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 .
The present Office Action is in response to Applicants’ filing of June 11, 2026. Claims 1-23 are presented for examination, with Claims 1, 10, and 17 being in independent form.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
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, 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.
Claims 1-23 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over U.S. Patent Publication No. 2021/0095601 (“Abraham”) in view of U.S. Patent Publication No. 2013/0181630 (“Taipale”) and further in view of U.S. Patent No. 7,036,948 (“Wyatt”).
Regarding Claim 1, Abraham discloses an electrical load control system (Fig. 1), comprising:
a plurality of sensors (daylight sensor 154; [0065]; and occupancy sensor 152; [0065], both included in each of the one or more control devices 110+112+114 (only one shown in Fig. 1); [0056]; [0074]) that includes:
a plurality of ambient light sensors (a plurality of ambient light sensors 154 included in the plurality of control devices 110+112+114 (only one shown in Fig. 1); [0056]; [0074]), and
at least one occupancy sensor (152);
one or more illuminated electrical load control devices (a plurality of load control devices 110+112+114 (only one shown in Fig. 1); [0056]; [0074]), each of the one or more illuminated electrical load control devices couplable to at least one electrical load device (126, 130+132, or 140+142);
wherein each of the one or more illuminated control devices (a plurality of load control devices 110+112+114 (only one shown in Fig. 1); [0056]; [0074]) includes:
a user actuatable element (114; [0058]);
a light source to illuminate at least a portion of the user actuatable element (light source 112 illuminates user interface 114, as broadly claimed); and
control circuitry operatively coupled to the plurality of sensors, the user actuatable element and the light source (control circuitry 110 is operatively coupled to 152, 154, 114 and 112), the control circuitry to, responsive to receipt of a signal indicative of an occupancy condition in the space from the at least one occupancy sensor ([0065]-[0066]), wherein each of the plurality of ambient light sensors is disposed external to the control device (a plurality of load control devices 110+112+114 (only one shown in Fig. 1); [0056]; [0074], are disposed externally to their respective control devices).
Abraham fails to specifically teach that the control circuitry varies the intensity of the light source to correspond to “aggregated ambient light data” determined using the output data provided by each of the plurality of ambient light sensors.
However, Taipale, in the same field of endeavor, teaches that the control circuitry varies the intensity of the light source to correspond to “aggregated ambient light data” determined using the output data provided by each of the plurality of ambient light sensors ([0094], lines 17-24).
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to have provided the plurality of sensors as taught by Abraham, and have aggregated the data provided by them as taught by Taipale, in order to reduce the total power consumed by the load control system, as evidenced by Taipale ([0094], lines 16-17).
Although the combination of Abraham in view of Taipale teaches the one or more illuminated electrical load devices, the combination fails to teach or suggest that the devices are backlit and that they are insertable into a wallbox.
However, Wyatt, teaches backlit controllable devices insertable into a wallbox (see, Fig. 5, controllable light source 11 backlighting user actuable element 12; col. 10, lines 16-33; Fig. 11; col. 13, lines 39-55; see also, wall plate 14; Fig. 1).
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to have provided the control devices as taught by the combination of Abraham in view of Taipale with the backlight as taught by Wyatt, in order to aid a user in detecting a switch position in a dimly lit room, as evidenced by Wyatt (Abstract).
Regarding Claim 2, the combination of Abraham in view of Taipale and further in view of Wyatt, as applied to Claim 1, further teaches wherein each of the one or more backlit electrical load control devices comprises a wallbox mountable control device (see Abraham, a plurality of load control devices 110+112+114 (only one shown in Fig. 1); [0056]; [0074], as modified by Wyatt).
Regarding Claim 3, the combination of Abraham in view of Taipale and further in view of Wyatt, as applied to Claim 1, further teaches wherein the one or more backlit electrical load control devices comprises a plurality of communicatively coupled backlit electrical load control devices (see Abraham, a plurality of load control devices 110+112+114 (only one shown in Fig. 1); [0056]; [0074], as modified by Wyatt).
Regarding Claim 4, the combination of Abraham in view of Taipale and further in view of Wyatt, as applied to Claim 1, further teaches wherein to vary the output intensity level of the light source proportional to the determined aggregate ambient light level, the control circuit (110 in Abraham) to further:
collectively vary in unison the output intensity level of the light source in each respective one of the plurality of backlit electrical load control devices (a plurality of load control devices 110+112+114 (only one shown in Fig. 1); [0056]; [0058]; [0074] in Abraham, as modified by Wyatt).
Regarding Claim 5, the combination of Abraham in view of Taipale, as applied to Claim1, further teaches wherein to vary the output intensity level of the light source proportional to the aggregate ambient light level, the control circuit (110 in Abraham) to further: receive the ambient light level data from each respective one of the plurality of ambient light sensors (daylight sensors 154; [0065] in Abraham); and combine the received ambient light level data using an algorithm to determine the aggregate ambient light level ([0193]-[0194] in Taipale).
