CTNF 18/864,586 CTNF 95550 DETAILED ACTION Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status 07-03-aia AIA 15-10-aia The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA. Claim Objections Claims 1-15 are pending in the application. Priority 02-26 AIA Receipt is acknowledged of certified copies of papers required by 37 CFR 1.55. Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112 07-34-01 Claims 5-11 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. Claim 5 in line 2 refers to “the data code”. There are two references to “a data code” in claim 2, on which claim 5 depends (with claim 4 in the interim). It is ambiguous as to whether “the data code” indicates the type of the data (lines 4-5 in claim 2) or whether “the data code” indicates the details of the data. For purposes of examination it is assumed that “the data code” refers to the type of the data. (If “the data code” is to refer to both types of data code, it is suggested that claims 2 and 5 be rewritten.) Claim 6 in line 2 refers to “the data code”. There are two references to “a data code” in claim 2, on which claim 6 depends (with claim 4 in the interim). It is ambiguous as to whether “the data code” indicates the type of the data (lines 4-5 in claim 2) or whether “the data code” indicates the details of the data. For purposes of examination it is assumed that “the data code” refers to the type of the data. (If “the data code” is to refer to both types of data code, it is suggested that claims 2 and 6 be rewritten.) Claim 7 in line 2 refers to “the data code”. There are two references to “a data code” in claim 2, on which claim 7 depends (with claim 4 in the interim). It is ambiguous as to whether “the data code” indicates the type of the data (lines 4-5 in claim 2) or whether “the data code” indicates the details of the data. For purposes of examination it is assumed that “the data code” refers to the type of the data. (If “the data code” is to refer to both types of data code, it is suggested that claims 2 and 7 be rewritten.) Claim 8 in line 2 refers to “the data code”. There are two references to “a data code” in claim 2, on which claim 8 depends (with claim 4 in the interim). It is ambiguous as to whether “the data code” indicates the type of the data (lines 4-5 in claim 2) or whether “the data code” indicates the details of the data. For purposes of examination it is assumed that “the data code” refers to the type of the data. (If “the data code” is to refer to both types of data code, it is suggested that claims 2 and 8 be rewritten.) Claim 9 in line 2 refers to “the data code”. There are two references to “a data code” in claim 2, on which claim 9 depends (with claim 4 in the interim). It is ambiguous as to whether “the data code” indicates the type of the data (lines 4-5 in claim 2) or whether “the data code” indicates the details of the data. For purposes of examination it is assumed that “the data code” refers to the type of the data. (If “the data code” is to refer to both types of data code, it is suggested that claims 2 and 9 be rewritten.) Claim 10 in line 2 refers to “the data code”. There are two references to “a data code” in claim 2, on which claim 10 depends (with claim 4 in the interim). It is ambiguous as to whether “the data code” indicates the type of the data (lines 4-5 in claim 2) or whether “the data code” indicates the details of the data. For purposes of examination it is assumed that “the data code” refers to the type of the data. (If “the data code” is to refer to both types of data code, it is suggested that claims 2 and 10 be rewritten.) Claim 11 contains two ambiguities. The first is a reference to “the data code” in the last line. ”. There are two references to “a data code” in claim 2, on which claim 11 depends. It is ambiguous as to whether “the data code” indicates the type of the data (lines 4-5 in claim 2) or whether “the data code” indicates the details of the data. For purposes of examination it is assumed that “the data code” refers to the type of the data. The second ambiguity in claim 11 is the reference in the last line to “the item”. There are five different items mentioned in claim 2, on which claim 11 depends. For purposes of examination it is assumed that “the item” should be interpreted as “any one of the items”. Allowable Subject Matter 12-151-07 AIA 07-97 12-51-07 Claim s 1-4, and 12-15 are allowed. Conclusion Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to TANYA CHRISTINE SIENKO whose telephone number is (571)272-5816. 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, Kito Robinson can be reached at 571-270-3912. 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. /TANYA C SIENKO/Examiner, Art Unit 3664 /KITO R ROBINSON/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3664 Application/Control Number: 18/864,586 Page 2 Art Unit: 3664 Application/Control Number: 18/864,586 Page 3 Art Unit: 3664 Application/Control Number: 18/864,586 Page 4 Art Unit: 3664 Application/Control Number: 18/864,586 Page 5 Art Unit: 3664
Prosecution Insights