Detailed Action
Double Patenting Rejections
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.
Claim(s) 1-6 and 11-15 is/are rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claim(s) 1-4 and 11-18 of U.S. Patent No. 12,221,880. Although the claims at issue are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other because the instant application and the patent recite an acoustic telemetry unit, whereas the claims of the instant application are broader version of claim(s) of the patent as illustrated below. Therefore, the claims of the instant application are encompassed by the claims of the patent, and it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, [before the effective filing date of the claimed invention/at the time of the invention], to arrive to the broader claims as recited in the instant application.
Instant Application
18/987,847
US Patent
12,221,880
1. An acoustic telemetry unit comprising:
an acoustic receiver arranged to receive acoustic telemetry signals;
a filter arranged to filter the acoustic telemetry signals received by the acoustic receiver to yield filtered signals;
a processor arranged to process the filtered signals passed by the filter to recover a data signal;
an energy storage module arranged to supply electrical power to the acoustic telemetry unit; and
a charge circuit arranged to charge the energy storage module using the acoustic telemetry signals received by the acoustic receiver which are not passed by the filter.
1. An acoustic telemetry unit comprising:
an acoustic receiver arranged to receive acoustic telemetry signals;
a filter arranged to filter signals received by the acoustic receiver;
a processor arranged to process a signal passed by the filter to recover a data signal,
the processor being operable in a sleep mode; a detector arranged to detect the signal passed by the filter; and a wake-up circuit arranged to wake the processor from the sleep mode when the detector detects the signal passed by the filter.
11. The acoustic telemetry unit according to claim 1, further comprising:
an energy storage module arranged to supply electrical power to the acoustic telemetry unit; and
a charge circuit arranged to charge the energy storage module using signals received by the acoustic receiver which are not passed by the filter.
2. The acoustic telemetry unit according to claim 1, wherein the filter has a passband corresponding to frequencies used for acoustic communication.
2. The acoustic telemetry unit according to claim 1, wherein the filter has a passband corresponding to frequencies used for acoustic communication.
3. The acoustic telemetry unit according to claim 1, wherein the filter is a passive filter.
3. The acoustic telemetry unit according to claim 1, wherein the filter is a passive filter.
4. The acoustic telemetry unit according to claim 1, wherein the filter is a tuned circuit with a resonant frequency corresponding to frequencies used for acoustic communications.
4. The acoustic telemetry unit according to claim 3, wherein the filter is a tuned circuit with a resonant frequency corresponding to frequencies used for acoustic communications.
5. The acoustic telemetry unit according to claim 1, wherein the charge circuit comprises a charge storage device arranged to store charge produced by the acoustic telemetry signals received by the acoustic receiver which are not passed by the filter.
12. The acoustic telemetry unit according to claim 11, wherein the charge circuit comprises a charge storage device arranged to store charge produced by the signals received by the acoustic receiver which are not passed by the filter.
6. The acoustic telemetry unit according to claim 5, further comprising an alternating current (AC) to direct current (DC) converter arranged to convert an AC signal received by the acoustic receiver to a DC signal for supply to the charge storage device.
13. The acoustic telemetry unit according to claim 12, further comprising an alternating current (AC) to direct current (DC) converter arranged to convert an AC signal received by the acoustic receiver to a DC signal for supply to the charge storage device.
11. The acoustic telemetry unit according to claim 1, wherein the processor is operable in a sleep mode, and the acoustic telemetry unit further comprises a wake-up circuit arranged to wake the processor from the sleep mode in dependence on an output of the filter.
Part of claim 1: the processor being operable in a sleep mode; a detector arranged to detect the signal passed by the filter; and a wake-up circuit arranged to wake the processor from the sleep mode when the detector detects the signal passed by the filter.
12. The acoustic telemetry unit according to claim 1, wherein the acoustic receiver comprises a transducer arranged to convert acoustic signals to electrical signals.
14. The acoustic telemetry unit according to claim 1, wherein the acoustic receiver comprises a transducer arranged to convert acoustic signals to electrical signals.
