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 .
This action is in response to the amendments filed on 05/13/2026. Claims 1-9 and 11-35 are currently pending, with claims 7-9, 14-16, and 19-34 withdrawn from consideration and claims 1-6, 11-13, 17-18, and 35 addressed on the merits below.
Response to Amendment
The limitation "the predetermined location" in claim 12 contains proper antecedent basis. Accordingly, the previous claim objection has been withdrawn.
Applicant has amended the claims to overcome the 35 U.S.C. 101 rejections. Accordingly, the 35 U.S.C. 101 rejections have been withdrawn.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to claims 1-6, 11-13, 17-18, and 35 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.
Claim Objections
Claim 18 is objected to because of the following informalities: “the including” should read “the collection device including.” Appropriate correction is required.
Claim Interpretation
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(f):
(f) Element in Claim for a Combination. – An element in a claim for a combination may be expressed as a means or step for performing a specified function without the recital of structure, material, or acts in support thereof, and such claim shall be construed to cover the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification and equivalents thereof.
The following is a quotation of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph:
An element in a claim for a combination may be expressed as a means or step for performing a specified function without the recital of structure, material, or acts in support thereof, and such claim shall be construed to cover the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification and equivalents thereof.
The claims in this application are given their broadest reasonable interpretation using the plain meaning of the claim language in light of the specification as it would be understood by one of ordinary skill in the art. The broadest reasonable interpretation of a claim element (also commonly referred to as a claim limitation) is limited by the description in the specification when 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is invoked.
As explained in MPEP § 2181, subsection I, claim limitations that meet the following three-prong test will be interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph:
(A) the claim limitation uses the term “means” or “step” or a term used as a substitute for “means” that is a generic placeholder (also called a nonce term or a non-structural term having no specific structural meaning) for performing the claimed function;
(B) the term “means” or “step” or the generic placeholder is modified by functional language, typically, but not always linked by the transition word “for” (e.g., “means for”) or another linking word or phrase, such as “configured to” or “so that”; and
(C) the term “means” or “step” or the generic placeholder is not modified by sufficient structure, material, or acts for performing the claimed function.
Use of the word “means” (or “step”) in a claim with functional language creates a rebuttable presumption that the claim limitation is to be treated in accordance with 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph. The presumption that the claim limitation is interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is rebutted when the claim limitation recites sufficient structure, material, or acts to entirely perform the recited function.
Absence of the word “means” (or “step”) in a claim creates a rebuttable presumption that the claim limitation is not to be treated in accordance with 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph. The presumption that the claim limitation is not interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is rebutted when the claim limitation recites function without reciting sufficient structure, material or acts to entirely perform the recited function.
Claim limitations in this application that use the word “means” (or “step”) are being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, except as otherwise indicated in an Office action. Conversely, claim limitations in this application that do not use the word “means” (or “step”) are not being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, except as otherwise indicated in an Office action.
This application includes one or more claim limitations that do not use the word “means,” but are nonetheless being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, because the claim limitations use a generic placeholder that is coupled with functional language without reciting sufficient structure to perform the recited function and the generic placeholder is not preceded by a structural modifier. Such claim limitations are:
“an acquisition device” (claim 1)
“a drive device” (claim 18)
“a transmission device” (claim 18)
Because these claim limitations are being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, they are being interpreted to cover the corresponding structure described in the specification ([0177]: “The control devices described with reference to the examples of the present invention can be directly embodied as hardware modules, software modules executed by processors, or combinations of hardware and software modules.”) as performing the claimed function, and equivalents thereof.
If applicant does not intend to have these limitations interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, applicant may: (1) amend the claim limitations to avoid them being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph (e.g., by reciting sufficient structure to perform the claimed function); or (2) present a sufficient showing that the claim limitations recite sufficient structure to perform the claimed function so as to avoid them being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph.
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.
Claims 1-2, 6, 11, 13, 17, and 35 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Nomoto et al., U.S. Patent Application Publication No. 2018/0101154 A1 (hereinafter Nomoto), in view of Tani et al., foreign patent document JP 2012083294 A (hereinafter Tani), in which a translation has been provided in the IDS dated 07/18/2024, and further in view of Ebrahimi Afrouzi et al., U.S. Patent No. 11684886 B1 (hereinafter Ebrahimi).
