DETAILED ACTION
Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status
1. The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
2. The following is a quotation of the appropriate paragraphs of 35 U.S.C. 102 that form the basis for the rejections under this section made in this Office action:
A person shall be entitled to a patent unless –
(a)(1) the claimed invention was patented, described in a printed publication, or in public use, on sale or otherwise available to the public before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
3. Claim(s) 37, 43-44, 50 and 53-54 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Fry (US 2006/0227115 A1, hereinafter referred as “Fry”).
Regarding claim 37, Fry discloses a system comprising:
an input device (106) configured to be utilized by an operator to generate input commands for controlling a medical (this intended use limitation doesn’t impart a patentable distinction) device (¶0008 discloses a touch sensitive control system for controlling a device; and ¶0018 discloses the device 102 is operable only with actual user commands entered through the control interface 106);
an operator-detection sensor configured to generate sensor data indicating a presence or an absence of the operator at the input device (106) (¶0020 discloses the control interface 106 includes one or more touch sensitive elements or touch sensors, e.g. touch sensors 107 and 109); and
a control unit (104) configured to:
control movement of the medical (this intended use limitation doesn’t impart a patentable distinction) device based on a comparison of the sensor data with a first baseline level and a first command line level (¶0028 discloses if the difference between the post-test pulse signal level and the pre-test pulse baseline signal level exceeds a current detect threshold value, the controller 104 senses a touch or detect at the touch sensitive area 206 and operates the associated device accordingly), the first baseline level associated with the absence of the operator at the input device (106) (¶0028 and ¶0033 discloses the controller 104 obtains a pre-test pulse baseline signal level from the control interface 106 for the touch sensitive elements 210, 212), the first command line level associated with the presence of the operator at the input device (106) (¶0027-¶0028 and ¶0033 discloses controller 104 monitors a response to the pulse (pulse signal) by obtaining a post-test pulse signal level from the element 210 after the element 210 sends the pulse to earth ground. If the difference between the post-test pulse signal level and the pre-test pulse baseline signal level exceeds a current detect threshold value, the controller 104 senses a touch or detect at the touch sensitive area 206 and operates the associated device accordingly), wherein:
input commands from the input device (106) are not used to control the medical (this intended use limitation doesn’t impart a patentable distinction) device when the comparison of the sensor data with the first baseline level indicates the absence of the operator at the input device (106) (¶0028 discloses the controller 104 obtains a pre-test pulse baseline signal level (sometimes referred to herein as a current pre-test pulse baseline signal level, baseline signal level reading, current baseline signal level reading, baseline reading, and current baseline reading) from the control interface 106 for the touch sensitive elements 210, 212); and
the input commands from the input device (106) are used to control the medical (this intended use limitation doesn’t impart a patentable distinction) device when the comparison of the sensor data with the first command line level indicates the presence of the operator at the input device (106) (¶0027-¶0028 and ¶0033 discloses controller 104 monitors a response to the pulse (pulse signal) by obtaining a post-test pulse signal level from the element 210 after the element 210 sends the pulse to earth ground. If the difference between the post-test pulse signal level and the pre-test pulse baseline signal level exceeds a current detect threshold value, the controller 104 senses a touch or detect at the touch sensitive area 206 and operates the associated device accordingly);
detect an occurrence of a triggering event for a calibration procedure for the operator-detection sensor (¶0009-¶0010 discloses an interfering event that changes the operating conditions of the capacitive touch sensor);
in response to detecting the occurrence of the triggering event, initiate the calibration procedure (¶0010 discloses if the current baseline reading exceeds the predetermined baseline reference value, the predetermined baseline reference value is raised to be at least equal to the current baseline reading), the calibration procedure comprising:
