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 .
Status of Claims
This is the office action on the merits in response to the application filed on 12/19/2025.
Claims 1-15 are currently pending and have been examined.
Response to Arguments
3. Applicant's arguments filed 12/19/2025 with respect to the rejection(s) of claim(s) 1-15 have been fully considered and are persuasive. Therefore, the rejection has been withdrawn.
However, upon further consideration, a new ground(s) of rejection is made. See remarks on page
9-11.
The rejection of claim 1-8, 10, and 12-15 under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) is withdrawn in view of Applicant’s amendments to correct the indefinite recitation indicated in the Office Action.
The rejection of claim 1-8, 10, and 12-15 under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) is withdrawn in view of Applicant’s amendments to correct the indefinite recitation indicated in the Office Action.
The rejection of claim 1-8, 10, and 12-15 under 35 U.S.C. 112(a) is withdrawn in view of Applicant’s amendments to correct the indefinite recitation indicated in the Office Action. See Remarks on page 8-9.
Applicant arguments filed 12/19/2026 with respect to the rejection of claim(s) 1-15 provisionally rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claims 1-11 of copending Application No. 18/941,590 have been fully considered but are not persuasive. The rejection is maintained. The claims of the copending application recite to a production management system that allocates software licenses to production-related apparatuses and cancels allocations when apparatuses are removed from the product line and the current claimed invention similarly relates to management of software licenses associated with production-related apparatuses. The amendments are an obvious variation of the current claim set. Therefore, the current claimed subject matter is not patentably distinct from the claims of copending Application No. 18/941,590 and the rejection of claims 1-15 of nonstatutory double patenting is maintained. See Remarks on page 8.
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 1-15 provisionally rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claims 1-11 of copending Application No. 18/941,590. Although the claims at issue are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other because claims are claimed invention directed toward monitoring, searching, tracking and tracing Monero transaction chain.
This is a provisional nonstatutory double patenting rejection because the patentably indistinct claims have not in fact been patented.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
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.
The factual inquiries set forth in Graham v. John Deere Co., 383 U.S. 1, 148 USPQ 459 (1966), that are applied for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows:
1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art.
2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue.
3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art.
4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness.
Claims 1-15 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103(a) as being unpatentable over Nakamura et al. (US 7477745 B2), in view of Jarosz et al. (US 11272649 B2), and further in view of Cutter et al. (US 20120036562 A1).
7. Regarding claims 1, and 13, Nakamura discloses (a production management system, ((a production management method, and a production management apparatus, (Abstract Section)),
display that displays a state of the software licenses allocated to the production-related apparatuses, (Column 5/line 23, Connected to the CPU 31 via the bus 30 are an input unit 34 including a keyboard, a mouse, etc., a storing portion 35, a display portion 36, a communication interface portion 37, etc.; and Column 4/line 38, This license management system shown in FIG. 1 is provided with user terminal devices 1 and 2, a license management apparatus 3 (hereinafter referred to as “server”), plural multifunction-type printing apparatuses 4-6 as operation function executing units. These terminal devices 1 and 2, server 3 and printing apparatuses 4-6 are mutually connected through a network 7.; and Column 5/line 27, The storing portion 35 is composed of, for example, a hard disk drive unit, and stores the number of licenses set for each of the operation functions of the printing apparatus 4-6, i.e., the printer function, the scanner function, the copy function and the FAX function, as a license management table T1 as shown in FIG. 4. The display portion 36 is a display such as a CRT or an LCD for showing the number of licenses, etc. The communication interface portion 37 enables data/signal communication between the terminal devices 1 and 2 and among the printing apparatuses 4-6, and also transfers the determination result of the CPU 31 on whether a license is to be permitted to the terminal devices 1 and 2. The CPU 31 may comprise a discriminator to discriminate whether the number of licenses currently permitted for a use of an operation function has reached the number of licenses stored in the storing portion upon request for a use of an operation function of the printing apparatuses 4-6 from the user's terminal devices 1 and 2, and may also comprise a determinator to determine whether the request for the use of the operation function is to be permitted based on the discrimination result. Furthermore, the CPU 31 may also comprise a subtractor to subtract “1” from the number of licenses in the license management table T1 when the request for the use of the operation function is permitted and for adding “1” to the number of licenses in the license management table T1 when the currently executing operation function is terminated.)
Nakamura does not explicitly disclose comprising: at least one processor configured to:
However, Jarosz teaches comprising: at least one processor configured to: obtain line configuration information related to an apparatus configuration of a production line including production-related apparatuses used in production of a mounting substrate, (Column 3/line 53, Each of the line management apparatuses 10, 20, 30 manage various types of information handled by the respective lines L1-L3 of the component mounting system, and collect and store production data which is used in the production of the mounted substrate by the mounting apparatuses M11-M34 of the respective mounting line L1-L3. As such, each of the line management apparatuses 10, 20, 30 includes a control device. The control device may include, e.g., at least one memory, hard drive, or like storage device configured to store instructions and a database or similar collection of production data, and at least one processor configured to execute the instructions to cause the apparatus to perform at least one of the operations thereof. In other words, the line management apparatuses 10, 20, 30 may be embodied as computers having processors, storage devices (hard drives, memory, and the like), displays, and the like, and may be more particularly embodied as either personal computers (e.g., tablets, laptops, desktop computers).; and Column 1/line 15, As shown in FIG. 1, in the component mounting field, a component mounting system 1 includes a plurality of mounting lines L1-L3 that each link a plurality of mounting-related apparatuses M11-M34 for executing operations for mounting a component, for example and electronic component, onto a substrate. With a plurality of mounting lines L1-L3 disposed in a production factory, the factory may perform mass production of mounted substrates by performing mounting work together in each mounting line. Operations of each mounting line are integrally managed by an integrated management apparatus (integrated system) 2 in communication with each mounting line via a communication network 3, such as a LAN.; and Column 3/line 53, Each of the line management apparatuses 10, 20, 30 manage various types of information handled by the respective lines L1-L3 of the component mounting system, and collect and store production data which is used in the production of the mounted substrate by the mounting apparatuses M11-M34 of the respective mounting line L1-L3…Each mounting line L1-L3 is configured by linking a plurality of mounting-related apparatuses M11-M34 used in mounting components onto a substrate to each other in a carrying direction of the substrate.)
