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.
This action is in response to the correspondence filed 01/21/2025.
Claims 16-31 are presented for examination.
Drawings
The drawings are objected to because Figs. 1 and 2 do not contain legends (I.e. connector 13, network 4, computer 5, etc.) which are necessary for understanding the drawing (See 37 CFR 1.84). 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 Objections
Claim 24 is objected to because of the following informalities: the limitation states “printed circuit board which is in mounted”. The Examiner believes the limitation was intended to read “printed circuit board which is mounted”. Appropriate correction is required.
Claim Interpretation
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(f):
(f) Element in Claim for a Combination. – An element in a claim for a combination may be expressed as a means or step for performing a specified function without the recital of structure, material, or acts in support thereof, and such claim shall be construed to cover the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification and equivalents thereof.
The following is a quotation of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph:
An element in a claim for a combination may be expressed as a means or step for performing a specified function without the recital of structure, material, or acts in support thereof, and such claim shall be construed to cover the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification and equivalents thereof.
The claims in this application are given their broadest reasonable interpretation using the plain meaning of the claim language in light of the specification as it would be understood by one of ordinary skill in the art. The broadest reasonable interpretation of a claim element (also commonly referred to as a claim limitation) is limited by the description in the specification when 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is invoked.
As explained in MPEP § 2181, subsection I, claim limitations that meet the following three-prong test will be interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph:
(A) the claim limitation uses the term “means” or “step” or a term used as a substitute for “means” that is a generic placeholder (also called a nonce term or a non-structural term having no specific structural meaning) for performing the claimed function;
(B) the term “means” or “step” or the generic placeholder is modified by functional language, typically, but not always linked by the transition word “for” (e.g., “means for”) or another linking word or phrase, such as “configured to” or “so that”; and
(C) the term “means” or “step” or the generic placeholder is not modified by sufficient structure, material, or acts for performing the claimed function.
Use of the word “means” (or “step”) in a claim with functional language creates a rebuttable presumption that the claim limitation is to be treated in accordance with 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph. The presumption that the claim limitation is interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is rebutted when the claim limitation recites sufficient structure, material, or acts to entirely perform the recited function.
Absence of the word “means” (or “step”) in a claim creates a rebuttable presumption that the claim limitation is not to be treated in accordance with 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph. The presumption that the claim limitation is not interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is rebutted when the claim limitation recites function without reciting sufficient structure, material or acts to entirely perform the recited function.
Claim limitations in this application that use the word “means” (or “step”) are being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, except as otherwise indicated in an Office action. Conversely, claim limitations in this application that do not use the word “means” (or “step”) are not being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, except as otherwise indicated in an Office action.
This application includes one or more claim limitations that do not use the word “means,” but are nonetheless being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, because the claim limitations use a generic placeholder that is coupled with functional language without reciting sufficient structure to perform the recited function and the generic placeholder is not preceded by a structural modifier. Such claim limitations are: “at least one communication module which is configured to…” “a time element which is configured to…” in claims 16, 19 and 28.
Because this/these claim limitation(s) is/are being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, it/they is/are being interpreted to cover the corresponding structure described in the specification as performing the claimed function, and equivalents thereof.
If applicant does not intend to have this/these limitation(s) interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, applicant may: (1) amend the claim limitation(s) to avoid it/them being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph (e.g., by reciting sufficient structure to perform the claimed function); or (2) present a sufficient showing that the claim limitation(s) recite(s) sufficient structure to perform the claimed function so as to avoid it/them being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
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.
Claims 16-31 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.
As to claims 16, 18 and 28, claim limitations “at least one communication module which is configured to…” “a time element which is configured to…” invoke 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph. However, the written description fails to disclose the corresponding structure, material, or acts for performing the entire claimed function and to clearly link the structure, material, or acts to the function. Therefore, the claim is indefinite and is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, second paragraph.
Applicant may:
(a) Amend the claim so that the claim limitation will no longer be interpreted as a limitation under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph;
(b) Amend the written description of the specification such that it expressly recites what structure, material, or acts perform the entire claimed function, without introducing any new matter (35 U.S.C. 132(a)); or
(c) Amend the written description of the specification such that it clearly links the structure, material, or acts disclosed therein to the function recited in the claim, without introducing any new matter (35 U.S.C. 132(a)).
