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 .
Information Disclosure Statement
2. The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on 05/15/2026, 12/20/2024 are in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statement is being considered by the examiner.
Drawings
3. The drawings were received on 12/20/2024. These drawings are considered by examiner.
Terminal Disclaimer
4. Examiner suggests the Assignee must submit the Terminal Disclaimer accordingly, in order to process of the application promptly.
Double Patenting
5. The nonstatutory double patenting rejection is based on a judicially created doctrine grounded in public policy (a policy reflected in the statute) so as to prevent the unjustified or improper timewise extension of the “right to exclude” granted by a patent and to prevent possible harassment by multiple assignees. A nonstatutory double patenting rejection is appropriate where the conflicting claims are not identical, but at least one examined application claim is not patentably distinct from the reference claim(s) because the examined application claim is either anticipated by, or would have been obvious over, the reference claim(s). See, e.g., In re Berg, 140 F.3d 1428, 46 USPQ2d 1226 (Fed. Cir. 1998); In re Goodman, 11 F.3d 1046, 29 USPQ2d 2010 (Fed. Cir. 1993); In re Longi, 759 F.2d 887, 225 USPQ 645 (Fed. Cir. 1985); In re Van Ornum, 686 F.2d 937, 214 USPQ 761 (CCPA 1982); In re Vogel, 422 F.2d 438, 164 USPQ 619 (CCPA 1970); In re Thorington, 418 F.2d 528, 163 USPQ 644 (CCPA 1969).
A timely filed terminal disclaimer in compliance with 37 CFR 1.321(c) or 1.321(d) may be used to overcome an actual or provisional rejection based on nonstatutory double patenting provided the reference application or patent either is shown to be commonly owned with the examined application, or claims an invention made as a result of activities undertaken within the scope of a joint research agreement. See MPEP § 717.02 for applications subject to examination under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA as explained in MPEP § 2159. See MPEP § 2146 et seq. for applications not subject to examination under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA . A terminal disclaimer must be signed in compliance with 37 CFR 1.321(b).
The filing of a terminal disclaimer by itself is not a complete reply to a nonstatutory double patenting (NSDP) rejection. A complete reply requires that the terminal disclaimer be accompanied by a reply requesting reconsideration of the prior Office action. Even where the NSDP rejection is provisional the reply must be complete. See MPEP § 804, subsection I.B.1. For a reply to a non-final Office action, see 37 CFR 1.111(a). For a reply to final Office action, see 37 CFR 1.113(c). A request for reconsideration while not provided for in 37 CFR 1.113(c) may be filed after final for consideration. See MPEP §§ 706.07(e) and 714.13.
The USPTO Internet website contains terminal disclaimer forms which may be used. Please visit www.uspto.gov/patent/patents-forms. The actual filing date of the application in which the form is filed determines what form (e.g., PTO/SB/25, PTO/SB/26, PTO/AIA /25, or PTO/AIA /26) should be used. A web-based eTerminal Disclaimer may be filled out completely online using web-screens. An eTerminal Disclaimer that meets all requirements is auto-processed and approved immediately upon submission. For more information about eTerminal Disclaimers, refer to www.uspto.gov/patents/apply/applying-online/eterminal-disclaimer.
Claims 1-20 rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claims 1-20 of U.S. Patent No. 12,208,310 as further detailed in the table below:
Instant Application
United States Patent No. 12,208,310
Claim 1. One or more non-transitory computer-readable media comprising computer-executable instructions that, when executed by one or more processors, cause the one or more processors to perform operations comprising:
determining a user fitness goal based at least in part on i) historical fitness data that was tracked by a fitness application during a plurality of periods that together correspond to a historical period, or ii) or a user input;
collecting current fitness data tracked by the fitness application during a current period;
determining a coaching notification based at least in part on the current fitness data and the user fitness goal, the coaching notification corresponding to progress toward achieving the user fitness goal prior to a conclusion of the current period; and providing the coaching notification for presentation at a user device.
Claim 1. One or more non-transitory computer-readable media comprising computer-executable instructions that, when executed by one or more processors, cause the one or more processors to perform operations comprising:
determining a user fitness goal based at least in part on historical fitness data that was tracked by a fitness application during a plurality of periods that together correspond to a historical period;
collecting current fitness data tracked by the fitness application during a current period;
determining a coaching notification based at least in part on the current fitness data and the user fitness goal, the coaching notification including a suggested action for achieving the user fitness goal prior to a conclusion of the current period; and providing the coaching notification for presentation at a user device.
