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 .
Status of Claims
Claims 1-20 are currently pending in application 19/234,606.
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted 6/25/2025 and 9/11/2025 are in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statement is being considered by the examiner.
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 claims at issue 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); and 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 a nonstatutory double patenting ground provided the reference application or patent either is shown to be commonly owned with this application, or claims an invention made as a result of activities undertaken within the scope of a joint research agreement. A terminal disclaimer must be signed in compliance with 37 CFR 1.321(b).
The USPTO internet Web site contains terminal disclaimer forms which may be used. Please visit http://www.uspto.gov/forms/. The filing date of the application will determine what form 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 http://www.uspto.gov/patents/process/file/efs/guidance/eTD-info-I.jsp.
Claim 1-20 are provisionally rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claim 1-20 of copending Application No. 19/248,564. Although the claims at issue are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other because all inventions disclose equivalent elements for determining/ authenticating passenger identities and tracking passenger progress through a facility. This is a provisional nonstatutory double patenting rejection.
Claims 1-20 are rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claims 1-15 of U.S. Patent No. 12,361,504; over claims 1-20 of U.S. Patent No. 11,854,106; and over claims 1-25 of U.S. Patent No. 11,200,630. Although the claims at issue are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other because all inventions disclose equivalent elements for determining/ authenticating passenger identities and tracking passenger progress through a facility.
19/234,606
US 12,361,504
Independent Claims 1, 18, and 19
An information processing apparatus comprising: a memory configured to store instructions; and a processor configured to execute the instructions to(information processing method comprising; non-transitory storage medium storing a program that causes a computer to perform):
capture facial images of a plurality of users, using a camera located at each of a plurality of stages including a first stage and a second stage subsequent to the first stage;
compare the captured facial images of the plurality of users with a plurality of registered facial images acquired in an initial stage in the plurality of stages;
update status information of each of the plurality of the users corresponding to each of the first stage and the second stage;
identify one or more first users among the plurality of users, with a recently completed state for the first stage;
identify one or more second users among the plurality of users, with a recently completed state for the second stage;
generate a graphical user interface comprising viewable information highlighting the one or more first users with the recently completed state for the first stage and highlighting the one or more second users with the recently completed state for the second stage; and
control a display to display the generated graphical user interface.
2. The information processing apparatus according to claim 1, wherein the processor is further configured to execute the instructions to: generate an alert when a deadline set for at least one of the plurality of users for the first stage, among the plurality of stages, has expired.
3. The information processing apparatus according to claim 2, wherein the processor is further configured to execute the instructions to: set the deadline for the at least one of the plurality of stages of the plurality of users before a last stage in the plurality of stages; and output the alert corresponding to the first stage when the deadline corresponding to the first stage has expired and the status corresponding to the first stage is incomplete for the at least one of the plurality of users.
4. The information processing apparatus according to claim 3, wherein the processor is further configured to execute the instructions to: determine a location of the at least one of the plurality of users based on a face image acquired from a video transmitted from a video camera, among a plurality of video cameras, when the deadline for the stage has expired.
5. The information processing apparatus according to claim 4, wherein the processor is further configured to execute the instructions to: detect the face image from the video transmitted from the video camera installed between a location corresponding to the first stage for which the deadline has expired and a location corresponding to the second stage, the second stage being a most recently completed stage among the plurality of stages.
Independent Claim 1
An information processing apparatus comprising: a memory storing instructions; and a processor configured to execute the instructions to:
receive one or more first facial images, from at least one stage among a plurality of stages between a check-in stage and a boarding stage, wherein the plurality of stages also include a baggage drop stage and a security stage;
update status information of one or more passengers in each of the plurality of stages based on a comparison of each of the one or more first facial images with a plurality of second facial images registered at the check-in stage;
generate a graphical user interface comprising viewable information indicating a number of passengers in each stage of the plurality of stages who have completed face recognition at the each stage and have not completed face recognition at a next stage;
control a display to display the generated graphical user interface; and
transmit an alert if the passengers present in any stage when a deadline time for the any stage has passed, wherein the deadline time for each stage is set based on boarding information registered in association with facial recognition at the check-in stage, wherein the processor is further configured to execute the instructions to determine the deadline time based on a congestion degree determined based on a number of the passengers in an airport where procedures in the plurality of stages are performed.
