DETAILED ACTION
Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status
The present application is being examined under the pre-AIA first to invent provisions.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed on 03/24/2026 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
Priority:
Applicant argued in the remark that specifications of all cited prior-filed applications are identical to the specification of the present application.
Examiner respectfully disagrees. The statement provided above fails to adequately demonstrate that a person having ordinary skill in the art would recognize that the claimed limitations are sufficiently supported by the specification of the prior-filed applications. In particular, the Applicant has not established a clear written description basis for the claimed subject matter within the earlier filings. Furthermore, the Applicant has not identified, cited, or otherwise directed attention to any specific portions, paragraphs, or disclosures within the prior-filed applications that correspond to or support the claimed limitations. This omission is especially significant in light of the Office Action, which explicitly raised concerns regarding entitlement to priority and identified particular limitations lacking apparent support. Without precise citations to the relevant sections of the prior-filed applications, it is not possible to verify that the claimed subject matter was adequately disclosed in a manner that would reasonably convey possession of the invention at the time of the earlier filings. As such, the Applicant has not met the burden of demonstrating that the claims are entitled to the benefit of the priority date.
Specification:
Applicant did not provide any response of the objection of the specification. Examiner has still found that the hyperlink is still exist in the page 17 line 6.
Examiner respectfully disagrees. The applicant has not provided any response regarding the trademark name in the specification. In particular, the Applicant has not addressed the issue raised in the Office Action concerning the presence and use of the trademark, nor has the Applicant clarified its relevance to the disclosed subject matter. Additionally, no explanation, amendment, or supporting argument has been submitted to justify or resolve the concern. As a result, the issue remains outstanding.
Drawing:
Applicant did not provide any response of the drawing objection.
112(a) rejections:
Applicant argued in the remark that the claim does not limit to the messages being the same. While some of the messages MAY be the same, it is noted that for example, as described in the specification, a content in a message may be split into multiple messages.
Examiner respectfully disagrees. Applicant responded that the messages are not the same, or that some of the messages may be the same; however, it is not clear what the Applicant is trying to convey. The Applicant did not point to any portion of the specification describing the first message, second message, or third message. As a result, one of ordinary skill in the art would understand that the specification does not clearly disclose, in a single coherent method, the claimed ordered sequence, namely: (1) a portable device transmitting a first message comprising a first identifier to a first cellular telephone set over a first wireless network; (2) the phone forwarding that identifier as a second message to a first server over the Internet using a second wireless network; and (3) the server forwarding a third message comprising the first identifier to a second cellular telephone set, which then receives and stores it via a third wireless network.
The Examiner notes that the §112 rejections were made in the previous Office Action in view of the Applicant’s arguments regarding the cited prior art. At that time, the Examiner further analyzed whether the claimed message sequence is supported by the specification and found that the disclosure does not support the use of distinct messages as claimed.
Additionally, the Applicant has not responded to the §112 rejections for the “paired as sender and recipient” limitation in claim 1, nor to the rejections of claims 2, 3, 4, and 11 as set forth on pages 29–31 of the Office Action.
112(b) rejection:
Applicant argued in the remark that claim 1- “over The Internet”. It is well-known globally interconnected network of computer networks.
Examiner respectfully disagrees. Applicant may revisit the antecedent basis such as example 2173.05(e) Lack of Antecedent Basis [R-01.2024]
A claim is indefinite when it contains words or phrases whose meaning is unclear. In re Packard, 751 F.3d 1307, 1314, 110 USPQ2d 1785, 1789 (Fed. Cir. 2014). The lack of clarity could arise where a claim refers to "said lever" or "the lever," where the claim contains no earlier recitation or limitation of a lever and where it would be unclear as to what element the limitation was making reference. Similarly, if two different levers are recited earlier in the claim, the recitation of "said lever" in the same or subsequent claim would be unclear where it is uncertain which of the two levers was intended. A claim which refers to "said aluminum lever," but recites only "a lever" earlier in the claim, is indefinite because it is uncertain as to the lever to which reference is made. Obviously, however, the failure to provide explicit antecedent basis for terms does not always render a claim indefinite. If the scope of a claim would be reasonably ascertainable by those skilled in the art, then the claim is not indefinite. Ex parte Porter, 25 USPQ2d 1144, 1145 (Bd. Pat. App. & Inter. 1992) ("controlled stream of fluid" provided reasonable antecedent basis for "the controlled fluid"). Inherent components of elements recited have antecedent basis in the recitation of the elements themselves. For example, the limitation "the outer surface of said sphere" would not require an antecedent recitation that the sphere has an outer surface. See Bose Corp. v. JBL, Inc., 274 F.3d 1354, 1359, 61 USPQ2d 1216, 1218-19 (Fed. Cir 2001) (holding that recitation of "an ellipse" provided antecedent basis for "an ellipse having a major diameter" because "[t]here can be no dispute that mathematically an inherent characteristic of an ellipse is a major diameter").
Applicant argued in the remark that regarding the claim 4, states, cities and countries are geographical area.
Examiner respectfully disagrees. States, cities and countries are not definite. The claim limitations are required to have the boundaries of the limitations.
Applicant argued in the remark of the claim 19 that Bluetooth is not a trademark.
Examiner respectfully disagrees. Bluetooth is a trademark. The term “Bluetooth” is registered trademarks owned by the Bluetooth Special Interest Group (Bluetooth SIG), which licenses their use to its members.
Applicant argued in the remark that the cellular telephone set may serve as a computer.
Examiner respectfully disagrees. On skill in the art would know that A cellphone is primarily designed for basic voice communication and text messaging, while a smartphone includes advanced features such as internet access, apps, and multimedia capabilities.
A computer is not equal to a cellular telephone set; they serve different purposes and have distinct functionalities.
Computers are designed for a wide range of tasks, including processing data, running software applications, and performing calculations. They typically have a larger screen, keyboard, and multiple input/output devices.
Cellular telephones, on the other hand, are primarily used for voice communication and accessing the internet through cellular networks. They are portable and designed for quick communication without the need for a computer
How the smart phone is equal to the cellular telephone set and how the computer can be a cellular telephone set that those lack description in the specification?
102 rejections:
Claim 1
Mapping:
Claim 1 recites, inter alia, the following elements: 'first cellular telephone set', 'second cellular telephone set', 'portable device', 'first server', 'first identifier',
'first wireless network', 'second wireless network', and 'third wireless network'.
The Action seems to map the recites elements to Kliland as follows:
(i) the claimed 'portable device' is equated to the 'Badge 19';
(ii) the claimed 'first identifier' is equated to 'sender ID/badge ID' at step 19;
(iii) the claimed 'first cellular telephone set' is equated to 'Bluetooth driver/mobile 2';
(iv) the claimed 'first server' is equated to 'numeral 15, SIP server';
(v) the claimed 'second cellular telephone set' is equated to 'numeral 8 equipment' and 'equipment 6-8';
(vi) the claimed 'first wireless network' is equated to 'Bluetooth connection 2';
(vii) the claimed 'second wireless network' is equated to 'GSM/UMTS'; and
(viii) the claimed 'third wireless network' is equated to H.323/SIP network 13-14 links of the SIP network 15 , i.e. a third wireless network, message, i.e. a third message (H.323 : Basically, the H.323 network may be a standard set by ITU which allows telephones on the general public telephone network to speak to computers connected to internet, The H.323 network operates over IP networks, which are typically wireless allowing for high-quality audio and video communication).
Argument #1: Applicant argued in the remark that Kliland -non-enabling reference
Examiner respectfully disagrees. One of the ordinary skill in the art be able to constitute a description of the Kliland prior art in terms of the claim limitations. However, that the prior art is presumed operable until applicant provides facts rebutting the presumption of operability. In re Sasse, 629 F.2d 675, 207 USPQ 107 (CCPA 1980). Therefore, applicant must provide evidence showing that a process for making was not known at the relevant time. The anticipating prior art Kliland discloses every element of the claim 1. Prior arts disclosure and drawings may be sufficiently enabling to put the public in the possession of the article pictured. Therefore, such an enabling picture may be used to reject claims to the article. However, the picture must show all the claimed structural features and how they are put together. In re Bager, 47 F.2d 951, 953, 8 USPQ 484, 486 (CCPA 1931) (“Description for the purposes of anticipation can be by drawings alone as well as by words.”) (citing Jockmus v. Leviton, 28 F.2d 812 (2d Cir. 1928)). See also MPEP 2125 for a discussion of drawings as prior art (see the rejection). Here is mapping for the all the limitations as follows: (i) the claimed 'portable device' is equated to the 'Badge 19';
(ii) the claimed 'first identifier' is equated to 'sender ID/badge ID' at step 19;
(iii) the claimed 'first cellular telephone set' is equated to 'Bluetooth driver/mobile 2';
(iv) the claimed 'first server' is equated to 'numeral 15, SIP server';
(v) the claimed 'second cellular telephone set' is equated to 'numeral 8 equipment' and 'equipment 6-8';
(vi) the claimed 'first wireless network' is equated to 'Bluetooth connection 2';
(vii) the claimed 'second wireless network' is equated to 'GSM/UMTS'; and
(viii) the claimed 'third wireless network' is equated to H.323/SIP network 15 , i.e. a third wireless network, message, i.e. a third message (H.323 : Basically, the H.323 network may be a standard set by ITU which allows telephones on the general public telephone network to speak to computers connected to internet, The H.323 network operates over IP networks, which are typically wireless allowing for high-quality audio and video communication).
