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 .
In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status.
Drawings
The drawings are objected to under 37 CFR 1.83(a). The drawings must show every feature of the invention specified in the claims. The following features are absent from the drawings
Claims 5, 13 and 19, “a first circuit breaker associated with the first transponder; a second circuit breaker associated with the second transponder; and a third circuit breaker associated with the third transponder, wherein in the first mode, the third circuit breaker is set to disable power to the third transponder, and in the second mode, the first circuit breaker or the second circuit breaker is set to disable power to the first transponder or the second transponder.”
Claims 6 , 14, and 20 “a loader card enables flight software to operate in association with the first mode or the second mode, and the loader card enables the flight software to operate in a civil mode, or operate in the civil mode and a military mode..”
Therefore, the above subject matter must be shown or the features canceled from the claims. No new matter should be entered.
Corrected drawing sheets in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(d) are required in reply to the Office action to avoid abandonment of the application. Any amended replacement drawing sheet should include all of the figures appearing on the immediate prior version of the sheet, even if only one figure is being amended. The figure or figure number of an amended drawing should not be labeled as “amended.” If a drawing figure is to be canceled, the appropriate figure must be removed from the replacement sheet, and where necessary, the remaining figures must be renumbered and appropriate changes made to the brief description of the several views of the drawings for consistency. Additional replacement sheets may be necessary to show the renumbering of the remaining figures. Each drawing sheet submitted after the filing date of an application must be labeled in the top margin as either “Replacement Sheet” or “New Sheet” pursuant to 37 CFR 1.121(d). If the changes are not accepted by the examiner, the applicant will be notified and informed of any required corrective action in the next Office action. The objection to the drawings will not be held in abeyance.
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 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 1-3, 7-11, and 15-17 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Woodring(US10928506B1) in view of CHEE(SG161123A1)
Regarding claim 1, Woodring discloses
An aircraft (“ A flight-transponder is a required electronic communications devise in the secured cockpit or flight deck of a commercial aircraft” [Col.4, ll.21-23]), comprising: avionics circuitry (FIG.11, Part.1100); a first transponder (FIG.11, Part.1110A); a second transponder(FIG.11, Part.1110B); a third transponder(FIG.11, Part.1110B); a first relay(FIG.11, Part.1114); […] a first antenna (“After receiving an interrogation, the aircraft's transponder transmits” [Col.4, ll.34-35]); a second antenna (“The second transmitter” [Col.10, L.39]); and a switch (Fig.11, Part.1112),
Woodring does not explicitly disclose nor limit wherein the switch selectively connects the first second and third transponders in two individual modes. CHEE teaches in the same field of endeavor of aircraft transponder systems. CHEE discloses, a second relay (FIG.2, Part.150) […] wherein the first and second relay are configured for installation between the first transponder, the second transponder, and the third transponder, and the first and second antennas(FIG.2, Parts. 101, 105,110, 120 & 150), the switch is configured to enable the aircraft to operate in a first mode or a second mode (“ operating a first transponder in respective identification modes corresponding to one or more communication modes; operating a second transponder in respective identification modes
corresponding to one or more communication modes, wherein the first and second transponders have one or more overlapping identification modes; and switching between the first and second
transponders” [Pgs.3-4, ll.34-36&1-4]), in the first mode, the switch is configured to drive the first and second relays and connect the first and second transponders to the first and second antennas, and in the second mode, the switch is configured to drive the first and second relays and connect the second and third transponders to the first and second antennas (“switching between the first and second transponders such that in each 5 switched state, only one of the transponders operates in said one or more overlapping identification modes”[Pg.4, ll.4-6]).
CHEE teaches in the same field of endeavor of aircraft transponder systems. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Woodring with the teachings of CHEE to incorporate the features of selectively connecting transponders in order to produce two individual modes so as to gain the advantage of reducing complexity [Pg.12, Par.3, CHEE]. Also, since it has been held that if a technique has been used to improve one device, and a person of ordinary skill in the art would recognize that it would improve similar devices in the same way, using the technique is obvious unless its actual application is beyond his or her skill (MPEP 2143).