19/234,606
US 11,854,106
Independent Claims 1, 18, and 19
An information processing apparatus comprising: a memory configured to store instructions; and a processor configured to execute the instructions to (information processing method comprising; non-transitory storage medium storing a program that causes a computer to perform):
capture facial images of a plurality of users, using a camera located at each of a plurality of stages including a first stage and a second stage subsequent to the first stage;
compare the captured facial images of the plurality of users with a plurality of registered facial images acquired in an initial stage in the plurality of stages;
update status information of each of the plurality of the users corresponding to each of the first stage and the second stage;
identify one or more first users among the plurality of users, with a recently completed state for the first stage;
identify one or more second users among the plurality of users, with a recently completed state for the second stage;
generate a graphical user interface comprising viewable information highlighting the one or more first users with the recently completed state for the first stage and highlighting the one or more second users with the recently completed state for the second stage; and
control a display to display the generated graphical user interface.
Independent Claim 1 and 13-14
An information processing apparatus comprising: a memory configured to store instructions; and a processor configured to execute the instructions to (information processing method comprising; non-transitory storage medium storing a program that causes a computer to perform):
receive captured facial images of a plurality of users from a camera located at each of a plurality of stages including a check-in stage, a baggage drop stage, a security stage and a boarding stage;
compare the captured facial images of the plurality of with a plurality of registered facial images acquired in the check-in stage;
generate a graphical user interface comprising viewable information indicating a number of users, in each of the plurality of stages listed in the order of the check-in stage, baggage drop stage, security stage and the boarding stage, who have completed face recognition at the respective stage and have not completed face recognition at a next stage following the respective stage; and
control a display to display the generated graphical user interface.
19/234,606
US 11,200,630
Independent Claims 1, 18, and 19
An information processing apparatus comprising: a memory configured to store instructions; and a processor configured to execute the instructions to (information processing method comprising; non-transitory storage medium storing a program that causes a computer to perform):
capture facial images of a plurality of users, using a camera located at each of a plurality of stages including a first stage and a second stage subsequent to the first stage;
compare the captured facial images of the plurality of users with a plurality of registered facial images acquired in an initial stage in the plurality of stages;
update status information of each of the plurality of the users corresponding to each of the first stage and the second stage;
identify one or more first users among the plurality of users, with a recently completed state for the first stage;
identify one or more second users among the plurality of users, with a recently completed state for the second stage;
generate a graphical user interface comprising viewable information highlighting the one or more first users with the recently completed state for the first stage and highlighting the one or more second users with the recently completed state for the second stage; and
control a display to display the generated graphical user interface.
Independent Claims 1, 22, and 23
An information processing apparatus comprising: a memory configured to store instructions; and a processor configured to execute the instructions to (information processing method comprising; non-transitory storage medium storing a program that causes a computer to perform):
capture facial images of a plurality of users, using a camera from at least one stage, among a plurality of stages between a check-in stage and a boarding stage, wherein the plurality of stages include a first stage and a second stage subsequent to the first stage;
compare the captured facial images of the plurality of users with a plurality of registered facial images acquired in the check-in stage;
update status information of each of the plurality of the users corresponding to each of the first stage and the second stage;
identify one or more first users among the plurality of users, with a recently completed state for the first stage;
identify one or more second users among the plurality of users, with a recently completed state for the second stage;
generate a graphical user interface comprising viewable information highlighting the one or more first users with the recently completed state for the first stage and highlighting the one or more second users with the recently completed state for the second stage; and
control a display to display the generated graphical user interface.
Claim Rejections – 35 USC §101
35 U.S.C. § 101 reads as follows:
Whoever invents or discovers any new and useful process, machine, manufacture, or composition of matter, or any new and useful improvement thereof, may obtain a patent therefor, subject to the conditions and requirements of this title.
Claims 1-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 101 because the claimed invention is directed to non-statutory subject matter, specifically an abstract idea.
Claims 1-20 are directed to a judicial exception (i.e., abstract idea), without providing a practical application, and without providing significantly more.
Under the 35 U.S.C. §101 subject matter eligibility two-part analysis, Step 1 addresses whether the claim is directed to one of the four statutory categories of invention, i.e., process, machine, manufacture, or composition of matter. See MPEP §2106.03. If the claim does fall within one of the statutory categories, it must then be determined in Step 2A [prong 1] whether the claim is directed to a judicial exception (i.e., law of nature, natural phenomenon, and abstract idea). See MPEP §2106.04. If the claim is directed toward a judicial exception, it must then be determined in Step 2A [prong 2] whether the judicial exception is integrated into a practical application. See MPEP §2106.04(d). Finally, if the judicial exception is not integrated into a practical application, it must additionally be determined in Step 2B whether the claim recites "significantly more" than the abstract idea. See MPEP §2106.05.
