DETAILED ACTION
This Non-Final Office Action is in response to the originally filed specification and claims filed September 19, 2025.
Claims 1-10 are currently pending and have been considered below.
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 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. 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” (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.
Claims 1-8 are directed towards “means-plus-function” language explicitly. The inclusion of the term apparatus is not sufficient structure, material, or acts to entirely perform the recited function. As such, the limitations of the independent claim reciting means for language are interpreted under 35 USC 112(f).
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112(b)
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.
Claim limitation 1 is directed towards, “first output means for acquiring type specifying information capable of specifying a type of a maintenance target, acquiring first work information indicating a first work for obtaining additional information regarding a state of the maintenance target by using the type specifying information, and outputting the first work information to a communication device” and “second output means for acquiring the additional information generated while the first work is performed or after the first work is performed, acquiring second work information indicating a second work to be performed by an owner or a user of the maintenance target to perform maintenance on the maintenance target using the additional information, and outputting the second work information to the communication device” which 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. Claim 1 is directed towards a first and second output means for acquiring and outputting. The specification describes a device in paragraph [39] but the specification also includes a device that are different devices including a washing machine, air conditioner, vehicle, gas appliance, water supply, and other equipment elements [11]. The indefiniteness arises based on the specification providing separate devices that are shown to have a clear link as to which device is performing the steps. The specification provides separate devices that have different requirements and elements that makes it indefinite in terms of providing which device is performing the claims are required under the 35 USC 112(f) interpretation. 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.
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 1-10 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 101 because the claimed invention is directed towards non-eligible subject matter.
In terms of Step 1, claims 1-10 are directed towards one of the four categories of statutory subject matter.
In terms of Step 2(a)(1), independent claims 1, 9, and 10 are directed towards (as represented by claim 1), “acquiring type specifying information capable of specifying a type of a maintenance target, acquiring first work information indicating a first work for obtaining additional information regarding a state of the maintenance target by using the type specifying information, and outputting the first work information; and acquiring the additional information generated while the first work is performed or after the first work is performed, acquiring second work information indicating a second work to be performed by an owner or a user of the maintenance target to perform maintenance on the maintenance target using the additional information, and outputting the second work information”. The claims are describing a collection of maintenance information and outputting work instructions to be performed based on the collected information. A person would be able to acquire maintenance information for a DIY repair based on the collected information (maintenance issue and device/asset needing repair). As such, the claims are directed towards an abstract idea under the mental process grouping.
Step 2(a)(II) considers the additional elements with respect to being transformative into a practical application. The additional elements of claims 1, 9, and 10 are directed towards, “An information output apparatus comprising: first output means for; second output means for; to a communication device (claim 1); An information output method causing a computer to perform (claim 9); A non-transitory storage medium storing a program causing a computer to function as (claim 10)”. The additional elements are described in the originally filed specification [39-46], figure 1, and figure 6. The additional elements are merely described as tools to implement the abstract idea. The computer elements are not directed towards a technical improvement and are merely used in their ordinary capacity to receive and transmit data/information. As such, the claims are not directed towards additional elements that are transformative into a practical application. Refer to MPEP 2106.05(f).
Step 2(b) considers the additional elements with respect to being significantly more than the identified abstract idea. The additional elements of claims 1, 9, and 10 are directed towards, “An information output apparatus comprising: first output means for; second output means for; to a communication device (claim 1); An information output method causing a computer to perform (claim 9); A non-transitory storage medium storing a program causing a computer to function as (claim 10)”. The additional elements are described in the originally filed specification [39-46], figure 1, and figure 6. The additional elements are merely described as tools to implement the abstract idea. The computer elements are not directed towards a technical improvement and are merely used in their ordinary capacity to receive and transmit data/information. As such, the claims are not directed towards additional elements that are significantly more than the identified abstract idea. Refer to MPEP 2106.05(f).
