DETAILED ACTION
Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status
The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
Double Patenting
The nonstatutory double patenting rejection is based on a judicially created doctrine grounded in public policy (a policy reflected in the statute) so as to prevent the unjustified or improper timewise extension of the “right to exclude” granted by a patent and to prevent possible harassment by multiple assignees. A nonstatutory double patenting rejection is appropriate where the conflicting claims are not identical, but at least one examined application claim is not patentably distinct from the reference claim(s) because the examined application claim is either anticipated by, or would have been obvious over, the reference claim(s). See, e.g., In re Berg, 140 F.3d 1428, 46 USPQ2d 1226 (Fed. Cir. 1998); In re Goodman, 11 F.3d 1046, 29 USPQ2d 2010 (Fed. Cir. 1993); In re Longi, 759 F.2d 887, 225 USPQ 645 (Fed. Cir. 1985); In re Van Ornum, 686 F.2d 937, 214 USPQ 761 (CCPA 1982); In re Vogel, 422 F.2d 438, 164 USPQ 619 (CCPA 1970); In re Thorington, 418 F.2d 528, 163 USPQ 644 (CCPA 1969).
A timely filed terminal disclaimer in compliance with 37 CFR 1.321(c) or 1.321(d) may be used to overcome an actual or provisional rejection based on nonstatutory double patenting provided the reference application or patent either is shown to be commonly owned with the examined application, or claims an invention made as a result of activities undertaken within the scope of a joint research agreement. See MPEP § 717.02 for applications subject to examination under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA as explained in MPEP § 2159. See MPEP § 2146 et seq. for applications not subject to examination under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA . A terminal disclaimer must be signed in compliance with 37 CFR 1.321(b).
The filing of a terminal disclaimer by itself is not a complete reply to a nonstatutory double patenting (NSDP) rejection. A complete reply requires that the terminal disclaimer be accompanied by a reply requesting reconsideration of the prior Office action. Even where the NSDP rejection is provisional the reply must be complete. See MPEP § 804, subsection I.B.1. For a reply to a non-final Office action, see 37 CFR 1.111(a). For a reply to final Office action, see 37 CFR 1.113(c). A request for reconsideration while not provided for in 37 CFR 1.113(c) may be filed after final for consideration. See MPEP §§ 706.07(e) and 714.13.
The USPTO Internet website contains terminal disclaimer forms which may be used. Please visit www.uspto.gov/patent/patents-forms. The actual filing date of the application in which the form is filed determines what form (e.g., PTO/SB/25, PTO/SB/26, PTO/AIA /25, or PTO/AIA /26) should be used. A web-based eTerminal Disclaimer may be filled out completely online using web-screens. An eTerminal Disclaimer that meets all requirements is auto-processed and approved immediately upon submission. For more information about eTerminal Disclaimers, refer to www.uspto.gov/patents/apply/applying-online/eterminal-disclaimer.
Claims 1-15 rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claims 1-20 of U.S. Patent No. [ 11,954,528, hereinafter refers as '528].
Regarding claim 1, the claim limitation of “network communication circuitry for use in the network communication with the at least one remote computer network via the at least one network; and processing circuitry configurable to perform operations comprising: based upon machine learning and request data, dynamically assigning one or more resources for use in service request processing associated with the at least one remote computer node, the request data to be based upon one or more requests to be provided from the at least one remote computer node via the at least one network; wherein: the service request processing is configurable to comprise: accessing the one or more resources in accordance with mapping data for use in identifying the one or more resources in association with the service request processing; and/or providing to the at least one remote computer node, via the at least one network, other data in response, at least in part, to the one or more requests; and the machine learning is configurable to be based upon one or more of: resource usage monitoring data; resource demand history data; dynamic condition data; and/or application requirement data” corresponds the claim limitation of “network communication circuitry for use in the network communication with the at least one remote computer network via the at least one network; and processing circuitry to execute instructions, the instructions, when executed by the processing circuitry, resulting in the server system being configurable to perform operations comprising: receiving one or more requests from the at least one remote computer node via the at least one network; based upon machine learning and the one or more requests, dynamically assigning one or more resources for use in service request processing associated with the at least one remote computer node; accessing the one or more resources for use in the service request processing; and providing to the at least one remote computer node, via the at least one network, data resulting from processing of the one or more requests; wherein: the one or more resources are accessible in accordance with mapping data for use in identifying the one or more resources in association with the service request processing; the machine learning is configurable to be based upon one or more of: resource usage monitoring data; resource demand history data; dynamic condition data; and/or application requirement data” of claim 1 of ‘528. Although the claims at issue are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other because the claim limitation of claim 1 is met by the claim limitation of claim 1 of ‘528.
