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 .
Per the 2019 (PEG) guidance, claim 1, 12, and 20 were reviewed for abstract idea. Claims 1 and 12 can be streamlined to determine the subject matter eligibility, and the eligibility of the claims is “self-evident.” Claim 20 passes the subject matter eligibility requirement at step 2a prong 2, “practical application.”
Priority
Applicant states on the ADS filed on 12/03/2024 that the subject application 18/967,615 is a continuation or divisional application of the prior-filed application 17/189,018. A continuation or divisional application cannot introduce new matter. The Federal Circuit has ruled original claims of non-provisional applications are considered part of specification, In re Benno, 768 F.2d 1340, 226 USPQ 683 (Fed. Cir. 1985); therefore, any new matter introduced in the claims of a child application will effectively change the child application to continuation-in-part (CIP). Therefore, Specification filed 12/03/2024 are objected to under 35 U.S.C. 132(a) because the specification introduced new matter into the disclosure on 12/03/2024. Applicant is requested to correct the continuity status, for the subject application 18/967,615 in an effort to overcome this objection. Please submit (i) a corrected ADS and (ii) amendment to specification to correct paragraph 0001 of the application: This application is a continuation-in-part of U.S. patent application Serial No. 17/189,018. In the corrected ADS, Applicant is requested to amend the benefit claim and maintain the proper continuity chain by changing the status (continuation or divisional application) to continuation-in-part (CIP) for the subject application 18/967,615. For the purpose of examination, subject application 18/967,615 filed on 12/03/2024 is being considered CIP of 17/189,018 because original claims 20 of subject application 18/967,615 were new matter and introduced for the first time on 12/03/2024, See 35 USC 112 (a) written description rejections of claim 20. Applicant is reminded of their duty of disclosing, to the Office, any new matter introduced in a continued application, See MPEP § 2000, 37 CFR §§ 1.56 and 1.555.
Drawings
The drawings are objected to under 37 CFR 1.83(a) because they fail to show “a probe having a connector end and a probe end… a probe input that receives the connector end of the probe when the probe end is inserted into a food item…the receiver device displays the temperature of the food item” as claimed in claim 1; “displaying temperatures corresponding to the two probe inputs or the four probe inputs,” as claimed in claim 5; “additional receiver device displays the temperature of the food item,” as claimed in claims 6 and 16; “the transmitter device [sic] displays a temperature,” as claimed in claim 12; “a probe connecting the food item to the transmitter device” as claimed in claim 20. The drawings must show every feature of the invention specified in the claims. Therefore, the abovementioned claimed subject matter must be shown or the feature(s) canceled from the claim(s). No new matter should be entered. Furthermore, any structural detail that is essential for a proper understanding of the disclosed invention should be shown in the drawing. MPEP § 608.02(d). 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 Interpretation
Claimed “transmitter device” is interpreted to be the disclosed “base unit”
Claim Objections
Claims 1, 7 and 17 are objected to because of the following informalities:
Claim 1 recites, “the transmitter device determines a temperature of a food item associated with the probe; and the transmitter device wirelessly transmits a temperature signal with the temperature of the food item over a predefined channel to the receiver device.” However, specification and drawings fail to show the specific structure of the transmitter device to perform these functions. Specification fails to show any processor or memory comprising instruction executed by a processor to perform any of the claimed functions: “determine temperature,” and share “temperature.” Cited primary reference Reinhart clearly teaches, “Signals from food temperature thermocouple amplifier 818 and operating temperature thermocouple amplifier 816 are received by primary digital microcontroller 810 (in which microcontroller the primary control logic for the system is stored and executed)... Primary digital microcontroller 810 is connected to and in communication with visual display 614 as an output device.” See ¶ 0056, Reinhart teaches “primary digital microcontroller 810 is responsible for sending temperatures measured by food temperature probe 310 (when present) and operating temperature probe 312 to wireless remote control module 1010.” See ¶ 0084. None of this is disclosed in subject specification. Therefore, Applicant fails to show that Applicant had the possession of the claimed subject matter.
