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 .
Information Disclosure Statement
2. The Information Disclosure Statements filed on 04/18/2024, 06/04/2024, 11/19/2024, 05/15/2025, 06/09/2025, 09/04/2025, 11/11/2025, 02/10/2025, 03/05/2026 and 05/206/2026 have been considered.
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 1,2,3,14,15,16,17,18, 29,30 and 31 provisionally rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claims 1,4,9,10,11,12, 13,16, 22, 23 and 24 of copending Application No. 18/639130 (reference application). Although the claims at issue are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other as reproduced below.
This is a provisional nonstatutory double patenting rejection because the patentably indistinct claims have not in fact been patented.
Claim 1 Application # 18/639069
Claim 1 of co-pending 18/639130
A communications system comprising:
A communications system comprising:
a laser generation system configured to emit a set of laser beams;
a laser generation system configured to emit a set of laser beams;
a computer system; and
a computer system; and
a communications manager in the computer system, wherein the communications manager is configured to:
a communications manager in the computer system, wherein the
communications manager is configured to:
identify digital information for transmission; and
identify digital information for transmission; and
control an emission of the set of laser beams by the laser generation system to generate electromagnetic radiation with motions between positions in a space to thereby encode the digital information.
See note below
control an emission of the set of laser beams by the laser generation system to generate electromagnetic radiation at positions in a space with motions between the positions, with the positions and the motions between the positions thereby encoding the digital information.
It has been held that the omission of an element and its function is obvious
expedient if the remaining elements perform the same function as before.
In re Karlson, 136 USPQ 184 (CCPA). Also note Ex parte Rainu, 168 USPQ 375 (bd.
App. 1969); the omission of a reference element whose function is not needed would be
obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art. Therefore, the omission of the positions and the motions between the positions and it functions is obvious expedient if the remaining elements perform the same function as before.
Claim 2 Application # 18/639069
Claim 4 of co-pending 18/639130
The communications system of claim 1, wherein as part of controlling the emission of the set of laser beams, the communications manager is configured to:
The communications system of claim 1, wherein as part of controlling the
emission of the set of laser beams, the communications manager is configured to:
generate the electromagnetic radiation without waiting for a decay time of the electromagnetic radiation to elapse at the positions.
See note below
control the emission of the set of laser beams to generate the electromagnetic
radiation at the positions in the space that encode the digital information without
waiting for a decay time of the electromagnetic radiation to elapse between the positions.
It has been held that the omission of an element and its function is obvious
expedient if the remaining elements perform the same function as before.
In re Karlson, 136 USPQ 184 (CCPA). Also note Ex parte Rainu, 168 USPQ 375 (bd.
App. 1969); the omission of a reference element whose function is not needed would be
obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art. Therefore, the omission of the positions and it functions is obvious expedient if the remaining elements perform the same function as before.
Claim 3 Application # 18/639069
Claim 9 of co-pending 18/639130
The communications system of claim 1, wherein as part of controlling the emission of the set of laser beams, the communications manager is further configured to:
The communications system of claim 1, wherein as part of controlling the emission of the set of laser beams, the communications manager is further configured to:
move the set of laser beams to generate the electromagnetic radiation at a number of intermediate positions while moving the set of laser beams from one position to another position in the positions.
move the set of laser beams to generate the electromagnetic radiation at a number of intermediate positions while moving the set of laser beams from one position to another position in the positions.
Claim 14 Application # 18/639069
Claim 10 of co-pending 18/639130
The communications system of claim 1, wherein the electromagnetic radiation is selected from at least one of a visible light, an ultraviolet light, an infrared light, radio frequencies, or x-rays.
The communications system of claim 1, wherein the electromagnetic radiation
is selected from at least one of a visible light, an ultraviolet light, an infrared light,
radio frequencies, or x-rays.
Claim 15 Application # 18/639069
Claim 11 of co-pending 18/639130
The communications system of claim 1, further comprising:
The communications system of claim 1, further comprising:
a receiver configured to: detect electromagnetic radiation; and
a receiver configured to detect electromagnetic radiation and
determine the digital information from the motions between the positions from which the electromagnetic radiation is detected.
determine the digital information from the electromagnetic radiation that is detected wherein the digital information is determined from at least one of the positions or the motions.
Claim 16 Application # 18/639069
Claims 1,12 of co-pending 18/639130
The communications system of claim 1, wherein the motions between the positions are:
The communications system of claim 1, wherein the positions are:
on a surface of an object in the space; or in an empty space.
on a surface of an object in the space; or in an empty space.
