Applicant : Beyer Jr.et al.
`Serial No. : 14/529,978
`Filed
`October 31, 2014
`
`Attorney Docket No.: MOC-001
`
`can view an "activity map" that shows locations of other active users within a geographic area
`
`([0042-0043]; FIG. 5). However, Steenstra does not teach or suggest that the user locations on
`
`the activity map are transmitted based on passage of a predetermined time interval, a
`
`displacement of a device by a predetermined distance, or both. Thus, Steenstra does not teach or
`
`suggest "based on passage of a predetermined time interval, a displacement of at least one of the
`
`devices by a predetermined distance, or both, ... transmitting the location of the at least one
`
`device to one or more other devices" as recited in claim 1.
`
`Accordingly, Crowley and Steenstra, whether alone or in combination, do not teach or
`
`suggest at least the above-emphasized limitations of claim 1. Claim 1 therefore patentably
`
`distinguishes over Crowley and Steenstra. Claims 2-14 and 59 depend from claim 1 and
`
`patentably distinguish over Crowley and Steenstra for at least the same reasons. Withdrawal of
`
`the rejections of claims 1-14 and 59 under 35 U.S.C. § 103 is respectfully requested.
`
`B. Independent claim 15 and the claims depending therefrom
`
`As amended, claim 15 recites a computer-implemented method comprising:
`
`sending a respective first map to each one of a plurality of devices wherein the
`device is configured to display the first map;
`
`based on passage of a predetermined time interval, a displacement of at least
`one of the devices by a predetermined distance, or both, receiving from the at least one
`device information comprising a location of the at least one device and sending the
`location of the at least one device to one or more other devices, wherein each of the
`other devices is configured to display a respective symbol representing the location on
`the first map;
`
`receiving from a first device information indicating user selection of one or more
`of the displayed symbols corresponding to second devices and, based thereon:
`
`obtaining a respective contact information for each of the second devices; and
`
`facilitating a respective communication between the first device and each of the
`second devices using the contact information of the second device. (Emphasis added.)
`
`For reasons that should be apparent from the discussion above, Crowley and Steenstra do
`
`not teach or suggest at least "based on passage of a predetermined time interval, a displacement
`
`of at least one of the devices by a predetermined distance, or both, ... sending the location of the
`
`at least one device to one or more other devices," as recited in claim 15. Claim 15 therefore
`
`patentably distinguishes over Crowley and Steenstra. Claims 16-25 and 60 depend from claim 15
`
`14
`
`

`

`Applicant : Beyer Jr.et al.
`Serial No. : 14/529,978
`Filed
`October 31, 2014
`
`Attorney Docket No.: MOC-001
`
`and patentably distinguish over Crowley and Steenstra for at least the same reasons. Withdrawal
`
`of the rejections of claims 15-25 and 60 under 35 U.S.C. § 103 is respectfully requested.
`
`C. Independent claim 26 and the claims depending therefrom
`
`As amended, independent claim 26 recites a system comprising one or more computers
`
`programmed to perform operations comprising:
`
`sending a respective first map to each one of a plurality of devices wherein the
`device is configured to display the first map;
`
`based on passage of a predetermined time interval, a displacement of at least
`one of the devices by a predetermined distance, or both, receiving from the at least one
`device information comprising a location of the at least one device and sending the
`location of the at least one device to one or more other devices, wherein each of the
`other devices is configured to display a respective symbol representing the location on
`the first map;
`
`receiving from a first device information indicating user selection of one or more
`of the displayed symbols corresponding to second devices and, based thereon:
`
`obtaining a respective contact information for each of the second devices; and
`
`facilitating a respective communication between the first device and each of the
`second devices using the contact information of the second device. (Emphasis added.)
`
`For reasons that should be apparent from the discussion above, Crowley and Steenstra do
`
`not teach or suggest at least "based on passage of a predetermined time interval, a displacement
`
`of at least one of the devices by a predetermined distance, or both, ... sending the location of the
`
`at least one device to one or more other devices," as recited in claim 26. Claim 26 therefore
`
`patentably distinguishes over Crowley and Steenstra. Claims 27-36 and 61 depend from claim 26
`
`and patentably distinguish over Crowley and Steenstra for at least the same reasons. Withdrawal
`
`of the rejections of claims 26-36 and 61 under 35 U.S.C. § 103 is respectfully requested.
`
`II.
`
`Claims 37-58
`
`Claims 37-58 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as purportedly being obvious over
`
`Steenstra in view of US Pub. No. 2003/0093405 ("Mayer"). Applicants respectfully traverse the
`
`rejections.
`
`15
`
`

