CTNF 19/034,811 CTNF 96185 DETAILED ACTION This is the first Office action on the merits and is responsive to the papers filed 01/23/2025. Claims 1-12 are currently pending and examined below. Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status 07-03-aia AIA 15-10-aia The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA. Priority 02-26 AIA Receipt is acknowledged of certified copies of papers required by 37 CFR 1.55. Information Disclosure Statement The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on 01/23/2025 is in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statement has been considered by the examiner. Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112 07-30-02 AIA 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. 07-34-01 Claims 8-10 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. In claims 8-10, the recitations “a relatively short cycle” and “a relatively long cycle” are subjective, and one of ordinary skill in the art would not be able to reasonably appraise at what degree is “relatively short” and “relatively long”. The scope of the invention is thus indefinite. Appropriate corrections are required. Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 101 07-04-01 AIA 07-04 35 U.S.C. 101 reads as follows: Whoever invents or discovers any new and useful process, machine, manufacture, or composition of matter, or any new and useful improvement thereof, may obtain a patent therefor, subject to the conditions and requirements of this title. 07-05 AIA Claim s 1-12 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 101 because Step 1: Claims 1-12 are directed to an information processing system, information processing method or a non-transitory computer readable storage medium. The claims fall within at least one of the four categories of patent eligible subject matter because the claims recite a machine (system/non-transitory computer readable storage medium) or a process (method). Step 1: Yes. Step 2A – prong 1: Claims 1, 11 and 12 recite the limitations, of acquire moving body information that indicates a position of each of multiple moving bodies existing in the real world; acquire, based on the moving body information, predictive moving body information at a prescribed cycle, the predictive moving body information indicating a predictive position of each of the multiple moving bodies after a point in time at which the moving body information is acquired. These limitations, as drafted, are simple processes that, under broadest reasonable interpretation, cover performance of the limitations in the mind but for the recitation of a system/processing circuitry. That is, other than “by a system/processing circuitry” nothing in the claims preclude the steps from practically being performed in the mind. For example, other than “by a system/processing circuitry” language, the claims encompass a person looking at data collected, forming a simple judgement and collect more data. The mere nominal recitation of a “by a system/processing circuitry” does not take the claim limitations out of the mental process grouping. Thus, claims 1, 11 and 12 are directed to mental process. Step 2A – Prong 1: Yes. Step 2A- Prong 2: Claims 1, 11 and 12 recite additional elements of system/processing circuitry/storage medium. System/processing circuitry that are used to perform acquiring information and setting the cycle steps and storage medium that is used to store program to perform the steps are recited at a high level of generality, therefore acting as generic computer components to perform the abstract idea. The additional elements are claimed generically and are operating in their ordinary capacity and do not use the judicial exception in a manner that imposes a meaningful limit on the judicial exception, such that the claims are more than mere instructions to apply the exception using a computer. Accordingly, even in combination, these additional elements do not integrate the abstract idea into a practical application because they do not impose any meaningful limits on practicing the abstract idea. Step 2A – Prong 2: No. Step 2B: As discussed with respect to step 2A Prong Two, the additional elements in the claims amounts to no more than mere instructions to apply the exception using generic computer components. The same analysis applies here in 2B, i.e., mere instructions to apply an exception using generic computer components cannot integrate a judicial exception into a practical application at Step 2A or provide an inventive concept in Step 2B. The claims are ineligible. Step 2B: No. Therefore, claims 1, 11 and 12 are ineligible under 35 U.S.C 101. Claims 2-10 do not contain limitations that render them subject matter eligible under 35 U.S.C. 101. Under MPEP guidelines (specifically §2106 and §2181), a "system" claim must do more than simply recite a "processor" or "computer" to avoid being deemed abstract or lacking definite structure (35 U.S.C. 101/112). It must include additional elements like memory or specialized hardware that improve computer functionality, ensuring it is not just a "pure functional claim". Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103 07-06 AIA 15-10-15 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. 07-20-aia AIA 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. 