DETAILED 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 .
Double Patenting
The non-statutory double patenting rejection is based on a judicially created doctrine grounded in public policy (a policy reflected in the statute) so as to prevent the unjustified or improper timewise extension of the “right to exclude” granted by a patent and to prevent possible harassment by multiple assignees. A non-statutory double patenting rejection is appropriate where the conflicting claims are not identical, but at least one examined application claim is not patentably distinct from the reference claim(s) because the examined application claim is either anticipated by, or would have been obvious over, the reference claim(s). See, e.g., In re Berg, 140 F.3d 1428, 46 USPQ2d 1226 (Fed. Cir. 1998); In re Goodman, 11 F.3d 1046, 29 USPQ2d 2010 (Fed. Cir. 1993); In re Longi, 759 F.2d 887, 225 USPQ 645 (Fed. Cir. 1985); In re Van Ornum, 686 F.2d 937, 214 USPQ 761 (CCPA 1982); In re Vogel, 422 F.2d 438, 164 USPQ 619 (CCPA 1970); In re Thorington, 418 F.2d 528, 163 USPQ 644 (CCPA 1969).
A timely filed terminal disclaimer in compliance with 37 CFR 1.321(c) or 1.321(d) may be used to overcome an actual or provisional rejection based on non-statutory double patenting provided the reference application or patent either is shown to be commonly owned with the examined application, or claims an invention made as a result of activities undertaken within the scope of a joint research agreement. See MPEP § 717.02 for applications subject to examination under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA as explained in MPEP § 2159. See MPEP § 2146 et seq. for applications not subject to examination under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA . A terminal disclaimer must be signed in compliance with 37 CFR 1.321(b).
The filing of a terminal disclaimer by itself is not a complete reply to a non-statutory double patenting (NSDP) rejection. A complete reply requires that the terminal disclaimer be accompanied by a reply requesting reconsideration of the prior Office action. Even where the NSDP rejection is provisional the reply must be complete. See MPEP § 804, subsection I.B.1. For a reply to a non-final Office action, see 37 CFR 1.111(a). For a reply to final Office action, see 37 CFR 1.113(c). A request for reconsideration while not provided for in 37 CFR 1.113(c) may be filed after final for consideration. See MPEP §§ 706.07(e) and 714.13.
The USPTO Internet website contains terminal disclaimer forms which may be used. Please visit www.uspto.gov/patent/patents-forms. The actual filing date of the application in which the form is filed determines what form (e.g., PTO/SB/25, PTO/SB/26, PTO/AIA /25, or PTO/AIA /26) should be used. A web-based eTerminal Disclaimer may be filled out completely online using web-screens. An eTerminal Disclaimer that meets all requirements is auto-processed and approved immediately upon submission. For more information about eTerminal Disclaimers, refer to www.uspto.gov/patents/apply/applying-online/eterminal-disclaimer.
Claim 15 provisionally rejected on the ground of non-statutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claim 16 of co-pending Application No. 17/876,277 (2024/0045016) (hereinafter Munir016) in view of US Patent 10,431,064 to Howard.
This is a provisional non-statutory double patenting rejection.
Application claim 15: Munir016 claim 16:
A mobile device comprising:
A mobile device comprising:
a cellular transceiver;
a cellular transceiver;
a Wi-Fi transceiver; and
a Wi-Fi transceiver; and
a controller configured to:
a controller configured to:
receive, from the cellular transceiver, a Wi-Fi ID associated with a remote Wi-Fi transceiver,
receive, from the cellular transceiver, a target ID associated with a remote Wi-Fi transceiver of a remote system,
transmit, via the cellular transceiver, an ID, channel, and band of the Wi-Fi transceiver, and
transmit, via the cellular transceiver, an ID, channel, and band of the Wi-Fi transceiver of the remote system,
transmit, via the Wi-Fi transceiver, a beacon of data packets at an interval.
receive packets from the remote Wi-Fi transceiver on the channel, extract received signal strength indicator (RSSI) data from the packets, filter the RSSI data to obtain a maximum RSSI signal within a window of time, in response to the maximum RSSI signal exceeding a threshold, output a signal indictive of the remote system being less than a predetermined distance away.
Munir016 may not explicitly teach or disclose transmit, via the Wi-Fi transceiver, a beacon of data packets at an interval.
However, Howard teaches or discloses transmit, via the Wi-Fi transceiver, a beacon of data packets at an interval (see abstract, col. 37, lines 17-20, the short-range wireless transceiver 508 periodically transmits the beacon signal and receives the location signals and the processor 502 periodically updates the persons in proximity to the wireless device in response thereto).
Before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art to modify mobile device range finder via RF power of Munir016 by including transmit, via the Wi-Fi transceiver, a beacon of data packets at an interval suggested by Howard. This modification would provide to determine the round trip signal delay to measure the distance to the remote device.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 16-20 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.
Claims 1-14 are allowed.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to claim 15 has been considered but are moot because the new ground of rejection does not rely on any reference applied in the prior rejection of record for any teaching or matter specifically challenged in the argument.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to PHIRIN SAM whose telephone number is (571)272-3082. The examiner can normally be reached Mon - Fri, 10:30am - 5pm.
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, Ayaz R. Sheikh can be reached at (571) 272 - 3795. 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.
Date: 03/04/2026
/PHIRIN SAM/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2476