DETAILED ACTION
The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
Specification
The following guidelines illustrate the preferred layout for the specification of a utility application. These guidelines are suggested for the applicant’s use.
Arrangement of the Specification
As provided in 37 CFR 1.77(b), the specification of a utility application should include the following sections in order. Each of the lettered items should appear in upper case, without underlining or bold type, as a section heading. If no text follows the section heading, the phrase “Not Applicable” should follow the section heading:
(a) TITLE OF THE INVENTION.
(b) CROSS-REFERENCE TO RELATED APPLICATIONS.
(c) STATEMENT REGARDING FEDERALLY SPONSORED RESEARCH OR DEVELOPMENT.
(d) THE NAMES OF THE PARTIES TO A JOINT RESEARCH AGREEMENT.
(e) INCORPORATION-BY-REFERENCE OF MATERIAL SUBMITTED ON A READ-ONLY OPTICAL DISC, AS A TEXT FILE OR AN XML FILE VIA THE PATENT ELECTRONIC SYSTEM.
(f) STATEMENT REGARDING PRIOR DISCLOSURES BY THE INVENTOR OR A JOINT INVENTOR.
(g) BACKGROUND OF THE INVENTION.
(1) Field of the Invention.
(2) Description of Related Art including information disclosed under 37 CFR 1.97 and 1.98.
(h) BRIEF SUMMARY OF THE INVENTION.
(i) BRIEF DESCRIPTION OF THE SEVERAL VIEWS OF THE DRAWING(S).
(j) DETAILED DESCRIPTION OF THE INVENTION.
(k) CLAIM OR CLAIMS (commencing on a separate sheet).
(l) ABSTRACT OF THE DISCLOSURE (commencing on a separate sheet).
(m) SEQUENCE LISTING. (See MPEP § 2422.03 and 37 CFR 1.821 - 1.825). A “Sequence Listing” is required on paper if the application discloses a nucleotide or amino acid sequence as defined in 37 CFR 1.821(a) and if the required “Sequence Listing” is not submitted as an electronic document either on read-only optical disc or as a text file via the patent electronic system.
Content of Specification
(a) TITLE OF THE INVENTION: See 37 CFR 1.72(a) and MPEP § 606. The title of the invention should be placed at the top of the first page of the specification unless the title is provided in an application data sheet. The title of the invention should be brief but technically accurate and descriptive, preferably from two to seven words. It may not contain more than 500 characters.
(b) CROSS-REFERENCES TO RELATED APPLICATIONS: See 37 CFR 1.78 and MPEP § 211 et seq.
(c) STATEMENT REGARDING FEDERALLY SPONSORED RESEARCH OR DEVELOPMENT: See MPEP § 310.
(d) THE NAMES OF THE PARTIES TO A JOINT RESEARCH AGREEMENT. See 37 CFR 1.71(g).
(e) INCORPORATION-BY-REFERENCE OF MATERIAL SUBMITTED ON A READ-ONLY OPTICAL DISC, AS A TEXT FILE OR AN XML FILE VIA THE PATENT ELECTRONIC SYSTEM: The specification is required to include an incorporation-by-reference of electronic documents that are to become part of the permanent United States Patent and Trademark Office records in the file of a patent application. See 37 CFR 1.77(b)(5) and MPEP § 608.05. See also the Legal Framework for Patent Electronic System posted on the USPTO website (https://www.uspto.gov/sites/default/files/documents/2019LegalFrameworkPES.pdf) and MPEP § 502.05
(f) STATEMENT REGARDING PRIOR DISCLOSURES BY THE INVENTOR OR A JOINT INVENTOR. See 35 U.S.C. 102(b) and 37 CFR 1.77.
(g) BACKGROUND OF THE INVENTION: See MPEP § 608.01(c). The specification should set forth the Background of the Invention in two parts:
(1) Field of the Invention: A statement of the field of art to which the invention pertains. This statement may include a paraphrasing of the applicable U.S. patent classification definitions of the subject matter of the claimed invention. This item may also be titled “Technical Field.”