If applicant is of the opinion that the written description of the specification already implicitly or inherently discloses the corresponding structure, material, or acts and clearly links them to the function so that one of ordinary skill in the art would recognize what structure, material, or acts perform the claimed function, applicant should clarify the record by either:
(a) Amending the written description of the specification such that it expressly recites the corresponding structure, material, or acts for performing the claimed function and clearly links or associates the structure, material, or acts to the claimed function, without introducing any new matter (35 U.S.C. 132(a)); or
(b) Stating on the record what the corresponding structure, material, or acts, which are implicitly or inherently set forth in the written description of the specification, perform the claimed function. For more information, see 37 CFR 1.75(d) and MPEP §§ 608.01(o) and 2181.
As to claim 22, the claim recites, “the computer comprises an optional data storage device”. The scope of the claim cannot be determined as it is unclear as to whether the data storage device actually exists if it is “optional”.
As to claim 28, the claim is directed to a method claim, however the claim also recites structure configured to perform functions, e.g. “at least one sensor configured to…” “at least one microcontroller configured to…” etc. Because the claim recites a structure of a device and a method for using that device, the claim does not apprise a person of ordinary skill in the art of the scope of the claim and are rendered indefinite under 35 USC 112 (b).
Claim 28 recites the limitation "a sensor signal" in line 23 of the claim. However, it is unclear whether this instance refers to “a sensor signal” in line 5 of the claim (if so, it should read “the sensor signal”) or is a newly introduced sensor signal (if so, it should read “a second sensor signal”). Appropriate correction is required.
Claim 28 recites the limitation "pre-processed data package" in line 29 of the claim. However, it is unclear whether this instance refers to “a pre-processed data package” in line 7 of the claim (if so, it should read “the pre-processed data package”) or is a newly introduced pre-processed data package (if so, it should read “a second pre-processed data package”). Appropriate correction is required.
Claim 28 recites the limitation "a processed data package" in line 26 of the claim. However, it is unclear whether this instance refers to “a processed data package” in line 14 of the claim (if so, it should read “the processed data package”) or is a newly introduced processed data package (if so, it should read “a second pre-processed data package”). Appropriate correction is required.
Claim 28 recites the limitation "information" in line 40 of the claim. However, it is unclear whether this instance refers to “information” in line 16 of the claim (if so, it should read “the information”) or is newly introduced information (if so, it should read “second information”). Appropriate correction is required.
As to claims 17, 20, 21, 23-27 and 29-31, claims 17, 20, 21, 23-27 and 29-31 do not cure the deficiency of claims 16 and 28, and are rejected under 35 USC § 112 for their dependency upon claims 16 and 28.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 101
35 U.S.C. 101 reads as follows:
Whoever invents or discovers any new and useful process, machine, manufacture, or composition of matter, or any new and useful improvement thereof, may obtain a patent therefor, subject to the conditions and requirements of this title.
Claim 31 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 101 because the claimed invention is directed to non-statutory subject matter.
As to claim 31, the claim does not fall within at least one of the four categories of patent eligible subject matter because the instructions are not stored on non-transitory computer readable storage medium. Therefore, the claims are software per se which do not fall within at least one of the four categories of patent eligible subject matter.
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 16-31 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over US 20180365636 A1 to Lucrecio et al. (Applicant’s IDS) (hereinafter Lucrecio) in view of US 20200322323 A1 to Corning.
As to claims 16, 28 and 31, Lucrecio teaches a system (paragraph 52, system 100) comprising a - at least one connector (paragraph 52, logistics tracking unit [LTU]) comprising o at least one sensor configured to measure physical properties of the connector and to provide a sensor signal based on the measured physical property (paragraph 54, sensors which may detect, record, and report tracking information including, but in no way limited to, geographical position, temperature, humidity, barometric pressure, atmospheric conditions (e.g., oxygen, carbon monoxide, carbon dioxide, and/or other gas and levels detected), shock, impacts, lighting, and/or other conditions associated with a shipment), o at least one microcontroller configured to receive said sensor signal, to pre-process said sensor signal, to provide a pre-processed data package comprising said sensor signal (paragraphs 68, 107 and 134, signals reported to processor), o at least one communication module which is configured to receive said pre-processed data package from the at least one microcontroller and to provide said pre-processed data package (paragraphs 107 and 134, sensor data sent from the sensor processor and received by the processor of the LTU),- a computer network configured to receive said pre-processed data package from the at least one communication module and to further process said pre-processed data package in order to provide a processed data package (paragraph 54, transmit and/or receive information via one or more orbiting communication satellites 124 and terrestrial satellite dish 128, terrestrial antennas 112 (e.g., cell towers, repeaters, GSM communication equipment, etc.), wireless local area networking (WiFi) hotspots 116, and/or other radio frequency communications), and- a computer configured to receive said processed data package, and having a processor configured to process said processed data package to obtain information relating to said sensor signal and a display to display said information relating to said sensor signal (paragraph 204, LTU server which receives the sensor data from the LTU),
Lucrecio does not explicitly teach wherein the microcontroller is further configured to encrypt said pre-processed data package such that said pre-processed data package is encrypted before its transmission to the computer network.