Claim 7 and 17, recite, “based on pairing with the additional transmitter device, the receiver device does not receive a second temperature signal with an updated temperature of the food item transmitted by the transmitter device over the preassigned channel.” The claims are reciting a negative limitation. Although, the use of negative limitation is allowed according to the MPEP; nevertheless, Applicant shall provide teaching for the claimed negative limitation in the specification. Any negative limitation or exclusionary proviso must have basis in the original disclosure. If alternative elements are positively recited in the specification, they may be explicitly excluded in the claims. See In re Johnson, 558 F.2d 1008, 1019, 194 USPQ 187, 196 (CCPA 1977). In describing alternative features, the applicant need not articulate advantages or disadvantages of each feature in order to later exclude the alternative features. See Inphi Corporation v. Netlist, Inc., 805 F.3d 1350, 1356-57, 116 USPQ2d 2006, 2010-11 (Fed. Cir. 2015). The mere absence of a positive recitation is not basis for an exclusion. In this instance specification does not discuss, the subject matter of the negatively claimed limitation. Therefore, the mere omission of the negatively claimed subject matter cannot be construed as Applicant's claimed invention. See MPEP 2173.05(i). Applicant is requested positively recite these limitations. Claiming something that receiver device does not do cannot be construed as Applicant's claimed invention, unless the specification has explicit support of the claimed limitation.
Appropriate correction is required.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of 35 U.S.C. 112(a):
(a) IN GENERAL.—The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor or joint inventor of carrying out the invention.
The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112:
The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor of carrying out his invention.
Claim 20 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(a) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), first paragraph, as failing to comply with the written description requirement. The claim(s) contains subject matter which was not described in the specification in such a way as to reasonably convey to one skilled in the relevant art that the inventor or a joint inventor, or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the inventor(s), at the time the application was filed, had possession of the claimed invention.
Claim 20 recites, “a computer-implemented method for monitoring thermometer temperatures comprises: pairing… identifying… transmitting… displaying...” Specification fails to show any computer-implemented method. No variation of the word “computer” or “processor” is disclosed to implement a method for monitoring thermometer temperatures, much less, “a computer-implemented method for monitoring thermometer temperatures comprises: a pairing… identifying… transmitting… displaying...” as claimed. Applicant is requested to point to section of the specification that shows that the inventors had the possession of claimed invention. See MPEP 2163 I A.
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.
Claim 12-19 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.
Claim 12 recites, “the transmitter device displays a temperature upon receiving the probe temperature signal over the preassigned channel.” Per the specification it is the receiver that is receiving the signal over the preassigned channel. It is unclear whether Applicant meant to claim “the receiver device displays a temperature upon receiving the probe temperature signal over the preassigned channel,” similar to claim 1. Claims 13-19 rejected by the virtue of their dependency.
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.
Claim(s) 1-3, 5, 12-14-15, and 20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Reinhart (US 2013/0061765 A1) and further in view of Arrington (US 2019/0081715 A1).