Regarding claim 2, Woodring as modified by CHEE disclose all the limitations of claim 1. Woodring discloses wherein, the first transponder comprises a first civil transponder; and the second transponder comprises a second civil transponder (“some commercial aircraft have two independent transponders
that provide a second or backup-transponder” [Col.6, ll.1-3]).
Regarding claim 3, Woodring as modified by CHEE disclose all the limitations of claim 2. Woodring does not explicitly disclose nor limit a military transponder. CHEE teaches in the same field of endeavor of aircraft transponder systems. CHEE discloses wherein, the third transponder comprises a military transponder (“The first transponder may operate in identification modes corresponding to civilian modes, mode 3/A and mode C and military modes, mode 1 and mode 2.” [Pg. 3, ll.13-24]).
CHEE teaches in the same field of endeavor of aircraft transponder systems. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Woodring with the teachings of CHEE to incorporate the features of a military transponder so as to gain the advantage of reducing complexity [Pg.12, Par.3, CHEE]. Also, since it has been held that if a technique has been used to improve one device, and a person of ordinary skill in the art would recognize that it would improve similar devices in the same way, using the technique is obvious unless its actual application is beyond his or her skill (MPEP 2143).
Regarding claim 7, Woodring as modified by CHEE disclose all the limitations of claim 1. Woodring does not explicitly disclose nor limit a military transponder. CHEE teaches in the same field of endeavor of aircraft transponder systems. CHEE discloses a jumper harness enabling the aircraft to operate in a civil mode, or operate in the civil mode and a military mode (FIG.2, Parts.109, 111 & 150).
CHEE teaches in the same field of endeavor of aircraft transponder systems. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Woodring with the teachings of CHEE to incorporate the features of a military transponder so as to gain the advantage of reducing complexity [Pg.12, Par.3, CHEE]. Also, since it has been held that if a technique has been used to improve one device, and a person of ordinary skill in the art would recognize that it would improve similar devices in the same way, using the technique is obvious unless its actual application is beyond his or her skill (MPEP 2143).
Regarding claim 8, Woodring discloses
A system, comprising: a first transponder (FIG.11, Part.1110A); a second transponder (FIG.11, Part.1110B); a third transponder (FIG.11, Part.1110B); a first relay (FIG.11, Part.1114); […] a first antenna (“After receiving an interrogation, the aircraft's transponder transmits” [Col.4, ll.34-35]); a second antenna (“The second transmitter” [Col.10, L.39]); and a switch, (Fig.11, Part.1112),
Woodring does not explicitly disclose nor limit wherein the switch selectively connects the first second and third transponders in two individual modes. CHEE teaches in the same field of endeavor of aircraft transponder systems. CHEE discloses, a second relay (FIG.2, Part.150) […]wherein the switch is configured to enable the system to operate in a first mode or a second mode, in the first mode (“ operating a first transponder in respective identification modes corresponding to one or more communication modes; operating a second transponder in respective identification modes
corresponding to one or more communication modes, wherein the first and second transponders have one or more overlapping identification modes; and switching between the first and second transponders” [Pgs.3-4, ll.34-36&1-4]), the switch is configured to drive the first and second relays and connect the first and second transponders to the first and second antennas, and in the second mode, the switch is configured to drive the first and second relays and connect the second and third transponders to the first and second antennas (“switching between the first and second transponders
such that in each 5 switched state, only one of the transponders operates in said one or more overlapping identification modes”[Pg.4, ll.4-6]).
CHEE teaches in the same field of endeavor of aircraft transponder systems. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Woodring with the teachings of CHEE to incorporate the features of selectively connecting transponders in order to produce two individual modes so as to gain the advantage of reducing complexity [Pg.12, Par.3, CHEE]. Also, since it has been held that if a technique has been used to improve one device, and a person of ordinary skill in the art would recognize that it would improve similar devices in the same way, using the technique is obvious unless its actual application is beyond his or her skill (MPEP 2143).
