Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status
The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
DETAILED ACTION
This action is responsive to the amend filed on 12/22/2025 to the Application filed on 3/6/2024.
This application claims benefit of Priority under 35 U.S.C. §119 (a) from Turkish Patent Application No TR 2023/002461, filed on 3/6/2023.
Claims 1-5 and 7-14 are pending in the case. Claims 1, 13, and 14 are independent claims. Claim 6 has been canceled.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 103 which forms the basis for all obviousness rejections set forth in this Office action:
A patent for a claimed invention may not be obtained, notwithstanding that the claimed invention is not identically disclosed as set forth in section 102, if the differences between the claimed invention and the prior art are such that the claimed invention as a whole would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which the claimed invention pertains. Patentability shall not be negated by the manner in which the invention was made.
This application currently names joint inventors. In considering patentability of the claims the examiner presumes that the subject matter of the various claims was commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the claimed invention(s) absent any evidence to the contrary. Applicant is advised of the obligation under 37 CFR 1.56 to point out the inventor and effective filing dates of each claim that was not commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the later invention in order for the examiner to consider the applicability of 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(C) for any potential 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) prior art against the later invention.
Claims 1, 5, 7-8, and 11-14 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Murphy et al., U.S. Patent Application Publication No. 20130092033, filed on 10/17/2011 (hereinafter Murphy) in view of Boccotti et al., U.S. Patent Application Publication No. 20230224185, filed on 1/13/2022 (hereinafter Boccotti).
As for independent claim 1, Murphy discloses method and a control unit of an appliance,
the appliance including a local user interface located at the appliance and a control menu with one or more submenus for at least one of selecting an operation program or setting an operation parameter of the appliance, and
(Murphy paragraph [0001], [0037], [0053]-[0056] discloses appliance displaying on local user interface with control menu, food type options tiles 320 as shown in fig. 6, with submenus, subcategory options 330 as shown in fig. 7, for setting parameter)
control unit configured to: detect a user input at the local user interface for selecting a submenu of the control menu; and cause the interface to provide the selected submenu in reaction to the detected user input
(Murphy paragraph [0001], [0037]-[0038], [0053]-[0056] discloses control unit 40 detecting receiving a input of selection of menu item protein displays selectable submenu subcategory option tiles 330 as shown in figs. 6 and 7); and
send an interface signal in reaction to the detected user input; the interface signal is indicative of the selected submenu; and the interface signal is indicative of an instruction to at least one of: output a notification regarding the selected submenu at the user device, or automatically start the with the selected submenu being displayed on a screen of the user device.
(Murphy paragraph [0001], [0037]-[0038], [0041]-[0044], [0053]-[0057] discloses controller 40 detecting user input of selecting food type protein and automatically displaying submenu “meats, poultry, fish, shellfish and eggs” as shown in figs. 6 and 7; “the cooking controller 40 may include or otherwise be in communication with processing circuitry 100”, Murphy [0041]; “the processing circuitry 100 to receive an indication of a user input at the user interface 140 and/or to provide an audible, visual, mechanical or other output to the user”, Murphy [0044]).
Murphy does not appear to explicitly disclose method and the appliance configured to be controlled by using a remote user interface on a user device, the control unit configured to: cause the remote user interface to provide the selected submenu on the user device and control unit configured to send an interface signal to at least one of the user device or a processing unit with which the user device interacts, and automatically start the remote user interface with the selected submenu being displayed on a screen of the user device.
However, Boccotti discloses method and
appliance configured to be controlled by using a remote user interface on a user device, and
(Boccotti paragraph [0021], [0031]-[0036] discloses cooking appliance 12 configured to be controlled by a remote user interface 34 on a user device 16 as shown in figs. 1A-5)
the control unit configured to: cause the remote user interface to provide the menu options on the user device
(Boccotti paragraph [0021], [0031]-[0036] discloses remote user interface 34 providing options for selection to control the appliance 12 by initiate calibration, optimize calibration, and initiate cooking for as shown in figs 3-5); and
send an interface signal to at least one of the user device or a processing unit with which the user device interacts, and automatically start the remote user interface with the menu options being displayed on a screen of the user device
(Boccotti paragraph [0021]-[0026], [0028], [0030]-[0031] discloses user device 16 in communication with communication interface 22 of cooking device via server automatically starting the remote user interface 34 with selectable menu option for calibrating cooking device 12 on the display screen of user device 16 based on received indication from cooking device 12 as show in figs. 3-5).
