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 .
A request for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, including the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e), was filed in this application after final rejection. Since this application is eligible for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114. Applicant's submission filed on 11-1-25 has been entered.
Claims 56, 58-66, 71-74, 79-81, 84 and 85 are pending.
The text of those sections of Title 35, U.S. Code not included in this action can be found in a prior Office action.
The prior rejection under 35 USC § 112(a) has been withdrawn in view of applicant’s claim amendments and remarks.
The prior nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claims 1-18 of U.S. Patent No. 11613575 has been withdrawn in view of applicant’s argument.
Claims 56, 58-64, 66 and 71-73 stand rejected, and claims 74, 79 and 81 are rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claims 18, 24, 25, 26 and 27 of U.S. Patent No. 11535679 (cited previously). Although the claims at issue are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other because the reference claims anticipate the instant claims.
Claims 56, 58-64, 66 and 71-73 stand rejected, and claims 74, 79 and 81 are rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claims 19, 24, 25, 25 and 27 of U.S. Patent No. 11548952 (cited previously). Although the claims at issue are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other because the reference claims anticipate the instant claims.
Claims 56, 58-64, 66 and 71-73 stand rejected, and claims 74, 79 and 81 are rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claims 16, and 22-33 of U.S. Patent No. 11845805 (cited previously). Although the claims at issue are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other because the reference claims anticipate the instant claims.
Claims 56, 58-64, 66 and 71-73 stand rejected, and claims 74, 79 and 81 are rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claims 18 and 23-28 of U.S. Patent No. 11858995 (cited previously). Although the claims at issue are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other because the reference claims anticipate the instant claims.
Applicant’s request that the ODP rejections set forth above be held in abeyance until allowable subject matter is indicated is acknowledged, but cannot be granted. Obviousness type double patenting rejections, whether provisional or not, cannot be held in abeyance. A double patenting rejection can be overcome, e.g., by a convincing rebuttal of the merits of the rejection, by amending the claims such that they are no longer anticipated and/or rendered obvious by the reference claims or by filing a proper terminal disclaimer.
Claims 56, 58-64, 66, 71-73, 74, 79 and 81 are rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claims 8, 13-16, 24, 29 and 30 of U.S. Patent No. 11608383 (cited on an IDS). Although the claims at issue are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other because the reference claims anticipate the instant claims.
Claims 56, 58-62, 63, 64, 66, 71, 72, 73, 74, 79 and 81 are rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claims 8-13 of U.S. Patent No. 11814437 (cited herewith). Although the claims at issue are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other because the reference claims anticipate the instant claims.
Claims 56, 58-62, 63, 64, 66, 71, 72, 73, 74, 79 and 81 are rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claims 1-29 of U.S. Patent No. 12435154 (cited herewith). Although the claims at issue are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other because the reference claims anticipate the instant claims.
No claims are allowed. However, claims 65, 80, 84 and 85 are 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.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ZACHARY S SKELDING whose telephone number is (571)272-9033. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 9-5 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, Daniel E Kolker can be reached at 571-272-3181. 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.
/ZACHARY S SKELDING/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1644