Regarding claim 9, Woodring as modified by CHEE disclose all the limitations of claim 8. Woodring does not explicitly disclose nor limit a second relay. CHEE teaches in the same field of endeavor of aircraft transponder systems. CHEE discloses, the first and second relay are configured for installation between the first transponder, the second transponder, and the third transponder, and the first and second antennas (FIG.2, Parts. 101, 105,110, 120 & 150).
CHEE teaches in the same field of endeavor of aircraft transponder systems. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Woodring with the teachings of CHEE to incorporate the features of a second relay so as to gain the advantage of reducing complexity [Pg.12, Par.3, CHEE]. Also, since it has been held that if a technique has been used to improve one device, and a person of ordinary skill in the art would recognize that it would improve similar devices in the same way, using the technique is obvious unless its actual application is beyond his or her skill (MPEP 2143).
Regarding claim 10, Woodring as modified by CHEE disclose all the limitations of claim 8. Woodring discloses wherein, the first transponder comprises a first civil transponder; and the second transponder comprises a second civil transponder (“some commercial aircraft have two independent transponders
that provide a second or backup-transponder” [Col.6, ll.1-3]).
Regarding claim 11, Woodring as modified by CHEE disclose all the limitations of claim 10. Woodring does not explicitly disclose nor limit a military transponder. CHEE teaches in the same field of endeavor of aircraft transponder systems. CHEE discloses wherein, the third transponder comprises a military transponder (“The first transponder may operate in identification modes corresponding to civilian modes, mode 3/A and mode C and military modes, mode 1 and mode 2.” [Pg. 3, ll.13-24]).
CHEE teaches in the same field of endeavor of aircraft transponder systems. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Woodring with the teachings of CHEE to incorporate the features of a military transponder so as to gain the advantage of reducing complexity [Pg.12, Par.3, CHEE]. Also, since it has been held that if a technique has been used to improve one device, and a person of ordinary skill in the art would recognize that it would improve similar devices in the same way, using the technique is obvious unless its actual application is beyond his or her skill (MPEP 2143).
Regarding claim 15, Woodring discloses
A transponder arrangement, comprising: a first transponder (FIG.11, Part.1110A); a second transponder(FIG.11, Part.1110B); a third transponder (FIG.11, Part.1110B); a first relay (FIG.11, Part.1114) […]and a switch (Fig.11, Part.1112),
Woodring does not explicitly disclose nor limit wherein the switch selectively connects the first second and third transponders in two individual modes. CHEE teaches in the same field of endeavor of aircraft transponder systems. CHEE discloses, a second relay (FIG.2, Part.150) […] wherein the switch is configured to enable an aircraft to operate in a first mode or a second mode(“ operating a first transponder in respective identification modes corresponding to one or more communication
modes; operating a second transponder in respective identification modes corresponding to one or more communication modes, wherein the first and second transponders have one or more overlapping identification modes; and switching between the first and second transponders” [Pgs.3-4, ll.34-36&1-4]), in the first mode, the switch is configured to drive the first and second relays and connect the first and second transponders to first and second antennas, and in the second mode, the switch is configured to drive the first and second relays and connect the second and third transponders to the first and second antennas (“switching between the first and second transponders such that in each 5 switched state, only one of the transponders operates in said one or more overlapping identification modes”[Pg.4, ll.4-6]).
CHEE teaches in the same field of endeavor of aircraft transponder systems. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Woodring with the teachings of CHEE to incorporate the features of selectively connecting transponders in order to produce two individual modes so as to gain the advantage of reducing complexity [Pg.12, Par.3, CHEE]. Also, since it has been held that if a technique has been used to improve one device, and a person of ordinary skill in the art would recognize that it would improve similar devices in the same way, using the technique is obvious unless its actual application is beyond his or her skill (MPEP 2143).
