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 .
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on 08/26/26 was filed after the mailing date of the Notice of Allowances on 05/27/26. The information disclosure statement is being considered by the examiner.
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 12-14 and 16-28 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.
With regards to claim 12, the phrase “a the normal” is unclear because it contains both the indefinite article “a” and the definite article “the” before “normal.” Accordingly, it is unclear whether Applicant intends to claim encoding “a normal” of each surface or “the normal” of each surface. Therefore, the metes and bounds of claim 12 are not reasonably clear. Correction of the phrase to “a normal” or “the normal,” as appropriate, would overcome this issue. Claims 13-14 and 16-18 are rejected for at least being dependent upon 12 and remedying the deficiencies of claim 12.
With regards to claim 16, the term “processers” appears to be a typographical error and does not clearly correspond to the “one or more processors” recited in independent claim 12. Therefore, the scope of claim 16 is not reasonably clear. Correction of “processers” to “processors” would overcome this issue.
With regards to claim 17, the term “processes” is unclear in this context because it does not clearly refer to the “one or more processors” recited in independent claim 12. Therefore, the scope of claim 17 is not reasonably clear. Correction of “processes” to “processors” would overcome this issue.
Allowable Subject Matter
The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter: Claims 1-7, 9-11, and 19-20 are allowed for similar reasons as to those described in the NOA dated 05/27/26. The remaining claims would be allowable once the 112 issues noted above are overcome.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Amandeep Saini whose telephone number is (571)272-3382. The examiner can normally be reached M-F (8AM-4PM).
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.
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.
/AMANDEEP SAINI/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2662
Prosecution Insights