DETAILED ACTION
Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status
The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
Claim Status
Claims 1-22 are currently pending.
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on 06-01-2025 and 02-25-26 has been considered by the examiner.
Claim Interpretation
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(f):
(f) Element in Claim for a Combination. – An element in a claim for a combination may be expressed as a means or step for performing a specified function without the recital of structure, material, or acts in support thereof, and such claim shall be construed to cover the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification and equivalents thereof.
The following is a quotation of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph:
An element in a claim for a combination may be expressed as a means or step for performing a specified function without the recital of structure, material, or acts in support thereof, and such claim shall be construed to cover the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification and equivalents thereof.
The claims in this application are given their broadest reasonable interpretation using the plain meaning of the claim language in light of the specification as it would be understood by one of ordinary skill in the art. The broadest reasonable interpretation of a claim element (also commonly referred to as a claim limitation) is limited by the description in the specification when 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is invoked.
As explained in MPEP § 2181, subsection I, claim limitations that meet the following three-prong test will be interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph:
(A) the claim limitation uses the term “means” or a term used as a substitute for “means” – see “module”, that is a generic placeholder (also called a nonce term or a non-structural term having no specific structural meaning) for performing the claimed function;
(B) the term “means” or the generic placeholder (“module”) is modified by functional language, typically, but not always linked by the transition word “for” (e.g., “means for”) or another linking word or phrase, such as “configured to” or “so that”; and
(C) the term “means” or the generic placeholder (“module”) is not modified by sufficient structure, material, or acts for performing the claimed function.
Use of the word “means” (or “module”) in a claim with functional language creates a rebuttable presumption that the claim limitation is to be treated in accordance with 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph. The presumption that the claim limitation is interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is rebutted when the claim limitation recites sufficient structure, material, or acts to entirely perform the recited function.
Absence of the word “means”/ (“module”) in a claim creates a rebuttable presumption that the claim limitation is not to be treated in accordance with 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph. The presumption that the claim limitation is not interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is rebutted when the claim limitation recites function without reciting sufficient structure, material or acts to entirely perform the recited function.
Claim limitations in this application that use the word “means” (or the nonce term) are being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, except as otherwise indicated in an Office action. Conversely, claim limitations in this application that do not use the word “means” (or the nonce term) are not being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, except as otherwise indicated in an Office action.
This application includes one or more claim limitations that do not use the word “means,” but are nonetheless being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, because the claim limitation(s) uses a generic placeholder that is coupled with functional language without reciting sufficient structure to perform the recited function and the generic placeholder is not preceded by a structural modifier. Such claim limitation(s) is/are:
In claim 1, “…an MD-managing module (MMM)…wherein the MMM is able to communicate with the CPM, via MDCM and CCU, in order to plan a plan of a journey from an origin location toward a desired location…”; and
In claim 19, “…an MD-managing module (MMM)…wherein the MMM is able to communicate with the CPM, via MDCM and CCU, in order to plan a plan of a journey from an origin location toward a desired location…”.
As to the MD-managing module (MMM) of claims 1 and 19 – while [0060], [0069], [0081], [0083], [0085], [0087] and [0089] disclose various operations of said element, the The Specification fails to adequately disclose a structure to perform the recited function or algorithm required to transform the processor such that it performs the recited function.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(b):
(b) CONCLUSION.—The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph:
The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the applicant regards as his invention.
Claims 1-22 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.
Independent claims 1 and 19 (as well any claim dependent thereon which fails to defined a structure feature) recite a “MD-managing module (MMM)” which fails to recite essential structural elements or transforming algorithm used to transform a general purpose computer so as to perform the recited function.
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) 1-11, 16, 17, 19 and 20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over CIOFFI (US Pub. 2015/0330787) in view of CAPORIZZO (US Pub. 2015/0323325).