Regarding claim 16, Woodring as modified by CHEE disclose all the limitations of claim 15. Woodring does not explicitly disclose nor limit a second relay. CHEE teaches in the same field of endeavor of aircraft transponder systems. CHEE discloses wherein, the first and second relay are configured for installation between the first transponder, the second transponder, and the third transponder, and the first and second antennas (FIG.2, Parts. 101, 105,110, 120 & 150).
CHEE teaches in the same field of endeavor of aircraft transponder systems. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Woodring with the teachings of CHEE to incorporate the features of a second relay so as to gain the advantage of reducing complexity [Pg.12, Par.3, CHEE]. Also, since it has been held that if a technique has been used to improve one device, and a person of ordinary skill in the art would recognize that it would improve similar devices in the same way, using the technique is obvious unless its actual application is beyond his or her skill (MPEP 2143).
Regarding claim 17, Woodring as modified by CHEE disclose all the limitations of claim 15. Woodring discloses wherein, the first transponder comprises a first civil transponder; the second transponder comprises a second civil transponder; and the third transponder comprises a military transponder (“some commercial aircraft have two independent transponders that provide a second or backup-transponder” [Col.6, ll.1-3]).
Woodring does not explicitly disclose nor limit a military transponder. CHEE teaches in the same field of endeavor of aircraft transponder systems. CHEE discloses the third transponder comprises a military transponder(FIG.2, Parts.109, 111 & 150).
CHEE teaches in the same field of endeavor of aircraft transponder systems. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Woodring with the teachings of CHEE to incorporate the features of a military transponder so as to gain the advantage of reducing complexity [Pg.12, Par.3, CHEE]. Also, since it has been held that if a technique has been used to improve one device, and a person of ordinary skill in the art would recognize that it would improve similar devices in the same way, using the technique is obvious unless its actual application is beyond his or her skill (MPEP 2143).
Claims 4, 12, and 18 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Woodring(US10928506B1) as modified by CHEE(SG161123A1) as applied to claims 1, 8, and 15, above, and further in view of GRAF(EP3273262A1).
Regarding claim 4, Woodring as modified by CHEE disclose all the limitations of claim 1. Woodring as modified by CHEE does not explicitly disclose nor limit coaxial relays. GRAF teaches in the same field of endeavor of aircraft transponder systems. GRAF discloses wherein, the first relay and the second relay include coaxial relays (“coaxial relays to connect one of the two redundant transmit/receiver TX/RX channels” [Pg.5, ll.8-9]).
GRAF teaches in the same field of endeavor of aircraft transponder systems. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Woodring as modified by CHEE with the teachings of GRAF to incorporate the features of coaxial relays so as to gain the advantage of improving switching precision. Also, since it has been held that if a technique has been used to improve one device, and a person of ordinary skill in the art would recognize that it would improve similar devices in the same way, using the technique is obvious unless its actual application is beyond his or her skill (MPEP 2143).
Regarding claim 12, Woodring as modified by CHEE disclose all the limitations of claim 8. Woodring as modified by CHEE does not explicitly disclose nor limit coaxial relays. GRAF teaches in the same field of endeavor of aircraft transponder systems. GRAF discloses wherein, the first relay and the second relay include coaxial relays (“coaxial relays to connect one of the two redundant transmit/receiver TX/RX channels” [Pg.5, ll.8-9]).
GRAF teaches in the same field of endeavor of aircraft transponder systems. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Woodring as modified by CHEE with the teachings of GRAF to incorporate the features of coaxial relays so as to gain the advantage of improving switching precision. Also, since it has been held that if a technique has been used to improve one device, and a person of ordinary skill in the art would recognize that it would improve similar devices in the same way, using the technique is obvious unless its actual application is beyond his or her skill (MPEP 2143).
Regarding claim 18, Woodring as modified by CHEE disclose all the limitations of claim 15. Woodring as modified by CHEE does not explicitly disclose nor limit coaxial relays. GRAF teaches in the same field of endeavor of aircraft transponder systems. GRAF discloses wherein, the first relay and the second relay include coaxial relays (“coaxial relays to connect one of the two redundant transmit/receiver TX/RX channels” [Pg.5, ll.8-9]).
