DETAILED ACTION
This office action is in response to Applicant’s communication of 8/1/2025. Claims 1-20 are pending and have been examined. The rejections and objection are stated below.
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 .
Drawings
FIGs 7C and 7D are objected to:
Drawings lack lines, numbers and letters that are durable, clean, black, sufficiently dense and dark and uniformly thick and well-defined and therefore fail to comply with 37 CFR 1.84l.
Drawings have excessive shading and reduce legibility and therefore fail to comply with 37 CFR 1.84m.
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.
35 USC § 112(f) Notification
Claims 17 and 19 recite the limitations “means for regulating”, “means for receiving”, “means for initiating”, “means for determining”, “means for,….., determining”, “means for,….., automatically forwarding”, “means for determining”, “means for forwarding”, “means for,….., storing”, “means for creating”, “means for storing”, “means for,….., automatically forwarding”, in claim 17 and “means for aggregating” and “means for storing” in claim 19 which have been interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), sixth paragraph, because it uses a non-structural term “means for” coupled with the functional language without reciting sufficient structure to achieve the function. Furthermore, the non-structural term is not preceded by a structural modifier.
Since these claim limitations invoke 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), sixth paragraph, claims 23 and 25 have been interpreted to cover the corresponding structure described in the specification that achieves the claimed function, and equivalents thereof.
A review of the specification appears to show no definitive structure for the 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), sixth paragraph limitation “means for”. If applicant wishes to provide further explanation, applicant must identify the corresponding structure with reference to the specification by page and line number, and to the drawing, if any, by reference characters in response to this Office action.
If applicant does not wish to have the claim limitation treated under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), sixth paragraph, applicant may amend the claim so that it will clearly not invoke 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), sixth paragraph, or present a sufficient showing that the claim recites sufficient structure, material, or acts for performing the claimed function to preclude application of 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), sixth paragraph.
For more information, see MPEP § 2173 et seq. and Supplementary Examination Guidelines for Determining Compliance with 35 U.S.C. § 112 and for Treatment of Related Issues in Patent Applications, 76 FR 7162, 7167 (Feb. 9, 2011). (FP 7.34.21)
Double Patenting
The non-statutory 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 non-statutory double patenting rejection is appropriate where the claims at issue 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); and 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 a non-statutory double patenting ground provided the reference application or patent either is shown to be commonly owned with this application, or claims an invention made as a result of activities undertaken within the scope of a joint research agreement. A terminal disclaimer must be signed in compliance with 37 CFR 1.321 (b).
The USPTO internet Web site contains terminal disclaimer forms which may be used. Please visit http://www.uspto.gov/forms/. The filing date of the application will determine what form 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 http://www.uspto.gov/patents/process/file/efs/guidance/eTD-info-I.jsp.
Claim Rejections - Double Patenting (Obviousness-type)
Claims 1-26 of the instant application are rejected on the grounds of non-statutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claims 1-16 of US Patent No 11,544,785 (‘785 hereinafter). Although the claims at issue are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other because the claims of the ‘785 Patent recite all the limitations of claims 1-20 of the instant application.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claim 1-20 are allowable over any combination of prior art under 35 U.S.C. 102/103.
The closest combination of prior art is Czupek et al (US 2008/0243576), Triplett (US 7,454,382) and Warsaw et al. (US 2010/0138334).
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure are listed on the enclosed PTO-892.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to CHRISTOPHER J BRIDGES whose telephone number is (571)270-5451. The examiner can normally be reached 7:00am-3:30pm M-F EDT.
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, Mike Anderson can be reached at 571-270-0508. 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.
/CHRISTOPHER BRIDGES/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3693
Prosecution Insights