Regarding claims 1,
CIOFFI teaches a system for guiding a Person with Reduced Mobility (PRM) while traveling in public transportation, comprising:
a guiding-system cloud (GSC) ([0043] teaches server 120 may interact via wireless communications network with one or more accesses devices; [0041] teaches that server 120 provides wayfinding services. As server 120 communicates wirelessly to provide a computing environment that provides services over a network, said server 120 is interpreted as corresponding to a guiding-system cloud), comprising a cloud-processing-module (CPM), a cloud-non-transitory computer readable storage device (CSD) (122 in fig. 1;see [0037]; [0040] In the exemplary embodiment, subscriber module 123 includes one or more sets of machine-readable and/or executable instructions for collecting and storing user account or subscriber data for blind users), and cloud-communication module (CCU) ([0041] teaches a telephony module 1244, and a web/http interface module 1245; [0041] teaches search engine 124 communicates the requests to databases 112, receives the results in textual form, for example, and forward them to text-to-speech module 1243 for conversion and output to telephony module 1244 for communication with an access device having a telephone capability), wherein the CSD is able to store one or more software programs to be used by the CPM ([0039] teaches a memory module 122, which takes the exemplary form of one or more electronic, magnetic, or optical data-storage devices, stores machine-readable instructions that when executed by one or more processors, performs one or more of the processes and/or methods as described herein); and
a mobile device (MD) (130 in fig. 1) that is associated with a Person with Reduced Mobility (PRM), the MD comprising an MD-managing module (MMM) (131 in fig. 1; [0045]), an MD-non-transitory computer readable storage device (MDSD) (132 in fig. 1), and an MD-communication-module (MDCM) ([0047] teaches that the wayfinding data can be transmitted from the server(s) 120 in an accessible digital format to the user's access device 130. The individual user receives that data in his or her preferred format, on their personal device 130), wherein the MDSD is able to store one or more software programs to be used by the MMM ([0046] teaches that memory 132 stores code (machine-readable or executable instructions) for an operating system 136).
While Cioffi teaches that the MMM is able to communicate with the CPM, via MDCM and CCU, in order to plan a plan of a journey from an origin location toward a desired location (in [0009] teaches a system embodiment wherein the system receives user input identifying a starting landmark and ending landmark in a particular selected geographic region and then searches a database for the corresponding narrative wayfinding instructions), Cioffi fails to expressly teach that the plan comprises wayfinding signal for stepping down from a vehicle of the public transportation, which is given by a buzzer that is associated with a door of the vehicle of the public transportation.
CAPORIZZO teaches a navigation system are described for guiding a visually impaired user to avoid obstructions and impediments while walking which provides a wayfinding signal for stepping down from a vehicle of the public transportation, which is given by a buzzer that is associated with a door of the vehicle of the public transportation ([0083] teaches that the control unit 110 may provide instructions utilizing the alarm coupling mechanism, (e.g., direction, determine which foot may have to step down or step up, or the ability to determine whether steps are going up or down; [0012] teaches that the system 100 may generate an alarm for the user; [0015] teaches that the system comprises a speaker 128, a distance measuring unit 142, and a plurality of alarm units 1441-144N, each alarm unit 144 including at least one of a vibration strap, an audible alert device, and the like).
Before the effective filing date of the invention it would have been obvious to modify the Cioffi system per the teachings of Caporizzo so as to supplement the wayfinding signal such that it provides guidance for stepping down from a vehicle of the public transportation, which is given by a buzzer that is associated with a door of the vehicle of the public transportation, for the purpose of providing more than a passive obstacle detection system but rather provides an active guidance system which both interprets that environment and provides actional navigation instruction.
Regarding claim 2,
Cioffi teaches that the PRM is a blind person then the wayfinding signals are audible instructions that are given via an MD of the PRM ([0110] teaches use by a blind or low vision user).
Regarding claim 3,
Cioffi teaches that the vehicle of the public transportation is a train([0110] teaches a subway station environment).
Regarding claim 4,
Cioffi teaches that the one or more station-guiding-systems (SGS), wherein each SGS is associated with a station of the public transportation ([0110] teaches providing the user with updates about their whereabouts within a subway station environment).
Regarding claim 5,
Cioffi teaches that each SGS comprises two or more wireless transmitter/receivers (WTR) (522, 524 in fig. B) and each WTR has an identification and number (ID) (at least claims 7 and 15 teach beacon identifiers).
Regarding claim 6,
Cioffi teaches that the communication with a WTR is based on Bluetooth technology ([0006], [0083] teach using BLE technology).
Regarding claim 7,
Cioffi teaches that each SGS is able to deliver information that is needed in order to give wayfinding signals to the PRM, when the PRM is associated with a relevant station of the public transportation ([0109] and [0110] teach information delivered to an access device 130 for traversing a subway station).
Regarding claims 8 and 9,
Cioffi teaches that the desired location is associated with a speaker wherein the wayfinding signals are given via the speaker ([0044] teaches access device 130 includes loudspeaker 133; [0047] teaches delivery of wayfinding information via audio).
Regarding claim 10,
Cioffi teaches that the PRM has hearing disability then the wayfinding signals are text messages ([0047] teaches wayfinding information delivery via text).
