DETAILED ACTION
Claims 1-20 are presented for examination.
The present application is being examined under the AIA (America Invents Act) First Inventor to File.
This Office Action is Final.
This action is responsive to the following communication: the response filed on 05-15-2026.
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on 01-14-2026, 04-22-2026 and 05-28-2026 are in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97.
Continuation Application
This application discloses and claims only subject matter disclosed in prior Application No. 14/876,687 and 16/038,783 and names an inventor or inventors named in the prior application. Accordingly, this application constitutes a continuation claiming benefit of the filing date of October 06, 2015 which is acknowledged.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
Claim rejections under USC § 112 during the Non-Final Office Action are withdrawn, in light of the amendment filed on 05-15-2026 by Applicant(s).
Double Patenting
The non-statutory 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. See 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); and, In re Thorington, 418 F.2d 528, 163 USPQ 644 (CCPA 1969).
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) may be used to overcome an actual or provisional rejection based on a nonstatutory double patenting ground provided the conflicting application or patent is shown to be commonly owned with this application. See 37 CFR 1.130(b).
Effective January 1, 1994, a registered attorney or agent of record may sign a terminal disclaimer. A terminal disclaimer signed by the assignee must fully comply with 37 CFR 3.73(b).
For faster processing of Terminal Disclaimer the USPTO Internet website contains terminal disclaimer forms which may be used. Please visit www.uspto.gov/ patent/patents-forms. The 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/process/file/efs/guidance/ eTD-info-I.jsp.
PNG
media_image1.png
18
19
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Claim Analysis
Although the conflicting claims are not identical , they are not patently distinct from each other because as illustrated by the table below, each feature claimed is directly mapped and taught by the cited prior art that is commonly owned. For example, analysis of each of the claims represented below are directed to the same features where a resonant circuit is configured for receiving a resonant frequency that comprises data for providing power to actuate a switch . Furthermore, these claims are further directed to a detector to draw power from a power source and process data. Combining the above facts, all the claims are concerned with power activation of a power consuming device that is enabled by using a switch and resonant circuitry. Thus, a later application claim is not patentably distinct from an earlier patent claim if the later claim is anticipated by, the earlier claim. In re Longi, 759 F.2d at 896, 225 USPQ at 651 (affirming a holding of obviousness-type double patenting because the claims at issue were obvious over claims in four prior art patents); In re Berg, 140 F.3d at 1437, 46 USPQ2d at 1233 (Fed. Cir. 1998) (affirming a holding of obviousness-type double patenting where a patent application claim to a genus is anticipated by a patent claim to a species within that genus).” ELI LILLY AND COMPANY v BARR LABORATORIES, INC., United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit, ON PETITION FOR REHEARING EN BANC (DECIDED: May 30, 2001).
INSTANT APPLICATION 18/642
U.S. Patent No. 11,997,352
U.S. Patent No. 10,057,642
1. (New) A method comprising:
receiving, by a controller and from a user device, an instruction to cause an action associated with a power consumption device; and
sending, by the controller to a detector and via a resonant frequency associated with the detector, a command signal configured to cause the power consumption device to perform the action,
wherein the command signal comprises data and provides activation power to actuate a switch to enable the detector to draw power from a power source and process the data
1. A method comprising:
receiving, by a detector via a resonant frequency, a command signal that comprises data and provides bootstrap power to the detector;
based on the bootstrap power, actuating a switch to enable the detector to draw power from a power line; detecting, by the detector, the data in the command signal; and
based on the data in the command signal, enabling power to a power consumption device.
1.A method comprising:
receiving, via a resonant frequency associated with a resonant circuit, a command signal comprising data;
after receiving the command signal, actuating, by the resonant circuit, a first switch to enable power to a detector; detecting, by the detector and after the actuation of the first switch, the data in the command signal;
determining that the data corresponds to an identifier associated with a second switch; and actuating the second switch to enable power to a power consumption device.
