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 .
Status of the Claims
Claims 21-32 and 35-40 are currently pending. Claims 33 and 34 have been cancelled.
Double Patenting
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 21-24, 27-30, 36-37 and 40 are rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claims 1-2, 7, and 14 of U.S. Patent No. 12260646 (hereinafter “the Patent”). Although the claims at issue are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other because
Instant Application
Patent No. 12260646
21-24. A method comprising:
causing, by a controller of a device, at least one processor of the device to power on in response to receipt of input from a sensor of the device; (claim 22) wherein the sensor is configured to generate the input in response to detecting motion within a field of view.
after receiving the input from the sensor, booting, by the at least one processor, an operating system of the device; (claim 23) wherein: the operating system booted before the another operating system is booted; the operating system is a real-time operating system, and the another operating system is a multitasking operating system.
(claim 24) analyzing, by the at least one processor, under control of the operating system, one or more images from an image sensor of the device to identify an image of a person.
booting, by the at least one processor, another operating system of the device after sending a signal to another device in response to identification of an object, (claim 23) the another operating system is a multitasking operating system.
27. The method of Claim 21, further comprising performing operations by the at least one processor, under control of the operating system, the operations including: activating an imaging sensor of the device, the imaging sensor distinct from the sensor from which the input is received;
obtaining, via the imaging sensor an image frame that includes the object; and
using an object identification process to identify the object.
28. The method of Claim 21, further comprising, after booting the operating system, causing, by the at least one processor, an audible alarm to sound.
29. The method of Claim 21, further comprising:
obtaining, by the at least one processor, under control of the operating system, an image from an imaging sensor of the device; and
sending the image to a remote computing system via a network interface, wherein sending is performed by the at least one processor under control of the another operating system.
36. A device comprising:
a motion sensor;
an image sensor;
at least one processor; and
a controller distinct from the at least one processor and configured to power on the at least one processor in response to reception of a signal from the motion sensor, wherein the at least one processor is operatively coupled to the controller and the image sensor and configured to
after reception of the signal from the motion sensor, boot a real-time operating system,
analyze one or more images from the image sensor to identify an image of a person,
send a trigger to a base station in response to identification of the image of the person, and
boot a multitasking operating system of the device after sending the trigger to the base station.
37. The device of Claim 36, wherein:
the motion sensor is a passive infrared sensor configured to detect motion within a first field of view; and
the image sensor is a camera that includes a shutter and that is configured to capture the image of the person.
1. A method comprising:
causing, by a controller of a device, at least one processor of the device distinct from the controller to power on in response to receipt of a signal from a sensor of the device configured to detect motion within a field of view;
after receiving the signal from the sensor, booting, by the at least one processor, a real-time operating system;
analyzing, by the at least one processor, one or more images from an image sensor of the device to identify an image of a person;
sending, by the at least one processor, a trigger to a base station in response to identification of the image of the person;
after booting the real-time operating system, causing, by the at least one processor, an audible alarm to sound; and
booting, by the at least one processor, a multitasking operating system of the device after sending the trigger to the base station and after causing the audible alarm to sound.
1. … causing, by a controller of a device, at least one processor of the device distinct from the controller to power on in response to receipt of a signal from a sensor of the device…
…analyzing, by the at least one processor, one or more images from an image sensor of the device to identify an image of a person…
1. … after booting the real-time operating system, causing, by the at least one processor, an audible alarm to sound…
2. The method of claim 1, further comprising:
after booting the real-time operating system, but prior to booting the multitasking operating system, receiving the one or more images; and
after booting the multitasking operating system, uploading, by the at least one processor via the multitasking operating system, the one or more images to a remote computing environment.
7. A device comprising:
a motion sensor;
an image sensor;
at least one processor; and
a controller distinct from the at least one processor and configured to power on the at least one processor in response to reception of a signal from the motion sensor, wherein the at least one processor is operatively coupled to the controller and the image sensor and configured to
after receiving the signal from the motion sensor, boot a real-time operating system,
analyze one or more images from the image sensor to identify an image of a person,
send a trigger to a base station in response to identification of the image of the person,
after booting the real-time operating system, cause an audible alarm to sound, and
boot a multitasking operating system of the device after sending the trigger to the base station and after causing the audible alarm to sound.
14. The device of claim 7, wherein the motion sensor includes a passive infrared sensor.
7. …an image sensor; …analyze one or more images from the image sensor to identify an image of a person…
Claims 30 and 40 are rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claims1 and 7 of U.S. Patent No. 12260646 in view of Laurans et al. (US 20210360446 A1).
Concerning claim 30, the Patent discloses the method of claim 29. Not explicitly disclosed is the method, further comprising powering off the at least one processor after the image is sent to the remote computing system.
Laurans et al. (hereinafter Laurans), in the same field of endeavor, discloses powering off components when they are not needed (¶0044: components can be deactivated or not powered when they are not needed). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to add the features of Laurans to the Patent in order conserve power battery power.
Concerning claim 40, the Patent discloses the system of claim 36. The Patent further discloses the system, wherein :the at least one processor is further configured to, while under control of the another operating system, send at least one of the one or more images to a remote computing system via a network interface (claim 8). Not explicitly disclosed is the system, wherein the controller is further configured to power off the at least one processor after the at least one of the one or more images is sent to the remote computer system..
Laurans , in the same field of endeavor, discloses powering off components when they are not needed (¶0044: components can be deactivated or not powered when they are not needed). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to add the features of Laurans to the Patent in order conserve power battery power.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments, see pages 6-7 of the remarks, filed 06/24/2026, with respect to double patenting rejections of claims 31-32 and 35 have been fully considered and are persuasive. Considering the amendments to these claims, the double patenting rejections have been withdrawn.
Applicant’s arguments, see pages 6-7 of the remarks, filed 06/24/2026, with respect to double patenting rejections of claims 21-24, 27-30, 36-37 and 40 have been fully considered, but they are not persuasive. The double patenting rejections of these claims is maintained.
Applicant’s arguments, see pages 7-12 of the remarks, filed 06/24/2026, with respect to the rejections of claims 21-30, 31-35, and 36-40 under 35 U.S.C. §103 have been fully considered and are persuasive. The rejections have been withdrawn.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 31-32 and 35 are allowed.
Conclusion
THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a).
A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of the advisory action. In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the mailing date of this final action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JAMES M ANDERSON II whose telephone number is (571)270-1444. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday 10AM-6PM.
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, BRIAN PENDLETON can be reached at 571-272-7527. 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.
/James M Anderson II/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2425
Prosecution Insights