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 are rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claims 1-20 of U.S. Patent No. 12,398,861. Although the claims at issue are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other because they are anticipated thereby see table below:
Application claims
Patented claims
Remarks
1
1
All limitations included.
2
2
All limitations included.
3
4
Identical
4
3
All limitations included.
5
5
All limitations included.
6
6
All limitations included.
7
7
Identical
8
8
Identical
9
9
All limitations included.
10
10
Identical
11
11
All limitations included.
12
12
All limitations included.
13
13
Identical
14
14
Identical
15
15
Identical
16
16
Identical
17
17
All limitations included; "a target surface" anticipated as "paper"
18
18 and 19
All limitations included.
19
17
All limitations included.
20
20
All limitations included; "a plurality of lighted paths are cast that are distinct from non-lighted paths" anticipated as "a plurality of discrete lighted paths and non-lighted paths are emitted".
Allowable Subject Matter
The following is an examiner’s statement of reasons for allowance:
Claim 1 recites a gifting kit including, in combination, (B) a plurality of ultraviolet electromagnetic radiation light- emitting diodes (UV LEDs) disposed within the body; (C) an electrical circuit coupled to the UV LEDs that is adapted to control at least one presentation attribute of the UV LEDs; and (3) at least one sheet of wrapping paper comprising a plurality of light- reactive print components that react with the UV LEDs such that one or more visual aspects of the print components varies in response to an intensity level of the UV LEDs. These features are not disclosed or suggested by the prior art of record.
Claim 17 recites a light-reactive gifting system including, in combination, (1) an illumination device adapted to emit UV light that includes (B) a plurality of ultraviolet electromagnetic radiation light-emitting diodes (UV LEDs) situated to disperse UV light around least a portion of a perimeter of the illumination device; (D) an electrical circuit adapted to control one or more operational functions of the illumination device; thereby enabling the UV light to be cast toward the target surface and causing a first visual appearance of the target surface and a second visual appearance of the target surface based on activating or deactivating the UV LEDs. These features are not disclosed or suggested by the prior art of record.
A closer prior art, Shlonsky et al. US 2016/0207673 A1 discloses a gifting kit [a gift box 100] comprising:(1) an illumination device [a power source 26 and a light, paragraph 0012] comprising: (A) a body [box 100] adapted to be affixed to a planar surface (figures 1-3). However, Shlonsky et al. US 2016/0207673 A1 does not disclose the plurality of ultraviolet electromagnetic radiation light- emitting diodes (UV LEDs) disposed within the body; and the at least one sheet of wrapping paper comprising a plurality of light- reactive print components that react with the UV LEDs as claimed; or thereby enabling the UV light to be cast toward the target surface and causing a first visual appearance of the target surface and a second visual appearance of the target surface based on activating or deactivating the UV LEDs.
Regarding claim 20, a closer prior art of record, Root, Jr. discloses a gift bow [bow 1002, figure 10], comprising a plurality of ribbon arms wherein each ribbon arm includes a plurality of folded-over portions [bow loops 1004] and wherein said plurality of ribbon arms are adapted to surround a light source [LED 102]. However, Root (U.S. 6,174,072) fails to disclose "wherein each of said plurality of folded-over portions of each ribbon arm are aligned with each other such that when the light source is activated, a plurality of lighted paths are cast that are distinct from non-lighted paths."
Any comments considered necessary by applicant must be submitted no later than the payment of the issue fee and, to avoid processing delays, should preferably accompany the issue fee. Such submissions should be clearly labeled “Comments on Statement of Reasons for Allowance.”
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Rudoy U.S. 6,568,828 B2 discloses a packaging for gift wrapping including a material having a plurality of light-emitting diodes positioned within the material.
Coffman U.S. 4,895,741 discloses a decorative device simulating a complex decorative bow know in ribbon; and an electric lamp 70 in the center of a bow.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to BAO Q TRUONG whose telephone number is (571)272-2383. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 7 am - 3 pm.
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, ABDULMAJEED AZIZ can be reached at 571 272 5046. 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.
BAO Q. TRUONG
Primary Examiner
Art Unit 2875
/BAO Q TRUONG/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2875