CTNF 19/025,911 CTNF 90568 DETAILED ACTION Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status 07-03-aia AIA 15-10-aia The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA. Double Patenting 08-29 Claim 1-8 of this application is patentably indistinct from claim 1-8 of Application No. 19/025,942. Pursuant to 37 CFR 1.78(f), when two or more applications filed by the same applicant or assignee contain patentably indistinct claims, elimination of such claims from all but one application may be required in the absence of good and sufficient reason for their retention during pendency in more than one application. Applicant is required to either cancel the patentably indistinct claims from all but one application or maintain a clear line of demarcation between the applications. See MPEP § 822. 08-30 AIA A rejection based on double patenting of the “same invention” type finds its support in the language of 35 U.S.C. 101 which states that “whoever invents or discovers any new and useful process... may obtain a patent therefor...” (Emphasis added). Thus, the term “same invention,” in this context, means an invention drawn to identical subject matter. See Miller v. Eagle Mfg. Co. , 151 U.S. 186 (1894); In re Vogel , 422 F.2d 438, 164 USPQ 619 (CCPA 1970); In re Ockert , 245 F.2d 467, 114 USPQ 330 (CCPA 1957). A statutory type (35 U.S.C. 101) double patenting rejection can be overcome by canceling or amending the claims that are directed to the same invention so they are no longer coextensive in scope. The filing of a terminal disclaimer cannot overcome a double patenting rejection based upon 35 U.S.C. 101. 08-31 AIA Claim 1-8 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 101 as claiming the same invention as that of claim 1-8 of prior U.S. Patent No. 19/025, 942 . This is a statutory double patenting rejection. Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112 07-30-02 AIA 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 2 rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA), second paragraph, as failing to set forth the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor, or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the applicant regards as the invention. Claim 2 recites the limitation "the one or more sensors" in line 1. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. Independent claim 1 recites “a sensor” not “one or more sensors” therefore dependent claim 2 lacks antecedent basis. Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103 07-06 AIA 15-10-15 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 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. 07-20-aia AIA 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. 07-21-aia AIA Claim 1-8 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Hazra et al (US 20170123487 A1) in view of Lanier et al (US 20180075658 A1) Regarding claim 1, Hazra discloses an apparatus ([0103] wearable and mobile gesture recognition system) comprising: an attachment mechanism for attaching the apparatus to a user's clothing Ib[0319] may be worn directly or through integration with clothing.; a sensor; a laser projection system ([0124] system may be provided with pico projection display module) ; one or more processors ([0136] one or more processors, graphics processors, application-specific processors) ; memory storing instructions that when executed by the one or more processors ([0104] The executable computer instructions are obtained using a mathematically-modeled, simulation-based gesture recognition system method) , cause the one or more processors to perform operations comprising: capturing, using the sensor, context data; identifying one or more real-world objects or user hand gestures from the context data ([0108] dynamic gesture (i.e., movement) can be recognized if the set of individual postures that comprise the gesture can be identified.) ; obtaining data associated with the identified one or more real-world objects or user hand gestures ([0109] a posture and gesture herein are with respect to a human hand, fingers, thumb and wrist, the terms “posture” and “gesture” are to be regarded as applicable to all aspects of human and non-human animal anatomy including without limitation, the face, neck, head, arm, elbow, shoulder, spine, hip, leg, knee, or ankle of a human or animal.) ; and projecting, using the laser projection system, at least a portion of the data on a surface ([0139] multi-pico projector 20 system shown can be used with at least one pico projector 20 and is capable of projection on one to four body surfaces) . Lanier discloses a sensor ([0056] time-of-flight (TOF) camera) capturing, using the sensor, context data ([0089] reconstructed 3D model that has been captured using various sensors and/or cameras (e.g., KINECT® or TOF camera))) ; Hazra and Lanier are combinable because they are from the same field of invention. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify wearable and mobile gesture recognition system of Hazra to include a sensor capturing, using the sensor, context data as described by Lanier. The motivation for doing so would have been to allow one or more users to turn their physical environment into a painting and drawing canvas (Lanier, [0004]). Therefore, it would have been obvious to combine Hazra and Lanier to obtain the invention as specified in claim 1. Regarding claim 2, Hazra is silent to wherein the one or more sensors includes a time of flight (TOF) camera. Lanier discloses wherein the one or more sensors includes a time of flight (TOF) camera. ([0056] time-of-flight (TOF) camera) Hazra and Lanier are combinable because they are from the same field of invention. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify wearable and mobile gesture recognition system of Hazra to include wherein the one or more sensors includes a time of flight (TOF) camera as described by Lanier. The motivation for doing so would have been to allow one or more users to turn their physical environment into a painting and drawing canvas (Lanier, [0004]). Therefore, it would have been obvious to combine Hazra and Lanier to obtain the invention as specified in claim 2. Regarding claim 3, Hazra discloses a global navigation satellite receiver configured to determine a geographic location of the apparatus ([0135] GPS sensors and receivers for location data,) ; a wireless transceiver configured to send the geographic location of the wearable multimedia device to a network-based data processing pipeline, and receive second data from the network-based data processing pipeline that is responsive to the geographic location ([0403] A wrist-worn embodiment may be used to display location based information where the location is determined from navigation sensors and information is accessed using wired or wireless networks.) . Regarding claim 4, Hazra discloses a biometric sensor configured to detect a heartbeat of a user ([0264] such metrics may include heart rate, blood pressure, tissue or region stiffness, blood flow velocities, posture dynamics, structural changes, tissue strain fields among others and their historical behaviors.) . Regarding claim 5, Hazra discloses a biometric sensor configured to detect a fingerprint of the user ([0283] automated feedback in a manner similar to how users are trained to use fingerprint sensors.) Regarding claim 6, Hazra is silent to a biometric sensor configured to detect an emotional state of the user. Lanier discloses a biometric sensor configured to detect an emotional state of the user ([0093] provide biometric data to allow for the drawings to change texture, color, and shapes, based, at least in part, on the user's physical and emotional stat) Hazra and Lanier are combinable because they are from the same field of invention. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify wearable and mobile gesture recognition system of Hazra to include a biometric sensor configured to detect an emotional state of the user as described by Lanier. The motivation for doing so would have been to allow one or more users to turn their physical environment into a painting and drawing canvas (Lanier, [0004]). Therefore, it would have been obvious to combine Hazra and Lanier to obtain the invention as specified in claim 6. Regarding claim 7, Hazra discloses one or more earbuds coupled to the apparatus; and one or more inertial sensors included in or coupled to the earbuds and configured to provide direction data indicative of a direction the user is facing or head gestures ([0219] inertial measurement sensors and body orientation values from the other systems.) . Regarding claim 8, Hazra discloses wherein the direction data is used to steer the sensor in the direction that the user is facing ([0360] gaze tracking, expression and eye tracking. One of the benefits of such an embodiment over traditional optical eye/gaze tracking hardware is it is non-occultatory (non-blocking or non-obstructing).) . Conclusion Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to SHIVANG I PATEL whose telephone number is (571)272-8964. The examiner can normally be reached on M-F 9am-5pm. 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, Alicia Harrington can be reached on (571) 272-2330. 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 https://ppair-my.uspto.gov/pair/PrivatePair. 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. /SHIVANG I PATEL/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2615 Application/Control Number: 19/025,911 Page 2 Art Unit: 2615
Prosecution Insights