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 .
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, 28 are rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claims 1, 21 of U.S. Patent No. 12066558. Although the claims at issue are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other because of the illustration below.
Current Application: claim 1
Patent/co-pending application: claim 1
A method for geolocating a receiver by measuring times of reception, by the receiver, of a plurality of geolocation signals originating from a plurality of emitters, the geolocation signals are emitted on multiple different wavelengths and are sent at predetermined times, at least one geolocation signal having a frequency less than 1GHz,
A method for geolocating a receiver by measuring times of reception, by the receiver, of a plurality of geolocation signals originating from a plurality of
emitters, the geolocation signals are emitted on multiple different wavelengths, at least one
geolocation signal having a frequency less than 1 GHz,
the receiver not having a clock synchronized with the emitters, the method comprising the steps of:
the receiver not having a clock synchronized with the emitters, the method comprising the steps of:
determining, for multiple pairs of emitters M1 and M2, a slice delimited by two hyperbolic surfaces revolving about the straight line linking the
emitters M1 and M2, the two hyperbolas are defined by the position of the emitters M1 and M2 and a difference in length between the points of
the hyperbolas at the two positions of the emitters M1 and M2,
determining, for multiple pairs of emitters M1 and M2, a slice delimited by two hyperbolic surfaces revolving about the straight line linking the emitters M1 and M2, the two hyperbolas are defined by the position of the emitters M1 and M2 and a difference in length between the points of the hyperbolas at the two positions of the emitters M1 and M2,
determining the position of the receiver by intersecting the slices.
determining the position of the receiver by intersecting the slices.
It appears the current claim1 is the same as patented (12066558) claim1 except for the highlighted language of “and are sent at predetermined times”. It is known in the art a emitter (such as BS , AP or terrestrial telecommunication tower) for geolocation has a predetermined transmission period (for example a pilot signal). Claim 28 is rejected as well for the same reason (vs patented claim 21).
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)(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) 1, 28are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) as being anticipated by Sangle-Ferriere (12066558).
The applied reference has a common claims 1 and 21 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.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 2-27, 29-38 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
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to HARRY K LIU whose telephone number is (571)270-1338. The examiner can normally be reached on every M-F 10 AM to 6:30 PM.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, please leave a voice message with application serial number and nature of call, a response within 24 hours can be expected during regular business days. Also, the Examiner’s supervisor Vladimir Magloire can be reached at (571)270-5144. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-270-2338.
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.
/HARRY K LIU/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3645 Tel: (571) 270-1338
Fax: (571) 270-2338
Email: harry.liu@uspto.gov
Prosecution Insights