BOVEDETAILED 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 .
The amendment filed on May 18, 2026 has been considered.
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 1, 8, and 15 are 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 1, 8, and 15, “area of interest having a hit criterion comprising one of must-hit or must-not-hit” is unclear. Fig. 3 shows areas of interest (302, 304, 306) including a box. Paragraph 0025 of the specification discloses “[t]he criteria for the regions of interest may be, for example, "must hit," "must not hit," and/or "do not care." That is, the one or more processors 104 can filter the acquired waveforms based on the regions of interest selected by the user and remove any waveforms from the GUI that do not fall within the criteria set by the user in the regions of interest”. In light of paragraph 0025 of the specification, examiner interprets a hit criterion comprising one of must-hit or must-not-hit, to read “within the region of interest” or “not within the region of interest”. A criterion of a region of interest being “not within the region of interest” seems indefinite.
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.
Claims 1-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Martin et al. (US 2014/0160144) in view of Ben-Oni (US 2015/0235394)
.
Regarding claims 1, 8, and 15, Martin et al. discloses a test and measurement instrument and method (Figs. 1, 2), comprising:
an input channel (including 105, 205, Fig. 2) configured to receive an input signal (105, 205, receiving an input signal, Fig. 2) from a device under test (acquiring plural waveforms via plural channels, paragraph 0008, lines 1-4) and acquire a plurality of different waveforms from the input signal (215 acquiring waveforms, i.e., waveform that has peaks via 230, waveform that has low frequency via 225), each of the plurality of different waveforms acquired from the input signal at different times (the different waveforms are from the input signal from ADC 205, Fig. 2; ADC’s 205 receive electrical signals from probes 105, 107, paragraph 0028, lines 8-11, one would know that the acquisitions of electrical signals can occur multiple times, thus, the electrical signal are received at different times);
a memory configured to store the plurality of acquired waveforms (Abstract, lines 1-4);
a display configured to display a graphical user interface (GUI) and a selected set of the plurality of acquired waveforms in the GUI (display waveform styles, Abstract, lines 1-2),
a user input configured to receive a selection from a user (user selection,
Abstract, lines 5-11), the selection further comprising a type of the region of interest (waveforms of unfiltered data, Fig. 3, or filtered data, Fig. 4),
one or more processors (122/130) configured to:
render the plurality of acquired waveforms overlaid in the GUI (paragraph
0005, lines 10-13),
after the plurality of acquired waveforms are rendered in the GUI,
receive the selection from the user input (user selection to switch to unfiltered waveforms (Fig. 3) after filtered waveforms (Fig. 4) are displayed, Abstract, lines 5-11).
However, Martin et al. does not disclose
the selection comprising the user using a cursor in the GUI to draw a shape, the shape defining a two-dimensional area region of interest in the GUI the area of interest having a hit criterion comprising one of must-hit or must-not-hit, the selection defining a subset of particular waveforms of interest of the plurality of acquired waveforms to display,
determine the subset of particular waveforms of interest of the plurality of
acquired waveforms to display by selecting only the particular waveforms of the plurality of acquired waveforms that meet the hit criterion for the area of interest, and
render only the subset of particular waveforms of interest of the plurality of
acquired waveforms in the GUI.
Ben-Oni discloses
a selection (308) comprising the user using a cursor (308 may be manipulated by cursor, paragraph 0040, lines 4-8) in the GUI (300) to draw a shape (drag a sliding box or window, paragraph 0038, line 9), the shape defining a two-dimensional area of interest (two-dimension area of sliding box) in the GUI (300), the area of interest having a hit criterion comprising one of must-hit (area within sliding box/window), the selection defining a subset of particular waveforms of interest of the plurality of acquired waveforms to display (selected sections of first and second waveforms are displayed in 306, paragraph 0038, lines 10-11; paragraph 0039, lines 12-14); and
determine the subset of particular waveforms of interest of the plurality of
acquired waveforms to display by selecting only the particular waveforms of the plurality of acquired waveforms that meet the hit criterion for the area of interest (306 determiners/displays only the selected portions of the first and second waveforms, paragraph 0038, lines 10-11; paragraph 0039, lines 12-14), and
render only the subset of particular waveforms of interest of the plurality of
acquired waveforms in the GUI (306 determiners/displays only the selected portions of the first and second waveforms, paragraph 0038, lines 10-11; paragraph 0039, lines 12-14).
It is noted that the hit criterion comprising one of must-not-hit is an alternative limitation since it is recited in the alternative form.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was filed to provide Martin et al. with a selection control as disclosed by Ben-Oni for the purpose of displaying the selected waveform sections of interest.
