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 Interpretation
“[P]rovide the replacement battery” as used in Claim 1 is interpreted based on Applicant’s Specification ¶ 72 to meet with the carrier with the mobile computing device 120 that needs battery replacement to either swap a battery or to provide a new battery. An old battery is swapped and/or a new battery provided.
“Mobile Delivery Device” as used in Claim 1 is interpreted based on Applicant’s Specification ¶ 43 to be “handheld scanners that allow persons utilizing them, such as U.S. Postal Service carriers to track package delivery, carrier position, delivery status, route status, route directions, and many other features”.
Double Patenting
The nonstatutory double patenting rejection is based on a judicially created doctrine grounded in public policy (a policy reflected in the statute) so as to prevent the unjustified or improper timewise extension of the “right to exclude” granted by a patent and to prevent possible harassment by multiple assignees. A nonstatutory double patenting rejection is appropriate where the conflicting claims are not identical, but at least one examined application claim is not patentably distinct from the reference claim(s) because the examined application claim is either anticipated by, or would have been obvious over, the reference claim(s). See, e.g., In re Berg, 140 F.3d 1428, 46 USPQ2d 1226 (Fed. Cir. 1998); In re Goodman, 11 F.3d 1046, 29 USPQ2d 2010 (Fed. Cir. 1993); In re Longi, 759 F.2d 887, 225 USPQ 645 (Fed. Cir. 1985); In re Van Ornum, 686 F.2d 937, 214 USPQ 761 (CCPA 1982); In re Vogel, 422 F.2d 438, 164 USPQ 619 (CCPA 1970); In re Thorington, 418 F.2d 528, 163 USPQ 644 (CCPA 1969).
A timely filed terminal disclaimer in compliance with 37 CFR 1.321(c) or 1.321(d) may be used to overcome an actual or provisional rejection based on nonstatutory double patenting provided the reference application or patent either is shown to be commonly owned with the examined application, or claims an invention made as a result of activities undertaken within the scope of a joint research agreement. See MPEP § 717.02 for applications subject to examination under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA as explained in MPEP § 2159. See MPEP § 2146 et seq. for applications not subject to examination under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA . A terminal disclaimer must be signed in compliance with 37 CFR 1.321(b).
The filing of a terminal disclaimer by itself is not a complete reply to a nonstatutory double patenting (NSDP) rejection. A complete reply requires that the terminal disclaimer be accompanied by a reply requesting reconsideration of the prior Office action. Even where the NSDP rejection is provisional the reply must be complete. See MPEP § 804, subsection I.B.1. For a reply to a non-final Office action, see 37 CFR 1.111(a). For a reply to final Office action, see 37 CFR 1.113(c). A request for reconsideration while not provided for in 37 CFR 1.113(c) may be filed after final for consideration. See MPEP §§ 706.07(e) and 714.13.
The USPTO Internet website contains terminal disclaimer forms which may be used. Please visit www.uspto.gov/patent/patents-forms. The actual filing date of the application in which the form is filed determines what form (e.g., PTO/SB/25, PTO/SB/26, PTO/AIA /25, or PTO/AIA /26) should be used. A web-based eTerminal Disclaimer may be filled out completely online using web-screens. An eTerminal Disclaimer that meets all requirements is auto-processed and approved immediately upon submission. For more information about eTerminal Disclaimers, refer to www.uspto.gov/patents/apply/applying-online/eterminal-disclaimer.
Claims 1-7 and 21 are rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claims 1-20 of U.S. Patent No. 11,743,828 B2. Although the claims at issue are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other because the differences in the claims subject matter would be obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, e.g. when the battery status is below a battery threshold or when the battery status indicates the battery exceeds a determined battery threshold, select or order a replacement battery, or cause the replacement battery to be delivered to the identified facility.
Allowable Subject Matter
The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter:
The prior art of record fails to disclose: A system for tracking battery use and replacement within a distribution network, the system comprising: a first mobile delivery device comprising: a battery; a scanner; a memory storing a unique device identifier and battery information; a global positioning system configured to detect a location of the first mobile delivery device; and at least one processor in communication with the battery, and one or more processors in communication with the first mobile delivery device, the one or more processors configured to: receive the battery information from the first mobile delivery device; determine a battery status based on the battery information; and when the battery status is below a battery threshold, select a replacement battery to replace the battery of the first mobile delivery device based on the location of the first mobile delivery device; and cause an inventory management system to provide the replacement battery to the first mobile delivery device.
WO 2006127154 A1, claims 10 and 20, disclose: “when a power level of the battery reaches a predetermined value, the second wireless device transmits a corresponding further signal to one of the first wireless device and a third wireless device.” This is similar to determining a battery status and battery threshold.
CN 102640541 B discloses: “the notification can be based on a preset minimum distance. Because the wireless radio and/or one or more wireless transceivers 108 typically does not have a global positioning system (GPS) function, yet the processor for mapping the distance 110 can be measured by an access point or other network device to the mobile computing device 100 of the one or more wireless radios 108 frames transmitted signal strength and basic path loss equation to estimate the moving distance”. This is similar to determining a distance between the first mobile delivery device and the second mobile delivery device based on the locations of the first mobile delivery device and the second mobile delivery device.
Conclusion
THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a).
A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of the advisory action. In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the mailing date of this final action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to RUSSELL S GLASS whose telephone number is (571)272-7285. The examiner can normally be reached M-F, 9-5.
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, FLORIAN ZEENDER can be reached at 571-272-6790. 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.
/RUSSELL S GLASS/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3627
Prosecution Insights