`

`Applicant : Beyer Jr.et al.
`Serial No. : 14/529,978
`Filed
`October 31, 2014
`
`Attorney Docket No.: MOC-001
`
`A. Independent claim 37 and the claims depending therefrom
`
`Independent claim 37 recites a computer-implemented method comprising:
`
`receiving user selection of a group of one or more users on an interactive display
`of a first device wherein each user is associated with a respective second device;
`
`obtaining a respective location and contact information for of each of the second
`devices;
`
`presenting an interactive map on the display comprising one or more user(cid:173)
`selectable symbols wherein each symbol corresponds to one of the second devices and is
`positioned on the map at a location corresponding to the respective location of the second
`device;
`
`identifying user interaction with the display specifying an action and, based
`thereon, initiating a communication with the second devices. (Emphasis added.)
`
`Even assuming the cited references could have properly been combined, no combination
`
`of the cited references would teach or suggest at least "presenting an interactive map on the
`
`display comprising one or more user-selectable symbols," as recited in claim 37. According to
`
`the Office Action (p. 12), the above-emphasized portion of claim 37 is purportedly taught by
`
`Steenstra because FIG. 5 of Steenstra shows icons corresponding to users and their locations on
`
`an activity map. However, Steenstra does not teach or suggest that the activity map's icons are
`
`"user-selectable." Regarding the activity map, Steenstra states that "[a]ctivity maps provide a
`
`map of active Qsocial users within a geographical area" ([0042]), and that the "candidates"
`
`displayed on a user's activity map are those that match the user's profile ([0044]). Separately,
`
`Steenstra states that a user can "select from a list of matched profiles and locations" (emphasis
`
`added) to propose a date with the selected users ([0037]). But Steenstra does not teach or suggest
`
`that a user can select a candidate by selecting an icon that corresponds to the candidate and is
`
`displayed on the activity map. In fact, Steenstra does not teach or suggest that a user can select
`
`any of the candidate icons displayed on the activity map. Thus, Steenstra does not teach or
`
`suggest "presenting an interactive map on the display comprising one or more user-selectable
`
`symbols," as recited in claim 37.
`
`Mayer does not remedy the deficiencies of Steenstra at least with respect to the above(cid:173)
`
`emphasized limitation of claim 37.
`
`Accordingly, Steenstra and Mayer, whether alone or in combination, do not teach or
`
`suggest at least the above-emphasized limitations of claim 37. Claim 37 therefore patentably
`
`16
`
`