Argument #2- No disclosure of “ second cellular telephone set”
Applicant argued in the remark that Kliland’s equipment is not a telephone in general and does not disclose the equipment is a cellular device in particular.
Examiner respectfully disagrees. Kliland’s system communicates with the Internet through a Bluetooth “dash link” as shown in Figure 1. In this arrangement, any device capable of communicating via a Bluetooth signal can be considered a cellular device or cellular telephone set for purposes of the disclosure. Paragraph 0048 further describes Figure 1, where the Personal Equipment Service (PES) runs over a call control API (CC-API). The CC-API may be any suitable interface, such as a proprietary API, a Telephone Application Interface (TAPI), or similar systems. The H.323 gatekeeper (UA) handles functions such as user charging by sending Call Detail Records (CDRs) to a billing server, as well as authenticating the user. In this setup, the equipment provides PES services over a telephone application within the network. Therefore, the disclosed equipment can be understood as a wireless telephone set, and such a wireless telephone set may correspond to the claimed “second cellular telephone set.”
Applicant argued in the remark that Argument #3- No disclosure of Paired as a sender and a recipient”.
Examiner respectfully disagrees. Kliland discloses in Figure 1 and paragraph 0051 that the badge ID is sent from badge 4 (i.e., the portable device/sender) to equipment 6 or 8 through the associated wireless device 5 or 7, which functions as the recipient and can be viewed as the second cellular telephone set.
Further, paragraph 0051 and Figure 3 explain that, when the equipment is H.323-adapted, an HTTP service channel (see H.323, Annex K) may be used to transmit the badge ID from badge 4 to equipment 6 or 8 via the paired wireless device 5 or 7 associated with the badge. In this process, the system also receives the corresponding equipment profiles.
Applicant argued in the remark that Argument #4 - No disclosure of 'sending, by the first server to the second cellular telephone set over the Internet, a third message that comprises the first identifier, in response to the receiving of the second message' .
Examiner respectfully disagrees. Kliland discloses in paragraph 0021 that the IP network may be a multimedia network, an H.323 network, or a SIP network. Paragraph 0039 further explains that an H.323 gatekeeper provides services within the home environment (16). As shown in Figure 3 and paragraph 0051, Figure 2 indicates that the mobile phone may be considered unnecessary in this arrangement, and that links 13 and 14 can directly connect equipment 6 and 8 to the Internet for both sending and receiving the badge ID. In Figure 1, SIP server 15 (i.e., the first server) transmits an H.323/SIP message—referred to as a third message—over links 13–14 (i.e., the third wireless/Internet links) to equipment 1–2 or 6–8 associated with wireless devices 5–7, which may correspond to the second cellular telephone set. Further, SIP server 15 sends the H.323/SIP message over the Internet link 14 to equipment 1–2 or 6–8 via wireless devices 5–7. Based on this disclosure, it can be understood that the SIP server conveys a first communication (i.e., the first identifier or message) from the mobile phone via GSM/UMTS, and then transmits further communications over the Internet through links 13–14 (i.e., the third wireless links), ultimately delivering the message (i.e., third message) to equipment 6–8 within the SIP network (15).
Applicant argued in the remark that Argument #5 - No disclosure of 'receiving and storing, by the second cellular telephone set from the first server over the Internet using a third wireless network, the third message, in response to the sending of the third message".
Kliland discloses in paragraph 0051 and Figure 3 (see also Figure 2) that the mobile phone may be considered unnecessary in this setup, and that links 13 and 14 can directly connect equipment 6 and 8 to the Internet for both sending and receiving the badge ID. As shown in Figure 1, SIP server 15 (i.e., the first server) sends an H.323/SIP message, referred to as a third message, over links 13–14 (i.e., the third wireless/Internet links) to equipment 1–2 or 6–8, which may correspond to the second cellular telephone set. The SIP server may also transmit the same H.323/SIP message over Internet link 14 (i.e., the third wireless network) to equipment 1–2 or 6–8 through wireless devices 5–7. From this disclosure, it can be understood that the SIP server carries the mobile phone’s initial communication (i.e., the first identifier or message, or second message) via GSM/UMTS to equipment 6 or 8, and then continues communication over the Internet through links 13–14 (i.e., the third wireless links), ultimately delivering the third message to equipment 6–8 within SIP network 15.
Accordingly, equipment 6–8 can be understood as the second cellular telephone set, as it receives the third message from SIP server 15 (i.e., the first server) over the third wireless network via link 14. Kliland discloses in Figure 1 and paragraph 0051 that SIP server 15 sends an H.323/SIP message through network 15 (i.e., a third wireless network). This message is transmitted over the Internet (link 14) and delivered to equipment 1–2 or 6–8 associated with wireless devices 5–7, which may be understood as the second cellular telephone set. The H.323 network is essentially a standard defined by ITU that allows communication between traditional telephone systems and internet-connected devices. It operates over IP networks, which are typically wireless and support audio and video communication. In this system, the equipment is adapted to the H.323 protocol, enabling it to communicate through wireless devices 5–7 and receive the badge ID sent from badge 4 via the SIP message (i.e., the third message). In this way, the wireless device or second cellular telephone set receives the badge ID from the portable device through the SIP-based communication.
Further, paragraph 0048 explains that GSM information is encrypted for security within the PLMN network, while the H.323 network provides its own security features. The H.323 system includes a gatekeeper (UA) running the Personal Equipment Service (PES) over a call control API (CC-API), which may be proprietary or based on standards such as TAPI. Accordingly, equipment 6–8 can be understood as corresponding to the second cellular telephone set.
Applicant argued in the remark that, Kliland discloses Bluetooth and GSM/UMTS networking, it fails to disclose any using of UWB technology.
Examiner respectfully disagrees. Kliland, in paragraph 0010, discusses setting up bandwidth from the network to the operable equipment. In this context, the disclosed bandwidth may include or be implemented using UWB (Ultra-Wideband) technology.
Applicant argued in the remark that Claim 23 recites that "...
but fails to disclose any of the cited cellular telephone identifiers - "a telephone number, a Mobile Equipment Identifier (MEID) number, an International Mobile Equipment Identity (IMEI) number, or an Electronic Serial Number (ESN) ".
Examiner respectfully disagrees. Kliland discloses in paragraph 0023 that an equipment identifier is wirelessly communicated from the equipment to be controlled to a mobile communication terminal. The mobile communication terminal then forwards, via a gateway to an IP network, a first information set that includes the user identifier and the equipment identifier (e.g., a cellular telephone identifier and/or a mobile terminal identifier such as a Mobile Equipment Identifier (MEID) number) to a User Agent (UA) in an Internet Protocol network.
Priority
The later-filed application must be an application for a patent for an invention which is also disclosed in the prior application (the parent or original nonprovisional application or provisional application). The disclosure of the invention in the parent application and in the later-filed application must be sufficient to comply with the requirements of 35 U.S.C. 112(a) or the first paragraph of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, except for the best mode requirement. See Transco Products, Inc. v. Performance Contracting, Inc., 38 F.3d 551, 32 USPQ2d 1077 (Fed. Cir. 1994);
The disclosure of the prior-filed application here, Application No. 62/430,275 fails to provide adequate support or enablement in the manner provided by 35 U.S.C. 112(a) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, first paragraph for one or more claims of this application.
In particular, it fails to provide adequate support for at least the:
sending, by the portable device to the first cellular telephone set over a first wireless network, a first message that comprises the first identifier;” in claim 1;
sending, by the first cellular telephone set to the first server over the Internet using a second wireless network, a second message that comprises the received first identifier” in claim 1;
sending, by the first server to the second cellular telephone set over the Internet, a third message that comprises the first identifier, in response to the receiving of the second message; in claim 1;
The disclosure of the prior-filed application here, Application No. 13/325,438 fails to provide adequate support or enablement in the manner provided by 35 U.S.C. 112(a) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, first paragraph for one or more claims of this application.
