DETAILED ACTION
The present application is being examined under the pre-AIA first to invent provisions.
In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status.
Amendment filed on 12/23/2025 have been acknowledged. Claims 1, 11 and 16 have been amended. Claim 6-7, 10, 21, 23-24 are cancelled. Claim 1, 11 and 16 are independent claim.
Priority
The application is a section 371 national stage application of International Application No. PCT/IB2013/054586 filed on June 4, 2013, which claims the benefit of U.S. Provisional Patent Application No.61/655,029, filed on June 4, 2012.
Remarks and Response
Applicant’s arguments filed in the amendments on 12/23/2025 have been fully considered but moot in view of new ground of rejection. The reasons set forth below.
On pages 8 of remarks filed on 12/23/2025, applicant argued that Loveland does not teach preference data include privacy/identity information pertaining to the collection and storing of data related to an individual by the lighting control.
Examiner respectfully disagrees. Claim recites “providing an interface, via the control system, to the individual wherein the individual can select one or more privacy settings pertaining to the data, including the privacy/identity information”. Loveland, ¶[0009], the applications may allow a user to specify preferred level of interactivity with controllable lighting networks. By selecting one of the presented options, the user may exercise control over the kinds of personal information transmitted to controllable lighting networks. Loveland, ¶[0011], the processor retrieves from the memory the user preference data associated with the user identifier, checks which user preference data the selected interactivity level authorizes for transmission to a controllable lighting network and generates a signal indicative of the user preference data authorized for transmission to the controllable lighting network by the selected interactivity level.
Loveland, ¶[0013], determining user location data associated with a user and transmitting a signal indicative of the user location data. Loveland, ¶[0015], the lighting control application comprises one or more user interfaces for modifying the user preference data and the lighting control application receives user specified data including modified user preference data.
Based on the above teaching from various sections of Loveland, it is clear that Loveland teaches providing an interface to the individual, the user can select their personal setting that is applicable for the data.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of the second paragraph 35 U.S.C. 112:
(b) CONCLUSION.—The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention.
Claim 1, 11 and 16 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, second paragraph, as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which applicant regards as the invention.
Claim 1, 11 and 16 recite “data is capable of being collected and stored by a control system, wherein the data includes the privacy/identity information, the method comprising…..”. The claim then further recites “configuring the control system for storing the data but removing privacy/identity information of the individual from the data”.
The claim language is incomprehensible. Initially the claim recites data that is stored by the control system includes privacy/identity information. Then claim recites to remove the privacy/identity information from the data. The claim is vague and indefinite.
Claim 1 , 11 and 16 recite “a method for protecting privacy/identity information of an individual”. Claim 1 further recites “removing privacy/identity information of the individual”. There is antecedent basis issue with the claim language.
Claim 11 recites “the data includes privacy/identity information of the individual”. Claim 11 further recites “privacy sensitive data/identity information of the individual”. The claim is vague and indefinite because it is not clear if sensitive data is same as privacy data and there is antecedent basis issue.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
The following is a quotation of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 103(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 102 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.
Claim 1, 3-5, 8-9, 11-16 and 22 are rejected under pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 103(a) as being unpatentable over Loveland (International Publication No. WO 2011/001320 A1) in view of Frank (US Patent Application Publication No. 2008/0155429 A1).
