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 Status
Claims 1-33 are pending.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
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)(1) the claimed invention was patented, described in a printed publication, or in public use, on sale, or otherwise available to the public before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claim(s) 1 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Minster (US 2017/0267256)
determining a trajectory based on movement data from an accelerometer of a
client device;
Minster [0035] Driving behavior may include any information relating to how an autonomous vehicle drives (e.g., actuates brakes, accelerator, steering, other controls) given a set of instructions (e.g., a route). The information relating to the driving behavior of an autonomous vehicle, in some embodiments, produces information that is observable by a passenger of the autonomous vehicle or an external entity. Thus, the driving behavior in such embodiments may include actions or operations performed by an autonomous vehicle while performing a route that is readily observable by an entity. The actions or operations performed by the autonomous vehicle may be observed by one or more of a human passenger's five senses and/or otherwise, observed by one or more sensors (e.g., camera, gyrometer, accelerometer, etc.) associated with an entity.
Interpretation:
Trajectory = autonomous vehicle while performing a route
Movement data = how an autonomous vehicle drives (e.g., actuates brakes, accelerator, steering, other controls)
Client device = by one or more sensors (e.g., camera, gyrometer, accelerometer, etc.) associated with an entity.
in response to the trajectory being within configured limits:
Minster [0035] Driving behavior may include any information relating to how an autonomous vehicle drives (e.g., actuates brakes, accelerator, steering, other controls) given a set of instructions (e.g., a route).
incorporating the trajectory into one or more facts, each fact comprising an
entity, an observation, and an object;
Minster [0035] Driving behavior may include any information relating to how an autonomous vehicle drives (e.g., actuates brakes, accelerator, steering, other controls) given a set of instructions (e.g., a route). The information relating to the driving behavior of an autonomous vehicle, in some embodiments, produces information that is observable by a passenger of the autonomous vehicle or an external entity. Thus, the driving behavior in such embodiments may include actions or operations performed by an autonomous vehicle while performing a route that is readily observable by an entity. The actions or operations performed by the autonomous vehicle may be observed by one or more of a human passenger's five senses and/or otherwise, observed by one or more sensors (e.g., camera, gyrometer, accelerometer, etc.) associated with an entity.
Interpretation:
Entity = entity
Observation = information that is observable by a passenger of the autonomous vehicle or an external entity.
Object = produces information that is observable by a passenger of the autonomous vehicle or an external entity
Interpretation: object = details of observation see specification [0087]
the object is actually a collection of objects that describe the details of the observation
comparing the one or more facts to historical data; and
Minster claim 2, The system of claim 1, wherein the computing platform is further configured to: collect vehicle behavior feedback, during and/or after the one or more routes of the autonomous vehicle involving the passenger, from the passenger of the autonomous vehicle; and modify the initial driving behavior of the autonomous vehicle based on the vehicle behavior feedback.
Interpretation:
historical = collect vehicle behavior feedback, during and/or after the one or more routes
comparing = modify the initial driving behavior of the autonomous vehicle based on the vehicle behavior feedback
determining one or more closest matches between the one or more facts and
the historical data.
Minster [0036] Driving behavior may additionally or alternatively include any information about how an autonomous vehicle calculates routes (e.g., prioritizing fastest time vs. shortest distance), and/or how an autonomous vehicle responds to environmental stimulus (e.g., how an autonomous vehicle behaves if it is raining, or if an animal jumps in front of the vehicle). Driving behavior may additionally or alternatively include information relating to manners in which an autonomous vehicle operates during driving and non-driving functions (e.g., parked or similar non-moving states). Some examples of elements that may contribute to driving behavior include acceleration constraints, deceleration constraints, speed constraints, steering constraints, suspension settings, routing preferences (e.g., scenic routes, faster routes, no highways), lighting preferences, sound preferences (e.g., music or other audio projected by the AV), “legal ambiguity” conduct (e.g., in a solid-green left turn situation, whether a vehicle pulls out into the intersection or waits at the intersection line), action profiles (e.g., how a vehicle turns, maneuvers, or changes lanes), and action frequency constraints (e.g., how often a vehicle changes lanes or performs driving maneuvers).
Interpretation:
closest matches = how an autonomous vehicle calculates routes
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
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(s) 2 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Minster in view of Kirkpatrick (US 2008/0147652).
Minster discloses elements of the claimed invention as noted but does not disclose selecting content of interest from the one or more closest matches; and incorporating the selected content of interest into the historical data. However, Kirkpatrick discloses:
Kirkpatrick claim 20. The computer readable medium of claim 19, further comprising, when the identified physical address has a match, then saving the identified physical address in a recent physical address list and when a close match is selected, then saving the selected close match to the recent physical address list.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Minster to obtain above limitation based on the teachings of Kirkpatrick for the purpose of comparing an address to a library of physical addresses to determine if exact or close matches exist, see abstract.
Claim(s) 3 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Minster in view of Brinkman (US 10,553.042).