One of ordinary skill in the art would have recognized that applying the known technique of Jarosz to the known invention of Nakamura would have been recognized that the application of the technique would have yielded predictable results because the level of ordinary skill in the art demonstrated by the references applied shows the ability to incorporate production-related features into a similar invention. Further, it would have been recognized by those of ordinary skill in the art that modifying the system to include at least one processor configured to: obtain line configuration information related to an apparatus configuration of a production line including production-related apparatuses used in production of a mounting substrate result in an improved invention because applying said technique will ensure that an obtainer that obtains line configuration information related to an apparatus for the correct production line thus improving the overall performance of the invention.
Nakamura does not explicitly disclose allocate, to the production-related apparatuses, based on the line configuration information, software licenses that correspond to a plurality of software which, by being executed, realize operations set to the production-related apparatuses, the software licenses being used to permit execution of the plurality of software by the production-related apparatuses.
However, Jarosz teaches allocate, to the production-related apparatuses, based on the line configuration information, software licenses that correspond to a plurality of software which, by being executed, realize operations set to the production-related apparatuses, the software licenses being used to permit execution of the plurality of software by the production-related apparatuses, (Column 6/line 4, The local database 81 in each line management apparatus 10, 20, 30 stores production data 91, operation data 92, reel use history data 93, and the like. The production data 91 is configured of various types of data for producing the mounted substrate, and includes mounting data 91a, component data 91b, and arrangement data 91c. The mounting data 91a may be data for mounting the component 70 onto the substrate 53, and include, for example, an XY coordinate of the mounting position set on the substrate 53, and a mounting angle of the component 70. The component data 91b may be data indicating a control parameter of an actuating element(s) when mounting the component 70 onto the substrate 53. For example, the component data 91b can include the shape of the component 70, a sending pitch of the carrier tape 57, a type of suction nozzle 62 used, and a speed parameter, such as a suction speed when the suction nozzle 62 suctions the component 70, or a mounting speed when the component 70 is mounted onto the substrate 53. The arrangement data 91c may be data indicating arrangement information of each tape feeder 55 disposed in the component supply unit 54, and can be configured by combining the “reel ID” and a “feeder address No.”. The “feeder address No.” indicates the feeder/mounting apparatus positional information of each tape feeder 55.; and Column 7/line 14, The scanned reel ID is transmitted to the line management apparatus 10, 20, 30 of the line L1-L3 of the mounting apparatus M11-M34 to which the reel 58 is being mounted. There, the line management apparatus 10, 20, 30 determines (step S2) whether the scanned reel ID is present in its local database 81, and communicates with each of the other line management apparatuses 10, 20, 30 over central network 40, via cross line communication, to determine whether the scanned reel ID is present in the local database 81 of any other line management apparatus 10, 20, 30. If the scanned reel ID is not present in any line management apparatus 10, 20, 30, the supply reel 58 is presumed to be new and the user is prompted to register (step S3) the reel by entering all associated information related to the supply reel 58 and components 70 thereon. The registration information is then stored (step S4) in the local database 81 of the line management apparatus 10, 20, 30 of the line L1-L3 of the mounting apparatus M11-M34 to which the reel 58 is being mounted. Finally, the initial number of components associated with the supply reel 58 (e.g., as provided by the supplier of the reel) is stored and used (step S5) to represent the remaining number of components (e.g., as stored in reel use history data 93) of the supply reel 58 associated with the scanned reel ID. That is, because the supply reel 58 has been identified as new it is expected that none of the components 70 thereon have been mounted to a substrate. Here it is noted that the initial number of components of each supply reel is often provided by the supplier of the supply reel 58 within a given tolerance. For example, a supplier may provide a supply reel 58 having 50,000 components thereon, within a 2% tolerance. Thus, the supply reel 58 may actually have 49,000-51,000 components thereon. If, at step S2, the reel ID is found in a local database 81, the time stamps (e.g., as stored in reel use history data 93) of each instance of the scanned reel ID are compared (step S6). The scanned reel ID entry having the most recent time is then selected (step S7) as having the most recent and accurate information associated with the reel ID)
One of ordinary skill in the art would have recognized that applying the known technique of Jarosz to the known invention of Nakamura would have been recognized that the application of the technique would have yielded predictable results because the level of ordinary skill in the art demonstrated by the references applied shows the ability to incorporate production-related features into a similar invention. Further, it would have been recognized by those of ordinary skill in the art that modifying the system to include allocate, to the production-related apparatuses, based on the line configuration information, software licenses that correspond to a plurality of software which, by being executed, realize operations set to the production-related apparatuses, the software licenses being used to permit execution of the plurality of software by the production-related result in an improved invention because applying said technique will ensure that software licenses are stored and allocate them to the correct production line thus improving the overall performance of the invention.
Nakamura as modified does not explicitly disclose cancel an allocation of a software license allocated to a production-related apparatus removed from the production line.
However, Cutter teaches cancel an allocation of a software license allocated to a production-related apparatus removed from the production line, (Para. 0016, a method is provided to remove at least one digital license from a client computing device. Each digital license includes an identification of a removal service that can authorize removing such license. In the method, the client selects each license to be removed and the service, constructs a challenge including therein a challenge license identification block (LIB) identifying each license to be removed, and sends the challenge to the service. The service receives the challenge, stores at least a portion of the challenge in a database, constructs a response corresponding to the challenge and including therein a response LIB identifying each license to be removed and an identification of the service, and sends the response to the client. The client receives the response, employs the response LIB from the response to identify each license to be removed, and removes each identified license upon confirming that the identification of the service in the identified license matches the identification of the service in the response. Thus, concurrently with removing each license from the computing device, the server is notified in a trusted manner that each license has been removed in a trusted manner.)
