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 .
DETAILED ACTION
The Preliminary Amendment filed on March 16, 2026 has been received and acknowledged.
The pending claims 1-11 are presented for examination.
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on 7/24/2025 has been considered by the examiner. Please see attached PTO-1449.
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement filed 3/16/2026 and 5/11/2026 fail to comply with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97, 1.98 and MPEP § 609 because there is no application and date information for some of NPL documents and Applicant has not provided a proper copy or list of the references with the same name in the information disclosure statement and English abstract or translation is needed for foreign document. Applicant is advised that the date of any re-submission of any item of information contained in this information disclosure statement or the submission of any missing element(s) will be the date of submission for purposes of determining compliance with the requirements based on the time of filing the statement, including all certification requirements for statements under 37 CFR 1.97(e). See MPEP § 609.05(a).
Priority
Acknowledgment is made of applicant's claim for foreign priority based on an application filed in Japan on February 02 2023. It is noted, however, that applicant has not filed a certified copy of the PCT/JP2023/003446 application as required by 37 CFR 1.55.
Claim Objections
Claim 6 is objected to because of the following informalities:
Claim 6, line 3, recites “when” is an optional statement. Claim scope is not limited by claim language that suggests or makes optional but does not require steps to be performed, or by claim language that does not limit a claim to a particular structure, see MPEP 2111.04.
Appropriate correction is required.
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 1-11 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 pre-AIA the applicant regards as the invention.
Claim 1 limitation “an inquiry receiver, an image obtainer, a situation obtainer, a screen generator and a screen transmitter” invokes 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph. However, the written description fails to disclose the corresponding structure, material, or acts for performing the entire claimed function and to clearly link the structure, material, or acts to the function. Because the written description fails to clearly link or associate the disclosed structure, material, or acts to the claimed function such that one of ordinary skill in the art would recognize what structure, material, or acts perform the claimed function. Therefore, the claim is indefinite and is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, second paragraph.
Applicant may:
(a) Amend the claim so that the claim limitation will no longer be interpreted as a limitation under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph;
(b) Amend the written description of the specification such that it expressly recites what structure, material, or acts perform the entire claimed function, without introducing any new matter (35 U.S.C. 132(a)); or
(c) Amend the written description of the specification such that it clearly links the structure, material, or acts disclosed therein to the function recited in the claim, without introducing any new matter (35 U.S.C. 132(a)).
If applicant is of the opinion that the written description of the specification already implicitly or inherently discloses the corresponding structure, material, or acts and clearly links them to the function so that one of ordinary skill in the art would recognize what structure, material, or acts perform the claimed function, applicant should clarify the record by either:
(a) Amending the written description of the specification such that it expressly recites the corresponding structure, material, or acts for performing the claimed function and clearly links or associates the structure, material, or acts to the claimed function, without introducing any new matter (35 U.S.C. 132(a)); or
(b) Stating on the record what the corresponding structure, material, or acts, which are implicitly or inherently set forth in the written description of the specification, perform the claimed function. For more information, see 37 CFR 1.75(d) and MPEP §§ 608.01(o) and 2181.
Similar problem exists in claims 10 and 11.
Claim 1, recites “an image of a location identified by the another location information” and “the image of the location identified by the location information”. It indicates they are different limitation, so that antecedent basis is making the limitation not clear. Therefore it is indefinite.
Similar problem exists in claims 3, 5, 7, 8, 9 and 11.
Claim 9, recites “while being associated with a right holder identifier for identifying a user of the user terminal”. It is not clear which limitation is associated with a right holder identifier for identifying a user of the user terminal. Therefore it is indefinite.
Appropriate clarification and correction is required.
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 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.
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 of this title, 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 set forth in Graham v. John Deere Co., 383 U.S. 1, 148 USPQ 459 (1966), that are applied 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.
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.
Claims 1, 2, 4, 5, 7, 8 and 11 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Lokesh (U.S. Pat. Pub. 2017/0372390) in view of Rathod (U.S. Pat. Pub. 2022/0179665).