Regarding claim 2, Martin et al. does not disclose the selection comprises the user drawing multiple shapes, each shape defining one of multiple areas of interest, each area of interest having a hit criterion comprising one of must-hit, and the one or more processors are further configured to determine the subset of particular waveforms of interest of the plurality of acquired waveforms to display by selecting only the particular waveforms of the plurality of acquired waveforms that meet the hit criterion for at least one of the areas of interest.
Ben-Oni discloses the selection comprises the user drawing multiple shapes (sliding box/window, paragraph 0038, line 9), each shape defining one of multiple areas of interest (each sliding box/window selects 12 display windows, Fig. 3), each area of interest having a hit criterion comprising one of must-hit (area within sliding box/window)], and the one or more processors are further configured to determine the subset of particular waveforms of interest of the plurality of acquired waveforms to display by selecting only the particular waveforms of the plurality of acquired waveforms that meet the hit criterion for at least one of the areas of interest (selected portions of first and second waveforms are displayed in 306, paragraph 0038, lines 10-11; paragraph 0039, lines 12-14).
It is noted that the hit criterion comprising one of must-not-hit is an alternative limitation since it is recited in the alternative form.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was filed to provide Martin et al. with a selection control as disclosed by Ben-Oni for the purpose of displaying the selected waveform sections of interest.
Regarding claim 3, Martin et al. does not disclose the one or more processors are further configured to determine the subset of particular waveforms of interest of the plurality of acquired waveforms to display by selecting only the particular waveforms of the plurality of acquired waveforms that meet the hit criterion for each of the areas of interest.
Ben-Oni discloses the one or more processors are further configured to determine the subset of particular waveforms of interest of the plurality of acquired waveforms to display by selecting only the particular waveforms of the plurality of acquired waveforms that meet the hit criterion for each of the areas of interest (selected portions of first and second waveforms are displayed in 306, paragraph 0038, lines 10-11; paragraph 0039, lines 12-14).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was filed to provide Martin et al. with a selection control as disclosed by Ben-Oni for the purpose of displaying the selected waveform sections of interest.
Regarding claims 4 and 5, Martin et al. does not disclose the selection is a first selection and the one or more processors are further configured to:
receive a second selection from the user input, the second selection comprising the user using a cursor in the GUI to draw a second shape, the second shape defining a second two-dimensional area of interest in the GUI, the second area of interest having a hit criterion comprising one of must-hit,
determine a second subset of particular waveforms of interest of the plurality of acquired waveforms to display by selecting only the particular waveforms of the plurality of acquired waveforms that meet the hit criterion for the second area of interest, and
render only the second subset of particular waveforms of interest of the plurality of acquired waveforms in the GUI.
Ben-Oni discloses a selection is a first selection (a selection of a portion of the fist first and second waveform) and the one or more processors are further configured to:
receive a second selection from the user input (make another selection), the second selection comprising the user using a cursor in the GUI to draw a second shape (make another selection by dragging the sliding box/window), the second shape defining a second two-dimensional area of interest in the GUI (two-dimension area of sliding box/window), the second area of interest having a hit criterion comprising one of must-hit (area within sliding box/window),
determine a second subset of particular waveforms of interest of the plurality of acquired waveforms to display by selecting only the particular waveforms of the plurality of acquired waveforms that meet the hit criterion for the second area of interest (306 determiners/displays only other selected portions of the first and second waveforms, paragraph 0038, lines 10-11; paragraph 0039, lines 12-14), and
render only the second subset of particular waveforms of interest of the plurality of
acquired waveforms in the GUI (306 determiners/displays only other selected portions of the first and second waveforms, paragraph 0038, lines 10-11; paragraph 0039, lines 12-14).
It is noted that the hit criterion comprising one of must-not-hit is an alternative limitation since it is recited in the alternative form.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was filed to provide Martin et al. with a selection control as disclosed by Ben-Oni for the purpose of displaying the selected waveform sections of interest.
Regarding claims 6, 13, and 19, Martin et al. discloses the modification is adding a second area of interest (user selected waveforms of filtered data, displayed in Fig. 4).
It is noted that deleting the region of interest, or changing a characteristic of the area of interest are alternative limitations because they are recited i9n the alternative form.
Regarding claims 7, 14, and 20, Martin et al. discloses the selection is a waveform characteristic (waveforms with unfiltered or filtered data), and the one or more processors determine the area of interest based on the waveform characteristic (whether waveforms with unfiltered or filtered data are user selected).
Regarding claim 11, Martin et al. discloses the filter criteria is a first filter criteria (selection of unfiltered data, Abstract, lines 7-8) further includes:
receiving a second filter criteria from the user input (user selection of filtered data, Abstract, lines 10-11),
filtering the plurality of acquired waveforms from the memory based on the second filter criteria to determine filtered waveforms (user selected waveforms of filtered data, Abstract, lines 10-11).