13. The acoustic telemetry unit according to claim 1, wherein the acoustic telemetry unit is for use in a wellbore.
15. The acoustic telemetry unit according to claim 1, wherein the acoustic telemetry unit is for use in a wellbore.
14. The acoustic telemetry unit according to claim 1, wherein the acoustic telemetry unit is an acoustic repeater.
16. The acoustic telemetry unit according to claim 1, wherein the acoustic telemetry unit is an acoustic repeater.
15. A method of operating an acoustic telemetry unit, the method comprising steps of:
receiving acoustic telemetry signals;
filtering the acoustic telemetry signals received in the receiving step to yield filtered signals;
processing the filtered signals passed in the filtering step to recover a data signal;
supplying power to the acoustic telemetry unit from an energy storage module; and
charging the energy storage module using the acoustic telemetry signals which are received in the receiving step and not passed in the filtering step.
17. A method of operating an acoustic telemetry unit, the method comprising steps of:
receiving acoustic telemetry signals;
filtering, by a filter, the acoustic telemetry signals received in the receiving step;
processing a signal passed by the filter in the filtering step to recover a data signal;
detecting the signal passed by the filter; and waking the acoustic telemetry unit from a sleep mode when the signal passed by the filter is detected.
18. The method according to claim 17, further comprising:
supplying power to the acoustic telemetry unit from an energy storage module; and
charging the energy storage module using signals which are not passed by the filter in the filtering step.
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(s) 1-20 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.
In regards to claim 1, the claim recites in the last three lines “using the acoustic telemetry signals received by the acoustic receiver which are not passed by the filter”. The applicant’s specification recites that the power can be generated with unwanted acoustic signals which are not passed by the filter. On the other hand, the claim recites that telemetry signals (signals with data) are used to generate power and that those signals are not passed by the filter. The applicant’s specification does not recite that acoustic signals that contain data can also be used to generate power. It is unclear why the filter will not pass telemetry signals (signals with data) which are needed to obtain data sent from the downhole. It also unclear how telemetry signals, which are used to recover data, can also be used to generate power. For the reasons presented above, the claim fails with the written description requirement, and the limitations of the last three lines constitute new matter. The examiner did not find prior art for the claim as written. The examiner has interpreted the claim in the following way in order to advance prosecution: “using [[the]] acoustic
In regards to claims 2-14, the claims fail with the written description requirement due to their dependency on claim 1.
In regards to claim 5, the last two lines of the claims have the same issues described in the rejection of claim 1 above. For this reason, the claim fails to comply with the written description requirement.
In regards to claims 6-9, the claims fail with the written description requirement due to their dependency on claim 5.
In regards to claim 15, the last two lines of the claims have the same issues described in the rejection of claim 1 above. For this reason, the claim fails to comply with the written description requirement. The examiner did not find prior art for the claim as written. The examiner has interpreted the claim in the following way in order to advance prosecution: “using [[the]] acoustic
In regards to claims 16-20, the claims fail with the written description requirement due to their dependency on claim 15.
In regards to claim 17, the last three lines of the claims have the same issues described in the rejection of claim 1 above. For this reason, the claim fails to comply with the written description requirement.
In regards to claims 18-20, the claims fail with the written description requirement due to their dependency on claim 17.
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(s) 1-20 is/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 pre-AIA the applicant regards as the invention.
In regards to claim 1, the claim recites in the last three lines “using the acoustic telemetry signals received by the acoustic receiver which are not passed by the filter”. The word “the” in front of the limitation(s) “acoustic telemetry signals received by the acoustic receiver which are not passed by the filter” means that the limitation(s) was/were previously defined. However, the limitation(s) was/were not previously defined. For this reason, the limitation(s) lack of antecedent basis and the claim is indefinite. The examiner has interpreted the claim in the following way in order to advance prosecution: “using [[the]] acoustic
In regards to claim(s) 2-16, the claim(s) is/are indefinite due to its/their dependency on indefinite claim 1.