Accordingly, it would have been obvious to person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine Boccotti’s appliance configured to be controlled by using a remote user interface on a user device, and the control unit configured to: cause the remote user interface to provide the menu options on the user device and send an interface signal to at least one of the user device or a processing unit with which the user device interacts, and automatically start the remote user interface with the menu options being displayed on a screen of the user device with Murphy’s control unit configured to: detect a user input at the local user interface for selecting a submenu of the control menu; and cause the interface to provide the selected submenu in reaction to the detected user input and send an interface signal in reaction to the detected user input; the interface signal is indicative of the selected submenu; and the interface signal is indicative of an instruction to at least one of: output a notification regarding the selected submenu at the user device, or automatically start the with the selected submenu being displayed on a screen of the user device for a method and appliance configured to be controlled by using a remote user interface on a user device, the control unit configured to: detect a user input at the local user interface for selecting a submenu of the control menu; cause the remote user interface to provide the selected submenu on the user device, in reaction to the detected user input and send an interface signal to at least one of the user device or a processing unit with which the user device interacts, in reaction to the detected user input; the interface signal is indicative of the selected submenu; and the interface signal is indicative of an instruction to at least one of: output a notification regarding the selected submenu at the user device, or automatically start the remote user interface with the selected submenu being displayed on a screen of the user device.
One would have been motivated to make such a combination for the benefit of being able to utilize user’s device as an additional screen space to display additional information depending on device capabilities (Boccotti [0026]).
As for claim 5, limitations of parent claim 1 have been discussed above. Murphy discloses method and control unit wherein:
the control unit is configured to cause the user device to automatically start the interface with the selected submenu being displayed on a screen
(Murphy paragraph [0001], [0037]-[0038], [0053]-[0057] discloses controller 40 configured to cause automatically start the interface with the selected submenu “meats, poultry, fish, shellfish and eggs” being displayed on a screen).
Murphy does not appear to explicitly disclose method and control unit configured to start the remote interface with submenu being displayed on a screen of the user device. However, Boccotti discloses method and control unit wherein:
the control unit is configured to start the remote interface with menu option being displayed on a screen of the user device
(Boccotti paragraph [0021]-[0026], [0031]-[0031] discloses automatically starting the remote user interface 34 with selectable menu option for calibrating cooking device 12 on the display screen of user device 16 as show in figs. 3-5).
Accordingly, it would have been obvious to person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine Boccotti’s appliance with control unit configured to start the remote interface with menu option being displayed on a screen of the user device with Murphy’s appliance with control unit configured to cause the user device to automatically start the interface with the selected submenu being displayed on a screen for an appliance with control unit configured to cause the user device to automatically start the remote user interface with the selected submenu being displayed on a screen of the user device. One would have been motivated to make such a combination for the benefit of being able to utilize user’s device as an additional screen space to display additional information depending on device capabilities (Boccotti [0026]).
As for claim 7, limitations of parent claim 1 have been discussed above. Boccetti discloses method and control unit wherein: the control unit is configured to
send the interface signal to the intermediate processing unit or to a server; and
(Boccotti paragraph [0004], [0021], [0024] discloses cooking appliance comprising a control module in communication with the remote server)
the user device includes a software application configured to interact with the processing unit to provide the remote user interface at the user device.
(Boccotti paragraph [0021]-[0026], [0031] discloses software application provided on user interface 34 is configured to interact with controller 20 of the cooking device 12).
Accordingly, it would have been obvious to person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine Boccotti with Murphy for the benefit of being able to utilize user’s device as an additional screen space to display additional information depending on device capabilities (Boccotti [0026]).
