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 .
Election/Restrictions
Applicant’s election, of Invention I: claims 1-13 in the “Response to Election / Restriction Filed - 04/23/2026” has been noticed along with cancellation of claims 14-20 and submission of new claims 21-26 in “Claims - 04/23/2026”.
However, it is noted that the newly submitted claims 21-26 represents distinct species, and was not part of original claim set. Had this was presented before, it would require restriction based on species.
Since applicant has been originally presented invention in “Claims - 01/04/2023”, this invention has been constructively presented by original presentation for prosecution for elected claims {1-13}. Accordingly, claim 21-26 are withdrawn from consideration as being directed to a non-elected invention, without traverse, and therefore made FINAL. See 37 CFR 1.142(b) and MPEP § 821.03.
In view of the above, this office action considers claims 1-13 and 21-26 pending for prosecution, of which, non-elected claims 21-26 are withdrawn, and elected claims 1-13 are examined on their merits.
Double Patenting
A rejection based on double patenting of the "same invention" type finds its support in the language of 35 U.S.C. 101 which states that "whoever invents or discovers any new and useful process ... may obtain a patent therefor ..." (Emphasis added). Thus, the term "same invention," in this context, means an invention drawn to identical subject matter. See Miller v. Eagle Mfg. Co., 151 U.S. 186 (1894); In re Ockert, 245 F.2d 467, 114 USPQ 330 (CCPA 1957); and In re Vogel, 422 F.2d 438, 164 USPQ 619 (CCPA 1970).
A statutory type (35 U.S.C. 101) double patenting rejection can be overcome by canceling or amending the conflicting claims so they are no longer coextensive in scope. The filing of a terminal disclaimer cannot overcome a double patenting rejection based upon 35 U.S.C. 101.
Claim {1-2, 5-13} are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 101 as claiming the same invention as that of claim {1-2, 3-10, 12} respectively of prior U.S. Patent No.11599781. This is a double patenting rejection.
Regarding claims 3-4; these are rejected as those inherits subject matter from rejected claim 1.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to MOAZZAM HOSSAIN whose telephone number is (571)270-7960. The examiner can normally be reached M-F: 8:30AM - 6:00 PM.
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, Julio J. Maldonado can be reached on 571-272-1864. 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.
/MOAZZAM HOSSAIN/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2898
May 13, 2026
Prosecution Insights