(2) Description of the Related Art including information disclosed under 37 CFR 1.97 and 37 CFR 1.98: A description of the related art known to the applicant and including, if applicable, references to specific related art and problems involved in the prior art which are solved by the applicant’s invention. This item may also be titled “Background Art.”
(h) BRIEF SUMMARY OF THE INVENTION: See MPEP § 608.01(d). A brief summary or general statement of the invention as set forth in 37 CFR 1.73. The summary is separate and distinct from the abstract and is directed toward the invention rather than the disclosure as a whole. The summary may point out the advantages of the invention or how it solves problems previously existent in the prior art (and preferably indicated in the Background of the Invention). In chemical cases it should point out in general terms the utility of the invention. If possible, the nature and gist of the invention or the inventive concept should be set forth. Objects of the invention should be treated briefly and only to the extent that they contribute to an understanding of the invention.
(i) BRIEF DESCRIPTION OF THE SEVERAL VIEWS OF THE DRAWING(S): See MPEP § 608.01(f). A reference to and brief description of the drawing(s) as set forth in 37 CFR 1.74.
(j) DETAILED DESCRIPTION OF THE INVENTION: See MPEP § 608.01(g). A description of the preferred embodiment(s) of the invention as required in 37 CFR 1.71. The description should be as short and specific as is necessary to describe the invention adequately and accurately. Where elements or groups of elements, compounds, and processes, which are conventional and generally widely known in the field of the invention described, and their exact nature or type is not necessary for an understanding and use of the invention by a person skilled in the art, they should not be described in detail. However, where particularly complicated subject matter is involved or where the elements, compounds, or processes may not be commonly or widely known in the field, the specification should refer to another patent or readily available publication which adequately describes the subject matter.
(k) CLAIM OR CLAIMS: See 37 CFR 1.75 and MPEP § 608.01(m). The claim or claims must commence on a separate sheet or electronic page (37 CFR 1.52(b)(3)). Where a claim sets forth a plurality of elements or steps, each element or step of the claim should be separated by a line indentation. There may be plural indentations to further segregate subcombinations or related steps. See 37 CFR 1.75 and MPEP 608.01(i) - (p).
(l) ABSTRACT OF THE DISCLOSURE: See 37 CFR 1.72 (b) and MPEP § 608.01(b). The abstract is a brief narrative of the disclosure as a whole, as concise as the disclosure permits, in a single paragraph preferably not exceeding 150 words, commencing on a separate sheet following the claims. In an international application which has entered the national stage (37 CFR 1.491(b)), the applicant need not submit an abstract commencing on a separate sheet if an abstract was published with the international application under PCT Article 21. The abstract that appears on the cover page of the pamphlet published by the International Bureau (IB) of the World Intellectual Property Organization (WIPO) is the abstract that will be used by the USPTO. See MPEP § 1893.03(e).
(m) SEQUENCE LISTING: See 37 CFR 1.821 - 1.825 and MPEP §§ 2421 - 2431. The requirement for a sequence listing applies to all sequences disclosed in a given application, whether the sequences are claimed or not. See MPEP § 2422.01.
Claim Objections
Claims 1-3 and 19-23 are objected to because of the following informalities:
Regarding claim 1, line 1 – “anti - aircraft” needs to be changed to “anti-aircraft”.
Regarding claim 2, the acronyms “UVC” is used without first laying out what the acronyms stand for. The Examiner suggests to amend the claims to include what “UVC” stands for in the first instance of “UVC”.
Regarding claim 3, last line – “3b” needs to be changed to “(3b)”.
Regarding claims 19-23, line 1 of each claim – “anti - aircraft” needs to be changed to “anti-aircraft”.
Appropriate correction is required.
Note: Applicant is suggested to amend the claims for positively claiming the subject matter which the Applicant regards as his/her invention. The claimed language as current are narrative and hard to follow. Adding semicolons “;” to clearly distinguish structure / part to perform the functions is suggested.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(b):
(b) CONCLUSION.—The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph:
The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the applicant regards as his invention.
