et al (US 2014/0210658 A1) in view of Xu (CN 102062855 A) and Watanabe (US 2021/0358309 A1) as applied to Claim 4 above, and further in view of ITU (ITU, 2001).
Regarding Claim 7, Ponsford teaches the processing circuitry: acquires the position and a ship speed of the ship as the navigational data [0032 for generates a location value indicative of a geographical location of the vessel].
Ponsford fails to explicitly teach and changes a frequency to include the position of the ship into the transmission data set according to the ship speed.
ITU has requirement for a universal shipborne automatic identification system (page 1, first paragraph) and teaches and changes a frequency to include the position of the ship into the transmission data set according to the ship speed [page 71, Section 4.3.1.1 for Rr should be affected by changes of speed].
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the applicant’s invention for modifying the data transfer techniques, as disclosed by Ponsford, further including the speed calculations as taught by ITU for the purpose to have a higher update rate when the ship changes course (ITU, page 71, Section 4.3.1.2).
Claim 8 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Ponsford et al (US 2014/0210658 A1), as applied to claim 1 above, in view of Bhogal et al (US 2019/0110086 A1).
Regarding Claim 8, Ponsford teaches the processing circuitry: acquires another-ship data indicative of a position of another ship existing around the ship as the navigational data [0032 for generates a location value indicative of a geographical location of the vessel].
Ponsford fails to explicitly teach and with respect to a frequency to include another-ship data of another ship within an observing area into the transmission data set, reduces a frequency to include the another-ship data of another ship within a non-observing area other than the observing area, as the channel capacity decreases.
Bhogal has an indication is received, from a content viewing device used by a remote viewer (abstract) and teaches and with respect to a frequency to include another-ship data of another ship within an observing area into the transmission data set, reduces a frequency to include the another-ship data of another ship within a non-observing area other than the observing area, as the channel capacity decreases [0014 for a transmission rate of image changes of video content within the RNOI (non-observing area) is reduced with claim 1].
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the applicant’s invention for modifying the data transfer techniques, as disclosed by Ponsford, further including the rate calculations as taught by Bhogal for the purpose to the reduced transmission rate of the image changes of the video content within the RNOI (Bhogal, 0014).
Claim 9 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Ponsford et al (US 2014/0210658 A1) in view of Xu (CN 102062855 A) as applied to Claim 2 above, and further in view of Bhogal et al (US 2019/0110086 A1).
Regarding Claim 9, Ponsford teaches the processing circuitry: acquires another-ship data indicative of a position of another ship existing around the ship as the navigational data[0032 for generates a location value indicative of a geographical location of the vessel].
Ponsford fails to explicitly teach and with respect to a frequency to include another-ship data of another ship within an observing area into the transmission data set, reduces a frequency to include the another-ship data of another ship within a non-observing area other than the observing area, as the channel capacity decreases.
Bhogal has an indication is received, from a content viewing device used by a remote viewer (abstract) and teaches and with respect to a frequency to include another-ship data of another ship within an observing area into the transmission data set, reduces a frequency to include the another-ship data of another ship within a non-observing area other than the observing area, as the channel capacity decreases [0014 for a transmission rate of image changes of video content within the RNOI (non-observing area) is reduced with claim 1].
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the applicant’s invention for modifying the data transfer techniques, as disclosed by Ponsford, further including the rate calculations as taught by Bhogal for the purpose to the reduced transmission rate of the image changes of the video content within the RNOI (Bhogal, 0014).
Claims 10, 16, and 18 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Ponsford et al (US 2014/0210658 A1) in view of Xu (CN 102062855 A), Watanabe (US 2021/0358309 A1) and ITU (ITU, 2001) as applied to Claim 7 above, and further in view of Bhogal et al (US 2019/0110086 A1).
Regarding Claim 10, Ponsford teaches the processing circuitry: acquires another-ship data indicative of a position of another ship existing around the ship as the navigational data [0032 for generates a location value indicative of a geographical location of the vessel].
Ponsford fails to explicitly teach and with respect to a frequency to include another-ship data of another ship within an observing area into the transmission data set, reduces a frequency to include the another-ship data of another ship within a non-observing area other than the observing area, as the channel capacity decreases.
Bhogal has an indication is received, from a content viewing device used by a remote viewer (abstract) and teaches and with respect to a frequency to include another-ship data of another ship within an observing area into the transmission data set, reduces a frequency to include the another-ship data of another ship within a non-observing area other than the observing area, as the channel capacity decreases [0014 for a transmission rate of image changes of video content within the RNOI (non-observing area) is reduced with claim 1].
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the applicant’s invention for modifying the data transfer techniques, as disclosed by Ponsford, further including the rate calculations as taught by Bhogal for the purpose to the reduced transmission rate of the image changes of the video content within the RNOI (Bhogal, 0014).
Regarding Claim 16, Ponsford teaches the processing circuitry [0039 for tracking circuitry]:
acquires a plurality of types of navigational data detected by a plurality of types of detection apparatuses [0040 for using both radar and AIS]; and with respect to a frequency to include a given type of navigational data among the plurality of types of navigational data,
reduces a frequency to include other types of navigational data into the transmission data set, as the channel capacity decreases [0054 for only priority radar track information may be transmitted using the AIS modem].
