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 .
Continued Examination Under 37 CFR 1.114
A request for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, including the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e), was filed in this application after final rejection. Since this application is eligible for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114. Applicant's submission filed on March 30, 2026 has been entered. Any previous objection/ rejection not repeated herein has been withdrawn.
New and/or modified grounds for rejection, necessitated by the amendments, are discussed.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of 35 U.S.C. 112(a):
(a) IN GENERAL.—The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor or joint inventor of carrying out the invention.
The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112:
The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor of carrying out his invention.
Claims 1 and 3-14 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(a) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), first paragraph, as failing to comply with the written description requirement. The claim(s) contains subject matter which was not described in the specification in such a way as to reasonably convey to one skilled in the relevant art that the inventor or a joint inventor, or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the inventor(s), at the time the application was filed, had possession of the claimed invention.
Claim 1 now recites a controller configure to… to project the notification area towards the eye position onto the transparent display for determining the display area, wherein the notification area is projected with a three- dimensional model of the transparent display together with the position of the door.
The last wherein clause to the notification area is projected with a three- dimensional model of the transparent display together with the position of the door, includes some of the language was added in a new claim 16 (filed Dec. 10, 2015), and rejected under 112 (b) and is now canceled. This new wherein clause in claim 1 does not find basis in the specification. The specification is very limited. Looking to applicant’s specification at [0032] of the corresponding US publication, that with the position sensor, two or more positions of the door may be detected, such as opened and closed. A three-dimensional model of the door and/or the transparent display together with its position and/or orientation may be stored in the controller. This model may be used for determining the projection of the notification area onto the transparent display. With the position sensor and/or the detected position of the door, the position of the door additionally may be taken into account for determining the projection.
This does not support the controller projecting a notification area onto a transparent display that includes a three-dimension model of the transparent display together with the position of the door. While this language presented in claim 16 was previously rejected under 112 (b), this new wherein clause is also confusing and does not find support in the specification. This is new matter.
Claim 12 includes the same unsupported limitations as discussed with respect to claim 1. Furthermore, the method does not link the door of the housing to the transparent display at all. Which is so broad that it does not find support in the specification as filed.
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 and 3-14 is 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, now recites some language presented in new claim 16 (now canceled) and was previously rejected under 112 (b). The recitation of controller projecting “notification area” onto the transparent display a display of a three-dimensional model of the (display) itself together with the position of the door, is confusing and indefinite. Looking to applicant’s specification for clarity, [0032] of the corresponding US publication, recites that with the position sensor, two or more positions of the door may be detected, such as opened and closed. A three-dimensional model of the door and/or the transparent display together with its position and/or orientation may be stored in the controller. This model may be used for determining the projection of the notification area onto the transparent display. With the position sensor and/or the detected position of the door, the position of the door additionally may be taken into account for determining the projection. It is not clear from the specification if a three-dimensional model is required for the transparent display in order to determine projection. This is does not clarify the claimed subject matter.
Also note that the limitations of claim 10 appear to be now recited in claim 1 which is confusing and indefinite.
Prior art
Claim 1, and 3-14 are not being treated with prior art. MPEP 2173.06(II) states, “where there is a great deal of confusion and uncertainty as to the proper interpretation of the limitations of a claim, it would not be proper to reject such a claim on the basis of prior art. As stated in In re Steele, 305 F.2d 859, 134 USPQ 292 (CCPA 1962), a rejection under 35 U.S.C. 103 should not be based on considerable speculation about the meaning of terms employed in a claim or assumptions that must be made as to the scope of the claims.” This is the case here and the examiner points to the above rejections of claims under 112(a) and 112(b). Unfortunately the examiner does not believe applicant’s limited specification provides enough clear detail that could be added to the claims in the future that would render them patentable. Note that if the claims where made clear it is believed that the known prior art would read on them.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to claims 1 and 3-14 have been considered but are moot because the new ground of rejection. However, the previous art rejections may be applied again against the claim should the overcome the instant 35 USC 112(a) and (b) rejections delineated above.
Conclusion
No claims are allowed.