11. (New) An apparatus comprising:
one or more processors; and
memory storing computer-readable instructions that, when executed by the one or more processors, cause the apparatus to:
receive, from a user device, an instruction to cause an action associated with a power consumption device; and
send, to a detector and via a resonant frequency associated with the detector, a command signal configured to cause the power consumption device to perform the action,
wherein the command signal comprises data and provides activation power to actuate a switch to enable the detector to draw power from a power source and process the data.
14. An apparatus configured to:
receive, via a resonant frequency, a command signal that comprises data and provides bootstrap power to a detector;
based on the bootstrap power, actuate a switch to enable the detector to draw power from a power line; detect the data in the command signal; and
based on the data in the command signal, enable power to a power consumption device.
7. A system comprising:
a controller configured to transmit a command signal comprising data; and an apparatus comprising: a resonant circuit configured to receive, via a resonant frequency, a command signal comprising data;
a first switch configured to be actuated by the resonant circuit, after the resonant circuit receives the command signal, wherein actuation of the first switch enables power to a detector; and the detector, wherein the detector is configured to: detect, after the actuation of the first switch, the data in the command signal; determine that the data corresponds to an identifier associated with a second switch; and actuate the second switch to enable power to a power consumption device.
19. A system comprising:
a resonant circuit configured to receive a resonant frequency signal that causes a power consumption device to perform an action,
wherein the resonant frequency signal comprises data and provides activation power to actuate a switch; and the switch configured to: after receiving the activation power, enable a detector to draw power from a power source and process the data.
19. An apparatus comprising:
a resonant circuit configured to: receive a resonant frequency signal that comprises data and powers the resonant circuit; and
after receiving the resonant frequency signal, enable bootstrap power to a detector, wherein the bootstrap power actuates a switch to enable the detector to draw power from a power line and process the data.
13. An apparatus comprising:
a resonant circuit configured to receive, via a resonant frequency, a command signal comprising data;
a first switch configured to be actuated by the resonant circuit, after the resonant circuit receives the command signal, wherein actuation of the first switch enables power to a detector; and the detector, wherein the detector is configured to: detect, after the actuation of the first switch, the data in the command signal; determine that the data corresponds to an identifier associated with a second switch; and actuate the second switch to enable power to a power consumption device.
Thus, a later application claim is not patentably distinct from an earlier patent claim if the later claim is anticipated by, the earlier claim. In re Longi, 759 F.2d at 896, 225 USPQ at 651In re Berg, 140 F.3d at 1437, 46 USPQ2d at 1233 (Fed. Cir. 1998) (affirming a holding of obviousness-type double patenting where a patent application claim to a genus is anticipated by a patent claim to a species within that genus).” ELI LILLY AND COMPANY v BARR LABORATORIES, INC., United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit, ON PETITION FOR REHEARING EN BANC (DECIDED: May 30, 2001).
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
The following is a quotation of the appropriate paragraphs of 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)(1) the claimed invention was patented, described in a printed publication, or in public use, on sale, or otherwise available to the public before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
(a)(2) the claimed invention was described in a patent issued under section 151, or in an application for patent published or deemed published under section 122(b), in which the patent or application, as the case may be, names another inventor and was effectively filed before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claim(s) 19-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1)/(a)(2) as being anticipated by U.S. Publication No. 2012/0281547 (hereinafter, “Kim”).