Regarding claim 1, Nomoto discloses a collection device (Nomoto Fig. 1) comprising:
an acquisition device configured to acquire information regarding a space of a target region (see at least Nomoto [0056]-[0060]: “Once the operation is started, a list of areas to which the HGW 600 is moved is acquired (step SB1)… For example, when the HGW 600 moved in order to measure the temperature of the room, the HGW 600 acquires temperature information from a temperature sensor of the room. Alternatively, when the HGW 600 moved in order to image a flower arranged in the room, the HGW 600 images the flower by using the camera 611. Furthermore, when the HGW 600 moved in order to monitor the open/closed state of a window of the room, the HGW 600 acquires opening/closing information from a window sensor of the room or images the window by using the camera.”);
the control device being configured to set a detection path based on an unreachable region within the space of the target region (see at least Nomoto [0062]: “In step SB3 described above, when it is determined that the HGW 600 cannot reach the unreached area, such an area is excluded from an operation (monitor) target area (step SB21), and the process returns to step SB2.”; [0115]: “The mobile HGW 600 captures an image of a movement path by the camera while moving, and when there is an obstacle, the mobile HGW 600 can avoid the obstacle and keep on moving.”)
and control the collection device to move along the detection path, the detection path including a plurality of operating locations that are preset along the detection path (see at least Nomoto [0048]: “Here, the mapping module 619 capable of storing the places of movement and creating a map will be further described. The mapping module 619 can utilize an image from the camera 611 that is mounted, for example. As the mapping function of the mapping module 619, a simultaneous localization and mapping (SLAM) function, which is the function of simultaneously estimating the self-position and creating the environmental map, is provided. In contrast to a conventional movable body which merely runs randomly on a floor, this SLAM function creates a map of a target area, and operates while constructing an operation (movement) path in accordance with the created map. The SLAM function can refer to imaging data from the camera, create the surrounding environmental map internally, and output the current position information.”);
Nomoto fails to expressly disclose a detection device configured to acquire environmental data including environmental data of the unreachable region detected when the collection device moves along the detection path in the space of the target region. However, Tani teaches
a control device including a processor (see at least Tani [0042]: “The microcomputer 17 mounted on the CO2 environment measuring instrument 100 takes in data from the GPS module 14, the CO2 sensor 11, the temperature sensor 12, and the humidity sensor 13 and stores the data in the microcomputer’s internal memory (not shown).”),
and a detection device configured to acquire environmental data including environmental data of the unreachable region detected when the collection device moves along the detection path in the space of the target region (see at least Tani [0085]: “Therefore, even at points where measurements have not been taken, the CO.sub.2 concentration can be calculated by interpolation from nearby measurement points and displayed.”; [0071]: “FIG. 6 shows an example of a display of the CO.sub.2 concentration measurement result by the data viewing PC 400, and FIG. 7 shows the processing flow…Furthermore, when the CO.sub.2 environment measuring instrument 100 is moved, a straight line is drawn along the movement path.”),
the detection device including a sensor configured to detect a value related to the air in the space of the target region (see at least Tani [0041]: “The CO2 environment measuring device 100 is equipped with a CO2 sensor 11, a temperature sensor 12, and a humidity sensor 13 in order to measure the CO2 concentration, temperature, and humidity at its installation position.”),
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the instant application to modify the device disclosed by Nomoto with the data calculation taught by Tani with reasonable expectation of success. Tani is directed towards the related field of a CO2 environmental measuring device. Therefore, one of ordinary skill in the art would be motivated to modify Nomoto with Tani to accurately and effectively measure an environment (see at least Tani [0019]: “The object of the present invention is to provide a CO2 environment measurement system that can accurately measure the CO2 environment while achieving a compact and low-cost system, and can be easily and effectively used in environmental science research and development, such as determining the environmental state and estimating environmental changes based on the measurement data.”).
