DETAILED ACTION
Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status
Y The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
Status of Claims
This office action is made in response to Applicant’s remarks filed on 5/202/2026. Claims 1-5, 8-12, and 15-19 have been amended. Claims 1-20 are pending.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s amendments regarding Examiner's rejections under 35 USC 101 have been considered and are accepted in view of the issues raised in the previous action. These rejections are accordingly withdrawn.
Applicant’s arguments with respect to Examiner's rejections under 35 USC 103 have been considered but are not persuasive. Therefore, these rejections are maintained.
Regarding claim 1, Applicant asserts that the cited prior art does not teach, "a graphical symbol selected based on a direction of travel determined between a location of the client device and the destination of interest," (Remarks at pg. 12). Examiner, however, respectfully disagrees.
Namely, Trivedi discloses “determining a direction of travel based on a location of the client device and the destination of interest” (see e.g. at least ¶ 21, 54, Fig. 8, and related text, providing navigational directions to ending destinations from a current position of the device). Moreover, Trivedi discloses “the first media content comprising a graphical symbol selected based on the direction of travel” (id., illustrating an arrow pointing in the direction of travel required to traverse the navigation directions from the current position to the destination of interest).
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status.
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 1-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Trivedi (US 2017/0045364 A1) in view of Elliott (US 9,459,115 B1).
Regarding claim 1, Trivedi discloses a method (see e.g. at least Abstract, Fig. 4-5, 7, and related text) comprising:
accessing, from a client device, user profile data (e.g. at least user profiles, see e.g. at least Abstract, ¶ 18, 27, Fig. 1-4, and related text);
determining a destination of interest based on the user profile data (id., dynamically identifying approaching POIs to the user based on a user profile, including user-defined POI policies);
determining a direction of travel based on a location of the client device and the destination of interest (see e.g. at least ¶ 21, 54, Fig. 8, and related text, providing navigational directions to ending destinations from a current position of the device);
detecting the client device within a first threshold distance of the destination of interest, the first threshold distance from the destination of interest being associated with first media content, the first media content comprising a graphical symbol selected based on the direction of travel (id., see also e.g. at least ¶ 46, 50, 53, 56, 58, Fig. 5-8, and related text, determining approaching point of interest based on positional information and user defined point of interest policy, and correlating approaching point of interest with travel information and metadata associated with the approaching point of interest, and generating an arrow pointing in the direction of travel required to traverse the navigation directions from the current position to the destination of interest); and
causing display of the first media content at the client device (id., displaying navigational information including travel information and metadata associated with the approaching point of interest per the user’s defined point of interest policy).
Additionally, Elliott teaches limitations not expressly disclosed by Trivedi including namely: detecting a client device within a second threshold distance of the destination of interest, the second threshold distance being associated with second media content (see e.g. at least 4:46-53, 5:56-64, Fig. 4A-4B, and related text); and
causing display of the second media content at the client device (id.).
Accordingly, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify the teaching of Trivedi by detecting the client device within a second threshold distance of the destination of interest, the second threshold distance being associated with second media content; and causing display of the second media content at the client device as taught by Elliott in order to enable the user to have a clear visual view of the portion of the route when compared to the 3D buildings that may obscure the route as compared with the display shown at a first distance (Elliott: 4:54-5:15).
Regarding claim 2, Modified Trivedi teaches that the graphical symbol comprises a directional indicator that guides a user of the client device to the destination of interest (Trivedi: see e.g. at least ¶ 21, 31, 52, 54, Fig. 6, 8, and related text; Elliott: see e.g. at least 4:46-53, 5:56-64, Fig. 4A-4B, and related text).
Regarding claim 3, Modified Trivedi teaches that selecting the graphical symbol comprises:
selecting a graphical symbol from a database of graphical symbols based on the direction of travel (Trivedi: see e.g. at least Fig. 1-2, 6-8, and related text; Elliott: see e.g. at least Fig. 2-12, and related text).
Regarding claim 4, Modified Trivedi teaches:
detecting, at the client device, a display of signage within image data displayed at the client device (Trivedi: see e.g. at least Fig. 6-8, and related text; Elliott: see e.g. at least Fig. 3-12, 16, and related text); and
generating the first media content based on the display of the signage (id.).
Regarding claim 5, Modified Trivedi teaches that the display of the signage comprises one or more attributes (Trivedi: see e.g. at least Fig. 6-8, and related text; Elliott: see e.g. at least Fig. 3-12, 16, and related text), and wherein the generating the first media content includes:
generating the first media content based on the one or more attributes of the display of the signage (id.).
Regarding claim 6, Modified Trivedi teaches that the destination of interest is a first destination of interest within a geo-fenced area, the geo-fenced area includes a plurality of destinations of interest (Trivedi: see e.g. at least ¶ 46, 50, Fig. 4-5, and related text), and the method further comprises:
selecting the first destination of interest from among the plurality of destinations of interest based on the user profile information (id.).
Regarding claim 7, Modified Trivedi teaches that the accessing the user profile data from the client device includes:
detecting the client device within a geo-fence (Trivedi: see e.g. at least ¶ 46, 50, Fig. 4-5, and related text); and
accessing the user profile data responsive to the detecting the client device within the geo-fence (id.).