Examiner note: The Office’s 2019 Revised Patent Subject Matter Eligibility Guidance (2019 PEG) is currently found in the Ninth Edition, Revision 10.2019 (revised June 2020) of the Manual of Patent Examination Procedure (MPEP), specifically incorporated in MPEP §2106.03 through MPEP §2106.07(c).
Regarding Step 1,
Claims 1-18 are directed toward an apparatus (system). Claim 19 is directed toward a process (method). Claims 20 are directed toward a computer program product having computer-readable tangible storage media (article of manufacture). Thus, all claims fall within one of the four statutory categories as required by Step 1.
Regarding Step 2A [prong 1],
Claims 1-20 are directed toward the judicial exception of an abstract idea. Independent claims 1, 19, and 20 are directed specifically to the abstract idea of user tracking and workflow management.
Regarding independent claims 1, 19, and 20, the underlined limitations emphasized below correspond to the abstract ideas of the claimed invention:
An information processing method comprising:
capturing facial images a plurality of users, using a camera located at each of a plurality of stages including a first stage and a second stage subsequent to the first stage; [Mental Processes / Certain Methods of Organizing Human Activity (Observation and data gathering). Data collection or standard imaging capture alone resembles an observation task.]
comparing the captured facial images of the plurality of users with a plurality of registered facial images acquired in an initial stage in the plurality of stages; [Mental processes - Generic data comparison/analysis that could theoretically be performed in the human mind or via pen-and-paper observation (looking at a person and checking a roster / looking at two photos and judging if they match).]
updating status information of each of the plurality of the users corresponding to each of the first stage and the second stage; [Certain Methods of Organizing Human Activity -Managing personal behavior or tracking progress/interactions. Record-keeping and updating tracking data reflect organizational and administrative tasks.]
identifying one or more first users among the plurality of users, with a recently completed state of the first stage; identifying one or more second users among the plurality of users, with a recently completed state for the second stage; [Certain methods of organizing human activity - Tracking the progress, status, or movement of people through an administrative process or sequence of checkpoints. / Mental Processes - Evaluation and determination. Categorizing individuals based on data status is an evaluative judgment concept.]
generating a graphical user interface comprising viewable information highlighting the one or more first users with the recently completed state for the first stage and highlighting the one or more second users with the recently completed state for the second stage; and controlling a display to display the generated graphical user interface. [Certain methods of organizing human activity - managing information flow and data presentation, presenting collected information without altering computer functionality.]
As the underlined claim limitations above demonstrate, independent claims 1, 19, and 20 are directed to the abstract idea of Mental processes (concepts performed in the human mind (including an observation, evaluation, judgment, or opinion)); and Certain methods of organizing human activity (fundamental economic principles or practices (including hedging, insurance, mitigating risk); commercial or legal interactions (including agreements in the form of contracts; legal obligations; advertising, marketing or sales activities or behaviors; business relations); managing personal behavior or relationships or interactions between people (including social activities, teaching, and following rules or instructions)).
Dependent claims 2-18 provide further details to the abstract idea of claims 1, 19, and 20 regarding the received data, therefore, these claims include mental processes, and certain methods of organizing human activities for similar reasons provided above for claims 1, 19, and 20.
After considering all claim elements, both individually and in combination and in ordered combination, it has been determined that the claims do not amount to significantly more than the abstract idea itself.
Regarding Step 2A [prong 2],
Claims 1-20 fail to integrate the recited judicial exception into any practical application. The claims recite additional limitations which are hardware or software elements or particular technological environment, such as an “information processing apparatus”, a “non-transitory storage medium”, a “memory”, a “processor”, a “camera”, a “graphical user interface”, and a “display”. However, these limitations are not enough to qualify as “practical application” being recited in the claims along with the abstract idea since these limitations are merely invoked as a tool to perform instruction of an abstract idea in a particular technological environment and/or are generally linking the use of the abstract idea to a particular technological environment or field of use, and merely applying and abstract idea in a particular technological environment and merely limiting use of an abstract idea to a particular field or a technological environment do not provide practical application for an abstract idea (MPEP 2106.05 (f) & (h)). The claims do not amount to "practical application" for the abstract idea because they neither (1) recite any improvements to another technology or technical field; (2) recite any improvements to the functioning of the computer itself; (3) apply the judicial exception with, or by use of, a particular machine; (4) effect a transformation or reduction of a particular article to a different state or thing; (5) provide other meaningful limitations beyond generally linking the use of the judicial exception to a particular technological environment.