`

`Applicant : Beyer Jr.et al.
`Serial No. : 14/529,978
`Filed
`October 31, 2014
`
`Attorney Docket No.: MOC-001
`
`distinguishes over Steenstra and Mayer. Claims 38-47 and 62 depend from claim 37 and
`
`patentably distinguish over Steenstra and Crowley for at least the same reasons. Withdrawal of
`
`the rejections of claims 37-47 and 62 under 35 U.S.C. § 103 is respectfully requested.
`
`B. Independent claim 48 and the claims depending therefrom
`
`Independent claim 48 recites a system comprising one or more computers programmed to
`
`perform operations comprising:
`
`receiving user selection of a group of one or more users on an interactive display
`of a first device wherein each user is associated with a respective second device;
`
`obtaining a respective location and contact information for of each of the second
`devices;
`
`presenting an interactive map on the display comprising one or more user(cid:173)
`selectable symbols wherein each symbol corresponds to one of the second devices and is
`positioned on the map at a location corresponding to the respective location of the second
`device;
`
`identifying user interaction with the display specifying an action and, based
`thereon, initiating a communication with the second devices. (Emphasis added.)
`
`For reasons that should be apparent from the discussion above, Steenstra and Mayer do
`
`not teach or suggest at least "presenting an interactive map on the display comprising one or
`
`more user-selectable symbols," as recited in claim 48. Claim 48 therefore patentably
`
`distinguishes over Steenstra and Mayer. Claims 49-58 and 63 depend from claim 48 and
`
`patentably distinguish over Steenstra and Mayer for at least the same reasons. Withdrawal of the
`
`rejections of claims 48-58 and 63 under 35 U.S.C. § 103 is respectfully requested.
`
`17
`
`

`

`Applicant : Beyer Jr.et al.
`Serial No. : 14/529,978
`Filed
`October 31, 2014
`
`Attorney Docket No.: MOC-001
`
`CONCLUSION
`
`In view of the above amendments, Applicants respectfully submit that the pending
`
`application is in condition for allowance. If, in the Examiner's opinion, further communication
`
`would expedite the favorable prosecution of the present application, the undersigned would
`
`welcome the opportunity to discuss any outstanding issues and to work with the Examiner
`
`toward placing the application in condition for allowance.
`
`Respectfully submitted,
`
`Daniel J. Bums
`Reg. No. 50,222
`
`Date:
`
`2015
`
`Customer Number 51414
`GOODWIN PROCTER LLP
`Telephone: (650) 752-3137
`Facsimile: (650) 853-1038
`
`18
`
`

