DETAILED FINAL OFFICE 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 .
Comments/Response to Amendment Remarks
The text of 37 CFR 1.111(b) is as follows:
“(b) In order to be entitled to reconsideration or further examination, the applicant or patent owner must reply to the Office action. The reply by the applicant or patent owner must be reduced to a writing which distinctly and specifically points out the supposed errors in the examiner’s action and must reply to every ground of objection and rejection in the prior Office action. The reply must present arguments pointing out the specific distinctions believed to render the claims, including any newly presented claims, patentable over any applied references. If the reply is with respect to an application, a request may be made that objections or requirements as to form not necessary to further consideration of the claims be held in abeyance until allowable subject matter is indicated. The applicant’s or patent owner’s reply must appear throughout to be a bona fide attempt to advance the application or the reexamination proceeding to final action. A general allegation that the claims define a patentable invention without specifically pointing out how the language of the claims patentably distinguishes them from the references does not comply with the requirements of this section.” (Bold added).
This office action is in response to the amendment of June 29, 2026.
The information disclosure statement (IDS) of July 23, 2026 has been considered during examination.
The rejections of claims 1-17 under 35 USC 101 as set forth in the office action of April 3, 2026 have been overcome by the amendment of June 29, 2026 and by the remarks with that amendment.
The rejections of claims 1-17 under 35 USC 112(b) as set forth in the office action of April 3, 2026 have been overcome by the amendment of June 29, 2026 and by the remarks with that amendment, EXCEPT for those rejections that are maintained below.
First, it is noted that Applicant has responded to the maintained rejections under 35 USC 112(b) as follows (Amendment: page 10):
“All recitations of "backup data" are amended to read "backup data point(s)". All recitations of "auxiliary data" are amended to read "auxiliary data point(s)". All recitations of "the echo signal" are amended to read "the at lased one echo signal".
As for Applicant’s first point, it does not in any way respond to the rejection under 35 USC 112(b) as to the lack of clarity of the terms “backup data” or “auxiliary data” as set forth in the office action of April 3, 2026. So, those rejections are maintained and repeated below.
Second, it is noted that Applicant has responded to the maintained rejections under 35 USC 112(b) as follows (Amendment: page 11, first paragraph);
“Other terms, "total composite degree (of a backup data point)" is defined in paragraph [0068] as a value indicating the similarity between the backup data point and other backup data points in the same measurement period, as well as with measurement data points in adjacent measurement periods; "main composite degree," "auxiliary composite degree," and "cross composite degree" are the values associated with the backup data point Si, and the Specification describes these values and their calculations in detail.”
As for Applicant’s second point, paragraph [0068] is of no real help to define the listed unclear terms in that paragraph [0068] attempts to define these terms using other unclear terms. The general allegation at the end of Applicant’s second point that “the Specification describes these values and their calculations in detail” does nothing to clarify the listed terms. So, those rejections are maintained and repeated below.
Rejections of Record as Maintained
Claims 1-17 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor (or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the applicant), regards as the invention.
In independent claim 1, each of the terms, “backup data,” “auxiliary data,” and, “total composite degree” is indefinite and unclear in context in that these are not known terms in the prior art and in that they are not defined in the specification.
In dependent claim 2, the terms “backup data” and “auxiliary data” are indefinite and unclear in context in that these are not known terms in the prior art and in that they are not defined in the specification. Substantially the same remarks apply to dependent claims 3 and 4.
In dependent claim 5, each of the terms, “backup data,” “auxiliary data,” “total composite degree,” “main composite degree,” “auxiliary composite degree,” and, “cross composite degree” is indefinite and unclear in context in that these are not known terms in the prior art and in that they are not defined in the specification.
In dependent claim 6, the terms, “main composite degree” and “backup data” are indefinite and unclear in context in that these are not known terms in the prior art and in that they are not defined in the specification. Substantially the same remarks apply to dependent claim 7.
In dependent claim 8, the terms, “auxiliary composite degree” and “backup data” are indefinite and unclear in context in that these are not known terms in the prior art and in that they are not defined in the specification. Substantially the same remarks apply to dependent claim 9.
In dependent claim 10, the terms, “cross composite degree” and “backup data” are indefinite and unclear in context in that these are not known terms in the prior art and in that they are not defined in the specification. Substantially the same remarks apply to dependent claim 11.
In dependent claim 12, the terms, “total composite degree” and “backup data” are indefinite and unclear in context in that these are not known terms in the prior art and in that they are not defined in the specification. Substantially the same remarks apply to dependent claim 13.
In independent claim 16, each of the terms, “backup data,” “auxiliary data,” “composite degree,” and, “total composite degree” is indefinite and unclear in context in that these are not known terms in the prior art and in that they are not defined in the specification.
In independent claim 17, each of the terms, “backup data,” “auxiliary data,” and, “total composite degree” is indefinite and unclear in context in that these are not known terms in the prior art and in that they are not defined in the specification.
Each of dependent claims 2-15 is unclear, at least, in that it depends from unclear, independent claim 1.
Rejections as Necessitated by the Amendment
Claims 1-17 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor (or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the applicant), regards as the invention.
In each of claims 1-17 as newly-amended, each and every mention of “backup data point”; “backup data points”; “auxiliary data point,” and “auxiliary data points” is indefinite and unclear in context in that these terms are not mentioned in the specification and in that the antecedent in the specification for each of these terms in unclear. 37 CFR 1.75(d)(1).
Each of dependent claims 2-15 is unclear, at least, in that it depends from unclear, independent claim 1.
Potentially-Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 1, 16, and 17 would be allowable if rewritten or amended to overcome the rejection(s) under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), 2nd paragraph, set forth in this Office action.
Claims 2-15 would be allowable if rewritten to overcome the rejection(s) under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), 2nd paragraph, set forth in this Office action and to include all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
Claims 1-17 are potentially-allowable in the none of the prior art discloses the claimed features related to the terms “backup data,” “backup data point,” “backup data points,” “auxiliary data,” “auxiliary data point,” “auxiliary data points,” “total composite degree,” “main composite degree,” “auxiliary composite degree,” or “cross composite degree.”
Finality of this Office Action
Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a). 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 nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) 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 mailing date of this final action.
Contact Information
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to BERNARR E GREGORY whose telephone number is (571)272-6972. The examiner can normally be reached on Mondays through Fridays from 7:30 am to 3:30 pm eastern time.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Vladimir Magloire, can be reached at telephone number 571-270-5144. 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 Patent Center. Status information for published applications may be obtained from Patent Center. Status information for unpublished applications is available through Patent Center to authorized users only. Should you have questions about access to the USPTO patent electronic filing system, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free).
Examiner interviews are available via a variety of formats. See MPEP § 713.01. To schedule an interview, applicant is encouraged to use the USPTO Automated Interview Request (AIR) Form at https://www.uspto.gov/InterviewPractice.
/BERNARR E GREGORY/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3648
Prosecution Insights