However, Corning teaches the microcontroller is further configured to encrypt said pre-processed data package such that said pre-processed data package is encrypted before its transmission to the computer network (paragraph 73, encrypting sensor data before transmitting the data).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to modify the teachings of Lucrecio with the method of encrypting transmitted sensor data as taught by Corning in order to protect the data from being accessed by unauthorized entities, therefore optimizing the overall security of the system.
As to claim 17, Lucrecio teaches wherein the connector is an electrical and/or fluidic connector (FIG. 3A and paragraph 66, wherein electrical signals traverse the LTU).
As to claim 18, Lucrecio teaches wherein the communication module is linked directly to the computer network (FIG. 1 and paragraph 54, the LTU 300 may be configured to transmit and/or receive information via one or more orbiting communication satellites 124 and terrestrial satellite dish 128, terrestrial antennas 112 (e.g., cell towers, repeaters, GSM communication equipment, etc.), wireless local area networking (WiFi) hotspots 116, and/or other radio frequency communications); or wherein the system comprises a gateway, which gateway is arranged between the communication module and the computer network, wherein said pre-processed data package is sent from the communication module via the gateway to the computer network.
As to claim 19, Lucrecio teaches wherein the microcontroller comprises a time element which is configured to add a time stamp to a said sensor signal, whereby the sensor signal and the time stamp are provided with said pre-processed data package (paragraph 56, provided details include time).
As to claim 20, Lucrecio teaches wherein said computer network comprises a network processor configured to process said pre-processed data package and/or a data storage device configured to store said data package (paragraph 100, database 917 may reside on a storage medium local to (and/or resident in) one or more of the computers 300, 907, 140, 913, 132. Alternatively, it may be remote from any or all of the computers 300, 907, 140, 913, 132, and in communication (e.g., via the network 136) with one or more of these. The database 917 may reside in a storage-area network (“SAN”) familiar to those skilled in the art. Similarly, any necessary files for performing the functions attributed to the computers 300, 907, 140, 913, 132 may be stored locally on the respective computer and/or remotely, as appropriate. The database 917 may be a relational database, such as Oracle 20i®, that is adapted to store, update, and retrieve data in response to SQL-formatted commands).
As to claim 21, Corning teaches wherein said network processor is configured to decrypt said pre-processed data package in order to store and/or to process decrypted sensor data, and/or wherein said network processor is configured to process said sensor data; and/or wherein said network processor is configured to encrypt said decrypted or said processed sensor data such that said processed data package is encrypted before its transmission from the computer network to the computer and/or wherein the received pre-processed data package is stored in said data storage in encrypted form (paragraphs 63 and 74, decrypting the received data).
As to claim 22, Corning teaches wherein the computer comprises an optional data storage device, wherein the processor of the computer is configured to decrypt said processed data package in order to store and/or to process decrypted sensor data, and/or wherein the processor of the computer is configured to process said sensor data; and/or wherein the processor of the computer is configured to encrypt said decrypted or said processed sensor data (paragraphs 63 and 74, decrypting the received data).
As to claim 23, Lucrecio teaches wherein the computer is connected to a further processing unit and/or wherein the computer comprises a user interface which is configured to receive user inputs (paragraph 99, web server 913 may be able to receive web page requests, web services invocations, and/or input data from a computing device 300, 907, 140 (e.g., a user computer, etc.) and can forward the web page requests and/or input data to the web (application) server).
As to claim 24, Lucrecio teaches wherein said at least one sensor and/or the microcontroller and/or the communication module are provided on a printed circuit board which is in mounted on the connector (paragraph 77, printed circuit board [PCB]).
As to claim 25, Lucrecio teaches wherein the connector comprises a connection interface via which the connector can be connected to a further connector having a connection interface which corresponds to the connection interface of the connector (paragraph 64, fastening elements; paragraph 84, mounting area and/or adhesive layer).