Regarding Claim 18. The ship information sharing device of claim 16, wherein the processing circuitry: acquires the-ship data according to the ship itself [0040 for radar for own ship],
and another-ship data according to another ship other than the ship, as the navigational data [0044 for tracking other ships];
and reduces a frequency to include the the-ship data into the transmission data set with respect to a frequency to include the another-ship data, as the channel capacity decreases [0054-0057 for adaptively determine the number and the frequency of the radar track data to be transmitted and/or received based on the available capacity, the rate or frequency of transmission of radar track data associated with a target].
Claims 11-13 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Ponsford et al (US 2014/0210658 A1) in view of Bhogal et al (US 2019/0110086 A1), as applied to claim 8 above, and further in view of Allan (US 4777489 A).
Regarding Claim 11, Ponsford fails to explicitly teach the processing circuitry: acquires a heading of the ship; and uses an area between the heading and the starboard direction on the basis of the ship as the observing area.
Allan has target pixel signals representing radar echo signals are stored in an addressable memory (abstract) and teaches acquires a heading of the ship [col 6, lines 20-35 or relative to the heading of the ship carrying the radar system, the CPU generates the appropriate ad dresses to define the outline of this guard zone];
and uses an area between the heading and the starboard direction on the basis of the ship as the observing area [col 6, lines 35-45 for guard zone is detected, and then verification is made that this detected pixel signal is derived from an actual target, as opposed to a spurious pixel signal due to, for example, sea clutter, rain clutter].
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the applicant’s invention for modifying the data transfer techniques, as disclosed by Ponsford, further including the zone calculations as taught by Allan for the purpose to define the outline of this guard zone (Allan, col 6, lines 25-30).
Regarding Claim 12, Ponsford fails to explicitly teach the processing circuitry: acquires a heading of the ship; and uses an area ahead of the ship as the observing area.
Allan has target pixel signals representing radar echo signals are stored in an addressable memory (abstract) and teaches acquires a heading of the ship [col 6, lines 20-35 or relative to the heading of the ship carrying the radar system, the CPU generates the appropriate ad dresses to define the outline of this guard zone];
and uses an area ahead of the ship as the observing area [col 6, lines 35-45 for guard zone is detected, and then verification is made that this detected pixel signal is derived from an actual target, as opposed to a spurious pixel signal due to, for example, sea clutter, rain clutter].
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the applicant’s invention for modifying the data transfer techniques, as disclosed by Ponsford, further including the zone calculations as taught by Allan for the purpose to define the outline of this guard zone (Allan, col 6, lines 25-30).
Regarding Claim 13, Ponsford fails to explicitly teach the processing circuitry: acquires a heading of the ship; and uses a guard zone for detecting an entry of a target object set on the basis of the ship in the radar as the observing area.
Allan has target pixel signals representing radar echo signals are stored in an addressable memory (abstract) and teaches acquires a heading of the ship [col 6, lines 20-35 or relative to the heading of the ship carrying the radar system, the CPU generates the appropriate ad dresses to define the outline of this guard zone];
and uses a guard zone for detecting an entry of a target object set on the basis of the ship in the radar as the observing area [col 6, lines 25-35 for guard zone relative to own ship].
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the applicant’s invention for modifying the data transfer techniques, as disclosed by Ponsford, further including the zone calculations as taught by Allan for the purpose of defining the outline of this guard zone (Allan, col 6, lines 25-30).
Claim 14 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Ponsford et al (US 2014/0210658 A1) in view of Bhogal et al (US 2019/0110086 A1), as applied to claim 8 above, and further in view of Watanabe (US 2021/0358309 A1).
Regarding Claim 14, Ponsford teaches the processing circuitry: acquires a position of the ship [0032 for generates a location value indicative of a geographical location of the vessel, 0040].
Ponsford fails to explicitly teach calculates a collision risk of the ship with the another ship; and uses an area corresponding to another ship or an area of which the collision risk is a threshold or above as the observing area.
Watanabe has a collision risk calculation method for a computer to execute a process (abstract) and teaches calculates a collision risk of the ship with the another ship; and uses an area corresponding to another ship or an area of which the collision risk is a threshold or above as the observing area [0101 for a base risk value between the vessel X and the vessel Y reaches a local maximum is represented by a circle].
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the applicant’s invention for modifying the data transfer techniques, as disclosed by Ponsford, further including the collision calculations as taught by Watanabe for the purpose to calculate avoidance maneuvering (Watanabe, 0106).
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Junk (US 7817079 B1) has methods for enable the automatic collection of maritime vessel location information within a global or regional framework by using a minimum network of vessels outfitted with non-intrusive AIS data collection systems
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to SAMARINA MAKHDOOM whose telephone number is (703)756-1044. The examiner can normally be reached Monday – Thursdays from 8:30 to 5:30 pm eastern time.
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, Resha Desai can be reached on 571-270-7792 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.
/SAMARINA MAKHDOOM/
Examiner, Art Unit 3648
Prosecution Insights