As for claim 8, limitations of parent claim 1 have been discussed above. Murphy discloses method and control unit wherein:
the selected submenu includes a set of menu points; and a menu point is associated with an operation program of the appliance being selected when selecting the menu point
(Murphy paragraph [0001], [0038], [0053]-[0057] discloses the submenu includes menu point “meats, poultry, fish, shellfish and eggs” as shown in fig. 7 and selection of menu point “meat” is associated with operation of displaying additional menu options “chilled or frozen” as shown in fig. 8).
As for claim 11, limitations of parent claim 1 have been discussed above. Boccetti discloses method and control unit wherein
the control unit is configured to communicate with at least one of the user device or an intermediate processing unit for providing the remote user interface on the user device via a wired or wireless data communication network.
(Boccotti paragraph [0021], [0028], [0031] discloses control unit 20 of the cooking device 12 communicates with mobile device 16 via communication interface 22 through wired or wireless connection to provide a remote user interface 34 as shown in figs. 2 and 3).
Accordingly, it would have been obvious to person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine Boccotti with Murphy for the benefit of being able to utilize user’s device as an additional screen space to display additional information depending on device capabilities (Boccotti [0026]).
As for claim 12, limitations of parent claim 1 have been discussed above. Murphy discloses method and control unit is configured to
receive a control signal indicative of a menu point of the selected submenu having been selected; and operate the appliance in dependence on the selected menu point.
(Murphy paragraph [0001], [0037]-[0038], [0053]-[0057] discloses the submenu includes menu point “meats, poultry, fish, shellfish and eggs” as shown in fig. 7 and controller 40 receiving selection of menu point “meat” and operating the appliance to displaying additional menu options “chilled or frozen” based on the selected menu point as shown in fig. 8).
Murphy does not appear to explicitly disclose method and control unit configured to receive menu point selected at the remote user interface on the user device. However, Boccotti discloses method and control unit configured to
receive a control signal indicative of a menu option having been selected at the remote user interface on the user device; and operate the appliance in dependence on the selected menu option
(Boccotti paragraph [0031]-[0033] discloses selecting option to initiate calibration routine on a remote interface 34 of user device 16 and operating the cooking appliance 12 to perform the calibration routine in response to the user selection as shown in figs. 3-5).
Accordingly, it would have been obvious to person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine Boccotti’s appliance with control unit configured to receive a control signal indicative of a menu option having been selected at the remote user interface on the user device; and operate the appliance in dependence on the selected menu option and Murphy’s appliance with control unit configured to receive a control signal indicative of a menu point of the selected submenu having been selected; and operate the appliance in dependence on the selected menu point for a method and control unit configured to receive a control signal indicative of a menu point of the selected submenu having been selected at the remote user interface on the user device; and operate the appliance in dependence on the selected menu point. One would have been motivated to make such a combination for the benefit of being able to utilize user’s device as an additional screen space to display additional information depending on device capabilities (Boccotti [0026]).
As for claim 13, claim 13 incorporates substantially similar subject matter as claimed in claim 1, and is rejected along the same rationale.
As for claim 14, claim 14 reflects the method comprising computer executable instructions for implementing the article of manufacture as claimed in claim 1, and is rejected along the same rationale.
Claims 2 and 3 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Murphy in view of Boccotti in view of Mensah et al., U.S. Patent Application Publication No. 20220021684, filed on 7/14/2021 (hereinafter Mensah).
As for claim 2, limitations of parent claim 1 have been discussed above. Murphy discloses method and control unit configured to display submenu
(Murphy paragraph [0001], [0037]-[0038], [0053]-[0056] discloses control unit 40 displays selectable submenu subcategory option tiles 330 as shown in figs. 6 and 7).
Murphy does not appear to explicitly disclose method and control unit configured to cause the user device to output a notification to the user; and the notification includes a link to the selected submenu within the remote user interface. However, Mensah discloses method and control unit configured to
cause the user device to output a notification to the user; and the notification includes a link to the menu options within the remote user interface
(Mensah paragraph [0099], [0109], [0112], [0114] discloses user mobile device 303 receiving notification with a link to menu options “Adjust 1st Floor Thermostat” and “Unlock Front Door” on the interface of user mobile device 303).