Dependent claims 2-8 are further describing the abstract idea and are not directed towards additional elements beyond those identified above. The additional elements are directed towards, “wherein the type specifying information comprises a first image capturing the maintenance target”, “wherein the additional information is an image obtained while the first work is performed or after the first work is performed, and comprises a second image capturing at least one of the maintenance target and the person who has performed the first work”, “wherein the second work comprises a work to be performed on the maintenance target by the owner or the user, and the second work information comprises guidance on the second work”, “wherein the second work comprises that the owner or the user requests maintenance of the maintenance target to an expert of the maintenance, and the second work information comprises information necessary for requesting the maintenance to the expert”, “wherein the second output means specifies a content of maintenance necessary for the maintenance target by using the additional information, and specifies the expert by using the content of the maintenance, and comprises information regarding the expert in the second work information”, “wherein the second output means specifies the expert by using position information regarding a position of the maintenance target, and comprises information regarding the expert in the second work information”, and “wherein the second output means specifies a cost required for the expert to perform the maintenance, and comprises the cost in the second work information”. The claims are further describing the maintenance aspects that a person can perform and provide under the mental process abstract idea. The claims further provide elements of mental process by describing the information received/collected (images obtained/captured), describing the information provided to perform maintenance, and describing the output in terms of both guidance and requesting an expert (such as a person calling a technician based on complexity of repairs). The claims are further describing the mental process of providing maintenance information and direction that falls within the identified abstract idea (mental process). There are no further additional elements beyond those identified above. As such, the claims are directed towards an abstract idea without additional elements that are significantly more or transformative into a practical application.
The claimed invention is describing an abstract idea without additional elements that are significantly more or transformative into a practical application. Therefore, claims 1-10 are rejected under 35 USC 101 for being directed towards noneligible subject matter.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status.
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(s) 1-7 and 9-10 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Guo et al [2019/0130163], hereafter Guo.
Regarding claim 1, Guo discloses an information output apparatus comprising: first output means for acquiring type specifying information capable of specifying a type of a maintenance target, acquiring first work information indicating a first work for obtaining additional information regarding a state of the maintenance target by using the type specifying information, and outputting the first work information to a communication device (Fig 4 and paragraphs [40-45]; Guo discloses acquiring an image and other information for the component and outputting work information (in terms of the component inventory, location, and other elements). The first information would be interpreted through the ordering aspect or printing the component.); and
second output means for acquiring the additional information generated while the first work is performed or after the first work is performed, acquiring second work information indicating a second work to be performed by an owner or a user of the maintenance target to perform maintenance on the maintenance target using the additional information, and outputting the second work information to the communication device (Paragraphs [40-45]; Guo discloses that the system includes location information for the component to be replaced based on inventory.).
Regarding claim 2, Guo further discloses the information output apparatus according to claim 1, wherein the type specifying information comprises a first image capturing the maintenance target (Paragraph [39]; Guo discloses that the system obtains an image of the component (interpreted as maintenance target).).
Regarding claim 3, Guo further discloses the information output apparatus according to claim 1, wherein the additional information is an image obtained while the first work is performed or after the first work is performed, and comprises a second image capturing at least one of the maintenance target and the person who has performed the first work (Paragraph [39]; Guo discloses that the system includes an image of the component and barcode.).
Regarding claim 4, Guo further discloses the information output apparatus according to claim 1, wherein the second work comprises a work to be performed on the maintenance target by the owner or the user, and the second work information comprises guidance on the second work (Paragraph [44-45]; Guo discloses that the system provides component replacement part and location of the part to retrieve the component and replace/maintain the component (interpreted as guidance). Examiner notes that the information provided in terms of the guidance is non-functional descriptive material. There is no specific function other than describing the printed matter that is for a human reader, but the functional aspect is outputting information. Refer to MPEP 2111.05.).
Regarding claim 5, Guo further discloses the information output apparatus according to claim 1, wherein the second work comprises that the owner or the user requests maintenance of the maintenance target to an expert of the maintenance, and the second work information comprises information necessary for requesting the maintenance to the expert (Paragraph [35]; Guo discloses that the system provides collaboration with other users that can provide supervision or assistance in maintenance based on the augmented vision system. Examiner notes that the system is providing non-functional descriptive material. The functional aspect is directed towards an output of information and what the information is merely describes non-functional printed matter for a human reader. This is specific to that the owner or the user requests maintenance of the maintenance target to an expert of the maintenance which is stating that the output is information regarding a user to request of another user (expert). As such, the claims are describing non-functional descriptive material. Refer to MPEP 2111.05.).
Regarding claim 6, Guo further discloses the information output apparatus according to claim 5, wherein the second output means specifies a content of maintenance necessary for the maintenance target by using the additional information, and specifies the expert by using the content of the maintenance, and comprises information regarding the expert in the second work information (Paragraph [35]; Guo discloses that the system provides collaboration with other users that can provide supervision or assistance in maintenance based on the augmented vision system. The collaborative user provides guidance and content based on the augmented vision system that provides communication with users.).