In particular, it fails to provide adequate support for at least the:
sending, by the portable device to the first cellular telephone set over a first wireless network, a first message that comprises the first identifier;” in claim 1;
sending, by the first cellular telephone set to the first server over the Internet using a second wireless network, a second message that comprises the received first identifier” in claim 1;
sending, by the first server to the second cellular telephone set over the Internet, a third message that comprises the first identifier, in response to the receiving of the second message; in claim 1;
The disclosure of the prior-filed application here, Application No.14/492551 fails to provide adequate support or enablement in the manner provided by 35 U.S.C. 112(a) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, first paragraph for one or more claims of this application.
In particular, it fails to provide adequate support for at least the:
sending, by the portable device to the first cellular telephone set over a first wireless network, a first message that comprises the first identifier;” in claim 1;
sending, by the first cellular telephone set to the first server over the Internet using a second wireless network, a second message that comprises the received first identifier” in claim 1;
sending, by the first server to the second cellular telephone set over the Internet, a third message that comprises the first identifier, in response to the receiving of the second message; in claim 1;
The disclosure of the prior-filed application here, Application No.15/679,185 fails to provide adequate support or enablement in the manner provided by 35 U.S.C. 112(a) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, first paragraph for one or more claims of this application.
In particular, it fails to provide adequate support for at least the:
sending, by the portable device to the first cellular telephone set over a first wireless network, a first message that comprises the first identifier;” in claim 1;
sending, by the first cellular telephone set to the first server over the Internet using a second wireless network, a second message that comprises the received first identifier” in claim 1;
sending, by the first server to the second cellular telephone set over the Internet, a third message that comprises the first identifier, in response to the receiving of the second message; in claim 1;
The disclosure of the prior-filed application here, Application No.16/807,757 fails to provide adequate support or enablement in the manner provided by 35 U.S.C. 112(a) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, first paragraph for one or more claims of this application.
In particular, it fails to provide adequate support for at least the:
sending, by the portable device to the first cellular telephone set over a first wireless network, a first message that comprises the first identifier;” in claim 1;
sending, by the first cellular telephone set to the first server over the Internet using a second wireless network, a second message that comprises the received first identifier” in claim 1;
sending, by the first server to the second cellular telephone set over the Internet, a third message that comprises the first identifier, in response to the receiving of the second message; in claim 1;
The disclosure of the prior-filed application here, Application No.17/685,410 fails to provide adequate support or enablement in the manner provided by 35 U.S.C. 112(a) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, first paragraph for one or more claims of this application.
In particular, it fails to provide adequate support for at least the:
sending, by the portable device to the first cellular telephone set over a first wireless network, a first message that comprises the first identifier;” in claim 1;
sending, by the first cellular telephone set to the first server over the Internet using a second wireless network, a second message that comprises the received first identifier” in claim 1;
sending, by the first server to the second cellular telephone set over the Internet, a third message that comprises the first identifier, in response to the receiving of the second message; in claim 1;
No portion of the prior-filed application describes any of the above features. Accordingly, NONE of the claims are entitled to the benefit of the filing date of the prior-filed application.
Specification
The disclosure is objected to because of the following informalities:
The disclosure is objected to because it contains an embedded hyperlink and/or other form of browser-executable code, pages 17 line 6, Applicant is required to delete the embedded hyperlink and/or other form of browser-executable code; references to websites should be limited to the top-level domain name without any prefix such as http:// or other browser-executable code. See MPEP § 608.01.
The use of the term the specification discloses Cisco ( page 3), IBM ( page 23), Intel corporation ( page 27) , HP ( page 27) , IEEE ( page 3), Blu-ray ( pages 15/16/19) which is a trade name or a mark used in commerce, has been noted in this application. The term should be accompanied by the generic terminology; furthermore the term should be capitalized wherever it appears or, where appropriate, include a proper symbol indicating use in commerce such as ™, SM , or ® following the term.
Although the use of trade names and marks used in commerce (i.e., trademarks, service marks, certification marks, and collective marks) are permissible in patent applications, the proprietary nature of the marks should be respected and every effort made to prevent their use in any manner which might adversely affect their validity as commercial marks.
Appropriate correction is required.
Drawings
The drawings are objected to under 37 CFR 1.83(a). The drawings must show every feature of the invention specified in the claims. Therefore, “a first cellular telephone set” and “a second cellular telephone set” (claim 1 ) must be shown or the feature(s) canceled from the claim(s). No new matter should be entered.
Corrected drawing sheets in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(d) are required in reply to the Office action to avoid abandonment of the application. Any amended replacement drawing sheet should include all of the figures appearing on the immediate prior version of the sheet, even if only one figure is being amended. The figure or figure number of an amended drawing should not be labeled as “amended.” If a drawing figure is to be canceled, the appropriate figure must be removed from the replacement sheet, and where necessary, the remaining figures must be renumbered and appropriate changes made to the brief description of the several views of the drawings for consistency. Additional replacement sheets may be necessary to show the renumbering of the remaining figures. Each drawing sheet submitted after the filing date of an application must be labeled in the top margin as either “Replacement Sheet” or “New Sheet” pursuant to 37 CFR 1.121(d). If the changes are not accepted by the examiner, the applicant will be notified and informed of any required corrective action in the next Office action. The objection to the drawings will not be held in abeyance.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of 35 U.S.C. 112(a):
(a) IN GENERAL.—The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor or joint inventor of carrying out the invention.
The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112:
The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor of carrying out his invention.
Claims 1-24 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(a) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), first paragraph, as failing to comply with the written description requirement. The claim(s) contains subject matter which was not described in the specification in such a way as to reasonably convey to one skilled in the relevant art that the inventor or a joint inventor, or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the inventor(s), at the time the application was filed, had possession of the claimed invention.
Claims 1 recites, inter alia, a specific, ordered sequence of transmissions: (i) a “first message” from a portable device to a first cellular telephone set over a first wireless network, the first message comprising a “first identifier”; (ii) a “second message” from the first cellular telephone set to a first server over the Internet using a second wireless network, the second message comprising the received “first identifier”; and (iii) a “third message” from the first server to a second cellular telephone set over the Internet using a third wireless network, the third message comprising the “first identifier”; with the second cellular telephone set “receiving and storing” the third message.
The as filed specification does not describe this ordered message chain with the recited message content and “in response to” relationships. While the specification discusses portable/cellular devices, device identifiers, wireless links, and server mediated messaging in isolation (e.g., [0175]–[0210], [0230]–[0234], [0249], [0347]–[0348]), it does not reasonably convey possession of the full scope claimed invention as a whole. See MPEP §2163; Ariad, 598 F.3d at 1351.
Specification (as filed) and generic statements found:
General Internet/server mediated messaging using senders, relay servers, and recipients (e.g., packets, slicing, routing) (e.g., paragraphs [0175]–[0210], [0230]–[0234]).
Cellular telephone sets as endpoints and that devices may have multiple identifiers (e.g., [0249]).
Wireless technologies such as Bluetooth, Wi Fi, GSM/2G/3G/EDGE (e.g., [0347]–[0348]).
However, the specification does not describe, in a single coherent method narrative, the exact ordered sequence claimed: (1) a “portable device” transmits a “first message” that explicitly “comprises the first identifier” to a “first cellular telephone set” over a “first wireless network”; (2) the phone forwards that identifier as a “second message” to a “first server” over the Internet using a “second wireless network”; (3) the server forwards a “third message” comprising the “first identifier” to a “second cellular telephone set,” which then “receives and stores” it via a “third wireless network.”.
The following claim limitations lack written description support as claimed (MPEP 2163; Ariad Pharm., Inc. v. Eli Lilly & Co., 598 F.3d 1336 (Fed. Cir. 2010) (en banc)):
Portable device → first cellular telephone set → first message comprising the portable device’s “first identifier,” over a first wireless network (ordered step)
The spec merely mentions portable/cellular devices and wireless links generally ([0347]–[0348]) and that cellular devices may have identifiers ([0249]), but it does not set out a specific example in which a separate “portable device” transmits a “first message” that “comprises the first identifier” to a first cellular telephone over a first wireless network as an expressly recited step in a multi hop method. The portions discussing Internet messaging flows (e.g., [0175]–[0210]) depict computers/servers exchanging packets but do not narrate this portable device to phone “first message” with identifier content.
First cellular telephone set → first server → “second message” comprising the received first identifier, sent over the Internet using a second wireless network (ordered step)
The spec merely describes phones as endpoints and discusses that devices communicate over the Internet, but it does not expressly disclose that the phone, after receiving the portable device’s identifier, constructs and sends a distinct “second message” that “comprises the received first identifier” to a server via its own cellular/Internet uplink. The general server mediated discussions ([0175]–[0210], [0230]–[0234]) do not link a received identifier at the phone to forwarding that same identifier to a server as a discrete ordered step.
3. First server → second cellular telephone set → “third message” comprising the first identifier; second phone “receiving and storing” over a third wireless network (ordered step)
While the spec explains that servers can forward/route messages and that recipients can receive and reconstruct/stash message content (e.g., [0129], [0230]), it does not describe an example where the server forwards a “third message” containing the “first identifier” (originating from the portable device) to a second cellular telephone, nor does it describe the second phone’s “receiving and storing” as part of an ordered chain that ties back to the portable device’s original “first identifier.” The “three message” sequence and explicit “in response to” linkages are not laid out in the body of the description.