Regarding Claim 1, Loveland discloses a method for protecting the privacy of an individual in a space in which data is capable of being collected and stored by a control system, wherein the data includes information related to the individual, the method comprising (Loveland, ¶[0039], processor receives the signal and extracts the user identifier and selected interactivity level from the signal. ¶[0043], Fig-3, the lighting control application may be launched on personal device. ¶[0045], the processor checks which of the user preference data is authorized for transmission to lighting network by selected interactivity level):
providing an interface, via the control system, to the individual wherein the individual can select one or more privacy settings pertaining to the data, including the privacy/identity information (Loveland, ¶[0009], the applications may allow a user to specify preferred level of interactivity with controllable lighting networks. By selecting one of the presented options, the user may exercise control over the kinds of personal information transmitted to controllable lighting networks. Loveland, ¶[0011], the processor retrieves from the memory the user preference data associated with the user identifier, checks which user preference data the selected interactivity level authorizes for transmission to a controllable lighting network and generates a signal indicative of the user preference data authorized for transmission to the controllable lighting network by the selected interactivity level. Loveland, ¶[0013], determining user location data associated with a user and transmitting a signal indicative of the user location data. Loveland, ¶[0015], the lighting control application comprises one or more user interfaces for modifying the user preference data and the lighting control application receives user specified data including modified user preference data. Loveland, ¶[0031], Fig-3, user associated with user identifier may select an interactivity level from group consisting of OFF level, IGNORE level, PERSONAL level, BROADCAST level and ADJUST level),
recording one or more selections made by the individual (Loveland, ¶[0031, OFF level denying controllable lighting network access to user identifier and to user preference data);
Loveland does not explicitly disclose the following limitation that Frank discloses:
wherein the one or more privacy settings include, configuring the control system for storing the data but disabling a logging function of the privacy/identity information of the individual or removing privacy/identity information of the individual from the data (Frank, ¶[0034], when Jim returns the rental car, all of Jim’s PPC settings are automatically discarded. ¶[0067], each such record is typically evaluated to determine if the specified preference typically indicated via preference ID. The lighting control system may not honor an ambient lighting preference due to a failed authorization or validation attempt. ¶[0072]- ¶[0073], restoring default settings once a preference no longer applies);
storing the data and modifying the data according to the recorded selections (Frank, ¶[0030], personal preference technologies for transient environment customization generally enable a person or other entity to interact with PPC enabled devices to have an environment customized in various ways to conform to the preferences of the entity);
Loveland in view of Frank are analogous art because they are from the “same field of endeavor” and are from the same “problem solving area”. Namely, they pertain to the field of “managing interaction with controllable networks to relate to the management and handling of preference settings for users”. It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was made to modify the invention of Loveland with the teaching in Frank to include the idea of managing privacy setting. Personal privacy settings allow a user to designate whether or not certain types of information can be collected, uploaded. The user may allow data to be collected or prefer to limit or prohibit data collection (Frank, ¶[0003]).
Regarding claim 3, Loveland in view of Frank discloses the method of claim 1 wherein the data is collected by one or more devices, wherein said non-lighting devices are selected from the group consisting of a camera, a sensor, a dimming ballast, a user interface, motorized blinds, and combinations thereof (Loveland, ¶[0035], orientation sensors. ¶[0056], sensor system may utilize sensors such as motion sensors, light sensors to detect movement. Also Frank, ¶[0079], the output components may include sensors).
Regarding claim 4, Loveland in view of Frank discloses the method of claim 3 wherein said sensors are selected from the group consisting of an occupancy sensor, a motion detector, a light sensor, a thermal sensor, a temperature sensor, a humidity sensor, and combinations thereof (Loveland, ¶[0035], orientation sensors. ¶[0056], sensor system may utilize sensors such as motion sensors, light sensors to detect movement. Also Frank, ¶[0079], the output components may include sensors).
Regarding claim 5, Loveland in view of Frank discloses the method of claim 1 further comprising reporting of any collected data in accordance with the recorded selections (Loveland, ¶[0031], Fig-3, user associated with user identifier may select an interactivity level from group consisting of OFF level, IGNORE level, PERSONAL level, BROADCAST level and ADJUST level. Also Frank, ¶[0071], Bob enters his office with a personal temperature preference of 70 degree, this preference is applied to the office’s temperature control system which sets the office temperature to conform to the preference).
Regarding claim 8, Loveland in view of Frank discloses the method of claim 2 wherein the privacy settings comprise an option, whereby the individual can limit what purposes the is permitted to be used and the method further including the step of restricting use of the data for that individual to predetermined uses (Loveland, ¶[0031], Fig-3, user associated with user identifier may select an interactivity level from group consisting of OFF level, IGNORE level, PERSONAL level, BROADCAST level and ADJUST level. Also Frank, ¶[0034], when Jim returns the rental car, all of Jim’s PPC settings are automatically discarded).
Regarding claim 9, Loveland in view of Frank discloses the method of claim 2 wherein the privacy settings comprise an option, whereby the individual can specify one or more data element categories for which data associated with the individual’s work space is permitted and the method further including the step of allowing use of the data from the devices collection of data for that individual to predetermined uses (Loveland, ¶[0031], Fig-3, user associated with user identifier may select an interactivity level from group consisting of OFF level, IGNORE level, PERSONAL level, BROADCAST level and ADJUST level. Also Frank, ¶[0034], when Jim returns the rental car, all of Jim’s PPC settings are automatically discarded).