Regarding claim 7, Guo further discloses the information output apparatus according to claim 5, wherein the second output means specifies the expert by using position information regarding a position of the maintenance target, and comprises information regarding the expert in the second work information (Paragraph [35]; Guo discloses that the system provides collaboration with other users that can provide supervision or assistance in maintenance based on the augmented vision system. The collaboration includes a further user (supervisor, coordinator) to communicate with the user and is based on the vision of the environment zone for the component.).
Regarding claim 9, Guo discloses an information output method causing a computer to perform: acquiring type specifying information capable of specifying a type of a maintenance target, acquiring first work information indicating a first work for obtaining additional information regarding a state of the maintenance target by using the type specifying information, and outputting the first work information to a communication device (Fig 4 and paragraphs [40-45]; Guo discloses acquiring an image and other information for the component and outputting work information (in terms of the component inventory, location, and other elements). The first information would be interpreted through the ordering aspect or printing the component.); and
acquiring the additional information generated while the first work is performed or after the first work is performed, acquiring second work information indicating a second work to be performed by an owner or a user of the maintenance target to perform maintenance on the maintenance target using the additional information, and outputting the second work information to the communication device (Paragraphs [40-45]; Guo discloses that the system includes location information for the component to be replaced based on inventory.).
Regarding claim 10, Guo discloses a non-transitory storage medium storing a program causing a computer to function as: acquiring type specifying information capable of specifying a type of a maintenance target, acquiring first work information indicating a first work for obtaining additional information regarding a state of the maintenance target by using the type specifying information, and outputting the first work information to a communication device (Fig 4 and paragraphs [40-45]; Guo discloses acquiring an image and other information for the component and outputting work information (in terms of the component inventory, location, and other elements). The first information would be interpreted through the ordering aspect or printing the component.); and
acquiring the additional information generated while the first work is performed or after the first work is performed, acquiring second work information indicating a second work to be performed by an owner or a user of the maintenance target to perform maintenance on the maintenance target using the additional information, and outputting the second work information to the communication device (Paragraphs [40-45]; Guo discloses that the system includes location information for the component to be replaced based on inventory.).
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 103 which forms the basis for all obviousness rejections set forth in this Office action:
A patent for a claimed invention may not be obtained, notwithstanding that the claimed invention is not identically disclosed as set forth in section 102, if the differences between the claimed invention and the prior art are such that the claimed invention as a whole would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which the claimed invention pertains. Patentability shall not be negated by the manner in which the invention was made.
The factual inquiries for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows:
1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art.
2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue.
3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art.
4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness.
Claim(s) 8 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Guo et al [2019/0130163], hereafter Guo, in view of Antony et al [2022/0092557], hereafter Antony.
Regarding claim 8, Guo discloses the above-enclosed limitations of the information output apparatus according to claim 5, however, Guo does not specifically teach a cost;
Antony teaches wherein the second output means specifies a cost required for the expert to perform the maintenance, and comprises the cost in the second work information (Paragraph [36]; Antony teaches a similar maintenance plan system that specifically provides cost estimates for labor and replacement parts. This also includes costs for labor in terms of expertise and other technician aspects [61].).
Guo discloses a maintenance repair system that provides guidance and outputs based on the component and other information, however, Guo does not specifically teach cost estimate;
The sole difference between the primary reference and the claimed subject matter is that Guo does not specifically teach cost estimates. Guo provides information regarding the repair and maintenance for the components.
Antony teaches a similar maintenance system that specifically provides cost estimates was known in the prior art at the time of the invention.
Since each individual element and its function are shown in the prior art, albeit shown in separate references, the difference between the claimed subject matter and the prior art rests not on any individual element or function but in the very combination itself—that is in the substitution of the cost estimate output of Antony for the displayed maintenance information of Guo. Therefore, the simple substitution of one known element for another providing a predictable result renders the claim obvious.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure:
Torii et al [2013/0114100] (maintenance based on image of device to repair);
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ANDREW CHASE LAKHANI whose telephone number is (571)272-5687. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 730am - 5pm (EST).
Examiner interviews are available via telephone, in-person, and video conferencing using a USPTO supplied web-based collaboration tool. To schedule an interview, applicant is encouraged to use the USPTO Automated Interview Request (AIR) at http://www.uspto.gov/interviewpractice.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Sarah Monfeldt can be reached at 571-270-1833. 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.
/ANDREW CHASE LAKHANI/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3629
Prosecution Insights