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 .
Specification
The disclosure is objected to because of the following informalities:
page 22 line 13 “pf” should be “of”.
Appropriate correction is required.
CLAIM INTERPRETATION
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(f):
(f) Element in Claim for a Combination. – An element in a claim for a combination may be expressed as a means or step for performing a specified function without the recital of structure, material, or acts in support thereof, and such claim shall be construed to cover the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification and equivalents thereof.
The following is a quotation of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph:
An element in a claim for a combination may be expressed as a means or step for performing a specified function without the recital of structure, material, or acts in support thereof, and such claim shall be construed to cover the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification and equivalents thereof.
Claims 1-9 and 11 have been interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) (pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph) to not invoke 35 U.S.C. 112(f) (pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph) claim interpretation.
Claims 10 have been interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) (pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph) to invoke 35 U.S.C. 112(f) (pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph) claim interpretation as follows.
The claims in this application are given their broadest reasonable interpretation using the plain meaning of the claim language in light of the specification as it would be understood by one of ordinary skill in the art. The broadest reasonable interpretation of a claim element (also commonly referred to as a claim limitation) is limited by the description in the specification when 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is invoked.
As explained in MPEP § 2181, subsection I, claim limitations that meet the following three-prong test will be interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph:
(A) the claim limitation uses the term “means” or “step” or a term used as a substitute for “means” that is a generic placeholder (also called a nonce term or a non-structural term having no specific structural meaning) for performing the claimed function;
(B) the term “means” or “step” or the generic placeholder is modified by functional language, typically, but not always linked by the transition word “for” (e.g., “means for”) or another linking word or phrase, such as “configured to” or “so that”; and
(C) the term “means” or “step” or the generic placeholder is not modified by sufficient structure, material, or acts for performing the claimed function.
Use of the word “means” (or “step”) in a claim with functional language creates a rebuttable presumption that the claim limitation is to be treated in accordance with 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph. The presumption that the claim limitation is interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is rebutted when the claim limitation recites sufficient structure, material, or acts to entirely perform the recited function.
Absence of the word “means” (or “step”) in a claim creates a rebuttable presumption that the claim limitation is not to be treated in accordance with 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph. The presumption that the claim limitation is not interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is rebutted when the claim limitation recites function without reciting sufficient structure, material or acts to entirely perform the recited function.
Claim limitations in this application that use the word “means” (or “step”) are being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, except as otherwise indicated in an Office action. Conversely, claim limitations in this application that do not use the word “means” (or “step”) are not being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, except as otherwise indicated in an Office action.
This application includes one or more claim limitations that do not use the word “means,” but are nonetheless being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, because the claim limitation(s) uses a generic placeholder that is coupled with functional language without reciting sufficient structure to perform the recited function and the generic placeholder is not preceded by a structural modifier. Such claim limitation(s) is/are:
“an acquirer that”, “an identifier that”, “a determiner that”, and “an outputter that” all present in claim 10.
Because this/these claim limitation(s) is/are being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, it/they is/are being interpreted to cover the corresponding structure described in the specification as performing the claimed function, and equivalents thereof.
If applicant does not intend to have this/these limitation(s) interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, applicant may: (1) amend the claim limitation(s) to avoid it/them being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph (e.g., by reciting sufficient structure to perform the claimed function); or (2) present a sufficient showing that the claim limitation(s) recite(s) sufficient structure to perform the claimed function so as to avoid it/them being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph.
Claim Objections
Claims 1-11 are objected to because of the following informalities:
Claims 1 and 10 each claim “the second space determined”, refer to claim 1 at lines 14 and 15 and to claim 10 at line 15. Applicant should consider changing “the second space determined” to be “the determined second space”. The dependent claims inherit and do not correct this issue. Appropriate correction is required.
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.
Claims 1-11 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.
Claims 1 and 10 each claim “is to be coupled” and “is coupled”, refer to claim 1 at line 10 and 11 and at line 15 and to claim 10 at line 11 and at line 15. The claimed “is coupled” is indefinite since the second space has not yet been coupled to the first space. This leads to ambiguity in the claimed “the second space determined is coupled to the first space”. The dependent claims inherit and do not correct this indefinite issue.