Regarding claim 11, Loveland discloses a lighting control system that provides privacy/identity information protection of an individual in which data is capable of being collected and stored by the lighting control system, the lighting control system comprising (Loveland, ¶[0039], processor receives the signal and extracts the user identifier and selected interactivity level from the signal. ¶[0043], Fig-3, the lighting control application may be launched on personal device. ¶[0045], the processor checks which of the user preference data is authorized for transmission to lighting network by selected interactivity level):
a plurality of devices for which the data related to the area can be obtained (Loveland, Fig-2, ¶[0007]);
a network for communicating the data to a computer (Loveland, Fig-2, ¶[0007);
an interface to provide the individual a menu by which the individual can select one or more privacy settings relate to the collection of data by the control system (Loveland, ¶[0009], the applications may allow a user to specify preferred level of interactivity with controllable lighting networks. By selecting one of the presented options, the user may exercise control over the kinds of personal information transmitted to controllable lighting networks. Loveland, ¶[0011], the processor retrieves from the memory the user preference data associated with the user identifier, checks which user preference data the selected interactivity level authorizes for transmission to a controllable lighting network and generates a signal indicative of the user preference data authorized for transmission to the controllable lighting network by the selected interactivity level. Loveland, ¶[0013], determining user location data associated with a user and transmitting a signal indicative of the user location data. Loveland, ¶[0015], the lighting control application comprises one or more user interfaces for modifying the user preference data and the lighting control application receives user specified data including modified user preference data. Loveland, ¶[0031], Fig-3, user associated with user identifier may select an interactivity level from group consisting of OFF level, IGNORE level, PERSONAL level, BROADCAST level and ADJUST level);
a database associated with the computer wherein the data is collected and stored, according to the individual’s selected privacy settings for the data (Loveland, ¶[0031], OFF level denying controllable lighting network access to user identifier and to user preference data);
Loveland does not explicitly disclose the following limitation that Frank discloses:
wherein the privacy settings include, configuring the control system for disabling a logging function of privacy sensitive data or removing privacy sensitive data/identity information of the individual from the data (Frank, ¶[0034], when Jim returns the rental car, all of Jim’s PPC settings are automatically discarded. ¶[0067], each such record is typically evaluated to determine if the specified preference typically indicated via preference ID. The lighting control system may not honor an ambient lighting preference due to a failed authorization or validation attempt. ¶[0072]- ¶[0073], restoring default settings once a preference no longer applies);
Loveland in view of Frank are analogous art because they are from the “same field of endeavor” and are from the same “problem solving area”. Namely, they pertain to the field of “managing interaction with controllable networks to relate to the management and handling of preference settings for users”. It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was made to modify the invention of Loveland with the teaching in Frank to include the idea of managing privacy setting. Personal privacy settings allow a user to designate whether or not certain types of information can be collected, uploaded. The user may allow data to be collected or prefer to limit or prohibit data collection (Frank, ¶[0003]).
Regarding claim 12, Loveland in view of Frank discloses the lighting control system of claim 11 wherein one or more the plurality of devices are selected from of a camera, a sensor, a user interface, motorized blinds, and combinations thereof (Loveland, ¶[0035], orientation sensors. ¶[0056], sensor system may utilize sensors such as motion sensors, light sensors to detect movement. Also Frank, ¶[0079], the output components may include sensors).
Regarding claim 13, Loveland in view of Frank discloses the lighting control system of claim 12 wherein the sensors are selected from an occupancy sensor, a motion detector, a light sensor, a thermal sensor, a temperature sensor, a humidity sensor, and combinations thereof (Loveland, ¶[0035], orientation sensors. ¶[0056], sensor system may utilize sensors such as motion sensors, light sensors to detect movement. Also Frank, ¶[0079], the output components may include sensors).
Regarding claim 14, Loveland in view of Frank discloses the lighting control system of claim 11 wherein the computer generates collected data reports in accordance with said selections (Loveland, ¶[0031], Fig-3, user associated with user identifier may select an interactivity level from group consisting of OFF level, IGNORE level, PERSONAL level, BROADCAST level and ADJUST level. Also Frank, ¶[0079], output components may include sensors).