Accordingly, it would have been obvious to person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine Mensah’s appliance with control unit configured to cause the user device to output a notification to the user; and the notification includes a link to the menu options within the remote user interface with Murphy’s appliance with control unit configured to display submenu with Boccetti for an appliance with control unit configured to cause the user device to output a notification to the user; and the notification includes a link to the selected submenu within the remote user interface. One would have been motivated to make such a combination for the benefit of being able to utilize user’s device as an additional screen space to display additional information and to be able to control appliance remotely.
As for claim 3, limitations of parent claim 1 have been discussed above. Murphy discloses method and control unit configured to display submenu
(Murphy paragraph [0001], [0037]-[0038], [0053]-[0056] discloses control unit 40 displays selectable submenu subcategory option tiles 330 as shown in figs. 6 and 7).
Murphy does not appear to explicitly disclose method and control unit wherein the notification is configured to cause the selected submenu to be automatically provided, and notably displayed, within the remote user interface on the user device, in response to selecting the notification. However, Mensah disclose method and control unit wherein
the notification is configured to cause the selected menu to be automatically provided, and notably displayed, within the remote user interface on the user device, in response to selecting the notification
(Mensah paragraph [0099], [0109], [0112], [0114] discloses user selection of notification link provides display of menu options “Adjust 1st Floor Thermostat” and “Unlock Front Door” on the interface of user mobile device 303).
Accordingly, it would have been obvious to person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine Mensah’s appliance with control unit wherein the notification is configured to cause the selected menu to be automatically provided, and notably displayed, within the remote user interface on the user device, in response to selecting the notification with Murphy’s appliance with control unit configured to display submenu and Boccetti for an appliance with control unit wherein the notification is configured to cause the selected submenu to be automatically provided, and notably displayed, within the remote user interface on the user device, in response to selecting the notification. One would have been motivated to make such a combination for the benefit of being able to utilize user’s device as an additional screen space to display additional information and to be able to control appliance remotely.
Claim 4 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Murphy in view of Boccotti in view of Mensah in view of Finkelstein, U.S. Patent Application Publication No. 20090070708, filed on 7/14/2021 (hereinafter Finkelstein).
As for claim 4, limitations of parent claim 1 have been discussed above. Murphy discloses method and control unit configured to display submenu
(Murphy paragraph [0001], [0037]-[0038], [0053]-[0056] discloses control unit 40 displays selectable submenu subcategory option tiles 330 as shown in figs. 6 and 7).
Murphy does not appear to explicitly disclose method and control unit wherein the notification includes at least one of a text-based or speech-based notification, indicating to the user that selection of a menu point of the selected submenu can be performed at the remote user interface. However, Mensah discloses method and control unit wherein
the notification includes at least one of a text-based or speech-based notification, indicating to the user that selection of a menu point of the selected menu can be performed at the remote user interface
(Mensah paragraph [0099], [0109], [0112], [0114], [0121] disclose notification includes text indication “Adjust 1st Floor Thermostat” and “Unlock Front Door” when selected adjusts thermostat and unlocks the front door).
Accordingly, it would have been obvious to person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine Mensah’s appliance with control unit wherein the notification includes at least one of a text-based or speech-based notification, indicating to the user that selection of a menu point of the selected menu can be performed at the remote user interface with Murphy’s appliance with control unit configured to display submenu with Boccetti for an appliance with control unit wherein the notification includes at least one of a text-based or speech-based notification, indicating to the user that selection of a menu point of the selected submenu can be performed at the remote user interface. One would have been motivated to make such a combination for the benefit of being able to utilize user’s device as an additional screen space to display additional information and to be able to control appliance remotely.
Murphy does not appear to explicitly disclose method and control unit wherein the notification includes at least one of an acoustic or a haptic stimulus for drawing the user’s attention to the at least one of text-based or speech-based notification. However, Finkelstein discloses method and control unit wherein
the notification includes at least one of an acoustic or a haptic stimulus for drawing the user’s attention to the at least one of text-based or speech-based notification.
(Finkelstein paragraph [0050] discloses notification includes audible sound from the device).
Accordingly, it would have been obvious to person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine Finkelstein with Murphy and Mensah for the benefit of being able to quickly gain user’s attention to the notification.
