`
`UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE
`
`UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
`United States Patent and Trademark Office
`Address: COMIVHSSIONER FOR PATENTS
`PO. Box 1450
`Alexandria1 Virginia 22313-1450
`wwwusptogov
`
`
`
`
`
`15/644,524
`
`07/07/2017
`
`Clayton K. Redmon
`
`REDM—POOOlUS
`
`2303
`
`Grable Martin Fulton PLLC
`2709 Dublin Road
`Plano, TX 75094
`
`NGUYEN, PHUNG HOANG JOSEPH
`
`ART UNIT
`
`2656
`
`PAPER NUIVIBER
`
`NOTIFICATION DATE
`
`DELIVERY MODE
`
`10/01/2018
`
`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):
`
`docketing @ gchub.com
`
`PTOL—90A (Rev. 04/07)
`
`
`
`Advisory Action
`Before the Filing of an Appeal Brief
`
`Application No.
`15/644,524
`Examiner
`Phung-Hoang J. Nguyen
`
`Applicant(s)
`REDMON ET AL.
`Art Unit
`AIA (First Inventor to File) Status
`2656
`Yes
`
`--The MAILING DA TE of this communication appears on the cover sheet with the correspondence address --
`THE REPLY FILED 05 September 2018 FAILS TO PLACE THIS APPLICATION IN CONDITION FOR ALLOWANCE.
`NO NOTICE OF APPEAL FILED
`
`1. X The reply was filed after a final rejection. No Notice of Appeal has been filed. To avoid abandonment of this application, applicant must timely file
`one of the following replies: (1) an amendment, affidavit, or other evidence, which places the application in condition for allowance;
`(2) a Notice of Appeal (with appeal fee) in compliance with 37 CFR 41.31; or (3) a Request for Continued Examination (RCE) in compliance with
`37 CFR 1.114 if this is a utility or plant application. Note that RCEs are not permitted in design applications. The reply must be filed within one of
`the following time periods:
`IX The period for reply expires gmonths from the mailing date of the final rejection.
`a)
`b) I] The period for reply expires on: (1) the mailing date of this Advisory Action; or (2) the date set forth in the final rejection, whichever is later.
`In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the mailing date of the final rejection.
`0) I] A prior Advisory Action was mailed more than 3 months after the mailing date of the final rejection in response to a first after-final reply filed
`within 2 months of the mailing date of the final rejection. The current period for reply expires
`months from the mailing date of
`the prior Advisory Action or SIX MONTHS from the mailing date of the final rejection, whichever is earlier.
`Examiner Note: If box 1
`is checked, check either box (
`), (b) or (c). ONLY CHECK BOX (b) WHEN THIS ADVISORY ACTION IS THE
`FIRST RESPONSE TO APPLICANT'S FIRST AFTER-FINAL REPLY WHICH WAS FILED WITHIN TWO MONTHS OF THE FINAL
`REJECTION. ONLY CHECK BOX (c) IN THE LIMITED SITUATION SET FORTH UNDER BOX (c). See MPEP 706.07(f).
`Extensions of time may be obtained under 37 CFR 1.136(a). The date on which the petition under 37 CFR 1.136(a) and the appropriate
`extension fee have been filed is the date for purposes of determining the period of extension and the corresponding amount of the fee. The
`appropriate extension fee under 37 CFR 1.17(a) is calculated from: (1) the expiration date of the shortened statutory period for reply originally
`set in the final Office action; or (2) as set forth in (b) or (0) above, if checked. Any reply received by the Office later than three months after the
`mailing date of the final rejection, even if timely filed, may reduce any earned patent term adjustment. See 37 CFR 1.704(b).
`NOTICE OF APPEAL
`
`. A brief in compliance with 37 CFR 41.37 must be filed within two months of the date of filing the
`2. I] The Notice of Appeal was filed on
`Notice of Appeal (37 CFR 41 .37(a)), or any extension thereof (37 CFR 41 .37(e)), to avoid dismissal of the appeal. Since a Notice of
`Appeal has been filed, any reply must be filed within the time period set forth in 37 CFR 41 .37( ).
`AMENDMENTS
`
`3. IX The proposed amendments filed after a final rejection, but prior to the date of filing a brief, will n_ot be entered because
`a)
`[XI They raise new issues that would require further consideration and/or search (see NOTE below);
`b) I] They raise the issue of new matter (see NOTE below);
`0) I] They are not deemed to place the application in better form for appeal by materially reducing or simplifying the issues for
`appeal; and/or
`d) D They present additional claims without canceling a corresponding number of finally rejected claims.
`NOTE: see below. (See 37 CFR 1.116 and 41 .33( )).