One of ordinary skill in the art would have recognized that applying the known technique of Cutter to the known invention of Nakamura as modified would have been recognized that the application of the technique would have yielded predictable results because the level of ordinary skill in the art demonstrated by the references applied shows the ability to incorporate production-related features into a similar invention. Further, it would have been recognized by those of ordinary skill in the art that modifying the system to include cancel an allocation of a software license allocated to a production-related apparatus removed from the production line result in an improved invention because applying said technique will ensure that license allocations are cancelled when a production apparatus is removed to make sure unused licenses can be used, thus improving the overall performance of the invention.
8. Regarding claim 2, Nakamura discloses further comprising: a storage that stores software licenses held by the user of the production-related apparatuses, wherein the processor configured to allocate software licenses from among the software licenses stored in the storage, (Column 5/line 19, The server 3 is equipped with a CPU 31 which generally controls the entire server, a ROM 32 storing the program which the CPU 31 executes and a RAM 33 as a work area used as a data read/write area. Connected to the CPU 31 via the bus 30 are an input unit 34 including a keyboard, a mouse, etc., a storing portion 35, a display portion 36, a communication interface portion 37, etc. The storing portion 35 is composed of, for example, a hard disk drive unit, and stores the number of licenses set for each of the operation functions of the printing apparatus 4-6, i.e., the printer function, the scanner function, the copy function and the FAX function, as a license management table T1 as shown in FIG. 4.; and Column 5/line 7, In this case, upon the request for the use of the scanner, the CPU 31 of the server 3 determines whether the number of licenses currently permitted for the use of the scanner function is equal to the number of licenses initially set for the use of the scanner function. For example, it is determined whether the number of licenses for the use of the scanner function in the license management table T1 of the storing portion 35 of the server 3 is “0.” In the non-use state, since the number of the available licenses is not “0,” but “1” as shown in FIG. 4, the CPU 31 permits the use of the scanner function. Then, the CPU 31 subtracts “1” from the number of licenses for the use of the scanner function in the license management table T1 to update the number of licenses currently available for the use of the scanner function as “0,” as shown in FIG. 5. In this state, any one of scanner functions of the printing apparatuses 4-6 can be used from the terminal device 1.)
9. Regarding claim 3, Nakamura discloses wherein the processor configured to display the software licenses allocated to the production-related apparatuses, (Column 5/line 27, The storing portion 35 is composed of, for example, a hard disk drive unit, and stores the number of licenses set for each of the operation functions of the printing apparatus 4-6, i.e., the printer function, the scanner function, the copy function and the FAX function, as a license management table T1 as shown in FIG. 4. The display portion 36 is a display such as a CRT or an LCD for showing the number of licenses, etc. The communication interface portion 37 enables data/signal communication between the terminal devices 1 and 2 and among the printing apparatuses 4-6, and also transfers the determination result of the CPU 31 on whether a license is to be permitted to the terminal devices 1 and 2. The CPU 31 may comprise a discriminator to discriminate whether the number of licenses currently permitted for a use of an operation function has reached the number of licenses stored in the storing portion upon request for a use of an operation function of the printing apparatuses 4-6 from the user's terminal devices 1 and 2, and may also comprise a determinator to determine whether the request for the use of the operation function is to be permitted based on the discrimination result. Furthermore, the CPU 31 may also comprise a subtractor to subtract “1” from the number of licenses in the license management table T1 when the request for the use of the operation function is permitted and for adding “1” to the number of licenses in the license management table T1 when the currently executing operation function is terminated.)
10. Regarding claim 4, Nakamura discloses wherein the processor configured to display a total number of the software licenses held by the user of the production-related apparatuses and a total number of the software licenses allocated to the production-related apparatuses, (Column 5/line 26, The storing portion 35 is composed of, for example, a hard disk drive unit, and stores the number of licenses set for each of the operation functions of the printing apparatus 4-6, i.e., the printer function, the scanner function, the copy function and the FAX function, as a license management table T1 as shown in FIG. 4.; and Column 5/line 7, In this case, upon the request for the use of the scanner, the CPU 31 of the server 3 determines whether the number of licenses currently permitted for the use of the scanner function is equal to the number of licenses initially set for the use of the scanner function. For example, it is determined whether the number of licenses for the use of the scanner function in the license management table T1 of the storing portion 35 of the server 3 is “0.” In the non-use state, since the number of the available licenses is not “0,” but “1” as shown in FIG. 4, the CPU 31 permits the use of the scanner function. Then, the CPU 31 subtracts “1” from the number of licenses for the use of the scanner function in the license management table T1 to update the number of licenses currently available for the use of the scanner function as “0,” as shown in FIG. 5. In this state, any one of scanner functions of the printing apparatuses 4-6 can be used from the terminal device 1.)
11. Regarding claim 5, Nakamura does not explicitly disclose wherein in response to an update to the production line, the processor configured to obtain new line configuration information of the production line updated, and the processor configured to allocate, to a production-related apparatus added as a result of the update, based on the new line configuration information, a software license that has not been allocated to the production-related apparatuses among the software licenses held by the user of the production-related apparatuses.