Regarding Claim 6, the combination of Abraham in view of Taipale, as applied to Claim 1, further teaches wherein to combine the received ambient light level data using the algorithm to determine the aggregate ambient light level, the control circuit (110 in Abraham) to further: determine the aggregate ambient light level (daylight sensor 154; [0065] in Abraham) using at least one of: an arithmetic mean of the received ambient light level data; or a weighted average of the received ambient light level data ([0193]-[0194] in Taipale).
Regarding Claim 7, the combination of Abraham in view of Taipale and further in view of Wyatt, as applied to Claim 1, further teaches wherein to determine the aggregate ambient light level (daylight sensor 154; [0065] in Abraham) using the weighted average of the received ambient light level data, the control circuit (110 in Abraham) to further: combine the received ambient light level data (daylight sensor 154; [0065]; occupancy sensor 152; [0065] in Abraham) using weighted values, each of the weighted values based on a distance between the respective ambient light sensor and the respective backlit electrical load control device ([0193]-[0194] in Taipale, as modified by Wyatt).
Regarding Claim 8, the combination of Abraham in view of Taipale, as applied to Claim 1, further teaches wherein to vary the output intensity level of the light source proportional to the aggregate ambient light level, the control circuit (110 in Abraham) to further: receive data indicative of the aggregated ambient light level from a communicatively coupled system controller (150 in Abraham; [0056]; [0074]).
Regarding Claim 9, the combination of Abraham in view of Taipale and further in view of Wyatt, as applied to Claim 1, further teaches wherein the one or more backlit electrical load control devices comprises a plurality of ganged, communicatively coupled, backlit electrical load control devices (a plurality of load control devices 110+112+114 (only one shown in Fig. 1); [0056]; [0074] in Abraham, as modified by Wyatt); and wherein to vary the output intensity level of the light source proportional to the determined aggregate ambient light level, the control circuit (110 in Abraham) in each of the one or more backlit electrical load control devices to further: receive ambient light level data from each respective one of the plurality of ambient light sensors external to the respective backlit electrical load control device (daylight sensor 154; [0065] in Abraham, as modified by Wyatt); and combine the received ambient light level data to determine the aggregate ambient light level using at least one of: an arithmetic mean of the received ambient light level data; or a weighted average of the received ambient light level data ([0193]-[0194] in Taipale).
Regarding Claim 10, Abraham discloses a method of illuminating one or more electrical load control devices (Fig. 1; a plurality of load control devices 110+112+114 (only one shown in Fig. 1); [0056]; [0074]), comprising:
for each of one or more illuminated electrical load control devices (a plurality of load control devices 110+112+114 (only one shown in Fig. 1); [0056]; [0074]):
illuminating at least a portion of a user actuatable element (114; [0058]) via a light source (112) operatively coupled to a control circuit (110) disposed in the respective illuminated electrical load control device (light source 112 illuminates user interface 114, as broadly claimed);
receiving, by the control circuit (110), a signal indicative of an occupancy condition in a space from at least one occupancy sensor (152; [0065]-[0066]); and
receiving, by the control circuit, ambient light level data provided by each of respective one of a plurality of ambient light sensors in the space (a plurality of ambient light sensors 154 included in the plurality of control devices 110+112+114 (only one shown in Fig. 1); [0056]; [0074]); and
varying, by the control circuit (110), the output intensity level of the light source in the illuminated electrical load control device proportional to the generated ambient light data ([0065]-[0066]).
Abraham fails to specifically teach that the control circuitry varies the intensity of the light source to correspond to “aggregated ambient light data” determined using the output data provided by each of the plurality of ambient light sensors.
However, Taipale, in the same field of endeavor, teaches that the control circuitry varies the intensity of the light source to correspond to “aggregated ambient light data” determined using the output data provided by each of the plurality of ambient light sensors ([0094], lines 17-24).
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to have provided the plurality of sensors as taught by Abraham, and have aggregated the data provided by them as taught by Taipale, in order to reduce the total power consumed by the load control system, as evidenced by Taipale ([0094], lines 16-17).
Although the combination of Abraham in view of Taipale teaches the one or more illuminated electrical load devices, the combination fails to teach or suggest that the devices are backlit and that they are insertable into a wallbox.
However, Wyatt, teaches backlit controllable devices insertable into a wallbox (see, Fig. 5, controllable light source 11 backlighting user actuable element 12; col. 10, lines 16-33; Fig. 11; col. 13, lines 39-55; see also, wall plate 14; Fig. 1).
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to have provided the control devices as taught by the combination of Abraham in view of Taipale with the backlight as taught by Wyatt, in order to aid a user in detecting a switch position in a dimly lit room, as evidenced by Wyatt (Abstract).