Minster discloses elements of the claimed invention as noted but does not disclose in response to a control activation of the client device: transmitting, by the client device, the one or more facts to a server, performing, by the server, the comparing and the determining the one or
more closest matches, wherein the historical data comprises stored trajectories
from one or more other client devices; and transmitting, by the server, the one or more closest matches to the client device. However, Brinkman discloses:
Brinkman col 12, lines 55-67 Additionally, when determining whether or not a current driving trip corresponds to a driving trip pattern, the driving analysis server 220 may compare the number of matching previous driving trips to a minimum driving pattern threshold. For example, if the current driving trip data matches only one previous driving trip in a driving trip database for a vehicle 210, then the driving analysis server 220 may determine that the current driving trip does not correspond to a driving pattern. In this example, the driving analysis server 220 may identify the current driving trip as matching an existing driving pattern only if it matches a minimum threshold number (e.g., 5, 10, 100, etc.) or threshold frequency (1 per week, 100 per year, etc.) of previous driving trips.
Brinkman col 3, lines 50-55, Input/Output (I/O) 109 may include a microphone, keypad, touch screen, and/or stylus through which a user of the computing device 101 may provide input, and may also include one or more of a speaker for providing audio output and a video display device for providing textual, audiovisual and/or graphical output.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Minster to obtain above limitation based on the teachings of Brinkman for the purpose of using telematics systems such as on-board diagnostics (OBD) systems in automobiles and other vehicles. OBD systems may provide information from the vehicle's on-board computers and sensors, allowing users to monitor a wide variety of information relating to the vehicle systems, see column 1 lines 45-55.
Claim(s) 4 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Minster in view of Brinkman in view of Zhang (US 9,674,271)
Minster in view of Brinkman discloses elements of the claimed invention as noted but does not disclose wherein the server only performs the comparing and determining for stored trajectories where an accelerometer detected movement of the one or more other client devices.
However, Zhang discloses:
Zhang col 6 lines 20-30 The sensors 368 in the client device 10 may include one or more proximity sensors for turning off and disabling the touch-sensitive display 352 when the client device 10 is placed near the user's ear (e.g., when the user is making a phone call). The client device 10 may also include one or more accelerometers for detecting the movement of the client device 10, a magnetometer for determining the orientation of the client device 10, a GPS receiver for obtaining the geographical location information of the client device 10, and one or more image sensors for capturing still images or video streams.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Minster in view of Brinkman to obtain above limitation based on the teachings of Zhang for the purpose of storing information items from a client device to a remote server, see abstract.
Claim(s) 5 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Minster in view of Raghavan (US 2019/0147042).
Minster discloses elements of the claimed invention as noted but does not disclose wherein in response to the accelerometer produces movement data: performing one or more directed searches based on the trajectory, comprising: obtaining a URL for a preferred website from a stored location; accessing a website page corresponding to the URL; requesting one or more entities, observations, or objects not present on the client device;
receiving data related to the one or more entities, observations, or objects not
present on the client device; and incorporating the received data into facts.
However, Raghavan discloses:
Raghavan [0026] According to other examples, the trip identification engine 124 uses the user's browsing history (i.e., browse or search signals 114) to identify locations that the user has visited, POIs searched for by the user, etc. In some examples, the trip identification engine 124 is operative or configured to identify locations, POIs, or entities using a rich document understanding pipeline of search engines (e.g., if the user books a flight for a trip on a particular website, the trip identification engine can identify the travel dates and the departure and destination locations of the trip from the website URL and page details).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Minster to obtain above limitation based on the teachings of Raghavan for the purpose of providing a trip content generation system which comprises various components for automatically generating a personalized travel diary, see [0017].
Claim(s) 6 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Minster in view of Suzuki (US 9,631,937).
Minster discloses elements of the claimed invention as noted but does not disclose above limitation. However, Suzuki discloses wherein the configured limits prevent trajectories that are
one or more of outside a distance range from the client device, a location range, a
time or date range, or not a specified type of travel from being incorporated into facts. However, Suzuki discloses:
Suzuki col 15 lines 53-55, According to this, it is possible to prevent a search for a route where a distance to the destination becomes too far. Furthermore, the user may choose to expand the area A1 if the user has more available time to reach the destination.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Minster to obtain above limitation based on the teachings of Suzuki for the purpose of proving an information processing apparatus, route navigator, method and computer program product with which it is possible to search for a route where a passage frequency is low, see column 1 lines 20-27.
Claim(s) 7 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Minster in view of Viswanathan (US 11,188,765)
Minster discloses elements of the claimed invention as noted but does not disclose determining the trajectory based on triangulation using wireless networking, rather than the movement data from the accelerometer. However, Viswanathan discloses:
Viswanathan claim 7, The method of claim 1, further comprising: receiving real-time stream of vehicle trajectory; and performing the feature triangulation based on determining that the vehicle trajectory indicates that the vehicle has passed the feature or approached the feature to within a threshold distance.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Minster to obtain above limitation based on the teachings of Viswanathan for the purpose of receiving a real-time stream of images captured by a sensor of a vehicle during a drive; extracting a sequence of two or more images from the real-time stream; reversing the sequence of the two or more images; and providing the reversed sequence of the two or more images for feature triangulation, see abstract.
Claim(s) 8 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Minster in view of Hiltch (US 12,130,844).
