DETAILED ACTION
Continued Examination Under 37 CFR 1.114
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and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114.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 12/15/2025 has been entered.
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
Applicant presents amendments to claims 11–12, 15, 17–20, cancels claims 1–6, 8–9, 13–14, and introduces new claims 21–26. All amendments have been fully considered.
Applicant’s amendments have been reviewed. While the subject matter found in the independent claims likely overcomes the previous combination of prior art and probably avoids rejection under 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103, it is impossible to be definitive in light of the current state of the claims. While an additional search was conducted, the indefiniteness of many critical aspects of the claims (detailed below) make searching for and applying prior art to be of limited use. The prior art that the Examiner considers to be the most relevant remains Kinney (US 2018/0144615 A1, published May 24, 2018) and Ozono (US 2022/0148354 A1, published Sep. 10, 2020) and it appears that the current amendments were made with these references in mind. The Examiner notes that overcoming the rejection under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) will require an additional search to make a determination of allowability.
Response to Arguments
Applicant presents arguments with respect to independent claims 11, 20, and 21. All arguments have been fully considered.
The Examiner agrees that the subject matter added to the amended claims likely overcomes the previous combination of prior art. However, as noted above, the indefiniteness of the claims makes a definitive determination of allowability impossible. The Examiner is only guessing at the meaning of a number of important aspects of the invention and the Examiner’s understanding of the invention is likely to change when these ambiguities are rectified.
Applicant is encouraged to not only remedy the noted antecedent basis issues listed below, but also review the claims to ensure there are not more issues that the Examiner may have missed.
Claim Objections
The numbering of claims is not in accordance with 37 CFR 1.126 which requires the original numbering of the claims to be preserved throughout the prosecution. When claims are canceled, the remaining claims must not be renumbered. When new claims are presented, they must be numbered consecutively beginning with the number next following the highest numbered claims previously presented (whether entered or not).
The claim amendments contain new claims including two claims numbered claim 22. One of the claims is required to be withdrawn or the repeated claim number and the subsequent claims renumbered.
Claim 20 objected to because of the following informalities: The claim recites, “identifying the predetermined intention of the the predetermined user “, which includes a repeated word. Appropriate correction is required.
The first claim 22 recites, “wherein to initiate the at least one of a plurality of actions securely without the homeowner being physically comprises transmitting a payment code”, which is missing a word after the “physically”. The Examiner presumes the claim should read, “physically present”. 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 11–12, 15, 17–26 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 applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the applicant), regards as the invention.
Claims 11, 20, and 21 recite “the authorized user”, which lacks antecedent basis. While the claim previously recites “a user command”, it also recites “a homeowner”, and subsequent limitations reference “the authorized user”, nowhere is there recited a clear first instance, such as “an authorized user”.
Claims 19 and 26 recite, “an authorized user”, which conflicts with the previously recited instances of “the authorized user”. There is no way to know if these are the same.
Claims 11, 20, and 21 recite “a real-world physical object”, which is recited a second time making the meaning of the term indefinite. While the context of the second recitation of “a real-world physical object” is related to a presence confirmation, the language makes it unclear what real-world physical object is being confirmed. Assuming that the “real-world physical object” is the same as previously recited, Examiner suggests that the current language, “delaying initiation of the action until a real-world physical object presence confirmation is received”, might be preferably amended to read, “delaying initiation of the action until a presence confirmation of the real-world physical object is received”, which may convey the same meaning, but without the indefinite language.
Claims 11, 20, and 21 recite “the contextual knowledge of the authorized user”, which lack antecedent basis. While the claim previously recites “contextual knowledge of a homeowner” is does not recited “contextual knowledge of the authorized user”. Further, the subsequent clause recites a broad “wherein the contextual knowledge comprises”, without any indication whether the “wherein the contextual knowledge” is referring to “contextual knowledge of a homeowner” or “contextual knowledge of the authorized user”, or both.
Claim 20 recites “the predetermined user”, which lacks antecedent basis.
Claims 18 and 25, recite “the another electronic device”, which is inherently distinguished from a first device of the authorized user. However, it is not clear what device that might be in order to differentiate from it.
The dependent claims inherit the indefiniteness of the independent claims. Applicant is encouraged to review the claims to remedy any other antecedent basis issues that the Examiner may have missed.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to VANCE M LITTLE whose telephone number is (571) 270-0408. The examiner can normally be reached on Monday - Friday 9:30am - 5:30pm.
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, Jung (Jay) Kim can be reached on (571) 272-3804. 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 access to the Private PAIR system, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (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.
/VANCE M LITTLE/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2493