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 .
Response to Amendment
The amendment filed on 09/09/2026 has been entered.
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 “step” or a term used as a substitute for “means” 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 “step” or the generic placeholder 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 “step” or the generic placeholder is not modified by sufficient structure, material, or acts for performing the claimed function.
Use of the word “means” (or “step”) 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. allowance 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” (or “step”) 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 “step”) 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 “step”) 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): “inquiry reception unit”, “mage acquisition unit", “screen configuration unit”, “screen transmission unit”, “group management unit”, “position reception unit”, “terminal determination means”, “instruction transmission means”, “image reception means”, “image accumulation unit”, “screen configuration unit”, “ranking means”, “configuration means”, “preservation means”, “location acquisition unit”, “inquiry acquisition unit”, “user transmission unit”, “user reception unit”, “user output unit”, “inquiry acquisition unit” are: generic placeholder as applied in any of the claims 1-13.
Because this/these claim limitation(s) is/are being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, it/they is/are being interpreted to cover the corresponding structure described in the specification as performing the claimed function, and equivalents thereof.
If applicant does not intend to have this/these limitation(s) interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, applicant may: (1) amend the claim limitation(s) to avoid it/them being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph (e.g., by reciting sufficient structure to perform the claimed function); or (2) present a sufficient showing that the claim limitation(s) recite(s) sufficient structure to perform the claimed function so as to avoid it/them being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claim(s) 2, 4, 5, 7, 9, 10 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.
Claim(s) 6, 8 also object as being dependent on an objected claim.
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, 3, 11-13 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Gueziec (2012/0123667) in view of Border et al. (2008/0297608) “Border”.
As of claim 1, Gueziec teaches
An information processing device, comprising:
an inquiry reception unit, receiving, from a user terminal, an inquiry comprising identification information for identifying a plurality of locations of comparison targets (Abs, [0018] teach application server 160 receives requests from user’s computing device 120 (user terminal) identifying one or more travel routes/locations (and camera snapshots/feeds along candidate routes) so that the user can compare conditions across candidate routes/locations t make informed decisions when choosing travel routes and a departure time to reach a desired destination”);
an image acquisition unit, comprising at least one processor, acquiring images transmitted [from mobile terminals present at the respective locations identified by the identification information] ([0018, 0057] Figs. 1 and 3 disclose application server 160 (comprising processor 310) acquiring active and passive crowdsourced data from mobile computing devices 120 traversing the respective routes/locations, as well as lates snapshots or video feeds from cameras at those locations).
a screen configuration unit, comprising at least one processor, forming a screen by using the images ([0021, 0057], Figs. 1 and 3 teach the one or more processors 310 execute instructions resulting in “the processor(s) generating and providing one or more graphical interfaces” that integrate the acquired snapshots/feeds and condition data into a report screen”); and
a screen transmission unit, transmitting the screen to the user terminal ([0021, 0057], Figs. 1 and 3 teach application server 160 transmits the generated graphical interface visa network 140 to the user’s computing device 120 for display).
Gueziec fails to explicitly teach
Wherein the images acquired by the image acquisition unit are images transmitted from mobile terminals present at the respective locations identification information.
However, Border teaches wherein said
acquiring images transmitted from mobile terminals present at the respective locations identified by the identification information (Abs, [0007, 0008], Figs. 6 and 7 teach an image acquisition method and system that identifies camera-equipped mobile terminals, such as mobile telephone apparatus/second digital devise, currently present at a desired geographical location specified in a request, and acquires images captured and transmitted by those mobile terminals present at the identified geographical location).
Therefore, it would be obvious to one ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to combine Gueziec and Border by configuring the at least one processor 310 of Gueziec server 160 to acquire captured images transmitted from mobile terminals present at the respective queried locations, as taught by Border, because doing so allows a user comparing candidate locations/routes to obtain real-time visual snapshots of conditions at locations where fixed roadside cameras are unavailable, out of service, or obstructed.
As of claim 3, Border teaches
wherein the image acquisition unit transmits transmission instructions for the images to the mobile terminals present at the respective locations identified by the identification information, and receives the images from the mobile terminals in response to transmission of the transmission instructions ([0007, 0008], Figs.6 and 7 explicitly teach determining which mobile telephone handsets are located at the geographical location specified in the request, transmitting the request/instruction to capture the image of the specified location to those mobile handsets present at the location, and receiving the captured images transmitted from the mobile handsets in response to the request).
