DETAILED ACTION
Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status
The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
Claim Objections
Claim 27 is objected to because of the following informalities: In line 3, “Wherein” is capitalized. It should be --wherein--.
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.
Claim 27 is 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.
Claim 27 recites the limitation "the first sensor" in line 23. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
Claims 28-41 are also rejected for incorporating the above deficiency by dependency.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
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 (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) 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 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)(2) the claimed invention was described in a patent issued under section 151, or in an application for patent published or deemed published under section 122(b), in which the patent or application, as the case may be, names another inventor and was effectively filed before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claims 27-30, 35-37, 39, 40 and 42-45 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) as being anticipated by Smith et al. (US 11,128,944).
Regarding claim 27: Smith discloses a proximity detection device for identifying objects, comprising a wearable device (110) and a personal device (130; cellphone):
wherein the wearable device comprises:
a first memory (122) comprising one or more non-transitory, computer-readable medium (CRM) having a first set of instructions stored thereon; a first processor (112) comprising one or more processors configured to execute the first set of instructions stored on the first memory;
a sensor comprising a camera (120);
a first communications transceiver (126) configured to communicate directly with the personal device; and a user interface (I/O, 114, of the wearable device), wherein the user interface comprises a display and an audio interface (col. 4, lines 3-21);
wherein the personal device comprises: a second memory comprising one or more non-transitory, computer-readable medium (CRM) having a second set of instructions stored thereon; a second processor comprising one or more processors configured to execute the second set of instructions stored on the second memory; a second communications transceiver configured to directly communicate with the wearable device; and wherein the first and second sets of instructions, when executed by the first and second processors respectively (the cellphone, 130, comprises all these components; col. 3, line 54-col. 4, line 21; col. 6, line 29-col. 7, line 60), result in operations comprising:
identifying an object (310), wherein identifying the object comprises using data from the camera of a first sensor; determining a first parameter associated with the object; determining a second parameter associated with the user of the wearable device; and issuing a notification to the user of the wearable device using the user interface based on at least one of the first parameter or the second parameter (col. 3, line 53-col. 5, line 27).
Regarding claim 28: Smith discloses downloading the application “app” onto the computing device (130); thus, the operation of determining the first parameter comprises downloading the first parameter from a network, and the operation of determining the second parameter comprises reading the second parameter from at least one of the first memory or the second memory; are within the application (col. 5, lines 12-27; col. 6, line 29-col. 7, line 60).
Regarding claim 29: Smith discloses the first parameter is a first threshold and the second parameter is a second threshold (col. 4, line 22-col. 5, line 11).
Regarding claim 30: Smith discloses the first and second thresholds are respective distance thresholds (col. 4, line 22-col. 5, line 11).
Regarding claim 35: Smith discloses the first parameter is a characteristic of the object (adults, children, men, women; col. 4, lines 39-54).
Regarding claim 36: Smith discloses the first parameter is interaction information (person, 310, is within the threshold distance of the user, 200 (col. 4, lines 55-67; col. 5, lines 1-10); thus, the person is interacting with the user through walking behind or a side of the user; Fig. 3; in motion relative to the user; col. 5, lines 41-46).
Regarding claim 37: Smith discloses the first parameter is a profile (adults, children, men, women; col. 4, lines 39-54).
Regarding claim 39: Smith discloses the characteristic is a health characteristic (safe distance) and the object is a person (310) (Fig. 3).
Regarding claim 40: Smith discloses the parameter is a social distancing score (col. 5, lines 3-6).
Regarding claim 42: Smith discloses a wearable device comprising: a sensor (116) comprising a camera (120) configured to sense image data; and a user interface (I/O, 114, of the wearable device) comprising a display and an audio interface (col. 4, lines 3-21; col. 5, lines 1-27), wherein the user interface is configured to issue a notification to a user of the wearable device, wherein the notification is based on a first parameter and a second parameter, wherein the first parameter is associated with a user of the wearable device (direction that the user traverse; col. 4, lines 55-61), and the second parameter is associated with a detected object (col. 4, line 62-col. 6, line 7).
Regarding claim 43: Smith disclose the first parameter is an adult, children (col. 4, lines 47-52); thus, adult and children is indicative of an age of the user of the wearable device.
