DETAILED ACTION
This office action is in response to the initial filing dated May 20, 2025.
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 1-19 are currently pending.
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 7-9 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.
Claim 7 recites the limitation "each stage" in line 6. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. Claim 7, depending from claim 1, does not recite multiple stages and does not clarify how the stages are incorporated in the claimed concepts.
Claims 8-9 are rejected as being dependent from a rejected base claim.
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 1-2, 7-14, and 16 are rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claims 1, 3-4, 8-10, and 21 of U.S. Patent No. 10,657,740. Although the claims at issue are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other because the patent claims include all of the limitations of the instant application claims, respectively. The patent claims also include additional limitations. Hence, the instant application claims are generic to the species of invention covered by the respective patent claims. As such, the instant application claims are anticipated by the patent claims and are therefore not patentably distinct therefrom. (See Eli Lilly and Co. v. Barr Laboratories Inc., 58 USPQ2D 1869, "a later genus claim limitation is anticipated by, and therefore not patentably distinct from, an earlier species claim", In re Goodman, 29 USPQ2d 2010, "Thus, the generic invention is 'anticipated' by the species of the patented invention" and the instant “application claims are generic to species of invention covered by the patent claim, and since without terminal disclaimer, extant species claims preclude issuance of generic application claims”).
As to claim 1, US Patent #10,657,740 claims an information processing apparatus comprising:
a memory configured to store instructions; and
a processor configured to execute the instructions to:
receive a first facial image of a user who is present in the vicinity of a display terminal; and
display first display information related to boarding information associated with a second facial image of the user, the first display information being displayed larger than second display information that is different from the first display information,
wherein the first display information is displayed based on a comparison between the first facial image and the second facial image (Claim 1).
As to claim 2, depending from the information processing apparatus according to claim 1, US Patent #10,657,740 claims wherein the second display information is different from the boarding information associated with the user (Claim 1).
As to claim 7, depending from the information processing apparatus according to claim 1, US Patent #10,657,740 claims wherein the processor is further configured to execute the instructions to:
display the first information including congestion information based on a number of people determined based on sensors installed at each stage (Claim 8).
As to claim 8, depending from the information processing apparatus according to claim 7, US Patent #10,657,740 claims wherein the congestion information indicates a degree of congestion in a place for a stage of the user before the boarding stage (Claim 9).
As to claim 9, depending from the information processing apparatus according to claim 7, US Patent #10,657,740 claims wherein the congestion information indicates an availability information, waiting time or the number of waiting persons in a line (Claim 10).
As to claim 10, depending from the information processing apparatus according to claim 1, US Patent #10,657,740 claims wherein the processor is further configured to execute the instructions to:
display the second display information including advertisement information (Claim 3).
As to claim 11, depending from the information processing apparatus according to claim 10, US Patent #10,657,740 claims wherein the processor is further configured to execute the instructions to:
select the advertisement information included in the second display information in accordance with the user (Claim 4).
As to claim 12, US Patent #10,657,740 claims an information processing apparatus comprising:
a memory configured to store instructions; and
a processor configured to execute the instructions to:
receive a first facial image of a user who is present in front of a display terminal;
match the first facial image with a second facial image, among a plurality of second facial images; and
output information to display first display information related to boarding information associated with the second facial image of the user, the first display information output to be displayed larger than second display information that is different from the first display information (Claim 1).
As to claim 13, US Patent #10,657,740 claims an information processing apparatus comprising:
a memory configured to store instructions; and
a processor configured to execute the instructions to:
receive a first facial image of a user who is present in front of a display terminal;
match the first facial image with a second facial image, among a plurality of second facial images; and
display first display information related to boarding information associated with the second facial image of the user, the first display information being displayed larger than second display information that is different from the first display information (Claim 1).
As to claim 14, US Patent #10,657,740 claims an information processing method comprising:
receiving a first facial image of a user who is present in the vicinity of a display terminal; and
displaying first display information related to boarding information associated with a second facial image of the user, the first display information being displayed larger than second display information that is different from the first display information,
wherein the first display displayed based on a comparison between the first facial image and the second facial image (Claim 21).