Regarding claim 15, Loveland in view of Frank discloses the lighting control system of claim 11 wherein the interface for providing the individual a menu is selected from a special purpose or general purpose processing system, a desktop computer, a laptop computer, a palm computer, a personal digital assistant (PDA), a smart phone, and combinations thereof (Loveland, ¶[0031], Fig-3, user associated with user identifier may select an interactivity level from group consisting of OFF level, IGNORE level, PERSONAL level, BROADCAST level and ADJUST level. Also Frank, ¶[0034], when Jim returns the rental car, all of Jim’s PPC settings are automatically discarded. ¶[0067], each such record is typically evaluated to determine if the specified preference typically indicated via preference ID. The lighting control system may not honor an ambient lighting preference due to a failed authorization or validation attempt. ¶[0072]- ¶[0073], restoring default settings once a preference no longer applies).
Regarding claim 16, Loveland discloses a computer-readable, non-transitory medium having stored therein instructions for causing at least for protecting the privacy/identity information of an individual in which data is capable of being collected and stored by a lighting control system, wherein the data comprises information related to non-lighting devices in the space, the method comprising (Loveland, ¶[0039], processor receives the signal and extracts the user identifier and selected interactivity level from the signal. ¶[0043], Fig-3, the lighting control application may be launched on personal device. ¶[0045], the processor checks which of the user preference data is authorized for transmission to lighting network by selected interactivity level):
providing an interface to the individual by which the individual can select one or more privacy settings pertaining to the data, including privacy/identity information of the individual, by the control system (Loveland, ¶[0009], the applications may allow a user to specify preferred level of interactivity with controllable lighting networks. By selecting one of the presented options, the user may exercise control over the kinds of personal information transmitted to controllable lighting networks. Loveland, ¶[0011], the processor retrieves from the memory the user preference data associated with the user identifier, checks which user preference data the selected interactivity level authorizes for transmission to a controllable lighting network and generates a signal indicative of the user preference data authorized for transmission to the controllable lighting network by the selected interactivity level. Loveland, ¶[0013], determining user location data associated with a user and transmitting a signal indicative of the user location data. Loveland, ¶[0015], the lighting control application comprises one or more user interfaces for modifying the user preference data and the lighting control application receives user specified data including modified user preference data. Loveland, ¶[0031], Fig-3, user associated with user identifier may select an interactivity level from group consisting of OFF level, IGNORE level, PERSONAL level, BROADCAST level and ADJUST level);
recording one or more selections made by the individual (Loveland, ¶[0031, OFF level denying controllable lighting network access to user identifier and to user preference data);
Loveland does not explicitly disclose the following limitation that Frank discloses:
wherein the privacy settings include, configuring the control system for storing the data but disabling a logging function of the privacy/identity information of the individual or removing privacy/identity information of the individual from the data (Frank, ¶[0034], when Jim returns the rental car, all of Jim’s PPC settings are automatically discarded. ¶[0067], each such record is typically evaluated to determine if the specified preference typically indicated via preference ID. The lighting control system may not honor an ambient lighting preference due to a failed authorization or validation attempt. ¶[0072]- ¶[0073], restoring default settings once a preference no longer applies);
storing the data is collected and stored according to the one or more privacy settings selected for the data (Frank, ¶[0030], personal preference technologies for transient environment customization generally enable a person or other entity to interact with PPC enabled devices to have an environment customized in various ways to conform to the preferences of the entity).
Loveland in view of Frank are analogous art because they are from the “same field of endeavor” and are from the same “problem solving area”. Namely, they pertain to the field of “managing interaction with controllable networks to relate to the management and handling of preference settings for users”. It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was made to modify the invention of Loveland with the teaching in Frank to include the idea of managing privacy setting. Personal privacy settings allow a user to designate whether or not certain types of information can be collected, uploaded. The user may allow data to be collected or prefer to limit or prohibit data collection (Frank, ¶[0003]).