Minster discloses elements of the claimed invention as noted but does not disclose wherein determining the one or more closest matches between the one or more facts and the historical data comprises: organizing the matches by a number of common instances of an entity, an
observation, or an object; and limiting the number of matches to a predetermined number of matches having a highest number of common instances. However, Hiltch discloses:
Hiltch col 13 lines 19-23, the extracted data is compared to data related to one or more entities indicated in a second database. In an embodiment, S530 may include identifying matching features between the instance of the entity in the first database and the data in the second database.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Minster to obtain above limitation based on the teachings of Hiltch for the purpose of resolving entities between databases, see abstract.
Claim(s) 9 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Minster in view of Tran (US 2014/0308930).
Minster discloses elements of the claimed invention as noted but does not disclose generating one or more search requests to a search engine application to perform one or more directed searches without user initiation. However, Tran discloses:
Tran [0136] In an embodiment, at step 910, the method 900 includes locating or searching for glanceable information using search engine. This can include local events for the day or week, for example. The method 900 can autonomously search information using a search engine by sending requests to the phone and searching using the Internet using cellular connections. The system can run a predetermined search query on a periodic basis and transmitting a search result over the search channel. The contents can be transmitted using Bluetooth protocol or alternatively through SMS protocol, Internet protocol, or encrypted protocol. The device periodically updates the contents with fresh information. In an embodiment, at step 912, the method 900 includes locating glanceable information from known sources, for example the wearable device can retrieve information from the user's favorite social network postings such as Facebook friend's postings, or can retrieve updates from LinkedIn profiles and provides glanceable information updates to the user. The automated search allows users to check traffic reports, sports events, weather forecasts, stock prices, news, movie listings and other information and receive messages.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Minster to obtain above limitation based on the teachings of Tran for the purpose of receiving and interacting with downloadable glanceable content on a mobile device.
Claim(s) 10 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Minster in view of Tran in view of Waisbein (US 2015/0160847).
Minster in view of Tran discloses elements of the claimed invention as noted but does not disclose wherein the one or more directed searches comprises internet
searches based on specific information requests for one or more of a location, a time
range, a date range, a travel-related time, travel directions, or a service or product
cost or availability. However, Waisbein discloses:
Waisbein [0244] Turning now to FIG. 8, there is shown a data record of interest that represents a search query in the data repository in accordance with the presently disclosed subject matter. As seen, the data record of interest 800 includes two portions: metadata 810 and a series of Rounds 820. Metadata 810 at the prefix of the data record represents the general information of the environment for the entity of interest that a user is searching for, such as the location, date and time etc.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Minster in view of Tran to obtain above limitation based on the teachings of Waisbein for the purpose of providing a data record of interest that represents a search query in the data repository, see [0244]
Claim(s) 11 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Minster in view of Tran in view of Raghavan.
Minster in view of Tran discloses elements of the claimed invention as noted but does not disclose wherein performing the one or more directed searches comprises:
obtaining a URL for a preferred website from a stored location;
accessing a website page corresponding to the URL;
requesting the one or more entities, observations, or objects not present in the
client device data; and
receiving data related to the one or more entities, observations, or objects not
present in the client device data. However, Raghavan discloses:
Raghavan [0026] According to other examples, the trip identification engine 124 uses the user's browsing history (i.e., browse or search signals 114) to identify locations that the user has visited, POIs searched for by the user, etc. In some examples, the trip identification engine 124 is operative or configured to identify locations, POIs, or entities using a rich document understanding pipeline of search engines (e.g., if the user books a flight for a trip on a particular website, the trip identification engine can identify the travel dates and the departure and destination locations of the trip from the website URL and page details).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Minster in view of Tran to obtain above limitation based on the teachings of Raghavan for the purpose of providing a trip content generation system which comprises various components for automatically generating a personalized travel diary, see [0017].
Claim(s) 12 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Minster (US 2017/0267256)
determining a trajectory based on movement data from an accelerometer of a
client device;
Minster [0035] Driving behavior may include any information relating to how an autonomous vehicle drives (e.g., actuates brakes, accelerator, steering, other controls) given a set of instructions (e.g., a route). The information relating to the driving behavior of an autonomous vehicle, in some embodiments, produces information that is observable by a passenger of the autonomous vehicle or an external entity. Thus, the driving behavior in such embodiments may include actions or operations performed by an autonomous vehicle while performing a route that is readily observable by an entity. The actions or operations performed by the autonomous vehicle may be observed by one or more of a human passenger's five senses and/or otherwise, observed by one or more sensors (e.g., camera, gyrometer, accelerometer, etc.) associated with an entity.
Interpretation:
Trajectory = autonomous vehicle while performing a route
Movement data = how an autonomous vehicle drives (e.g., actuates brakes, accelerator, steering, other controls)
Client device = by one or more sensors (e.g., camera, gyrometer, accelerometer, etc.) associated with an entity.
in response to the trajectory being within configured limits:
Minster [0035] Driving behavior may include any information relating to how an autonomous vehicle drives (e.g., actuates brakes, accelerator, steering, other controls) given a set of instructions (e.g., a route).
incorporating the trajectory into one or more facts, each fact comprising an
entity, an observation, and an object;
Minster [0035] Driving behavior may include any information relating to how an autonomous vehicle drives (e.g., actuates brakes, accelerator, steering, other controls) given a set of instructions (e.g., a route). The information relating to the driving behavior of an autonomous vehicle, in some embodiments, produces information that is observable by a passenger of the autonomous vehicle or an external entity. Thus, the driving behavior in such embodiments may include actions or operations performed by an autonomous vehicle while performing a route that is readily observable by an entity. The actions or operations performed by the autonomous vehicle may be observed by one or more of a human passenger's five senses and/or otherwise, observed by one or more sensors (e.g., camera, gyrometer, accelerometer, etc.) associated with an entity.