Claims 1-23 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.
Initially, the following is noted.
“Though understanding the claim language may be aided by explanations contained in the written description, it is important not to import into claim limitations that are not part of the claim. For example, a particular embodiment appearing in the written description may not be read into a claim when the claim language is broader than the embodiment.” Superguide Corp. v. DirecTV Enterprises, Inc., 358 F.3d 870, 875, 69 USPQ2d 1865, 1868 (Fed. Cir. 2004). See also Liebel-Flarsheim Co. v. Medrad Inc., 358 F.3d 898, 906, 69 USPQ2d 1801, 1807 (Fed. Cir. 2004) (discussing recent cases wherein the court expressly rejected the contention that if a patent describes only a single embodiment, the claims of the patent must be construed as being limited to that embodiment); E-Pass Techs., Inc. v. 3Com Corp., 343 F.3d 1364, 1369, 67 USPQ2d 1947, 1950 (Fed. Cir. 2003) (“Interpretation of descriptive statements in a patent’s written description is a difficult task, as an inherent tension exists as to whether a statement is a clear lexicographic definition or a description of a preferred embodiment. The problem is to interpret claims ‘in view of the specification’ without unnecessarily importing limitations from the specification into the claims.”); Altiris Inc. v. Symantec Corp., 318 F.3d 1363, 1371, 65 USPQ2d 1865, 1869-70 (Fed. Cir. 2003) (Although the specification discussed only a single embodiment, the court held that it was improper to read a specific order of steps into method claims where, as a matter of logic or grammar, the language of the method claims did not impose a specific order on the performance of the method steps, and the specification did not directly or implicitly require a particular order). When an element is claimed using language falling under the scope of 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, 6th paragraph (often broadly referred to as means- (or step-) plus- function language), the specification must be consulted to determine the structure, material, or acts corresponding to the function recited in the claim, and the claimed element is construed as limited to the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification and equivalents thereof. In re Donaldson, 16 F.3d 1189, 29 USPQ2d 1845 (Fed. Cir. 1994) (see MPEP § 2181- MPEP § 2186).
Phillips v. AWH Corp., 415 F.3d 1303, 1323 (Fed. Cir. 2005) (referring to “the danger” of importing claim limitations from the specification). See also Varco, L.P. v. Pason Sys. USA Corp., 436 F.3d 1368, 1373 (Fed. Cir. 2006) (stating how the Federal Circuit “will not at any time” bring in claim limitations from the specification); Comark Commc'ns, Inc. v. Harris Corp., 156 F.3d 1182, 1186-67 (Fed. Cir. 1998) (following that limitations from the specification are not to be read into the claims).
Applicant appears to be attempting to incorporate limitations from the specification into the claims, which as noted above is improper.
Regarding claim 1, it is unclear of what is meant and encompasses “EM source unit driving capabilities” as claimed. Does Applicant mean the driving capabilities as capable to generate and emit EM radiation or something else?
Regarding claim 2, it is unclear of what is meant and encompasses “at least one profile of a simulated missile or of a jamming mode” as claimed. It lacks any clarity as to what metes and bounds of such encompasses.
Regarding claim 4, it recites the limitation “the counter countermeasures software module” in lines 3-4. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
Regarding claim 19, it recites both a system of claim 11 and a method for using that system which is unclear. “A claim such as those before us cannot be both method and apparatus. It must be clear from [the] wording [of the claim] that it is drawn to one or the other of [the] mutually exclusive statutory classes of invention [set forth in 35 USC 101]. A method or process [claim] is an act or a series of acts and from the standpoint of patentability must distinguish over the prior art in term of steps, whereas a claim drawn to apparatus must distinguish in terms of structure. This is so elemental as not to require citation of authorities.” Ex parte Lyell, 17 USPQ2d 1551-1552 (Bd. Pat. App. & Int 1990).