As of claim 11, Gueziec teaches
A user terminal, comprising:
a location acquisition unit, comprising a receiver, acquiring a location identifier identifying a location of a user terminal ([0019]–[0020], Fig. 1 disclose that computing device 120 offers location-based information generated through cellular network base stations or Global Positioning System (GPS) data via an antenna receiver of a GPS device to identify the current location of computing device 120);
an inquiry acquisition unit, comprising a processor, acquiring an inquiry comprising identification information by using the location identifier; and a user transmission unit, transmitting the inquiry to an information processing device ( [0018], [0020], and [0057], Figs. 1 and 3 teach computing device 120, comprising processor(s) 310, generates and transmits a request/query over network 140 to application server 160 for traffic and condition reports for candidate routes/locations based on the user's current GPS location and desired destination);
a user reception unit, receiving, from the information processing device, a screen formed by using images of a plurality of locations comprising the location identified by the location identifier ([0018] and [0021], Fig. 1 teach computing device 120 receives from application server 160 one or more graphical interfaces displaying traffic reports and latest snapshots or video from cameras across the queried locations along the route, starting from the user's current location); and
a display outputting the screen ( [0021] and [0057]–[0058], Fig. 3 teach system 300 implementing computing device 120 comprises output devices 350 and a graphics display 370 outputting the received graphical interface screen to user 110).
To the extent Gueziec fails to explicitly teach
wherein the screen received by the user reception unit is formed by using cooperative real-time images of a plurality of locations comprising the location identified by the location identifier acquired on-demand from devices at those specified geographical locations.
However, Border teaches
receiving, at a requesting user terminal, a screen formed by using images of a plurality of locations comprising a specified geographical location ( Abs, [0007]–[0008], Figs. 6 and 7: discloses a first digital device 100 comprising a display module 8 and network communication module that sends a request identifying desired geographical locations on a map, receives images captured at the specified geographical locations, and outputs the screen displaying the images on display module 8).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine Gueziec and Border so that Gueziec's computing device 120 receives and outputs on graphics display 370 a comparison screen formed using captured images of the plurality of queried locations including the user terminal's current location, as taught by Border, because doing so provides the user with direct visual verification of real-time conditions at both the user's starting/current location and candidate route locations on a single display screen.
As of claim 12, Gueziec teaches
A user terminal, comprising:
an inquiry acquisition unit, comprising a processor, acquiring an inquiry comprising identification information comprising a user identifier; and a user transmission unit, transmitting the inquiry to an information processing device ( [0018, 0057], Figs. 1 and 3: discloses that user 110 registers and logs in via computing device 120, which comprises processor(s) 310, to transmit a request comprising user registration/profile identification information over network 140 to application server 160)
a user reception unit, receiving, from the information processing device, a screen formed by using images of a plurality of locations identified by a plurality of location identifiers corresponding to the user identifier ( [0018, 0021], Fig. 1 disclose that database 170 stores a profile of user 110 including saved user preferences, frequently traversed routes/locations such as home, office, and school, and bookmarks for particular traffic cameras/latest snapshots corresponding to the user's profile, and computing device 120 receives customized graphical interfaces displaying the reports and snapshots for the plurality of locations associated with that user's profile); and
a display outputting the screen ( [002, 0057–[0058], Fig. 3 teach system 300 implementing computing device 120 comprises output devices 350 and a graphics display 370 outputting the received graphical interface screen).
To the extent Gueziec fails to explicitly teach
wherein the screen received by the user reception unit is formed by using cooperative real-time images of a plurality of locations acquired from mobile capture devices at the respective locations.
However, Border teaches
receiving, at a requesting user terminal, a screen formed by using images captured at a plurality of specified geographical locations (Border et al., Abstract and ¶ [0007]–[0008], Figs. 6 and 7: discloses a first digital device 100 comprising a display module 8 that receives and displays images captured by secondary mobile devices present at requested geographical locations).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine Gueziec and Border so that upon receiving an inquiry comprising a user identifier from computing device 120, the screen returned to and displayed on computing device 120 is formed using captured images of the plurality of bookmarked/saved locations corresponding to that user identifier, because doing so allows a registered user to immediately view real-time images across all of their personalized, frequently visited locations upon login without manually re-entering each location.
As of claim 13, claim 13 is rejected the same as claims 1. Only claim 13 is a method claim.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to claim(s) 1-13 have been considered but are moot because the new ground of rejection does not rely on all references applied in the prior rejection of record for any teaching or matter specifically challenged in the argument.
Conclusion
THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a).
A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of the advisory action. In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the mailing date of this final action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to INSA SADIO whose telephone number is (571)270-5580. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 9:00 am-6:00 am.
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, NITIN K PATEL can be reached at 571-272-7677. 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.
INSA . SADIO
Primary Examiner
Art Unit 2628
/INSA SADIO/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2628
Prosecution Insights