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 .
This application currently names joint inventors. In considering patentability of the claims the examiner presumes that the subject matter of the various claims was commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the claimed invention(s) absent any evidence to the contrary. Applicant is advised of the obligation under 37 CFR 1.56 to point out the inventor and effective filing dates of each claim that was not commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the later invention in order for the examiner to consider the applicability of 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(C) for any potential 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) prior art against the later invention.
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on 6/13/2025 is in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statement is being considered by the examiner.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
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.
The following is a quotation of the appropriate paragraphs of 35 U.S.C. 102 that form the basis for the rejections under this section made in this Office action:
A person shall be entitled to a patent unless –
(a)(1) the claimed invention was patented, described in a printed publication, or in public use, on sale or otherwise available to the public before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
(a)(2) the claimed invention was described in a patent issued under section 151, or in an application for patent published or deemed published under section 122(b), in which the patent or application, as the case may be, names another inventor and was effectively filed before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claim(s) 21, 29, 31, and 32 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Sorokin (US 20130096702 A1).
With regards to claim 21. Sorokin disclose(s):
(previously presented) A system comprising:
a lighting controller (10, 26, 12, 34) connected to each of the plurality of lighting devices (“lighting” in fig 1; [0038]), the lighting controller being operable to control a function of each of the plurality of lighting devices and to execute stored computer code by which the plurality of lighting devices emit lighting signals (“The lighting system may create a desired lighting scene under control of the atmosphere creation system 10” [0038]; see interfaces for controlling lighting in [0039]; see interfaces being stored in 12 [0040]); and
an input controller (18, 20) connected to the lighting controller, the input controller including at least one receiving unit (19, 21; [0045]) for receiving an input from an external device (28; [0045]),
wherein the input received from the external device (28) is operable to alter the lighting signals emitted by the plurality of lighting devices (see interfaces for controlling lighting in [0039]; see 28 having the interfaces in [0047]).
With regards to claim 29. Sorokin disclose(s):
The system of claim 21, wherein the input controller (18, 20) includes a plurality of receiving units (19, 21; [0045]).
With regards to claim 31. Sorokin disclose(s):
(new) The system of claim 21, wherein the receiving unit receives the input from the external device wirelessly (wirelessly [0045]).
With regards to claim 32. Sorokin disclose(s):
(new) The system of claim 31, wherein the external device (28; [0045]) is a mobile phone.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
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.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 103 which forms the basis for all obviousness rejections set forth in this Office action:
A patent for a claimed invention may not be obtained, notwithstanding that the claimed invention is not identically disclosed as set forth in section 102 of this title, if the differences between the claimed invention and the prior art are such that the claimed invention as a whole would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which the claimed invention pertains. Patentability shall not be negated by the manner in which the invention was made.
Claim(s) 33-35 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Sorokin (US 20130096702 A1) in view of Verfuerth (US 20090243517 A1).
With regards to claim 33. Sorokin disclose(s):
(new) The system of claim 32, wherein the lighting controller is accessed by the mobile phone using a web-based interface [0039]
Sorokin does not disclose(s):
the web-based interface being based on hyperlinks
Verfuerth teaches
the web-based interface being based on hyperlinks [0089].
Before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, it would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art to have modified the device/method/system of Sorokin by implementing the web-based interface being based on hyperlinks as disclosed by Verfuerth in order to efficiently and remotely control a system through an web based interface as taught/suggested by Verfuerth ([0089]).
With regards to claim 34. Sorokin as modified disclose(s):
(new) The system of claim 33,
Sorokin further disclose(s):
wherein the hyperlink is provided in a scannable image readable by the mobile phone (see 36 in fig 1; see 18 being an smartphone with a camera in [0045]).
With regards to claim 35. Sorokin as modified disclose(s):
(new) The system of claim 34,
Sorokin further disclose(s):
wherein the scannable image is a QR code (see 36 in fig 1).
Claim(s) 30 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Sorokin (US 20130096702 A1) in view of Wilson (US 10143053 B1)
With regards to claim 30. Sorokin as modified disclose(s):
The system of claim 21,
Sorokin further disclose(s):
wherein the input received from the external device (28; [0045]) is operable to cause the lighting controller (10, 26, 12, 34)
Sorokin does not disclose(s):
wherein the input received from the external device is operable to cause the lighting controller to execute additional stored computer code by which the plurality of lighting devices emit additional lighting signals.
Wilson teaches
wherein the input received from the external device (103; fig 1; fig 5) is operable to cause the lighting controller (104; fig 1) to execute additional stored computer code by which the plurality of lighting devices emit additional lighting signals (see 521 in fig 5; [lines 3-7 in col 10]).
Before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, it would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art to have modified the device/method/system of Sorokin by implementing the input received from the external device is operable to cause the lighting controller to execute additional stored computer code by which the plurality of lighting devices emit additional lighting signals as disclosed by Wilson in order to allow users to further access to advance lighting control as taught/suggested by Wilson ([line 60 in col 9 to line 6 in col 10]).
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to the claims have been considered but are moot because the arguments do not apply to any of the interpretation being used in the current rejection.
Applicant asserts that the prior art, Sorokin, fails to disclose “the input received from the external device is operable to alter the lighting signals emitted by the plurality of lighting devices” as recited in claim 1. The examiner respectfully disagrees; Sorokin discloses the input received from the external device (28) is operable to alter the lighting signals emitted by the plurality of lighting devices (see interfaces for controlling lighting in [0039]; see 28 having the interfaces in [0047]). For at least reason above, the examiner maintain reference Sorokin with a different interpretation to reject claims 21, and 29-35.
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 RENAN LUQUE whose telephone number is (571)270-1044. The examiner can normally be reached on M-F 9:00AM-5:00PM.
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, Jessica Han can be reached on 571-272-2078. 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 https://ppair-my.uspto.gov/pair/PrivatePair. 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.
/RENAN LUQUE/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2896