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 .
Claims 1-10 are pending.
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on 12/18/2024 was in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statement is being considered by the Examiner.
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.
Claim 10 is 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.
The term “proximate” in claim 10 is a relative term which renders the claim indefinite. The term “proximate” is not defined by the claim, the specification does not provide a standard for ascertaining the requisite degree, and one of ordinary skill in the art would not be reasonably apprised of the scope of the invention. The Specification does not provide an objective standard by which to determine whether or not the one or more inputs are located proximate to one of the appendages. Therefore, one of ordinary skill would not readily ascertain the metes and bounds of this limitation in the claims.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 1-9 are allowed.
Claim 10 would be allowable if rewritten to overcome the rejection(s) under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), 2nd paragraph, set forth in this Office action and to include all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter:
The closest prior art is McCart-Pollak (U.S. Pat. App. Pub. 2018/0117484) and Kashar (U.S. Pat. App. Pub. 2016/0217662).
Regarding claim 1, McCart-Pollak disclosed a communications system among users, the system comprising:
a server (back-end infrastructure, i.e., server, ¶[0041], [0049]); and
a plurality of devices, each of the devices associated with one of the users (toys, devices, ¶[0144], [0147], Fig. 4) and comprising:
a transceiver configured to communicate with the server (communication link, ¶[0134]);
a light (light up element/region, ¶0021], [0084], [0091], [0092]); and
one or more inputs (interaction components, ¶[0082], [0083]);
wherein one of the devices is configured to be linked with other ones of the devices (enabling communication between toys and network, ¶[0134]; toys pairing/associating, i.e., linking, ¶[0069]);
wherein the one of the devices is configured to transmit a message to a particular one of the other ones of the devices by the one of the devices transmitting the message to the server (toy user sending messages to other toys, ¶[0041]; message-sending platform provided by back-end infrastructure, i.e., server, ¶[0049]);
wherein the server, upon receipt of the message, is configured to determine which of the other ones of the devices is the particular one of the other ones of the devices to which the message is intended (portal enabling sending of messages to toys, ¶[0041]); and
wherein each of the other ones of the devices is configured to connect with the server (enabling communication between toys and network, ¶[0134]), and upon the particular one of the other ones of the devices connecting with the server, the server is configured to transmit the message to the particular one of the other ones of the devices (portal enabling sending of messages to toys, ¶[0041]).
Further regarding claim 1, Kashar disclosed each of the other ones of the devices associated with a different unique color selected by the user associated with the one of the devices from a plurality of colors (user selecting/assigning a particular color to a particular phone number, i.e., other device, for colored visual light alerts when receiving messages from that phone number, ¶[0052]).
While the prior art disclosed a plush toy with lights for communicating messages between the toys, and assigning colors to users for identifying the sending of a message via colored light, the prior art did not disclose sending messages to other devices by selecting a color of the intended recipient using the devices’ inputs and light as claimed. Specifically, the prior art of record does not teach, suggest, or render obvious the specific method, system, and product as set forth in the Specification, ¶[0022]-[0056], and recited in independent claim 1, in particular comprising:
wherein the one of the devices is configured to transmit a message to a particular one of the other ones of the devices by (1) the user associated with the one of the devices selecting, using the one or more inputs and the light, the different unique color associated by the one of the devices with the particular one of the other ones of the devices, and (2) the one of the devices transmitting the message to the server (claim 1, emphasis added).
These limitations, in conjunction with the other limitations of the independent claims, are allowable over the prior art.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Goslin et al. (U.S. Pat. App. Pub. 2017/0203221) disclosed remote voice interaction with a toy device.
Setlak et al. (U.S. Pat. App. Pub. 2010/0321158) disclosed a visible light guide illuminating with a color corresponding to a user’s contact information when an instant message is received from the user.
Chipps et al. (U.S. Pat. App. Pub. 2016/0247367) disclosed a user assigning a color to another user to display future messages from the other user in the assigned color.
Lambert (U.S. Pat. 11,985,103) disclosed a user assigning colors to email contacts for displaying resulting emails from the contacts in their assigned color.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JOSEPH R MANIWANG whose telephone number is (571)270-7257. The examiner can normally be reached 8:30AM - 4:30PM.
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, Kamal B. Divecha can be reached at (571) 272-5863. 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.
/JOSEPH R MANIWANG/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2441