Accordingly, the specification fails to reasonably convey to one of ordinary skill in the art that the inventor had possession, as of the filing date, of the claimed invention as a whole—specifically, the ordered, three hop message sequence and content (first/second/third message each “comprising the first identifier”) as recited. The cited passages provide building blocks in isolation (devices, identifiers, wireless links, server forwarding), but they do not disclose the invention as claimed in the requisite level of detail. See MPEP 2163, 2163.02.
Claim 1 recites “paired as sender and a recipient”, the claim requires that “the portable device and the second cellular telephone set are paired as a sender and a recipient,” but the specification never defines or provides disclosure as to what “paired” means in this context or how the applicant intends to perform this or function achieved. A skilled artisan cannot determine the required pairing mechanism or criteria or whether any pairing suffices to have possession of the full scope of the claim.
Claim 1 recites, “receiving, … the first message, in response to the sending of the first message”. The claim requires performance of specified operations “in response to” particular events (for example, “in response to the sending of the first message”, such “in response” limitations are not mere temporal adornments — they are claim‑limiting causal relationships that require the specification to show possession of the claimed trigger/response behavior.
The written‑description requirement demands that the specification reasonably convey to a skilled artisan that the inventor had possession of the claimed subject matter. The specification as filed contains high‑level descriptions of message flows but does not disclose the required minimum attributes for the “in response” relationship. Specifically, the specification does not describe with sufficient particularity any of the following items (all of which are material to whether a PHOSITA would recognize the claimed trigger/response relationship as “possessed” by the inventor): Because the specification fails to disclose any minimum items (trigger, detection, logic, timing, error handling, and a concrete implementation), a PHOSITA reading the specification would not reasonably understand that the inventor possessed the full scope of the claimed “in response” behavior. Instead, the specification provides only abstract or high‑level sequence descriptions. The absence of such described structure and logic renders the “in response” limitations unsupported by the written description as filed.
Claim 2, recites, similarly the “in response to” language and rejected for the same reasons. This claim adds an “in response” …to the third message”), and the specification does not set out how this is to be achieved, for the device acting “in response” (see the prior 112(a) OA). A PHOSITA reading the spec has no reliable way to determine what qualifies the third message to cause display nor how immediate display should be done.
Claim 3 and claim 4, to the extent that the claim requires that the “first and second cellular telephone sets are located at geographically disparate locations” (and recites “different cities, different states, different countries, or different continents”). The specification as filed contains explicit disclosure and examples that relay servers and intermediate servers may be geographically disparate (e.g., examples enumerating relay servers located in different continents, countries, and cities). However, the specification does not describe, exemplify, or otherwise disclose the cellular telephone sets (the claimed “first” and “second” cellular telephone sets) being located in geographically disparate locations. And while the original claims me be considered part of the specification, the specification fails to disclose the method or mechanism by which the telephone sets determine or establish that they are in disparate locations or disparate different cities/states/countries/continents.
Claim 11, “wherein the first, second, or third message is delivered as part of a real-time service.” However, the specification does not set forth the operational details (in a manner showing possession) that define how a message is to be “delivered as part of a real‑time service” across the broad range of networks and transports encompassed by the claim 1. This claim is a a mere statement desire result that services are real‑time, or that some applications are delay‑sensitive, is an abstract identification of a class of uses; it does not demonstrate possession of the claimed method steps specifically adapted or implemented for “delivery as part of a real‑time service.”. Claim 11 introduces a functional limitation with a mere generic recital that services may be “real‑time”, does not demonstrate that the inventor possessed the claimed method of delivering messages specifically “as part of a real‑time service” across the full breadth of the claim. The written‑description requirement is not satisfied by desire result statement.
Dependent claims 2-24 are rejected based on the same reasons set forth in the claim 1, due to their dependencies.
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 1-24 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.
Claim 1 recites the limitation "the Internet" in line 9.
While a persona having ordinary skill in the art (PHOSITA) normally understands “the Internet” in general technical parlance, but the specification fails to supply the minimum structural and/or functional characteristics that define the claimed “over the Internet” path in the context of this claimed invention. The specification discusses networks and IP concepts broadly and on a high level, but does not identify the baseline technical properties that would allow a PHOSITA to determine whether a particular network path or implementation qualifies as “over the Internet” for purposes of the claim. The absence of such boundaries renders the claim scope uncertain under because a PHOSITA cannot determine, with reasonable certainty, whether alternative network constructions (for example: a private intranet, a VPN overlay, an anonymizing overlay such as Tor, an IP-over-non-IP encapsulation, or a store-and-forward telephony/SMS path) are included or excluded by the claim. More specifically, the specification does not state the minimum characteristics that are required for a network path to count as “the Internet” in the claim. Making the claim indefinite.
Claim 3, recites “the first and second cellular telephone sets are located at geographically disparate locations.” The term is a relative term which renders the claim indefinite. The term is 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. The term of degree “geographically disparate locations” lacks objective boundaries in the intrinsic record and therefore renders the scope of claim indefinite. The specification does not define “geographically disparate,” does not state any threshold distance or measurement method, nor tie the term to an objective criterion. Absent such guidance, a person of ordinary skill cannot determine, with reasonable certainty, the scope of the claim.
Claim 4, as further dependent on claim 3, do not cure deficiencies of claim 3 since further recites wherein the first and second cellular telephone sets are located in different cities, in different states, in different countries, or on different continents. The specification repeatedly uses language about “geographically disparate” for servers, and it is to be noted nowhere for telephone sets. Claim 4 depends from claim 3 and further recites “wherein the first and second cellular telephone sets are located in different cities, in different states, in different countries, or on different continents.” The phrase “geographically disparate locations,” and the related “different cities/states/countries/continents,” are terms of degree that, as used in the claims, lack objective boundaries in the intrinsic record such that a person of ordinary skill in the art cannot determine with reasonable certainty whether a given pair of cellular telephone sets falls within or outside the claimed scope. The specification as filed provides examples addressing geographically disparate relay servers (e.g., servers in different continents and countries), but the specification does not define or provide any objective metric or test for determining when two cellular telephone sets are “geographically disparate,” nor does it instruct how to determine whether two telephones are in “different cities,” “different states,” “different countries,” or “different continents.”
Claim 7, recites wherein the first, second, or third wireless network comprises a Local Area Network (LAN), Wide Area Network (WAN), Metropolitan Area Network (MAN), Next Generation Network (NGN), or an intranet. Claim 1 requires sending “to the first server over the Internet.” Dependent claim 7 then adds “wherein the first, second, or third wireless network comprises … an intranet.” The term “intranet” commonly denotes a private or internal network distinct from the public Internet. If applicant intends that an “intranet” is within the scope of the claimed “Internet” path, however the specification does not explicitly so state, hence, dependent claim 7 conflict with claim 1 because a dependent claim broaden the parent claim 1 introducing an inconsistent alternative. The specification does not resolve this apparent inconsistency. Making the clam indefinite.
Claim 19 contains the trademark/trade name Bluetooth. Where a trademark or trade name is used in a claim as a limitation to identify or describe a particular material or product, the claim does not comply with the requirements of 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph. See Ex parte Simpson, 218 USPQ 1020 (Bd. App. 1982). The claim scope is uncertain since the trademark or trade name cannot be used properly to identify any particular material or product. A trademark or trade name is used to identify a source of goods, and not the goods themselves. Thus, a trademark or trade name does not identify or describe the goods associated with the trademark or trade name. In the present case, the trademark/trade name is used to identify/describe in the specification 0347Bluetooth®, and, accordingly, the identification/description is indefinite. Using a trademark to identify a product (e.g., "Teflon" instead of "polytetrafluoroethylene") is improper because the branded product's composition may change over time.
As per claim 1, this claim recites the phase “cellular telephone set” in line 2. specification discloses par 0249, a cellular telephone set is serving as the source computer. Is the computer a cellular telephone set? None of the drawing shows the image of the cellular telephone set. There are lack of description and image in the specification and drawing about the cellular telephone set. The cellular telephone set limitation is confused to the Examiner because of the lack of proper definition. Therefore, this claim is indefinite.
All the dependent claims are rejected based on the same rational set forth in the claim 1.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
The following is a quotation of the appropriate paragraphs of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 that form the basis for the rejections under this section made in this Office action:
A person shall be entitled to a patent unless –
(a) the invention was known or used by others in this country, or patented or described in a printed publication in this or a foreign country, before the invention thereof by the applicant for a patent.
Claim(s) 1 and 22-23 are rejected under pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102(a) as being anticipated by Kliland et al US 2002/0065905.