Regarding claim 2, the claim limitation is same as claim 6 of ‘528.
Regarding claim 3, the claim limitation is same as claim 3 of ‘528.
Regarding claim 4, the claim limitation is same as claim 4 of ‘528.
Regarding claim 5, the claim limitation is same as claim 5 of ‘528.
Regarding claim 6, the claim limitation of “network communication circuitry for use in the network communication with the at least one remote computer network via the at least one network; and processing circuitry configurable to perform operations comprising: based upon machine learning and request data, dynamically assigning one or more resources for use in service request processing associated with the at least one remote computer node, the request data to be based upon one or more requests to be provided from the at least one remote computer node via the at least one network; wherein: the service request processing is configurable to comprise: accessing the one or more resources in accordance with mapping data for use in identifying the one or more resources in association with the service request processing; and/or providing to the at least one remote computer node, via the at least one network, other data in response, at least in part, to the one or more requests; and the machine learning is configurable to be based upon one or more of: resource usage monitoring data; resource demand history data; dynamic condition data; and/or application requirement data” corresponds the claim limitation of “network communication circuitry for use in the network communication with the at least one remote computer network via the at least one network; and processing circuitry to execute instructions, the instructions, when executed by the processing circuitry, resulting in the server system being configurable to perform operations comprising: receiving one or more requests from the at least one remote computer node via the at least one network; based upon machine learning and the one or more requests, dynamically assigning one or more resources for use in service request processing associated with the at least one remote computer node; accessing the one or more resources for use in the service request processing; and providing to the at least one remote computer node, via the at least one network, data resulting from processing of the one or more requests; wherein: the one or more resources are accessible in accordance with mapping data for use in identifying the one or more resources in association with the service request processing; the machine learning is configurable to be based upon one or more of: resource usage monitoring data; resource demand history data; dynamic condition data; and/or application requirement data” of claim 8 of ‘528. Although the claims at issue are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other because the claim limitation of claim 6 is met by the claim limitation of claim 8 of ‘528.
Regarding claim 7, the claim limitation is same to claim 13 of ‘528.
Regarding claim 8, the claim limitation is same to claim 10 of ‘528.
Regarding claim 9, the claim limitation is same to claim 11 of ‘528.
Regarding claim 10, the claim limitation is same to claim 12 of ‘528.
Regarding claim 11, the claim limitation of “network communication circuitry for use in the network communication with the at least one remote computer network via the at least one network; and processing circuitry configurable to perform operations comprising: based upon machine learning and request data, dynamically assigning one or more resources for use in service request processing associated with the at least one remote computer node, the request data to be based upon one or more requests to be provided from the at least one remote computer node via the at least one network; wherein: the service request processing is configurable to comprise: accessing the one or more resources in accordance with mapping data for use in identifying the one or more resources in association with the service request processing; and/or providing to the at least one remote computer node, via the at least one network, other data in response, at least in part, to the one or more requests; and the machine learning is configurable to be based upon one or more of: resource usage monitoring data; resource demand history data; dynamic condition data; and/or application requirement data” corresponds the claim limitation of “network communication circuitry for use in the network communication with the at least one remote computer network via the at least one network; and processing circuitry to execute instructions, the instructions, when executed by the processing circuitry, resulting in the server system being configurable to perform operations comprising: receiving one or more requests from the at least one remote computer node via the at least one network; based upon machine learning and the one or more requests, dynamically assigning one or more resources for use in service request processing associated with the at least one remote computer node; accessing the one or more resources for use in the service request processing; and providing to the at least one remote computer node, via the at least one network, data resulting from processing of the one or more requests; wherein: the one or more resources are accessible in accordance with mapping data for use in identifying the one or more resources in association with the service request processing; the machine learning is configurable to be based upon one or more of: resource usage monitoring data; resource demand history data; dynamic condition data; and/or application requirement data” of claim 15 of ‘528. Although the claims at issue are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other because the claim limitation of claim 11 is met by the claim limitation of claim 15 of ‘528.
Regarding claim 12, the claim limitation is same to claim 20 of ‘528.
Regarding claim 13, the claim limitation is same to claim 17 of ‘528.
Regarding claim 14, the claim limitation is same to claim 18 of ‘528.
Regarding claim 15, the claim limitation is same to claim 18 of ‘528.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to CAI Y CHEN whose telephone number is (571)270-5679. The examiner can normally be reached 8:30 AM -4:30 PM.
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, Brian Pendleton can be reached at 571-272-7527. 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.
/CAI Y CHEN/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2425
Prosecution Insights