Interpretation:
Entity = entity
Observation = information that is observable by a passenger of the autonomous vehicle or an external entity.
Object = produces information that is observable by a passenger of the autonomous vehicle or an external entity
Interpretation: object = details of observation see specification [0087]
the object is actually a collection of objects that describe the details of the observation
comparing the one or more facts to historical data; and
Minster claim 2, The system of claim 1, wherein the computing platform is further configured to: collect vehicle behavior feedback, during and/or after the one or more routes of the autonomous vehicle involving the passenger, from the passenger of the autonomous vehicle; and modify the initial driving behavior of the autonomous vehicle based on the vehicle behavior feedback.
Interpretation:
historical = collect vehicle behavior feedback, during and/or after the one or more routes
comparing = modify the initial driving behavior of the autonomous vehicle based on the vehicle behavior feedback
determining one or more closest matches between the one or more facts and
the historical data.
Minster [0036] Driving behavior may additionally or alternatively include any information about how an autonomous vehicle calculates routes (e.g., prioritizing fastest time vs. shortest distance), and/or how an autonomous vehicle responds to environmental stimulus (e.g., how an autonomous vehicle behaves if it is raining, or if an animal jumps in front of the vehicle). Driving behavior may additionally or alternatively include information relating to manners in which an autonomous vehicle operates during driving and non-driving functions (e.g., parked or similar non-moving states). Some examples of elements that may contribute to driving behavior include acceleration constraints, deceleration constraints, speed constraints, steering constraints, suspension settings, routing preferences (e.g., scenic routes, faster routes, no highways), lighting preferences, sound preferences (e.g., music or other audio projected by the AV), “legal ambiguity” conduct (e.g., in a solid-green left turn situation, whether a vehicle pulls out into the intersection or waits at the intersection line), action profiles (e.g., how a vehicle turns, maneuvers, or changes lanes), and action frequency constraints (e.g., how often a vehicle changes lanes or performs driving maneuvers).
Interpretation:
closest matches = how an autonomous vehicle calculates routes
Claim(s) 13 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Minster in view of Kirkpatrick (US 2008/0147652).
Minster discloses elements of the claimed invention as noted but does not disclose selecting content of interest from the one or more closest matches; and incorporating the selected content of interest into the historical data. However, Kirkpatrick discloses:
Kirkpatrick claim 20. The computer readable medium of claim 19, further comprising, when the identified physical address has a match, then saving the identified physical address in a recent physical address list and when a close match is selected, then saving the selected close match to the recent physical address list.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Minster to obtain above limitation based on the teachings of Kirkpatrick for the purpose of comparing an address to a library of physical addresses to determine if exact or close matches exist, see abstract.
Claim(s) 14 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Minster in view of Brinkman (US 10,553.042).
Minster discloses elements of the claimed invention as noted but does not disclose in response to a control activation of the client device: transmitting, by the client device, the one or more facts to a server, performing, by the server, the comparing and the determining the one or
more closest matches, wherein the historical data comprises stored trajectories
from one or more other client devices; and transmitting, by the server, the one or more closest matches to the client device. However, Brinkman discloses:
Brinkman col 12, lines 55-67 Additionally, when determining whether or not a current driving trip corresponds to a driving trip pattern, the driving analysis server 220 may compare the number of matching previous driving trips to a minimum driving pattern threshold. For example, if the current driving trip data matches only one previous driving trip in a driving trip database for a vehicle 210, then the driving analysis server 220 may determine that the current driving trip does not correspond to a driving pattern. In this example, the driving analysis server 220 may identify the current driving trip as matching an existing driving pattern only if it matches a minimum threshold number (e.g., 5, 10, 100, etc.) or threshold frequency (1 per week, 100 per year, etc.) of previous driving trips.
Brinkman col 3, lines 50-55, Input/Output (I/O) 109 may include a microphone, keypad, touch screen, and/or stylus through which a user of the computing device 101 may provide input, and may also include one or more of a speaker for providing audio output and a video display device for providing textual, audiovisual and/or graphical output.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Minster to obtain above limitation based on the teachings of Brinkman for the purpose of using telematics systems such as on-board diagnostics (OBD) systems in automobiles and other vehicles. OBD systems may provide information from the vehicle's on-board computers and sensors, allowing users to monitor a wide variety of information relating to the vehicle systems, see column 1 lines 45-55.
Claim(s) 15 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Minster in view of Brinkman in view of Zhang (US 9,674,271)
Minster in view of Brinkman discloses elements of the claimed invention as noted but does not disclose wherein the server only performs the comparing and determining for stored trajectories where an accelerometer detected movement of the one or more other client devices.
However, Zhang discloses:
Zhang col 6 lines 20-30 The sensors 368 in the client device 10 may include one or more proximity sensors for turning off and disabling the touch-sensitive display 352 when the client device 10 is placed near the user's ear (e.g., when the user is making a phone call). The client device 10 may also include one or more accelerometers for detecting the movement of the client device 10, a magnetometer for determining the orientation of the client device 10, a GPS receiver for obtaining the geographical location information of the client device 10, and one or more image sensors for capturing still images or video streams.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Minster in view of Brinkman to obtain above limitation based on the teachings of Zhang for the purpose of storing information items from a client device to a remote server, see abstract.