Regarding claim 44: Smith discloses a communications transceiver (126) configured to communicate information directly with a personal device (130) (Fig. 1; col. 4, lines 3-21).
Regarding claim 45: Smith discloses the information communicated directly with the personal device is based on the image data (col. 5, line 47-col. 6, line 7).
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 (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) 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.
Claim 38 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Smith et al. (US 11,128,944).
Regarding claim 38: Smith does not disclose the profile is a vaccine status. Smith discloses the first parameter is a profile (adults, children, men, women; col. 4, lines 39-54). Thus, it would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to one of ordinary skill in the art to modify different profile to further distinct different profiles.
Claims 46, 47, 49, 51 and 52 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Smith et al. (US 11,128,944) in view of Carlson et al. (US 10,475,060).
Regarding claim 46: Smith discloses a proximity detection device for identifying objects comprising one or more non-transitory, computer-readable medium (CRM) having instructions stored thereon, wherein the instructions, when executed by one or more processors (col. 6, line 29-col. 7, line 60), result in operations comprising: determining a distance threshold (300); determining a distance between a person (200) and an object (310); comparing the distance to the distance threshold (col. 4, lines 55-col. 5, lines 27). Smith does not disclose the storing interaction information and determining an incentive. Carlson discloses storing interaction information (reward) relating to the person based on the comparison; and determining an incentive (reward) for the person based on the interaction information (col. 45, line 49-col. 47, line 49). It would have been obvious before the effective filing date to provide an incentive as taught by Carlson in a system as disclosed by Smith for simply reward good behavior in association with public health.
Regarding claim 47: Carlson discloses the inventive is a reward (col. 4, lines 4-10).
Regarding claim 49: Smith discloses maintaining a distance between the person and the object that is greater than the distance threshold (col. 4, line 55-col.5, line 27).
Regarding claim 51: Carlson discloses the reward comprises at least one of the group consisting of a discount, a free item, and admission to an event (gifts) (col. 4, lines 4-5; col. 21, lines 35-39).
Regarding claim 52: Smith disclsoes the system is distributed between multiple devices (col. 3, line 54-col. 4, line 21).
Claims 41, 48 and 50 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Smith et al. (US 11,128,944) in view of Carlson et al. (US 10,475,060) as applied to claim 46 above and further in view of Williams (US 10,497,242).
Regarding claim 41: Smith and Carlson do not disclose the object is on a safe list. Williams discloses a system for monitoring for and preempting pre-identified restriction violation-related behavior(s) of persons under restriction (social distancing) comprising a safe list for the person (col. 13, lines 15-43). It would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to provide a safe list for the user as taught by Williams in a system as disclosed by Smith and Carlson to provide a more peace of mind to the user.
Regarding claim 48: Smith and Carlson do not disclose the incentive comprises a penalty. Williams discloses a system for monitoring for and preempting pre-identified restriction violation-related behavior(s) of persons under restriction (social distancing) comprising the loss of points (penalty) if the person is in violation (col. 23, lines 1-11). It would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to penalize the user as taught by Williams in a system as disclosed by Smith and Carlson to prevent the user from violating the rules.
Regarding claim 50: Smith and Carlson do not disclose the incentive comprises a score. Williams discloses a system for monitoring for and preempting pre-identified restriction violation-related behavior(s) of persons under restriction (social distancing) comprising comprise scores based on the user’s actions (col. 20, lines 32-57). It would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to penalize the user as taught by Williams in a system as disclosed by Smith and Carlson to encourage the user to maintain good behavior.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 31-34 are objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
-Hagi et al. (US 9,424,734) discloses a device to monitor distance between people.
-Warake (US 2024/0135294) discloses a building system with building health recommendations.
-Mendiola et al. (US 2023/0188931) discloses a device, server and system for detecting items or persons coming into proximity of one another.
-Neill et al. (US 2022/0309904) discloses a system for enforcing dynamic thresholds of social distancing rules.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to TOAN NGOC PHAM whose telephone number is (571)272-2967. The examiner can normally be reached M - F (7 AM - 3:30 PM).
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, Quan-Zhen Wang can be reached at (571) 272-3114. 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.
/TOAN N PHAM/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2685 5/7/26
Prosecution Insights