`

`PTO/SB/06 (09-11)
`Approved for use through 1/31/2014. OMB 0651-0032
`U.S. Patent and Trademark Office; U.S. DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
`Under the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 no persons are required to respond to a collection of information unless it displays a valid OMB control number
`PATENT APPLICATION FEE DETERMINATION RECORD
`Application or Docket Number
`Filing Date
`14/529,978
`Substitute for Form PT0-875
`
`10/31/2014 D To be Mailed
`
`ENTITY: D LARGE 1:8] SMALL D MICRO
`
`APPLICATION AS FILED- PART I
`
`(Column 1)
`
`(Column 2)
`
`NUMBER FILED
`
`NUMBER EXTRA
`
`RATE($)
`
`FEE($)
`
`N/A
`
`N/A
`
`N/A
`
`N/A
`
`N/A
`
`N/A
`
`minus 20 =
`
`minus 3 =
`
`.
`.
`
`N/A
`
`N/A
`
`N/A
`
`X $
`
`X $
`
`=
`
`=
`
`FOR
`D BASIC FEE
`(37 CFR 1 16(a), (b), or (c))
`D SEARCH FEE
`(37 CFR 1 16(k), (i), or (m))
`D EXAMINATION FEE
`(37 CFR 1.16(o), (p), or (q))
`TOTAL CLAIMS
`(37 CFR 1.16(i))
`INDEPENDENT CLAIMS
`(37 CFR 1.16(h))
`
`0APPLICATION SIZE FEE
`(37 CFR 1.16(s))
`
`If the specification and drawings exceed 1 00 sheets
`of paper, the application size fee due is $310 ($155
`for small entity) for each additional 50 sheets or
`fraction thereof. See 35 U.S.C. 41 (a)(1 )(G) and 37
`CFR 1.16(s).
`
`D MULTIPLE DEPENDENT CLAIM PRESENT (37 CFR 1.16(j))
`
`• If the difference in column 1 is less than zero, enter "0" in column 2.
`
`TOTAL
`
`APPLICATION AS AMENDED- PART II
`
`(Column 1)
`
`(Column 2)
`
`(Column 3)
`
`05/28/2015
`
`<(
`
`CLAIMS
`REMAINING
`f--
`AFTER
`z
`AMENDMENT
`w
`• 63
`Total (37 CFR
`~ 1.161111
`0
`z
`• 5
`Independent
`w
`(37 CFR 1.16(hll
`~ D Application Size Fee (37 CFR 1.16(s))
`D FIRST PRESENTATION OF MULTIPLE DEPENDENT CLAIM (37 CFR 1.16(j))
`
`HIGHEST
`NUMBER
`PREVIOUSLY
`PAID FOR
`•• 58
`···5
`
`Minus
`
`Minus
`
`PRESENT EXTRA
`
`= 5
`= 0
`
`(Column 1)
`
`(Column 2)
`
`(Column 3)
`
`RATE($)
`
`ADDITIONAL FEE ($)
`
`X $40 =
`X $210 =
`
`TOTAL ADD'L FEE
`
`200
`0
`
`200
`
`PRESENT EXTRA
`
`RATE($)
`
`ADDITIONAL FEE ($)
`
`CLAIMS
`REMAINING
`AFTER
`AMENDMENT
`
`HIGHEST
`NUMBER
`PREVIOUSLY
`PAID FOR
`
`..
`...
`
`=
`
`=
`
`Minus
`
`Minus
`
`.
`f--
`z
`Total (37 CFR
`w
`.
`1.161111
`~ Independent
`0
`(37 CFR 1.16(hll
`z D Application Size Fee (37 CFR 1.16(s))
`w
`~ D FIRST PRESENTATION OF MULTIPLE DEPENDENT CLAIM (37 CFR 1.16(j))
`
`<(
`
`* If the entry in column 1 is less than the entry in column 2, write "0" in column 3.
`•• If the "Highest Number Previously Paid For" IN THIS SPACE is less than 20, enter "20".
`
`••• If the "Highest Number Previously Paid For" IN THIS SPACE is less than 3, enter "3".
`
`X $
`X $
`
`=
`
`=
`
`TOTAL ADD'L FEE
`
`LIE
`/STELLA LITTLE/
`
`The "Highest Number Previously Paid For" (Total or Independent) is the highest number found in the appropriate box in column 1.
`
`Th1s collection of 1nformat1on 1s requ1red by 37 CFR 1.16. The 1nformat1on 1s requ1red to obta1n or reta1n a benefit by the publ1c wh1ch 1s to f1le (and by the USPTO to
`process) an application. Confidentiality is governed by 35 U.S.C. 122 and 37 CFR 1.14. This collection is estimated to take 12 minutes to complete, including gathering,
`preparing, and submitting the completed application form to the USPTO. Time will vary depending upon the individual case. Any comments on the amount of time you
`require to complete this form and/or suggestions for reducing this burden, should be sent to the Chief Information Officer, U.S. Patent and Trademark Office, U.S.
`Department of Commerce, P.O. Box 1450, Alexandria, VA 22313-1450. DO NOT SEND FEES OR COMPLETED FORMS TO THIS
`ADDRESS. SEND TO: Commissioner for Patents, P.O. Box 1450, Alexandria, VA 22313-1450.
`If you need assistance in completing the form, call 1-800-PT0-9199 and select option 2.
`
`

`

`Document code: WFEE
`
`United States Patent and Trademark Office
`Sales Receipt for Accounting Date: 06/03/2015
`
`SUTTLE
`
`504634 14529978
`SALE #00000001 Mailroom Dt: 05/28/2015
`01
`FC : 2202
`200.00 DA
`
`