As to claim 16, US Patent #10,657,740 claims an information processing method comprising:
receiving a first facial image of a user who is present in front of a display terminal;
matching the first facial image with a second facial image, among a plurality of second facial images; and
outputting information to display first display information related to boarding information associated with the second facial image of the user, the first display information output to be displayed larger than second display information that is different from the first display information (Claim 21).
Claims 1-19 are rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claims 1-19, respectively, of U.S. Patent No. 11,113,912. Although the claims at issue are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other because the patent claims include all of the limitations of the instant application claims, respectively. The patent claims also include additional limitations. Hence, the instant application claims are generic to the species of invention covered by the respective patent claims. As such, the instant application claims are anticipated by the patent claims and are therefore not patentably distinct therefrom. (See Eli Lilly and Co. v. Barr Laboratories Inc., 58 USPQ2D 1869, "a later genus claim limitation is anticipated by, and therefore not patentably distinct from, an earlier species claim", In re Goodman, 29 USPQ2d 2010, "Thus, the generic invention is 'anticipated' by the species of the patented invention" and the instant “application claims are generic to species of invention covered by the patent claim, and since without terminal disclaimer, extant species claims preclude issuance of generic application claims”).
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status.
This application currently names joint inventors. In considering patentability of the claims the examiner presumes that the subject matter of the various claims was commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the claimed invention(s) absent any evidence to the contrary. Applicant is advised of the obligation under 37 CFR 1.56 to point out the inventor and effective filing dates of each claim that was not commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the later invention in order for the examiner to consider the applicability of 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(C) for any potential 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) prior art against the later invention.
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.
The factual inquiries for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows:
1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art.
2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue.
3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art.
4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness.
Claims 1, 2, 7-10, and 12-19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Stefani (US PG Pub #2013/0070974) in view of Yang (US PG Pub #2020/0047346).
As to claim 1, Stefani teaches an information processing apparatus (Paragraph [0060] teaches a passenger tracking unit) comprising:
a memory configured to store instructions; and
a processor configured to execute the instructions (Paragraph [0060] teaches a processor and memory; Paragraph [0061] teaches a processor executing instructions in memory) to:
receive a first facial image of a user who is present in the vicinity of a display terminal (Paragraph [0067] teaches a facial recognition management module receiving captured facial features from a camera; Paragraph [0055] teaches a camera at an arrival or departure display); and
display first display information related to boarding information (Paragraph [0071] teaches displaying average wait times through portions of the travel facility and flight information including arrival and departure information and baggage information), the first display information being displayed larger than second display information that is different from the first display information (Figure 6 shows displaying a map, including the time to the gate, in a manner larger than displaying weather data, the airport name, and the name of the program or system being used).
However, Stefani does not explicitly teach the first display information is associated with a second facial image of the user and wherein the first display information is displayed based on a comparison between the first facial image and the second facial image.
In the field of airport displays, Yang teaches the first display information is associated with a second facial image of the user and wherein the first display information is displayed based on a comparison between the first facial image and the second facial image (Paragraph [0012] teaches photographing and storing a facial image of each ticket-issued person for a flight-scheduled airplane, matching stored facial images of each ticket-issued person among each facial image received at a robot and displaying flight information to the specific boarding person; Paragraph [0143] teaches flight information corresponding to the flight-scheduled airplane; Paragraphs [0147]-[0148] teach photographing a facial image of each ticket-issued person of a flight-scheduled airplane at a ticket issuing window). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the display of Stefani with the flight information of Yang because this increases the efficiency in the use of time by the boarding person (Paragraph [0016]).
As to claim 2, depending from the information processing apparatus according to claim 1, Stefani teaches wherein the second display information is different from the boarding information (Paragraph [0055] teaches displaying car rental, advertisements, weather, and hotel information), but doesn’t explicitly teach the boarding information is associated with the user.
In the field of airport displays, Yang teaches the boarding information is associated with the user (Paragraph [0012] teaches photographing and storing a facial image of each ticket-issued person for a flight-scheduled airplane, matching stored facial images of each ticket-issued person among each facial image received at a robot and displaying flight information to the specific boarding person; Paragraph [0143] teaches flight information corresponding to the flight-scheduled airplane). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the display of Stefani with the flight information of Yang because this increases the efficiency in the use of time by the boarding person (Paragraph [0016]).