As per claim 19, Kim discloses a system comprising:
a resonant circuit (resonator 121; Fig 1) configured to receive a resonant frequency signal that causes a power consumption device (target device 120; Fig 1) to perform an action, (¶ [0015] discloses how data is received using “resonance frequency”. In response to the data transmitted, the target device 120 may include communication functions that at least, inter alia, includes “a response message corresponding to the request message” ¶ [0015], ¶s [0065]-[0066], Fig’s 2-4)
wherein the resonant frequency signal comprises data (data, that may include command code such as “0000”; ¶ [00152]) and provides activation power to actuate a switch; and (¶ [0153] states “target resonator may be powered ON or powered OFF by controlling switches illustrated in FIGS. 7B and 7C to be powered ON or powered OFF”)
the switch configured to:
after receiving the activation power, enable a detector (control/communication module 126; Fig 1) to draw power from a power source and process the data. (As already noted above, whether to power the target resonator is done by controlling switches illustrated by Fig. 7. In response to powering ON the target resonator, it allows the communication power to be transmitted for “operating the communication module” (¶ [0084)) as further illustrated by Fig. 1)
As per claim 20, Kim discloses a system further comprising: a user device configured to send an instruction to cause the action associated with the power consumption device. (According to ¶ [0047], the power source device may be a “charging station”, in which, to PHOSITA would recognize as a device for car users, thus making the charging station a user device. Further, the power source device transmits “request” or “command” as illustrated by at least Fig’s 3-4, ¶s and [009]), respectively)
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.
Claim(s) 1- 20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over U.S. Publication No. 2007/0213879 (hereinafter, “Iwamura”) in view of U.S. Publication No. 2012/0281547 (hereinafter, “Kim”).
As per claims 1, 11, 191, Iwamura discloses a system further method comprising:
receiving, by a controller and from a user device, an instruction to cause an action associated with a power consumption device; and (at least power consumer devices 140, 141 receiving, by controller of the central controller 130, “command signals over the local PLC network 120 to sensor adaptors to control current and/or power delivery to one or more consumer products coupled with the sensor adaptors.” ¶ [0022])
sending, by the controller to a detector (any of the components 428, 430,440,442 that are part of the sensor adaptors 132; Fig’s 1, 4) and via a resonant frequency associated with the detector, (PLC coupling, which may be an “inductive coupler” ¶ [0037]). It is therefore apparent to a PHOSITA that inductive coupling uses magnetic field frequencies. )
a command signal configured to cause the power consumption device to perform the action, (abstract states “ a PLC interface through which the current usage level is communicated over the PLC power line to the central controller, and an adaptor switch that interrupts current flow to the consumer product in response to a command received over the PLC power line from the central controller “ )
wherein the command signal comprises data and provides activation power to actuate a switch (switch 424; Fig. 4) to enable the detector to draw power from a power source and process the data. (abstract states “ a PLC interface through which the current usage level is communicated over the PLC power line to the central controller, and an adaptor switch that interrupts current flow to the consumer product in response to a command received over the PLC power line from the central controller “ )
Iwamura does not distinctly discloses that the claimed language directed to data is more narrowly interpreted as being a data packet.
However, Kim discloses that. In particular, Kim discloses the following:
receiving, by a controller and from a user device, an instruction to cause an action associated with a power consumption device; and ( ¶ [0047] discloses the power source device that may be a “charging station”, in which, to PHOSITA would recognize as a device for car users, thus making the charging station a user device. Further, the power source device transmits “request” or “command” as illustrated by at least Fig’s 3-4, ¶s and [009]), respectively. Lastly, Fig. 1 illustrates at least one device within the power source that may be interpreted as a controller.)
sending, by the controller to a detector (control/communication module 126; Fig 1) and via a resonant frequency (resonator 121; Fig 1) associated with the detector,
a command signal configured to cause the power consumption device to perform the action, (¶ [0015] discloses how data is received using “resonance frequency”. In response to the data transmitted, the target device 120 may include communication functions that at least, inter alia, includes “a response message corresponding to the request message” ¶ [0015], ¶s [0065]-[0066], Fig’s 2-4)
wherein the command signal comprises data (data, that may include command code such as “0000” ¶ [00152] using a data packet as illustrated by Fig. 5) and provides activation power to actuate a switch (¶ [0153] states “target resonator may be powered ON or powered OFF by controlling switches illustrated in FIGS. 7B and 7C to be powered ON or powered OFF” ) to enable the detector to draw power from a power source and process the data. (As already noted above, whether to power the target resonator is done by controlling switches illustrated by Fig. 7. In response to powering ON the target resonator, it allows the communication power to be transmitted for “operating the communication module” (¶ [0084)) as further illustrated by Fig. 1)
It would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the teachings of Iwamura and Kim because both references are in the same field of endeavor. Kim’s teaching of using a data packet technology would enhance Iwamura's system by enhancing communication efficiency and security of the network.