`

`UNITED STATES pATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE
`
`UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
`United States Patent and Trademark Office
`Address: COMMISSIONER FOR PATENTS
`P.O. Box 1450
`Alexandria, Virginia 22313-1450
`www .uspto.gov
`
`APPLICATION NO.
`
`FILING DATE
`
`FIRST NAMED INVENTOR
`
`ATTORNEY DOCKET NO.
`
`CONFIRMATION NO.
`
`14/529,978
`
`10/3112014
`
`Malcolm K. Beyer Jr.
`
`10963.3834
`
`1092
`
`22235
`7590
`04/08/2015
`Malin Haley DiMaggio & Bowen, P.A.
`1936 S ANDREWS A VENUE
`FORT LAUDERDALE, FL 33316
`
`EXAMINER
`
`OBAYANJU, OMONIYI
`
`ART UNIT
`
`PAPER NUMBER
`
`2646
`
`NOTIFICATION DATE
`
`DELIVERY MODE
`
`04/08/2015
`
`ELECTRONIC
`
`Please find below and/or attached an Office communication concerning this application or proceeding.
`
`The time period for reply, if any, is set in the attached communication.
`
`Notice of the Office communication was sent electronically on above-indicated "Notification Date" to the
`following e-mail address(es):
`info@ mhdpatents.com
`
`PTOL-90A (Rev. 04/07)
`
`

`

`Application No.
`14/529,978
`
`Applicant(s)
`BEYER ET AL.
`
`Office Action Summary
`
`AlA (First Inventor to File)
`Status
`No
`-- The MAILING DATE of this communication appears on the cover sheet with the correspondence address -(cid:173)
`Period for Reply
`
`Examiner
`OMONIYI OBAYANJU
`
`Art Unit
`2646
`
`A SHORTENED STATUTORY PERIOD FOR REPLY IS SET TO EXPIRE ;2 MONTHS FROM THE MAILING DATE OF
`THIS COMMUNICATION.
`Extensions of time may be available under the provisions of 37 CFR 1.136(a). In no event, however, may a reply be timely filed
`after SIX (6) MONTHS from the mailing date of this communication.
`If NO period for reply is specified above, the maximum statutory period will apply and will expire SIX (6) MONTHS from the mailing date of this communication.
`Failure to reply within the set or extended period for reply will, by statute, cause the application to become ABANDONED (35 U.S.C. § 133).
`Any reply received by the Office later than three months after the mailing date of this communication, even if timely filed, may reduce any
`earned patent term adjustment. See 37 CFR 1.704(b).
`
`Status
`1 )~ Responsive to communication(s) filed on 0312312015.
`0 A declaration(s)/affidavit(s) under 37 CFR 1.130(b) was/were filed on __ .
`2a)0 This action is FINAL.
`2b)~ This action is non-final.
`3)0 An election was made by the applicant in response to a restriction requirement set forth during the interview on
`__ ;the restriction requirement and election have been incorporated into this action.
`4)0 Since this application is in condition for allowance except for formal matters, prosecution as to the merits is
`closed in accordance with the practice under Ex parte Quayle, 1935 C.D. 11, 453 O.G. 213.
`
`Disposition of Claims*
`5)~ Claim(s) 1-58 is/are pending in the application.
`5a) Of the above claim(s) __ is/are withdrawn from consideration.
`6)0 Claim(s) __ is/are allowed.
`7)~ Claim(s) 1-58 is/are rejected.
`8)0 Claim(s) __ is/are objected to.
`9)0 Claim(s) __ are subject to restriction and/or election requirement.
`* If any claims have been determined allowable, you may be eligible to benefit from the Patent Prosecution Highway program at a
`participating intellectual property office for the corresponding application. For more information, please see
`http:ilvvww.uspto.gov!patents/init events/pph/index.jsp or send an inquiry to PPHfeedback(wuspto.oov.
`
`Application Papers
`1 0)0 The specification is objected to by the Examiner.
`11 )~The drawing(s) filed on 1013112014 is/are: a)~ accepted or b)O objected to by the Examiner.
`Applicant may not request that any objection to the drawing(s) be held in abeyance. See 37 CFR 1.85(a).
`Replacement drawing sheet(s) including the correction is required if the drawing(s) is objected to. See 37 CFR 1.121 (d).
`
`Priority under 35 U.S.C. § 119
`12)0 Acknowledgment is made of a claim for foreign priority under 35 U.S.C. § 119(a)-(d) or (f).
`Certified copies:
`a)O All b)O Some** c)O None of the:
`Certified copies of the priority documents have been received.
`1.0
`Certified copies of the priority documents have been received in Application No. __ .
`2.0
`Copies of the certified copies of the priority documents have been received in this National Stage
`3.0
`application from the International Bureau (PCT Rule 17.2(a)).
`** See the attached detailed Office action for a list of the certified copies not received.
`
`Attachment{s)
`1) ~ Notice of References Cited (PT0-892)
`
`2) ~ Information Disclosure Statement(s) (PTO/SB/08a and/or PTO/SB/08b)
`Paper No(s)/Mail Date See Continuation Sheet.
`U.S. Patent and Trademark Off1ce
`PTOL-326 (Rev. 11-13)
`
`Office Action Summary
`
`3) 0 Interview Summary (PT0-413)
`Paper No(s)/Mail Date. __ .
`4) 0 Other: __ .
`
`Part of Paper No./Mail Date 20150331
`
`