Claims 9 and 10 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Murphy in view of Boccotti in view of Choi et al., U.S. Patent Application Publication No. 20230111529, filed on 12/13/2022 (hereinafter Choi).
As for claim 9, limitations of parent claim 1 have been discussed above. Choi discloses method and control unit wherein at least one of
the local user interface of the appliance is configured to prevent a set of menu points of the selected submenu from being displayed on a display screen of the appliance at least one of in a self-explanatory manner or in conjunction with a textual description or using an icon for the one or more menu points, or the remote user interface on the user device is configured to allow the set of menu points of the selected submenu to be displayed on a screen of the user device in at least one of a self-explanatory manner or using a textual description or using an icon for the one or more menu points
(Choi paragraph [0049]-[0056], [0117]-[0118] discloses remote user interface 700 on mobile apparatus 3 displaying submenu with menu points “Normal”, “Super-speed”, and “Eco” with textual description explain temperature and rinse times in response to selecting sequential course as shown in figs, 2, 7, 8).
Accordingly, it would have been obvious to person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine Choi with Murphy and Boccotti for the benefit of being able to utilize user’s device as an additional screen space to display additional information.
As for claim 10, limitations of parent claim 1 have been discussed above. Boccotti discloses method and control unit wherein the control unit is configured to:
determine whether or not menu option can be displayed on a display screen of the appliance in a self-explanatory manner; and cause the remote user interface to provide menu options only upon determining that menu options cannot be displayed on the display screen of the appliance in a self-explanatory manner
(Boccotti paragraph [0021]-[0026], [0031] discloses displaying user interface 34 with menu options on remote mobile device 16 after determining capabilities of the mobile device 16 with interface 34 and the cooking device 12 with interface 36).
Boccotti does not appear to explicitly disclose method and control unit wherein the control unit is configured to: cause the remote user interface to provide the selected submenu on the user device. However, Choi discloses method and control unit configured to cause the
remote user interface to provide a set of menu points of the selected submenu on the display screen in a self-explanatory manner
(Choi paragraph [0049]-[0056], [0117]-[0118] discloses remote user interface 700 on mobile apparatus 3 displaying submenu with menu points “Normal”, “Super-speed”, and “Eco” with textual description explain temperature and rinse times in response to selecting menu option sequential course as shown in figs, 2, 7, 8).
Accordingly, it would have been obvious to person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine Choi’s appliance with control unit configured to cause the remote user interface to provide a set of menu points of the selected submenu on the display screen in a self-explanatory manner with Boccotti’s appliance with control unit configured to determine whether or not menu option can be displayed on a display screen of the appliance in a self-explanatory manner; and cause the remote user interface to provide menu options only upon determining that menu options cannot be displayed on the display screen of the appliance in a self-explanatory manner with Murphy for an appliance with control unit configured to determine whether or not a set of menu points of the selected submenu can be displayed on a display screen of the appliance in a self-explanatory manner; and cause the remote user interface to provide the selected submenu on the user device only upon determining that the set of menu points of the selected submenu cannot be displayed on the display screen of the appliance in a self-explanatory manner. One would have been motivated to make such a combination for the benefit of being able to utilize user’s device as an additional screen space to display additional information.
Response to Arguments
35 U.S.C. § 112 Rejection
Rejection of claim 13 under on 35 U.S.C. § 112 in the previous office action have been withdrawn based on the amendment.
35 U.S.C. §103 Rejections
Applicant states that “that the wrong number was used for the Finkelstein reference in the Office Action”, (Remarks page 10). There is no requirement to provide a patent or PGPUB number in the office action. A correct PGPUB number was provided in form PTO-892, as such applicant had valid notice and the rejection is still valid.
Applicant argues “Murphy does not disclose any remote user interface”, (Remarks page 13).
In response to applicants' argument that the reference fails to show certain features of applicants' invention, it is noted that one cannot show nonobviousness by attacking references individually where the rejections are based on combinations of references. In re Keller, 642 F.2d 413, 208 USPQ 871 (CCPA 1981); In re Merck & Co., Inc., 800 F.2d 1091, 231 USPQ 375 (Fed. Cir. 1986).