GRAF teaches in the same field of endeavor of aircraft transponder systems. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Woodring as modified by CHEE with the teachings of GRAF to incorporate the features of coaxial relays so as to gain the advantage of improving switching precision. Also, since it has been held that if a technique has been used to improve one device, and a person of ordinary skill in the art would recognize that it would improve similar devices in the same way, using the technique is obvious unless its actual application is beyond his or her skill (MPEP 2143).
Claims 5, 13, and 19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Woodring(US10928506B1) as modified by CHEE(SG161123A1) as applied to claims 1, 8, and 15 above, and further in view of BARTONEK(US20090326855A1).
Regarding claim 5, Woodring as modified by CHEE disclose all the limitations of claim 1. Woodring as modified by CHEE does not explicitly disclose nor limit circuit breakers. BARTONEK teaches in the same field of endeavor of transponder systems. BARTONEK discloses, a first circuit breaker associated with the first transponder; a second circuit breaker associated with the second transponder; and a third circuit breaker associated with the third transponder, wherein in the first mode, the third circuit breaker is set to disable power to the third transponder, and in the second mode, the first circuit breaker or the second circuit breaker is set to disable power to the first transponder or the second transponder (“The parts of the electrical distribution and/or installation facility 2 secured by the first, second, third, and fourth circuit breaker 13, 14, 15, 16” [0021])
BARTONEK teaches in the same field of endeavor of transponder systems. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Woodring as modified by CHEE with the teachings of BARTONEK to incorporate the features of circuit breakers so as to gain the advantage of improving system reliability. Also, since it has been held that if a technique has been used to improve one device, and a person of ordinary skill in the art would recognize that it would improve similar devices in the same way, using the technique is obvious unless its actual application is beyond his or her skill (MPEP 2143).
Regarding claim 13, Woodring as modified by CHEE disclose all the limitations of claim 8. Woodring as modified by CHEE does not explicitly disclose nor limit circuit breakers. BARTONEK teaches in the same field of endeavor of transponder systems. BARTONEK discloses, a first circuit breaker associated with the first transponder; a second circuit breaker associated with the second transponder; and a third circuit breaker associated with the third transponder, wherein in the first mode, the third circuit breaker is set to disable power to the third transponder, and in the second mode, the first circuit breaker or the second circuit breaker is set to disable power to the first transponder or the second transponder (“The parts of the electrical distribution and/or installation facility 2 secured by the first, second, third, and fourth circuit breaker 13, 14, 15, 16” [0021])
BARTONEK teaches in the same field of endeavor of transponder systems. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Woodring as modified by CHEE with the teachings of BARTONEK to incorporate the features of circuit breakers so as to gain the advantage of improving system reliability. Also, since it has been held that if a technique has been used to improve one device, and a person of ordinary skill in the art would recognize that it would improve similar devices in the same way, using the technique is obvious unless its actual application is beyond his or her skill (MPEP 2143).
Regarding claim 19, Woodring as modified by CHEE disclose all the limitations of claim 15. Woodring as modified by CHEE does not explicitly disclose nor limit circuit breakers. BARTONEK teaches in the same field of endeavor of transponder systems. BARTONEK discloses wherein, the first transponder is associated with a first circuit breaker; the second transponder is associated with a second circuit breaker; and the third transponder is associated with a third circuit breaker, wherein in the first mode, the third circuit breaker is set to disable power to the third transponder, and in the second mode, the first circuit breaker or the second circuit breaker is set to disable power to the first transponder or the second transponder (“The parts of the electrical distribution and/or installation facility 2 secured by the first, second, third, and fourth circuit breaker 13, 14, 15, 16” [0021])
BARTONEK teaches in the same field of endeavor of transponder systems. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Woodring as modified by CHEE with the teachings of BARTONEK to incorporate the features of circuit breakers so as to gain the advantage of improving system reliability. Also, since it has been held that if a technique has been used to improve one device, and a person of ordinary skill in the art would recognize that it would improve similar devices in the same way, using the technique is obvious unless its actual application is beyond his or her skill (MPEP 2143).