Claims 1 and 10 each further claim “presenting, to the user, via a cross reality (XR) device worn by the user, a video in which the second space determined is coupled to the first space in the augmented reality space” in which the claimed “a video” is unclear as to the contents of the “a video”, thus, the BRI of the claimed “a video” is any video. Therefore, the metes and bounds of the claimed “a video” is ambiguous and unclear.
Claim limitation “an outputter that” invokes 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph. However, the written description fails to disclose the corresponding structure, material, or acts for performing the entire claimed function and to clearly link the structure, material, or acts to the function. For similar reasons given previously for claim 10:
Claim 10 claims “is to be coupled” and “is coupled”, refer to claim 10 at line 11 and at line 15. The claimed “an outputter that … the second space determined is coupled to the first space in the augmented reality space” is indefinite since the second space has not yet been coupled to the first space. This leads to ambiguity in the claimed “the second space determined is coupled to the first space”. The specification uses the same language, refer to page 6 line 20 to page 7 line 3 and page 25 line 29 to page 26 line 7. Therefore, the claim is indefinite and is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, second paragraph.
Claim 10 further claims “presenting, to the user, via a cross reality (XR) device worn by the user, a video in which the second space determined is coupled to the first space in the augmented reality space” in which the claimed “a video” is unclear as to the contents of the “a video”, thus, the BRI of the claimed “a video” is any video. The specification uses the same language, refer to page 6 line 20 to page 7 line 3 and page 25 line 29 to page 26 line 7. Therefore, the claim is indefinite and is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, second paragraph.
An amendment addressing the above indefinite issues in claim 10 following Applicant’s written description may overcome both the above indefinite issues in claim 10 and this 112(f) based 112(b) issue.
Additionally:
Applicant may:
(a) Amend the claim so that the claim limitation will no longer be interpreted as a limitation under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph;
(b) Amend the written description of the specification such that it expressly recites what structure, material, or acts perform the entire claimed function, without introducing any new matter (35 U.S.C. 132(a)); or
(c) Amend the written description of the specification such that it clearly links the structure, material, or acts disclosed therein to the function recited in the claim, without introducing any new matter (35 U.S.C. 132(a)).
If applicant is of the opinion that the written description of the specification already implicitly or inherently discloses the corresponding structure, material, or acts and clearly links them to the function so that one of ordinary skill in the art would recognize what structure, material, or acts perform the claimed function, applicant should clarify the record by either:
(a) Amending the written description of the specification such that it expressly recites the corresponding structure, material, or acts for performing the claimed function and clearly links or associates the structure, material, or acts to the claimed function, without introducing any new matter (35 U.S.C. 132(a)); or
(b) Stating on the record what the corresponding structure, material, or acts, which are implicitly or inherently set forth in the written description of the specification, perform the claimed function. For more information, see 37 CFR 1.75(d) and MPEP §§ 608.01(o) and 2181.
Prior Art
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Wedig et al., US Patent Application No. 2019/0096232, describes augmenting a video of a space with sensor data of that space. [0049], [0050], [0058], and [0059].
[0049] In some embodiments, the drones 125 have the capability to directly connect to one or more of the sensors 135, 140, 145, 150, 155, and 160, the gateway 115, and the server 120 to get the sensor data. In an illustrative embodiment, the drones 125 may be programmed to overlay the sensor data over the captured videos and/or images to create the augmented view and transmit the augmented view to the monitoring computer 130. For example, in an illustrative embodiment, the drones 125 can determine a location of the sensors 135, 140, 145, 150, 155, and 160 based on a signal received from those sensors. In an illustrative embodiment, a signal strength of the sensors 135, 140, 145, 150, 155, and 160 from each of two or more of the drones 125 can be used to determine a location of the sensor 110 (e.g., biangulation, triangulation, etc.) In an illustrative embodiment, the drones 125 can continuously update the augmented view with the updated sensor data and the live recorded videos and/or images. Thus, the drones 125 can provide a real-time (or substantially real-time) augmented view of the building 105 and of the fire engulfing the building.
