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 .
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.
Claims 1-7 and 20 are 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.
Re claims 1 and 20: Applicants use the phrase “integrity of the unique identity,” (claim 1 at line 11, and claim 20, line 3), but the metes and bounds of this language are unclear. That is, it is unclear what is considered as integrity of the identity?
Appropriate correction and/or clarification is required.
Claims 2-7 are also rejected because claims are depended on rejected claim.
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 8-20 are rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claims 1-5 of U.S. Patent No. 12164987 and claims 7-11 and 13 of U.S. Patent No. 11714985. Although the claims at issue are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other because claims 8-20 of the instant application claim a method comprising allocating a unique identity for an ambient electromagnetic power harvesting (AEPH) chip, storing the unique identity by the AEPH management application in a first record in a datastore, providing the unique identity by the AEPH management application to an original equipment manufacturer (OEM) of the AEPH chip; receiving a request by the AEPH management application to update a state associated in the datastore with the unique identity identified in the request; authorizing by the AEPH management application the request to update the state associated with the unique identity in the datastore; and adding a second record to the database that associates the unique identity with an updated state of the unique identity (claim 8) and a method comprising analyzing a history of states associated in the datastore with the unique identity by the AEPH management application to determine that the different state is an invalid state change based on the history of states associated in the datastore with the unique identity; and rejecting by the AEPH management application the request to update the state associated in the datastore with the unique AEPH identity to the different state (claim 14).
Claims 1-5 of U.S. Patent No. 12164987 discloses a method of controlling assignment and management of identities in ambient electromagnetic power harvesting (AEPH) chips comprising allocating a plurality of unique AEPH identities by an AEPH management application executing on a computer system, wherein each unique AEPH identity comprises an identity of a product item and an instance identity; storing the plurality of unique AEPH identities by the AEPH management application in a first immutable record in a datastore, wherein the first immutable record associates each unique AEPH identity with an initial state; providing the plurality of unique AEPH identities by the AEPH management application to an original equipment manufacturer (OEM) of AEPH chips, receiving a request via the API by the AEPH management application to update a state associated in the datastore with a unique AEPH identity to a first state, authorizing by the AEPH management application the request to update the state associated in the datastore with the unique AEPH identity; in response to the successful authorization of the request, adding a second immutable record to the datastore by the AEPH management application, wherein the second immutable record in the datastore associates the unique AEPH identity with a second state identified in the request.
Claims 7-11 and 13 of U.S. Patent No. 11714985 disclose a method of controlling assignment and management of identities in ambient electromagnetic power harvesting (AEPH) chips comprising allocating a plurality of unique AEPH identities by an AEPH management application executing on a computer system, wherein each unique AEPH identity comprises an identity of a product item and an instance identity; storing the plurality of unique AEPH identities by the AEPH management application in a first immutable record in a datastore, wherein the first immutable record associates each unique AEPH identity with an initial state; providing the plurality of unique AEPH identities by the AEPH management application to an original equipment manufacturer (OEM) of AEPH chips, receiving a first request via the API by the AEPH management application to update a state associated in the datastore with a first unique AEPH identity to a first state, wherein the first unique AEPH identity is one of the plurality of unique AEPH identities stored in the first immutable record in the datastore; analyzing a history of states associated in the datastore with the first unique AEPH identity by the AEPH management application to determine that the first state is a valid state change based on the history of states associated in the datastore with the first unique AEPH identity; rejecting by the AEPH management application the second request to update the state associated in the datastore with the second unique AEPH identity identified in the second request, whereby the state associated in the datastore with the second unique AEPH identity remains unchanged.
Claim 8 of the instant application is corresponded to claim 1 of U.S. Patent No. 12164987.
Claim 9 of the instant application is corresponded to claim 1 of U.S. Patent No. 12164987.
Claim 10 of the instant application is corresponded to claim 2 of U.S. Patent No. 12164987.
Claim 11 of the instant application is corresponded to claim 3 of U.S. Patent No. 12164987.
Claim 12 of the instant application is corresponded to claim 4 of U.S. Patent No. 12164987.
Claim 13 of the instant application is corresponded to claim 5 of U.S. Patent No. 12164987.
Claim 14 of the instant application is corresponded to claim 7 of U.S. Patent No. 11714985.
Claim 15 of the instant application is corresponded to claim 8 of U.S. Patent No. 11714985.
Claim 16 of the instant application is corresponded to claim 9 of U.S. Patent No. 11714985.
Claim 17 of the instant application is corresponded to claim 7 of U.S. Patent No. 11714985.
Claim 18 of the instant application is corresponded to claim 10 of U.S. Patent No. 11714985.
Claim 19 of the instant application is corresponded to claim 11 of U.S. Patent No. 11714985.
Claim 20 of the instant application is corresponded to claim 13 of U.S. Patent No. 11714985.
Additional Remarks
The lack of an art rejection with this Office action is not an indication of allowable subject matter (i.e., even though the claims 1-7 and 20 are rewritten or amended to overcome the Claim rejections as discussed above). The disclosure/claimed language is such that it is impractical to conduct a reasonable search of the prior art by the Examiner.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Ziola (US 2018/0107914) teaches a method of tracking objects having tags using a database.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to SEUNG H LEE whose telephone number is (571)272-2401. The examiner can normally be reached 7-4:00PM.
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, Steven Paik can be reached at 571-272-2404. 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.
/SEUNG H LEE/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2876