As to claim 7, depending from the information processing apparatus according to claim 1, Stefani teaches wherein the processor is further configured to execute the instructions to:
display the first information including congestion information based on a number of people determined based on sensors installed at each stage (Paragraph [0071] teaches displaying passenger travel or wait times through portions of the travel facility).
As to claim 8, depending from the information processing apparatus according to claim 7, Stefani teaches wherein the congestion information indicates a degree of congestion in a place for a stage of the user before the boarding stage (Paragraph [0071] teaches displaying passenger travel or wait times through portions of the travel facility; Figure 7A shows displaying gauges of information including red zone and non-red zone areas).
As to claim 9, depending from the information processing apparatus according to claim 7, Stefani teaches wherein the congestion information indicates an availability information, waiting time or the number of waiting persons in a line (Paragraph [0071] teaches displaying passenger travel or wait times through portions of the travel facility).
As to claim 10, depending from the information processing apparatus according to claim 1, Stefani teaches wherein the processor is further configured to execute the instructions to:
display the second display information including advertisement information (Paragraph [0071] teaches displaying advertisement information).
As to claim 12, Stefani teaches an information processing apparatus (Paragraph [0060] teaches a passenger tracking unit) comprising:
a memory configured to store instructions; and
a processor configured to execute the instructions (Paragraph [0060] teaches a processor and memory; Paragraph [0061] teaches a processor executing instructions in memory) to:
receive a first facial image of a user who is present in front of a display terminal (Paragraph [0067] teaches a facial recognition management module receiving captured facial features from a camera; Paragraph [0055] teaches a camera at an arrival or departure display); and
output information to display first display information related to boarding information (Paragraph [0071] teaches displaying average wait times through portions of the travel facility and flight information including arrival and departure information and baggage information), the first display information output to be displayed larger than second display information that is different from the first display information (Figure 6 shows displaying a map, including the time to the gate, in a manner larger than displaying weather data, the airport name, and the name of the program or system being used).
However, Stefani does not explicitly teach match the first facial image with a second facial image, among a plurality of second facial images; and first display information related to boarding information associated with the second facial image of the user.
In the field of airport displays, Yang teaches match the first facial image with a second facial image, among a plurality of second facial images (Paragraph [0012] teaches matching stored facial images of each ticket-issued person among each facial image received at a robot); and first display information related to boarding information associated with the second facial image of the user (Paragraph [0012] teaches photographing and storing a facial image of each ticket-issued person for a flight-scheduled airplane, matching stored facial images of each ticket-issued person among each facial image received at a robot and displaying flight information to the specific boarding person; Paragraph [0143] teaches flight information corresponding to the flight-scheduled airplane). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the display of Stefani with the flight information of Yang because this increases the efficiency in the use of time by the boarding person (Paragraph [0016]).
As to claim 13, Stefani teaches an information processing apparatus (Paragraph [0060] teaches a passenger tracking unit) comprising:
a memory configured to store instructions; and
a processor configured to execute the instructions (Paragraph [0060] teaches a processor and memory; Paragraph [0061] teaches a processor executing instructions in memory) to:
receive a first facial image of a user who is present in front of a display terminal (Paragraph [0067] teaches a facial recognition management module receiving captured facial features from a camera; Paragraph [0055] teaches a camera at an arrival or departure display);
display first display information related to boarding information (Paragraph [0071] teaches displaying average wait times through portions of the travel facility and flight information including arrival and departure information and baggage information), the first display information output to be displayed larger than second display information that is different from the first display information (Figure 6 shows displaying a map, including the time to the gate, in a manner larger than displaying weather data, the airport name, and the name of the program or system being used).
However, Stefani does not explicitly teach match the first facial image with a second facial image, among a plurality of second facial images; and first display information related to boarding information associated with the second facial image of the user.
In the field of airport displays, Yang teaches match the first facial image with a second facial image, among a plurality of second facial images (Paragraph [0012] teaches matching stored facial images of each ticket-issued person among each facial image received at a robot); and first display information related to boarding information associated with the second facial image of the user (Paragraph [0012] teaches photographing and storing a facial image of each ticket-issued person for a flight-scheduled airplane, matching stored facial images of each ticket-issued person among each facial image received at a robot and displaying flight information to the specific boarding person; Paragraph [0143] teaches flight information corresponding to the flight-scheduled airplane). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the display of Stefani with the flight information of Yang because this increases the efficiency in the use of time by the boarding person (Paragraph [0016]).