Other claims are also rejected based on their dependency of the defected parent claim(s).
It is Applicant’s responsibility to draft a clear and concise set of claims defining the metes and bounds of Applicant’s invention. While the Office has noted numerous instances of these issues above, the claims consistently show that they lack a clear definition of the Applicant’s invention. Applicant should review all of the outstanding claims in response hereto. All of the claims should be reviewed for issues related to clarity and scope as the errors/issues are not constrained to those listed above.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 1-23 are allowed over prior art. However, 35 USC 112(b) rejections must be overcome.
Conclusion
The cited prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
US 12,560,413 discloses a device for protecting an aircraft against missiles, includes a Short-Wave InfraRed based (SWIR-based) Missile Tracking Unit, having a SWIR-based optical imager that associated with an optical SWIR band filter. The device further includes a SWIR signals processor; it analyzes the captured SWIR optical signals; and it performs a SWIR-based missile acquisition process, which is also based on raw angular position data of a missile as received from a Missile Approach Warning System (MAWS); and it performs a SWIR-based missile tracking process, which continuously and dynamically determines a precise angular position of the missile based on the captured SWIR optical signals. The device includes a laser-based missile-jamming unit, having an internal laser emitter; and optionally also being operably associated with an external high-power laser emitter; to disrupt the missile, or to disrupt a guiding station of the missile.
US 2026/0016839 discloses an air-based counter-countermeasure (CCM) system includes an autonomous or semi-autonomous unmanned aircraft capable of deployment to an area of a countermeasure system having a laser detector to receive and identify an incident laser signal as a target designator signal and one or more countermeasure subsystems operative in response to an output of the laser detector to deploy corresponding countermeasures against a laser target designator. The CCM system further includes a laser-based CCM subsystem carried by the aircraft, the CCM subsystem being configured and operative, during the deployment of the aircraft, to direct a simulated target designator laser signal to the laser detector of the countermeasure system to trigger one or more of the countermeasures and thereby reduce protective ability of the countermeasure system against subsequent laser-guided attack.
US 11,893,209 discloses countermeasures systems and, more specifically to a unit for displaying information about a countermeasures system in controlling a counter measures system. In a countermeasures control interface for use in deploying countermeasures in response to user commands, which are deployed from a first countermeasure dispenser that deploys a first type of countermeasure and a second countermeasure dispenser that deploys a second type of countermeasure different from the first type. A user interface receives user commands regarding countermeasures deployment and includes a display that shows a user-selectable image formats. At least one of the user-selectable image formats includes a graphic representation of a loadout of the first countermeasure dispenser and the second countermeasure dispenser, as well as a graphical representation of currently-available countermeasures deployment options. The user interface also receives input regarding a user countermeasure deployment choice and generates a signal corresponding to the countermeasure deployment choice. An electronic circuit controls the display and generates the user-selectable image formats, receives the countermeasure deployment choice from the user interface and activates the countermeasure dispensers.
US 10,731,950 discloses a projectile round for intercepting an incoming threat to a vehicle or the like. The projectile round may include an explosive layer, which upon detonation, may cause a the fracturing of one or more material layers into one or both of shrapnel and chaff while simultaneously causing the distortion and/or destruction of a piezoelectric material contained within the projectile round. The distortion and/or destruction of this piezoelectric material may further cause the release of an electromagnetic pulse. The projectile round may be part of a countermeasure system against guided munition threats, including those posed by man-portable air defense systems.
US 9,212,872 discloses a system for evaluating aircraft/watercraft/battle-vehicle survivability equipment comprising: (1) a Static Pyrotechnic Unit (SPTU) and a support stand; (2) a system of Short Range Simulating Rocket (SRSR) and a rocket launching apparatus; and (3) a control system that activates said Static Pyrotechnic Unit in (1) and said system SRSR in (2). When the Static pyrotechnic Unit is ignited, the resulting flash has an IR wavelength and multi spectral emission, intensity and time duration that simulate the initial flash created by a shoulder missile. When the Short Range Simulating Rocket is fired, the resulting radiation has an IR wavelength and multi spectral emission, intensity and time duration that simulates the radiation trail emitted from a fired shoulder missile. The flash created by the Static pyrotechnic Unit, and the trail emission of the Short Range Simulating Rocket are detected by the target survivability detection equipment, enabling the target to take protective measures.