`4. I] The amendments are not in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121. See attached Notice of Non-Compliant Amendment (PTOL-324).
`5. I] Applicant’s reply has overcome the following rejection(s):
`6. I] Newly proposed or amended claim(s)
`would be allowable if submitted in a separate, timely filed amendment canceling the non-
`allowable claim( ).
`7. D For purposes of appeal, the proposed amendment(s): (a) I] will not be entered, or (b) I] will be entered, and an explanation of how the
`new or amended claims would be rejected is provided below or appended.
`AFFIDAVIT OR OTHER EVIDENCE
`
`8. I] A declaration(s)/affidavit(s) under 37 CFR 1.130(b) was/were filed on
`9. [I The affidavit or other evidence filed after final action, but before or on the date of filing a Notice of Appeal will n_ot be entered because
`applicant failed to provide a showing of good and sufficient reasons why the affidavit or other evidence is necessary and was not earlier
`presented. See 37 CFR 1.116( ).
`10. I] The affidavit or other evidence filed after the date of filing the Notice of Appeal, but prior to the date of filing a brief, will n_ot be entered
`because the affidavit or other evidence failed to overcome a_H rejections under appeal and/or appellant fails to provide a showing of good
`and sufficient reasons why it is necessary and was not earlier presented. See 37 CFR 41 .33(d)(1).
`1 1. I] The affidavit or other evidence is entered. An explanation of the status of the claims after entry is below or attached.
`REQUEST FOR RECONSIDERATION/OTHER
`
`12. I] The request for reconsideration has been considered but does NOT place the application in condition for allowance because:
`
`
`
`13. I] Note the attached Information Disclosure Sfafemenf(s). (PTO/SB/08) Paper No( ).
`14. I] Other:
`.
`STATUS OF CLAIMS
`
`15. The status of the claim(s) is (or will be) as follows:
`Claim(s) allowed:
`Claim(s) objected to:
`Claim(s) rejected: 1-8.
`Claim(s) withdrawn from consideration:
`
`US. Patent and Trademark Office
`PTOL-303 (Rev. 08-2013)
`
`/Phung-Hoang J Nguyen/
`Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2656
`
`Advisory Action Before the Filing of an Appeal Brief
`
`Part of Paper No. 20180926
`
`
`
`Continuation Sheet (PTOL-303)
`
`Application No.
`
`The amendment is not persuasive and has not overcome the current prior arts...The amend is ratherto clarify the 112 rejection but it does
`not change the substance of the rejection.
`
`Please note first that Hillstrom‘s system identifies each lawyer‘s background and qualitfication on specific type of law of specific jurisdiction
`(The legal background should include in what states the attorney is licensed, and the type of law that they specialize in, [0098]) where it
`selects particularly qualified lawyers to pursue, prosecute, defend and manage legal claims on behalf of clients, [0011]; where these
`particular qualified lawyers can accommodate/work on issues associated with different states or national laws to server users in disparate
`geographical locations, [0034] and this system provides real-time service, all the time, worldwide, [0024] where system will perform
`“recording and transmission of live video and audio data of proceeding, recording and transmission of live video and audio data of
`proceedings, including depositions, court hearings, trials, conferences and the like to Managing Lawyers and Clients, [0067]”
`
`Applicant argues that Hillstrom does not select lawyer based on real-time Iocation.... Examier respectfully disagrees. Please see the
`reason above... and furthermore, the primary art, Moore teaches a GPS device will automatically identifies the vehicle's location, [0005] or
`device 10 automatically transmits data via the link including an identification of vehicle 12 and the subscriber, the geographic location of
`vehicle 12 based on GPS data, and a signal indicating the nature of the incident, [0020].
`
`Applicant concluded that the Office is improper and reached the conclusion based on the knowledge gleaned from the applicant‘s
`disclosure as applicant discussed per MPEM 2142...(Page. 11)
`
`In the same manner, examinerwishes to also provide:
`
`1] 7.37.03 Unpersuasive Argument: Hindsight Reasoning In response to applicant’s argument that the examiner’s conclusion of
`obviousness is based upon improper hindsight reasoning, it must be recognized that any judgment on obviousness is in a sense
`necessarily a reconstruction based upon hindsight reasoning. But so long as it takes into account only knowledge which was within the
`level of ordinary skill at the time the claimed invention was made, and does not include knowledge gleaned only from the applicant’s
`disclosure, such a reconstruction is proper. See In re McLaughlin, 443 F.2d 1392, 170 USPQ 209 (CCPA 1971).
`
`The evidenve is unequivocally provided by MOORE and HILLSTROM above. Fact does not glean from the applicant‘s disclosure but from
`the combination of Moore and Hillstorm. Thus examiner respectfully sustains the rejection.
`
`