Referring to claim 1, Lokesh teaches an information processing device comprising:
an inquiry receiver configured to receive an inquiry including a location information (receiving a selection of a location associated with the event, see Lokesh, Para 16);
an image obtainer configured to obtain another location information (receiving a selection of a location associated with the event, see Lokesh, Para 16), obtain an image of a location identified by the another location information and obtain the image of the location identified by the location information included in the inquiry (receiving a selection of a location associated with the event. The method may also include sending a request for the digital image to preview the event from the location and for weather data in view of the time element. The method may include receiving the digital image and the weather data, see Lokesh, Para 16);
a situation obtainer configured to obtain a situation information for identifying a situation of the location identified by the location information included in the inquiry (receiving a selection of a location associated with the event. The method may also include sending a request for the digital image to preview the event from the location and for weather data in view of the time element. The method may include receiving the digital image and the weather data, see Lokesh, Para 16);
a screen generator configured to generate a screen including the situation information obtained by the situation obtainer based on a plurality of images obtained by the image obtainer (generating a weather enhanced graphical preview… The weather enhanced graphical preview may include a digital image of a view from a seating section or from a particular seat that includes weather information, see Lokesh, Para 15); and
a screen transmitter configured to transmit the screen generated by the screen generator to a user terminal (At block 630, the processing logic may send the digital image and the weather data to the client device as a weather enhanced graphical preview, see Lokesh, Para 74).
However, Lokesh does not explicitly teach
location information included in a group information including the location information included in the inquiry from the group information, the group information being stored in a group manager storing one or a plurality of group information.
Rathod teaches
location information included in a group information including the location information included in the inquiry from the group information (select location or place from list 5923 or enable user to search and/or select location from map and set as location of event 5925 or define geo-fence boundaries of event 5922, see Rathod, Para. 705) , the group information being stored in a group manager storing one or a plurality of group information (databases or storage mediums of locations or places, see Rathod, Para. 22).
Therefore, 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 method of Lokesh, to have location information included in a group information including the location information included in the inquiry from the group information, the group information being stored in a group manager storing one or a plurality of group information, as taught by Rathod, to provide better answer (Rathod, Para. 792).
As to claim 2, Lokesh teaches the situation information includes a weather information for identifying a weather (weather information, see Lokesh, Para 15).
As to claim 4, Lokesh teaches the situation information includes a weather information for identifying a weather in a future (The weather conditions may also be presented based on a time component, such that the buyer may view predicted weather conditions at or near the actual time of the event, see Lokesh, Para 15, preview predicted weather data, see Lokesh, Para 17).
As to claim 5, Lokesh as modified teaches the inquiry includes the location information (location data pertaining to a physical location in a venue, see Lokesh, Para 18), a time information (The information pertaining to the event may include a time element, see Lokesh, Para 16) and the situation information (receiving the digital image and the weather data, see Lokesh, Para 16), the image obtainer is configured to obtain the image corresponding to the location information, the time information and the situation information included in the inquiry from an image storage (search image, see Rathod, Para. 639) storing images associated with three or more attribute values including the location information, the time information and the situation information (one or more target criteria including provide or add keywords 1761, provide one or more object criteria… search image, see Rathod, Para. 341, provide preferences of showing of one or more types of retrieved content… weather,… map, time, see Rathod, Para. 768).
As to claim 7, Lokesh teaches the image obtainer is configured to obtain the image of the location identified by the location information included in the inquiry at a plurality of points in time (preview sun data from the location and at a given time, see Lokesh, Para 31).
As to claim 8, Lokesh teaches the image at a plurality of points in time includes a current image and a past image of the location identified by the location information (The digital image may include metadata indicating the location and time, see Lokesh, Para 31. The database may return a position of the sun at the location and at the particular time, see Lokesh, Para 72), and the screen generator is configured to generate the screen including a plurality of images in time order (Presenting the digital image and the weather data via the display device may include presenting the sun in a first position and presenting a first time associated with the first position,… view the sun at the second time, the processing logic may present the sun at a second position, see Lokesh, Para 66).
Referring to claim 11, Lokesh teaches an information processing method for performing all processes performed by the information processing device according to claim 1.
Claim 3 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Lokesh (U.S. Pat. Pub. 2017/0372390) in view of Rathod (U.S. Pat. Pub. 2022/0179665) as applied to claims 1, 2, 4, 5, 7, 8 and 11 above, and in further view of Rapoport et al. (U.S. Pat. Pub. 2018/0307707).
As to claim 3, Lokesh as modified does not explicitly teach situation information includes an information indicating brightness and darkness of the image.
However, Rapoport et al. teaches situation information includes an information indicating brightness and darkness of the image (a mostly dark image may depict a night scene of a location as opposed to depicting a day scene, see Rapoport et al., Para. 34).
Therefore, 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 method of Lokesh as modified, to have situation information includes an information indicating brightness and darkness of the image, as taught by Rapoport et al., to automatically select real-world street level images that are most visually relevant to the current conditions (Rapoport et al., Para. 17).
