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 .
Prosecution Status
Applicant’s amendments filed 12/23/2025 have been received and reviewed. The status of the claims is as follows:
Claims 1-20 are pending.
In light of errors in the previous action within rejection statements regarding the disposition of the claims, the present action is being made non-final. The Examiner notes that claim 20 was erroneously asserted to be parallel to claims 1 and 10, and was rejected therewith. Additionally, Independent claim 19 was objected to, rather than rejected. Those errors are corrected herein.
Specification
The title of the invention is not descriptive. A new title is required that is clearly indicative of the invention to which the claims are directed.
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.
1. Claims 1, 10, 19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Harvill et al. (US 20240020430 A1, hereinafter Harvill) in view of MacInnes et al. (US 20050081161 A1, hereinafter MacInnes).
The applied reference (Harvill) has a common assignee with the instant application. Based upon the earlier effectively filed date of the reference, it constitutes prior art under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2).
This rejection under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) might be overcome by: (1) a showing under 37 CFR 1.130(a) that the subject matter disclosed in the reference was obtained directly or indirectly from the inventor or a joint inventor of this application and is thus not prior art in accordance with 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(A); (2) a showing under 37 CFR 1.130(b) of a prior public disclosure under 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(B) if the same invention is not being claimed; or (3) a statement pursuant to 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(C) establishing that, not later than the effective filing date of the claimed invention, the subject matter disclosed in the reference and the claimed invention were either owned by the same person or subject to an obligation of assignment to the same person or subject to a joint research agreement.
Regarding Claim 1
Harvill discloses a computer-implemented method for real-time animation and customization of products on a client-side device, the method comprising:
receiving, by a web service or user interface, external inputs in the form of key+value pairs; (see at least ¶71, 213)
updating, by a processor, key-value pairs of a product description stored within a functional data container in response to the received external inputs; (see at least ¶80)
triggering, by the processor, stored resources within the functional data container to generate a plurality of image frames representing stages of customization of the product; (see at least ¶610)
displaying, on a display of the client-side device, the plurality of image frames as an animation in real-time to visualize the customization of the product; (see at least ¶353, 612)
storing, in a memory of the client-side device, the functional data container and a set of product options as key+value pairs; (see at least ¶80)
editing and updating, by the user, a client user interface displaying key-value pairs of the product description locally on the client-side device and displaying the result without requiring a direct connection to the web service; (see at least ¶353, 610)
transmitting to a web service, via a communication interface of the client-side device, the edited and updated key-value pairs of the product description; (see at least ¶602)
Harvill does not explicitly disclose, but MacInnes teaches, in a similar environment:
optimizing, by employing data compression techniques, by a distributed system comprising the web service or user interface and the client-side device, the portability and performance of the functional data container to mitigate negative performance effects due to slow or disrupted network connectivity and to enhance the speed and rendering of the edited and updated key-value pairs of the product description. (MacInnes: see at least ¶74: object representing products such as furniture items converted into compressed format)
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of filing to have modified the invention of Harvill, with the compression techniques of MacInnes, since such a modification would have advantageously lessened the burden on system resources during the planning and rendering operations of application (MacInnes: ¶74).
Regarding Claims 10, 19
Claims 10 and 19 are substantially similar in scope to claim 1 and are rejected on similar grounds.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 2-9, 11-18, 21 would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to the 35 USC 112 rejection have been fully considered, and are persuasive in light of the present amendments. Accordingly, the rejection has been withdrawn.
Applicant’s arguments with respect to the prior art rejection have been considered but are moot because the new ground of rejection does not rely on any reference applied in the prior rejection of record for any teaching or matter specifically challenged in the argument.
Applicant’s arguments with respect to the objection to the title have been fully considered, but they are not persuasive. Applicant argues that the present title of “CONTAINERS FOR STORING AND TRANSMITTING REPRESENTATIONS OF CUSTOMIZABLE PRODUCTS” accurately and succinctly identifies the subject matter of the claimed invention. The Examiner respectfully disagrees. The present claims are not directed towards the containers themselves, but are instead directed to a method, apparatus, and media that make use of the containers. The present title indicates neither the statutory class to which the claims are actually directed, nor the specific usage of containers with the claims. Accordingly, the objection is maintained above.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to MICHAEL A MISIASZEK whose telephone number is (571)272-6961. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Thursday. 8:00 AM - 5:30 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, Jeffrey Smith can be reached at 571272-6763. 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.
/MICHAEL MISIASZEK/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3688