In regards to claim 15, the last two lines of the claims have the same issues described in the rejection of claim 1 above. For this reason, the claim is indefinite. The examiner has interpreted the claim in the following way in order to advance prosecution: “using [[the]] acoustic
In regards to claim(s) 16-20, the claim(s) is/are indefinite due to its/their dependency on indefinite claim 15.
In regards to claim 17, the claim recites in the last three lines “produced by the acoustic telemetry signals received by an acoustic receiver which are not passed by a filter used during the filtering step”. The word “the” in front of the limitation(s) “acoustic telemetry signals received by an acoustic receiver which are not passed by a filter used during the filtering step” means that the limitation(s) was/were previously defined. However, the limitation(s) was/were not previously defined. For this reason, the limitation(s) lack of antecedent basis and the claim is indefinite. The examiner has interpreted the claim in the following way in order to advance prosecution: “produced by the acoustic were not passed
In regards to claim(s) 18-20, the claim(s) is/are indefinite due to its/their dependency on indefinite claim 17.
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) 1-4, 10 and 12-16 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Song et al. (US-10,487,647) in view of Fripp et al. (US-6,998,999).
In regards to claim 1, Song teaches an acoustic telemetry unit comprising an acoustic receiver arranged to receive acoustic telemetry signals [fig. 4 elements 380 and 388, col. 13 L. 17-25, col. 15 L. 65-67, col. 16 L. 1, col. 17 L. 41-45 and L. 50-53]. Also, Song teaches that the acoustic telemetry unit comprises a filter arranged to filter the acoustic telemetry signals received by the acoustic receiver to yield filtered signals [col. 3 L. 57-60, col. 18 L. 19-23, col. 21 L. 16-19]. Furthermore, Song teaches that the acoustic telemetry unit comprises a processor arranged to process the filtered signals passed by the filter to recover a data signal [col. 17 L. 67, col. 18 L. 1-2]. Song teaches that the telemetry unit is powered by a battery [col. 13 L. 54-56, col. 17 L. 39-41]. This teaching means that the telemetry unit comprises an energy storage module arranged to supply electrical power to the acoustic telemetry unit.
Song further teaches that acoustic signals, received by the receiver, can be used to recharge a battery that provides power to the unit [see Song col. 3 L. 48-56]. This teaching means that the telemetry unit comprises a charge circuit arranged to charge the energy storage module using acoustic signals received by the acoustic receiver. However, the combination does not teach that the acoustic signals are signals which are not passed by the filter.
On the other hand, Fripp teaches that power can be generated from mechanical forces (acoustic signals) that are present downhole [col. 10 L. 64-67, col. 11 L. 1-4]. This teaching means that power can be generated using acoustic signals that are not used for data communication. In other words, power is generated using acoustic signals that are not passed by the filter.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to use Fripp’s teachings of using acoustic signals present in the wellbore environment to generate power in the acoustic telemetry unit taught by Song because it will permit the unit to generate power even when communications are not performed.
In regards to claim 2, the combination of Song and Fripp, as applied in the rejection of claim 1 above, further teaches that the filter has a passband corresponding to frequencies used for acoustic communication [see Song col. 3 L. 57-60, col. 18 L. 19-23, col. 21 L. 16-19].
In regards to claim 3, the combination of Song and Fripp, as applied in the rejection of claim 1 above, further teaches the concept that a passive resonator can be used to filter signals of a certain frequency [see Song col. 20 L. 57-64]. This teaching means that a passive resonator can be used as a passive bandpass filter to filter undesired signals.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to use Song’s teachings of using a passive resonator as a bandpass filter to replace the bandpass filter taught by the combination because it will permit to filter the signals without using power.
In regards to claim 4, the combination of Song and Fripp, as applied in the rejection of claim 1 above, further teaches that the filter is a tuned circuit with a resonant frequency corresponding to frequencies used for acoustic communications [see Song col. 20 L. 57-64].