As per claims 2, 12, Iwamura as modified discloses a method wherein the activation power comprises a boostrap power to activate the detector from a depowered state. (Kim: initially powering the internal components of the target resonator is done by controlling switches illustrated by at least Fig’s 1, 7) & (Iwamura: Iwamura discloses a central controller 130 that allows the adaptor controller 444 to activate the solenoid 426 to open the adaptor switch 424 to interrupt the current flow to the one or more consumer products. ¶ [0042], Fig’s 1-4)
As per claims 3, Iwamura as modified discloses a method wherein sending the command signal comprises sending a wireless signal.( Kim: a communication method of a wireless power transmission and charging system; Fig. 2 ¶ [0015], [022]) & (Iwamura: ¶ [0021], Fig’s 1-4)
As per claims 4, 13, Iwamura as modified discloses a method wherein the data identifies the detector and the power consumption device. (Kim: Fig 7 illustrates a data that identifies target device and at least target resonator) & (Iwamura: Fig’s 1-4)
As per claims 5, 14, Iwamura as modified discloses a method wherein the command signal causes a resonant circuit to provide the activation power to the detector. (Kim: As already noted above, whether to power the target resonator is done by controlling switches illustrated by Fig. 7. In response to powering ON the target resonator, it allows the communication power to be transmitted for “operating the communication module” (¶ [0084)) as further illustrated by Fig. 1) & (Iwamura: Fig’s 1-4)
As per claim(s) 6, 15, Iwamura as modified discloses a method wherein causing the power consumption device to perform the action comprises: determining that the data in the command signal corresponds to an identifier associated with a second switch; and actuating the second switch to enable power to the power consumption device. (Kim: Registration information ¶s [0141]-[148] to indicate an identifier of the target device, a field to indicate a command to be transferred to the target device ¶ [0088]-[0089]Alternatively, Fig 7) & (Iwamura: ¶ [0084] identifiers associated with sensor adaptors for controlling switches 424 to one or more power consuming devices. ¶ [0084], Fig’s 1-4)
As per claim(s) 7, Iwamura as modified discloses a method wherein causing the power consumption device to perform the action comprises: determining that the data in the command signal corresponds to an identifier associated with the power consumption device, enabling power to the power consumption device based on identifier. (Kim: Registration information ¶s [0141]-[148] to indicate an identifier of the target device, a field to indicate a command to be transferred to the target device ¶ [0088]-[0089]Alternatively, Fig 7) & (Iwamura: ¶ [0084] identifiers associated with sensor adaptors for controlling switches 424 to one or more power consuming devices. ¶ [0084], Fig’s 1-4)
As per claim(s) 8, 16, Iwamura as modified discloses a method further comprising: sending, by the controller to the detector and via the resonant frequency, an additional command signal to turn off the power consumption device.(Kim, Fig 1 illustrates switch 124 for controlling power to the charging unit of the target device and Fig’s 7a-c includes a switch for controlling ON/OFF power to the resonator that supplies power to the internal components of the target device. ) & (Iwamura: Fig’s 1-4)
As per claim(s) 9, 17, Iwamura as modified discloses a method wherein sending the command signal comprises sending a digital video recorder recording instruction via the resonant frequency. (Iwamura:TV, DVD ¶ [0026]) & ( Kim: Fig’s 1-5) )
As per claim(s) 10, 18, Iwamura as modified discloses a method wherein sending the command signal comprises: sending the command signal via a power line. (Iwamura: power lines 134, 136)
As per claim 20, Iwamura as modified discloses a method further comprising: a user device configured to send an instruction to cause the action associated with the power consumption device. (Kim: at least power consumer devices 140, 141 receiving, by controller of the central controller 130, “command signals over the local PLC network 120 to sensor adaptors to control current and/or power delivery to one or more consumer products coupled with the sensor adaptors.” ¶ [0022]) & ( Iwamura: (According to ¶ [0047], the power source device may be a “charging station”, in which, to PHOSITA would recognize as a device for car users, thus making the charging station a user device. Further, the power source device transmits “request” or “command” as illustrated by at least Fig’s 3-4, ¶s and [009]), respectively)
Remarks
Applicant's arguments filed on 05-15-2026 with respect to independent claims 1, 11 and 19 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive to the extent that is applicable to the claims.