US 6,980,152 discloses methods, computer-readable media, and systems for externally cued aircraft warning and defense. A surveillance system may include a sensor field or array and may include a processor system that processes signals including acoustic signals received by the sensor array. Signals including acoustic signals are processed to determine the presence of indicia, including acoustic signatures, of known surface-to-air missiles including man-portable air defense systems. When the presence of such surface-to-air missiles is indicated, a cue signal is sent to one or more countermeasure systems that include one or more countermeasures such as chaff, expendable decoys and flares. The countermeasure systems may be ground-based or aircraft-based. The countermeasures are deployed in response to the cue signal. The surface-to-air missile may consequently be defeated.
US 2005/0150371 discloses a CM system for the defense of aircraft against missile attack leverages nanocrystal technology to provide safe and reliable protection. The CM system generally includes one or more ground-based laser emitter subsystems, one or more ground-based Doppler-sensitive radar subsystems, an aircraft-based nanocrystal dispenser subsystem, and an engagement control subsystem that governs the operation of the CM system. In response to the detection of a missile within an attack envelope, the engagement control subsystem instructs the dispenser subsystem to release nanocrystals into an area proximate the aircraft. In addition, the engagement control subsystem instructs one or more of the laser emitter subsystems to direct an excitation signal at the dispensed nanocrystal "cloud" to thereby cause the nanocrystals to emit infrared radiation that approximates that of jet engine exhaust. The properties of the nanocrystals and the excitation signal are selected to ensure that the emitted radiation provides an effective decoy for the missile seeker system.
CN 116105551 discloses a light bicycle integrated short-range missile system layout structure, comprising a 4X4 light wheel chassis, weapon unit, a detection unit, a control unit, a power supply unit and missile tail flame protection device. Using Y-shaped emitting frame and the heterogeneic quadrilateral mechanism with a layered space conjugate driving structure, realizing short-range missile air-proof system structure miniaturization, light weight, realizing the system integrated structure design on the 4X4 light chassis. The high-rigidity composite structure of the missile pitching driving mechanism and the arc-shaped sliding rail supporting component ensures the whole rigidity of the weapon unit vertical and lateral. The heavy multi-vehicle separating structure of the existing short-range missile anti-air system is optimized as the light bicycle integrated structure form. The whole system has simple structure, small volume, convenient for structure layout; the reliability of the mechanism is high and the cost is low, the normal transportation force, financial resources, less personnel need can be more convenient to use the short-range missile defense system.
WO 2019/120555 discloses an IRCM system, that is designed to be installed on a platform for protection against IR- guided missiles and to be connected to a MWS installed on said platform, wherein said MWS is configured to detect approaching IR-guided missiles. The IRCM system comprises: a DIRCM system operable to track and jam approaching infrared-guided missiles; a flare deployment/launch apparatus operable to deploy/launch flares; and a self-protection suite manager. Said self-protection suite manager is configured to: store one or more DIRCM-flare coordination libraries indicative of a predefined policy of coordination of flare deployment/launch with operation of the DIRCM system; operate the DIRCM system to track and jam an approaching IR-guided missile detected by the MWS; and, when the DIRCM system is tracking and jamming an approaching IR-guided missile, operate also the flare deployment/launch apparatus to deploy/launch flares based on the stored DIRCM-flare coordination library(ies).
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to CHUONG P NGUYEN whose telephone number is (571)272-3445. The examiner can normally be reached Mon-Fri, 10:00-10:00 EST.
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, JACK KEITH can be reached at (571) 272-6878. 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.
/CHUONG P NGUYEN/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3646