Claim(s) 16 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Minster in view of Raghavan (US 2019/0147042).
Minster discloses elements of the claimed invention as noted but does not disclose wherein in response to the accelerometer produces movement data: performing one or more directed searches based on the trajectory, comprising: obtaining a URL for a preferred website from a stored location; accessing a website page corresponding to the URL; requesting one or more entities, observations, or objects not present on the client device;
receiving data related to the one or more entities, observations, or objects not
present on the client device; and incorporating the received data into facts.
However, Raghavan discloses:
Raghavan [0026] According to other examples, the trip identification engine 124 uses the user's browsing history (i.e., browse or search signals 114) to identify locations that the user has visited, POIs searched for by the user, etc. In some examples, the trip identification engine 124 is operative or configured to identify locations, POIs, or entities using a rich document understanding pipeline of search engines (e.g., if the user books a flight for a trip on a particular website, the trip identification engine can identify the travel dates and the departure and destination locations of the trip from the website URL and page details).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Minster to obtain above limitation based on the teachings of Raghavan for the purpose of providing a trip content generation system which comprises various components for automatically generating a personalized travel diary, see [0017].
Claim(s) 17 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Minster in view of Suzuki (US 9,631,937).
Minster discloses elements of the claimed invention as noted but does not disclose wherein the configured limits prevent trajectories that are one or more of outside a distance range from the client device, a location range, a time or date range, or not a specified type of travel from being incorporated into facts.
However, Suzuki discloses:
Suzuki col 15 lines 53-55, According to this, it is possible to prevent a search for a route where a distance to the destination becomes too far. Furthermore, the user may choose to expand the area A1 if the user has more available time to reach the destination.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Minster to obtain above limitation based on the teachings of Suzuki for the purpose of proving an information processing apparatus, route navigator, method and computer program product with which it is possible to search for a route where a passage frequency is low, see column 1 lines 20-27.
Claim(s) 18 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Minster in view of Viswanathan (US 11,188,765)
Minster discloses elements of the claimed invention as noted but does not disclose determining the trajectory based on triangulation using wireless networking, rather than the movement data from the accelerometer. However, Viswanathan discloses:
Viswanathan claim 7, The method of claim 1, further comprising: receiving real-time stream of vehicle trajectory; and performing the feature triangulation based on determining that the vehicle trajectory indicates that the vehicle has passed the feature or approached the feature to within a threshold distance.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Minster to obtain above limitation based on the teachings of Viswanathan for the purpose of receiving a real-time stream of images captured by a sensor of a vehicle during a drive; extracting a sequence of two or more images from the real-time stream; reversing the sequence of the two or more images; and providing the reversed sequence of the two or more images for feature triangulation, see abstract.
Claim(s) 19 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Minster in view of Hiltch (US 12,130,844).
Minster discloses elements of the claimed invention as noted but does not disclose wherein determining the one or more closest matches between the one or more facts and the historical data comprises: organizing the matches by a number of common instances of an entity, an
observation, or an object; and limiting the number of matches to a predetermined number of matches having a highest number of common instances. However, Hiltch discloses:
Hiltch col 13 lines 19-23, the extracted data is compared to data related to one or more entities indicated in a second database. In an embodiment, S530 may include identifying matching features between the instance of the entity in the first database and the data in the second database.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Minster to obtain above limitation based on the teachings of Hiltch for the purpose of resolving entities between databases, see abstract.
Claim(s) 20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Minster in view of Tran (US 2014/0308930).
Minster discloses elements of the claimed invention as noted but does not disclose generating one or more search requests to a search engine application to perform one or more directed searches without user initiation. However, Tran discloses:
Tran [0136] In an embodiment, at step 910, the method 900 includes locating or searching for glanceable information using search engine. This can include local events for the day or week, for example. The method 900 can autonomously search information using a search engine by sending requests to the phone and searching using the Internet using cellular connections. The system can run a predetermined search query on a periodic basis and transmitting a search result over the search channel. The contents can be transmitted using Bluetooth protocol or alternatively through SMS protocol, Internet protocol, or encrypted protocol. The device periodically updates the contents with fresh information. In an embodiment, at step 912, the method 900 includes locating glanceable information from known sources, for example the wearable device can retrieve information from the user's favorite social network postings such as Facebook friend's postings, or can retrieve updates from LinkedIn profiles and provides glanceable information updates to the user. The automated search allows users to check traffic reports, sports events, weather forecasts, stock prices, news, movie listings and other information and receive messages.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Minster to obtain above limitation based on the teachings of Tran for the purpose of receiving and interacting with downloadable glanceable content on a mobile device.
Claim(s) 21 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Minster in view of Tran in view of Waisbein (US 2015/0160847).