Nomoto in view of Tani fail to expressly disclose recording a location of the collection device as a deviation location upon determining that the collection device deviates from the detection path. However, Ebrahimi teaches wherein the control device being further configured to control the collection device to
record a location of the collection device as a deviation location upon determining that the collection device has deviated from the detection path (see at least Ebrahimi Col. 50, lines 52-54: “In some embodiments, a new map may be stored as a separate entry when the difference between a stored map and the new map exceeds a certain threshold.”; Col. 61, lines 20-22: “For example, during manual training a processor may learn to avoid a particular area due to high obstacle density and may mark it in the map.”),
after recording the deviation location, move to a next operating location among the plurality of operating locations and perform detection while moving along the detection path, and return to the deviation location and perform detection at the deviation location after completing movement along the detection path (see at least Ebrahimi Col. 63, line 54-Col. 64, line 8: “In some embodiments, the processor of the robot described herein may identify high obstacle density areas. In some embodiments, the robot may cover open or low obstacle density areas first then cover high obstacle density areas or vice versa. FIG. 25B illustrates an example of a path 2405 of the robot that covers open or low obstacle density areas first then high obstacle density areas…In another example, the robot covers the majority of areas initially, particularly open or low obstacle density areas, leaving high obstacle density areas uncovered. The robot may then execute a wall follow to cover all edges. The robot may finally cover high obstacle density areas (e.g., under tables and chairs).”; this limitation is taught through the combination of Ebrahimi and Tani, where Tani teaches performing detection of a value related to the air along the detection path (see at least Tani [0093])).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the instant application to modify the device disclosed by Nomoto in view of Tani with Ebrahimi with reasonable expectation of success. Ebrahimi is directed towards the related field of an autonomous robotic vacuum with vibrating air filter. Therefore, one of ordinary skill in the art would be motivated to modify Nomoto in view of Tani with Ebrahimi to improve efficient navigation and task completion (see at least Ebrahimi Col. 2, lines 3-12: “To operate autonomously or with minimal (or less than fully manual) input and/or external control within an environment, methods such as mapping, localization, path planning, object and user recognition, and user authentication methods, among others, are required such that robotic devices may interact with users, autonomously create a map of the environment, subsequently use the map for navigation, and devise intelligent path and task plans for efficient navigation and task completion.”).
Regarding claim 2, Nomoto in view of Tani and Ebrahimi teach all elements of the collection device according to claim 1 as explained above. Tani further teaches
wherein acquiring the environmental data includes calculating environmental data inside the unreachable region based on environmental data of a region in a surrounding area of the unreachable region (see at least Tani [0085]: “Therefore, even at points where measurements have not been taken, the CO.sub.2 concentration can be calculated by interpolation from nearby measurement points and displayed.”).
Regarding claim 6, Nomoto in view of Tani and Ebrahimi teach all elements of the collection device according to claim 1 as explained above. Nomoto further teaches wherein acquiring information inside the space of the target region includes
acquiring information inside the space of the target region by recognizing or scanning a layout within the space of the target region using a camera or acquiring information inside the space of the target region from Building Information Modeling (see at least Nomoto [0048]: “Here, the mapping module 619 capable of storing the places of movement and creating a map will be further described. The mapping module 619 can utilize an image from the camera 611 that is mounted, for example. As the mapping function of the mapping module 619, a simultaneous localization and mapping (SLAM) function, which is the function of simultaneously estimating the self-position and creating the environmental map, is provided.”; Nomoto teaches at least recognizing or scanning a layout within the space of the target region using a camera).
Regarding claim 11, Nomoto in view of Tani and Ebrahimi teach all elements of the collection device according to claim 1 as explained above. Nomoto further teaches
wherein detection performed by the detection device includes at least one of performing detection at a predetermined location, performing detection at a predetermined time, and performing detection at a predetermined distance (see at least Nomoto [0054]: “The HGW 600 starts the operation based on, for example, an operation setting based on a timer set by the user, the user's direct operation, or some kind of detection information from the other sensors.”; Nomoto teaches at least performing detection at a predetermined time).
Regarding claim 13, Nomoto in view of Tani and Ebrahimi teach all elements of the collection device according to claim 1 as explained above. Nomoto further teaches
wherein the detection path includes one of a Z-shaped detection path, a character-shaped detection path, a circular detection path, and a region-specific detection path (see at least Nomoto [0048]: “In contrast to a conventional movable body which merely runs randomly on a floor, this SLAM function creates a map of a target area, and operates while constructing an operation (movement) path in accordance with the created map.”; Nomoto teaches at least a region-specific detection path).
Regarding claim 17, Nomoto in view of Tani and Ebrahimi teach all elements of the collection device according to claim 1 as explained above. Tani further teaches
wherein the acquired environmental data is used to generate an environmental data distribution state map (see at least Tani [0094]-[0095]: “For example, as shown in FIG. 12, the CO.sub.2 concentration measured at multiple locations are displayed in a gradation on a map. In the example display in the figure, map G1 shows a shrine forest, a shopping district, and roads, and map G2 shows the morning CO.sub.2 concentration around the road increases due to the morning rush hour, but the CO.sub.2 concentration in the forest remains low, which is shown by different colors (red for high concentration, blue for low concentration). Furthermore, in daytime Figure G3, the traffic volume on the road decreases, causing a slight decrease in CO.sub.2 concentration, while people are out in the shopping district, causing an increase in CO.sub.2 concentration, and the CO.sub.2 concentration in the forest also increases slightly. Furthermore, in Figure G4 at night, there is almost no traffic on the roads, so the CO.sub.2 concentration drops, and the CO.sub.2 concentration in the shopping district and forest also drops…In this way, by moving the gradation over time, the change in CO.sub.2 concentration is dynamically displayed.”).