`

`Continuation Sheet (PTOL-326)
`
`Application No. 14/529,978
`
`Continuation of Attachment(s) 2). Information Disclosure Statement(s) (PTO/SB/08), Paper No(s)/Mail Date :03/23/2015,02/19/2015,
`10/31/2014.
`
`

`

`Application/Control Number: 14/529,978
`Art Unit: 2646
`
`Page 2
`
`The present application is being examined under the pre-AlA first to invent
`
`provisions.
`
`DETAILED ACTION
`
`Double Patenting
`
`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); and 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.
`
`Claims 37-58 are provisionally rejected under 35 U.S.C. 101 as claiming
`
`the same invention as that of claims 1-28 of copending Application No.
`
`14633764. This is a provisional statutory double patenting rejection since the
`
`claims directed to the same invention have not in fact been patented.
`
`Take an example of comparing claim 37 of pending application and claim
`
`1 of copending Application No. 14633764:
`
`

`

`Application/Control Number: 14/529,978
`Art Unit: 2646
`
`Page 3
`
`Copending
`
`Pending
`
`Application 14633764
`
`Application 14529978
`
`1. A computer-
`
`37. A computer-
`
`implemented method
`
`implemented method comprising:
`
`comprising: receiving user
`
`receiving user selection of a
`
`selection of a group of one or
`
`group of one or more users on an
`
`more users on an interactive
`
`interactive display of a first device
`
`display of a first device wherein
`
`wherein each user is associated
`
`each user is associated with a
`
`with a respective second device;
`
`respective second device;
`
`obtaining a respective location
`
`obtaining a respective location
`
`and contact information for of
`
`and contact information for of
`
`each of the second devices;
`
`each of the second devices;
`
`presenting an interactive map on
`
`presenting an interactive map on
`
`the display comprising one or
`
`the display comprising one or
`
`more user-selectable symbols
`
`more user-selectable symbols
`
`wherein each symbol
`
`wherein each symbol
`
`corresponds to one of the second
`
`corresponds to one of the
`
`devices and is positioned on the
`
`second devices and is
`
`map at a location corresponding
`
`positioned on the map at a
`
`to the respective location of the
`
`location corresponding to the
`
`second device;
`
`

`

`Application/Control Number: 14/529,978
`Art Unit: 2646
`
`Page 4
`
`respective location of the
`
`identifying user interaction with
`
`second device; and
`
`the display specifying an action
`
`identifying user interaction with
`
`and, based thereon, initiating a
`
`the display specifying an action
`
`communication with the second
`
`and, based thereon, initiating a
`
`devices.
`
`communication with the second
`
`devices.
`
`Furthermore, 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 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
`
`