Consider claim 1, Reinhart teaches, a system for monitoring thermometer temperatures, Reinhart teaches, “temperature control system for a barbecue grill… operating area temperature probe for communicating the temperature of the operating area of the grill… A remote control may also be provided to allow the user to input a desired temperature for the system to obtain and/or to change temperature information for the grill or other structure.” See Abstract, comprising:
a transmitter device (118/1012), Reinhart teaches, “the automated temperature control system 10 comprises an automated damper assembly 116 and a remote control device 118 which operate in conjunction with at least one operating temperature probe 312” See ¶ 0044;
a receiver device (1010), Reinhart teaches “[w]ireless automated damper assembly 1012 is in communication with wireless remote control module 1010 through radio frequency signals.” See ¶ 0078, See Fig. 10; and
a probe (310/312) having a connector end and a probe end, Reinhart teaches, “temperature probe lead 218 connects the remote control module 118 to an operating temperature probe 312, and optionally, to a food temperature probe 310,” See ¶ 0047, Reinhart teaches, “control circuit … connects with temperature probe lead 218 through temperature probe lead receptacle 616” See ¶ 0054 and Figs. 2-3, wherein:
the transmitter device (118/1012) includes a probe input (616, See Fig. 6) that receives the connector end (218) of the probe (310/312) when the probe end (310) is inserted into a food item, “Food temperature probe 310 may assist the user in determining the temperature of a food item that is being cooked on a grill,” See ¶ 0050, Reinhart teaches, “The control circuit … connects with temperature probe lead 218 through temperature probe lead receptacle 616.” See ¶0054 See Figs. 3 and 6;
the transmitter device determines a temperature of the food item associated with the probe, Reinhart teaches, “Signals from food temperature thermocouple amplifier 818 and operating temperature thermocouple amplifier 816 are received by primary digital microcontroller 810 (in which microcontroller the primary control logic for the system is stored and executed)... Primary digital microcontroller 810 is connected to and in communication with visual display 614 as an output device.” See ¶ 0056, Reinhart teaches, “primary digital microcontroller 810 is responsible for sending temperatures measured by food temperature probe 310 (when present) and operating temperature probe 312 to wireless remote control module 1010.” See ¶ 0084;
the transmitter device (1012) wirelessly transmits a temperature signal with the temperature of the food item [[Reinhart teaches, “Primary digital microcontroller 810 is connected to and in communication with local wireless transceiver module 1312, for sending signals to and receiving signals from remote wireless transceiver module 1412 of wireless remote control module 1010. Primary digital microcontroller 810 is programmed with logic to drive communication between local wireless transceiver module 1312 and remote wireless transceiver module 1412. It will be apparent that a radio transceiver or other frequency communication module will facilitate communication between local wireless transceiver module 1312 and remote wireless transceiver module 1412.” See ¶ 0081, Reinhart teaches, “secondary digital microcontroller 1410 is programmed to receive temperatures measured by food temperature probe 310 (when present) and operating temperature probe 312 wirelessly. All wireless communication between wireless remote control module 1010 and wireless local control module 1105 is accomplished by way of local wireless transceiver module 1312 and remote wireless transceiver module 1412.” See ¶ 0085; and
the receiver device (1010) displays the temperature of the food item upon receiving the temperature signal over the preassigned channel, Reinhart teaches, “control circuitry of wireless remote control module 1010 includes … Secondary digital microcontroller 1410 is connected to and in communication with visual display 614 as an output device... secondary digital microcontroller 1410 is programmed with logic for displaying information on visual display 614 as well as logic to drive communication between local wireless transceiver module 1312 and remote wireless transceiver module 1412.” See ¶ 0083, Reinhart teaches, “Secondary digital microcontroller 1410 is programmed to display current temperatures of food temperature probe 310 (when present) and operating temperature probe 312 on visual display 614 for the duration of the cooking cycle.” See ¶ 0085.
Reinhart does not explicitly state, the transmitter device wirelessly transmits a signal over a preassigned channel to the receiver device, in an analogous art, Arrington teaches, “wireless microphone systems are generally partitioned into a transmitter portion 200 and a receiver portion 210.” See ¶ 102, Arrington teaches, “Causing a given receiver and transmitter to both operate on an assigned frequency, at which point the transmitter and receiver are considered to be “paired”… Keeping track of which wireless transmitter is paired to a given receiver and then connecting the appropriate audio cable to each receiver's audio output port so that audio signal routing can be correctly performed.” See ¶ 0104.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skilled in the art at the time of invention (effective filing date for AIA application) to modify the invention of Reinhart and transmit a signal over a preassigned channel to the receiver as suggested by Arrington in an effort to provide a system that is designed “in selecting frequencies used by the pairs of transmitters and receivers in order to avoid interferers and to avoid creating additional, so-called intermodulation interference, that arises when multiple transmitters operate simultaneously at certain frequency intervals and power levels.” See ¶ 0123.