PNG
media_image1.png
754
562
media_image1.png
Greyscale
As per claim 1, Kliland discloses A method for a communication path from a portable device (fig.1-2, Badge 19) that is identified by a first identifier (fig.1-2, Badge sends ID/badge ID at step 19) , via a first cellular telephone set (fig.2-3, the Bluetooth driver/mobile 2)and a first server (fig.1, numeral 15, 0039 SIP server ), to a second cellular telephone set( fig.1, numeral 8 equipment 2 0013 the third wireless device and second wireless device and 0051 equipment 6-8 are associated wireless device 5 or 7, i.e. second cellular telephone set ), wherein the portable device and the second cellular telephone set are paired as a sender and a recipient (fig.1, 0051 sending the badge Id from the badge 4,i.e. the portable device/sender, to the equipment 6 or 8, via the equipment associated wireless device 5 or 7/recipient , i.e. the second cellular telephone set and 0051 . In FIG. 3, if the equipment to be controlled or configured is H.323 adapted, then the HTTP service channel (see specification H.323, Annex K) can be used for sending the badge Id from the badge 4 to the equipment 6 or 8, via the equipment associated, i.e. paired , wireless device 5 or 7 of the badge 4, i.e. portable device, respectively, and receiving the equipment profiles), the method comprising:
sending, by the portable device to the first cellular telephone set over a first wireless network, a first message that comprises the first identifier (fig.1 0017 a user identity badge provided with a first wireless communication device/ the Bluetooth driver/mobile 2, having a first identifier, i.e. first message, wherein the Bluetooth connection, i.e. a first wireless network, with the first message);
receiving, by the first cellular telephone set from the portable device over the first wireless network, the first message, in response to the sending of the first message ( fig.1, the Bluetooth driver/mobile 2, i.e. first cellular telephone, received the badge identifier as seen in the fig.2 via the Bluetooth connection );
sending, by the first cellular telephone set to the first server over the Internet using a second wireless network, a second message that comprises the received first identifier (fig.1, the Bluetooth driver/mobile 2sends the GSM/UMTS, i.e. a second wireless network, communication, i.e. a second message, to the to SIP sever 15 over the Internet);
receiving, by the first server from the first cellular telephone set over the Internet, the second message, in response to the sending of the second message (fig.1, the SIP server 15 received the GSM/UMTS communication, i.e. second message, from the Bluetooth driver/mobile 2, i.e. the first cellular telephone);
sending, by the first server to the second cellular telephone set over the Internet, a third message that comprises the first identifier, in response to the receiving of the second message (0021 IP network is a multimedia network, a H.323 network or a SIP network. And 0039 an H.323 gatekeeper is providing the services of the home environment 16. And fig.3 par 0051 FIG. 2, it can be said that the mobile phone can be regarded superfluous in this case, and that an Internet connection 13, 14 linking the equipment 6,8 with the Internet can be used for both sending and receiving the badge Id wherein the fig.1, the Numeral 15 SIP server, i.e. the first server sends the H.323/SIP message, i.e. a third message, over the links 13- 14, i.e. the third wireless, over Internet then to the equipment 1-2/6-8 of the wireless devices 5-7, i.e. the second cellular telephone set and fig.1, the Numeral 15 SIP server, i.e. first server sends the H.323/SIP message, i.e. a third message, over the internet 14 then to the equipment 1-2/6-8 of the wireless devices 5-7, i.e. the second cellular telephone set), from the above discussion it can be concluded that the SIP server conveys the mobile phone communication or message to the equipment 6,8 over internet via the radio links 13-14 , i.e. third wireless links 13-14, from the Internet to the equipment’s 6-8 ); and
receiving and storing, by the second cellular telephone set from the first server over the Internet using a third wireless network, the third message, in response to the sending of the third message ( Kliland discloses fig.3 par 0051 FIG. 2, it can be said that the mobile phone can be regarded superfluous in this case, and that an 13, 14 link is linking the equipment 6,8 with the Internet can be used for both sending and receiving the badge Id wherein the fig.1, the Numeral 15 SIP server, i.e. the first server sends the H.323/SIP message, i.e. a third message, over the links 13- 14, i.e. the third wireless, to the equipment 1-2/6-8 , i.e. the second cellular telephone set and fig.1, the Numeral 15 SIP server, i.e. first server sends the H.323/SIP message, i.e. a third message, over the internet link 14, i.e. over the third wireless network then to the equipment 1-2/6-8 of the wireless devices 5-7, i.e. the second cellular telephone set), from the above discussion it can be concluded that the SIP server conveys the mobile phone first communication , i.e. first identifier or message, i.e. second message, via GSM/UMTs to the equipment 6,8 over internet via the links 13-14 , i.e. third wireless links 13-14 communication , i.e. third message, to the equipment’s 6-8 over the Internet of SIP network 15. Wherein it can be seen the equipment’s 6-8 would be the second cellular telephone that received the third message from the sip server network 15, i.e. the first sever, over the third wireless network 14 and fig.1, fig.1, 0051 the Numeral 15 SIP server sends the H.323/SIP network 15 , i.e. a third wireless network, message, i.e. a third message (H.323 : Basically, the H.323 network may be a standard set by ITU which allows telephones on the general public telephone network to speak to computers connected to internet, The H.323 network operates over IP networks, which are typically wireless allowing for high-quality audio and video communication ), over the internet 14 then to the equipment 1-2/6-8 associated with the wireless devices 5-7, i.e. the second cellular telephone set wherein the equipment’s are adapted the H.323 protocol that enables the equipment to associated with the wireless devices 5-7 respectively and so sending the badge Id from the badge 4 to the equipment 6 or 8, via the equipment associated wireless device 5 or 7, i.e. the second cellular telephone set, thus, the wireless device/ the second cellular telephone set received the badge ID through the SIP message, i.e. third message, from the badge, i.e. the portable device and 0048 For security purposes, GSM information is for example encrypted so as to maintain the security within the PLMN network, while the H.323 network can by inherent functions provide corresponding security connections. In the H.323 network, a H.323 gatekeeper (UA) running the Personal Equipment Service (PES) over a call control API (CC-API). The CC-API can be any suitable CC-API, such as a proprietary type, a Telephone Application Interface (TAPI), Parly, Thus, the Equipment’s 6-8 can be considered as the second cellular telephone set).
As per claim 22. Kliland discloses the method according to claim 1, wherein the first, second, or third wireless network comprises, is based on, or uses, Ultra-Wideband (UWB) (Kliland teaches the 0010 which bandwidth should be set-up from the network towards the operable equipment? With the Bandwidth includes the UWB technology).
As per claim 23. Kliland discloses The method according to claim 1, wherein the first identifier comprises a telephone number, a Mobile Equipment Identifier (MEID) number, an International Mobile Equipment Identity (IMEI) number, or an Electronic Serial Number (ESN)( 0023 wirelessly communicating an equipment identifier from an equipment to be controlled to a mobile communication terminal, forwarding from said mobile communication terminal, via a gateway to an IP network, a first information set including said user identifier and equipment identifier , i.e. a cellular telephone identifier and/or a mobile terminal identifier i.e. a Mobile Equipment Identifier (MEID) number, to a User Agent (UA) in a Internet Protocol network ).
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
The following is a quotation of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 103(a) which forms the basis for all obviousness rejections set forth in this Office action:
(a) A patent may not be obtained though the invention is not identically disclosed or described as set forth in section 102, if the differences between the subject matter sought to be patented and the prior art are such that the subject matter as a whole would have been obvious at the time the invention was made to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which said subject matter pertains. Patentability shall not be negated by the manner in which the invention was made.
Claims 9-10 are rejected under pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 103(a) as being unpatentable over Kliland and ORourke US 2002/0161795.
As per claim 9. Kliland et al discloses the method according to claim 1, Kliland does not disclose wherein the portable device is integrated or co-located with a security device.
However, ORourke discloses wherein the portable device is integrated or co-located with a security device([018] The network architecture of FIG. 1 is exemplary only. The portable processing devices may operate in a variety of network environments involving one or more hierarchically arranged LANs or WANs including Ethernet-compatible LANs (used to connect different hospital departments, for example) and multiple Medical Interface Buses (MIBs) for corresponding multiple patients. In addition, a portable processing device is able to access the Internet via, integrated, a firewall. i.e. security device).
Kliland and ORourke are both considered to be analogous to the claimed invention because they are in the same field of networking.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to someone of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Kliland to incorporate the teachings of ORourke and provide a firewall for the portable device in the network. Doing so would provide a protection for the network device, thereby increasing prevention for the malicious traffic in the network.
As per claim 10. Kliland and ORourke discloses the method according to claim 9, ORourke discloses wherein the security device is a firewall(a portable processing device is able to access the Internet via a firewall, i.e. security device).
Claims 2, 4-8, 11-21 and 24 are rejected under pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 103(a) as being unpatentable over Kliland and Wu US 2007/0008954.