Regarding claims 12 and 18, Martin et al. discloses
receiving a modification of the filter criteria from the user input (receive a user selection to display filtered/unfiltered waveform, Abstract, lines 5-11); and
filtering the plurality of acquired waveforms from the memory based on the modified filter criteria to determine filtered waveforms (Fig. 4).
Regarding claims 9 and 16, Martin et al. does not disclose the filter criteria is based on multiple areas of interest, and the filtered waveforms include only the particular waveforms from the plurality of acquired waveforms that meet the hit criterion for at least one of the areas of interest.
Ben-Oni discloses a filter criteria is based on multiple areas of interest (multi areas of interest, Fig. 3, to be selected for display in 306), and the filtered waveforms include only the particular waveforms from the plurality of acquired waveforms that meet the hit criterion for at least one of the areas of interest (selected portions of first and second waveforms are displayed in 306, paragraph 0038, lines 10-11; paragraph 0039, lines 12-14)..
Regarding claims 10 and 17, Martin et al. does not disclose the filtered waveforms include only the particular waveforms from the plurality of acquired waveforms that meet the hit criterion for each of the areas of interest.
Ben-Oni discloses filtered waveforms include only the particular waveforms from the plurality of acquired waveforms that meet the hit criterion for each of the areas of interest (306 displays only waveforms that are selected by 308; paragraph 0038, lines 10-11; paragraph 0039, lines 12-14).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was filed to provide Martin et al. with a selection control as disclosed by Ben-Oni for the purpose of displaying the selected waveform sections of interest.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed on May 18, 2026 have been fully considered.
With respect to the rejections under 35 USC 103, Applicants argue “Martin fails to teach "the selection comprising the user using a cursor in the GUI to draw a shape defining a region of interest in the GUI, the selection defining a subset of the plurality of acquired waveforms to display," and fails to teach "determine the subset of the plurality of acquired waveforms to display by selecting only the particular waveforms of the plurality of acquired waveforms that are associated with the region of interest according to the type of the region of interest." … Martiny still fails to disclose "the shape defining a two-dimensional area of interest in the GUI, the area of interest having a hit criterion comprising one of must-hit or must- not-hit" as recited in amended claim 1. … Furthermore, Martiny completely fails to disclose any "hit criterion" at all, let alone "a hit criterion comprising one of must-hit or must-not-hit," as recited in amended claim 1. Moreover, because Martiny fails to disclose any "hit criterion," Martiny necessarily fails to disclose "determine the subset of particular waveforms of interest of the plurality of acquired waveforms to display by selecting only the particular waveforms of the plurality of acquired waveforms that meet the hit criterion for the area of interest," as recited in amended claim 1. … [A]mended claims 8 and 15 are patentable over the combination of Martin and Martiny for similar reasons as amended claim 1, as discussed above.”
Examiner’s position is that Martin et al. in view of Ben-Oni discloses the limitations of claims 1, 8, and 15, as discussed above. In particular, Ben-Oni discloses
a selection (308) comprising the user using a cursor (308 may be manipulated by cursor, paragraph 0040, lines 4-8) in the GUI (300) to draw a shape (drag a sliding box or window, paragraph 0038, line 9), the shape defining a two-dimensional area of interest (two-dimension area of sliding box) in the GUI (300), the area of interest having a hit criterion comprising one of must-hit (area within sliding box/window), the selection defining a subset of particular waveforms of interest of the plurality of acquired waveforms to display (selected sections of first and second waveforms are displayed in 306, paragraph 0038, lines 10-11; paragraph 0039, lines 12-14); and
determine the subset of particular waveforms of interest of the plurality of
acquired waveforms to display by selecting only the particular waveforms of the plurality of acquired waveforms that meet the hit criterion for the area of interest (306 determiners/displays only the selected portions of the first and second waveforms, paragraph 0038, lines 10-11; paragraph 0039, lines 12-14), and
render only the subset of particular waveforms of interest of the plurality of
acquired waveforms in the GUI (306 determiners/displays only the selected portions of the first and second waveforms, paragraph 0038, lines 10-11; paragraph 0039, lines 12-14).
It is noted that the hit criterion comprising one of must-not-hit is an alternative limitation since it is recited in the alternative form.
Applicant’s remaining arguments have been considered but are traversed in view of the grounds of rejection and discussion above.
Conclusion
Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a). 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.
Contact Information
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Michael Nghiem whose telephone number is (571) 272-2277. The examiner can normally be reached on M-F.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Andrew Schechter can be reached at (571) 272-2302. 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).
/MICHAEL P NGHIEM/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2857 July 13, 2026
Prosecution Insights