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 Office Action is in response to Applicant’s amendment filed 12/16/2025. Claims 1 and 3-11 are currently pending in this application.
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.
Claims 1 and 3-11 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Dutkin et al. (U.S. 2020/0094709 A1) in view of Carter (U.S. 2009/0278390 A1).
Claim 1, Dutkin teaches:
A proximity alert device (Dutkin, Fig. 1: 102), comprising:
a housing (Dutkin, Fig. 1: 102);
a circuitry located within the housing (Dutkin, Fig. 3: 302);
an interface in communication with the circuitry, the interface configured to send data through the circuitry to perform a task (Dutkin, Fig. 3: 302, Paragraphs [0047-0048], The circuit 302 determines the presence of a mass, and communicates the determination to the automotive system 114, the portable device 104, and the fob 106 (or other wearable device), which is at least one task.), the interface including a microphone to capture sound (Dutkin, Paragraphs [0027] and [0032], The circuit includes an optional microphone, and it is obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, at the time of filing, for microphones to capture sound.); and
a remote electronic device in wireless communication with the circuitry (Dutkin, Fig. 3: 104, 106, Paragraph [0048], The term “remote” is interpreted as being separate and away from the infant car seat 102.), the circuitry configured to monitor the location of the remote electronic device (Dutkin, Paragraphs [0066-0068], The circuit, i.e. circuit 302, monitors the distance between the circuit and a portable electronic device.);
wherein the circuitry is configured to automatically emit a notification when the location of the remote electronic device exceeds a preselected distance from the circuitry (Dutkin, Fig. 6, Paragraphs [0066-0072], In response to the method determining that the distance between the circuit and the one or more electronic devices is greater than a threshold, the method sends an alert to the one or more electronic devices. It is noted that the method operates without the need for input from a user, and is therefore automatic.).
Dutkin does not specifically teach:
Wherein the interface and the remote electronic device are configured to have two- way communication such that a message can be transmitted from the interface to remote electronic device to provide instructions for retrieval, the message being captured via the microphone and relayed through the remote electronic device.
Carter teaches:
Wherein the interface and the remote electronic device are configured to have two- way communication such that a message can be transmitted from the interface to remote electronic device, the message being captured via the microphone and relayed through the remote electronic device (Carter, Paragraph [0101], The speaker and microphone of the car seat assembly 10 allows the child to place a phone call, i.e. two-way communication, with a provided contact list.).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, at the time of filing, to modify the system in Dutkin by integrating the teaching of a car seat assembly, as taught by Carter.
The motivation would be to enable emergency contacting for the child in the car seat assembly (see Carter, Paragraph [0101]).
As per the limitation of the message to provide instructions for retrieval, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, at the time of filing, for the conversation between the child in the child seat and the person on the contact list, to include a message for aiding in the retrieval of a lost item. Additionally, “retrieval” may also refer to the child wanting the person on the contact list, e.g. the parents, to retrieve the child from the child seat.
Claim 3, Dutkin in view of Carter further teaches:
The device of claim 2, wherein the remote electronic device is configured to automatically emit the sound and the message, the message being at least pre-recorded or captured via the microphone after receipt of the notification (Carter, Paragraph [0101], During a phone call, the receiver of the telephone call, e.g. a cellular phone, would automatically emit the sound captured by the microphone of the car seat assembly 10.).
Claim 4, Dutkin in view of Carter further teaches:
The device of claim 1, wherein the interface is configured to pair the circuitry with the remote electronic device (Dutkin, Paragraphs [0033-0035], The device 102 is paired with smartphone 104 , a key fob 106, and an automotive system 114 via a short-range communication link, e.g. Bluetooth.).
Claim 5, Dutkin in view of Carter teaches:
The device of claim 1, and a low-power state (Dutkin, Paragraph [0026]).
Dutkin in view of Carter does not explicitly teach:
Wherein the interface is configured to turn on and off the circuitry.
However, it would have been obvious to one ordinary skill in the art, at the time of filing, to allow for the circuit in Dutkin in view of Carter to be turned on and off, e.g. to turn off transceiver 310 and portions of processor 306 and 308 when in the low-powered state.
The motivation would be to conserve the batter 323 (see Dutkin, Fig. 3: 323, Paragraph [0047]).
Claim 6, Dutkin in view of Carter further teaches:
The device of claim 1, wherein the interface is configured to play or select audible sounds (Dutkin, Paragraph [0032], Because the device 102 has a speaker, it is configured to play audible sounds.).
Claim 7, Dutkin in view of Carter further teaches:
The device of claim 1, wherein the interface is configured to capture audible sounds (Dutkin, Paragraph [0032], Because the device 102 has a microphone, it is configured to capture audible sounds.).
Claim 8, Dutkin in view of Carter further teaches:
The device of claim 1, wherein the interface is configured to play audible sounds (Dutkin, Paragraph [0032], Because the device 102 has a speaker, it is configured to play audible sounds.).
Claim 9, Dutkin in view of Carter further teaches:
The device of claim 1, wherein the circuitry includes a battery (Dutkin, Fig. 3: 323).
Claim 10, Dutkin in view of Carter further teaches:
The device of claim 1.
Dutkin in view of Carter does not specifically teach:
Wherein the housing includes a circular loop.
However, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, at the time of filing, to modify the shape of circuit 302 of device 102 to include a circular portion, i.e. a circular loop. Such a modification would not change the principal operation of the system, as a whole, and would yield predictable results. See MPEP 2144.04.
Claim 11, Dutkin in view of Carter further teaches:
The device of claim 1.
Dutkin in view of Carter does not explicitly teach:
Wherein the location of the remote electronic device is transmitted to the circuitry.
However, Dutkin in view of Carter discloses that the proximity module 320 can determine the proximity of the portable device 104 and the fob 106 or other wearable device to the circuit 302 utilizing GPS data, wherein utilizing GPS data requires the GPS data of the circuit and the GPS data of the portable device (see Dutkin, Paragraph [0066]). Thus, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, at the time of filing, for the portable devices to share/transmit their GPS data to the proximity module 320 in order for the proximity module 320 to perform the step of determining proximity via GPS. Such a modification would ensure that the system is capable of performing its intended function.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 12/16/2025 have been fully considered but they are moot in view of the new grounds of rejection, necessitated by the Applicant’s amendment.
In response to applicant's argument that the Applicant’s claimed invention, as currently amended, requires the step of providing a message that provides instructions for retrieval, a recitation of the intended use of the claimed invention must result in a structural difference between the claimed invention and the prior art in order to patentably distinguish the claimed invention from the prior art. If the prior art structure is capable of performing the intended use, then it meets the claim. Thus, in the combination of Dutkin in view of Carter, a conversation may be had between the child and the person on the contact list, any kind of conversation may be had between said persons, dependent on the capabilities of the child and the person on the contact list. Additionally, the claims do not inherently or explicitly recite that “instructions for retrieval” are specific to a device, e.g. an electronic device.
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 JAMES J YANG whose telephone number is (571)270-5170. The examiner can normally be reached 9:30am-6:00p M-F.
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, BRIAN ZIMMERMAN can be reached at (571) 272-3059. 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.
/JAMES J YANG/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2686