As per claim 2. Kliland discloses the method according to claim 1, Kliland discloses further comprising displaying, by a screen in the second cellular telephone set, an information in response to the third message.
Kliland discloses an information in response to the third message ( fig.1, fig.1, 0051 the Numeral 15 SIP server sends the H.323/SIP message, i.e. a third message, over the internet 14 then to the equipment 1-2/6-8 associated with the wireless devices 5-7, i.e. the second cellular telephone set wherein the equipment’s are adapted the H.323 protocol that enables the equipment to associated with the wireless devices 5-7 respectively and so sending the badge Id from the badge 4 to the equipment 6 or 8, via the equipment associated wireless device 5 or 7, i.e. the second cellular telephone set, thus, the wireless device received the badge ID through the SIP message from the badge, i.e. the portable device
Kliland does not disclose displaying, by a screen in the second cellular telephone set, an information in response of the message.
Wu discloses displaying, by a screen in the second cellular telephone set, an information in response of the message( fig.7, par 0042 the speech or audiovisual information can be transmitted to the telephone 120', i.e. the second cellular telephone, at a target end, wherein the via the mobile audiovisual data conversion device 56', i.e. a data from the device 56’ can be seen as a third message, on the target end, i.e. on the target end/ device 120’, i.e., the second cellular telephone, wherein a data as a third message is receiving and storing by the telephone 120’ and can further be transferred to and received by the mobile communication apparatus 62’, since the data can be further transferred from the telephone 120” to the mobile 62” , the screen would display the audiovisual data).
Kliland and Wu are both considered to be analogous to the claimed invention because they are in the same field of networking.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to someone of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Kliland to incorporate the teachings of Wu and provide a message in the telephone device.
Doing so would provide a protection for the network device, thereby increasing prevention for the malicious traffic in the network.
As per claim 4. Kliland discloses the method according to claim 3, Kliland does not explicitly disclose wherein the first and second cellular telephone sets are located in different cities, in different states, in different countries, or on different continents Kliland discloses
However, Wu discloses the method according to claim 3, wherein the first and second cellular telephone sets are located in different cities, in different states, in different countries, or on different continents (0042 The apparatus of the receiving end can be a portable computer 54 or a general desktop for facilitating the receiving of speech or audiovisual signal at any time and any location so as to achieve a bi-directional communication ).
Kliland and Wu are both considered to be analogous to the claimed invention because they are in the same field of networking.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to someone of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Kliland to incorporate the teachings of Wu and provide a message in the telephone device.
Doing so would provide a protection for the network device, thereby increasing prevention for the malicious traffic in the network.
As per claim 5. Kliland discloses the method according to claim 1, Kliland does not explicitly disclose wherein the first and second cellular telephone sets are located at a same geographical location
However, Wu discloses the method according to claim 1, wherein the first and second cellular telephone sets are located at a same geographical location (fig.7, 0037 It is noted that the relay server can be located on the local end, such as the relay server in a company, so that when a line comes, it can be transferred to the target computer according to the lookup table, or can be located in a third location, i.e. geograpical locations, other than the local end and the target end. The local end lacking the relay server can thus be firstly connected to the Internet by a network bridge for further connection to this relay server, and then the communication signal can be transferred to the target end by the transferring function).
Kliland and Wu are both considered to be analogous to the claimed invention because they are in the same field of networking. Therefore, it would have been obvious to someone of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Kliland to incorporate the teachings of Wu and provide a message in the telephone device. Doing so would provide a protection for the network device, thereby increasing prevention for the malicious traffic in the network.
As per clam 6. Kliland discloses Wu discloses the method according to claim 5, Kliland does not explicitly wherein the first and second cellular telephone sets are located in a same city, in a same state, or in a same country.
However, Wu discloses the method according to claim 5, wherein the first and second cellular telephone sets are located in a same city, in a same state, or in a same country (0042 The apparatus of the receiving end can be a portable computer 54 or a general desktop for facilitating the receiving of speech or audiovisual signal at any time and any location so as to achieve a bi-directional communication ).
Kliland and Wu are both considered to be analogous to the claimed invention because they are in the same field of networking. Therefore, it would have been obvious to someone of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Kliland to incorporate the teachings of Wu and provide a message in the telephone device. Doing so would provide a protection for the network device, thereby increasing prevention for the malicious traffic in the network.
As per claim 7. Kliland discloses The method according to claim 1, Kliland , par 0010/0021 discloses which bandwidth should be set-up from the network towards the operable equipment? wherein the first, second, or third wireless network comprises a Local Area Network (LAN), Wide Area Network (WAN), Metropolitan Area Network (MAN), Next Generation Network (NGN), or an intranet (0047 The personal profiles or settings, preferably stored in the home environment, are then through steps 25, 26, 27 and 28 forwarded from the home environment, by means of the network, to the mobile phone terminal. In turn, the mobile phone terminal, in step 29, forwards by short-range wireless means, such as e.g. Bluetooth technology devices, the profile to the equipment and which then is configured accordingly. It will be readily apparent to a person skilled in the art that the technology of the mobile phone terminal is not limiting for the invention, and that the mobile phone terminal in this situation can be based on any known or coming mobile phone technology (GSM, UMTS etc.) that is capable of communicating with a network and having an interface adapted to forward electronically to a short-range wireless device, information received via the network. It will also be understood that the location information can be used for triggering location dependent services provided by the equipment to be controlled, by the profile or settings provided by the home environment and intended for to the equipment), Kliland fails to teach telephone.
However, Wu discloses The method according to claim 1, wherein the first, second, or third wireless network comprises a Local Area Network (LAN), Wide Area Network (WAN), Metropolitan Area Network (MAN), Next Generation Network (NGN), or an intranet (fig.7, internet 123 and 0016] The present invention provides a method for transmitting audiovisual data using a mobile conversion device, in which audiovisual data is transmitted from a mobile communication device to a device on the other side via the mobile communication apparatus, and by using a relay server coupled to the Internet, to connect the computers on two ends or from a computer to a mobile communication device. The above-described mobile audiovisual data conversion device includes an analog-to-digital conversion function, a dialing function, and a function of connecting to a computer or a telephone device by a communication port mounted therein). Kliland and Wu are both considered to be analogous to the claimed invention because they are in the same field of networking. Therefore, it would have been obvious to someone of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Kliland to incorporate the teachings of Wu and provide a message in the telephone device. Doing so would provide a protection for the network device, thereby increasing prevention for the malicious traffic in the network.
As per claim 8. Kliland discloses The method according to claim 1, wherein the portable device is integrated or co-located with a router, a NAT-enabled computer or a gateway (0048 FIG. 1 also comprises a gateway (GW) function 11, 12 between the Public Land Mobile Network (PLMN) and the H.323 network. For security purposes, GSM information is for example encrypted so as to maintain the security within the PLMN network, while the H.323 network can by inherent functions provide corresponding security connections. In the H.323 network, a H.323 gatekeeper (UA) (not shown in FIG. 1, but illustrated by the sequence diagrams of FIGS. 2 and 3) is communicating with the Service Agent (SA) (referred to as the "service layer" in FIG. 1)), Kliland fails to teach telephone. However, Wu discloses The method according to claim 1, wherein the portable device is integrated or co-located with a router, a NAT-enabled computer or a gateway (fig.7, 0006[0006] In practice, VoIP can be divided into three categories, PC-to-PC, PC-to-telephone, and telephone-to-telephone. PC-to-PC executes a computer-to-network communication software such as, for example, Skype or Net2Phome on a PC. If the two parties both have this software, then the direct communication by telephone can be achieved. PC-to-telephone executes a software on the PC, and after the PC is connected to a network and to the VoIP connection apparatus of the ISP, the user directly communicates by the household telephone. Telephone-to-telephone directly dials the VoIP apparatus of the ISP, which is already connected to the VoIP apparatus at the location of the other party. After dialing the telephone number through the local telecommunication network, communication can be achieved). Kliland and Wu are both considered to be analogous to the claimed invention because they are in the same field of networking. Therefore, it would have been obvious to someone of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Kliland to incorporate the teachings of Wu and provide a message in the telephone device. Doing so would provide a protection for the network device, thereby increasing prevention for the malicious traffic in the network.
As per claim 11. Kliland discloses The method according to claim 1, wherein the first, second, or third message is delivered as part of a real-time service(0023 wirelessly communicating a user identifier from a user identity badge to a mobile communication terminal, wirelessly communicating an equipment identifier from an equipment to be controlled to a mobile communication terminal, forwarding from said mobile communication terminal, via a gateway to an IP network, a first information set including said user identifier and equipment identifier and/or a mobile terminal identifier to a User Agent (UA) in a Internet Protocol network, forwarding from said UA said first information set, via a Call Control API (CC-API), to a service Agent (SA), returning from said SA a second information set including said predetermined user profile, via said Call Control API (CC-API), to said UA, ), Kliland fails to teach telephone.