[0050] The drones 125 record videos and/or images of the building 105 at step 225. In an illustrative embodiment, after recording the videos and/or images, the drones 125 can create an augmented view of the building by overlaying sensor data onto the recorded video or images. At step 230, the drones transmit the received sensor data and the recorded images/video to the monitoring computer 130. In embodiments in which the drones 125 generate the augmented view, the augmented view is transmitted to the monitoring computer 130. In other embodiments, the drones 125 may not receive any sensor data at the step 220. In such embodiments, the step 220 is skipped and the drones capture the videos and/or images at the step 215 and transmit those videos/images back to the monitoring computer 130 at the step 230. In such an embodiment, the monitoring computer can receive sensor information from, for example, the server 120 (or the gateway 115) and generate an augmented view using the images from the drones 125 and the sensor information from the sensors 135, 140, 145, 150, 155, and 160. The monitoring computer 130 can receive the videos, images, and/or the augmented view from the drones 125 and display the information for viewing by emergency personnel.
[0058] Once the emergency response crew has the sensor data from the sensors 135, 140, 145, 150, 155, and 160 and the imagery from all of the drones 125, the monitoring computer 130 creates an augmented view at a step 325. As discussed above, the drones 125 may have the capability to create an augmented view of the videos/images that the drone captures. If the monitoring computer 130 receives the augmented view from the drones 125, the emergency response crew can use the augmented views from all of the drones 125 to create an overall augmented view. In some embodiments, the creation of the overall augmented view happens automatically, while in other embodiments, the emergency response crew can decide which augmented views from the drones 125 to use to create the overall augmented view. In an illustrative embodiment, the emergency response crew has the ability to change the sensor information that is visible on the overall augmented view. For example, the emergency response crew can drag and drop sensors onto the imagery from the drones 125 to see the information reported by those particular sensors. Likewise, the emergency response crew can remove sensor information from the overall augmented view if that sensor information is not deemed relevant. The emergency response crew can view and change the augmented reality view using the monitoring computer 130.
[0059] The overall augmented view can be displayed on a user interface of the monitoring computer 130 for review. The overall augmented view, in some embodiments, automatically provides suggestions for an action plan. For example, the augmented view may reveal that there are people or pets trapped inside the building 105 (e.g., via occupancy sensors). The augmented view may also reveal the best or closest and safest ways to extract the people/pets from the building 105 with minimal injuries to the emergency response crew. The augmented view may also make suggestions as to fire spreading patterns, which areas of the building 105 are particularly vulnerable for explosions (e.g., by virtue of having explosive devices or equipment in those areas), and so on. Based on all the suggestions from the overall augmented view, the emergency response crew and/or the monitoring computer 130 can devise an action plan at step 335.
Kates, US Patent Application No. 2006/0267756, describes sensing with a sensor “a condition, such as, for example, smoke, temperature, humidity, moisture, water, water temperature, carbon monoxide, natural gas, propane gas, other flammable gases, radon, poison gasses, etc”, detecting abnormal data, and transmitting an alert, refer to paragraphs [0013], [0037], and [0067].
[0013] In one embodiment, the sensor system includes a battery-operated sensor unit that detects a condition, such as, for example, smoke, temperature, humidity, moisture, water, water temperature, carbon monoxide, natural gas, propane gas, other flammable gases, radon, poison gasses, etc. The sensor unit is placed in a building, apartment, office, residence, etc. In order to conserve battery power, the sensor is normally placed in a low-power mode. In one embodiment, while in the low-power mode, the sensor unit takes regular sensor readings, adjusts the threshold level, and evaluates the readings to determine if an anomalous condition exists. If an anomalous condition is detected, then the sensor unit "wakes up" and begins communicating with the base unit or with a repeater. At programmed intervals, the sensor also "wakes up" and sends status information to the base unit (or repeater) and then listens for commands for a period of time.
