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 .
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, 4-13 and 16-20 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 and 12 both disclose “wherein one or more triggers unlocks a next step in a series of steps to unlock additional content, wherein the one or more triggers includes a first trigger unlocks a second trigger as the next step, wherein the one or more triggers includes a physical trigger, wherein the physical triggers is operable to interact with the remote and/or the viewer to unlock the additional content and/or a next step in a series of steps to unlock the additional content” which is unclear since the one or more triggers is discloses as being a first trigger unlocking a second trigger as a next step but then goes on to disclose a physical trigger which is defined as being the one or more triggers previously disclosed but it can either unlock the additional content and/or the next step and it is further unclear how or if this trigger relates back to the previously disclosed first or second trigger and as such the scope of the claim is unascertainable. Furthermore, later dependent claims disclose the one or more triggers including either digital or audible triggers and it is unclear how these triggers are included or implemented based on the independent claim limitations. For the purposes of examination, the independent claims will be interpreted as requiring a plurality of triggers, wherein the plurality of triggers are configured to unlock additional content and/or a next step in a series of steps to unlock the additional content, wherein a first trigger of the plurality of triggers is configured to unlock a second trigger of the plurality of triggers as a next step to unlock the additional content and a third trigger of the plurality of triggers is configured as a physical trigger operable to interact with the remote and/or viewer to unlock additional content and/or a next step in a series of steps to unlock the additional content. The dependent claims will be interpreted as the plurality of triggers including a fourth trigger configured as either a digital trigger or an audible trigger, respectively.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
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.
Claim(s) 1 and 4 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Rehkemper (6558225), Nakamura (2009/0117819), Watanabe (JP2008295519A) and Sharpe III (D382307). Rehkemper discloses a hand-held (column 3 lines 47-48) collectible (Fig. 1) toy with a viewer (12) operable to display content associated with a theme (column 2 lines 33-42, column 3 line 54-column 4 line 18), wherein the viewer has a body with accessory components (14, 16, 18, 20) connected thereto to form a design which corresponds to the theme (column 4 line 55 – column 5 line 18) and further encapsulates a processor (32) and a display (22). The accessory components form a plurality of triggers (50,56,70) for unlocking additional content by interacting with the viewer that can take the form of physical triggers (column 5 line 35-column 6 line 6). Rehkemper discloses the basic inventive concept with the exception of a trigger of the plurality of triggers unlocking a second trigger as the next step and further including a remote operable to wirelessly control the content displayed on the viewer when separated from the viewer but further configured to be partially received in a recess on the body and the display having a size that is smaller than two inches. Nakamura discloses a collectible toy (abstract, Fig. 1) with a viewer (30) and a plurality of triggers (60) wherein at least one of the triggers is an on/off switch operable to unlock another of the triggers such as a motion trigger to provide content or a next step (paragraphs 35-36 & 45). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art from the teaching of Nakamura to modify Rehkemper to include a trigger such as an on/off trigger for unlocking other triggers for the predictable result of conserving power and preventing unwanted activations of the toy until desired thereby providing enhanced utility and functionality. Watanabe discloses a toy device (3) and a remote control device (2) that are both configured to correspond to a theme, wherein the remote control device is configured to be attached to the toy and then removed from the toy to wirelessly control output actions corresponding to the theme of the toy device when separated from the toy device (Fig. 1, pages 1-6). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art from the teaching of Watanabe to modify Rehkemper and Nakamura to include a removable wireless remote control configured to correspond with the theme of the toy for the predictable result of providing enhanced functionality and utility by enabling a greater variety of control options to create more varied and interesting effects thereby enhancing play value. Sharpe III discloses a toy having a recess for detachably storing a remote control on the toy (Figs. 1 & 8). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art from the teaching of Sharpe III to include a recess on the toy for receiving the remote for the predictable result of shaping the toy to receive the remote in a known manner for retention therein. In regard to the size of the display being smaller than two inches, the examiner notes that it has been held that where the only difference between the prior art and the claimed device is a recitation of relative dimensions and a device having the claimed relative dimensions would not perform differently than the prior art device, the claimed device is not patentably distinct from the prior art device. See Gardner v. TEC Syst., Inc., 725 F.2d 1338, 220 USPQ 777 (Fed. Cir. 1984), cert. denied, 469 U.S. 830, 225 USPQ 232 (1984).
Claim(s) 5 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Rehkemper, Nakamura, Watanabe and Sharpe III and further in view of Poesch (7338340). Rehkemper, Nakamura, Watanabe and Sharpe III disclose the basic inventive concept, with the exception of the physical triggers interacting with the remote or viewer using a resistor. Poesch discloses a collectible toy body (10) with an overall design that corresponds to a theme and that is configured to output content that corresponds to the theme and further discloses having a physical trigger that interacts with the body by means of a resistor that is operable to control the collectible to output content that corresponds to the theme (column 2 line 27-column 3 line 62). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to modify the physical triggers of Rehkemper to include a resistor for the predictable result of differentiating between the different physical triggers to enable different responses for each of the physical triggers in a known manner.