establishing a second baseline level associated with the absence of the operator at the input device (106) (¶0048 discloses if the current pre-test pulse baseline signal level is greater than the current vcfar value, then noise is present, and the noise floor is raised by setting vcfar to the current-pre-test pulse baseline signal level at 796); and
establishing a second command line level associated with the presence of the operator at the input device (106) (¶0048 discloses as such, the sensitivity of the control interface is self-adjusting as the noise level increases, and the threshold for touch detection is raised accordingly as noise events occur); and
control movement of the medical (this intended use limitation doesn’t impart a patentable distinction) device based on the second baseline level and the second command line level (¶0028 discloses if the difference between the post-test pulse signal level and the pre-test pulse baseline signal level exceeds a current detect threshold value, the controller 104 senses a touch or detect at the touch sensitive area 206 and operates the associated device accordingly), wherein:
input commands from the input device (106) are not used to control the medical (this intended use limitation doesn’t impart a patentable distinction) device when the comparison of the sensor data with the second baseline level indicates the absence of the operator at the input device (106) (¶0028 discloses the controller 104 obtains a pre-test pulse baseline signal level (sometimes referred to herein as a current pre-test pulse baseline signal level, baseline signal level reading, current baseline signal level reading, baseline reading, and current baseline reading) from the control interface 106 for the touch sensitive elements 210, 212); and
the input commands from the input device (106) are used to control the medical (this intended use limitation doesn’t impart a patentable distinction) device when the comparison of the sensor data with the second command line level indicates the presence of the operator at the input device (106) (¶0027-¶0028 and ¶0033 discloses controller 104 monitors a response to the pulse (pulse signal) by obtaining a post-test pulse signal level from the element 210 after the element 210 sends the pulse to earth ground. If the difference between the post-test pulse signal level and the pre-test pulse baseline signal level exceeds a current detect threshold value, the controller 104 senses a touch or detect at the touch sensitive area 206 and operates the associated device accordingly).
Regarding claim 43, Fry discloses the system of claim 37, wherein the first command line level is a calculated offset based on the first baseline level (¶0033 discloses if a sampling difference 510 (e.g. the post-pulse sampling 514 minus the baseline sampling 512) exceeds a current positive detect threshold, a touch or detect is sensed at the touch key 206).
Regarding claim 44, Fry discloses the system of claim 37, wherein the second baseline level is different than the first baseline level (¶0048 discloses if the current pre-test pulse baseline signal level is greater than the current vcfar value, then noise is present, and the noise floor is raised by setting vcfar to the current-pre-test pulse baseline signal level at 796), and wherein the second command line level is different than the first command line level (¶0048 discloses as such, the sensitivity of the control interface is self-adjusting as the noise level increases, and the threshold for touch detection is raised accordingly as noise events occur).
Regarding claim 50, Fry discloses the system of claim 37, wherein the operator-detection sensor comprises a capacitance sensor (Fig. 2 and ¶0026 discloses the touch sensitive elements 210, 212 are capacitive touch sensors) configured to detect physical contact of the operator with the input device (106) (Fig. 2 and ¶0025 discloses elements 210 and 212, and the controller 104 are configured to detect an actual touch).
Regarding claim 53, Fry discloses the system of claim 37, wherein the control unit (104) is further configured to: determine the first baseline level when the operator-detection sensor detects the absence of the operator at the input device (106) (¶0028 discloses the controller 104 obtains a pre-test pulse baseline signal level (sometimes referred to herein as a current pre-test pulse baseline signal level, baseline signal level reading, current baseline signal level reading, baseline reading, and current baseline reading) from the control interface 106 for the touch sensitive elements 210, 212); and determine the first command line level based on the first baseline level (¶0027-¶0028 and ¶0033 discloses pre-test pulse baseline signal level exceeds a current detect threshold value).