Consider claim 2, the system of claim 1, Arrington teaches, wherein the transmitter device and the receiver device are paired to communicate only over the preassigned channel, See ¶ 0104.
Consider claim 3, the system of claim 1, wherein the receiver device (1010) receives the temperature signal directly from the transmitter device (1012), Reinhart teaches, “All wireless communication between wireless remote control module 1010 and wireless local control module 1105 is accomplished by way of local wireless transceiver module 1312 and remote wireless transceiver module 1412.” See ¶ 0085.
Consider claim 5, the system of claim 1, wherein the transmitter device includes: two probe inputs (310-312) [[Reinhart teaches, “Operating temperature probe 312 is preferably installed in proximity to cooking region 216 by clipping operating temperature probe 312 to food grate 214 (as shown in FIG. 2 and FIG. 3 Detail A), or by any other suitable means. Before the grill is ignited, optional food temperature probe 310 may be positioned anywhere, either inside or outside of the grill. Operating temperature probe 312 and optional food temperature probe 310 are connected to remote control module 118 by temperature probe leads 218.” See ¶ 0064; and
a display screen for displaying temperatures corresponding to the two probe inputs [[Reinhart teaches, “the current operating temperature and food temperatures (optional) are updated and displayed on visual display 614” see ¶ 0089.
Consider claim 12, a wireless communication system for monitoring thermometer temperatures comprising:
a transmitter device; and
a receiver device, wherein: the transmitter device and the receiver device are paired to communicate only over a preassigned channel, See rejection of claim 2;
the transmitter device wirelessly transmits a probe temperature signal only over the preassigned channel to the receiver device; and
the transmitter device displays a temperature upon receiving the probe temperature signal over the preassigned channel, See rejection of claim 1.
Consider claim 14, the wireless communication system of claim 12, wherein the preassigned channel used by the transmitter device is not user-modifiable, Reinhart teaches, “Primary digital microcontroller 810 is programmed with logic to drive communication between local wireless transceiver module 1312 and remote wireless transceiver module 1412.” See ¶ 0081. Therefore, the micro-controller is preprogramed to send the data between local wireless transceiver module 1312 and remote wireless transceiver module 1412, and not user-modifiable.
Consider claim 15, the wireless communication system of claim 12, wherein when paired with the transmitter device, the receiver device only listens for probe temperature signals on the preassigned channel, See rejection of claim 2.
Consider claim 20, a computer-implemented (810) method for monitoring thermometer temperatures, Reinhart clearly teaches, “Signals from food temperature thermocouple amplifier 818 and operating temperature thermocouple amplifier 816 are received by primary digital microcontroller 810 (in which microcontroller the primary control logic for the system is stored and executed)... Primary digital microcontroller 810 is connected to and in communication with visual display 614 as an output device.” See ¶ 0056, Reinhart teaches “primary digital microcontroller 810 is responsible for sending temperatures measured by food temperature probe 310 (when present) and operating temperature probe 312 to wireless remote control module 1010.” See ¶ 0084, comprising:
pairing a receiver device with a transmitter device, wherein pairing causes the receiver device to only receive transmissions from a preassigned channel uniquely associated with the transmitter device, See rejection of claim 2;
identifying a temperature of a food item based on a probe connecting the food item to the transmitter device;
transmitting a temperature signal that includes the temperature of the food item from the transmitter device over the preassigned channel; and
based on receiving the temperature signal directly from the transmitter device on the preassigned channel, displaying the temperature of the food item on the receiver device, See rejection of claim 1.
Claim(s) 4, 6-8, 11, and 16-18 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Reinhart (US 2013/0061765 A1), in view of Arrington (US 2019/0081715 A1), and further in view of Hale (US 2013/0057778 A1).
