DETAILED ACTION
The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA . 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 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.
Status of the application
This Office Action is in response to Applicant's amendments filed on 03/30/2026. Claims 1, 2 and 4-10 are pending for this examination.
Examiner’s Interview
Examiner tried to contact the attorney Mr. Robert Joynes (reg # 54,842) to discuss potential amendments. On 5/18/2026 examiner sent an email. Next day examiner left a voice message. Subsequently, examiner called the attorney several times and left a message for Mr. Joynes assistant. There was no response from the attorney.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 101
35 U.S.C. 101 reads as follows:
Whoever invents or discovers any new and useful process, machine, manufacture, or composition of matter, or any new and useful improvement thereof, may obtain a patent therefor, subject to the conditions and requirements of this title.
Software per se
Claims 1 and 6 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 101 because the claimed invention is directed to non-statutory subject matter. The claims refer to a system. The instant specification has provided evidence that the claimed system is a software per se, wherein a series of modules are to be executed. The claims do not define structural and functional descriptive material used in interrelationship between the computer software and the hardware like a memory or processor.
Claims 2, 4-5, 7-10 are rejected for being dependent on a rejected base claim and failing to cure the deficiencies of the above rejected non-statutory base claims 1 and 6 above.
Conclusion
THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. 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 HOSSAIN MORSHED whose telephone number is (571)272-3335. The examiner can normally be reached on Monday - Friday 12:00 PM – 9:00 PM Eastern time. The email address for the examiner is hossain.morshed@uspto.gov.
Examiner interviews are available via telephone or 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, Wei Mui can be reached on (571)272-3708.
/HOSSAIN M MORSHED/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2191
May 21, 2026
Prosecution Insights