However, Jarosz teaches wherein in response to an update to the production line, the processor configured to obtain new line configuration information of the production line updated, and the processor configured to allocate, to a production-related apparatus added as a result of the update, based on the new line configuration information, a software license that has not been allocated to the production-related apparatuses among the software licenses held by the user of the production-related apparatuses, (Column 5/line 26, As shown in FIG. 1, in the component mounting field, a component mounting system 1 includes a plurality of mounting lines L1-L3 that each link a plurality of mounting-related apparatuses M11-M34 for executing operations for mounting a component, for example and electronic component, onto a substrate. With a plurality of mounting lines L1-L3 disposed in a production factory, the factory may perform mass production of mounted substrates by performing mounting work together in each mounting line. Operations of each mounting line are integrally managed by an integrated management apparatus (integrated system) 2 in communication with each mounting line via a communication network 3, such as a LAN.; and Column 6/line 4, The local database 81 in each line management apparatus 10, 20, 30 stores production data 91, operation data 92, reel use history data 93, and the like. The production data 91 is configured of various types of data for producing the mounted substrate, and includes mounting data 91a, component data 91b, and arrangement data 91c. The mounting data 91a may be data for mounting the component 70 onto the substrate 53, and include, for example, an XY coordinate of the mounting position set on the substrate 53, and a mounting angle of the component 70.)
One of ordinary skill in the art would have recognized that applying the known technique of Jarosz to the known invention of Nakamura would have been recognized that the application of the technique would have yielded predictable results because the level of ordinary skill in the art demonstrated by the references applied shows the ability to incorporate production-related features into a similar invention. Further, it would have been recognized by those of ordinary skill in the art that modifying the system to include wherein in response to an update to the production line, the obtainer obtains new line configuration information of the production line updated, and the allocator allocates, to a production-related apparatus added as a result of the update, based on the new line configuration information, a software license that has not been allocated to the production-related apparatuses among the software licenses held by the user of the production-related apparatuses result in an improved invention because applying said technique will ensure that the system will reallocate software licenses when needed, thus improving the overall performance of the invention.
12. Regarding claim 6, Nakamura discloses wherein when software licenses for allocation to the production-related apparatuses are lacking in number, the processor configured to display information indicating that the software licenses are lacking in number, (Column 5/line 7, In this case, upon the request for the use of the scanner, the CPU 31 of the server 3 determines whether the number of licenses currently permitted for the use of the scanner function is equal to the number of licenses initially set for the use of the scanner function. For example, it is determined whether the number of licenses for the use of the scanner function in the license management table T1 of the storing portion 35 of the server 3 is “0.” In the non-use state, since the number of the available licenses is not “0,” but “1” as shown in FIG. 4, the CPU 31 permits the use of the scanner function. Then, the CPU 31 subtracts “1” from the number of licenses for the use of the scanner function in the license management table T1 to update the number of licenses currently available for the use of the scanner function as “0,” as shown in FIG. 5. In this state, any one of scanner functions of the printing apparatuses 4-6 can be used from the terminal device 1.; and Column 6/line 37, Next, it is assumed that the use of the scanner function of the printing apparatus 4 from the user's terminal device 1 is terminated. At this time, since the number of licenses available for a scanner function in the license management table T1 is “0” as shown in FIG. 5, the CPU 31 of the server 3 adds “1” to the number of licenses for the use of the scanner function in the license management table T1 after the termination of the scanner function to update the number “1” as shown in FIG. 4. Thus, the scanner function becomes available by a new request.)
13. Regarding claim 7, Nakamura does not explicitly disclose wherein the processor configured to calculate, from the new line configuration information, a total number of software licenses that are lacking for allocation to the production-related apparatuses included in the production line updated, and the processor configured to display the total number of software licenses that are lacking.
However, Jarosz teaches wherein the processor configured to calculate, from the new line configuration information, a total number of software licenses that are lacking for allocation to the production-related apparatuses included in the production line updated, and the processor configured to display the total number of software licenses that are lacking, (Column 6/line 23, The arrangement data 91c may be data indicating arrangement information of each tape feeder 55 disposed in the component supply unit 54, and can be configured by combining the “reel ID” and a “feeder address No.”. The “feeder address No.” indicates the feeder/mounting apparatus positional information of each tape feeder 55. The operation data 92 may be data indicating operation information of the mounting apparatuses M11-M34 for the line associated with the line management apparatus 10, 20, 30. The operation information includes, for example, the number of produced mounted substrates, generated errors and frequency thereof, the number of components 70 used, and the like.; and Column 4/line 65, Particularly, when a supply reel 58 is mounted to (or de-mounted from) one of the mounting apparatuses M12-M14, a user scans the barcode label 71 with barcode reader 72. The read-out reel ID is sent to the mounting line management apparatus 10 and used when managing the component 70 accommodated in the supply reel 58 to determine whether or not the proper supply reel 58 (having the proper components 70) is mounted to the mounting apparatus M12-M14. The line management apparatus 10 further uses the reel ID to identify a remaining number of components 70 on the carrier tape 57 of the supply reel 58 to help control operation of the mounting line L1 and mounting apparatuses M11-M14. It is noted that an installation location of the barcode reader 72 is arbitrary, and the barcode reader 72 and the mounting line management apparatus 10 may be directly connected to each other, instead of via the component mounting apparatuses M12-M14.)
One of ordinary skill in the art would have recognized that applying the known technique of Jarosz to the known invention of Nakamura would have been recognized that the application of the technique would have yielded predictable results because the level of ordinary skill in the art demonstrated by the references applied shows the ability to incorporate production-related features into a similar invention. Further, it would have been recognized by those of ordinary skill in the art that modifying the system to include wherein the allocator calculates, from the new line configuration information, a total number of software licenses that are lacking for allocation to the production-related apparatuses included in the production line updated, and the displayer displays the total number of software licenses that are lacking result in an improved invention because applying said technique will ensure that the system can calculate how many software licenses are lacking when the production line is updated, thus improving the overall efficiency of the invention.
14. Regarding claim 8, Nakamura does not explicitly disclose wherein the processor configured to display a first user interface (UI) including a button for accepting a control operation to transition to a purchasing screen for purchasing a software license.