Minster in view of Tran discloses elements of the claimed invention as noted but does not disclose wherein the one or more directed searches comprises internet
searches based on specific information requests for one or more of a location, a time
range, a date range, a travel-related time, travel directions, or a service or product
cost or availability. However, Waisbein discloses:
Waisbein [0244] Turning now to FIG. 8, there is shown a data record of interest that represents a search query in the data repository in accordance with the presently disclosed subject matter. As seen, the data record of interest 800 includes two portions: metadata 810 and a series of Rounds 820. Metadata 810 at the prefix of the data record represents the general information of the environment for the entity of interest that a user is searching for, such as the location, date and time etc.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Minster in view of Tran to obtain above limitation based on the teachings of Waisbein for the purpose of providing a data record of interest that represents a search query in the data repository, see [0244]
Claim(s) 22 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Minster in view of Tran in view of Raghavan.
Minster in view of Tran discloses elements of the claimed invention as noted but does not disclose wherein performing the one or more directed searches comprises:
obtaining a URL for a preferred website from a stored location;
accessing a website page corresponding to the URL;
requesting the one or more entities, observations, or objects not present in the
client device data; and
receiving data related to the one or more entities, observations, or objects not
present in the client device data. However, Raghavan discloses:
Raghavan [0026] According to other examples, the trip identification engine 124 uses the user's browsing history (i.e., browse or search signals 114) to identify locations that the user has visited, POIs searched for by the user, etc. In some examples, the trip identification engine 124 is operative or configured to identify locations, POIs, or entities using a rich document understanding pipeline of search engines (e.g., if the user books a flight for a trip on a particular website, the trip identification engine can identify the travel dates and the departure and destination locations of the trip from the website URL and page details).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Minster in view of Tran to obtain above limitation based on the teachings of Raghavan for the purpose of providing a trip content generation system which comprises various components for automatically generating a personalized travel diary, see [0017].
Claim(s) 23 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Minster (US 2017/0267256)
Minster discloses:
a processor; and
a memory, coupled to the processor, comprising instructions that when executed
by the processor are configured to:
Minster [0082]
determine a trajectory based on movement data from an accelerometer of a
client device;
Minster [0035] Driving behavior may include any information relating to how an autonomous vehicle drives (e.g., actuates brakes, accelerator, steering, other controls) given a set of instructions (e.g., a route). The information relating to the driving behavior of an autonomous vehicle, in some embodiments, produces information that is observable by a passenger of the autonomous vehicle or an external entity. Thus, the driving behavior in such embodiments may include actions or operations performed by an autonomous vehicle while performing a route that is readily observable by an entity. The actions or operations performed by the autonomous vehicle may be observed by one or more of a human passenger's five senses and/or otherwise, observed by one or more sensors (e.g., camera, gyrometer, accelerometer, etc.) associated with an entity.
Interpretation:
Trajectory = autonomous vehicle while performing a route
Movement data = how an autonomous vehicle drives (e.g., actuates brakes, accelerator, steering, other controls)
Client device = by one or more sensors (e.g., camera, gyrometer, accelerometer, etc.) associated with an entity.
in response to the trajectory being within configured limits:
Minster [0035] Driving behavior may include any information relating to how an autonomous vehicle drives (e.g., actuates brakes, accelerator, steering, other controls) given a set of instructions (e.g., a route).
incorporating the trajectory into one or more facts, each fact comprising an
entity, an observation, and an object;
Minster [0035] Driving behavior may include any information relating to how an autonomous vehicle drives (e.g., actuates brakes, accelerator, steering, other controls) given a set of instructions (e.g., a route). The information relating to the driving behavior of an autonomous vehicle, in some embodiments, produces information that is observable by a passenger of the autonomous vehicle or an external entity. Thus, the driving behavior in such embodiments may include actions or operations performed by an autonomous vehicle while performing a route that is readily observable by an entity. The actions or operations performed by the autonomous vehicle may be observed by one or more of a human passenger's five senses and/or otherwise, observed by one or more sensors (e.g., camera, gyrometer, accelerometer, etc.) associated with an entity.
Interpretation:
Entity = entity
Observation = information that is observable by a passenger of the autonomous vehicle or an external entity.
Object = produces information that is observable by a passenger of the autonomous vehicle or an external entity
Interpretation: object = details of observation see specification [0087]
the object is actually a collection of objects that describe the details of the observation
compare the one or more facts to historical data; and
Minster claim 2, The system of claim 1, wherein the computing platform is further configured to: collect vehicle behavior feedback, during and/or after the one or more routes of the autonomous vehicle involving the passenger, from the passenger of the autonomous vehicle; and modify the initial driving behavior of the autonomous vehicle based on the vehicle behavior feedback.
Interpretation:
historical = collect vehicle behavior feedback, during and/or after the one or more routes
comparing = modify the initial driving behavior of the autonomous vehicle based on the vehicle behavior feedback
determine one or more closest matches between the one or more facts and
the historical data.
Minster [0036] Driving behavior may additionally or alternatively include any information about how an autonomous vehicle calculates routes (e.g., prioritizing fastest time vs. shortest distance), and/or how an autonomous vehicle responds to environmental stimulus (e.g., how an autonomous vehicle behaves if it is raining, or if an animal jumps in front of the vehicle). Driving behavior may additionally or alternatively include information relating to manners in which an autonomous vehicle operates during driving and non-driving functions (e.g., parked or similar non-moving states). Some examples of elements that may contribute to driving behavior include acceleration constraints, deceleration constraints, speed constraints, steering constraints, suspension settings, routing preferences (e.g., scenic routes, faster routes, no highways), lighting preferences, sound preferences (e.g., music or other audio projected by the AV), “legal ambiguity” conduct (e.g., in a solid-green left turn situation, whether a vehicle pulls out into the intersection or waits at the intersection line), action profiles (e.g., how a vehicle turns, maneuvers, or changes lanes), and action frequency constraints (e.g., how often a vehicle changes lanes or performs driving maneuvers).