Regarding claim 11,
Cioffi teaches that the plan further comprises instruction to which direction to turn upon stepping down from the vehicle of public transportation to a platform of a station of the public transportation (Caporizzo teaches providing information regarding stepping up/down; Coiffi teaches directions comprise turn instructions upon vehicle exit, [0106]).
Regarding claim 16,
Cioffi teaches that the plan comprises wayfinding signals that are adapted to a disability of the PRM ([0047] teaches that the individual user receives that data in his or her preferred format, on their personal device 130. Thus, the delivery of the wayfinding information in, e.g., braille, audio, or text, relies upon the capabilities of that personal device 130.)
Regarding claim 17,
Cioffi teaches that further:
a cabin-guiding-system cloud (CGSC) that is able to deliver information that is needed in order to give wayfinding signals to the PRM, wherein the PRM is associated with a cabin ([0032] teaches means for uniquely identifying geopraphic regions e.g., a facility (or “cabin” as broadly recited));
a station-guiding-system (SGS) comprising two or more wireless transmitter/receivers (WTR) (522, 524 in fig. B) and each WTR has an identification and number (ID) (at least claims 7 and 15 teach beacon identifiers) and;
wherein the (MD) is able to process information that was obtained from at least one of the GSC, CGSC and the SGS and deliver wayfinding instructions toward the desired location ([0110] teaches providing the user with updates about their whereabouts within a subway station environment).
Regarding claims 19,
CIOFFI teaches a system for guiding a Person with Reduced Mobility (PRM) while traveling in public transportation, comprising:
a guiding-system cloud (GSC) ([0043] teaches server 120 may interact via wireless communications network with one or more accesses devices; [0041] teaches that server 120 provides wayfinding services. As server 120 communicates wirelessly to provide a computing environment that provides services over a network, said server 120 is interpreted as corresponding to a guiding-system cloud), comprising a cloud-processing-module (CPM), a cloud-non-transitory computer readable storage device (CSD) ( 122 in fig. 1; see [0037]; [0040] teaches that subscriber module 123 includes one or more sets of machine-readable and/or executable instructions for collecting and storing user account or subscriber data for blind users), and cloud-communication module (CCU) ( [0041] teaches a telephony module 1244, and a web/http interface module 1245; [0041] teaches search engine 124 communicates the requests to databases 112, receives the results in textual form, for example, and forward them to text-to-speech module 1243 for conversion and output to telephony module 1244 for communication with an access device having a telephone capability), wherein the CSD is able to store one or more software programs to be used by the CPM ([0039] teaches memory module 122, which takes the exemplary form of one or more electronic, magnetic, or optical data-storage devices, stores machine-readable instructions that when executed by one or more processors, performs one or more of the processes and/or methods as described herein); and
a mobile device (MD) (130 in fig. 1) that is associated with a Person with Reduced Mobility (PRM), the MD comprising an MD-managing module (MMM) (131 in fig. 1; [0045]), an MD-non-transitory computer readable storage device (MDSD) (132 in fig. 1), and an MD-communication-module (MDCM) ([0047] teaches that the wayfinding data can be transmitted from the server(s) 120 in an accessible digital format to the user's access device 130. The individual user receives that data in his or her preferred format, on their personal device 130), wherein the MDSD is able to store one or more software programs to be used by the MMM ([0046] teaches that memory 132 stores code (machine-readable or executable instructions) for an operating system 136).
Cioffi teaches that wherein the MMM is able to communicate with the CPM, via MDCM and CCU, in order to plan a plan of a journey from an origin location toward a desired location ([0009] discloses a system embodiment wherein the system receives user input identifying a starting landmark and ending landmark in a particular selected geographic region and then searches a database for the corresponding narrative wayfinding instructions) and further teaches that directions comprise turn instructions upon vehicle exit, [0106]). Cioffi fails to expressly teach that the plan comprises instruction to step down from a vehicle of the public transportation.
CAPORIZZO teaches a navigation system are described for guiding a visually impaired user to avoid obstructions and impediments while walking which provides a wayfinding signal for stepping down from a vehicle of the public transportation, which is given by a buzzer that is associated with a door of the vehicle of the public transportation ([0083] teaches that the system’s control unit 110 may provide instructions utilizing the alarm coupling mechanism, (e.g., direction, determine which foot may have to step down or step up, or the ability to determine whether steps are going up or down).