Regarding claim 8, Trivedi discloses a system (see e.g. at least Abstract, Fig. 3, and related text) comprising:
a memory (e.g. at least memory 313, see e.g. at least Fig. 3, and related text); and
at least one hardware processor coupled to the memory and comprising instructions (e.g. at least controller 303, id.) that causes the system to perform operations comprising:
accessing, from a client device, user profile data (e.g. at least user profiles, see e.g. at least Abstract, ¶ 18, 27, Fig. 1-4, and related text);
determining a destination of interest based on the user profile data (id., dynamically identifying approaching POIs to the user based on a user profile, including user-defined POI policies);
determining a direction of travel based on a location of the client device and the destination of interest (see e.g. at least ¶ 21, 54, Fig. 8, and related text, providing navigational directions to ending destinations from a current position of the device);
detecting the client device within a first threshold distance of the destination of interest, the first threshold distance from the destination of interest being associated with first media content, the first media content comprising a graphical symbol selected based on the direction of travel (id., see also e.g. at least ¶ 46, 50, 53, 56, 58, Fig. 5-8, and related text, determining approaching point of interest based on positional information and user defined point of interest policy, and correlating approaching point of interest with travel information and metadata associated with the approaching point of interest, and generating an arrow pointing in the direction of travel required to traverse the navigation directions from the current position to the destination of interest); and
causing display of the first media content at the client device (id., displaying navigational information including travel information and metadata associated with the approaching point of interest per the user’s defined point of interest policy).
Additionally, Elliott teaches limitations not expressly disclosed by Trivedi including namely: detecting a client device within a second threshold distance of the destination of interest, the second threshold distance being associated with second media content (see e.g. at least 4:46-53, 5:56-64, Fig. 4A-4B, and related text); and
causing display of the second media content at the client device (id.).
Accordingly, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify the teaching of Trivedi by detecting the client device within a second threshold distance of the destination of interest, the second threshold distance being associated with second media content; and causing display of the second media content at the client device as taught by Elliott in order to enable the user to have a clear visual view of the portion of the route when compared to the 3D buildings that may obscure the route as compared with the display shown at a first distance (Elliott: 4:54-5:15).
Regarding claim 15, Trivedi discloses a non-transitory machine-readable storage medium comprising instructions (see e.g. at least Abstract, Fig. 3, and related text) that, when executed by one or more processors of a machine, cause the machine to perform operations comprising:
accessing, from a client device, user profile data (e.g. at least user profiles, see e.g. at least Abstract, ¶ 18, 27, Fig. 1-4, and related text);
determining a destination of interest based on the user profile data (id., dynamically identifying approaching POIs to the user based on a user profile, including user-defined POI policies);
determining a direction of travel based on a location of the client device and the destination of interest (see e.g. at least ¶ 21, 54, Fig. 8, and related text, providing navigational directions to ending destinations from a current position of the device);
detecting the client device within a first threshold distance of the destination of interest, the first threshold distance from the destination of interest being associated with first media content, the first media content comprising a graphical symbol selected based on the direction of travel (id., see also e.g. at least ¶ 46, 50, 53, 56, 58, Fig. 5-8, and related text, determining approaching point of interest based on positional information and user defined point of interest policy, and correlating approaching point of interest with travel information and metadata associated with the approaching point of interest, and generating an arrow pointing in the direction of travel required to traverse the navigation directions from the current position to the destination of interest); and
causing display of the first media content at the client device (id., displaying navigational information including travel information and metadata associated with the approaching point of interest per the user’s defined point of interest policy).
Additionally, Elliott teaches limitations not expressly disclosed by Trivedi including namely: detecting a client device within a second threshold distance of the destination of interest, the second threshold distance being associated with second media content (see e.g. at least 4:46-53, 5:56-64, Fig. 4A-4B, and related text); and
causing display of the second media content at the client device (id.).
Accordingly, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify the teaching of Trivedi by detecting the client device within a second threshold distance of the destination of interest, the second threshold distance being associated with second media content; and causing display of the second media content at the client device as taught by Elliott in order to enable the user to have a clear visual view of the portion of the route when compared to the 3D buildings that may obscure the route as compared with the display shown at a first distance (Elliott: 4:54-5:15).
Claims 9-14 and 16-20 recite substantially similar subject matter as claims 2-7, but in system and non-transitory computer readable medium form. These claims are similarly rejected for the same reasons as discussed in the rejection of claims 2-7 above
Conclusion
THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a).
A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any extension fee 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 CHARLES J HAN whose telephone number is (571) 270-3980. The examiner can normally be reached on M-Th and every other F (7:30 AM - 5 PM).
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Christian Chace can be reached on 571-272-4190. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300.
Information regarding the status of an application may be obtained from the Patent Application Information Retrieval (PAIR) system. Status information for published applications may be obtained from either Private PAIR or Public PAIR. Status information for unpublished applications is available through Private PAIR only. For more information about the PAIR system, see http://pair-direct.uspto.gov. Should you have questions on access to the Private PAIR system, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative or access to the automated information system, call 900-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
/CHARLES J HAN/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3662
Prosecution Insights