However, Wu discloses The method according to claim 1, wherein the first, second, or third message is delivered as part of a real-time service (fig.7 a communication link, i.e. send a dial as a first message as a first wireless network, between the portable phone 62 and a local phone 12. And Fig.7, Wherein the relay server received the digital signal as a second message form the phone 120, i.e. the first cellular telephone set over the internet 52 and fig.7, par 0042 the speech or audiovisual information , i..e a first message, can be transmitted to the telephone 120', i.e. the second cellular telephone, at a target end, wherein the via the mobile audiovisual data conversion device 56', i.e. a data from the device 56’ can be seen as a third message, on the target end, i.e. on the target end/ device 120’, i.e., the second cellular telephone, wherein a data as a third message is receiving and storing by the telephone 120’ ).
Kliland and Wu are both considered to be analogous to the claimed invention because they are in the same field of networking. Therefore, it would have been obvious to someone of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Kliland to incorporate the teachings of Wu and provide a message in the telephone device. Doing so would provide a protection for the network device, thereby increasing prevention for the malicious traffic in the network.
As per claim 12. Kliland discloses the method according to claim I, Kliland discloses wherein the first, second, or third message includes audio or video information (0043 the equipment 6, 8 or 10, is a video or sound player. Depending on the badge Id transmitted from the badge 4 and forwarded to the home environment 16, the corresponding favorite video and/or sound programming are forwarded to the equipment 6, 8 or 10 to be enjoyed by the user 1). Kliland fails to teach audio.
However, Wu discloses the method according to claim I, wherein the first, second, or third message includes audio or video information (0044 the head office needs to have a telephone 120' connected to the mobile audiovisual conversion device 56' and connected to the Internet 52 through a computer 53 or an apparatus connected network (e.g., network bridge, or network sharer). If it is intended to establish the branch companies or service centers in Area A, Area B, and Area C, then only corresponding software and hardware need to be set up. For example, Area A at least includes telephone 120a, mobile audiovisual conversion device 56a and the network bridge 80a. Area B at least includes telephone 120b, mobile audiovisual conversion device 56b and the network bridge 80b. Area C at least includes telephone 120c, mobile audiovisual conversion device 56c and the network bridge 80c. The telephone is connected to the mobile audiovisual conversion device and connected to the Internet 52 through the network bridge). Kliland and Wu are both considered to be analogous to the claimed invention because they are in the same field of networking. Therefore, it would have been obvious to someone of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Kliland to incorporate the teachings of Wu and provide a message in the telephone device. Doing so would provide a protection for the network device, thereby increasing prevention for the malicious traffic in the network.
As pee claim 13. Kliland discloses The method according to claim 12, wherein the respective first, second, or third message is part of VoIP, video conferencing, IPTV, Internet telephony service, or any combination thereof (0048 For security purposes, GSM information is for example encrypted so as to maintain the security within the PLMN network, while the H.323 network can by inherent functions provide corresponding security connections. In the H.323 network, a H.323 gatekeeper (UA) (not shown in FIG. 1, but illustrated by the sequence diagrams of FIGS. 2 and 3) is communicating with the Service Agent (SA) (referred to as the "service layer" in FIG. 1) running the Personal Equipment Service (PES) over a call control API (CC-API). The CC-API can be any suitable CC-API, such as a proprietary type, a Telepohone Application Interface (TAPI), Parly, etc. The H.323 GK (UA) is responsible for charging the user, i.e. for sending Call Detail Records (CDRs) to a per se known billing server (not shown) of the network, as well as for authenticating the user. If a quality of service (QoS) is specified and/or required, the UA can also be responsible for setting up a connections from the UA towards the equipment with a certain QoS. The SA is referred to as the service layer in FIG. 1). Kliland fails to teach telephone, However, Wu The method according to claim 12, wherein the respective first, second, or third message is part of VoIP, video conferencing, IPTV, Internet telephony service, or any combination thereof (0006VoIP can be divided into three categories, PC-to-PC, PC-to-telephone, and telephone-to-telephone. PC-to-PC executes a computer-to-network communication software). Kliland and Wu are both considered to be analogous to the claimed invention because they are in the same field of networking. Therefore, it would have been obvious to someone of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Kliland to incorporate the teachings of Wu and provide a message in the telephone device. Doing so would provide a protection for the network device, thereby increasing prevention for the malicious traffic in the network.
As per claim 14. Kliland discloses The method according to claim 1, where the first server comprises, is part of, or is integrated with, a web server, a database server, a mail server, an FTP server, a DHCP server, a DNS server, or any combination thereof([0039] The home environment 16 is a location where the user 1 keeps or stores her/his profiles according to e.g. GSM's Home Location Register (HLR). The home environment 16 includes an electronic memory means to hold or store the personal profiles, the memory means preferably being an electronic database (DB) system. In situations where the network is H.323 enabled, preferably an H.323 gatekeeper is providing the services of the home environment 16. However, in a SIP enabled network, preferably a SIP server would perform these tasks). Kliland fails to teach DNS.
However, Wu discloses The method according to claim 1, where the first server comprises, is part of, or is integrated with, a web server, a database server, a mail server, an FTP server, a DHCP server, a DNS server, or any combination thereof ([0013] The user utilizes the local phone 11 to call the charging system 10, to connect to the Internet 15 through an uplink computer 16 passing through the uplink switchboard 13 provided by the system, to connect to a phone switchboard system represented by the local switchboard 14 through a downlink computer 18, and then to call the target phone 12. The phone 12 can be a cell phone or a general household telephone, and the charging system 10 usually includes devices such as, for example, a commercial telephone switchboard, or a computer server connected to a network, thereby making an inbound communication signal outbound to telephone switch systems in two locations).
Kliland and Wu are both considered to be analogous to the claimed invention because they are in the same field of networking. Therefore, it would have been obvious to someone of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Kliland to incorporate the teachings of Wu and provide a message in the telephone device. Doing so would provide a protection for the network device, thereby increasing prevention for the malicious traffic in the network.
As per claim 15. Kliland discloses the method according to claim 1, wherein the portable device comprises a laptop (0048 a wireless device 3, such as e.g. a Bluetooth technology device), Kliland fail to teach the telephone. However, Wu discloses the method according to claim 1, wherein the portable device comprises a laptop (fig.7, numeral 54 laptop computer).
Kliland and Wu are both considered to be analogous to the claimed invention because they are in the same field of networking. Therefore, it would have been obvious to someone of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Kliland to incorporate the teachings of Wu and provide a message in the telephone device. Doing so would provide a protection for the network device, thereby increasing prevention for the malicious traffic in the network.
As per claim 16. Kliland discloses The method according to claim 1, Kliland discloses further comprising encrypting, by the first cellular telephone set, the received first message, and wherein the second message comprises the encrypted first message(0006] Badge and user authentication as well as general security aspects as encryption and integrity ), Kliland fails the telephone. However, Wu discloses The method according to claim 1, further comprising encrypting, by the first cellular telephone set, the received first message, and wherein the second message comprises the encrypted first message (fig.7 a communication link, i.e. send a dial as a first message as a first wireless network, between the portable phone 62 and a local phone 12. And Fig.7, Wherein the relay server received the digital signal as a second message form the phone 120, i.e. the first cellular telephone set over the internet 52 and fig.7, par 0042 the speech or audiovisual information , i..e a first message, can be transmitted to the telephone 120', i.e. the second cellular telephone, at a target end, wherein the via the mobile audiovisual data conversion device 56', i.e. a data from the device 56’ can be seen as a third message, on the target end, i.e. on the target end/ device 120’, i.e., the second cellular telephone, wherein a data as a third message is receiving and storing by the telephone 120’ ).
Kliland and Wu are both considered to be analogous to the claimed invention because they are in the same field of networking. Therefore, it would have been obvious to someone of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Kliland to incorporate the teachings of Wu and provide a message in the telephone device. Doing so would provide a protection for the network device, thereby increasing prevention for the malicious traffic in the network.
As per claim 17. Kliland discloses, wherein the first server is identified in the Internet using a first IP address, wherein the first IP address is stored in the first cellular telephone set, and wherein the sending, by the first cellular telephone set to the first server over the Internet of the second message uses the stored first IP address(0013 automatic equipment remote control according to a predetermined user profile, comprises: a user identity badge provided with a first wireless communication device having a first identifier, controllable equipment automatically responsive to a user profile and provided with and connected to a second wireless communication device having a second identifier, a mobile communication terminal adapted to communicate by an Internet Protocol (IP) network, said mobile communication terminal being provided with and connected to a third wireless communication device having a third identifier, and a user profile server connected to said IP network and holding the predetermined user profile ). Kliland fails the telephone.
