DETAILED ACTION
Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status
1. The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
Status of the Application
2. Pursuant to the application filed January 10, 2024, claims 1-20 are pending.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
3. 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.
4. Claims 1, 12, and 19 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 terms “short duration signal” and “long duration signal” in claim 1 are relative terms which render the claim indefinite. The terms “short duration signal” and “long duration signal” are not defined by the claim, the specification does not provide a standard for ascertaining the requisite degree, and one of ordinary skill in the art would not be reasonably apprised of the scope of the invention.
Claims 2-11 are rejected for the same reasons as claim 1 because claims 2-11 depend from claim 1.
Claims 13-18 are rejected for the same reasons as claim 12 because claims 13-18 depend from claim 12.
Claim 20 is rejected for the same reasons as claim 19 because claim 20 depends from claim 19.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
5. 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.
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, 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.
6. Claims 1, 12, and 14 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Zhang (US 2015/0043676 A1).
Regarding claim 1, Zhang discloses:
an electronic monitoring system ([0008]; the limitation, “monitoring system” is mere preamble, so it is not limiting), comprising:
a communication device ([0020]; FIG. 1: 140A), further comprising:
an actuator which generates a signal when the actuator is selectively engaged ([0020]; Zhang discloses that the wireless device is a smartphone, which comprises a user interface that actuates the smartphone in response to selective manual input), and
a transmitter to transmit data corresponding to the signal when the actuator is selectively engaged ([0020]; Zhang discloses a smartphone, which comprises a transmitter); and
a receiver in communication with the transmitter to receive the data from the transmitter ([0020]; FIG. 1: 110); and
a controller in communication with the receiver to receive the data from the receiver ([0007], [0023]; FIG. 1: 120),
the controller is operative to:
detect at least one short duration signal and at least one long duration signal from the data ([0007], [0023], [0024]),
detect a pattern from the at least one short duration signal and the at least one long duration signal ([0007], [0023], [0024]), and
Zhang does not explicitly disclose executing a task in the electronic monitoring system, selected from a plurality of tasks, as a function of the pattern detected, but Zhang does disclose processing of the pattern detected ([0023], [0024]), Zhang does disclose that the receiver is a component of a smart phone ([0020]), which comprises multiple components that execute a plurality of tasks, and Zhang does disclose that the system is directed communication in a computer network ([0003]), all of which suggests that the system of Zhang comprises executing a task in the electronic monitoring system, selected from a plurality of tasks, as a function of the pattern detected for the benefit of enabling the receiver to communicate in a computer network;
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the application to have configured the system of Zhang in the foregoing manner because that would have enabled the system to communicate in a computer network.
Regarding Claim 12, Zang discloses a method ([0006]); otherwise, claims 12 is rejected as claim 1.
Regarding claim 14, Zhang discloses monitoring a duration of the signal with a control circuit in the communication device each time the actuator is selectively engaged, identifying whether the duration of the signal during each selective engagement is a short duration signal or a long duration signal with the control circuit in the communication device, and inserting a sequence of short duration signals and long duration signals into the data transmitted to the controller with the control circuit in the communication device. ([0045])
Allowable Subject Matter
7. Claim 2 is objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
Claims 3-10 are objected to for the same reasons as claim 2 because claims 3-10 depend from claim 2.
Claim 11 is objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
Claim 13 is objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
Claim 15 is objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
Claim 16 is objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
Claim 17 is objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
Claim 18 is objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
Claim 19 is objected to as being rejected under Section 112 but would be allowable if the Section 112 rejection were avoided without materially changing the scope of the claim.
Claim 20 is objected to for the same reasons as claim 19 because claim 20 depends from claim 19.
Conclusion
8. Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JOHN F MORTELL whose telephone number is (571)270-1873. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday 10-7 ET.
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, Davetta Goins can be reached at 571-272-2957. 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.
/JOHN F MORTELL/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2689