Regarding claim 22, Loveland in view of Frank discloses the method of claim 1, further including providing, by the lighting control system, the collected data in the space to an operational management system for analysis, with or without identity information of the individual associated to the collected data based on the recorded selection (Loveland, ¶[0031], Fig-3, user associated with user identifier may select an interactivity level from group consisting of OFF level, IGNORE level, PERSONAL level, BROADCAST level and ADJUST level. Also Frank, ¶[0067], each such record is typically evaluated to determine if the specified preference, typically indicated via preference ID. A lighting control system may be able to honor an ambient lighting preference but may not be able to honor a music type preference. The lighting control system may nor honor an ambient lighting preference due to a failed authorization or validation attempt).
Claim 2 is rejected under pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 103(a) as being unpatentable over Loveland (International Publication No. WO 2011/001320 A1) in view of Frank (US Patent Application Publication No. 2008/0155429 A1) and further in view of Lee (US Patent Publication No. US 2003/0227439 A1).
Regarding claim 2, Loveland in view of Frank does not disclose the following limitation that Lee discloses:
the method of claim 1 wherein the control system is a Hybrid Integrated Lighting and Daylight Control system and the data relates to the individual's work space (Lee, ¶[0021], Rooms R1 and R2 have cameras, heating units, speakers lights. ¶[0023], lines may be input to a separate lighting controller that provides the appropriate dimming control signals to L1 and L2).
Loveland in view of Frank and Lee are analogous art because they are from the “same field of endeavor” and are from the same “problem solving area”. Namely, they pertain to the field of “managing interaction with controllable lighting networks”. It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was made to modify the invention of Loveland with the teaching in Frank and Lee to include the idea of preferred level of interactivity with controllable lighting network to exercise the control of network’s reaction to user’s preference to achieve better efficiency of the existing system.
Claim 17-20 are rejected under pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 103(a) as being unpatentable over Loveland (International Publication No. WO 2011/001320 A1) in view of Frank (US Patent Application Publication No. 2008/0155429 A1) and further in view of Verfuerth (US Patent Publication No. US 2012/0040606 A1).
Regarding claim 17, Loveland in view of Frank does not disclose the following limitation that Verfuerth teaches:
the method of claim 1 wherein the lighting control system relates to an outdoor lighting facility (Verfuerth, abstract, outdoor lighting fixture includes a first ballast for controllably providing power to at least a lamp for illuminating an outdoor area).
Loveland in view of Frank and Verfuerth are analogous art because they are from the “same field of endeavor” and are from the same “problem solving area”. Namely, they pertain to the field of “managing interaction with controllable lighting networks”. It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was made to modify the invention of Loveland with the teaching in Frank and Verfuerth to include the idea of preferred level of interactivity with controllable lighting network to exercise the control of network’s reaction to user’s preference to make the existing system more efficient.
Regarding claim 18, Loveland in view of Frank does not disclose the following limitation that Verfuerth teaches:
the method of claim 17 wherein the data relates to one or more outdoor areas in proximity to an individual's home (Verfuerth, abstract, outdoor lighting fixture includes a first ballast for controllably providing power to at least a lamp for illuminating an outdoor area).
Regarding claim 19, Loveland in view of Frank does not disclose the following limitation that Verfuerth teaches:
the method of claim 17 wherein the data relates to one or more outdoor areas in proximity to an individual's workplace (Verfuerth, abstract, outdoor lighting fixture includes a first ballast for controllably providing power to at least a lamp for illuminating an outdoor area).
Regarding claim 20, Loveland in view of Frank does not disclose the following limitation that Verfuerth teaches:
the system of claim 11 wherein one or more of the plurality of devices is located within outside lighting units (Verfuerth, abstract, outdoor lighting fixture includes a first ballast for controllably providing power to at least a lamp for illuminating an outdoor area).
Conclusion
Applicant’s amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a). Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a).
A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any extension fee pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of the advisory action. In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the date of this final action. Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to WASIKA NIPA whose telephone number is (571)272-8923. The examiner can normally be reached on M-F (7:30 - 5:00).
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, JEFFRY PWU can be reached on 571-272-6798. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300.
Information regarding the status of an application may be obtained from the Patent Application Information Retrieval (PAIR) system. Status information for published applications may be obtained from either Private PAIR or Public PAIR. Status information for unpublished applications is available through Private PAIR only. For more information about the PAIR system, see http://pair-direct.uspto.gov. Should you have questions on access to the Private PAIR system, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative or access to the automated information system, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
/WASIKA NIPA/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2433