Regarding claim 35, this claim recites a method performed by the collection device of claim 1. The combination of Nomoto in view of Tani and Ebrahimi also teaches a method performed by the collection device of claim 1, as outlined in the rejection of claim 1 above. Therefore, claim 35 is rejected for the same rationale as claim 1.
Claims 3-5 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Nomoto in view of Tani and Ebrahimi, and further in view of Fernandez Guzman et al., U.S. Patent Application Publication No. 2024/0103547 A1 (hereinafter Fernandez Guzman).
Regarding claim 3, Nomoto in view of Tani and Ebrahimi teach all elements of the collection device according to claim 2 as explained above. Nomoto in view of Tani and Ebrahimi fail to expressly disclose calculating environmental data inside the unreachable region based on pieces of environmental data of regions in the surrounding area of the unreachable region detected along different detection paths. However, Fernandez Guzman teaches
wherein the environmental data inside the unreachable region is calculated based on pieces of environmental data of regions in the surrounding area of the unreachable region detected along different detection paths (see at least Fernandez Guzman [0068]: “If data between one of the field robots 1 to 5 being outside of the reach R.sub.20 of the logistic unit 20 and the logistic unit 20 being outside of the reach R.sub.1 to R.sub.5 of the corresponding robot 1 to 5 shall be exchanged through the short range communication devices 11 and 21, the corresponding robot 1 to 5 would need to approximate to the logistic unit 20 until the robot 1 to 5 and the logistic unit 20 are mutually covered by their reaches R.sub.1 to R.sub.5 and R.sub.20.”; [0058]: “Field robot 1 is allocated to subfield 7.1, field robot 2 is allocated to subfield 7.2, and so on, whereas each field robot 1 to 5 has its own path 9.1 to 9.5 to traverse and to treat its correlated subfield 7.1 to 7.5.”; Fernandez Guzman [0059] teaches environmental data because the data includes conditions of the plants or soil of the agricultural field).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the instant application to modify the device disclosed by Nomoto in view of Tani and Ebrahimi with the calculating data based on data detected along different detection paths taught by Fernandez Guzman with reasonable expectation of success. Fernandez Guzman is directed towards the related field of data exchange between a plurality of robotic units. Therefore, one of ordinary skill in the art would be motivated to modify Nomoto in view of Tani and Ebrahimi with Fernandez Guzman to obtain data without requiring a mobile object to return to obtain the desired data (see at least Fernandez Guzman [0008]: “it is an objective of the present disclosure to provide a robotic system for transferring data, especially a fast transfer of a great amount of data, between a mobile robot and another robotic unit without the need of the mobile robot to return to the robotic unit for the transfer of data and to provide a method to get at least three robotic units connected to build up a communication chain.”).
Regarding claim 4, Nomoto in view of Tani, Ebrahimi, and Fernandez Guzman teach all elements of the collection device according to claim 3 as explained above. Tani further teaches wherein calculating environmental data inside the unreachable region based on the pieces of environmental data of the regions in the surrounding area of the unreachable region detected along different detection paths includes
identifying, for each of the detection paths, a relationship between a location in the surrounding area of the unreachable region and a piece of environmental data (see at least Tani [0094]: “For example, as shown in FIG. 12, the CO.sub.2 concentration measured at multiple locations are displayed in a gradation on a map…Concentrations at locations where measurements were not taken will be calculated from nearby measurement points.”),
and calculating environmental data inside the unreachable region based on the identified relationships between the locations and the pieces of environmental data (see at least Tani [0081]-[0082]: “(S12) From the acquired position information, several nearby measurement points are extracted …(S13) An interpolated value at the same time is calculated from the extracted neighboring measurement points by intra-element interpolation. For example, calculation of an interpolated value when there are three adjacent measurement points will be described”).