Interpretation:
closest matches = how an autonomous vehicle calculates routes
Claim(s) 24 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Minster in view of Kirkpatrick (US 2008/0147652).
Minster discloses elements of the claimed invention as noted but does not disclose select content of interest from the one or more closest matches; and incorporate the selected content of interest into the historical data. However, Kirkpatrick discloses:
Kirkpatrick claim 20. The computer readable medium of claim 19, further comprising, when the identified physical address has a match, then saving the identified physical address in a recent physical address list and when a close match is selected, then saving the selected close match to the recent physical address list.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Minster to obtain above limitation based on the teachings of Kirkpatrick for the purpose of comparing an address to a library of physical addresses to determine if exact or close matches exist, see abstract.
Claim(s) 25 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Minster in view of Brinkman (US 10,553.042).
Minster discloses elements of the claimed invention as noted but does not disclose
transmit, by the client device, the one or more facts to a server, wherein a
processor of the server is configured to:
compare and determine the one or more closest matches, wherein the
historical data comprises stored trajectories from one or more other client
devices; and transmit the one or more closest matches to the client device.
. However, Brinkman discloses:
Brinkman col 12, lines 55-67 Additionally, when determining whether or not a current driving trip corresponds to a driving trip pattern, the driving analysis server 220 may compare the number of matching previous driving trips to a minimum driving pattern threshold. For example, if the current driving trip data matches only one previous driving trip in a driving trip database for a vehicle 210, then the driving analysis server 220 may determine that the current driving trip does not correspond to a driving pattern. In this example, the driving analysis server 220 may identify the current driving trip as matching an existing driving pattern only if it matches a minimum threshold number (e.g., 5, 10, 100, etc.) or threshold frequency (1 per week, 100 per year, etc.) of previous driving trips.
Brinkman col 3, lines 50-55, Input/Output (I/O) 109 may include a microphone, keypad, touch screen, and/or stylus through which a user of the computing device 101 may provide input, and may also include one or more of a speaker for providing audio output and a video display device for providing textual, audiovisual and/or graphical output.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Minster to obtain above limitation based on the teachings of Brinkman for the purpose of using telematics systems such as on-board diagnostics (OBD) systems in automobiles and other vehicles. OBD systems may provide information from the vehicle's on-board computers and sensors, allowing users to monitor a wide variety of information relating to the vehicle systems, see column 1 lines 45-55.
Claim(s) 26 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Minster in view of Brinkman in view of Zhang (US 9,674,271)
Minster in view of Brinkman discloses elements of the claimed invention as noted but does not disclose wherein the server only compares and determines for stored trajectories where an accelerometer detects movement of the one or more other client devices.
However, Zhang discloses:
Zhang col 6 lines 20-30 The sensors 368 in the client device 10 may include one or more proximity sensors for turning off and disabling the touch-sensitive display 352 when the client device 10 is placed near the user's ear (e.g., when the user is making a phone call). The client device 10 may also include one or more accelerometers for detecting the movement of the client device 10, a magnetometer for determining the orientation of the client device 10, a GPS receiver for obtaining the geographical location information of the client device 10, and one or more image sensors for capturing still images or video streams.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Minster in view of Brinkman to obtain above limitation based on the teachings of Zhang for the purpose of storing information items from a client device to a remote server, see abstract.
Claim(s) 27 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Minster in view of Raghavan (US 2019/0147042).
Minster discloses elements of the claimed invention as noted but does not disclose wherein in response to the accelerometer produces movement data, the processor is configured to:
perform one or more directed searches based on the trajectory, comprising the processor is configured to:
obtain a URL for a preferred website from a stored location;
access a website page corresponding to the URL;
request one or more entities, observations, or objects not present on the client
device;
receive data related to the one or more entities, observations, or objects not
present on the client device; and
incorporate the received data into facts.
However, Raghavan discloses:
Raghavan [0026] According to other examples, the trip identification engine 124 uses the user's browsing history (i.e., browse or search signals 114) to identify locations that the user has visited, POIs searched for by the user, etc. In some examples, the trip identification engine 124 is operative or configured to identify locations, POIs, or entities using a rich document understanding pipeline of search engines (e.g., if the user books a flight for a trip on a particular website, the trip identification engine can identify the travel dates and the departure and destination locations of the trip from the website URL and page details).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Minster to obtain above limitation based on the teachings of Raghavan for the purpose of providing a trip content generation system which comprises various components for automatically generating a personalized travel diary, see [0017].
Claim(s) 28 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Minster in view of Suzuki (US 9,631,937).
Minster discloses elements of the claimed invention as noted but does not disclose wherein the configured limits prevent trajectories that are one or more of outside a distance range from the client device, a location range, a time or date range, or not a specified type of travel from being incorporated into facts.