Claim 1. identify digital information for transmission; and
control an emission of the set of laser beams by the laser generation system to generate electromagnetic radiation at positions in a space with motions between the positions, with the positions and the motions between the positions thereby encoding the digital information.
Claim 17 Application # 18/639069
Claim 13 of co-pending 18/639130
A method for communicating digital information, the method comprising:
A method for communicating digital information, the method comprising:
identifying the digital information for transmission; and
identifying digital information for transmission; and
controlling an emission of a set of laser beams by a laser generation system to generate electromagnetic radiation with motions between positions in a space to thereby encode the digital information.
See note below.
controlling an emission of a set of laser beams to generate electromagnetic
radiation at positions in a space with motions between the positions, with the positions and the motions between the positions thereby encoding the digital information.
It has been held that the omission of an element and its function is obvious
expedient if the remaining elements perform the same function as before.
In re Karlson, 136 USPQ 184 (CCPA). Also note Ex parte Rainu, 168 USPQ 375 (bd.
App. 1969); the omission of a reference element whose function is not needed would be
obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art. Therefore, the omission of the positions and the motions between the positions and it functions is obvious expedient if the remaining elements perform the same function as before.
Claim 18 Application # 18/639069
Claim 16 of co-pending 18/639130
The method of claim 17, wherein said controlling the emission of the set of laser beams comprises:
The method of claim 13, wherein said controlling the emission of the set of laser beams comprises:
generating the electromagnetic radiation without waiting for a decay time of the electromagnetic radiation to elapse at the positions.
See note below
controlling the emission of the set of laser beams to generate the electromagnetic radiation at the positions in the space that encode the digital information without waiting for a decay time of the electromagnetic radiation to
elapse between the positions.
It has been held that the omission of an element and its function is obvious
expedient if the remaining elements perform the same function as before.
In re Karlson, 136 USPQ 184 (CCPA). Also note Ex parte Rainu, 168 USPQ 375 (bd.
App. 1969); the omission of a reference element whose function is not needed would be
obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art. Therefore, the omission of the positions and it functions is obvious expedient if the remaining elements perform the same function as before.
Claim 29 Application # 18/639069
Claim 22 of co-pending 18/639130
The method of claim 17, wherein the electromagnetic radiation is selected from at least one of a visible light, an ultraviolet light, an infrared light, radio frequencies, or x-rays.
The method of claim 13, wherein the electromagnetic radiation is selected
from at least one of a visible light, an ultraviolet light, an infrared light, radio
frequencies, or x-rays.
Claim 30 Application # 18/639069
Claim 23 of co-pending 18/639130
The method of claim 17, further comprising:
The method of claim 13, further comprising:
detecting electromagnetic radiation; and determining the digital information from the motions between the positions from which the electromagnetic radiation is detected.
detecting the electromagnetic radiation; and determining the digital information from the positions at which the electromagnetic radiation is detected and the motions between the positions.
Claim 31 Application # 18/639069
Claim 24 of co-pending 18/639130
The method of claim 17, wherein the motions between the positions are:
The method of claim 13, wherein the positions are:
on a surface of an object in the space; or in an empty space.
on a surface of an object in the space; or in an empty space.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
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.
The factual inquiries for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows:
1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art.
2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue.
3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art.
4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness.
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 1,15 and 16 are rejected under 35 USC 103 as being unpatentable over Barnwell et al; (US 12580650) in view of Christian et al; (Analysis and Improvement of motion encoding in magnetic resonance encoding – 2018 attached).
Regarding claim 1, Barnwell discloses a communications system ;(communication system with transmitter 202 and receiver 206, see figure 3)comprising: a laser generation system configured to emit a set of laser beams;( the one or more transmitters 202 create the plasma at the atmospheric point 302, which radiates omnidirectional light 304 with a direct line-of-sight to the receiver 206, see column 2, lines 45-48 and figure 3) a computer system; and a communications manager in the computer system,(one or more transmitters 202 in a mobile or stationary platform (a vehicle, airplane, train), see column 3, lines 14-16 and figure 3) wherein the communications manager is configured to: identify digital information for transmission;(the pulsed modulation technique may be used with the laser to modulate the signal, see column 3, lines 7-9 and figure 3) and control an emission of the set of laser beams by the laser generation system to generate electromagnetic radiation to thereby encode the digital information ;( one or more transmitters 202 in a mobile or stationary platform (a vehicle, airplane, train) provide a combination of pulsed modulation techniques are used, each pulsed modulation technique may encode a signal for the same data or encode a signal for different data, see column 3, lines 11-23 and figure 3).
