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 .
Priority
Acknowledgment is made of applicant’s claim for foreign priority under 35 U.S.C. 119 (a)-(d). The certified copy has been filed in parent Application No. 15/558652, filed on September 15, 2017.
Double Patenting
The nonstatutory double patenting rejection is based on a judicially created doctrine grounded in public policy (a policy reflected in the statute) so as to prevent the unjustified or improper timewise extension of the “right to exclude” granted by a patent and to prevent possible harassment by multiple assignees. A nonstatutory double patenting rejection is appropriate where the conflicting claims are not identical, but at least one examined application claim is not patentably distinct from the reference claim(s) because the examined application claim is either anticipated by, or would have been obvious over, the reference claim(s). See, e.g., In re Berg, 140 F.3d 1428, 46 USPQ2d 1226 (Fed. Cir. 1998); In re Goodman, 11 F.3d 1046, 29 USPQ2d 2010 (Fed. Cir. 1993); In re Longi, 759 F.2d 887, 225 USPQ 645 (Fed. Cir. 1985); In re Van Ornum, 686 F.2d 937, 214 USPQ 761 (CCPA 1982); In re Vogel, 422 F.2d 438, 164 USPQ 619 (CCPA 1970); In re Thorington, 418 F.2d 528, 163 USPQ 644 (CCPA 1969).
A timely filed terminal disclaimer in compliance with 37 CFR 1.321(c) or 1.321(d) may be used to overcome an actual or provisional rejection based on nonstatutory double patenting provided the reference application or patent either is shown to be commonly owned with the examined application, or claims an invention made as a result of activities undertaken within the scope of a joint research agreement. See MPEP § 717.02 for applications subject to examination under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA as explained in MPEP § 2159. See MPEP § 2146 et seq. for applications not subject to examination under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA . A terminal disclaimer must be signed in compliance with 37 CFR 1.321(b).
The filing of a terminal disclaimer by itself is not a complete reply to a nonstatutory double patenting (NSDP) rejection. A complete reply requires that the terminal disclaimer be accompanied by a reply requesting reconsideration of the prior Office action. Even where the NSDP rejection is provisional the reply must be complete. See MPEP § 804, subsection I.B.1. For a reply to a non-final Office action, see 37 CFR 1.111(a). For a reply to final Office action, see 37 CFR 1.113(c). A request for reconsideration while not provided for in 37 CFR 1.113(c) may be filed after final for consideration. See MPEP §§ 706.07(e) and 714.13.
The USPTO Internet website contains terminal disclaimer forms which may be used. Please visit www.uspto.gov/patent/patents-forms. The actual filing date of the application in which the form is filed determines what form (e.g., PTO/SB/25, PTO/SB/26, PTO/AIA /25, or PTO/AIA /26) should be used. A web-based eTerminal Disclaimer may be filled out completely online using web-screens. An eTerminal Disclaimer that meets all requirements is auto-processed and approved immediately upon submission. For more information about eTerminal Disclaimers, refer to www.uspto.gov/patents/apply/applying-online/eterminal-disclaimer.
Claim 1 (and similarly recited claims 8 and 14) are rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claim 1 of U.S. Patent No. 12271584 B2 in view of US 9569697 B1 to McNerney et al., hereinafter, “McNerney”. McNerney is in the same field of object detection. Thus, before the effective filing date of the present application, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to combine the teachings of Takahashi with the teachings of McNerney [col. 4, lines 1-5] so the user is enabled to reliably select one or multiple objects of choice according to the object classifications without the need of additional selection methods.
Present application 19/075878
US 12271584 B2
A system comprising:
1. A system comprising:
one or more memories storing instructions;
one or more memories storing instructions;
and one or more processors configured to execute the instructions to perform:
and one or more processors configured to execute the instructions to perform:
specifying, based on a type of an input device operation,
the class defined based on a type of an input device operation;
receiving an input of a partial region, the partial region formed in an image by the input;
receiving an input of a partial region and a class, the partial region formed in an image by the input,
outputting a graph indicating a relation between a plurality of images including the image and a plurality of regions including the partial region;
outputting a graph indicating a relation between a plurality of images including the image and a plurality of regions including the partial region;
Present application 19/075878
US 9569697 B1
a class among a plurality of class;
[col. 1, lines 21-22] identifying one or more object classifications
and outputting coordinate values of the plurality of the partial regions associated with the class.
[col. 1, lines 21-24] identifying one or more object classifications in the image and storing at least one locator for one or more regions of the image corresponding to each instance of the object classification
[col. 8, lines 25-36] the computing device 138 may determine the corresponding location of the object classifications and store the locators in the object index 124…the locators are map notations that point to the location of the object classification on the image. For example, the locator may include a collection of x and y coordinates corresponding to all pixel locations in a grid of pixels of the image that include the depiction of a particular object classification
[col. 8, lines 41-44] In FIG. 1, the index 124 includes object classification 126 of a tree and locator 128 defined by coordinates (x7, y3), (x7, y4), and (x7, y5)
Likewise claims 2-7 (and similarly recited claims 9-13 and 15-19) are also rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over US 12271584 B2 described below.
Present application 19/075878
US 12271584 B2
Claim 2
Claim 2
Claim 3
Claim 3
Claim 4
Claim 5
Claim 5
Claim 6
Claim 6
Claim 8
Claim 7
Claim 9
Claims 1-19 would be allowable once the double patenting rejection is overcome. The innovation that makes claims 1, 8 and 14 allowable is “specifying, based on a type of an input device operation, a class among a plurality of class” in view of the remaining limitations.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to DELOMIA L GILLIARD whose telephone number is (571)272-1681. The examiner can normally be reached 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, John Villecco can be reached at (571) 272-7319. 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.
/DELOMIA L GILLIARD/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2661
Prosecution Insights