However, Suzuki discloses:
Suzuki col 15 lines 53-55, According to this, it is possible to prevent a search for a route where a distance to the destination becomes too far. Furthermore, the user may choose to expand the area A1 if the user has more available time to reach the destination.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Minster to obtain above limitation based on the teachings of Suzuki for the purpose of proving an information processing apparatus, route navigator, method and computer program product with which it is possible to search for a route where a passage frequency is low, see column 1 lines 20-27.
Claim(s) 29 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Minster in view of Viswanathan (US 11,188,765)
Minster discloses elements of the claimed invention as noted but does not disclose determine the trajectory based on triangulation using wireless networking, rather than the movement data from the accelerometer.
However, Viswanathan discloses:
Viswanathan claim 7, The method of claim 1, further comprising: receiving real-time stream of vehicle trajectory; and performing the feature triangulation based on determining that the vehicle trajectory indicates that the vehicle has passed the feature or approached the feature to within a threshold distance.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Minster to obtain above limitation based on the teachings of Viswanathan for the purpose of receiving a real-time stream of images captured by a sensor of a vehicle during a drive; extracting a sequence of two or more images from the real-time stream; reversing the sequence of the two or more images; and providing the reversed sequence of the two or more images for feature triangulation, see abstract.
Claim(s) 30 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Minster in view of Hiltch (US 12,130,844).
Minster discloses elements of the claimed invention as noted but does not disclose wherein the processor determines the one or more closest matches between the one or more facts and the historical data comprises the processor is configured to: organize the matches by a number of common instances of an entity, an observation, or an object; and limit the number of matches to a predetermined number of matches having a highest number of common instances.
However, Hiltch discloses:
Hiltch col 13 lines 19-23, the extracted data is compared to data related to one or more entities indicated in a second database. In an embodiment, S530 may include identifying matching features between the instance of the entity in the first database and the data in the second database.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Minster to obtain above limitation based on the teachings of Hiltch for the purpose of resolving entities between databases, see abstract.
Claim(s) 31 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Minster in view of Tran (US 2014/0308930).
Minster discloses elements of the claimed invention as noted but does not disclose generating
generate one or more search requests to a search engine application to perform one or more directed searches without user initiation.
. However, Tran discloses:
Tran [0136] In an embodiment, at step 910, the method 900 includes locating or searching for glanceable information using search engine. This can include local events for the day or week, for example. The method 900 can autonomously search information using a search engine by sending requests to the phone and searching using the Internet using cellular connections. The system can run a predetermined search query on a periodic basis and transmitting a search result over the search channel. The contents can be transmitted using Bluetooth protocol or alternatively through SMS protocol, Internet protocol, or encrypted protocol. The device periodically updates the contents with fresh information. In an embodiment, at step 912, the method 900 includes locating glanceable information from known sources, for example the wearable device can retrieve information from the user's favorite social network postings such as Facebook friend's postings, or can retrieve updates from LinkedIn profiles and provides glanceable information updates to the user. The automated search allows users to check traffic reports, sports events, weather forecasts, stock prices, news, movie listings and other information and receive messages.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Minster to obtain above limitation based on the teachings of Tran for the purpose of receiving and interacting with downloadable glanceable content on a mobile device.
Claim(s) 32 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Minster in view of Tran in view of Waisbein (US 2015/0160847).
Minster in view of Tran discloses elements of the claimed invention as noted but does not disclose wherein the one or more directed searches comprises internet searches based on specific information requests for one or more of a location, a time range, a date range, a travel-related time, travel directions, or a service or product cost or availability.
. However, Waisbein discloses:
Waisbein [0244] Turning now to FIG. 8, there is shown a data record of interest that represents a search query in the data repository in accordance with the presently disclosed subject matter. As seen, the data record of interest 800 includes two portions: metadata 810 and a series of Rounds 820. Metadata 810 at the prefix of the data record represents the general information of the environment for the entity of interest that a user is searching for, such as the location, date and time etc.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Minster in view of Tran to obtain above limitation based on the teachings of Waisbein for the purpose of providing a data record of interest that represents a search query in the data repository, see [0244]
Claim(s) 33 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Minster in view of Tran in view of Raghavan.
Minster in view of Tran discloses elements of the claimed invention as noted but does not disclose wherein the processor performs the one or more directed
searches comprises the processor is configured to:
obtain a URL for a preferred website from a stored location;
access a website page corresponding to the URL;
request the one or more entities, observations, or objects not present in the client
device data; and
receive data related to the one or more entities, observations, or objects not
present in the client device data.
However, Raghavan discloses:
Raghavan [0026] According to other examples, the trip identification engine 124 uses the user's browsing history (i.e., browse or search signals 114) to identify locations that the user has visited, POIs searched for by the user, etc. In some examples, the trip identification engine 124 is operative or configured to identify locations, POIs, or entities using a rich document understanding pipeline of search engines (e.g., if the user books a flight for a trip on a particular website, the trip identification engine can identify the travel dates and the departure and destination locations of the trip from the website URL and page details).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Minster in view of Tran to obtain above limitation based on the teachings of Raghavan for the purpose of providing a trip content generation system which comprises various components for automatically generating a personalized travel diary, see [0017].
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ETIENNE PIERRE LEROUX whose telephone number is (571)272-4022. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 8:00 am to 4:30 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, Apu Mofiz can be reached at 571 272 4080. 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.
/ETIENNE P LEROUX/Primary Examiner of Art Unit 2161