As to claim 26, Lucrecio teaches wherein the connector comprises a further connection interface to which an external connector is connected, wherein said further connection interface is connected to said connection interface with at least one internal connector element (paragraph 64, fastening elements).
As to claim 27, Lucrecio teaches wherein the sensor is chosen from the group of a temperature sensor configured to measure an ambient temperature, which is said physical property; and/or a temperature sensor configured to measure a specific temperature, which is said physical property; and/or a humidity sensor configured to measure an ambient humidity, which is said physical property; and/or an air pressure sensor configured to measure an ambient air pressure, which is said physical property; and/or an altitude sensor configured to measure an altitude, which is said physical property; and/or a vibration sensor configured to measure vibrations, which is said physical property; and/or an optical sensor configured to measure illuminance, which is said physical property; and/or a tilt sensor configured to measure a tilt, which is said physical property; and/or an acceleration sensor configured to measure an acceleration, which is said physical property; and/or an mating cycle sensor configured to measure the number of mating cycles, which are said physical property; and/or a flow sensor configured to measure a volume flow, which is said physical property (paragraph 54, information including, but in no way limited to, geographical position, temperature, humidity, barometric pressure, atmospheric conditions (e.g., oxygen, carbon monoxide, carbon dioxide, and/or other gas and levels detected), shock, impacts, lighting, and/or other conditions associated with a shipment).
As to claim 29, Corning teaches decrypting the pre-processed data package before the step of further processing said pre-processed data package in the computer network to the processed data package (paragraphs 63 and 74, decrypting the received data).
As to claim 30, Corning teaches encrypting the processed data package in the computer network and decrypting said processed data package by the computer (paragraphs 52 and 63, encryption and decryption of the sensor data).
Relevant Prior Art
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure:
US 20240077007 A1 to Nivard et al. teaches a detection system for detecting a failure in a fluid path of a fluid system, the detection system including: at least one pipe comprising a pipe wall which defines a fluid path for the transfer of fluid and at least one electrically conductive element extending along the at least one pipe and which forms an electrical signal path for a first electrical signal which indicates a state of the at least one pipe; and, an electrical terminal electrically connected to the at least one electrically conductive element so that the first electrical signal is transmitted to the electrical terminal via the electrical signal path. Further embodiments include a smart connector. The connector may comprise a sensor for determining a connection condition of the connector. Thus, the sensor may be configured to send a signal to the electrical terminal which is indicative of the connection condition and whether there is a partially or full disconnection of the connector or an misalignment for example.
US 20230084777 A1 to Parvaneh teaches various smart medical connection embodiments encompassing a magnetic connectivity manager energizing ferromagnet(s) in response to a powering on the magnetic connectivity manager and a sensing of a connection strain on a medical base (21) and/or a patient base (31) of the device, whereby a magnetic connectivity interface (22, 32) activates a magnetic connectivity between metallic module(s) and the ferromagnet(s) for interfacing the conduit channels of the bases. The various smart medical connection embodiments of the present disclosure further encompass the magnetic connectivity manager deenergizing the ferromagnet(s) in response to a powering down of the magnetic connectivity manager and/or a sensing of a disconnection strain on the base(s), whereby the magnetic connectivity interface (22, 32) deactivates the magnetic connectivity between the metallic module(s) and the ferromagnet(s) for interfacing the conduit channels of the bases.
US 20190381230 A1 to Biewer et al. teaches a sensor assembly that measures characteristics of a fluid entering or exiting a patient via a catheter. The sensor assembly includes a flow tube that accepts the fluid at a first end thereof expels the fluid at a second end thereof, a plurality of sensors disposed about the flow tube, the sensors including at least one temperature sensor that measures temperature of the fluid and at least one pressure sensor that measures pressure of the fluid, and a connector that connects the sensor assembly to the catheter. The sensors may also include a clarity sensor, a conductivity sensor, a flow sensor, and/or an air detector. The sensor assembly may also include a wireless communication device that provides wireless communication. The sensor assembly may communicate with a dialysis machine via a network. The dialysis machine may be a peritoneal dialysis machine.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to MALCOLM CRIBBS whose telephone number is (571)270-1566. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 930a-330p; 430p-630p.
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, Eleni Shiferaw can be reached at (571)272-3867. 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.
MALCOLM . CRIBBS
Examiner
Art Unit 2497
/MALCOLM CRIBBS/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2497