However, Jarosz teaches wherein the displayer displays a first user interface (UI) including a button for accepting a control operation to transition to a purchasing screen for purchasing a software license, (Column 5/line 35, Next, with reference to FIG. 5, a configuration of a control system of the component mounting system will be described with line L1 again used as an example. The line management apparatus 10 (or line management apparatuses 20 and 30 in lines L2 and L3) includes a transceiver 80, a local database 81, a processor 82, an operation & input interface 83, and a display 84 (e.g., local to the line management apparatuses 10, 20, 30 or displaying a web interface hosted remotely). A control system 85 of the mounting apparatuses M12-M14 (or mounting apparatuses M22-24 and M32-34 in lines L2 and L3) includes a transceiver 86, a storage unit such as memory or a hard drive 87, and a driver such as a controller or processor 88. The storage unit 87 can include information about the supply reel 58 currently mounted to that apparatus including, for example, a reel ID, a component ID, programming time, operator information, and an apparatus ID. In addition, the control system 85 is connected to actuation elements such as the substrate carrier 52, the tape feeder 55, the barcode reader 72, the Y-axis beam 60Y, the X-axis beam 60X, the mounting head 61, a display 89, and an operation and input unit 90.; and Column 7/line 11, When mounting a supply reel 58, a user scans (step S1) the reel ID from barcode label 71 with barcode scanner 72. The scanned reel ID is transmitted to the line management apparatus 10, 20, 30 of the line L1-L3 of the mounting apparatus M11-M34 to which the reel 58 is being mounted. There, the line management apparatus 10, 20, 30 determines (step S2) whether the scanned reel ID is present in its local database 81, and communicates with each of the other line management apparatuses 10, 20, 30 over central network 40, via cross line communication, to determine whether the scanned reel ID is present in the local database 81 of any other line management apparatus 10, 20, 30. If the scanned reel ID is not present in any line management apparatus 10, 20, 30, the supply reel 58 is presumed to be new and the user is prompted to register (step S3) the reel by entering all associated information related to the supply reel 58 and components 70 thereon. The registration information is then stored (step S4) in the local database 81 of the line management apparatus 10, 20, 30 of the line L1-L3 of the mounting apparatus M11-M34 to which the reel 58 is being mounted. Finally, the initial number of components associated with the supply reel 58 (e.g., as provided by the supplier of the reel) is stored and used (step S5) to represent the remaining number of components (e.g., as stored in reel use history data 93) of the supply reel 58 associated with the scanned reel ID. That is, because the supply reel 58 has been identified as new it is expected that none of the components 70 thereon have been mounted to a substrate.)
One of ordinary skill in the art would have recognized that applying the known technique of Jarosz to the known invention of Nakamura would have been recognized that the application of the technique would have yielded predictable results because the level of ordinary skill in the art demonstrated by the references applied shows the ability to incorporate production-related features into a similar invention. Further, it would have been recognized by those of ordinary skill in the art that modifying the system to include wherein the displayer displays a first user interface (UI) including a button for accepting a control operation to transition to a purchasing screen for purchasing a software license result in an improved invention because applying said technique will ensure that operators can purchase licenses, thus improving the overall efficiency of the invention.
15. Regarding claim 9, Nakamura discloses wherein the storage stores a total number of licenses purchased via the purchasing screen, (Column 3/line 53, Each of the line management apparatuses 10, 20, 30 manage various types of information handled by the respective lines L1-L3 of the component mounting system, and collect and store production data which is used in the production of the mounted substrate by the mounting apparatuses M11-M34 of the respective mounting line L1-L3. As such, each of the line management apparatuses 10, 20, 30 includes a control device. The control device may include, e.g., at least one memory, hard drive, or like storage device configured to store instructions and a database or similar collection of production data, and at least one processor configured to execute the instructions to cause the apparatus to perform at least one of the operations thereof. In other words, the line management apparatuses 10, 20, 30 may be embodied as computers having processors, storage devices (hard drives, memory, and the like), displays, and the like, and may be more particularly embodied as either personal computers (e.g., tablets, laptops, desktop computers).; and Column 5/line 35, Next, with reference to FIG. 5, a configuration of a control system of the component mounting system will be described with line L1 again used as an example. The line management apparatus 10 (or line management apparatuses 20 and 30 in lines L2 and L3) includes a transceiver 80, a local database 81, a processor 82, an operation & input interface 83, and a display 84 (e.g., local to the line management apparatuses 10, 20, 30 or displaying a web interface hosted remotely). A control system 85 of the mounting apparatuses M12-M14 (or mounting apparatuses M22-24 and M32-34 in lines L2 and L3) includes a transceiver 86, a storage unit such as memory or a hard drive 87, and a driver such as a controller or processor 88. The storage unit 87 can include information about the supply reel 58 currently mounted to that apparatus including, for example, a reel ID, a component ID, programming time, operator information, and an apparatus ID. In addition, the control system 85 is connected to actuation elements such as the substrate carrier 52, the tape feeder 55, the barcode reader 72, the Y-axis beam 60Y, the X-axis beam 60X, the mounting head 61, a display 89, and an operation and input unit 90. )
16. Regarding claim 10, Nakamura does not explicitly disclose wherein in response to an update to the production line, the processor configured to obtain new line configuration information of the production line updated, and the processor configured to cancel, based on the new line configuration information, an allocation of a software license allocated to a production-related apparatus removed from the production line as a result of the update.