Regarding claim 54, Fry discloses a non-transitory machine-readable medium storing instructions (¶0021 discloses the controller memory 110 stores instructions) that, when run by one or more processors (¶0020 discloses controller 104 may include a microcomputer or microprocessor 105), cause the one or more processors to:
control movement of a medical (this intended use limitation doesn’t impart a patentable distinction) device based on a comparison of sensor data with a first baseline level and a first command line level (¶0028 discloses if the difference between the post-test pulse signal level and the pre-test pulse baseline signal level exceeds a current detect threshold value, the controller 104 senses a touch or detect at the touch sensitive area 206 and operates the associated device accordingly), the sensor data generated by an operator-detection sensor (¶0020 discloses the control interface 106 includes one or more touch sensitive elements or touch sensors, e.g. touch sensors 107 and 109), the first baseline level associated with an absence of an operator at an input device (106) (¶0028 and ¶0033 discloses the controller 104 obtains a pre-test pulse baseline signal level from the control interface 106 for the touch sensitive elements 210, 212), the first command line level associated with a presence of the operator at the input device (106) (¶0027-¶0028 and ¶0033 discloses controller 104 monitors a response to the pulse (pulse signal) by obtaining a post-test pulse signal level from the element 210 after the element 210 sends the pulse to earth ground. If the difference between the post-test pulse signal level and the pre-test pulse baseline signal level exceeds a current detect threshold value, the controller 104 senses a touch or detect at the touch sensitive area 206 and operates the associated device accordingly), the input device (106) configured to be utilized by the operator to generate input commands for controlling a medical (this intended use limitation doesn’t impart a patentable distinction) device (¶0008 discloses a touch sensitive control system for controlling a device; and ¶0018 discloses the device 102 is operable only with actual user commands entered through the control interface 106), wherein:
input commands from the input device (106) are not used to control the medical (this intended use limitation doesn’t impart a patentable distinction) device when the comparison of the sensor data with the first baseline level indicates the absence of the operator at the input device (106) (¶0028 discloses the controller 104 obtains a pre-test pulse baseline signal level (sometimes referred to herein as a current pre-test pulse baseline signal level, baseline signal level reading, current baseline signal level reading, baseline reading, and current baseline reading) from the control interface 106 for the touch sensitive elements 210, 212); and
the input commands from the input device (106) are used to control the medical (this intended use limitation doesn’t impart a patentable distinction) device when the comparison of the sensor data with the first command line level indicates the presence of the operator at the input device (106) (¶0027-¶0028 and ¶0033 discloses controller 104 monitors a response to the pulse (pulse signal) by obtaining a post-test pulse signal level from the element 210 after the element 210 sends the pulse to earth ground. If the difference between the post-test pulse signal level and the pre-test pulse baseline signal level exceeds a current detect threshold value, the controller 104 senses a touch or detect at the touch sensitive area 206 and operates the associated device accordingly);
detect an occurrence of a triggering event for a calibration procedure for the operator-detection sensor (¶0009-¶0010 discloses an interfering event that changes the operating conditions of the capacitive touch sensor);
in response to detecting the occurrence of the triggering event, initiate the calibration procedure (¶0010 discloses if the current baseline reading exceeds the predetermined baseline reference value, the predetermined baseline reference value is raised to be at least equal to the current baseline reading), the calibration procedure comprising:
establishing a second baseline level associated with the absence of the operator at the input device (106) (¶0048 discloses if the current pre-test pulse baseline signal level is greater than the current vcfar value, then noise is present, and the noise floor is raised by setting vcfar to the current-pre-test pulse baseline signal level at 796); and
establishing a second command line level associated with the presence of the operator at the input device (106) (¶0048 discloses as such, the sensitivity of the control interface is self-adjusting as the noise level increases, and the threshold for touch detection is raised accordingly as noise events occur); and
control movement of the medical (this intended use limitation doesn’t impart a patentable distinction) device based on the second baseline level and the second command line level (¶0028 discloses if the difference between the post-test pulse signal level and the pre-test pulse baseline signal level exceeds a current detect threshold value, the controller 104 senses a touch or detect at the touch sensitive area 206 and operates the associated device accordingly), wherein:
input commands from the input device (106) are not used to control the medical (this intended use limitation doesn’t impart a patentable distinction) device when the comparison of the sensor data with the second baseline level indicates the absence of the operator at the input device (106) (¶0028 discloses the controller 104 obtains a pre-test pulse baseline signal level (sometimes referred to herein as a current pre-test pulse baseline signal level, baseline signal level reading, current baseline signal level reading, baseline reading, and current baseline reading) from the control interface 106 for the touch sensitive elements 210, 212); and
the input commands from the input device (106) are used to control the medical (this intended use limitation doesn’t impart a patentable distinction) device when the comparison of the sensor data with the second command line level indicates the presence of the operator at the input device (106) (¶0027-¶0028 and ¶0033 discloses controller 104 monitors a response to the pulse (pulse signal) by obtaining a post-test pulse signal level from the element 210 after the element 210 sends the pulse to earth ground. If the difference between the post-test pulse signal level and the pre-test pulse baseline signal level exceeds a current detect threshold value, the controller 104 senses a touch or detect at the touch sensitive area 206 and operates the associated device accordingly).