I. Rejections under 35 U.S.C. §102/103
Independent Claims
Claims 19-20 stand rejected during under Non-Final rejection under 35 U.S.C. § 102(e) over U.S. Publication No. 2012/0281547 (hereinafter, “Kim”). Claims 1-20 stand rejected under Non-Final rejection under 35 U.S.C. § 103 over U.S. Publication No. 2012/0281547 (hereinafter, “Kim”) in view of U.S. Publication No. 2007/0213879 (hereinafter "Iwamura”) .
During examination of patent application, claims are given their broadest reasonable interpretation under the BRI standard. Furthermore, under the BRI, words of the claim must be given their plain meaning. In re Morris, 127 F.3d 1048, 1054-55, 44 USPQ2d 1023, 1027-28 (Fed. Cir. 1997). Limitations appearing in the specification but not recited in the claim are not read into the claim. In re Prater, 415 F.2d 1393, 1404-05, 162 USPQ 541, 550-551 (CCPA 1969)” (MPEP p 2100-8, c 2, I 45-48; p 2100-9, c 1, l 1-4).
As per independent claim 19, Applicants assert that the cited prior art allegedly fails to disclose at least “wherein the resonant frequency signal comprises data and provides activation power to actuate a switch [that] enable[s] a detector to draw power from a power source and process the data.” In particular, Applicant argues that Kim discloses “[a] target device [that] receives power directly via resonant coupling”, but argues that teaching does not read on “the resonance signal to actuate a switch connecting to an independent power source”.
As an initial matter, the Office acknowledges Applicant’s assertion that Kim discloses the invention to a wireless power transmission between a source device and target device via “magnetic coupling” technology. The Office further acknowledges Applicant’s assertion that wireless power and data is communicated via magnetic coupling for “activating a communication module and processor of the target device”. However, the Office disagrees with Applicants assertion that claim 19 is directed to “the resonance signal to actuate a switch connecting to an independent power source” as being alleged. Rather, independent claim 19 is directed, at least in part, to “wherein the resonant frequency signal comprises data and provides activation power to actuate a switch; and the switch configured to: after receiving the activation power, enable a detector to draw power from a power source and process the data.” Clearly, Applicants argued limitations are not the same as limitations recited by claim 19. Therefore, for this reason alone, the Office submits that the cited prior art clearly discloses the language recited in claim 19 because Applicants attempt in establishing a distinction is not recited in the rejected claim(s). Applicant has not provided any specific arguments corresponding to the claims themselves where the Examiner has supposedly erred, other than naked assertions that the corresponding claimed expressions are not found on the prior art. In other words, 37 CFR 1.111 (b) requires specific findings. Simply put, a statement that merely points put what a claim recites cannot be considered an argument for patentability of the claim.
