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 .
Continued Examination Under 37 CFR 1.114
A request for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, including the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e), was filed in this application after final rejection. Since this application is eligible for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114. Applicant's submission filed on 06/05/2026 has been entered.
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 1-20 are provisionally rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claims 1-20 of copending Application No. 18/623,680. Although the claims at issue are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other because this application is a continuation of 18/623,680 and this application claims with more words but in a broader manner the invention concisely claimed in 18/623,680.
This is a provisional nonstatutory double patenting rejection because the patentably indistinct claims have not in fact been patented.
The claims map to each other as follows:
Instant Application
Co-pending 18/623,680
Claim 1.
A computer-implemented method of using augmented reality (AR) for visualizing proper fastening of a vehicle seat comprising:
receiving, by one or more processors, input data, the input data including one or more of vehicle data, vehicle seat data, or child data;
receiving, by the one or more processors, underlay layer data indicative of a field of view (FOV) associated with an AR viewer device;
generating, by the one or more processors, overlay layer data based upon the input data, the overlay layer data including an indication of a proper fastening of the vehicle seat;
correlating, by the one or more processors, the overlay layer data with the underlay layer data;
creating, by the one or more processors, an AR display based upon the correlation; and
presenting, by the one or more processors to the AR viewer device, the AR display.
Claim 1
A computer-implemented method of using augmented reality (AR) for validating proper fastening of a vehicle seat via an application executing on a mobile computing device, the method comprising:
the application causing one or more processors of the mobile computing device to obtain input data via an input interface of the mobile computing device, the input data including one or more of vehicle data, vehicle seat data, or child data;
the application causing the one or more processors to obtain underlay layer data generated by an image sensor of the mobile computing device;
the application causing the one or more processors to generate overlay layer data based upon the input data and/or the underlay layer data, the overlay layer data including an indication associated with proper fastening of the vehicle seat;
the application causing the one or more processors to corelate the overlay layer data with the underlay layer data;
the application causing the one or more processors to create an AR display based upon the correlation; and
the application causing the one or more processors to present the AR display via an AR interface of the mobile computing device.
Claim 12
Claim 13
Claim 20
Claim 20
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 1-21 would be allowable if rewritten or amended to overcome the double patenting set forth in this Office action.
The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter:
Regarding claim 1, none of the prior art of record, alone or in combination, disclose the claim as amended.
Claims 2-11 are allowable for depending from claim 1.
Claim 12 is allowable for reciting similar amended subject matter as claim 1.
Claims 13-19 are allowable for depending from claim 12.
Claim 20 is allowable for reciting similar amended subject matter as claim 1.
Claims 21is allowable for depending from claim 21.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JITESH PATEL whose telephone number is (571)270-3313. The examiner can normally be reached 8am - 5pm.
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, Said A. Broome can be reached at (571) 272-2931. 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.
/JITESH PATEL/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2612
Prosecution Insights