`

`Application/Control Number: 14/529,978
`Art Unit: 2646
`
`Page 5
`
`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
`
`nonstatutory 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-l.jsp.
`
`Claims 1-36 are rejected on the ground of nonstatutory obviousness-type
`
`double patenting as being unpatentable over claims 1-20 of copending
`
`Application 14633764. Although the conflicting claims are not identical, they are
`
`not patentably distinct from each other because all the claimed limitations recited
`
`in the present application are transparently found in the copending Application
`
`

`

`Application/Control Number: 14/529,978
`Art Unit: 2646
`
`Page 6
`
`14633764 with obvious wording variations. Take an example of comparing claim
`
`1 of pending application and claim 1 of the copending Application 14529978:
`
`Copending Application
`
`Pending Application
`
`14/633764
`
`14/529978
`
`1. A computer-implemented
`
`A computer-implemented
`
`method comprising: receiving user
`
`method comprising:
`
`selection of a group of one or more
`
`transmitting a map to each one of
`
`users on an interactive display of a
`
`a plurality of devices wherein the
`
`first device wherein each user is
`
`devices are
`
`associated with a respective second
`
`each configured to display the
`
`device;
`
`map;
`
`obtaining a respective location and
`
`receiving at various times from
`
`contact information for of each of
`
`one or more of the devices
`
`the second devices; presenting an
`
`information
`
`interactive map on the display
`
`comprising a respective location of
`
`comprising one or more user-
`
`the device and transmitting the
`
`selectable symbols wherein each
`
`location to one or
`
`symbol corresponds to one of
`
`more other devices;
`
`the second devices and is
`
`transmitting to each of the other
`
`positioned on the map at a
`
`devices information comprising a
`
`location corresponding to the
`
`symbol
`
`

`

`Application/Control Number: 14/529,978
`Art Unit: 2646
`
`Page 7
`
`respective location of the second
`
`corresponding to the location on
`
`device; and
`
`the map of each of the one or more
`
`identifying user interaction with the
`
`devices; and
`
`display specifying an action and,
`
`receiving from a one or more of the
`
`based thereon, initiating a
`
`devices information indicating user
`
`communication with the second
`
`selection
`
`devices.
`
`of at least one of the displayed
`
`symbols corresponding to one or
`
`more other devices.
`
`The claims of the instant application encompass the same subject matter
`
`except the instant of word variations as shown above wherein the instant
`
`application claims "transmitting a map to each one of a plurality of devices
`
`wherein the devices are
`
`each configured to display the map; receiving at various times from one or
`
`more of the devices information comprising a respective location of the
`
`device and transmitting the location to one or more other devices;
`
`transmitting to each of the other devices information comprising a symbol
`
`corresponding to the location on the map of each of the one or more
`
`devices" while the copending application claims "presenting an interactive
`
`

`

`Application/Control Number: 14/529,978
`Art Unit: 2646
`
`Page 8
`
`map on the display comprising one or more user-selectable symbols
`
`wherein each symbol corresponds to one of the second devices and is
`
`positioned on the map at a location corresponding to the respective
`
`location of the second device". Therefore, the instant application claim is
`
`anticipated by the claims of copending application 14/633764 because it is
`
`readily known by one of ordinary skill in the art as a routine skill to
`
`interchangeably use the terms as mentioned above in the communication
`
`network.
`
`Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
`
`The following is a quotation of pre-AlA 35 U.S.C. 1 03(a) which forms the basis
`
`for all obviousness rejections set forth in this Office action:
`
`(a) A patent may not be obtained though the invention is not identically disclosed or
`described as set forth in section 1 02 of this title, if the differences between the subject matter
`sought to be patented and the prior art are such that the subject matter as a whole would
`have been obvious at the time the invention was made to a person having ordinary skill in the
`art to which said subject matter pertains. Patentability shall not be negatived by the manner in
`which the invention was made.
`
`Claims 1-36 are rejected under pre-AlA 35 U.S.C. 1 03(a) as being unpatentable
`
`over Crowley et al. (US Patent No. 7593740) in view of Streenstra et al. (US Publication
`
`No. 20060047825).
`
`As to claim 1, Crowley teaches a computer-implemented method comprising:
`
`transmitting a map to each one of a plurality of devices wherein the devices are
`
`each configured to display the map (fig. 3, fig. 7, col. 9, lines 15-19, transmit map to
`
`