As stated in the rejection above, Murphy discloses control unit is configured to send an interface signal in reaction to the detected user input; the interface signal is indicative of the selected submenu (Murphy paragraph [0001], [0037]-[0038], [0041]-[0044], [0053]-[0057] discloses controller 40 detecting user input of selecting food type protein and automatically displaying submenu “meats, poultry, fish, shellfish and eggs” as shown in figs. 6 and 7; “the cooking controller 40 may include or otherwise be in communication with processing circuitry 100”, [0041]; the interface panel 16) may be in communication with the processing circuitry 100 to receive an indication of a user input at the user interface 140 and/or to provide an audible, visual, mechanical or other output to the user”, Murphy [0044]).
Applicant argues “none of the references, whether taken alone or in any combination, either teach or suggest the limitations of claims 1, 13 and 14”, (Remarks page 15) because “in Boccotti there is no need for an interface signal, which is indicative of a selected submenu”, (Remarks page 13).
In response to applicants' argument that the reference fails to show certain features of applicants' invention, it is noted that reference is relevant for all it contains ("The use of patents as references is not limited to what the patentees describe as their own inventions or to the problems with which they are concerned. They are part of the literature of the art, relevant for all they contain." In re Heck, 699 F.2d 1331, 1332-33, 216 USPQ 1038, 1039 (Fed. Cir. 1983) (quoting In re Lemelson, 397 F.2d 1006, 1009, 158 USPQ 275, 277 (CCPA 1968)), a reference may be relied upon for all that it would have reasonably suggested to one having ordinary skill the art. Merck & Co. v. Biocraft Laboratories, 874 F.2d 804, 10 USPQ2d 1843 (Fed. Cir.), cert. denied, 493 U.S. 975 (1989). See also Upsher-Smith Labs. v. Pamlab, LLC, 412 F.3d 1319, 1323, 75 USPQ2d 1213, 1215 (Fed. Cir. 2005), and that one cannot show nonobviousness by attacking references individually where the rejections are based on combinations of references. In re Keller, 642 F.2d 413, 208 USPQ 871 (CCPA 1981); In re Merck & Co., Inc., 800 F.2d 1091, 231 USPQ 375 (Fed. Cir. 1986).
As stated in the rejection above Boccotti discloses appliance configured to be controlled by using a remote user interface on a user device (Boccotti paragraph [0021], [0031]-[0036] discloses cooking appliance 12 configured to be controlled by a remote user interface 34 on a user device 16 as shown in figs. 1A-5; “The mobile device 16 may be in communication with a database 30 (e.g., a remote database, remote server, local database, etc.) and a controller 20 of the cooking device 12 via at least one communication interface 22 as discussed later in specific reference to FIG. 2”, Boccotti [0021]); and
controller configured to send an interface signal to at least one of the user device or a processing unit with which the user device interacts (Boccotti paragraph [0021]-[0026], [0028], [0030]-[0031] discloses user device 16 in communication with communication interface 22 of cooking device via server automatically starting the remote user interface 34 with selectable menu option for calibrating cooking device 12 on the display screen of user device 16 based on received indication from cooking device 12 as show in figs. 3-5; “the communication interfaces 22 may include a first communication interface 22a, which may provide communication between the cooking device 12 and the mobile device 16.”, Bocoti [0028]“For example, the identification device 40 may be activated in response to one or more communication signals from the cooking device 12 and/or the mobile device 16 via the communication interface”, Boccoti [0030]).
As such as stated in the rejection above, Murphy in view of Boccotti discloses all the limitation of independent claim 1, 13, and 14.
Conclusion
Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a). 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 JEANETTE J PARKER whose telephone number is (571)270-3647. The examiner can normally be reached Mon-Fri 9-5.
Examiner interviews are available via telephone, in-person, and video conferencing using a USPTO supplied web-based collaboration tool. To schedule an interview, applicant is encouraged to use the USPTO Automated Interview Request (AIR) at http://www.uspto.gov/interviewpractice.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Jeanette Parker can be reached at 571-2703647. 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.
/JEANETTE J PARKER/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2646
Prosecution Insights