The relevant question under Step 2A [prong 2] is not whether the claimed invention itself is a practical application, instead, the question is whether the claimed invention includes additional elements beyond the judicial exception that integrate the judicial exception into a practical application by imposing a meaningful limit on the judicial exception. This is not the case with Applicant’s claimed invention. The steps of "receiving captured facial images" and "generating a graphical user interface" represent generic information collection and traditional display manipulation without a specific structural computer improvement. Automating the recited claimed features as a combination of computer instructions implemented by computer hardware and/or software elements as recited above does not qualify an otherwise unpatentable abstract idea as patent eligible. Examples where the Courts have found selecting a particular data source or type of data to be manipulated to be insignificant extra-solution activity include selecting information, based on types of information and availability of information in a power-grid environment, for collection, analysis and display, Electric Power Group, LLC v. Alstom S.A., 830 F.3d 1350, 1354-55, 119 USPQ2d 1739, 1742 (Fed. Cir. 2016); Applicant’s limitations as recited above do nothing more than supplement the abstract idea using additional hardware/software computer components as a tool to perform the abstract idea and generally link the use of the abstract idea to a technological environment, which is not sufficient to integrate the judicial exception into a practical application since they do not impose any meaningful limits. Dependent claims 2-18 merely incorporate the additional elements recited above, along with further embellishments of the abstract idea of independent claims respectively, but these features only serve to further limit the abstract idea of independent claims. Therefore, the additional elements recited in the claimed invention individually, and in combination fail to integrate the recited judicial exception into any practical application.
Regarding Step 2B,
Claims 1-20 fail to amount to “significantly more” than an abstract idea. The claims recite additional limitations which are hardware or software elements or particular technological environment, such as an “information processing apparatus”, a “non-transitory storage medium”, a “memory”, a “processor”, a “camera”, a “graphical user interface”, and a “display”. However, these limitations are not enough to qualify as “significantly more” being recited in the claims along with the abstract idea since these limitations are merely invoked as a tool to perform instruction of Abstract idea in a particular technological environment and/or are generally linking the use of the abstract idea to a particular technological environment or field of use, and simply displaying information on a screen or organizing history in a predetermined order without a specific, technical improvement to computer functionality fails to integrate the abstract idea into a patent-eligible practical application (MPEP 2106.05(f) & (h)). The claims do not amount to "significantly more" than the abstract idea because they neither (1) recite any improvements to another technology or technical field; (2) recite any improvements to the functioning of the computer itself; (3) apply the judicial exception with, or by use of, a particular machine; (4) effect a transformation or reduction of a particular article to a different state or thing; (5) add a specific limitation other than what is well-understood, routine and conventional in the field; (6) add unconventional steps that confine the claim to a particular useful application; nor (7) provide other meaningful limitations beyond generally linking the use of the judicial exception to a particular technological environment.
Dependent claims 2-18 merely recite further additional embellishments of the abstract idea of independent claims 1, 19, and 20 respectively, but these features only serve to further limit the abstract idea of independent claims 1, 19, and 20; however, none of the dependent claims recite an improvement to a technology or technical field or provide any meaningful limits. The addition of another abstract concept to the limitations of the claims does not render the claim other than abstract. Under the Interim Guidance on Patent Subject Matter Eligibility (PEG 2019), it specifically states that narrowing an abstract idea of claims do not resolve the claims of being "significantly more" than the abstract idea. Thus, the additional elements in the dependent claims only serve to further limit the abstract idea utilizing the computer components as a tool and/or generally link the use of the abstract idea to a particular technological environment.
Therefore, since there are no limitations in the claims 1-20 that transform the exception into a patent eligible application such that the claims amount to significantly more than the exception itself, and looking at the limitations as a combination and as an ordered combination adds nothing that is not already present when looking at the elements taken individually, claims 1-20 are rejected under 35 USC § 101 as being directed to non-statutory subject matter under 35 U.S.C. § 101.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JONATHAN P OUELLETTE whose telephone number is (571)272-6807. The examiner can normally be reached on M-F 8am-6pm.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Lynda C Jasmin, can be reached at telephone number (571) 272-6782. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300.
Information regarding the status of an application may be obtained from Patent Center. Status information for published applications may be obtained from Patent Center. Status information for unpublished applications is available through Patent Center for authorized users only. Should you have questions about access to Patent Center, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free).
Examiner interviews are available via telephone, in-person, and video conferencing using a USPTO supplied web-based collaboration tool. To schedule an interview, applicant is encouraged to use the USPTO Automated Interview Request (AIR) Form at https://www.uspto.gov/patents/uspto-automated- interview-request-air-form.
August 24, 2026
/JONATHAN P OUELLETTE/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3629
Prosecution Insights