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 .
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, 11 and 20 are rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claims 1, 13 and 19 of U.S. Patent No. (12,067,774) (hereinafter ‘774). Although the claims at issue are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other because:
Current Application ‘774
Claim 1:
at least one processor;
at least one non-transitory computer-readable medium; and
program instructions stored on the at least one non-transitory computer-readable medium that, when executed by the at least one processor, cause the computing system to:
receive input for creating a new data object related to a construction project, wherein the input is captured via a client-side interface;
pre-process the received input for creating the new data object;
analyze the pre-processed input for creating the new data object utilizing an artificial intelligence (AI) model that functions to predict a type of the new data object to be created;
based on the predicted type of the new data object to be created, identify a schema to use for the new data object; and
create the new data object in accordance with the identified schema.
Claim 1:
at least one processor;
at least one non-transitory computer-readable medium; and
program instructions stored on the at least one non-transitory computer-readable medium that are executable by the at least one processor such that the computing system is configured to:
receive, from a first client station associated with a first user, media content that is descriptive of a given on-site item of a construction site;
apply a speech recognition technique to transcribe audio data included in the media content into text that is descriptive of the given on-site item;
generate a data record for the given on-site item;
pre-populate at least a portion of the transcribed text into one or more fields of the data record for the given on-site item; and
cause a second client station to display the data record to a second user for review.
Current Application ‘774
Claim 11:
receive input for creating a new data object related to a construction project, wherein the input is captured via a client-side interface;
pre-process the received input for creating the new data object;
analyze the pre-processed input for creating the new data object utilizing an artificial intelligence (AI) model that functions to predict a type of the new data object to be created;
based on the predicted type of the new data object to be created, identify a schema to use for the new data object; and
create the new data object in accordance with the identified schema.
Claim 13:
receive, from a first client station associated with a first user, media content that is descriptive of a given on-site item of a construction site;
apply a speech recognition technique to transcribe audio data included in the media content into text that is descriptive of the given on-site item;
generate a data record for the given on-site item;
pre-populate at least a portion of the transcribed text into one or more fields of the data record for the given on-site item; and
cause a second client station to display the data record to a second user for review.
Current Application ‘774
Claim 20:
receiving input for creating a new data object related to a construction project, wherein the input is captured via a client-side interface;
pre-processing the received input for creating the new data object;
analyzing the pre-processed input for creating the new data object utilizing an artificial intelligence (AI) model that functions to predict a type of the new data object to be created;
based on the predicted type of the new data object to be created, identifying a schema to use for the new data object; and
creating the new data object in accordance with the identified schema.
Claim 19:
receiving, from a first client station associated with a first user, media content that is descriptive of a given on-site item of a construction site;
applying a speech recognition technique to transcribe audio data included in the media content into text that is descriptive of the given on-site item;
generating a data record for the given on-site item;
pre-populating at least a portion of the transcribed text into one or more fields of the data record for the given on-site item; and
causing a second client station to display the data record to a second user for review.
Claims 2-10 and 12-19 of the current application do not correspond to any claims of ‘774.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 2-10 and 12-29 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.
Claims 1-20 would be allowed provided the Double Patenting Rejection is overcome.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. Zass et al. (US 2020/0413011 A1).
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to CHARLOTTE M BAKER whose telephone number is (571)272-7459. The examiner can normally be reached Mon - Fri 8:00-5:00.
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, JENNIFER MEHMOOD can be reached at (571)272-2976. 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.
/CHARLOTTE M BAKER/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2664
29 June 2026
Prosecution Insights