UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE
`
`
`
`UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
`United States Patent and Trademark Office
`Address: COMMISSIONER FOR PATENTS
`PO. Box 1450
`Alexandria, Virginia 2231371450
`www.uspto.gov
`
`15/ 122,327
`
`08/29/2016
`
`Takashi NISHIYAMA
`
`HOKUP0331WOUS
`
`7258
`
`MARK D. SARALINO (PAN)
`RENNER, OTTO, BOISSELLE & SKLAR, LLP
`1621 EUCLID AVENUE
`19TH FLOOR
`CLEVELAND, OH 44115
`
`SITIRICHE LUIS A
`
`ART UNIT
`2122
`
`PAPER NUMBER
`
`NOTIFICATION DATE
`
`DELIVERY MODE
`
`12/27/2019
`
`ELECTRONIC
`
`Please find below and/or attached an Office communication concerning this application or proceeding.
`
`The time period for reply, if any, is set in the attached communication.
`
`Notice of the Office communication was sent electronically on above—indicated "Notification Date" to the
`
`following e—mail address(es):
`
`ipdoeket@rennerotto.eom
`
`PTOL-90A (Rev. 04/07)
`
`

`

`017/09 A0170” Summary
`
`Application No.
`15/122,327
`Examiner
`LUISASITIRICHE
`
`Applicant(s)
`NISHIYAMA et al.
`Art Unit
`AIA (FITF) Status
`2122
`Yes
`
`- The MAILING DA TE of this communication appears on the cover sheet wit/7 the correspondence address -
`Period for Reply
`
`A SHORTENED STATUTORY PERIOD FOR REPLY IS SET TO EXPIRE g MONTHS FROM THE MAILING
`DATE OF THIS COMMUNICATION.
`Extensions of time may be available under the provisions of 37 CFR 1.136(a). In no event, however, may a reply be timely filed after SIX (6) MONTHS from the mailing
`date of this communication.
`|f NO period for reply is specified above, the maximum statutory period will apply and will expire SIX (6) MONTHS from the mailing date of this communication.
`-
`- Failure to reply within the set or extended period for reply will, by statute, cause the application to become ABANDONED (35 U.S.C. § 133).
`Any reply received by the Office later than three months after the mailing date of this communication, even if timely filed, may reduce any earned patent term
`adjustment. See 37 CFR 1.704(b).
`
`Status
`
`1). Responsive to communication(s) filed on Preliminary Amendment 8/29/2016.
`CI A declaration(s)/affidavit(s) under 37 CFR 1.130(b) was/were filed on
`
`2a)[:] This action is FINAL.
`
`2b)
`
`This action is non-final.
`
`3)[:] An election was made by the applicant in response to a restriction requirement set forth during the interview
`on
`; the restriction requirement and election have been incorporated into this action.
`
`4):] Since this application is in condition for allowance except for formal matters, prosecution as to the merits is
`closed in accordance with the practice under Expade Quay/e, 1935 CD. 11, 453 O.G. 213.
`
`Disposition of Claims*
`
`5)
`
`Claim(s)
`
`flis/are pending in the application.
`
`5a) Of the above Claim(s)
`
`is/are withdrawn from consideration.
`
`
`
`[:1 Claim(ss)
`
`is/are allowed.
`
`Claim(ss) 1_—7 is/are rejected.
`
`D Claim(ss_) is/are objected to.
`
`) ) ) )
`
`S)
`are subject to restriction and/or election requirement
`[:1 Claim(s
`* If any claims have been determined aflowable. you may be eligible to benefit from the Patent Prosecution Highway program at a
`
`participating intellectual property office for the corresponding application. For more information, please see
`
`http://www.uspto.gov/patents/init events/pph/index.jsp or send an inquiry to PPeredback@uspto.gov.
`
`Application Papers
`
`10)|:l The specification is objected to by the Examiner.
`
`11). The drawing(s) filed on 8/29/2016 is/are: a). accepted or b)C] objected to by the Examiner.
`Applicant may not request that any objection to the drawing(s) be held in abeyance. See 37 CFR 1.85(a).
`Replacement drawing sheet(s) including the correction is required if the drawing(s) is objected to. See 37 CFR 1.121 (d).
`
`Priority under 35 U.S.C. § 119
`
`12). Acknowledgment is made of a claim for foreign priority under 35 U.S.C. § 119(a)-(d) or (f).
`Certified copies:
`
`a). All
`
`b)C] Some**
`
`c)C] None of the:
`
`1.. Certified copies of the priority documents have been received.
`
`2C] Certified copies of the priority documents have been received in Application No.
`
`SD Copies of the certified copies of the priority documents have been received in this National Stage
`application from the International Bureau (PCT Rule 17.2(a)).
`
`** See the attached detailed Office action for a list of the certified copies not received.
`
`Attachment(s)
`
`1)
`
`Notice of References Cited (PTO-892)
`
`Information Disclosure Statement(s) (PTO/SB/08a and/or PTO/SB/08b)
`2)
`Paper No(s)/Mail Date 8/29/2015.
`U.S. Patent and Trademark Office
`
`3) E] Interview Summary (PTO-413)
`Paper No(s)/Mail Date
`4) CI Other-
`
`PTOL-326 (Rev. 11-13)
`
`Office Action Summary
`
`Part of Paper No./Mai| Date 20191205
`
`