As to claim 14, Stefani teaches an information processing method (Paragraph [0067] teaches a passenger tracking process) comprising:
receiving a first facial image of a user who is present in the vicinity of a display terminal (Paragraph [0067] teaches a facial recognition management module receiving captured facial features from a camera; Paragraph [0055] teaches a camera at an arrival or departure display); and
displaying first display information related to boarding information (Paragraph [0071] teaches displaying average wait times through portions of the travel facility and flight information including arrival and departure information and baggage information), the first display information being displayed larger than second display information that is different from the first display information (Figure 6 shows displaying a map, including the time to the gate, in a manner larger than displaying weather data, the airport name, and the name of the program or system being used).
However, Stefani does not explicitly teach boarding information associated with a second facial image of the user and wherein the first display displayed based on a comparison between the first facial image and the second facial image.
In the field of airport displays, Yang teaches boarding information associated with a second facial image of the user (Paragraph [0012] teaches photographing and storing a facial image of each ticket-issued person for a flight-scheduled airplane, matching stored facial images of each ticket-issued person among each facial image received at a robot and displaying flight information to the specific boarding person; Paragraph [0143] teaches flight information corresponding to the flight-scheduled airplane) and wherein the first display displayed based on a comparison between the first facial image and the second facial image (Paragraph [0012] teaches matching stored facial images of each ticket-issued person among each facial image received at a robot). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the display of Stefani with the flight information of Yang because this increases the efficiency in the use of time by the boarding person (Paragraph [0016]).
As to claim 15, Stefani teaches a non-transitory storage medium storing a program that causes a computer (Paragraph [0064] teaches performing functions based on a processor executing instructions contained in a computer-readable medium, such as memory; Paragraph [0075] teaches computer-readable media carrying computer-executable instructions) to perform:
receiving a first facial image of a user who is present in the vicinity of a display terminal (Paragraph [0067] teaches a facial recognition management module receiving captured facial features from a camera; Paragraph [0055] teaches a camera at an arrival or departure display); and
displaying first display information related to boarding information (Paragraph [0071] teaches displaying average wait times through portions of the travel facility and flight information including arrival and departure information and baggage information), the first display information being displayed larger than second display information that is different from the first display information (Figure 6 shows displaying a map, including the time to the gate, in a manner larger than displaying weather data, the airport name, and the name of the program or system being used).
However, Stefani does not explicitly teach boarding information associated with a second facial image of the user and wherein the first display displayed based on a comparison between the first facial image and the second facial image.
In the field of airport displays, Yang teaches boarding information associated with a second facial image of the user (Paragraph [0012] teaches photographing and storing a facial image of each ticket-issued person for a flight-scheduled airplane, matching stored facial images of each ticket-issued person among each facial image received at a robot and displaying flight information to the specific boarding person; Paragraph [0143] teaches flight information corresponding to the flight-scheduled airplane) and wherein the first display displayed based on a comparison between the first facial image and the second facial image (Paragraph [0012] teaches matching stored facial images of each ticket-issued person among each facial image received at a robot). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the display of Stefani with the flight information of Yang because this increases the efficiency in the use of time by the boarding person (Paragraph [0016]).
As to claim 16, Stefani teaches an information processing method (Paragraph [0067] teaches a passenger tracking process) comprising:
receiving a first facial image of a user who is present in front of a display terminal (Paragraph [0067] teaches a facial recognition management module receiving captured facial features from a camera; Paragraph [0055] teaches a camera at an arrival or departure display); and
outputting information to display first display information related to boarding information (Paragraph [0071] teaches displaying average wait times through portions of the travel facility and flight information including arrival and departure information and baggage information), the first display information output to be displayed larger than second display information that is different from the first display information (Figure 6 shows displaying a map, including the time to the gate, in a manner larger than displaying weather data, the airport name, and the name of the program or system being used).
However, Stefani does not explicitly teach matching the first facial image with a second facial image, among a plurality of second facial images; and first display information related to boarding information associated with the second facial image of the user.
