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 .
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 1-11 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 enablement requirement. The claim(s) contains subject matter which was not described in the specification in such a way as to enable one skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and/or use the invention. Claim 1 recites a smartphone application configured to generate non-ionizing radiation over a range of 3 kHz to 300 GHz, wherein the “target frequencies are configured to interact with a lachrymator particle proximate to an onion cutting area” to reduce onion-cutting discomfort. The application as filed does not provide adequate written description support for this full scope, for at least the following reasons. The specification does not describe, other than in purely functional terms, how particular frequencies or sub-ranges within the 3 kHz–300 GHz band are selected or configured to interact with lachrymator particles. The disclosure lacks any identification of specific operative frequencies, field strengths, modulation schemes, distances, or exposure conditions that correlate RF emissions with an interaction with lachrymator particles. As such, the present disclosure amounts to little more than a statement of a desired result (i.e., reducing onion-cutting discomfort by emitting RF) without describing the invention that achieves that result, which is insufficient under MPEP 2163. The broad genus of “target frequencies between 3 kHz and 300 GHz configured to interact with a lachrymator particle” is not supported by an adequate number of representative species or common structural features. The specification fails to provide representative examples across the claimed range that would demonstrate possession of the full breadth of frequencies purportedly capable of providing the recited interaction with lachrymator particles. Under MPEP 2163.03, written-description deficiency for overly broad genus claims. In view of these deficiencies, the originally filed disclosure does not reasonably convey to one of ordinary skill in the art that the inventor had possession, as of the filing date, of a smartphone-based system capable of emitting any frequency within 3 kHz–300 GHz that is “configured to interact with a lachrymator particle” as broadly claimed. Accordingly, claim 1 fails to satisfy the written description requirement of 35 U.S.C. 112(a).
Further the dependent claims do not remedy the issues in the Independent claims and are therefore rejected also.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. YAJIMA et al. (US 20170196490) discloses a detection device, a detection method, and a program capable of detecting a living body state of a human body easily and accurately (abstract) .
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to KEITH FERGUSON whose telephone number is (571)272-7865. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 7 am -3 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, Wesley L Kim can be reached at (571) 272-7867. 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.
/KEITH FERGUSON/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2648