In regards to claim 10, the combination of Song and Fripp, as applied in the rejection of claim 1 above, further teaches that the energy storage module is a battery pack [see Song col. 3 L. 48-56, col. 13 L. 54-56, col. 17 L. 39-41].
In regards to claim 12, the combination of Song and Fripp, as applied in the rejection of claim 1 above, further teaches that the acoustic receiver comprises a transducer arranged to convert acoustic signals to electrical signals [see Song col. 17 L. 41-45, col. 18 L. 2-5 and L. 24-26].
In regards to claim 13, the combination of Song and Fripp, as applied in the rejection of claim 1 above, further teaches that wherein the acoustic telemetry unit is for use in a wellbore [see Song fig. 1].
In regards to claim 14, the combination of Song and Fripp, as applied in the rejection of claim 1 above, further teaches that the acoustic telemetry unit is an acoustic repeater [see Song col. 13 L. 17-25].
In regards to claim 15, the combination of Song and Fripp, as shown in the rejection of claim 1 above, teaches a telemetry unit performing the claimed functions. Therefore, the combination also teaches the claimed method.
In regards to claim 16, the combination of Song and Fripp, as shown in the rejection of claim 2 above, teaches the claimed limitations.
Claim(s) 5, 8, 17 and 19 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Song et al. (US-10,487,647) in view of Fripp et al. (US-6,998,999) as applied to claims 1 and 15 above, and further in view of Krachman (US-10,355,516).
In regards to claim 5, the combination of Song and Fripp, as applied in the rejection of claim 1 above, further teaches that the acoustic telemetry unit can harvest power from acoustic telemetry signals received by the acoustic receiver which are not passed by the filter [see Fripp col. 10 L. 64-67, col. 11 L. 1-4]. However, the combination does not teach that the charge circuit comprises a charge storage device.
On the other hand, Krachman teaches that a device harvesting power can comprise capacitors (a charge storage device) that will receive the harvested power, and transfer the harvested power to a battery when the battery is discharged [col. 5 L. 52-67, col. 6 L. 1-8]. This teaching means that the charge circuit comprises a charge storage device arranged to store charge produced by the harvested power.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to use Krachman’s teachings of including a charge storage device in the telemetry unit taught by the combination because it will permit the telemetry unit to harvest power from the acoustic signals not passed by the filter even when the battery is fully charged so power is readily available to recharge the battery.
In regards to claim 8, the combination of Song, Fripp and Krachman, as applied in the rejection of claim 5 above, further teaches that the telemetry unit can stop and start the transfer of energy from the charge storage device to the energy storage module as needed [see Krachman col. 5 L. 52-67, col. 6 L. 1-8]. This teaching means that telemetry unit comprises a switching device arranged to discharge the charge storage device into the energy storage module.
In regards to claim 17, the combination of Song, Fripp and Krachman, as shown in the rejection of claim 5 above, teaches the claimed limitations.
In regards to claim 19, the combination of Song, Fripp and Krachman, as shown in the rejection of claim 8 above, teaches the claimed limitations.
Claim(s) 6 and 18 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Song et al. (US-10,487,647) in view of Fripp et al. (US-6,998,999) and Krachman (US-10,355,516) as applied to claims 5 and 17 above, and further in view of Ahmad (US-9,810,059).
In regards to claim 6, the combination of Song, Fripp and Krachman, as applied in the rejection of claim 5 above, further teaches that harvested power is first stored in the charge storage device [see Krachman col. 5 L. 52-67, col. 6 L. 1-8]. However, the combination does not teach that the telemetry unit comprises an AC to DC converter.
On the other hand, Ahmad teaches that a circuit used to harvest power from acoustic signals can comprise an alternating current (AC) to direct current (DC) converter arranged to convert an AC signal received by the acoustic receiver to a DC signal for supply a charge storage device which in the case of the combination is the charge storage device providing power to the energy storage module [col. 4 L. 15-28, col. 6 L. 6-15, col. 8 L. 49-52].
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to use Ahmad’s teachings of including AC to DC converter in the telemetry unit taught by the combination because it will permit the unit to convert the power generated from the acoustic signals to usable power that can be stored.