Claims 6, 14, and 20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Woodring(US10928506B1) as modified by CHEE(SG161123A1) as applied to claims 1, 8, and 15 above, and further in view of Gadgil(US20160200455A1).
Regarding claim 6, Woodring as modified by CHEE disclose all the limitations of claim 1. Woodring as modified by CHEE does not explicitly disclose nor limit loader card. Gadgil teaches in the same field of endeavor of transponder systems. Gadgil discloses wherein, a loader card enables flight software to operate in association with the first mode or the second mode, and the loader card enables the flight software to operate in a civil mode, or operate in the civil mode and a military mode (“the technician or other user may insert a physical memory loader card that includes software and configuration data for the new LRU” [0003]).
Gadgil teaches in the same field of endeavor of transponder systems. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Woodring as modified by CHEE with the teachings of Gadgil to incorporate the features of a loader card so as to gain the advantage of improving software configuration [0006, Gadgil]. Also, since it has been held that if a technique has been used to improve one device, and a person of ordinary skill in the art would recognize that it would improve similar devices in the same way, using the technique is obvious unless its actual application is beyond his or her skill (MPEP 2143).
Regarding claim 14, Woodring as modified by CHEE disclose all the limitations of claim 8. Woodring as modified by CHEE does not explicitly disclose nor limit loader card. Gadgil teaches in the same field of endeavor of transponder systems. Gadgil discloses wherein, a loader card enables flight software to operate in association with the first mode or the second mode (“the technician or other user may insert a physical memory loader card that includes software and configuration data for the new LRU” [0003]).
Gadgil teaches in the same field of endeavor of transponder systems. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Woodring as modified by CHEE with the teachings of Gadgil to incorporate the features of a loader card so as to gain the advantage of improving software configuration [0006, Gadgil]. Also, since it has been held that if a technique has been used to improve one device, and a person of ordinary skill in the art would recognize that it would improve similar devices in the same way, using the technique is obvious unless its actual application is beyond his or her skill (MPEP 2143).
Regarding claim 20, Woodring as modified by CHEE disclose all the limitations of claim 15. Woodring as modified by CHEE does not explicitly disclose nor limit loader card. Gadgil teaches in the same field of endeavor of transponder systems. Gadgil discloses wherein, a loader card enables flight software to operate in a civil mode, or operate in the civil mode and a military mode (“the technician or other user may insert a physical memory loader card that includes software and configuration data for the new LRU” [0003]).
Gadgil teaches in the same field of endeavor of transponder systems. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Woodring as modified by CHEE with the teachings of Gadgil to incorporate the features of a loader card so as to gain the advantage of improving software configuration [0006, Gadgil]. Also, since it has been held that if a technique has been used to improve one device, and a person of ordinary skill in the art would recognize that it would improve similar devices in the same way, using the technique is obvious unless its actual application is beyond his or her skill (MPEP 2143).
For applicant’s benefit portions of the cited reference(s) have been cited to aid in the review of the rejection(s). While every attempt has been made to be thorough and consistent within the rejection it is noted that the PRIOR ART MUST BE CONSIDERED IN ITS ENTIRETY, INCLUDING DISCLOSURES THAT TEACH AWAY FROM THE CLAIMS. See MPEP 2141.02 VI.
Documents Considered but not Relied Upon
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to the applicant’s Disclosure.
Troxel(US20190113617A1) is considered analogous art to the instant application as it discloses in [0005] “The system can also include a first mode-S transponder function in wired connection to the directional antenna. The system can further include a second mode-S transponder function in wired connection to the directional antenna, wherein the first mode-S transponder function is independent from the second mode-S transponder function.”
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to CLAYTON PAUL RIDDER whose telephone number is (571)272-2771. The examiner can normally be reached Monday thru Friday ET.
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, Jack Keith can be reached on (571) 272-6878. 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.
/C.P.R./Examiner, Art Unit 3646
/JACK W KEITH/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3646
Prosecution Insights