Consider claim 6, the system of claim 1, wherein: the transmitter device (22 comprising 27/28) is paired with an additional receiver device (24/26 comprising receivers 30, 31, 32, 33) to communicate over the preassigned channel (the first transmitter 27 transmits signals in a first frequency band, second transmitter 28 control signals are carried in a second frequency band), in an analogous art, Hale teaches, “a system that includes a remote control, a first set top box, and at least a second set top box.” See ¶ 0007, Hale teaches, “control unit 22 includes first and second wireless transmitters 27, 28… first wireless transmitter 27 is configured to transmit… wireless signals to the first processing unit 24 and the second processing unit 26” See ¶ 0020 via receivers 30, 31, 32, 33, See Figs. 1-2, Hale teaches, “In particular the control unit 22 issues a pairing signal in the first frequency band to either the first processing unit 24 or the second processing unit 26. For example, if a user desires to control the first processing unit 24, then the user positions the control unit 22 to establish a line of sight between the control unit 22 and the processing unit 24. The control unit issues the pairing signal in the first frequency band from the first transmitter 27, for example following the user pressing a specific remote control button or buttons. The pairing signal is received by the receiver 30 of the first processing unit 24. Upon receiving the pairing signal the first processing unit 24 registers that it is now paired to the control unit 22. The first processing unit also transmits a signal to the second processing unit 26 by means of the link 29. The second processing unit receives the signal from the first processing unit 24 and registers that the first processing unit 24 is paired to the control unit 22.” See ¶ 0023; and
With respect to, displays the temperature of the food item upon receiving the temperature signal, Reinhart teaches, “the current operating temperature and food temperatures (optional) are updated and displayed on visual display 614” see ¶ 0089.
With respect to, the additional receiver device displays the signal over the preassigned channel, Hale teaches, “the remote control 22 transmits display control signals to the television 36.” See ¶ 0067.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skilled in the art at the time of invention (effective filing date for AIA application) to modify the combination of Reinhart-Arrington and allow the transmitter and receivers to be paired and unpaired with other transmitter and receivers in an effort for the user to be able to utilize multiple receivers in different rooms of the house.
Consider claim 7, the system of claim 1, wherein: the transmitter device is unpaired with the receiver device; the receiver device is paired with an additional transmitter device to receive temperature signals over a second preassigned channel that is different from the preassigned channel, Hale teaches, “If the second processing unit 26 was previously paired to the control unit 22, upon receiving the unpairing signal from the first processing unit 24 the second processing unit 26 unpairs itself from the control unit 22. In this way only one of the processing units 24, 26 is paired to the control unit 22 at any given time.” See ¶ 0023; and
based on pairing with the additional transmitter device, the receiver device does not receive a second temperature signal with an updated temperature of the food item transmitted by the transmitter device over the preassigned channel, Hale teaches, “only the first processing unit 24 responds to the control signals by performing the commands contained in the control signals” See ¶ 0026. Reinhart teaches, “the current operating temperature and food temperatures (optional) are updated and displayed on visual display 614” see ¶ 0089. In view of Reinhart receiver updated temperature of the food item transmitted by the transmitter device it is paired to.
Consider claim 8, the system of claim 7, wherein the receiver device receives the temperature signals transmitted from the additional transmitter device over the second preassigned channel without receiving signal interference from concurrent temperature signals transmitted from the transmitter device, Hale teaches, “system 20 allows for a user to control a set top box 24, 26 in one room while other users can use a set top box in a separate room without interference. For this reason there can be as many remote controls 22 as there are set top boxes 24, 26. Any remote control 22 can be taken to any set top box 24, 26 and immediately be paired to that set top box 24, 26 and unpaired from the other set top box 26, 24.” See ¶ 0036.
Consider claim 4, the system of claim 1, the transmitter device and the receiver device use shared authentication information when transmitting and receiving the temperature signal, Hale teaches, “radio frequency pairing signal also contains the unique identification code of the remote control 22. A set top box that did not receive the unique identification code of the remote control 22 contained in the infrared pairing signal will not accept the subsequent radio frequency pairing request containing the unique identification code of the remote control 22.” See ¶ 0060.
