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 § 101
35 U.S.C. 101 reads as follows:
Whoever invents or discovers any new and useful process, machine, manufacture, or composition of matter, or any new and useful improvement thereof, may obtain a patent therefor, subject to the conditions and requirements of this title.
Claim 20 rejected under 35 U.S.C. 101 because the claimed invention is directed to non-statutory subject matter. The claim(s) does/do not fall within at least one of the four categories of patent eligible subject matter because the claim recites “computer-readable medium storing non-transitory instructions”. Paragraph [0064] of the applicant’s specification suggests examples of computer storage media. However, the paragraph is not limited to physical media which can be open ended to transitory media having propagating signals. A suggestion of incorporating the term non-transitory before computer-readable medium as well as remove the term non-transitory before instructions will meet the 35 U.S.C 101 compliance.
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 1-20 rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claims 1-20 of U.S. Patent No. 11,709,916 B1 in view of Mai et al., US2021/0334888 A1.
Application Number 18/939054
U.S. Patent No. 11,709,916 B1
1. A computer-implemented method of cabinet product identification, the computer-implemented method comprising: capturing, by one or more processors of an electronic device and via an image capture device associated with the electronic device, at least one digital image depicting a cabinet having a first set of characteristics; sending, by the one or more processors, the at least one digital image depicting the cabinet to a server; receiving, by the one or more processors and from the server, an indication of one or more candidate cabinet products having a second set of characteristics similar to the first set of characteristics.
1. A computer-implemented method of cabinet product identification, the method comprising: receiving, from an electronic device via a network connection, at least one digital image depicting a cabinet; analyzing, by one or more processors, the at least one digital image to determine a first set of characteristics of the cabinet; accessing, by the one or more processors from memory, a second set of characteristics corresponding to a plurality of cabinet products; comparing, by the one or more processors, the first set of characteristics to the second set of characteristics to identify a cabinet product of the plurality of cabinet products that matches the cabinet; and transmitting, to the electronic device via the network connection, an indication of the cabinet product.
11. An electronic device for cabinet product identification, the electronic device comprising: one or more processors; and a memory storing instructions that, when executed by the one or more processors, cause the one or more processors to: capture, via an image capture device associated with the electronic device, at least one digital image depicting a cabinet having a first set of characteristics; send the at least one digital image depicting the cabinet to a server; receive, from the server, an indication of one or more candidate cabinet products having a second set of characteristics similar to the first set of characteristics.
11. A computing system for cabinet product identification, the computing system comprising: a transceiver in communication with an electronic device via a network connection; one or more processors; and a program memory storing instructions that, when executed by the one or more processors, cause the one or more processors to: receive, from an electronic device via the transceiver, at least one digital image depicting a cabinet; analyze the at least one digital image to determine a first set of characteristics of the cabinet; access from memory a second set of characteristics corresponding to a plurality of cabinet products; compare the first set of characteristics to the second set of characteristics to identify a cabinet product of the plurality of cabinet products that matches the cabinet; and transmit, to the electronic device via the transceiver, an indication of the cabinet product.
20. A computer-readable medium storing non-transitory instructions for cabinet product identification, wherein the non-transitory instructions, when executed by one or more processors of an electronic device, cause the one or more processors to: capture, via an image capture device associated with the electronic device, at least one digital image depicting a cabinet having a first set of characteristics; send the at least one digital image depicting the cabinet to a server; receive, from the server, an indication of one or more candidate cabinet products having a second set of characteristics similar to the first set of characteristics.
11. A computing system for cabinet product identification, the computing system comprising: a transceiver in communication with an electronic device via a network connection; one or more processors; and a program memory storing instructions that, when executed by the one or more processors, cause the one or more processors to: receive, from an electronic device via the transceiver, at least one digital image depicting a cabinet; analyze the at least one digital image to determine a first set of characteristics of the cabinet; access from memory a second set of characteristics corresponding to a plurality of cabinet products; compare the first set of characteristics to the second set of characteristics to identify a cabinet product of the plurality of cabinet products that matches the cabinet; and transmit, to the electronic device via the transceiver, an indication of the cabinet product.
The issued reference of claims 1, 11 and 20 fails to teach the following recited limitation. However, Mai teaches displaying, by the one or more processors and via a user interface associated with the electronic device, an indication of the one or more candidate cabinet products (par. 0037; The 3D model is displayed in the user interface (e.g., of a web-browser), and includes a variety of types of kitchen cabinets (e.g., cabinets 14-34) that are selectable by a user input within the user interface in the web browser (e.g., by a computer mouse).). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to combine the issued reference teachings with Mai’s teachings in order for the selection to be made by the user selecting the graphical representation of the cabinet type from the interactive 3D model (Mai, par. 0009).
Claims 2-10 and 12-19 corresponds to claims 2-10 and 12-20 of the issued reference.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to AYODEJI O AYOTUNDE whose telephone number is (571)270-7983. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday, 7:00am-3:30pm.
Examiner interviews are available via telephone, in-person, and video conferencing using a USPTO supplied web-based collaboration tool. To schedule an interview, applicant is encouraged to use the USPTO Automated Interview Request (AIR) at http://www.uspto.gov/interviewpractice.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Yuwen Pan can be reached at 571-272-7855. 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.
/AYODEJI O AYOTUNDE/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2649
Prosecution Insights