DETAILED CORRESPONDENCE
Election
Applicant’s election without traverse of Invention I (corresponds to Claim 1) in the reply filed on 18 September 2025 is acknowledged. Therefore, Claims 2-4 are withdrawn from further consideration pursuant to 37 CFR 1.142(b) as being drawn to a nonelected invention. This election is therefore made final.
Status of Claims
Clean copy version of Claim 1 is/are examined in this office 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 .
In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. § 103 which forms the basis for all obviousness rejections set forth in this Office action:
A patent for a claimed invention may not be obtained, notwithstanding that the claimed invention is not identically disclosed as set forth in section 102 of this title, if the differences between the claimed invention and the prior art are such that the claimed invention as a whole would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which the claimed invention pertains. Patentability shall not be negated by the manner in which the invention was made.
Claim(s) 1 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103 as being unpatentable over US 8095434 B1 (“Puttick”) and further in view of US 20030074132 A1 (“Sutanto”).
As to Claim 1, Puttick discloses A method for determining an indication (e.g., “annotations” from Step 304) of a plurality of sites (see at least Fig. 16) included in a transportation system (e.g., “annotated map” from Step 306 and/or “Map 450” from Fig. 4. The Examiner views the interconnected roads on a map is a system of interconnected paths that permits vehicles to move around and thus is a transportation system.) using a similarity (e.g., “user’s search criteria” and/or Elements 411-426 from Fig. 4) (see at least Fig. 3-8, 13 and 16 with associated text. Fig. 16 shows multiple property sites along a few streets. Additionally, “The map shows a number of city regions, including city regions 461-466” according to associated text related to Fig. 4.), the method characterized by:
(a) receiving a request comprising at least one place (e.g., “map location” from Step 301) included in the transportation system (see at least Fig. 3, 13 and 16 with associated text; in particular, Step 301);
(b) determining at least two sites included in the plurality of sites (see at least Fig. 3, 13 and 16 with associated text);
(c) determining the indication using steps comprising one of (Only one option is required to satisfy a “one of” limitation.):
i. determining a plurality of similar sites included in the at least two sites (see at least Fig. 3, 13 and 16 with associated text. The Examiner views “a plurality of similar sites” as multiple property sites geo-located on one similar street.), and determining the indication of the plurality of similar sites (see at least Fig. 3, 13 and 16 with associated text),
or (Only one option is required to satisfy an “or” limitation.)
ii. selecting at least one first site that is not similar to at least one second site, both included in the at least two sites (see at least Fig. 16 with associated text. Fig. 16 also shows a map comprising multiple property sites on multiple streets, wherein each property having distinct prices with a distinct street address thus interpreted as “at least one first site that is not similar to at least one second site”.), and determining the indication of the at least one first site and the at least one second site (see at least 3, 13 and 16 with associated text); and
(d) responding to the request with the indication (see at least Fig. 3, 13 and 16 with associated text; in particular, Step 306 responds with an annotated map).
Puttick does not directly disclose isochrone are lines using a length of travel, wherein a length of travel within a transportation system between each isochrone site and an at least one place is included in a range.
However, Sutanto teaches isochrone are lines using a length of travel, wherein a length of travel within a transportation system between each isochrone site and an at least one place is included in a range (see at least Abstract – “The present invention utilizes a novel polar coordinate grid to improve the processes of calculating and generating isochrones”, [0062] and Fig. 6-7 with associated text). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art BEFORE the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Puttick’s invention by incorporating a polar coordinate-based isochrone generation feature as taught by Sutanto in order to utilize a polar coordinate grid for data sampling to make isochrone generation faster and more efficient (see [0008]).
Communications via The Internet and Authorization
MPEP § 502.03 II, “Without a written authorization by applicant in place, the USPTO will not respond via Internet email to any Internet correspondence which contains information subject to the confidentiality requirement as set forth in 35 U.S.C. 122. A paper copy of such correspondence and response will be placed in the appropriate patent application by the examiner. except for correspondence that only sets up an interview time, all correspondence between the office and the applicant including applicant’s representative must be placed in the appropriate patent application. If an email contains any information beyond scheduling an interview, such as an interview agenda, it must be placed in the application. THE WRITTEN AUTHORIZATION MAY BE SUBMITTED VIA EFS-WEB, MAIL, OR FAX. It cannot be submitted by email.”
Contact Information
Primary Examiner Calvin Cheung’s contact information is listed at the bottom, and he is typically reached MONDAY-THURSDAY, 0700-1700 ET. If attempts to reach the primary by telephone are unsuccessful, the primary’s supervisor, HELAL ALGAHAIM, is available at telephone number (571) 270-5227.
Applicants are encouraged to use the USPTO Automated Interview Request (AIR) at http://www.uspto.gov/interviewpractice for scheduling an examiner interview that will be performed over telephone or video conferencing (using a USPTO supplied web-based collaboration tool).
Information regarding the status of an application may be obtained from the Patent Application Information Retrieval (PAIR) system. Status information for published applications may be obtained from either Private PAIR or Public PAIR. Status information for unpublished applications is available through Private PAIR only. For more information about the PAIR system, see http://pair-direct.uspto.gov. Should you have questions on access to the Private PAIR system, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative or access to the automated information system, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
/CALVIN CHEUNG/
Direct Office Number (571) 270-7041
Email and Fax send to Calvin.Cheung@USPTO.GOV