Consider claim 11, the system of claim 1, wherein the transmitter device transmits the temperature signal using a unique code not shared by other transmitter devices, Hale teaches, “radio frequency pairing signal also contains the unique identification code of the remote control 22. A set top box that did not receive the unique identification code of the remote control 22 contained in the infrared pairing signal will not accept the subsequent radio frequency pairing request containing the unique identification code of the remote control 22.” See ¶ 0060.
Consider claim 16, the wireless communication system of claim 12, wherein: the transmitter device is paired with an additional receiver device to communicate over the preassigned channel; and the additional receiver device displays the temperature upon receiving the probe temperature signal over the preassigned channel, See rejection of claim 6.
Consider claim 17, the wireless communication system of claim 12, wherein: the transmitter device is unpaired with the receiver device; the receiver device is paired with an additional transmitter device to receive temperature signals over a second preassigned channel that is different from the preassigned channel; and based on pairing with the additional transmitter device, the receiver device does not receive a second temperature signal transmitted by the transmitter device over the preassigned channel, See rejection of claim 7.
Consider claim 18, the wireless communication system of claim 17, wherein the receiver device receives the temperature signals transmitted from the additional transmitter device over the second preassigned channel without receiving signal interference from concurrent temperature signals transmitted from the transmitter device, See rejection of claim 8.
Claim(s) 9 and 13 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Reinhart (US 2013/0061765 A1), in view of Arrington (US 2019/0081715 A1), and further in view of Van der Lee US 2018/0368339 A1).
Consider claim 9, the system of claim 1, wherein the transmitter device transmits the temperature signal directly to the receiver device when the receiver device is up to 1.24 miles away from the transmitter device, Van der Lee teaches, “[t]he application of the LoRa standard wireless communication allows gateway and sensor stations to be miles apart, depending on local conditions and is therefore well suited for agricultural applications.” See ¶ 0022.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skilled in the art at the time of invention (effective filing date for AIA application) to modify the combination of Reinhart-Arrington and use LoRa long-rage wireless communication that will allow the user to be miles apart from Reinhart’s probe 310 and still be able to receive the signal on device 1010, thus allow the end-user to run local errands without having to worry about losing wireless connectivity between probe 310 and mobile device 1010.
Consider claim 13, the wireless communication system of claim 12, wherein the transmitter device sends the probe temperature signal using a long-range (LoRa) transmitter, See rejection of claim 9.
Claim(s) 10 and 19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Reinhart (US 2013/0061765 A1), in view of Arrington (US 2019/0081715 A1), and further in view of Haubrich (US 2006/0161222 A1).
Consider claim 10, the system of claim 1, wherein the transmitter device transmit the temperature signal over a sub-channel with a defined bandwidth not used by other transmitter devices transmitting temperature signals to other receiver devices, in an analogous art, Haubrich teaches, “Transmitters 400 transmit uplink telemetry data to IPG 10 through transmissions 404… each transmitter 400 transmits at a different frequency,… Receivers 402 receive transmissions 404… each receiver 402 is paired to a transmitter 400, that is to say that each receiver 402 is adapted to receive the frequency of a transmitter 400. ” See ¶ 0041. Haubrich teaches, “each transmission 404 has its own distinct frequency separated from other transmissions by a channel outside the band to insure no interference with the other transmissions 404.” See ¶ 0042.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skilled in the art at the time of invention (effective filing date for AIA application) to modify the combination of Reinhart-Arrington and provide a pair of transmitter and receiver that are paired to each other own distinct frequency separated from other transmissions by a channel to insure no interference with the other transmissions.
Consider claim 19, the wireless communication system of claim 12, wherein the transmitter device transmits the probe temperature signal over a sub-channel with a defined bandwidth not used by other transmitter devices transmitting temperature signals to other receiver devices, See rejection of claim 10.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Omer S. Khan whose telephone number is (571)270-5146. The examiner can normally be reached 10:00 am to 8:00 pm EST.
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, Brian A. Zimmerman can be reached at 571-272-3059. 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.
/Omer S Khan/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2686