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, 8, 15, 22 are rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claims 4 of U.S. Patent No. 12170932 B2 in view of Peterson et al. (US 20190311061 A1).
Regarding claim 1, the following limitations of claim 1 are substantially similar to or contained in the corresponding limitations of claim 4 of US 12170932 with the correspondences shown in the table below:
Instant application
US 12170932
Comments
determining, by a computing device, based on one or more rates of change of values of a wireless parameter and based on connection of a wireless device to an access point associated with a premises, an entry of the wireless device into a coverage area of the access point;
Claim 1: determining, by a computing device, based on one or more rates of change of values of a wireless parameter and based on connection of a wireless device to an access point, whether the wireless device arrived at a premises;
Coverage area corresponds to premises
detecting, within a time period after the connection, a disconnection of the wireless device from the access point;
Claim 4: determining, for each connection of a plurality of connections of the wireless device to the access point, post-connection values for the wireless parameter during a time period following the connection; determining, based on the post-connection values, criteria for rates of change associated with departure from the premises; and determining, based on receiving an indication that the wireless device has disconnected from the access point and based on comparing the criteria with one or more second rates of change of second values of the wireless parameter, whether the wireless device has departed from the premises.
US 12170932 does not disclose: based on the detecting of the disconnection within the time period, not performing at least one action associated with the entry of the wireless device into the coverage area.
In the same field of endeavor, however, Peterson discloses:
Abstract: “….wireless activity (WLA) tracking apparatus, wireless activity of a mobile device in a proximity of a local wireless environment.”
[0068]: “Alternatively, the security cameras 151 may be activated by motion detectors 153 and/or other sensors and record video data for corresponding time periods. Optionally, the security cameras 151 may be programmed to be activated during predetermined times (e.g., nighttime).
[0099]: “…the search request may also request that the security cameras 524-526 activate and capture video data for as long as the mobile device 558 is present, and for a predetermined period of time thereafter..”
Hence, from the above, it would be obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art to perform an action of turning the video cameras off when a wireless device leaves the premises. This corresponds to “not performing at least one action associated with the entry of the wireless device into the coverage area”.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the invention, to use the method, as disclosed by Peterson, in the system of US 12170932 because turning the video cameras off when the wireless device leaves the premises would result in lower power/battery consumption and less storage space being used.
Claims 8, 15, 22 recite similar limitations to claim 1 and are therefore rejected similarly as above.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 2 - 7, 9 - 14, 16 - 21, 23 - 28 are objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
Claims 1, 8, 15, 22 would be allowable if the Double Patenting rejection were overcome.
Other Prior Art Cited
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to the applicant’s disclosure.
The following patents/publications are cited to further show the state of the art with respect to presence detection:
Shen et al. (US 10448211) discloses organizing groups of physical objects using wireless tags.
Shen et al. (US 10945092) discloses organizing groups of physical objects using wireless tags.
Contact Information
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ADOLF DSOUZA whose telephone number is (571)272-1043. The examiner can normally be reached Mon - Fri 9 AM - 5 PM.
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, Chieh M Fan can be reached at 571-272-3042. 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.
/ADOLF DSOUZA/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2632
Prosecution Insights