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 .
For compact prosecution, Gregory Winter was contacted on March 18, 2026 to request that Applicant submit a Terminal Disclaimer directed to Patent Number US 12292920 B2 to preclude a double patenting rejection, however, no response has been received.
The title of the invention is not descriptive. A new title is required that is clearly indicative of the invention to which the claims are directed.
Claim 1 is cancelled.
Claims 2-20, filed November 07, 2025 are examined on the merits.
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.
Claims 1-5, 10-15 and 20 are rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claims1-5, 9-14, and 17 of U.S. Patent No. 12292920. Although the claims at issue are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other because the allowed claims are specific specie of the instant claimed invention.
Instant Application: 19198559
Patent Number: US 12292920 B2
2. (New) A system, comprising: one or more processors configured to: receive a set of exemplar locations;
for an exemplar location in the set of exemplar locations:
determine an identifier of a tile corresponding to the exemplar location; and
determine an exemplar feature vector corresponding to the identifier of the tile, wherein determining the exemplar feature vector comprises extracting visual features from the tile at least in part by performing feature extraction on spectral data associated with pixels of the tile;
for the exemplar feature vector, determine a set of visual neighbor feature vectors corresponding to tiles determined to be visual neighbors of the tile corresponding to the exemplar location, wherein inclusion of a visual neighbor feature vector in the set of visual neighbor feature vectors is based at least in part on determining a distance or similarity measure between the visual neighbor feature vector and the exemplar feature vector; and
associate the exemplar feature vector with the set of visual neighbor feature vectors at least in part by storing a set of files comprising: identifiers of the tiles determined to be visual neighbors of the tile corresponding to the exemplar location; and
the set of visual neighbor feature vectors corresponding to the identifiers of the tiles determined to be visual neighbors, including the visual neighbor feature vector that is included based at least in part on the determining of the distance or similarity measure; and
wherein at query time, a search involving a query image tile is facilitated at least in part by:
performing a first comparison between a query feature vector corresponding to the query image tile and the exemplar feature vector;
based at least in part on the first comparison between the query feature vector and the exemplar feature vector, performing a second comparison between the query feature vector and visual neighbor feature vectors in the stored set of visual neighbor feature vectors determined for the exemplar feature vector; and
based at least in part on the second comparison, returning, as output, a tile identifier of the visual neighbor feature vector included in the stored set of visual neighbor feature vectors determined for the exemplar feature vector; and a memory coupled to the one or more processors and configured to provide the one or more processors with instructions.
1.A system, comprising: one or more processors configured to: receive a set of exemplar locations;
for an exemplar location in the set of exemplar locations:
determine an identifier of a tile corresponding to the exemplar location; and
determine an exemplar feature vector corresponding to the identifier of the tile, wherein determining the exemplar feature vector comprises extracting visual features from the tile at least in part by performing feature extraction on spectral data associated with pixels of the tile; for the exemplar feature vector, determine a set of visual neighbor feature vectors corresponding to tiles determined to be visual neighbors of the tile corresponding to the exemplar location, wherein inclusion of a visual neighbor feature vector in the set of visual neighbor feature vectors is based at least in part on determining a hamming distance between the visual neighbor feature vector and the exemplar feature vector; and
associate the exemplar feature vector with the set of visual neighbor feature vectors at least in part by storing a set of files comprising: identifiers of the tiles determined to be visual neighbors of the tile corresponding to the exemplar location; and
the set of visual neighbor feature vectors corresponding to the identifiers of the tiles determined to be visual neighbors, including the visual neighbor feature vector that is included based at least in part on the determining of the hamming distance; and
wherein at query time, a search involving a query image tile is facilitated at least in part by: performing a first comparison between a query feature vector corresponding to the query image tile and the exemplar feature vector;
based at least in part on the first comparison between the query feature vector and the exemplar feature vector, performing a second comparison between the query feature vector and visual neighbor feature vectors in the stored set of visual neighbor feature vectors determined for the exemplar feature vector; and
based at least in part on the second comparison, returning, as output, a tile identifier of the visual neighbor feature vector included in the stored set of visual neighbor feature vectors determined for the exemplar feature vector; and a memory coupled to the one or more processors and configured to provide the one or more processors with instructions.
3. (New) The system of claim 2, wherein the exemplar location comprises a pair of latitude and longitude coordinates.
2. The system of claim 1, wherein the exemplar location comprises a pair of latitude and longitude coordinates.
4. (New) The system of claim 2, wherein the set of exemplar locations comprises a set of randomly selected locations.
3. The system of claim 1, wherein the set of exemplar locations comprises a set of randomly selected locations.
5. (New) The system of claim 2, wherein the set of exemplar locations comprises locations of a set of points of interest.
