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 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 1-5 and 8-18 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.
Claim 1 recites “
. . .
wherein the interactive visual representation includes:
a user-interactive filtering menu including a user indication of at least one of:
a first variable by which to split cards such that a first card displays data for a first value of the first variable and a second card displays data for a second value of the variable;
and a second variable by which to group elements within a particular card;
and a card for each group of the second variable;
and a dynamic description of information based at least in part on the user indication.
(emphasis added). The indenting for the bolded element above does not match the indenting in the other independent claims. It also does not match Applicant’s reproduction of claim 1 in Applicant’s remarks. As such, one skilled in the art could not determine the scope of this claim because it is unclear whether Applicant intends for the bolded element to be a part of the “at least one of” clause. This renders the claim vague and indefinite.
For the purposes of this action, Examiner assumes claim 1 should be formatted as presented in Applicant’s remarks and as presented in the other independent claims. Examiner recommends correcting the indention in claim 1 to overcome this rejection1.
The dependent claims of claim 1 inherit this deficiency.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 1-5 and 8-18 would be allowed if the 112b rejections above are overcome.
Claims 19-20 are allowed.
Response to Arguments
Examiner agrees the claimed invention recites an improvement disclosed in at least paragraphs 104-109 and 42-43 of Applicant’s specification.
Examiner agrees the prior art of record fails to teach or suggest at least the following:
. . .
wherein the interactive visual representation includes:
a user-interactive filtering menu including a user indication of at least one of:
a first variable by which to split cards such that a first card displays data for a first value of the first variable and a second card displays data for a second value of the variable;
and a second variable by which to group elements within a particular card;
and a card for each group of the second variable;
and a dynamic description of information based at least in part on the user indication.
Conclusion
The following prior art is relevant to Applicant’s specification:
US 11216762 B1, col. 14:8-10 and Fig. 6 items 606 and 602 (user interactive display with descriptions based on user keywords and/or filters).
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.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ALBERT M PHILLIPS, III whose telephone number is (571)270-3256. The examiner can normally be reached 10a-6:30pm EST M-F.
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, Ann J Lo can be reached at (571) 272-9767. 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.
/ALBERT M PHILLIPS, III/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2159
1 Examiner suggests doing this as an after final amendment because this would cause the claims to be in condition for allowance after final.
Prosecution Insights