Claim 2
Claim 2
Claim 3
Claim 3
Claim 4
Claim 4
Claim 5
Claim 5
Claim 6
Claim 6
Claim 7
Claim 7
Claim 8
Claim 8
Claim 9
Claim 9
Claim 10
Claim 10
Claim 11. A computer-implemented method, comprising:
determining a user fitness goal based at least in part on i) historical fitness data that was tracked by a fitness application during a plurality of periods that together correspond to a historical period, or ii) a user input;
collecting current fitness data tracked by the fitness application during a current period;
determining a coaching notification based at least in part on the current fitness data and the user fitness goal, the coaching notification corresponding to progress toward achieving the user fitness goal prior to a conclusion of the current period; and providing the coaching notification for presentation at a user device.
Claim 12
Claim 13
Claim 14
Claim 15
Claim 16. A user device, comprising:
a memory comprising computer-executable instructions; and
a processor communicatively coupled with the memory and configured to execute the computer-executable instructions to at least:
determine a user fitness goal based at least in part on i) historical fitness data that was tracked by a fitness application during a plurality of periods that together correspond to a historical period, or ii) a user input;
collect current fitness data based on activities tracked by the fitness application during a current period; determine a coaching notification based at least in part on the current fitness data and the user fitness goal, the coaching notification corresponding to progress toward achieving the user fitness goal prior to a conclusion of the current period; and provide the coaching notification for presentation at the user device.
Claim 11. A computer-implemented method, comprising:
determining a user fitness goal based at least in part on historical fitness data that was tracked by a fitness application during a plurality of periods that together correspond to a historical period;
collecting current fitness data tracked by the fitness application during a current period;
determining a coaching notification based at least in part on the current fitness data and the user fitness goal, the coaching notification including a suggested action for achieving the user fitness goal prior to a conclusion of the current period; and providing the coaching notification for presentation at a user device.
Claim 12
Claim 13
Claim 14
Claim 15
Claim 16. A user device, comprising:
a memory comprising computer-executable instructions; and
a processor communicatively coupled with the memory and configured to execute the computer-executable instructions to at least:
determine a user fitness goal based at least in part on historical fitness data that was tracked by a fitness application during a plurality of periods that together correspond to a historical period;
collect current fitness data based on activities tracked by the fitness application during a current period; determine a coaching notification based at least in part on the current fitness data and the user fitness goal, the coaching notification including a suggested action for achieving the user fitness goal prior to a conclusion of the current period; and provide the coaching notification for presentation at the user device.
Claim 17
Claim 17
Claim 18
Claim 18
Claim 19
Claim 19
Claim 20
Claim 20
Although the conflicting claims are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other because the Patent claims include all the limitations of the instant application claims, respectively. The patent claims also include additional limitations. Hence, the instant application claims are generic to the species of invention covered by the respective patent claims. As such, the instant application claims are anticipated by the patent claims and are therefore not patentably distinct therefrom (See Eli Lilly and Co. v. Barr Laboratories Inc., 58 USPQ2D 1869, " a later genus claim limitation is anticipated by, and therefore not patentably distinct from, an earlier species claim", In re Goodman, 29 USPQ2d 2010, "Thus, the generic invention is 'anticipated' by the species of the patented invention" and the instant “application claims are generic to species of invention covered by the patent claim, and since without terminal disclaimer, extant species claim preclude issuance of generic application claims”).
Conclusion
6. The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Bastide et al (US 2018/0116599) teaches the smartphone may be installed with an app or application that provides detailed statistics of the user's mobile phone usage (e.g., applications, web browsing, screen activation, and/or others). A user's wearable fitness device may be interfaced with the smartphone (paragraph [0014]).
6. Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to MICHAEL T VU whose telephone number is (571)272-8131. The examiner can normally be reached on 8:00AM to 6:00PM.
Examiner interviews are available via telephone, in-person, and video conferencing using a USPTO supplied web-based collaboration tool. To schedule an interview, Applicant is encouraged to use the USPTO Automated Interview Request (AIR) at http://www.uspto.gov/interviewpractice.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Charles Appiah can be reached on (571-272-7904. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300.
Information regarding the status of an application may be obtained from the Patent Application Information Retrieval (PAIR) system. Status information for published applications may be obtained from either Private PAIR or Public PAIR. Status information for unpublished applications is available through Private PAIR only. For more information about the PAIR system, see http://pair-direct.uspto.gov. Should you have questions on access to the Private PAIR system, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative or access to the automated information system, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
/MICHAEL T VU/
Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2641
Prosecution Insights