However, Wu discloses the method according to claim 1, wherein the first server is identified in the Internet using a first IP address, wherein the first IP address is stored in the first cellular telephone set, and wherein the sending, by the first cellular telephone set to the first server over the Internet of the second message uses the stored first IP address (0030] In a conventional VoIP device, the analog speech signal is converted into a speech packet for transmission by the data network through a switchboard. Then, the speech packet is transmitted to the receiving end, and again converted into an analog speech signal by the switchboards for reception by a regular phone or a cell phone. Alternatively, both sides have to own a VoIP phone with a VoIP function therein. Firstly, an IP address and other necessaries must be established. Then, communication can be established. The main purpose of the VoIP device is to lower the telephone bill in a manner of an instantaneous phone).
Kliland and Wu are both considered to be analogous to the claimed invention because they are in the same field of networking. Therefore, it would have been obvious to someone of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Kliland to incorporate the teachings of Wu and provide a message in the telephone device. Doing so would provide a protection for the network device, thereby increasing prevention for the malicious traffic in the network.
As per claim 18. Kliland discloses the method according to claim 1, wherein the first, second, or third wireless network comprises, is based on, or uses, a Personal Area network (0017 automatic equipment remote control according to a predetermined user profile, comprises: a user identity badge provided with a first wireless communication device having a first identifier, controllable equipment automatically responsive to a user profile, said controllable equipment provided with and connected to a second wireless communication device having a second identifier, and connected to an Internet Protocol (IP) network, and a user profile server connected to said IP network and holding the predetermined user profile, wherein, said first and second wireless communication devices are adapted to communicate with one another, said first wireless communication device is adapted to communicate to said second wireless communication device, when in-range, the first identifier, said controllable equipment is adapted to communicate to the user profile server, via the Internet Protocol (IP) network, the first and second identifiers, and the user profile server is adapted to communicate to the controllable equipment, via the Internet Protocol (IP) network, on basis of the second identifier, the predetermined user profile in response to receiving the first and second identifiers. ). Kliland fails for the PAN.
However, Wu discloses the method according to claim 1, wherein the first, second, or third wireless network comprises, is based on, or uses, a Personal Area network (PAN)(0035 The connection between the communication device on the local end, i.e. personal area network, and the receiving communication apparatus is thus established.).
Kliland and Wu are both considered to be analogous to the claimed invention because they are in the same field of networking.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to someone of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Kliland to incorporate the teachings of Wu and provide a local area for the telephone device.
Doing so would provide a telephone service, thereby increasing a telephone service.
As per claim 19, Kliland and Wu discloses the method according to claim 18, Kliland discloses wherein the PAN comprises, is based on, or uses, Bluetooth( fig.1 0017 a user identity badge provided with a first wireless communication device/ the Bluetooth driver/mobile 2, having a first identifier , i.e. first message, , wherein the Bluetooth connection, i.e. a first wireless network, with the first message and 0022 the first and second wireless communication devices are Bluetooth enabled wireless communication devices ).
As per claim 20. Kliland discloses the method according to claim 1, Kliland discloses wherein the first, second, or third wireless network comprises, is based on, or uses, a cellular network(0023 wirelessly communicating a user identifier from a user identity badge to a mobile communication terminal, wirelessly communicating an equipment identifier from an equipment to be controlled to a mobile communication terminal, forwarding from said mobile communication terminal, via a gateway to an IP network, a first information set including said user identifier and equipment identifier and/or a mobile terminal identifier to a User Agent (UA) in a Internet Protocol network). Kliland fails to disclose telephone.
However, Wu discloses the method according to claim 1, wherein the first, second, or third wireless network comprises, is based on, or uses, a cellular network (claim 5 wherein the communication device is a mobile phone, a PDA or a mobile communication apparatus having the function of a cellular phone. And 0044 the head office needs to have a telephone 120' connected to the mobile audiovisual conversion device 56' and connected to the Internet 52 through a computer 53 or an apparatus connected network (e.g., network bridge, or network sharer). If it is intended to establish the branch companies or service centers in Area A, Area B, and Area C, then only corresponding software and hardware need to be set up. For example, Area A at least includes telephone 120a, mobile audiovisual conversion device 56a and the network bridge 80a. Area B at least includes telephone 120b, mobile audiovisual conversion device 56b and the network bridge 80b. Area C at least includes telephone 120c, mobile audiovisual conversion device 56c and the network bridge 80c. The telephone is connected to the mobile audiovisual conversion device and connected to the Internet 52 through the network bridge).
Kliland and Wu are both considered to be analogous to the claimed invention because they are in the same field of networking.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to someone of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Kliland to incorporate the teachings of Wu and provide a message in the telephone device.
Doing so would provide a telephone service, thereby increasing a telephone service.
As per claim 21, Kliland disclose the method of according to claim 1, Kliland discloses the method of clam according to claim 20, wherein the cellular network comprises, is based on, or uses, Global System for Mobile communication (GSM), 2 G, 2.5 G, 3 G, 3.5 G, Enhanced Data rates for GSM Evolution (EDGE), or any combination thereof ( 0039, The home environment 16 is a location where the user 1 keeps or stores her/his profiles according to e.g. GSM 's Home Location Register (HLR). The home environment 16 includes an electronic memory means to hold or store the personal profiles, the memory means preferably being an electronic database (DB) system. In situations where the network is H.323 enabled, preferably an H.323 gatekeeper is providing the services of the home environment 16. However, in a SIP enabled network, preferably a SIP server would perform these tasks.). Kliland fails the telephone.
However, Wu disclose wherein the cellular network comprises, is based on, or uses, Global System for Mobile communication (GSM), 2 G, 2.5 G, 3 G, 3.5 G, Enhanced Data rates for GSM Evolution (EDGE), or any combination thereof (claim 5 wherein the communication device is a mobile phone, a PDA or a mobile communication apparatus having the function of a cellular phone. And claim 18 wherein the portable computer is connected to the Internet in a wireless manner).
Kliland and Wu are both considered to be analogous to the claimed invention because they are in the same field of networking.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to someone of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Kliland to incorporate the teachings of Wu and provide a message in the telephone device.
Doing so would provide a telephone service, thereby increasing a telephone service.
As per clam 24. Kliland discloses the method according to claim 1, wherein the first identifier comprises a first Medium Access Control (MAC), or a first Internet Protocol (IP) address that identifies the portable device in the Internet ( 0017 connected to an Internet Protocol (IP) network, and a user profile server connected to said IP network and holding the predetermined user profile, wherein, said first and second wireless communication devices are adapted to communicate with one another, said first wireless communication device is adapted to communicate to said second wireless communication device, when in-range, the first identifier, said controllable equipment is adapted to communicate to the user profile server, via the Internet Protocol (IP) network, the first and second identifiers, and the user profile server is adapted to communicate to the controllable equipment, via the Internet Protocol (IP) network, on basis of the second identifier, the predetermined user profile in response to receiving the first and second identifiers.), Kliland fails to disclose MAC.
However, Wu discloses the method according to claim 1, wherein the first identifier comprises a first Medium Access Control (MAC), or a first Internet Protocol (IP) address that identifies the portable device in the Internet ( 0035 FIG. 4, the transferring interface software in the relay server is set by using the computer on the target end. The relay server is set to identify the connected mobile audiovisual conversion device (step S131), and then, the communication device on the local end calls the phone on the local end (step S132). After putting the line through, the communication signal is transmitted to a mobile audiovisual conversion device (step S133). Then, the communication signal is converted to a digital signal by the mobile audiovisual conversion device (step 134), and the digital signal is transmitted to the relay server, which is connected to the Internet (step S135) depending on the contents of the communication signal and the lookup table for transferring the phone or the computer on the target end in the server, which may comprise a comparison table for IPs or MAC addresses of the computers on two sides, or member numbers of video conference. The digital signal is transmitted to a computer on the target end via the Internet according to this lookup table (step S136). When the computer on the target end is shut down, the audiovisual or speech message of the communication can be stored in the memory of the relay server, or when the computer on the target end is under using, it can be previously transmitted to the mobile audiovisual conversion device on the target end according to the transferring setting (step S137), converted into analog signal, transferred to the phone on the target end through the dialing function contained therein (step S138), and dialed to a communication apparatus, such as a mobile phone or other wireless communication apparatus, according to the setting (step S139). The connection between the communication device on the local end and the receiving communication apparatus is thus established).
Kliland and Wu are both considered to be analogous to the claimed invention because they are in the same field of networking.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to someone of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Kliland to incorporate the teachings of Wu and provide a message in the telephone device.
Doing so would provide a telephone service, thereby increasing a telephone service.
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 ABU S SHOLEMAN whose telephone number is (571)270-7314. The examiner can normally be reached EST: 9am-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, JORGE ORTIZ CRIADO can be reached at 571-272-7624. 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.
/ABU S SHOLEMAN/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2496
Prosecution Insights