Regarding claim 5, Nomoto in view of Tani, Ebrahimi, and Fernandez Guzman teach all elements of the collection device according to claim 4 as explained above. Ebrahimi further teaches
wherein an average value of a plurality of pieces of environmental data or an average value of a pair of pieces of environmental data out of the plurality of pieces of environmental data with a lowest mean squared error is treated as the environmental data of the unreachable region (This limitation is taught through the combination of Tani and Ebrahimi. Tani discloses determining the environmental data of the unreachable region using a plurality of environmental data (see at least Tani [0085]). Tani fails to expressly disclose the average value of data with a lowest mean squared error. However, Ebrahimi teaches determining an average value of a plurality of environmental data using minimum mean squared error (see at least Ebrahimi Col. 15, lines 8-14: “The minimum sum of errors may also be used to adjust and calculate new readings for the overlapping area to compensate for the lack of precision between overlapping readings perceived within the first and second fields of view. By way of further example, the minimum mean squared error may be used to provide a more precise estimate of readings within the overlapping area.”; Ebrahimi Col. 9, lines 5-7 teaches the data is environmental data). Therefore, the combination of Tani and Ebrahimi teach the entirety of this limitation).
Claim 12 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Nomoto in view of Tani and Ebrahimi, and further in view of Hayashida et al., U.S. Patent Application Publication No. 2024/0272645 A1 (hereinafter Hayashida).
Regarding claim 12, Nomoto in view of Tani and Ebrahimi teach all elements of the collection device according to claim 1 as explained above. Nomoto in view of Tani and Ebrahimi fail to expressly disclose moving the collection device to a predetermined location to perform its detection when switching the detection path. However, Hayashida teaches
wherein when switching the detection path, the collection device immediately moves to a predetermined location and performs its detection, or moves to the predetermined location at a predetermined time and performs its detection (see at least Hayashida [0046]: “Here, the setting may be such that when it is determined that the work using the second route setting method is completed, the setting method is switched to the first route setting method.”; [0125]: “The information processing system, configured to further execute a detection step of detecting an object in the work area, wherein the second method is a method of resetting, based on the acquired boundary information and a position of the detected object, the route each time the work machine travels a predetermined distance.”).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the instant application to modify the device disclosed by Nomoto in view of Tani and Ebrahimi with Hayashida with reasonable expectation of success. Hayashida is directed towards the related field of an information processing system for a work machine that travels along a path. Therefore, one of ordinary skill in the art would be motivated to modify Nomoto in view of Tani and Ebrahimi with Hayashida to improve likelihood that a set route has high work quality (see at least Hayashida [0005]: “In view of the above circumstances, the present invention provides an information processing system, etc. capable of improving a likelihood that a route with high work quality is set in a work area.”).
Claim 18 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Nomoto in view of Tani and Ebrahimi, and further in view of Bier et al., U.S. Patent Application Publication No. 2023/0054574 A1 (hereinafter Bier).
Regarding claim 18, Nomoto in view of Tani and Ebrahimi teach all elements of the collection device according to claim 1 as explained above. Nomoto further teaches
a drive device configured to drive in order to operate the collection device (see at least Nomoto [0040]: “Further, the HGW 600 comprises an actuator 618a which drives and controls the aforementioned movable device 618.”),
the control device being configured to control the drive device to move the collection device along a preset detection path or an updated detection path (see at least Nomoto [0115]: “The mobile HGW 600 captures an image of a movement path by the camera while moving, and when there is an obstacle, the mobile HGW 600 can avoid the obstacle and keep on moving.”).
Tani further teaches
and a transmission device configured to transmit a data signal to a database (see at least Tani [0037]: “Furthermore, the output data from each CO.sub.2 concentration measuring device 100 stored in the data collection PC 200 is transmitted to the server 300 via the Internet and accumulated in the database of the server 300.”)
Nomoto in view of Tani and Ebrahimi fail to expressly disclose the device including a propeller or a balloon. However, Bier teaches
the including a propeller or a balloon (see at least Bier [0063]: “Through such movement, a robotic device may perform one or more automatic functions or function sets. Examples of such operations, functions or tasks may include, without limitation, operating wheels or propellers to effectuate driving, flying or other transportation actions, operating robotic lifts for loading, unloading, medical-related processes, construction-related processes, and/or the like.”)
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the instant application to modify the device disclosed by Nomoto in view of Tani and Ebrahimi with Bier with reasonable expectation of success. Bier is directed towards the related field of collecting building environmental data. Therefore, one of ordinary skill in the art would be motivated to modify Nomoto in view of Tani and Ebrahimi with Bier to improve data collection reliability (see at least Bier [0007]: “To prevent data loss, a reliable way to collect the data from all such sensors in a building, and to do so often enough that no data is lost, is needed.”).
Conclusion
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.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ELIZABETH J SLOWIK whose telephone number is (571)270-5608. The examiner can normally be reached MON - FRI: 0900-1700.
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, ANISS CHAD can be reached at (571)270-3832. 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.
/ELIZABETH J SLOWIK/Examiner, Art Unit 3662
/ANISS CHAD/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3662
Prosecution Insights