[0037] In one embodiment, the sensor unit 102 has an internal power source (e.g., battery, solar cell, fuel cell, etc.). In order to conserve power, the sensor unit 102 is normally placed in a low-power mode. In one embodiment, using sensors that require relatively little power, while in the low-power mode the sensor unit 102 takes regular sensor readings and evaluates the readings to determine if an anomalous condition exists. In one embodiment, using sensors that require relatively more power, while in the low-power mode, the sensor unit 102 takes and evaluates sensor readings at periodic intervals. If an anomalous condition is detected, then the sensor unit 102 "wakes up" and begins communicating with the base unit 112 through the repeater 110. At programmed intervals, the sensor unit 102 also "wakes up" and sends status information (e.g., power levels, self diagnostic information, etc.) to the base unit (or repeater) and then listens for commands for a period of time. In one embodiment, the sensor unit 102 also includes a tamper detector. When tampering with the sensor unit 102 is detected, the sensor unit 102 reports such tampering to the base unit 112.
[0067] FIG. 6 is a flowchart showing one embodiment of the operation of the sensor unit 102 wherein relatively continuous monitoring is provided. In FIG. 6, a power up block 601 is followed by an initialization block 602. After initialization, the sensor unit 102 checks for a fault condition (e.g., activation of the tamper sensor, low battery, internal fault, etc.) in a block 603. A decision block 604 checks the fault status. If a fault has occurred, then the process advances to a block 605 were the fault information is transmitted to the repeater 110 (after which, the process advances to a block 612); otherwise, the process advances to a block 606. In the block 606, the sensor Unit 102 takes a sensor reading from the sensor(s) 201. The sensor data is subsequently evaluated in a block 607. The sensor data is abnormal, then the process advances to a transmit block 609 where the sensor data is transmitted to the repeater 110 (after which, the process advances to a block 612); otherwise, the process advances to a timeout decision block 610. If the timeout period has not elapsed, then the process returns to the fault-check block 603; otherwise, the process advances to a transmit status block 611 where normal status information is transmitted to the repeater 110. In one embodiment, the normal status information transmitted is analogous to a simple "ping" which indicates that the sensor unit 102 is functioning normally. After the block 611, the process proceeds to a block 612 where the sensor unit 102 momentarily listens for instructions from the monitor computer 113. If an instruction is received, then the sensor unit 102 performs the instructions, otherwise, the process returns to the status check block 603. In one embodiment, transceiver 203 is normally powered down. The controller 202 powers up the transceiver 203 during execution of the blocks 605, 609, 611, and 612. The monitoring computer 113 can send instructions to the sensor unit 102 to change the parameters used to evaluate data used to evaluate data used in block 607; the listen period used in block 612, etc.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 1-11 would be allowable if rewritten or amended to overcome the rejection(s) under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), 2nd paragraph, set forth in this Office action.
The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter: The prior art of record fails to teach or suggest in the context of each of independent claims 1 and 10:
determining/determines, based on the status information of each of the plurality of spaces, as a second space to which the first space is to be coupled, a space that is currently in a predetermined status among the plurality of spaces in the real space; and
outputting/outputs presentation information for presenting, to the user, via a cross reality (XR) device worn by the user, a video in which the second space determined is coupled to the first space in the augmented reality space.
In summary the prior art of record fails to teach or suggest in the context of each of independent claims 1 and 10 determining/determines a second space to which the first space is to be coupled based on the status information, coupling the second space to the first space, and presenting, to the user, via a cross reality (XR) device worn by the user, a video of the determined second space coupled to the first space in the augmented reality space.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JEFFERY A BRIER whose telephone number is (571)272-7656. The examiner can normally be reached on Mon-Fri from 8:30am-3:00pm.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Xiao M Wu, can be reached at telephone number 571-272-7761. 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 Patent Center. Status information for published applications may be obtained from Patent Center. Status information for unpublished applications is available through Patent Center for authorized users only. Should you have questions about access to Patent Center, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free).
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) Form at https://www.uspto.gov/patents/uspto-automated- interview-request-air-form.
JEFFERY A. BRIER
Primary Examiner
Art Unit 2613
/JEFFERY A BRIER/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2613
Prosecution Insights