`

`Application/Control Number: 15/122,327
`Art Unit: 2122
`
`Page 2
`
`DETAILED ACTION
`
`This Office Action is in response to the Preliminary Amendment entered on
`
`8/29/2016. Claims 3-7 are amended. No claims were added or cancelled.
`
`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 Objections
`
`Claim 1
`
`is objected to because of the following informalities. Claim 1 recites:
`
`“a storage device configured to preliminarily store
`
`prior probabilities each...”; and
`
`“an activity inferred configured to
`
`calculate, for each...”.
`
`A ‘colon’ (:) should be used after the words “store” and “to” in order to precede the
`
`enumeration of limitations.
`
`Appropriate correction is required.
`
`Information Disclosure Statement
`
`The information disclosure statement filed 8/29/2016 fails to comply with 37 CFR
`
`1.98(a)(3)(i) because it does not include a concise explanation of the relevance, as it is
`
`presently understood by the individual designated in 37 CFR1.56(c) most knowledgeable
`
`about the content of the information, of each reference listed that is not in the English
`
`language (JP 2010-182072, JP 5292505, Form PCT/ISA/237).
`
`It has been placed in the
`
`application file, but the information referred to therein has not been considered.
`
`

`

`Application/Control Number: 15/122,327
`Art Unit: 2122
`
`Page 3
`
`Claim Interpretation
`
`The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(f):
`
`(f) Elementin Claim for a Combination. — An elementin a claim for a combination maybe
`expressed as a means orstepfor perform ing a specified function withoutthe recital ofstru cture,
`material, or acts in support thereof, and such claim shall be construed to cover the
`corresponding structure, m aterfal, 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 maybe expressed as a means orstep forperforming
`a specified function withoutthe recital ofstructure, material, or acts in support thereof, and such
`claim shall be construed to coverthe 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;
`
`

`

`Application/Control Number: 15/122,327
`Art Unit: 2122
`
`Page 4
`
`(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.
`
`It
`
`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.
`
`

`

`Application/Control Number: 15/122,327
`Art Unit: 2122
`
`Page 5
`
`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.
`ll
`
`Such claim limitation(s)
`
`is/are: “an obtainef’, “an appliance operation detectof’,
`
`an
`
`activity inferref’ in claims 1, 3, 6; and “an inputtef’, “an updatef’ in claim 4.
`
`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.
`
`lf 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.
`
`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 distinctlyclaiming the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor
`regards as the invention.
`
`The following is aquotation of 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA), second paragraph:
`The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularlypointing out and distinctly
`claiming the subject matterwhich the applicant regards as his invention.
`
`