However, Barnwell does not explicitly disclose with motions between positions in a space.
In a related field of endeavor, Christian discloses with motions between positions in a space;( different motion sensitization strategies with respect to their motion
encoding efficiency in two fundamental encoding limits, see Abstract and figure 1).
Thus, it would be obvious for one of the ordinary skilled in the art before the effective filling date of the invention to combine the motion modulation of Barnwell with Christian to provide Motion-guided Modulation and the motivation is to provide improved data sensitivity and noise immunity.
Regarding claim 15, Barnwell discloses the communications system of claim 1, further comprising: a receiver configured to: detect electromagnetic radiation; (omnidirectional light 304 with a direct line-of-sight to the receiver 206, see column 2, lines 45-48 and figure 3) and determine the digital information from which the electromagnetic radiation is detected ;(the signal is demodulated from the transmitted plasma at each receiver, thereby transmitting information encoded on the signal, see column 2, lines 54-56).
However, Barnwell does not explicitly disclose from the motions between the positions.
In a related field of endeavor, Christian discloses from the motions between the positions ;( different motion sensitization strategies with respect to their motion
encoding efficiency in two fundamental encoding limits, see Abstract and figure 1). Motivation same as claim 1.
Regarding claim 16, Barnwell discloses the communications system of claim 1, wherein the motions between the positions are: on a surface of an object in the space; or in an empty space ;( two or more transmitters 202 emitting laser pulses at different atmospheric points; see column 2, line 67 and column 3, line 1).
Claim 14 is rejected under 35 USC 103 as being unpatentable over Barnwell et al; (US 12580650) in view of Christian et al; (A Simple Sign-Bit Probabilistic Shaping Scheme- April 2022 attached) and further in view of Morel et al; (US 2020/0191721).
Regarding claim 14, the combination of Barnwell and Christian does not explicitly disclose the communications system of claim 1, wherein the electromagnetic radiation is selected from at least one of a visible light, an ultraviolet light, an infrared light, radio frequencies, or x-rays.
In a related field of endeavor, Morel discloses the communications system of claim 1, wherein the electromagnetic radiation is selected from at least one of a visible light, an ultraviolet light, an infrared light, radio frequencies,( for enhancing and suppressing (modulating) radio frequency (RF) emissions in a laser induced plasma system using a second laser, see Abstract and figure 1) or x-rays. (Only one of the claim limitation is required to be considered by the Examiner).
Thus, it would be obvious for one of the ordinary skilled in the art before the effective filling date of the invention to combine the radio frequency (RF) signals of Morel with Barnwell and Christian to provide the generation of radio frequency signals by the lase induced plasma and the motivation is to provide generation of radio frequency signals.
Claims 17,29 and 30 are rejected under 35 USC 103 as being unpatentable over Barnwell et al; (US 12580650) in view of Christian et al; (A Simple Sign-Bit Probabilistic Shaping Scheme- April 2022 attached).
Regarding claim 17, Barnwell discloses a method for communicating digital information, ;(communication system with transmitter 202 and receiver 206, see figure 3) the method comprising: identifying the digital information for transmission; (the pulsed modulation technique may be used with the laser to modulate the signal, see column 3, lines 7-9 and figure 3) and controlling an emission of a set of laser beams by a laser generation system to generate electromagnetic radiation in a space to thereby encode the digital information ;( one or more transmitters 202 in a mobile or stationary platform (a vehicle, airplane, train) provide a combination of pulsed modulation techniques are used, each pulsed modulation technique may encode a signal for the same data or encode a signal for different data, see column 3, lines 11-23 and figure 3).
However, Barnwell does not explicitly disclose with motions between positions.
In a related field of endeavor, Christian discloses with motions between positions ;( different motion sensitization strategies with respect to their motion
encoding efficiency in two fundamental encoding limits, see Abstract and figure 1).
Thus, it would be obvious for one of the ordinary skilled in the art before the effective filling date of the invention to combine the motion modulation of Barnwell with Christian to provide Motion-guided Modulation and the motivation is to provide improved data sensitivity and noise immunity.
Regarding claim 30, Barwell discloses the method of claim 17, further comprising: detecting electromagnetic radiation; (omnidirectional light 304 with a direct line-of-sight to the receiver 206, see column 2, lines 45-48 and figure 3) and determining the digital information from which the electromagnetic radiation is detected ;(the signal is demodulated from the transmitted plasma at each receiver, thereby transmitting information encoded on the signal, see column 2, lines 54-56).
However, Barnwell does not explicitly disclose from the motions between the positions.