However, Jarosz teaches wherein in response to an update to the production line, the processor configured to obtain new line configuration information of the production line updated, and the processor configured to cancel, based on the new line configuration information, an allocation of a software license allocated to a production-related apparatus removed from the production line as a result of the update, (Column 3/line 53, Each of the line management apparatuses 10, 20, 30 manage various types of information handled by the respective lines L1-L3 of the component mounting system, and collect and store production data which is used in the production of the mounted substrate by the mounting apparatuses M11-M34 of the respective mounting line L1-L3. As such, each of the line management apparatuses 10, 20, 30 includes a control device. The control device may include, e.g., at least one memory, hard drive, or like storage device configured to store instructions and a database or similar collection of production data, and at least one processor configured to execute the instructions to cause the apparatus to perform at least one of the operations thereof. In other words, the line management apparatuses 10, 20, 30 may be embodied as computers having processors, storage devices (hard drives, memory, and the like), displays, and the like, and may be more particularly embodied as either personal computers (e.g., tablets, laptops, desktop computers).; and Column 7/line 12, When mounting a supply reel 58, a user scans (step S1) the reel ID from barcode label 71 with barcode scanner 72. The scanned reel ID is transmitted to the line management apparatus 10, 20, 30 of the line L1-L3 of the mounting apparatus M11-M34 to which the reel 58 is being mounted. There, the line management apparatus 10, 20, 30 determines (step S2) whether the scanned reel ID is present in its local database 81, and communicates with each of the other line management apparatuses 10, 20, 30 over central network 40, via cross line communication, to determine whether the scanned reel ID is present in the local database 81 of any other line management apparatus 10, 20, 30. If the scanned reel ID is not present in any line management apparatus 10, 20, 30, the supply reel 58 is presumed to be new and the user is prompted to register (step S3) the reel by entering all associated information related to the supply reel 58 and components 70 thereon. The registration information is then stored (step S4) in the local database 81 of the line management apparatus 10, 20, 30 of the line L1-L3 of the mounting apparatus M11-M34 to which the reel 58 is being mounted. Finally, the initial number of components associated with the supply reel 58 (e.g., as provided by the supplier of the reel) is stored and used (step S5) to represent the remaining number of components (e.g., as stored in reel use history data 93) of the supply reel 58 associated with the scanned reel ID. That is, because the supply reel 58 has been identified as new it is expected that none of the components 70 thereon have been mounted to a substrate.)
One of ordinary skill in the art would have recognized that applying the known technique of Jarosz to the known invention of Nakamura would have been recognized that the application of the technique would have yielded predictable results because the level of ordinary skill in the art demonstrated by the references applied shows the ability to incorporate production-related features into a similar invention. Further, it would have been recognized by those of ordinary skill in the art that modifying the wherein in response to an update to the production line, the obtainer obtains new line configuration information of the production line updated, and the allocator cancels, based on the new line configuration information, an allocation of a software license allocated to a production-related apparatus removed from the production line as a result of the update result in an improved invention because applying said technique will ensure that all licenses are correctly allocated to prevented unneeded licenses on the production line, thus improving the overall performance of the invention.
17. Regarding claim 11, Nakamura does not explicitly disclose wherein the production-related apparatuses include any one of a solder printing apparatus that prints solder on a substrate, a component mounting apparatus that mounts a component on the substrate, an inspecting apparatus that inspects the substrate on which the solder has been printed or the substrate on which the component has been mounted, or a support apparatus that supports at least one apparatus among the solder printing apparatus, the component mounting apparatus, or the inspecting apparatus by managing the at least one apparatus or managing production preparation work for the at least one apparatus.
However, Jarosz teaches wherein the production-related apparatuses include any one of a solder printing apparatus that prints solder on a substrate, a component mounting apparatus that mounts a component on the substrate, an inspecting apparatus that inspects the substrate on which the solder has been printed or the substrate on which the component has been mounted, or a support apparatus that supports at least one apparatus among the solder printing apparatus, the component mounting apparatus, or the inspecting apparatus by managing the at least one apparatus or managing production preparation work for the at least one apparatus, (Column 5/line 26, As shown in FIG. 1, in the component mounting field, a component mounting system 1 includes a plurality of mounting lines L1-L3 that each link a plurality of mounting-related apparatuses M11-M34 for executing operations for mounting a component, for example and electronic component, onto a substrate. With a plurality of mounting lines L1-L3 disposed in a production factory, the factory may perform mass production of mounted substrates by performing mounting work together in each mounting line. Operations of each mounting line are integrally managed by an integrated management apparatus (integrated system) 2 in communication with each mounting line via a communication network 3, such as a LAN.; and Column 6/line 4, The local database 81 in each line management apparatus 10, 20, 30 stores production data 91, operation data 92, reel use history data 93, and the like. The production data 91 is configured of various types of data for producing the mounted substrate, and includes mounting data 91a, component data 91b, and arrangement data 91c. The mounting data 91a may be data for mounting the component 70 onto the substrate 53, and include, for example, an XY coordinate of the mounting position set on the substrate 53, and a mounting angle of the component 70.)
One of ordinary skill in the art would have recognized that applying the known technique of Jarosz to the known invention of Nakamura would have been recognized that the application of the technique would have yielded predictable results because the level of ordinary skill in the art demonstrated by the references applied shows the ability to incorporate production-related features into a similar invention. Further, it would have been recognized by those of ordinary skill in the art that modifying the system to include wherein the production-related apparatuses include any one of a solder printing apparatus that prints solder on a substrate, a component mounting apparatus that mounts a component on the substrate, an inspecting apparatus that inspects the substrate on which the solder has been printed or the substrate on which the component has been mounted, or a support apparatus that supports at least one apparatus among the solder printing apparatus, the component mounting apparatus, or the inspecting apparatus by managing the at least one apparatus or managing production preparation work for the at least one apparatus result in an improved invention because applying said technique will ensure that the production line machines are supported, thus improving the overall performance of the invention.
