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 .
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statements (IDS) submitted on 09/18/2024 and 10/29/2024 are being considered by the examiner.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
The following is a quotation of the appropriate paragraphs of 35 U.S.C. 102 that form the basis for the rejections under this section made in this Office action:
A person shall be entitled to a patent unless –
(a)(2) the claimed invention was described in a patent issued under section 151, or in an application for patent published or deemed published under section 122(b), in which the patent or application, as the case may be, names another inventor and was effectively filed before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claim(s) 1 and 12 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) as being anticipated by Gogolla et al. (US. Pub. No. 2004/0223164, hereinafter “Gogolla”).
As to claim 1, Gogolla discloses a method for controlling a laser rangefinder [figures 1a-d, abstract, controlling a laser rangefinder 1], comprising:
acquiring an actuation of a setting element [paragraph 29, acquiring the pressing of button 8] of the laser rangefinder;
providing an animated measurement mode visualization [figure 1a, providing an animated measurement mode visualization on display 7, paragraph 29, an output device 7 in the form of an alphanumeric display for the distance X determined by the microcontroller 4]; and
displaying the animated measurement mode visualization on a display unit of the laser
rangefinder [figure 1a, display the alphanumeric display on display unit 7, paragraph 29, an output device 7 in the form of an alphanumeric display for the distance X determined by the microcontroller 4].
As to claim 12, Gogolla discloses the method according to claim 1, wherein the laser rangefinder includes a control unit [paragraph 14, a control device which is connected with the mechanical distance measuring device and which is internal and connected to the electro-optical distance measurement module in a controllable manner so that the electro-optical distance measurement module is controllable by the mechanical distance measuring device] configured to carry out the method.
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.
This application currently names joint inventors. In considering patentability of the claims the examiner presumes that the subject matter of the various claims was commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the claimed invention(s) absent any evidence to the contrary. Applicant is advised of the obligation under 37 CFR 1.56 to point out the inventor and effective filing dates of each claim that was not commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the later invention in order for the examiner to consider the applicability of 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(C) for any potential 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) prior art against the later invention.
Claim(s) 2-8 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Gogolla in view of Leutz et al. (US. Pub. No. 2003/0078755, hereinafter “Leutz”).
As to claim 2, Gogolla discloses the method according to claim 1.
Gogolla doesn’t expressly disclose further comprising providing a measurement mode overview from a memory unit of the laser rangefinder.
Leutz teaches providing a measurement mode overview from a memory unit of a laser rangefinder [paragraph 23, the keypad 28 has a button 36 for recalling the contents of a memory 24 of the computer 22 located inside the measuring device, and a button 38 for automatically adding the most recent measured value to the existing contents of the memory 24].
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to have modified the method of Gogolla to provide a measurement mode overview from a memory unit of a laser rangefinder, as taught by Leutz, in order to determine the desired measurement variable to be carried out (Leutz, abstract).
As to claim 3, Gogolla discloses the method according to claim 2, further comprising visualizing the measurement mode overview on the display unit [figure 1a, visualize the measurement mode overview on display 7].
As to claim 4, Gogolla discloses the method according to claim 1.
Gogolla doesn’t expressly disclose further comprising acquiring an actuation of a selection element for selecting a measurement mode.
Leutz teaches to acquire an actuation of a selection element for selecting a measurement mode [figure 2, acquire a pressing of button 32 for selecting a measurement mode S6, abstract, selects a desired measurement mode by pressing just one button 32].
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to have modified the method of Gogolla to acquire an actuation of a selection element for selecting a measurement mode, as taught by Leutz, in order to determine the desired measurement variable to be carried out (Leutz, abstract).
As to claim 5, Gogolla, as modified by Leutz, discloses the method according to claim 4, further comprising implementing the measurement mode by way of a ranging unit [Leutz, figure 2, select mode S6, paragraph 33, After the mode button 32 is pressed once (S6), a square icon appears in the lower left-hand corner of the display panel 26 of the device 10 that indicates that the measuring device 10 is now in the "measure area" mode. The operator must now decide (S7) if he wants to measure area or volume.]. In addition, the same rationale is used as in rejection for claim 4.