Before the effective filing date of the invention it would have been obvious to modify the Cioffi system per the teachings of Caporizzo so as to supplement the wayfinding signal such that it provides guidance for stepping down from a vehicle of the public transportation, which is given by a buzzer that is associated with a door of the vehicle of the public transportation, for the purpose of providing more than a passive obstacle detection system but rather provides an active guidance system which both interprets that environment and provides actional navigation instruction.
Regarding claim 20,
Coiffi teaches that the vehicle of the public transportation is a train([0110] teaches a subway station environment).
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 and 19 are rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being and unpatentable over claims 1 and 32 of U.S. Patent No. 12,343,304 to KILIM in view of CIOFFI (US Pub. 2015/0330787.
Regarding claims 1 and 19,
U.S. Patent No. 12,343,304 to KILIM, in claims 1 and 32, respectively teaches a Person with Reduced Mobility (PRM) while traveling in public transportation, comprising:
a guiding-system cloud (GSC) comprising a cloud-processing-module (CPM) (See claim), a cloud-non-transitory computer readable storage device (CSD) (See claim) , and cloud-communication module (CCU) (corresponds to the “to communicate…” of the patent claims);
a mobile device (MD) (130 in fig. 1) that is associated with a Person with Reduced Mobility (PRM), the MD comprising an MD-managing module (MMM) (131 in fig. 1; [0045]), an MD-non-transitory computer readable storage device (MDSD) (132 in fig. 1), and an MD-communication-module (MDCM) (also corresponds to the “to communicate…” of the patent claims); and
wherein the plan comprises wayfinding signal for stepping down from a vehicle of the public transportation, which is given by a buzzer that is associated with a door of the vehicle of the public transportation (recited in claims).
U.S. Patent No. 12,343,304 to KILIM fails to expressly teach that the CSD is able to store one or more software programs to be used by the CPM; and wherein the MDSD is able to store one or more software programs to be used by the MMM.
COIFFI teaches a guiding-system cloud (GSC) ([0043] teaches that server 120 may interact via wireless communications network with one or more accesses devices; [0041] teaches that server 120 provides wayfinding services. As server 120 communicates wirelessly to provide a computing environment that provides services over a network, said server 120 is interpreted as corresponding to a guiding-system cloud), comprising a cloud-processing-module (CPM), a cloud-non-transitory computer readable storage device (CSD) ( 122 in fig. 1;see [0037]; [0040] teaches that subscriber module 123 includes one or more sets of machine-readable and/or executable instructions for collecting and storing user account or subscriber data for blind users), and cloud-communication module (CCU) ( [0041] teaches a telephony module 1244, and a web/http interface module 1245; [0041] teaches search engine 124 communicates the requests to databases 112, receives the results in textual form, for example, and forward them to text-to-speech module 1243 for conversion and output to telephony module 1244 for communication with an access device having a telephone capability), wherein the CSD is able to store one or more software programs to be used by the CPM ([0039] teaches memory module 122, which takes the exemplary form of one or more electronic, magnetic, or optical data-storage devices, stores machine-readable instructions that when executed by one or more processors, performs one or more of the processes and/or methods as described herein); and
a mobile device (MD) (130 in fig. 1) that is associated with a Person with Reduced Mobility (PRM), the MD comprising an MD-managing module (MMM) (131 in fig. 1; [0045]), an MD-non-transitory computer readable storage device (MDSD) (132 in fig. 1), and an MD-communication-module (MDCM) ([0047] teaches that the wayfinding data can be transmitted from the server(s) 120 in an accessible digital format to the user's access device 130. The individual user receives that data in his or her preferred format, on their personal device 130), wherein the MDSD is able to store one or more software programs to be used by the MMM ([0046] teaches that memory 132 stores code (machine-readable or executable instructions) for an operating system 136).
Before the effective filing date of the invention it would have been obvious to modify the KILIM such that the CSD and MDSD are able to store one or more software programs as recited, because said stored software programs are well known to those of ordinary skill in the art for storing executable programs that enable the system to perform intended operations. Incorporating such storage means would have represent nothing more than a predictable use of known computer technology according to an already-established function.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to DIONNE PENDLETON whose telephone number is (571)272-7497. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 9a-5pm.
Examiner interviews are available via telephone, in-person, and video conferencing using a USPTO supplied web-based collaboration tool. To schedule an interview, applicant is encouraged to use the USPTO Automated Interview Request (AIR) at http://www.uspto.gov/interviewpractice.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Davetta Goins can be reached at 571-272-2957. 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.
/DIONNE PENDLETON/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2689
Prosecution Insights