In the field of airport displays, Yang teaches matching the first facial image with a second facial image, among a plurality of second facial images (Paragraph [0012] teaches matching stored facial images of each ticket-issued person among each facial image received at a robot); and first display information related to boarding information associated with the second facial image of the user (Paragraph [0012] teaches photographing and storing a facial image of each ticket-issued person for a flight-scheduled airplane, matching stored facial images of each ticket-issued person among each facial image received at a robot and displaying flight information to the specific boarding person; Paragraph [0143] teaches flight information corresponding to the flight-scheduled airplane). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the display of Stefani with the flight information of Yang because this increases the efficiency in the use of time by the boarding person (Paragraph [0016]).
As to claim 17, Stefani teaches a non-transitory storage medium storing a program that causes a computer (Paragraph [0064] teaches performing functions based on a processor executing instructions contained in a computer-readable medium, such as memory; Paragraph [0075] teaches computer-readable media carrying computer-executable instructions) to perform:
receiving a first facial image of a user who is present in front of a display terminal (Paragraph [0067] teaches a facial recognition management module receiving captured facial features from a camera; Paragraph [0055] teaches a camera at an arrival or departure display); and
outputting information to display first display information related to boarding information (Paragraph [0071] teaches displaying average wait times through portions of the travel facility and flight information including arrival and departure information and baggage information), the first display information output to be displayed larger than second display information that is different from the first display information (Figure 6 shows displaying a map, including the time to the gate, in a manner larger than displaying weather data, the airport name, and the name of the program or system being used).
However, Stefani does not explicitly teach matching the first facial image with a second facial image, among a plurality of second facial images; and first display information related to boarding information associated with the second facial image of the user.
In the field of airport displays, Yang teaches matching the first facial image with a second facial image, among a plurality of second facial images (Paragraph [0012] teaches matching stored facial images of each ticket-issued person among each facial image received at a robot); and first display information related to boarding information associated with the second facial image of the user (Paragraph [0012] teaches photographing and storing a facial image of each ticket-issued person for a flight-scheduled airplane, matching stored facial images of each ticket-issued person among each facial image received at a robot and displaying flight information to the specific boarding person; Paragraph [0143] teaches flight information corresponding to the flight-scheduled airplane). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the display of Stefani with the flight information of Yang because this increases the efficiency in the use of time by the boarding person (Paragraph [0016]).
As to claim 18, Stefani teaches an information processing apparatus (Paragraph [0060] teaches a passenger tracking unit) comprising:
a memory configured to store instructions; and
a processor configured to execute the instructions (Paragraph [0060] teaches a processor and memory; Paragraph [0061] teaches a processor executing instructions in memory) to:
receive a first facial image of a user who is present in the vicinity of a display terminal (Paragraph [0067] teaches a facial recognition management module receiving captured facial features from a camera; Paragraph [0055] teaches a camera at an arrival or departure display);
display first information related to boarding information (Paragraph [0071] teaches displaying average wait times through portions of the travel facility and flight information including arrival and departure information and baggage information); and
display second information different from the boarding information (Paragraph [0055] teaches displaying car rental, advertisements, weather, and hotel information),
wherein a visual feature of the first information related to boarding information is configured for emphasis and the first information being displayed larger than the second information (Figure 6 shows displaying a map, including the time to the gate, in a manner larger than displaying weather data, the airport name, and the name of the program or system being used).
However, Stefani does not explicitly teach first information related to boarding information of the user and a visual feature is configured for emphasis based on a match between the first facial image of the user and a second facial image, among a plurality of second facial images.
In the field of airport displays, Yang teaches first information related to boarding information of the user (Paragraph [0012] teaches photographing and storing a facial image of each ticket-issued person for a flight-scheduled airplane, matching stored facial images of each ticket-issued person among each facial image received at a robot and displaying flight information to the specific boarding person; Paragraph [0143] teaches flight information corresponding to the flight-scheduled airplane) and a visual feature is configured for emphasis based on a match between the first facial image of the user and a second facial image, among a plurality of second facial images (Paragraph [0012] teaches matching stored facial images of each ticket-issued person among each facial image received at a robot). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the display of Stefani with the flight information of Yang because this increases the efficiency in the use of time by the boarding person (Paragraph [0016]).