As to claim 6, Gogolla, as modified by Leutz, discloses the method according to claim 4, further comprising checking a further actuation of the selection element [Leutz, figure 1, press button 34, paragraph 38, The operator presses measurement button 34 (S10) to start the measurement procedure. Again, an acoustic signal is emitted by the device to indicate that the procedure has been completed]. In addition, the same rationale is used as in rejection for claim 4.
As to claim 7, Gogolla, as modified by Leutz, discloses the method according to claim 6, further comprising providing a further animated measurement mode visualization for the further actuation of the selection element [Leutz, paragraph 39, The length value determined for the first side of the desired area appears in the display panel 26 of the measuring device 10. The corresponding side of the square icon stops blinking in the display 26 (S11)]. In addition, the same rationale is used as in rejection for claim 4.
As to claim 8, Gogolla discloses the method according to claim 1.
Gogolla doesn’t expressly disclose further comprising acquiring an actuation of an activation element for activating a measurement mode displayed by way of the animated measurement mode visualization.
Leutz teaches to acquire an actuation of an activation element for activating a measurement mode displayed by way of the animated measurement mode visualization [figure 2, acquire a pressing of button 32 for selecting a measurement mode S6, abstract, selects a desired measurement mode by pressing just one button 32, paragraph 11, A measurement mode selected once via the unequivocal measurement mode button on the device is shown in a schematic, graphic presentation in the display panel and can therefore be easily monitored by the operator].
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to have modified the method of Gogolla to acquire an actuation of an activation element for activating a measurement mode displayed by way of the animated measurement mode visualization, as taught by Leutz, in order to determine the desired measurement variable to be carried out (Leutz, abstract).
Claim(s) 9 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Gogolla in view of Panosian et al. (US. Pub. No. 2022/0136821, hereinafter “Panosian”).
As to claim 9, Gogolla discloses the method according to claim 1.
Gogolla doesn’t expressly disclose further comprising ascertaining a connection to an external adapter.
Panosian teaches comprising ascertaining a connection to an external adapter [paragraph 73, Power supply 234 provides power to computing device 200. A rechargeable or non-rechargeable battery may be used to provide power. The power may also be provided by an external power source, such as an AC adapter or a powered docking cradle that supplements and/or recharges a battery].
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to have modified the method of Gogolla to comprise ascertaining a connection to an external adapter, as taught by Panosian, in order to provide power to the rangefinder device (Panosian, paragraph 73).
Claim(s) 10-11 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Gogolla in view of Lopez et al. (US. Pub. No. 2014/0016114, hereinafter “Lopez”).
As to claim 10, Gogolla discloses a control unit [paragraph 14, a control device which is connected with the mechanical distance measuring device and which is internal and connected to the electro-optical distance measurement module in a controllable manner so that the electro-optical distance measurement module is controllable by the mechanical distance measuring device] for controlling a laser rangefinder which is configured such that it carries out the method according to claim 1.
Gogolla doesn’t expressly disclose a control unit comprising a processor.
Lopez teaches a control unit for controlling a laser rangefinder comprising a processor [paragraph 6, the laser distance measuring device comprises a computer unit… The computer unit advantageously comprises at least one processor, input interfaces, output interfaces and/or, advantageously, operating programs, regulating routines, control routines and/or calculation routines stored in a memory of the computer unit].
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to have modified the method of Gogolla to have a control unit comprising a processor, as taught by Lopez, in order to determine and output a distance between the laser unit and the measurement point using the laser beam (Lopez, paragraph 4).
As to claim 11, Gogolla, as modified by Lopez discloses a laser rangefinder comprising the control unit [Gogolla, paragraph 14, a control device which is connected with the mechanical distance measuring device and which is internal and connected to the electro-optical distance measurement module in a controllable manner so that the electro-optical distance measurement module is controllable by the mechanical distance measuring device] according to claim 10.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Schmidt et al. (US. Pub. No. 2004/0070747) is considered as pertinent art to claim 1 regarding laser rangefinder device as seen in figure 1.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to NAN-YING YANG whose telephone number is (571)272-2211. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday, 8am-5pm, 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, BENJAMIN LEE can be reached at (571)272-2963. 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.
/NAN-YING YANG/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2629
Prosecution Insights