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure include:
Kumagai et al. (US 2020/0408792) which disclose facilitates comprehension of the actual positions of constituent units of a sample measurement system regardless of a direction in which a user faces. The present invention provides a display device (6, 60) for displaying information about a sample measurement system (1) for measuring a sample, a display unit (509), a display control unit (101) that displays an image indicating an arrangement of a predetermined part of the sample measurement system on the display unit, and a receiving unit (102, 105) for receiving information on a display direction when displaying the arrangement of the predetermined part, wherein the display control unit (101) changes a display direction of the arrangement of the predetermined part according to the information. According to this aspect, the invention provides a display device (6, 60) for changing a display direction when displaying an arrangement of a predetermined part in the sample measurement system in accordance with a display direction in the received information.
Kalbavi et al., (US 2019/0389069) which disclose an augmented reality (AR) system for production-tuning of parameters for a visual tracking robotic picking system. The robotic picking system includes one or more robots configured to pick randomly-placed and randomly-oriented parts off a conveyor belt and place the parts in an available position, either on a second moving conveyor belt or on a stationary device such as a pallet. A visual tracking system identifies position and orientation of the parts on the feed conveyor. The AR system allows picking system tuning parameters including upstream, discard and downstream boundary locations to be visualized and controlled, real-time robot pick/place operations to be viewed with virtual boundaries, and system performance parameters such as part throughput rate and part allocation by robot to be viewed. The AR system also allows virtual parts to be used in simulations, either instead of or in addition to real parts.
Broemsen et al., (US 2013/0052927) which disclose a laboratory fume hood, especially a safety cabinet, comprising a working space which is enclosed by a housing and which is closable by an especially movable front window. It comprises a projection apparatus in order to project an image into the working space.
Kanda et al., (US 2005/0237343) which disclose a machine tool having a transparent observation window on a front surface of a cover that encloses a machining area space, and a display device provided in the observation window that becomes transparent or semi-transparent when a displayed image disappears. A control panel may be arranged below the observation window.
Leadbetter (US 2024/0046826) which discloses an apparatus that comprises: a display device including an optically transparent display screen for displaying images to a user; a sensor configured to track a viewing direction and/or a viewing position of the user; a detector configured to determine a location of a target viewable by the user through the display screen; and a controller configured to control the display device to display an image on the display screen at screen coordinates corresponding with the viewable target, using the tracked viewing direction and/or the tracked viewing position of the user and the determined location of the target.
Kunert (US 2022/0197578) which discloses a laboratory analyzer comprising a housing at least partially enclosing at least one analyzing instrument and at least one display device, wherein the display device comprises at least one screen, wherein the screen is partially transparent and reflective, wherein the screen is integrated into the housing, wherein the display device is configured for displaying screen information on the screen such that the screen information is visible and/or readable from outside the housing.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to P. Kathryn Wright whose telephone number is (571)272-2374. The examiner can normally be reached on 9:30am-7:30 pm EST.
Examiner interviews are available via telephone 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.
E-mail communication Authorization
Per updated USPTO Internet usage policies, Applicant and/or applicant’s representative is encouraged to authorize the USPTO examiner to discuss any subject matter concerning the above application via Internet e-mail communications. See MPEP 502.03. To approve such communications, Applicant must provide written authorization for e-mail communication by submitting the following statement via EFS Web (using PTO/SB/439) or Central Fax (571-273-8300):
Recognizing that Internet communications are not secure, I hereby authorize the USPTO to communicate with the undersigned and practitioners in accordance with 37 CFR 1.33 and 37 CFR 1.34 concerning any subject matter of this application by video conferencing, instant messaging, or electronic mail. I understand that a copy of these communications will be made of record in the application file.
Written authorizations submitted to the Examiner via e-mail are NOT proper. Written authorizations must be submitted via EFS-Web (using PTO/SB/439) or Central Fax (571-273-8300). A paper copy of e-mail correspondence will be placed in the patent application when appropriate. E-mails from the USPTO are for the sole use of the intended recipient, and may contain information subject to the confidentiality requirement set forth in 35 USC § 122. See also MPEP 502.03.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Charles Capozzi can be reached on (571) 270-3638. 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.
/P. Kathryn Wright/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1798