4. The system of claim 1, wherein the set of exemplar locations comprises locations of a set of points of interest.
6. (New) The system of claim 5, wherein the set of exemplar locations is received based at least in part on a query for a type of location.
5. The system of claim 4, wherein the set of exemplar locations is received based at least in part on a query for a type of location.
Claims 10-15 and 20 are directed to a method and computer program product comprising the same steps as claims 1-6 above.
Claims 9-14 and 17 are directed to a method and computer program product comprising the same steps as claims 1-5 above.
Basis for nonstatutory double patenting
The claims of US 12292920 B2 is directed to an invention requiring the specific embodiment of “a hamming distance” while, the instant claims are directed to a similar invention requiring a broader embodiment of “a distance or similarity measure.” The allowed claims of US 12292920 B2 is a specie of the broader claimed invention. Therefore, the allowed claims would reasonably anticipate the instant claim invention.
PERTINENT PRIOR ART
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Kansal et al. (US 20080226130 A1) discloses the key features are analyzed to eliminate spurious key feature matches. The vector difference of the pixel locations of the matched key feature in the input image and the corresponding matched key feature in the previously stored image for each matched pair is computed. Each difference vector consists of two elements, corresponding to the horizontal and vertical dimensions. Threshold distances are determined by the matcher module 318 for the horizontal and vertical components respectively. This determination is based upon the distance vectors for each pair of matched key features. All the matched key features for which the horizontal and vertical components of difference vectors lie within threshold distances are considered non-spurious matches and are retained. The remaining key features are rejected as spurious matches by the key feature matching module 318 ([0053]).
Chen, X. (US 20100328462 A1) discloses after or while comparing the gradient vectors or invariant components corresponding to the image 401 to the data library 441, it is determined that the image 401 includes a common geographic feature (such as a speed limit sign) based on a match with the reference invariant components 449. Then, the image 401 may be identified to a map developer as an image including a speed limit sign or desired common feature to enhance or develop a navigation or map database, such as the database 132 ([0037]).
Lockerman et al. (Creating Texture Exemplars from Unconstrained Images, 2013) discloses the user can generate texture tiles interactively by clicking on a point in the source image. The set of tiles can be refined interactively, if desired, by selecting additional points, rejecting tiles, and adjusting a single parameter.
Lockerman et al. (US 9007373 B2) discloses a computer-readable medium for creating texture exemplars from images are provided. The texture exemplars are created by receiving an image containing a plurality of pixels representing a plurality of textures, wherein each texture in the plurality of textures is configured to be selectable by a user, determining a desired texture in the plurality of textures contained within the image and defining a scale of the desired texture, generating a heat mapping of the image, wherein the heat mapping indicates location of the desired texture, generating, based on the heat mapping, a plurality of tiles corresponding to the defined scale of the desired texture, and generating an exemplar of desired texture (Abstract).
Davide Mottin (Exemplar queries: a new way of searching, 2016) discloses a novel query paradigm that considers a user query as an example of the data in which the user is interested (Abstract).
Lionel Guegen (Classifying Compound Structures in Satellite Images: A Compressed Representation for Fast Queries, 2014) discloses while pixeland object-based classification approaches are widely used for extracting information from imagery, recent studies have shown the importance of spatial contexts for discriminating more specific and challenging classes. This paper proposes a new compact representation for the fast query/classification of compound structures from very high resolution optical remote sensing imagery (Abstract).
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 7-9 and 16-19 are objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
CONCLUSION
Patent applicants with problems or questions regarding electronic images that can be viewed in the Patent Application Information Retrieval system (PAIR) can now contact the USPTO's Patent Electronic Business Center (Patent EBC) for assistance. Representatives are available to answer your questions daily from 6 am to midnight (EST). The toll free number is (866) 217-9197. When calling please have your application serial or patent number, the type of document you are having an image problem with, the number of pages and the specific nature of the problem. The Patent Electronic Business Center will notify applicants of the resolution of the problem within 5-7 business days. Applicants can also check PAIR to confirm that the problem has been corrected. The USPTO's Patent Electronic Business Center is a complete service center supporting all patent business on the Internet. The USPTO's PAIR system provides Internet-based access to patent application status and history information. It also enables applicants to view the scanned images of their own application file folder(s) as well as general patent information available to the public.
For all other customer support, please call the USPTO Call Center (UCC) at 800-786-9199. The USPTO's official fax number is 571-272-8300.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to C. Dune Ly, whose telephone number is (571) 272-0716. The examiner can normally be reached on Monday-Friday from 8 A.M. to 4 PM ET.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner's supervisor, Neveen Abel-Jalil, can be reached on 571-270-0474.
/Cheyne D Ly/
Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2152
3/26/2026