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
4. 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 of this title, 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.
5. Claim(s) 38, 39 and 49 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Fry in view of Uchida et al. (US 2019/0004633 A1, hereinafter referred as “Uchida”).
Regarding claim 38, Fry doesn’t disclose the system of claim 37, wherein the calibration procedure further comprises: providing an indication to the operator to not touch the input device during the calibration procedure.
However, in the same field of endeavor, Uchida discloses wherein the calibration procedure (abstract discloses a calibration performing unit configured to perform a first calibration process for adjusting a reference potential, which serves as a detection threshold for a touch manipulation on the touch panel) further comprises: providing an indication to the operator to not touch the input device during the calibration procedure (¶0051 discloses the display unit 2061 may display a message such as for example ‘Don't touch the touch panel’ as illustrated in FIG. 5 during the activation of the video processor 20 or at least while a calibration process is being performed in order to prevent the calibration process from being performed with the touch panel 206 touched by the user's hand etc.).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Fry for the purpose of ensuring that the baseline reference represents the no-touch environmental condition of the sensor.
Regarding claim 39, Fry doesn’t disclose the system of claim 38, wherein the indication is a visual message, and wherein providing the indication comprises displaying the visual message on a display device.
However, in the same field of endeavor, Uchida discloses wherein the indication is a visual message (¶0051 discloses the display unit 2061 may display a message), and wherein providing the indication comprises displaying the visual message on a display device (¶0051 discloses the display unit 2061 may display a message such as for example ‘Don't touch the touch panel’ as illustrated in FIG. 5 during the activation of the video processor 20 or at least while a calibration process is being performed in order to prevent the calibration process from being performed with the touch panel 206 touched by the user's hand etc.).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Fry for the purpose of ensuring that the baseline reference represents the no-touch environmental condition of the sensor.
Regarding claim 49, Fry doesn’t disclose the system of claim 37, wherein the calibration procedure further comprises: instructing the operator to not contact the input device during the establishing the second baseline level and during the establishing the second command line level.
However, in the same field of endeavor, Uchida discloses instructing the operator to not contact the input device during the establishing the second baseline level and during the establishing the second command line level (¶0051 discloses the display unit 2061 may display a message such as for example ‘Don't touch the touch panel’ as illustrated in FIG. 5 during the activation of the video processor 20 or at least while a calibration process is being performed in order to prevent the calibration process from being performed with the touch panel 206 touched by the user's hand etc.).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Fry for the purpose of ensuring that the baseline reference represents the no-touch environmental condition of the sensor.
6. Claim(s) 40 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Fry in view of Uchida and in further view of Zhang et al. (US 2018/0095539 A1, hereinafter referred as “Zhang”).
Regarding claim 40, Fry as modified doesn’t disclose the system of claim 38, wherein the indication is an audio message, and wherein providing the indication comprises audibly playing the audio message to the operator.