Claim 6 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Lokesh (U.S. Pat. Pub. 2017/0372390) in view of Rathod (U.S. Pat. Pub. 2022/0179665) as applied to claims 1, 2, 4, 5, 7, 8 and 11 above, and in further view of Yu et al. (U.S. Pat. Pub. 2008/0154962).
As to claim 6, Lokesh as modified does not explicitly teach the image obtainer is configured to obtain the image of the location identified by the another location information when the image of the location identified by the location information included in the inquiry cannot be obtained.
However, Yu et al. teaches the image obtainer is configured to obtain the image of the location identified by the another location information when the image of the location identified by the location information included in the inquiry cannot be obtained (if the search unit 222 does not find an image matching the keyword in the folder 712, the search unit 222 may search various other locations for an image matching the metadata keyword, see Yu et al., Para. 42).
Therefore, 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 method of Lokesh as modified, to have the image obtainer is configured to obtain the image of the location identified by the another location information when the image of the location identified by the location information included in the inquiry cannot be obtained, as taught by Yu et al., to efficiently search (Yu et al., Para. 32).
Claim 9 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Lokesh (U.S. Pat. Pub. 2017/0372390) in view of Rathod (U.S. Pat. Pub. 2022/0179665) as applied to claims 1, 2, 4, 5, 7, 8 and 11 above, and in further view of Patton et al. (U.S. Pat. No. 10,261,846).
As to claim 9, Lokesh as modified does not explicitly teach a third preserver configured to accumulate the image at a plurality of points in time or the screen including the image at the plurality of points in time while being associated with a right holder identifier for identifying a user of the user terminal.
Patton et al. teaches a third preserver configured to accumulate the image at a plurality of points in time or the screen including the image at the plurality of points in time while being associated with a right holder identifier for identifying a user of the user terminal (personal information is detected from different parts of a portion of content ( e.g., different parts of an image) considered in the aggregate. In other aspects, personal information is detected from parts of different portions of content (e.g., text and an image). The analysis modules can remove detected personal information from signal content or render the personal information, see Patton et al., Col. 16, lines 61-67).
Therefore, 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 method of Lokesh as modified, to have a third preserver configured to accumulate the image at a plurality of points in time or the screen including the image at the plurality of points in time while being associated with a right holder identifier for identifying a user of the user terminal, as taught by Patton et al., to more efficiently and effectively detect events (Patton et al., Col. 9, line 27).
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
The following is a quotation of the appropriate paragraphs of 35 U.S.C. 102 that form the basis for the rejections under this section made in this Office action:
A person shall be entitled to a patent unless –
(a)(1) the claimed invention was patented, described in a printed publication, or in public use, on sale or otherwise available to the public before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
(a)(2) the claimed invention was described in a patent issued under section 151, or in an application for patent published or deemed published under section 122(b), in which the patent or application, as the case may be, names another inventor and was effectively filed before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claim 10 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) and 102(a)(2) as being anticipated by Lokesh (U.S. Pat. Pub. 2017/0372390).
Referring to claim 10, Lokesh teaches a user terminal comprising:
a user acceptor configured to accept an inquiry including a location information (receiving a selection of a location associated with the event, see Lokesh, Para 16);
a user transmitter configured to transmit the inquiry to an information processing device (send a request for a digital image (e.g., a weather enhanced graphical preview) to preview the event from the location, see Lokesh, Para 64, request the digital image from a first server, see Lokesh, Para 65);
a user receiver configured to receive a screen including a situation information for identifying a situation of a location identified by the location information based on images of the location identified by the location information at a plurality of points in time (generating a weather enhanced graphical preview… The weather enhanced graphical preview may include a digital image of a view from a seating section or from a particular seat that includes weather information, see Lokesh, Para 15, receiving a selection of a location associated with the event. The method may also include sending a request for the digital image to preview the event from the location and for weather data in view of the time element. The method may include receiving the digital image and the weather data, see Lokesh, Para 16, previews may include different views from a seat or seating section at different times, see Lokesh, Para 27); and
a user output unit configured to output the screen (At block 630, the processing logic may send the digital image and the weather data to the client device as a weather enhanced graphical preview, see Lokesh, Para 74).
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JAU SHYA MENG whose telephone number is (571)270-1634. The examiner can normally be reached 9AM-5PM EST M-F.
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, Charles Rones can be reached at 571-272-4085. 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.
/JAU SHYA MENG/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2168
Prosecution Insights