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 .
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 12/2/25 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
Regarding the 35 U.S.C. 101 rejection of claim 8, Applicant argues that the amendment to the claim address the rejection (Arguments, pg. 7). Examiner respectfully disagrees as the claim is still directed to a computer program product (i.e., program per se) not embodied on a non-transitory computer readable medium, and as such, the claim does not correspond to one of the four categories of patent eligible subject matter.
Applicant’s arguments (12/2/25) with respect to the 35 U.S.C. 103 rejection of the claims with references Stokes and Fusco have been fully considered and are persuasive. The rejection of the claims is withdrawn.
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.
Claims 8-10, 12 and 14 are still rejected under 35 U.S.C. 101 because the claimed invention is directed to non-statutory subject matter. The claims do not fall within at least one of the four categories of patent eligible subject matter because the amended claim 8 recites “a computer program product … the computer program product comprising_;” not embodied on a non-transitory computer readable medium, i.e., the claim involves a recitation of software per se that is one of the four categories of patent eligible subject matter. Claims 9-10, 12 and 14 are rejected based on their dependency.
Claim Objections
Claim 8 is objected to because of the following informalities: “the computer program product comprising :” as recited in line 3 of the claim should be “the computer program product comprising:”. Appropriate correction is required.
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 8-10, 12 and 14 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as failing to set forth 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. In particular, as provided in the advisory action (12/5/25), claim 8 recites the limitation "program instructions stored on the one or more non-transitory computer-readable storage media…”. There is insufficient antecedent basis for “the one or more non-transitory computer-readable storage media” in the claim. The dependent claims are rejected based on their dependency. Appropriate correction is required.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 1-3, 6, 7, 15-17 and 20 are allowable over the prior art of record. Claims 8-10, 12 and 14 are allowable over the prior art of record, but pending Applicant addressing the above claim objection as well as the 35 U.S.C. 101 and 112 rejections of the claims.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. See PTO 892 form.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to OLUJIMI A ADESANYA whose telephone number is (571)270-3307. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 8:30-5:00pm.
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, Richemond Dorvil can be reached on 571-272-7602. 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.
/OLUJIMI A ADESANYA/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2658
Prosecution Insights