However, in the same field of endeavor, Uchida discloses wherein the indication is a… message (¶0051 discloses the display unit 2061 may display a message), and wherein providing the indication comprises …[dis]playing the …message to the operator (¶0051 discloses the display unit 2061 may display a message such as for example ‘Don't touch the touch panel’ as illustrated in FIG. 5 during the activation of the video processor 20 or at least while a calibration process is being performed in order to prevent the calibration process from being performed with the touch panel 206 touched by the user's hand etc.).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Fry for the purpose of ensuring that the baseline reference represents the no-touch environmental condition of the sensor.
Fry as modified doesn’t disclose the indication is an audio message, and audibly playing the audio message.
However, in the same field of endeavor, Zhang discloses the indication is an audio message, and audibly playing the audio message (¶0038 discloses the phone (or other device) can emit an audio or visual cue to indicate to the user to prepare for the calibration process).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to further modify Fry since the audio message is faster to perceive and effective even when the user’s hands block the display.
7. Claim(s) 41 and 55 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Fry in view of Parikh (US 2019/0130925 A1, hereinafter referred as “Parikh”) and in further view of King et al. (US 2012/0050181 A1, hereinafter referred as “King”).
Regarding claim 41, Fry doesn’t disclose the system of claim 37, further comprising a motion sensor associated with the input device and configured to detect a displacement of the input device, wherein the calibration procedure further comprises: detecting, via the motion sensor, a motion of the input device by the operator; and in response to detecting the motion of the input device, restarting the establishing the second baseline level.
However, in the same field of endeavor, Parikh discloses further comprising a motion sensor associated with the input device (¶0076 discloses the user device may include one or more of an accelerometer, scanner, global positioning system, WiFi, Wan, proximity sensor, light sensor, the like, or combinations thereof) and configured to detect a displacement of the input device (¶0098 discloses a state of motion of the user device monitored by an accelerometer of the user device), wherein the calibration procedure further comprises: detecting, via the motion sensor, a motion of the input device by the operator (¶0098 discloses a state of motion of the user device monitored by an accelerometer of the user device); and in response to detecting the motion of the input device, restarting [the calibration procedure] (¶0098 discloses touch screen calibration… may be adjusted based on analysis of a combination of conditions, including but not limited to… a state of motion of the user device monitored by an accelerometer of the user device).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Fry for the purpose of adapting to capacitance shifts from mechanical flex and vibration of the input device.
Fry as modified doesn’t disclose restarting the establishing the second baseline level.
However, in the same field of endeavor, King discloses restarting the establishing the second baseline level (¶0103 discloses to compensate for signal drift, the baseline capacitance can be reset periodically to take into account any environmental, operating, mechanical, and other changes; and ¶0104 discloses capacitance measurements can be taken and the panel 2426 can be calibrated with the measurements as the new baseline).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to further modify Fry for the purpose of compensating for signal drift (¶0103).
Regarding claim(s) 55, this/these CRM claim(s) has/have similar limitations as system claim(s) 41, and therefore rejected on similar grounds.
8. Claim(s) 42 and 56 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Fry in view of Parikh and in further view of King and still in further view of Uchida.
Regarding claim 42, Fry doesn’t disclose the system of claim 41, wherein the calibration procedure further comprises: based on the detection of the motion of the input device, providing an indication to the operator to not touch the input device during the calibration procedure.
However, in the same field of endeavor, Parikh discloses wherein the calibration procedure further comprises: based on the detection of the motion of the input device (¶0098 discloses touch screen calibration… may be adjusted based on analysis of a combination of conditions, including but not limited to… a state of motion of the user device monitored by an accelerometer of the user device)…
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Fry for the purpose of adapting to capacitance shifts from mechanical flex and vibration of the input device.
Fry as modified doesn’t disclose …providing an indication to the operator to not touch the input device during the calibration procedure.