As to claim 19, Stefani teaches an information processing method (Paragraph [0067] teaches a passenger tracking process) comprising:
receiving a first facial image of a user who is present in the vicinity of a display terminal (Paragraph [0067] teaches a facial recognition management module receiving captured facial features from a camera; Paragraph [0055] teaches a camera at an arrival or departure display);
displaying first information related to boarding information (Paragraph [0071] teaches displaying average wait times through portions of the travel facility and flight information including arrival and departure information and baggage information); and
displaying second information different from the boarding information (Paragraph [0055] teaches displaying car rental, advertisements, weather, and hotel information),
wherein a visual feature of the first information related to boarding information is configured for emphasis and the first information being displayed larger than the second information (Figure 6 shows displaying a map, including the time to the gate, in a manner larger than displaying weather data, the airport name, and the name of the program or system being used).
However, Stefani does not explicitly teach first information related to boarding information of the user and a visual feature is configured for emphasis based on a match between the first facial image of the user and a second facial image, among a plurality of second facial images.
In the field of airport displays, Yang teaches first information related to boarding information of the user (Paragraph [0012] teaches photographing and storing a facial image of each ticket-issued person for a flight-scheduled airplane, matching stored facial images of each ticket-issued person among each facial image received at a robot and displaying flight information to the specific boarding person; Paragraph [0143] teaches flight information corresponding to the flight-scheduled airplane) and a visual feature is configured for emphasis based on a match between the first facial image of the user and a second facial image, among a plurality of second facial images (Paragraph [0012] teaches matching stored facial images of each ticket-issued person among each facial image received at a robot). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the display of Stefani with the flight information of Yang because this increases the efficiency in the use of time by the boarding person (Paragraph [0016]).
Claim 3 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Stefani (US PG Pub #2013/0070974) in view of Yang (US PG Pub #2020/0047346) as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Tamayama et al. (Tamayama; US PG Pub #2004/0051644).
As to claim 3, depending from the information processing apparatus according to claim 1, Stefani does not explicitly teach wherein the processor is further configured to execute the instructions to:
display the first information including a remaining time for boarding indicated in the boarding information.
In the field of airport guidance, Tamayama teaches wherein the processor is further configured to execute the instructions to: display the first information including a remaining time for boarding indicated in the boarding information (Figure 3C; Paragraph [0042]). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the teaching of Stefani with that of Tamayama to display the remaining time because this allows the user to know exactly how long until they must arrive at the destination in order to make the airport guidance less stressful and more reliable since the user can walk in the direction of a desired facility without getting lost (Paragraph [0046]).
Claim 11 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Stefani (US PG Pub #2013/0070974) in view of Yang (US PG Pub #2020/0047346) as applied to claim 10 above, and further in view of Gordon et al. (Gordon; US PG Pub #2018/0032997).
As to claim 11, depending from the information processing apparatus according to claim 10, Stefani does not explicitly teach wherein the processor is further configured to execute the instructions to:
select the advertisement information included in the second display information in accordance with the user.
In the field of display units (Paragraph [0160]), Gordon teaches wherein the processor is further configured to execute the instructions to:
select the advertisement information included in the second display information in accordance with the user (Paragraph [0156] teaches conditionally manifesting an advertisement based on a facial recognition; Paragraph [0247] teaches personalized ads; Paragraph [0248] teaches the advertisements displayed may be based on the identity of the user). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the teaching of Stefani with the personalized ads of Gordon because this ensures ads are deemed appropriate and relevant (Paragraph [0248]).
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 4-6 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.
The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter: Dependent claim 4 recites setting a deadline for at least one stage between a check-in stage and a boarding stage, among a plurality of stages, based on the boarding information and displaying the first information including the deadline when the remaining time is less than or equal to a predetermined threshold. The prior art of record does not teach, suggest, or render obvious the claimed subject matter.
Dependent claims 5 and 6 are objected to as being dependent from claim 4.
Contact Information
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to RYAN W SHERWIN whose telephone number is (571)270-7269. The examiner can normally be reached M-F, 9:00-5:00 EST.
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, Steven Lim can be reached at 571.270.1210. 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.
/RYAN W SHERWIN/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2688
Prosecution Insights