Claim(s) 6-7 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Rehkemper, Nakamura, Watanabe and Sharpe III as applied above and further in view of Butler (2016/0184724). Rehkemper, Nakamura, Watanabe and Sharpe III disclose the basic inventive concept with the exception of also including digital triggers to provide additional content. Butler discloses a collectible (300) that can be configured to include a QR code that can be scanned by an external device (310) to produce additional data and content in the external device (Fig. 1, paragraphs 30, 44-45). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to configure the collectible of Rehkemper, Nakamura, Watanabe and Sharpe III to also include digital triggers for the predictable result of enabling enhanced functionality by enabling interaction with external devices.
Claim(s) 8-11 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Rehkemper, Nakamura, Watanabe and Sharpe III as applied for claim 1 above and further in view of Ko (2001/0008499). Rehkemper, Nakamura, Watanabe and Sharpe III disclose the basic inventive concept with the exception of also including audible triggers that are picked up by a microphone. Ko discloses a collectible (12) with a microphone (14) that forms an audible trigger operable in response to an audible signal emitted by an external device (10) such as a computer or television set, wherein the signal can be a hypersonic tone created by an ultrasonic frequency signal which would have a frequency of 20KHz and the signal is configured to be processed to activate an output of content from the collectible (abstract, Fig. 2a, paragraphs 13-18). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to configure the collectible of Rehkemper, Nakamura, Watanabe and Sharpe III to also include audible triggers for the predictable result of enabling enhanced functionality by enabling interaction with external devices.
Claim(s) 12-13 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Rehkemper, Nakamura, Watanabe and Sharpe III as applied above for claim 1 and further in view of Brownrigg (2001/0034183). Rehkemper, Nakamura, Watanabe and Sharpe III disclose the basic inventive concept with the exception of further including a system for the collectible having one or more theme components such as a sofa. Brownrigg discloses themed collectibles (Fig. 6) provided in a system with one or more theme components having a design that correspond to the theme (Fig. 1), wherein at least one of the theme components includes a sofa or couch (35). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to combine the collectible of Rehkemper, Nakamura, Watanabe and Sharpe III with a plurality of theme components as taught by Brownrigg for the predictable result of creating a more entertaining and elaborate play experience (paragraph 3).
Claim(s) 16 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Rehkemper, Nakamura, Watanabe, Sharpe III and Brownrigg as applied for claim 12 above and further in view of Poesch (7338340). Rehkemper, Nakamura, Watanabe, Sharpe III and Brownrigg disclose the basic inventive concept, with the exception of the physical triggers interacting with the remote or viewer using a resistor. Poesch discloses a collectible toy body (10) with an overall design that corresponds to a theme and that is configured to output content that corresponds to the theme and further discloses having a physical trigger that interacts with the body by means of a resistor that is operable to control the collectible to output content that corresponds to the theme (column 2 line 27-column 3 line 62). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to modify the physical triggers of Rehkemper to include a resistor for the predictable result of differentiating between the different physical triggers to enable different responses for each of the physical triggers in a known manner.
Claim(s) 17 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Rehkemper, Nakamura, Watanabe, Sharpe III and Brownrigg as applied above and further in view of Butler (2016/0184724). Rehkemper, Nakamura, Watanabe, Sharpe III and Brownrigg disclose the basic inventive concept with the exception of including digital triggers to provide additional content. Butler discloses a collectible (300) that can be configured to include a QR code that can be scanned by an external device (310) to produce additional data and content in the external device (Fig. 1, paragraphs 30, 44-45). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to configure the collectible of Rehkemper, Nakamura, Watanabe and Sharpe III to also include digital triggers for the predictable result of enabling enhanced functionality by enabling interaction with external devices.
Claim(s) 18-20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Rehkemper, Nakamura, Watanabe, Sharpe III and Brownrigg as applied for claim 12 above and further in view of Ko (2001/0008499). Rehkemper, Nakamura, Watanabe, Sharpe III and Brownrigg disclose the basic inventive concept with the exception of including audible triggers that are picked up by a microphone. Ko discloses a collectible (12) with a microphone (14) that forms an audible trigger operable in response to an audible signal emitted by an external device (10) such as a computer or television set, wherein the signal can be a hypersonic tone created by an ultrasonic frequency signal which would have a frequency of 20KHz and the signal is configured to be processed to activate an output of content from the collectible (abstract, Fig. 2a, paragraphs 13-18). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to configure the collectible of Rehkemper, Nakamura, Watanabe and Sharpe III to also include audible triggers for the predictable result of enabling enhanced functionality by enabling interaction with external devices.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to claim(s) 1, 4-13 and 16-20 have 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
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 ALYSSA HYLINSKI whose telephone number is (571)272-2684. The examiner can normally be reached Mon - Fri 9:30 - 6:00.
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, Eugene Kim can be reached at 571-272-4463. 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.
/A.M.H/Examiner, Art Unit 3711 /EUGENE L KIM/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3711
Prosecution Insights