However, in the same field of endeavor, Uchida discloses …providing an indication to the operator to not touch the input device during the calibration procedure (¶0051 discloses the display unit 2061 may display a message such as for example ‘Don't touch the touch panel’ as illustrated in FIG. 5 during the activation of the video processor 20 or at least while a calibration process is being performed in order to prevent the calibration process from being performed with the touch panel 206 touched by the user's hand etc.).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Fry for the purpose of ensuring that the baseline reference represents the no-touch environmental condition of the sensor.
Regarding claim(s) 56, this/these CRM claim(s) has/have similar limitations as system claim(s) 42, and therefore rejected on similar grounds.
9. Claim(s) 45 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Fry in view of Rosener (US 2011/0216016 A1, hereinafter referred as “Rosener”).
Regarding claim 45, Fry as modified doesn’t disclose the system of claim 37, wherein the triggering event comprises the operator-detection sensor being stuck or otherwise inoperable.
However, in the same field of endeavor, Rosener discloses wherein the triggering event comprises the operator-detection sensor being stuck or otherwise inoperable (¶0025 discloses the method further includes determining an active sensor touch state from the series of sensor signal values utilizing the baseline level, determining a stuck-on activity state, and setting the baseline level to a current sampled sensor signal value responsive to determining the stuck-on activity state. The baseline level is further adjusted using the sampled sensor signal values to produce an adjusted baseline level).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Fry so that the baseline level is further adjusted using the sampled sensor signal values to produce an adjusted baseline level (¶0025).
10. Claim(s) 46 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Fry in view of Su et al. (US 2019/0171302 A1, hereinafter referred as “Su”).
Regarding claim 46, Fry doesn’t disclose the system of claim 37, wherein the triggering event comprises a determination that a displacement distance of the input device exceeds a displacement threshold.
However, in the same field of endeavor, Su discloses wherein the triggering event comprises a determination that a displacement distance of the input device exceeds a displacement threshold (¶0039 discloses recalibrating a movement (e.g., due to a repositioning of a hand) of input device 130 can be performed automatically (e.g., by input device 130 determining that input device 130 has moved a threshold distance from a surface).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Fry for the purpose of preventing accidental or unsafe commands.
11. Claim(s) 47 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Fry in view of Liberty et al. (US 2005/0253806 A1, hereinafter referred as “Liberty”).
Regarding claim 47, Fry doesn’t disclose the system of claim 37, wherein the triggering event comprises a determination that a velocity of the input device exceeds a velocity threshold for a threshold duration of time.
However, in the same field of endeavor, Liberty discloses wherein the triggering event comprises a determination that a velocity of the input device exceeds a velocity threshold for a threshold duration of time (¶0061 discloses by using the accelerometer to determine the angular velocity along the axis which is not sensed by the rotational sensor; and ¶0067 discloses value of sensor output(s) over a time window is greater than predetermined threshold).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Fry for the purpose of preventing accidental or unsafe commands.
12. Claim(s) 48 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Fry in view of Kirschenman et al. (US 2011/0238010 A1, hereinafter referred as “Kirschenman”).
Regarding claim 48, Fry as modified doesn’t disclose the system of claim 37, wherein the control unit is further configured to: in response to the triggering event, prevent movement of the medical device.
However, in the same field of endeavor, Kirschenman discloses wherein the control unit is further configured to: in response to the triggering event, prevent movement of the medical (this intended use limitation doesn’t impart a patentable distinction) device (Fig. 2, ¶0045, claims 14 and 15 discloses wherein the dead man switch is an optical switch or a capacitive switch configured to detect the presence or absence of a portion of a hand in contact with at least a portion of the handle).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Fry in order to prevent unintentional control of the instrument.
Allowable Subject Matter
13. Claims 51-52 are objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to PRIYANK J SHAH whose telephone number is (571)270-3732. The examiner can normally be reached on 10:00 - 6:00 M-F.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, LunYi Lao can be reached on 5712727671. 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.
/PRIYANK J SHAH/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2621