In a related field of endeavor, Christian discloses from the motions between the positions ;( different motion sensitization strategies with respect to their motion
encoding efficiency in two fundamental encoding limits, see Abstract and figure 1). Motivation same as claim 17.
Regarding claim 31, Christian discloses the method of claim 17, wherein the motions between the positions are: on a surface of an object in the space; or in an empty space ;( two or more transmitters 202 emitting laser pulses at different atmospheric points; see column 2, line 67 and column 3, line 1).
Claim 29 is rejected under 35 USC 103 as being unpatentable over Barnwell et al; (US 12580650) in view of Christian et al; (A Simple Sign-Bit Probabilistic Shaping Scheme- April 2022 attached) and further in view of Morel et al; (US 2020/0191721).
Regarding claim 29, the combination of Barnwell and Christian does not explicitly disclose the method of claim 17, wherein the electromagnetic radiation is selected from at least one of a visible light, an ultraviolet light, an infrared light, radio frequencies, or x-rays.
In a related field of endeavor, discloses the method of claim 17, wherein the electromagnetic radiation is selected from at least one of a visible light, an ultraviolet light, an infrared light, radio frequencies, or x-rays,( for enhancing and suppressing (modulating) radio frequency (RF) emissions in a laser induced plasma system using a second laser, see Abstract and figure 1) or x-rays. (Only one of the claim limitation is required to be considered by the Examiner).
Thus, it would be obvious for one of the ordinary skilled in the art before the effective filling date of the invention to combine the radio frequency (RF) signals of Morel with Barnwell and Christian to provide the generation of radio frequency signals by the lase induced plasma and the motivation is to provide generation of radio frequency signals.
Claim 32 is rejected under 35 USC 103 as being unpatentable over Barnwell et al; (US 12580650) in view of Christian et al; (A Simple Sign-Bit Probabilistic Shaping Scheme- April 2022 attached).
Regarding claim 32, Barnwell discloses computer program product for communicating digital information ;(communication system with transmitter 202 and receiver 206, see figure 3) the computer program product comprising a computer-readable storage medium having program instructions embodied therewith, the program instructions executable by a computer system to cause the computer system to perform the following computer operations ;( one or more transmitters 202 in a mobile or stationary platform (a vehicle, airplane, train) provide a combination of pulsed modulation techniques are used, each pulsed modulation technique may encode a signal for the same data or encode a signal for different data, see column 3, lines 14-16 and figure 3); identify the digital information for transmission;(the pulsed modulation technique may be used with the laser to modulate the signal, see column 3, lines 7-9 and figure 3) and control an emission of a set of laser beams by a laser generation system to generate electromagnetic radiation in a space to thereby encode the digital information ;( one or more transmitters 202 in a mobile or stationary platform (a vehicle, airplane, train) provide a combination of pulsed modulation techniques are used, each pulsed modulation technique may encode a signal for the same data or encode a signal for different data, see column 3, lines 11-23 and figure 3).
However, Barnwell does not explicitly disclose with motions between positions.
In a related field of endeavor, Christian disclose with motions between positions;( different motion sensitization strategies with respect to their motion
encoding efficiency in two fundamental encoding limits, see Abstract and figure 1).
Thus, it would be obvious for one of the ordinary skilled in the art before the effective filling date of the invention to combine the motion modulation of Barnwell with Christian to provide Motion-guided Modulation and the motivation is to provide improved data sensitivity and noise immunity.
Allowable Subject Matter
3. Claims 4-13 and 19-28 are objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
Conclusion
4. The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure as reproduced below.
a. Englesbe et al; (US 2022/0390553 A1) discloses an ultrashort laser pulse generating causes the formation of plasma having a predetermined temporal and spatial duration and the plasma generates an electron wave in the gas medium that moves with the plasma as travels through the gas until the plasma terminates, see figure 1.
b. Kim et al; (US 10601517) discloses a system and method for probabilistic shaping of an eight-dimensional super-symbol in optical transport networks, including receiving binary data to be transmitted as an optical signal; mapping at least a portion of the binary data to symbols of a M-QAM constellation ;see figure 4.
c. Gu et al; (Motion Matters: Motion-guided Modulation Network for Skeleton-based Micro-Action Recognition – November 2025 attached) discloses novel Motion-guided
Modulation Network (MMN) that implicitly captures and modulates subtle motion cues to enhance spatial-temporal representation learning, see figure 2.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to AMRITBIR K SANDHU whose telephone number is (571)270-1894. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 9am to 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, Kenneth Vanderpuye can be reached at 571-272-3078. 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.
/AMRITBIR K SANDHU/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2634
Prosecution Insights