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 .
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 1-10 are rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claims 1-16 of U.S. Patent No. 12,271,779 (hereinafter ‘779 Patent). Although the claims at issue are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other because the instant claimed invention recites similar limitations as ‘779 Patent. For instance in claims 1 of the current application and in the ‘779 Patent, the applicant claims:
Application No. 18/898,432
Patent No. 12,271,779
A display control system, comprising: a plurality of first wireless devices attached respectively to a plurality of targets of management movable in a real space, first identification information for identifying a corresponding target of management being stored in each of the plurality of first wireless devices; at least one reading apparatus that is capable of reading, from a wireless device, identification information stored in the wireless device; one or more processors; and one or more memories storing instructions that, when executed by the one or more processors, cause the display control system to: estimate, based on a result of reading the first identification information from the first wireless device by a first reading device, position coordinates where each of the plurality of targets of management is located, cause a display device to display information regarding the plurality of targets of management, segment the real space into a plurality of coordinate areas regularly and set a block area from at least one of the coordinate areas, and display, on the display device, block area information that represents the block area and coordinate area information regarding the coordinate area to which the position coordinates estimated for each of the plurality of targets of management belong.
A display control system comprising: a first wireless device configured to be attached to a management target that is movable in a real space, the first wireless device storing first identification information for identifying the management target; a second wireless device configured to be installed at a predetermined position in the real space, the second wireless device storing specific second identification information; a reading apparatus that is capable of reading, from the first wireless device and the second wireless device, identification information stored in either the first wireless device or the second wireless device; at least one processor; and at least one memory, wherein the at least one processor and the at least one memory are configured to: estimate a located position of the management target based on a result of reading the first identification information from the first wireless device at a first reading time by the reading apparatus and a result of reading the second identification information from the second wireless device at a second reading time by the reading apparatus, and cause a display apparatus to display an estimated area within which the management target is estimated to be located in the real space based on the located position, wherein a magnitude of the estimated area is based on an amount of movement of the reading apparatus between the first reading time and the second reading time.
Thus, in respect to above discussions, it would have been obvious to an artisan at the time the invention was made to use the teaching of claims 1-16 of the ‘779 Patent as a general teaching for a display control system, to perform the same function as claimed in the present invention. The instant claims obviously encompass the claimed invention of the ‘779 Patent and differ only in terminology. The extent that the instant claims are broaden and therefore generic to claimed invention of ‘779 Patent [species], In re Goodman 29 USPQ 2d 2010 CAFC 1993, states that a generic claim cannot be issued without a terminal disclaimer, if a species claim has been previously been claimed in a co-pending application.
The obviousness-type double patenting rejection is a judicially established doctrine based upon public policy and is primarily intended to prevent prolongation of the patent term by prohibiting claims in a second patent not patentably distinct from the claims in a first paten. IN re Vogel, 164 USPQ 619 (CCPA 1970). A timely filed terminal disclaimer in compliance with 37 C.F.R. & 1.321(b) would overcome an actual or provisional rejection on this ground provided the conflicting application or patent is shown to be commonly owned with this application. See 37 C>FR> &1.78(d).
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 1-20 would be allowed upon filing of a terminal disclaimer.
The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter: The applicant teaches a display control system and a method thereof which includes a plurality of first wireless devices, at least one reading apparatus for reading from a wireless device, identification information stored in the wireless device, wherein at least one or more processors causing the display control system to estimate position coordinates where each of a plurality of targets of management is located, cause a display device to display information regarding the plurality of targets of management, segment the real space into a plurality of coordinate areas regularly and set a block area from at least one of the coordinate areas, and display, on the display device, block area information that represents the block area and coordinate area information regarding the coordinate area to which the position coordinates estimated for each of the plurality of targets of management belong. These limitations in conjunction with other limitations in the claims were not shown by the prior art of record.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 01/20/26 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive. See examiner remarks.
Remarks:
In response to the applicant arguments , the prior art rejection has been withdrawn. With respect to arguments regarding the double patent rejection the examiner respectfully disagrees. The applicant argued that: “the display device to display information regarding the plurality of targets of management, segmenting the real space into a plurality of coordinate areas regularly and set a block area from at least one of the coordinate areas, and displaying, on the display device, block area information that represents the block area and coordinate area information regarding the coordinate area to which the position coordinates estimated for each of the plurality of targets of management belong” is distinct from the claims of 12,271,779 Patent, the examiner respectfully disagrees. The claims recite: that wherein the at least one processor and the at least one memory are configured to: estimate located positions of a plurality of management targets that are movable in the real space, cause the display apparatus to display a list of the plurality of management targets, and cause the display apparatus to display a first estimated area within which a first management target is estimated to be located in the real space in a case where the first management target is designated by a user from among the plurality of management targets and wherein the real space is regularly segmented into a plurality of coordinate regions, and the list of the plurality of management targets is a list of management targets that are estimated, by the at least one processor and the at least one memory, to be located in a coordinate region designated by the user from among the plurality of coordinate regions. The instant claims obviously encompass the claimed invention of the ‘779 Patent and differ only in terminology, such a plurality of coordinate areas vs a plurality of coordinate regions. The applicant’s argument is not persuasive. Refer to the rejection above.
Conclusion
THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a).
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 nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) 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.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to DANIEL ST CYR whose telephone number is (571)272-2407. The examiner can normally be reached M to F 8:00-8:00.
Examiner interviews are available via telephone, in-person, and video conferencing using a USPTO supplied web-based collaboration tool. To schedule an interview, applicant is encouraged to use the USPTO Automated Interview Request (AIR) at http://www.uspto.gov/interviewpractice.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Michael G Lee can be reached at 571-272-2398. 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.
DANIEL ST CYR
Primary Examiner
Art Unit 2876
/DANIEL ST CYR/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2876