`

`Application/Control Number: 15/122,327
`Art Unit: 2122
`
`Page 6
`
`Claim limitations “an obtainer’, “an appliance operation detector’, “an activity
`
`inferrer’ in claims 1, 3, 6, and “an inputter’, “an updater’ in claim 4 invoke 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 functions:
`
`Claim 1: “configured to obtain, for each of sections...”, “configured to determine,
`
`for each of the sections. .
`
`“configured to calculate, for each of the multiple kinds. . .infer
`
`that a living activity. .
`
`Claim 3: “configured to further use the transition probabilities...”;
`
`Claim 4: “configured to receive feedback information...”,
`
`“ configured to update at
`
`least one of the prior probabilities. .
`
`Claim 6: “configured to periodically perform a process of detecting...record a
`
`pattern. . .determine that there is irregularity. . .”.
`
`Therefore, claims 1-7 are indefinite and are 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-AlA 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
`
`

`

`Application/Control Number: 15/122,327
`Art Unit: 2122
`
`Page 7
`
`(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)).
`
`lf 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 anynew and useful process, machine, manufacture, or
`composition of matter, or any new and useful improvementthereof, mayobtain a patent
`therefor, subject to the conditions and requirements ofthis title.
`
`Claim 7 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 101 because the claimed invention is directed
`
`to non-statutory subject matter. The claim is directed to a program, therefore,
`
`this is
`
`software per se. A claim that recites a piece of software alone without any link to a
`
`

`

`Application/Control Number: 15/122,327
`Art Unit: 2122
`
`Page 8
`
`hardware component is directed to non-statutory subject matter since there is no
`
`relationship between the computer software and hardware components which permits the
`
`functionality of the software to be realized. The claims lack the necessary physical articles
`
`or objects to constitute a machine or a manufacture within the meaning of 35 USC 101.
`
`The claim recites that the program, when executed by a computer, causes a certain
`
`function, however,
`
`the claim is directed to the program by itself, not to a device that
`
`comprises a processor that executes a program, or a computer program product. As such,
`
`it fails to fall within a statutory category under 35 USC 101.
`
`Examiner’s comments
`
`For claims 1-7, no art rejection is made for these claims, they are only rejected
`
`under 35 USC 112 (b) and claim 7 is further rejected under 35 USC 101 as explained
`
`above in this office action.
`
`Conclusion
`
`The prior art made of record and not
`
`relied upon is considered pertinent
`
`to
`
`applicant's disclosure:
`
`- Katzer et al, US Patent 7710824; Katzer teaches detecting presence of a
`
`person in rooms of a house via sensors;
`
`-
`
`lvvai et al, US Pub. No 20120200657 lvvai
`
`traches generating presence
`
`information indicating whether or not a user of the electronic apparatus is in a
`
`room or a home;
`
`-
`
`Sim et al, US Pub. No. 2010/0312876; Sim teaches a method for monitoring
`
`activities of a user on any of a plurality of platforms
`
`

`

`Application/Control Number: 15/122,327
`Art Unit: 2122
`
`Page 9
`
`-
`
`Park et al, US Pub. No. 2012/0226572; Park teaches monitoring power
`
`consumption in real-time states of units via bidirectional
`
`communication
`
`between the respective units;
`
`-
`
`Stefanski et al, US Patent 8942853 Stefanski teaches a system operable to
`
`determining a set of wake-up conditions for a processor to enter into a second
`
`operating state from a first operating state. It contains monitor sensors used to
`
`detect the closeness of a user and wake the head unit processor as needed.
`
`Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the
`
`examiner should be directed to LUIS A SITIRICHE whose telephone number is (571)270-
`
`1316. The examiner can normally be reached on M—F 9am-6pm.
`
`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, Kakali Chaki can be reached on 571-272-3719. 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 the Patent
`
`Application
`
`Information Retrieval
`
`(PAIR) system.
`
`Status information for published
`
`applications may be obtained from either Private PAIR or Public PAIR. Status information
`
`for unpublished applications is available through Private PAIR only. For more information
`
`about the PAIR system, see http://pair-direct.uspto.gov. Should you have questions on
`
`accessto the Private PAIR system, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-
`
`

`

`Application/Control Number: 15/122,327
`Art Unit: 2122
`
`Page 10
`
`217-9197 (toll-free).
`
`If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service
`
`Representative or access to the automated information system, call 800-786-9199 (IN
`
`USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
`
`/LU|S A SITIRICHE/
`
`Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2122
`
`