In regards to claim 18, the combination of Song, Fripp, Krachman and Ahmad, as shown in the rejection of claim 6 above, teaches the claimed limitations.
Claim(s) 7 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Song et al. (US-10,487,647) in view of Fripp et al. (US-6,998,999), Krachman (US-10,355,516) and Ahmad (US-9,810,059) as applied to claims 6 above, and further in view of Winton (US-7,157,961).
In regards to claim 7, the combination of Song, Fripp, Krachman and Ahmad, as applied in the rejection of claim 6 above, further teaches that the telemetry unit comprises a AC to DC converter [see Ahmad col. 4 L. 15-28, col. 6 L. 6-15, col. 8 L. 49-52]. However, the combination does not teach that the AC to DC converter comprises a charge pump.
On the other hand, Winton teaches that a charge pump can be used as AC to DC converter [col. 1 L. 15-20 and L. 34-38].
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to use Winton’s teachings of using a charge pump as an AC to DC converter in the telemetry unit taught by the combination because a charge pump provides reliable means to convert AC power to DC power.
Claim(s) 9 and 20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Song et al. (US-10,487,647) in view of Fripp et al. (US-6,998,999) and Krachman (US-10,355,516) as applied to claims 5 and 19 above, and further in view of Okabe et al. (US-9,018,794).
In regards to claim 9, the combination of Song, Fripp and Krachman, as applied in the rejection of claim 5 above, further teaches that harvested power is first stored in the charge storage device which transfer the power to the energy storage module [see Krachman col. 5 L. 52-67, col. 6 L. 1-8]. However, the combination does not teach that the telemetry unit comprises a DC to DC converter arranged to convert a voltage of the charge storage device to a voltage for charging the energy storage module.
On the other hand, Okabe teaches that when a capacitor transfer power to a battery, a DC to DC converter can be used to perform the power transfer [col. 1 L. 32-36]. This teaching means that the device comprises a DC to DC converter arranged to convert a voltage of the charge storage device to a voltage for charging the energy storage module.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to use Okabe’s teachings of including DC to DC converter in the telemetry unit taught by the combination because it will permit the unit to prevent damage of the energy storage module when receiving power from the charge storage device.
In regards to claim 20, the combination of Song, Fripp, Krachman and Okabe, as shown in the rejection of claim 9 above, teaches the claimed limitations.
Claim(s) 11 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Song et al. (US-10,487,647) in view of Fripp et al. (US-6,998,999) as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Ounadjela et al (US-10,436,026).
In regards to claim 11, the combination of Song and Fripp, as applied in the rejection of claim 1 above, further teaches that the processor is operable in a sleep mode [see Song col. 19 L. 10-15]. Also, the combination teaches that the acoustic telemetry unit comprises a wake-up circuit arranged to wake the processor from the sleep mode [see Song col. 19 L. 10-15 and L. 30-37, col. 20 L. 40-50]. However, Song does not teach that the wake-up circuit wakes up the processor in dependence on an output of the filter.
On the other hand, Ounadjela teaches that a processor of an acoustic telemetry unit can be waked up by an acoustic signal that passes through a filter [col. 4 L. 45-54 (processor and sleep mode), col. 4 L. 63-67 (acoustic telemetry), col. 6 L. 12-15 (acoustic wake up signal), col. 7 L. 14-24 (filter output used for waking up)]. This teaching means that the wake-up circuit is arranged to wake the processor from the sleep mode in dependence on an output of the filter.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to use Ounadjela’s teachings of using the filter output to wake up the processor in the telemetry unit taught by the combination because it will permit to reduce the complexity of the unit by using the existing filter to wake up the processor.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to FRANKLIN D BALSECA whose telephone number is (571)270-5966. The examiner can normally be reached 6AM-4PM EST M-F.
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, CURTIS KUNTZ can be reached on (571)272-7499. 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.
/FRANKLIN D BALSECA/Examiner, Art Unit 2687