18. Regarding claim 12, Nakamura discloses wherein the processor configured to calculate, based on a total number of software licenses that are lacking for allocation to the production-related apparatuses and a purchasing price associated with the software licenses that are lacking, a shortage amount relative to a payable balance of a user of the production-related apparatuses, and the processor configured to display the shortage amount, (Column 5/line 7, In this case, upon the request for the use of the scanner, the CPU 31 of the server 3 determines whether the number of licenses currently permitted for the use of the scanner function is equal to the number of licenses initially set for the use of the scanner function. For example, it is determined whether the number of licenses for the use of the scanner function in the license management table T1 of the storing portion 35 of the server 3 is “0.” In the non-use state, since the number of the available licenses is not “0,” but “1” as shown in FIG. 4, the CPU 31 permits the use of the scanner function. Then, the CPU 31 subtracts “1” from the number of licenses for the use of the scanner function in the license management table T1 to update the number of licenses currently available for the use of the scanner function as “0,” as shown in FIG. 5. In this state, any one of scanner functions of the printing apparatuses 4-6 can be used from the terminal device 1.; and Column 5/line 27, The storing portion 35 is composed of, for example, a hard disk drive unit, and stores the number of licenses set for each of the operation functions of the printing apparatus 4-6, i.e., the printer function, the scanner function, the copy function and the FAX function, as a license management table T1 as shown in FIG. 4. The display portion 36 is a display such as a CRT or an LCD for showing the number of licenses, etc. The communication interface portion 37 enables data/signal communication between the terminal devices 1 and 2 and among the printing apparatuses 4-6, and also transfers the determination result of the CPU 31 on whether a license is to be permitted to the terminal devices 1 and 2. The CPU 31 may comprise a discriminator to discriminate whether the number of licenses currently permitted for a use of an operation function has reached the number of licenses stored in the storing portion upon request for a use of an operation function of the printing apparatuses 4-6 from the user's terminal devices 1 and 2, and may also comprise a determinator to determine whether the request for the use of the operation function is to be permitted based on the discrimination result. Furthermore, the CPU 31 may also comprise a subtractor to subtract “1” from the number of licenses in the license management table T1 when the request for the use of the operation function is permitted and for adding “1” to the number of licenses in the license management table T1 when the currently executing operation function is terminated.))
19. Regarding claim 14, Nakamura discloses A non-transitory computer-readable recording medium having recorded thereon a program for causing a computer to execute the production management method according to claim 13, (Column 5/line 7, The storing portion 27 is composed of, for example, a hard disk drive unit for storing image data, designated print jobs and the like. The communication interface portion 28 enables a signal/data communication among the terminal devices 1 and 2, the printing apparatuses 4-6 and the server 3. The display portion 29 is provided on an operation panel to display an input operation status, etc., and composed of an LCD, an EL element, etc. FIG. 3 is a block diagram showing an electric structure of the server 3 according to an embodiment of the invention. The server 3 is equipped with a CPU 31 which generally controls the entire server, a ROM 32 storing the program which the CPU 31 executes and a RAM 33 as a work area used as a data Connected to the CPU 31 via the bus 30 are an input unit 34 including a keyboard, a mouse, etc., a storing portion 35, a display portion 36, a communication interface portion 37, etc. The storing portion 35 is composed of, for example, a hard disk drive unit, and stores the number of licenses set for each of the operation functions of the printing apparatus 4-6, i.e., the printer function, the scanner function, the copy function and the FAX function, as a license management table T1 as shown in FIG. 4.)
20. Regarding claim 15, Nakamura discloses A production management system comprising: a storage that stores software licenses that correspond to a plurality of software which, by being executed, realize operations set to production-related apparatuses used in production of a mounting substrate, the software licenses being used to permit execution of the plurality of software by the production-related apparatuses, (Column 5/line 7, The storing portion 27 is composed of, for example, a hard disk drive unit for storing image data, designated print jobs and the like. The communication interface portion 28 enables a signal/data communication among the terminal devices 1 and 2, the printing apparatuses 4-6 and the server 3. The display portion 29 is provided on an operation panel to display an input operation status, etc., and composed of an LCD, an EL element, etc. FIG. 3 is a block diagram showing an electric structure of the server 3 according to an embodiment of the invention. The server 3 is equipped with a CPU 31 which generally controls the entire server, a ROM 32 storing the program which the CPU 31 executes and a RAM 33 as a work area used as a data Connected to the CPU 31 via the bus 30 are an input unit 34 including a keyboard, a mouse, etc., a storing portion 35, a display portion 36, a communication interface portion 37, etc. The storing portion 35 is composed of, for example, a hard disk drive unit, and stores the number of licenses set for each of the operation functions of the printing apparatus 4-6, i.e., the printer function, the scanner function, the copy function and the FAX function, as a license management table T1 as shown in FIG. 4.; and Column 5/line 27, The storing portion 35 is composed of, for example, a hard disk drive unit, and stores the number of licenses set for each of the operation functions of the printing apparatus 4-6, i.e., the printer function, the scanner function, the copy function and the FAX function, as a license management table T1 as shown in FIG. 4. The display portion 36 is a display such as a CRT or an LCD for showing the number of licenses, etc. The communication interface portion 37 enables data/signal communication between the terminal devices 1 and 2 and among the printing apparatuses 4-6, and also transfers the determination result of the CPU 31 on whether a license is to be permitted to the terminal devices 1 and 2. The CPU 31 may comprise a discriminator to discriminate whether the number of licenses currently permitted for a use of an operation function has reached the number of licenses stored in the storing portion upon request for a use of an operation function of the printing apparatuses 4-6 from the user's terminal devices 1 and 2, and may also comprise a determinator to determine whether the request for the use of the operation function is to be permitted based on the discrimination result. Furthermore, the CPU 31 may also comprise a subtractor to subtract “1” from the number of licenses in the license management table T1 when the request for the use of the operation function is permitted and for adding “1” to the number of licenses in the license management table T1 when the currently executing operation function is terminated.)
Nakamura does not explicitly disclose at least one processor configured to: obtain that obtains line configuration information related to an apparatus configuration of a production line including the production-related apparatuses.