`

`Application/Control Number: 14/529,978
`Art Unit: 2646
`
`Page 9
`
`users); receiving at various times from one or more of the devices information
`
`comprising a respective location of the device and transmitting the location to one or
`
`more other devices (fig. 3, col. 7, lines 25-31, and lines 60-67, communicating location
`
`information); transmitting to each of the other devices information comprising a location
`
`on the map of each of the one or more devices (fig. 3, fig. 7, col. 9, lines 15-19, transmit
`
`map to users). However, Crowley fails to explicitly teach user symbol and receiving from
`
`a one or more of the devices information indicating user selection of at least one of the
`
`displayed symbols corresponding to one or more other devices.
`
`In an analogous field of endeavor, Streenstra teaches user symbol and
`
`receiving from a one or more of the devices information indicating user selection of at
`
`least one of the displayed symbols corresponding to one or more other devices
`
`(pp0038, fig. 4, display selection of the list of active Qsocial users, and pp0019, fig. 5,
`
`shows icon 502 or 504 of users and their locations on the activity map). Thus it would
`
`have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at time invention was made to
`
`combine the teachings of Crowley with the teachings Streenstra to achieve the goal of
`
`efficiently and reliably creating and maintaining location based service social network in
`
`a communication system (Streenstra, pp0006).
`
`As to claim 2, Crowley teaches further comprising receiving from one or more of
`
`the devices information comprising the respective contact information for the device (fig.
`
`3, col. 12, lines 34-49); and facilitating communication between the one or more devices
`
`using the received contact information (fig. 3, and col. 13, lines 25-45, send message to
`
`friends).
`
`

`

`Application/Control Number: 14/529,978
`Art Unit: 2646
`
`Page 10
`
`As to claims 3, 16, and 27, Crowley teaches wherein the communication is a
`
`phone call, a short message service message, a voice message, a text message, an
`
`electronic mail message, an image, or a video (col. 9, lines 12-16).
`
`As to claims 4, 19, and 30, Crowley teaches wherein particular contact
`
`information is a phone number or an Internet Protocol address (fig. 3, col. 12, lines 34-
`
`49).
`
`As to claims 5, 17, and 28, Crowley teaches wherein at the devices are part of a
`
`same group within a user-specified geographic area (fig. 3, friends near Luna lounge).
`
`As to claims 6, 18, and 29, Crowley teaches wherein the group is a friends or
`
`family group (fig. 3, friends near Luna lounge).
`
`As to claims 7, 20, and 31, Crowley teaches further comprising: performed by
`
`one of the devices (fig. 3): obtaining contact information associated with the user (fig. 3,
`
`col. 12, lines 34-49); and performing an action using the contact information wherein the
`
`action is initiating a phone call, transferring data, sending an electronic mail message,
`
`or opening a web page (fig. 3, and col. 13, lines 25-45, send message to friends, and
`
`col. 9, lines 12-16). However failed to explicitly teach receiving user selection of the
`
`symbol on the map.
`
`In an analogous field of endeavor, Streenstra teaches receiving user selection
`
`of the symbol on the map (pp0038, fig. 4, display selection of the list of active Qsocial
`
`users, and pp0019, fig. 5, shows icon 502 or 504 of users and their loca