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, 11-14, and 21-24 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.
The claims recite, “determining [via computer] whether a respective process result of the first process result, the second process result, and the third process result converges or diverges from a remainder of the first data process result, the second data process result, and the third data process result.”
First, there is insufficient antecedent basis for “the first data process result, the second data process result, and the third data process result.” In particular, it is unclear if and to what extent “data process result[s]” differ from “process result[s].”
Second, it remains unclear how the claimed “results” can be consistently determined to be “converging” or “diverging.” The claims offer no metric by which to determine whether given results are converging or diverging, and offer no explanation as how a single data result may converge or diverge with respect to two different data results. Further, the disclosure offers no specified boundaries or thresholds to define “converging” or “diverging” data results, but rather describes “determining whether a data process result is excluded from a standard deviation analysis of the total results.” What “standard deviation analysis” is or how to apply it is left completely unexplained. As such, the disclosure lacks any objective boundaries as to how one is to determine whether a data result is converging or diverging with respect to two different data results in such a fashion so as to understand the metes and bounds of the claims.
Since the claims lack antecedent basis and fail to provide sufficient objective boundaries for determining the scope/metes and bounds of the claims, the claims are rejected as indefinite.
Claims 22-24 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 22 depends from claim 221, which does not exist. For purposes of expedient examination, the claim will be understood to depend from claim 21.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 1-4, 11-14, and 21-24 would be allowable if rewritten or amended to overcome the rejection(s) under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) set forth in this Office action.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 10/31/25 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
Applicant argues the convergence and divergence limitations are definite. This is not persuasive for those reasons set forth in the indefiniteness rejection above.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to WYATT A STOFFA whose telephone number is (571)270-1782. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 0700-1600 EST.
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, ROBERT KIM can be reached at 571 272 2293. 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.
WYATT STOFFA
Primary Examiner
Art Unit 2881
/WYATT A STOFFA/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2881
Prosecution Insights