However, Jarosz at least one processor configured to: obtain line configuration information related to an apparatus configuration of a production line including the production-related apparatuses, (Column 1/line 15, As shown in FIG. 1, in the component mounting field, a component mounting system 1 includes a plurality of mounting lines L1-L3 that each link a plurality of mounting-related apparatuses M11-M34 for executing operations for mounting a component, for example and electronic component, onto a substrate. With a plurality of mounting lines L1-L3 disposed in a production factory, the factory may perform mass production of mounted substrates by performing mounting work together in each mounting line. Operations of each mounting line are integrally managed by an integrated management apparatus (integrated system) 2 in communication with each mounting line via a communication network 3, such as a LAN.; and Column 3/line 53, Each of the line management apparatuses 10, 20, 30 manage various types of information handled by the respective lines L1-L3 of the component mounting system, and collect and store production data which is used in the production of the mounted substrate by the mounting apparatuses M11-M34 of the respective mounting line L1-L3…Each mounting line L1-L3 is configured by linking a plurality of mounting-related apparatuses M11-M34 used in mounting components onto a substrate to each other in a carrying direction of the substrate.)
One of ordinary skill in the art would have recognized that applying the known technique of Jarosz to the known invention of Nakamura would have been recognized that the application of the technique would have yielded predictable results because the level of ordinary skill in the art demonstrated by the references applied shows the ability to incorporate production-related features into a similar invention. Further, it would have been recognized by those of ordinary skill in the art that modifying the system to include at least one processor configured to: obtain line configuration information related to an apparatus configuration of a production line including the production-related apparatuses result in an improved invention because applying said technique will ensure that an obtainer that obtains line configuration information related to an apparatus for the correct production line thus improving the overall performance of the invention.
Nakamura does not explicitly disclose allocate that allocates the software licenses to the production-related apparatuses based on the line configuration information.
However, Jarosz teaches allocate that allocates the software licenses to the production-related apparatuses based on the line configuration information, (Column 6/line 4, The local database 81 in each line management apparatus 10, 20, 30 stores production data 91, operation data 92, reel use history data 93, and the like. The production data 91 is configured of various types of data for producing the mounted substrate, and includes mounting data 91a, component data 91b, and arrangement data 91c. The mounting data 91a may be data for mounting the component 70 onto the substrate 53, and include, for example, an XY coordinate of the mounting position set on the substrate 53, and a mounting angle of the component 70. The component data 91b may be data indicating a control parameter of an actuating element(s) when mounting the component 70 onto the substrate 53. For example, the component data 91b can include the shape of the component 70, a sending pitch of the carrier tape 57, a type of suction nozzle 62 used, and a speed parameter, such as a suction speed when the suction nozzle 62 suctions the component 70, or a mounting speed when the component 70 is mounted onto the substrate 53. The arrangement data 91c may be data indicating arrangement information of each tape feeder 55 disposed in the component supply unit 54, and can be configured by combining the “reel ID” and a “feeder address No.”. The “feeder address No.” indicates the feeder/mounting apparatus positional information of each tape feeder 55.; and Column 7/line 14, The scanned reel ID is transmitted to the line management apparatus 10, 20, 30 of the line L1-L3 of the mounting apparatus M11-M34 to which the reel 58 is being mounted. There, the line management apparatus 10, 20, 30 determines (step S2) whether the scanned reel ID is present in its local database 81, and communicates with each of the other line management apparatuses 10, 20, 30 over central network 40, via cross line communication, to determine whether the scanned reel ID is present in the local database 81 of any other line management apparatus 10, 20, 30. If the scanned reel ID is not present in any line management apparatus 10, 20, 30, the supply reel 58 is presumed to be new and the user is prompted to register (step S3) the reel by entering all associated information related to the supply reel 58 and components 70 thereon. The registration information is then stored (step S4) in the local database 81 of the line management apparatus 10, 20, 30 of the line L1-L3 of the mounting apparatus M11-M34 to which the reel 58 is being mounted. Finally, the initial number of components associated with the supply reel 58 (e.g., as provided by the supplier of the reel) is stored and used (step S5) to represent the remaining number of components (e.g., as stored in reel use history data 93) of the supply reel 58 associated with the scanned reel ID. That is, because the supply reel 58 has been identified as new it is expected that none of the components 70 thereon have been mounted to a substrate. Here it is noted that the initial number of components of each supply reel is often provided by the supplier of the supply reel 58 within a given tolerance. For example, a supplier may provide a supply reel 58 having 50,000 components thereon, within a 2% tolerance. Thus, the supply reel 58 may actually have 49,000-51,000 components thereon. If, at step S2, the reel ID is found in a local database 81, the time stamps (e.g., as stored in reel use history data 93) of each instance of the scanned reel ID are compared (step S6). The scanned reel ID entry having the most recent time is then selected (step S7) as having the most recent and accurate information associated with the reel ID).
One of ordinary skill in the art would have recognized that applying the known technique of Jarosz to the known invention of Nakamura would have been recognized that the application of the technique would have yielded predictable results because the level of ordinary skill in the art demonstrated by the references applied shows the ability to incorporate production-related features into a similar invention. Further, it would have been recognized by those of ordinary skill in the art that modifying the system to include allocate the software licenses to the production-related apparatuses based on the line configuration information result in an improved invention because applying said technique will ensure that software licenses are stored and allocate them to the correct production line thus improving the overall performance of the invention.
Conclusion
THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a). The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Image Forming Apparatus, License Determination Method, and Computer-Readable Recording Medium Thereof (US 20100071069 A1) teaches an image forming apparatus capable of executing an application formed by a plurality of program modules is disclosed, including: a correspondence information storing part, a determination part, and a boot control part. A correspondence information storing part stores correspondence information corresponding to the plurality of program modules and a plurality of sets of license data for the application. A determination part determines whether to permit or deny activation based on the license data corresponded to the correspondence information for each of the program modules included in the application. A boot control part activates one or more program modules which are permitted to be activated by the determination part.
A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any extension fee pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of the advisory action. In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the mailing date of this final action.
In addition to the foregoing, other aspects are described in the claims, drawings, and text. Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Davida L. King whose telephone number is (571) 272-4724. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 8am-5pm.
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, Neha Patel can be reached on (571) 270-1492. 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.
/D.L.K./Examiner, Art Unit 3699
/NEHA PATEL/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3699