Furthermore, as noted on the outstanding Non-Final office action, Kim is directed to a system for wireless power and data transmission between a source device 110 and a target device 120. (See Fig’s 1-3) This wireless transmission as Applicant has wisely admitted in their remarks, is achieved via magnetic resonant coupling technology, the same technology as “resonant coupling” as recited by claim 19. Kim’s invention further recites how the wireless power transmitted by the source device enables an “on/off” request to a resonator switch (See Fig’s 7A-C) and on/off request to switch 124. Therefore, the “on/off” request to a resonator switch allows target device 120 to be power any of the internal hardware components found in the target device including the “communication module and processor of the target device” like Applicant has acknowledged. Further, the wireless power further causes the activation of switch 124 that allows power to the load device enabling the load device to operate. For these reasons, Kim clearly discloses the language recited in independent claim 19.
Applicant further argues that Iwamura does not discloses “a resonant frequency signal and the switch 124 is actuated by the electric current” further adding that “Iwamura odes not teach the claimed features that “wherein the resonant frequency signal comprises data and provides activation power to actuate a switch that enables a detector to draw power from a power source and process data”.
Again, the Office disagrees with Applicants assertion that claim 19 is directed to “a resonant frequency signal and the switch 124 is actuated by the electric current” as being alleged. Rather, independent claim 19 is directed, at least in part, to “wherein the resonant frequency signal comprises data and provides activation power to actuate a switch; and the switch configured to: after receiving the activation power, enable a detector to draw power from a power source and process the data.” Clearly, Applicants argued limitations are not the same as limitations recited by claim 19. Therefore, for this reason alone, the Office submits that the cited prior art clearly discloses the language recited in claim 19 because Applicants attempt in establishing a distinction is not recited in the rejected claim(s). Applicant has not provided any specific arguments corresponding to the claims themselves where the Examiner has supposedly erred, other than naked assertions that the corresponding claimed expressions are not found on the prior art. In other words, 37 CFR 1.111 (b) requires specific findings. Simply put, a statement that merely points put what a claim recites cannot be considered an argument for patentability of the claim.
As noted in the previous Office Action, Iwamura discloses the invention to “inductive coupling” technology. The same resonant coupling technology recited by claim 19. Further, Iwanura discloses how the PLC interface through which the current usage level is communicated over the PLC power line to the central controller, and an adaptor switch that interrupts current flow to the consumer product in response to a command received over the PLC power line from the central controller. For example, Iwamura discloses a central controller 130 that allows the adaptor controller 444 to activate the solenoid 426 to open the adaptor switch 424 to interrupt the current flow to the one or more consumer products. ¶ [0042] Therefore, applicant's arguments against the references individually, one cannot show nonobviousness by attacking references individually where the rejections are based on combinations of references. See In re Keller, 642 F.2d 413, 208 USPQ 871 (CCPA 1981); In re Merck & Co., 800 F.2d 1091, 231 USPQ 375 (Fed. Cir. 1986)
For at least the above reasons the rejections are maintained.
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 extension fee 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 date of this final action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to AUREL PRIFTI whose telephone number is (571)270-1743. The examiner can normally be reached on M-F 8 a.m.- 6 p.m..
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Andrew J. Jung can be reached on 571-270-3779. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300.
Information regarding the status of an application may be obtained from the Patent Application Information Retrieval (PAIR) system. Status information for published applications may be obtained from either Private PAIR or Public PAIR. Status information for unpublished applications is available through Private PAIR only. For more information about the PAIR system, see http://pair-direct.uspto.gov. Should you have questions on access to the Private PAIR system, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative or access to the automated information system, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
/AUREL PRIFTI/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2175
Aurel Prifti
Primary Examiner
Art Unit 2175
Tel. (571) 270-1743
Fax (571) 270-2743
aurel.prifti@uspto.gov
1 As per independent claim(s) 11, 19, these claims are substantially equivalent to method claim 1, because the additional feature(s) are present on any off the shelf general-purpose computer. Therefore, for at least this reason, claims 11 and 19 also stand rejected. Indeed, at least ¶s [0226], [0028] of Iwamura further disclose the claimed feature directed to one or more processors; and memory storing computer-readable instructions that, when executed by the one or more processors, cause the apparatus as claimed.
Prosecution Insights