07-21-aia AIA Claim s 1-5 and 11-12 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kim et al. (US 20250299563 A1; hereinafter Kim) in view of Bandyopadhyay et al. (US 20140376384 A1; hereinafter Bandyopadhyay) . Regarding claim 1, Kim discloses: An information processing system (Fig. 2: computing system 1000), comprising processing circuitry ([0035] one or more processors), the processing circuitry being configured to: acquire moving body information ([0035] traffic object information) that indicates a position of each of multiple moving bodies existing in the real world ([0041] “to derive traffic object information including traffic volume for each driving direction and traffic volume for each lane on a corresponding road”); acquire, based on the moving body information, predictive moving body information at a prescribed cycle ([0041] “derives twin base information, which is used to implement the digital twin 300 of the intersection in real time, from the simulator 1210 in a second cycle shorter than the first cycle”), the predictive moving body information indicating a predictive position of each of the multiple moving bodies after a point in time at which the moving body information is acquired ([0045] “The twin basic information includes: position coordinate information of a vehicle moving on the corresponding intersection based on a preset coordinate system of the simulator 1210; vehicle characteristic information; and geographic coordinate information corresponding to intersection geographic information of the corresponding intersection”). Kim does not specifically disclose: set the cycle for acquiring the predictive moving body information in at least one zone among multiple zones in which the moving bodies are present to be longer than the cycle for acquiring the predictive moving body information in the other zones. However, Bandyopadhyay discloses: set the cycle for acquiring the moving body information in at least one zone among multiple zones ([0044] where vehicle covers an area on the map) in which the moving bodies are present to be longer than the cycle for acquiring the moving body information in the other zones ([0044] “track the vehicle…the update interval for the server and time interval of collecting data may vary depending upon the speed of the vehicle, i.e., when the vehicle is travelling faster, the time interval and update interval may be reduced”). Kim and Bandyopadhyay are considered to be analogous to the claimed invention because they are in the same field of object positioning. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Kim’s object positioning to further incorporate Bandyopadhyay’s object positioning for the advantage of adjusting refresh speed of moving vehicle based on the speed of the vehicle which results in bandwidth and energy conservation (Bandyopadhyay’s [0044]). Regarding claim 2, Kim as modified discloses the information processing system of claim 1, Kim further discloses: wherein the processing circuitry is configured to: establish a zone in which no moving body is present (Kim [0069] “The geographic coordinate information corresponds to geographic information of the actual intersection, and includes the type or shape of intersections, such as a T-shaped and cross (+)-shaped intersections, a width of the road, and the like” where intersection covers an area on the map) in addition to the zones in which the moving bodies are present (Kim [0071] “position coordinates of the vehicle objects” where vehicle covers an area on the map); and set the cycle for the zone in which no moving body is present to be longer than the cycle for the zones in which the moving bodies are present (Kim [0071] “since position coordinates of the vehicle objects are changed at every time shorter than the predetermined first cycle, the twin basis information output from the simulator 1210 is configured with a second cycle that is shorter than the predetermined first cycle in order to include position coordinates of the vehicle objects moving at every short time”). Regarding claim 3, Kim as modified discloses the information processing system of claim 1, Kim as modified further discloses: wherein the moving body information includes a moving speed of each of the moving bodies (Bandyopadhyay [0044] “speed of the vehicle”), the zones include a first zone and a second zone (Bandyopadhyay [0044] “location of the vehicle” where vehicle covers an area on the map), the first zone is a zone in which no moving body with a moving speed higher than or equal to a prescribed moving speed is present (Bandyopadhyay [0044] vehicle travelling slower), the second zone is a zone in which one or more moving bodies with a moving speed higher than or equal to the prescribed moving speed are present (Bandyopadhyay [0044] vehicle travelling faster), and the processing circuitry is configured to set the cycle for the first zone to be longer than the cycle for the second zone (Bandyopadhyay [0044] “the update interval for the server and time interval of collecting data may vary depending upon the speed of the vehicle, i.e., when the vehicle is travelling faster, the time interval and update interval may be reduced”). Regarding claim 4, Kim as modified discloses the information processing system of claim 1, Kim further discloses: wherein the processing circuitry is configured to allocate one of the zones to each of the moving bodies (Kim [0071] “position coordinates of the vehicle objects” where vehicle covers an area on the map). Regarding claim 5, Kim as modified discloses the information processing system of claim 4, Kim as modified further discloses: wherein the moving body information includes a moving speed of each of the moving bodies (Bandyopadhyay [0044] “speed of the vehicle”), and the processing circuitry is configured to extend the cycle for the zone as the moving speed of the corresponding moving body decreases (Bandyopadhyay [0044] “the update interval for the server and time interval of collecting data may vary depending upon the speed of the vehicle, i.e., when the vehicle is travelling faster, the time interval and update interval may be reduced”). Regarding claim 11, Kim discloses: An information processing method, comprising: acquiring moving body information ([0035] traffic object information) that indicates a position of each of multiple moving bodies existing in the real world ([0041] “to derive traffic object information including traffic volume for each driving direction and traffic volume for each lane on a corresponding road”); acquiring, based on the moving body information, predictive moving body information at a prescribed cycle ([0041] “derives twin base information, which is used to implement the digital twin 300 of the intersection in real time, from the simulator 1210 in a second cycle shorter than the first cycle”), the predictive moving body information indicating a predictive position of each of the multiple moving bodies after a point in time at which the moving body information is acquired ([0045] “The twin basic information includes: position coordinate information of a vehicle moving on the corresponding intersection based on a preset coordinate system of the simulator 1210; vehicle characteristic information; and geographic coordinate information corresponding to intersection geographic information of the corresponding intersection”). Kim does not specifically disclose: setting the cycle for acquiring the predictive moving body information in at least one zone among multiple zones in which the moving bodies are present to be longer than the cycle for acquiring the predictive moving body information in the other zones. However, Bandyopadhyay discloses: setting the cycle for acquiring the moving body information in at least one zone among multiple zones ([0044] where vehicle covers an area on the map) in which the moving bodies are present to be longer than the cycle for acquiring the moving body information in the other zones ([0044] “track the vehicle…the update interval for the server and time interval of collecting data may vary depending upon the speed of the vehicle, i.e., when the vehicle is travelling faster, the time interval and update interval may be reduced”). Kim and Bandyopadhyay are considered to be analogous to the claimed invention because they are in the same field of object positioning. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Kim’s object positioning to further incorporate Bandyopadhyay’s object positioning for the advantage of adjusting refresh speed of moving vehicle based on the speed of the vehicle which results in bandwidth and energy conservation (Bandyopadhyay’s [0044]). Regarding claim 12, Kim discloses: A non-transitory computer readable storage medium ([0035] one or more memories) storing an information processing program to be executed by processing circuitry ([0035] one or more processors) included in an information processing system ([0035] implementing a method), wherein the predictive moving body information ([0035] traffic object information) is acquired based on moving body information that indicates a position of each of multiple moving bodies present in the real world ([0041] “to derive traffic object information including traffic volume for each driving direction and traffic volume for each lane on a corresponding road”), the predictive moving body information indicating a predictive position of each of the multiple moving bodies after a point in time at which the moving body information is acquired ([0041] “derives twin base information, which is used to implement the digital twin 300 of the intersection in real time, from the simulator 1210 in a second cycle shorter than the first cycle”, [0045] “The twin basic information includes: position coordinate information of a vehicle moving on the corresponding intersection based on a preset coordinate system of the simulator 1210; vehicle characteristic information; and geographic coordinate information corresponding to intersection geographic information of the corresponding intersection”). Kim does not specifically disclose: the information processing program causes the processing circuitry to set a cycle for acquiring predictive moving body information in at least one zone among multiple zones in which the moving bodies are present to be longer than the cycle for acquiring the predictive moving body information in the other zones. However, Bandyopadhyay discloses: the information processing program causes the processing circuitry to set a cycle for acquiring moving body information in at least one zone among multiple zones ([0044] where vehicle covers an area on the map) in which the moving bodies are present to be longer than the cycle for acquiring the moving body information in the other zones ([0044] “track the vehicle…the update interval for the server and time interval of collecting data may vary depending upon the speed of the vehicle, i.e., when the vehicle is travelling faster, the time interval and update interval may be reduced”). Kim and Bandyopadhyay are considered to be analogous to the claimed invention because they are in the same field of object positioning. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Kim’s object positioning to further incorporate Bandyopadhyay’s object positioning for the advantage of adjusting refresh speed of moving vehicle based on the speed of the vehicle which results in bandwidth and energy conservation (Bandyopadhyay’s [0044]) . 07-21-aia AIA Claim s 6-10 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kim, in view of Bandyopadhyay and in view of Ikeda et al. (US 20120203528 A1; hereinafter Ikeda) . Regarding claim 6, Kim as modified discloses the information processing system of claim 4, but fails to teach: wherein the moving body information includes a moving speed of each of the moving bodies, and the processing circuitry is configured to narrow the zone as the moving speed of the corresponding moving body decreases. Ikeda teaches: wherein the moving body information includes a moving speed of each of the moving bodies ([0048] “speed of a vehicle”), and the processing circuitry is configured to narrow the zone as the moving speed of the corresponding moving body decreases ([0048] “the higher the speed of a vehicle is, the broader range can be referenced in the simulation”). Ikeda is analogous to the claimed invention because it pertains to the same field of object positioning. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Kim’s object positioning as currently modified to further incorporate Ikeda’s object positioning for the advantage of adjusting the range which results in realizing a more realistic simulation (Ikeda’s [0048]). Regarding claim 7, Kim as modified discloses the information processing system of claim 4, but fails to teach: wherein the moving body information includes information on a traveling direction of each of the moving bodies, and the processing circuitry is configured to calculate a predicted path for each moving body from the moving body information; and define each of the zones for the corresponding moving body such that a centroid of the zone in which the moving body is present is positioned on a side on which the predicted path extends with respect to the center of the moving body. Ikeda teaches: wherein the moving body information includes information on a traveling direction of each of the moving bodies ([0049] direction), and the processing circuitry is configured to calculate a predicted path for each moving body from the moving body information ([0038] route); and define each of the zones for the corresponding moving body such that a centroid of the zone in which the moving body is present is positioned on a side on which the predicted path extends with respect to the center of the moving body (see Figs. 5A and 5B). Ikeda is analogous to the claimed invention because it pertains to the same field of object positioning. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Kim’s object positioning as currently modified to further incorporate Ikeda’s object positioning for the advantage of adjusting the range which results in realizing a more realistic simulation (Ikeda’s [0048]). Regarding claim 8, Kim as modified discloses the information processing system of claim 5, but fails to teach: wherein the processing circuitry is configured to, when a zone having a relatively short cycle and a zone having a relatively long cycle at least partially overlap with each other, change the cycle for the zone having the relatively long cycle to the cycle of the zone having the relatively short cycle. Ikeda teaches: wherein the processing circuitry is configured to, when a zone having a relatively short cycle and a zone having a relatively long cycle at least partially overlap with each other ([0040] “considering the reference range of each agent…The behavior of the agent simulated by each computers A through D has an influence of surrounding agents”), change the cycle for the zone having the relatively long cycle to the cycle of the zone having the relatively short cycle (see Figs. 5A-5B, [0039]-[0040] relationship between frame W1/W2 vs. vehicle speed vs. update of the behavior of the reference vehicle a [Wingdings font/0xE0] faster vehicle speed/larger range/faster update, [0040] “between the state in which an agent to be analyzed is driven at a high speed and the state in which it is stopped according to the traffic signal, the ranges in which the other agents referenced by the agent to be analyzed are located are different…with the more movements over the virtual spaces by the high-speed running of a large number of agents, it is more necessary to communicate data to be processed, thereby increasing the traffic between the computers … determines the condition of another agent to be referenced based on the movement state of each agent, and transmits and receives only the information about the agent corresponding to the condition, thereby reducing the traffic between the computers”). Ikeda is analogous to the claimed invention because it pertains to the same field of object positioning. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Kim’s object positioning as currently modified to further incorporate Ikeda’s object positioning for the advantage of increasing the range and update speed which results in realizing a more realistic simulation and communication traffic between computers (Ikeda’s [0040], [0048]). Regarding claim 9, Kim as modified discloses the information processing system of claim 6, Ikeda further teaches: wherein the processing circuitry is configured to, when a zone having a relatively short cycle and a zone having a relatively long cycle at least partially overlap with each other ([0040] “considering the reference range of each agent…The behavior of the agent simulated by each computers A through D has an influence of surrounding agents”), change the cycle for the zone having the relatively long cycle to the cycle of the zone having the relatively short cycle (see Figs. 5A-5B, [0039]-[0040] relationship between frame W1/W2 vs. vehicle speed vs. update of the behavior of the reference vehicle a [Wingdings font/0xE0] faster vehicle speed/larger range/faster update, [0040] “between the state in which an agent to be analyzed is driven at a high speed and the state in which it is stopped according to the traffic signal, the ranges in which the other agents referenced by the agent to be analyzed are located are different…with the more movements over the virtual spaces by the high-speed running of a large number of agents, it is more necessary to communicate data to be processed, thereby increasing the traffic between the computers … determines the condition of another agent to be referenced based on the movement state of each agent, and transmits and receives only the information about the agent corresponding to the condition, thereby reducing the traffic between the computers”). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Kim’s object positioning as currently modified to further incorporate Ikeda’s object positioning for the advantage of increasing the range and update speed which results in realizing a more realistic simulation and communication traffic between computers (Ikeda’s [0040], [0048]). Regarding claim 10, Kim as modified discloses the information processing system of claim 6, Ikeda further teaches: wherein the processing circuitry is configured to, when a zone having a relatively short cycle and a zone having a relatively long cycle at least partially overlap with each other ([0040] “considering the reference range of each agent…The behavior of the agent simulated by each computers A through D has an influence of surrounding agents”), change the cycle for the zone having the relatively long cycle to the cycle of the zone having the relatively short cycle (see Figs. 5A-5B, [0039]-[0040] relationship between frame W1/W2 vs. vehicle speed vs. update of the behavior of the reference vehicle a [Wingdings font/0xE0] faster vehicle speed/larger range/faster update, [0040] “between the state in which an agent to be analyzed is driven at a high speed and the state in which it is stopped according to the traffic signal, the ranges in which the other agents referenced by the agent to be analyzed are located are different…with the more movements over the virtual spaces by the high-speed running of a large number of agents, it is more necessary to communicate data to be processed, thereby increasing the traffic between the computers … determines the condition of another agent to be referenced based on the movement state of each agent, and transmits and receives only the information about the agent corresponding to the condition, thereby reducing the traffic between the computers”). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Kim’s object positioning as currently modified to further incorporate Ikeda’s object positioning for the advantage of increasing the range and update speed which results in realizing a more realistic simulation and communication traffic between computers (Ikeda’s [0040], [0048]). Conclusion Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to PAYSUN WU whose telephone number is (571)272-1528. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 8AM-5PM. 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, Hunter Lonsberry can be reached on (571)272-7298. 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. /PAYSUN WU/Examiner, Art Unit 3665 /DONALD J WALLACE/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3665 Application/Control Number: 19/034,811 Page 2 Art Unit: 3665 Application/Control Number: 19/034,811 Page 3 Art Unit: 3665 Application/Control Number: 19/034,811 Page 4 Art Unit: 3665 Application/Control Number: 19/034,811 Page 5 Art Unit: 3665 Application/Control Number: 19/034,811 Page 6 Art Unit: 3665 Application/Control Number: 19/034,811 Page 7 Art Unit: 3665 Application/Control Number: 19/034,811 Page 8 Art Unit: 3665 Application/Control Number: 19/034,811 Page 9 Art Unit: 3665 Application/Control Number: 19/034,811 Page 10 Art Unit: 3665 Application/Control Number: 19/034,811 Page 11 Art Unit: 3665 Application/Control Number: 19/034,811 Page 12 Art Unit: 3665 Application/Control Number: 19/034,811 Page 13 Art Unit: 3665 Application/Control Number: 19/034,811 Page 14 Art Unit: 3665 Application/Control Number: 19/034,811 Page 15 Art Unit: 3665 Application/Control Number: 19/034,811 Page 16 Art Unit: 3665
Prosecution Insights