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 .
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 1-20 rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claims 1-20 of U.S. Patent No. 12372617. Although the claims at issue are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
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.
Claim(s) 1-20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Lingard et al., US Pg. Pub. No. (2021/0123745) referred to hereinafter as Lingard.
As per claim 1, Lingard teaches a portable electronic device (see at least para 36, 37), comprising: a sensor configured to: detect a first location of the portable electronic device within an environment at a first time (see at least abstract, background, para 35-43); and detect a second location of the portable electronic device within the environment at a second time (see at least abstract, background, para 43); and a processor (see para 39, 40) configured to: generate a path based on the first location and the second location, the path associated with movement of the portable electronic device within the environment (see at least abstract, background, para 43-44); and detect an attribute of the environment based at least partially on the path (see at least abstract, background, para 47-48).
As per claim 2, Lingard teaches a portable electronic device of claim 1, wherein: the portable electronic device comprises a smart phone or a smart watch; and the attribute comprises at least one of a boundary of the environment or an object within the environment (see at least abstract, background, para 36-37, 39-40, 43-44, 35-43, 47-48).
As per claim 3, Lingard teaches a portable electronic device of claim 1, wherein the portable electronic device comprises a first electronic device; the portable electronic device further comprising an antenna configured to receive location data from a second electronic device, the path generated by the processor is at least partially based on the location data received from the second electronic device (see at least abstract, background, para 36-37, 39-40, 43-44, 35-43, 47-48).
As per claim 4, Lingard teaches a portable electronic device of claim 3, wherein the portable electronic device comprises a first portable electronic device and the second electronic device comprises a second portable electronic device disposed within the environment (see at least abstract, background, para 36-37, 39-40, 43-44, 35-43, 47-48).
As per claim 5, Lingard teaches a portable electronic device of claim 3, wherein the second electronic device comprises a stationary electronic device disposed within the environment (see at least abstract, background, para 36-37, 39-40, 43-44, 35-43, 47-48).
As per claim 6, Lingard teaches a portable electronic device of claim 1, wherein the processor is configured to generate an output based on the attribute when an input is received from a user of the portable electronic device (see at least abstract, background, para 36-37, 39-40, 43-44, 35-43, 47-48).
As per claim 7, Lingard teaches a portable electronic device of claim 1, wherein the portable electronic device comprises a smart phone, a smart watch, or a tablet computing device (see at least abstract, background, para 36-37, 39-40, 43-44, 35-43, 47-48).
As per claims 8-20, the limitations of claims 8-20 are similar to the limitations of claims 1-7, therefore they are rejected based on the same rationale.
Conclusion
Please refer to form 892 for cited references.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to MUSSA A SHAAWAT whose telephone number is (313)446-6592. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 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, Erin Piateski can be reached on 571-270-7429. 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.
/MUSSA A SHAAWAT/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3669
Prosecution Insights