Regarding Claim 11, the combination of Abraham in view of Taipale and further in view of Wyatt, as applied to Claim 10, further teaches wherein the one or more backlit electrical load control devices comprises a plurality of communicatively coupled backlit electrical load control devices (a plurality of load control devices 110+112+114 (only one shown in Fig. 1); [0056]; [0074] in Abraham, as modified by Wyatt); and
wherein varying the intensity of the light source in each respective one of the plurality of backlit electrical load control devices proportional to the aggregated ambient light leveldata further comprises:
for each of the plurality of backlit electrical load control devices (a plurality of load control devices 110+112+114 (only one shown in Fig. 1); [0056]; [0074] in Abraham, as modified by Wyatt):
collectively varying, by the control circuit (110 in Abraham), the output intensity level of the light source in the respective backlit electrical load control device in unison with varying the output intensity level of the light sources in the remaining plurality of backlit electrical load control devices corresponding to the generated aggregate ambient light level data ([0056]; [0058] in Abraham, as modified by Wyatt).
Regarding Claim 12, the combination of Abraham in view of Taipale and further in view of Wyatt, as applied to Claim 10, further teaches wherein determining by the control circuitry, aggregate ambient light level using the ambient light level data received from each of the plurality of ambient light sensors (daylight sensor 154; [0065] in Abraham) further comprises:
for each of the one or more backlit electrical load control devices (a plurality of load control devices 110+112+114 (only one shown in Fig. 1); [0056]; [0074] in Abraham, as modified by Wyatt):
determining, by the control circuit, the aggregated ambient light level using an algorithm ([0193]-[0194] in Taipale).
Regarding Claim 13, the combination of Abraham in view of Taipale and further in view of Wyatt, as applied to Claim 10, further teaches wherein determining the aggregate ambient light level using an algorithm further comprises:
for each of the one or more backlit electrical load control devices (a plurality of load control devices 110+112+114 (only one shown in Fig. 1); [0056]; [0074] in Abraham, as modified by Wyatt):
determining, by the control circuit (110 in Abraham), the aggregate ambient light level (daylight sensor 154; [0065] in Abraham) using at least one of:
an arithmetic mean of the received ambient light level data; or
a weighted average of the received ambient light level data ([0193]-[0194] in Taipale).
Regarding Claim 14, the combination of Abraham in view of Taipale and further in view of Wyatt, as applied to Claim 10, further teaches wherein determining the aggregate ambient light level (daylight sensor 154; [0065] in Abraham) using the weighted average of the received ambient light level data ([0193]-[0194] in Taipale) further comprises:
combining, by the control circuit (110 in Abraham), the received ambient light level (daylight sensor 154; [0065] in Abraham) using weighted values, each of the weighted values based on the distance between the respective ambient light sensor and the respective backlit electrical load control device ([0193]-[0194] in Taipale, as modified by Wyatt).
Regarding Claim 15, the combination of Abraham in view of Taipale, as applied to Claim 10, further teaches wherein determining the aggregate ambient light level using the ambient light level data received from each of the plurality of ambient light sensors further comprises: receiving, by the control circuit (110 in Abraham), data representative of the aggregated ambient light level from a communicatively coupled system controller (150 in Abraham; [0056]; [0074]).
Regarding Claim 16, the combination of Abraham in view of Taipale and further in view of Wyatt, as applied to Claim 10, further teaches wherein the one or more backlit electrical load control devices comprises a plurality of ganged, communicatively coupled, backlit, electrical load control devices (a plurality of load control devices 110+112+114 (only one shown in Fig. 1); [0056]; [0074] in Abraham, as modified by Wyatt); and
wherein varying the output intensity level of the light source proportional to the determined aggregate ambient light level further comprises:
for each of the plurality of backlit electrical load control devices (a plurality of load control devices 110+112+114 (only one shown in Fig. 1); [0056]; [0074] in Abraham, as modified by Wyatt):
receiving, by the control circuit (110 in Abraham), ambient light level data from each of the plurality of ambient light sensors external to the backlit control device (daylight sensor 154; [0065]; occupancy sensor 152; [0065] in Abraham); and
combining, by the control circuit (110 in Abraham), the received ambient light level data to determine the aggregate ambient light level using at least one of:
an arithmetic mean of the received ambient light level data; or
a weighted average of the received ambient light level data ([0193]-[0194] in Taipale).
Regarding Claim 17, Abraham discloses a non-transitory, machine-readable, storage device that includes instructions that, when executed by a control circuit (110) disposed in each of one or more electrical load control devices (Fig. 1; a plurality of load control devices 110+112+114 (only one shown in Fig. 1); [0056]; [0074]), causes the control circuitry to:
cause an operatively coupled light source (112) to illuminate at least a portion of a user actuatable element (114; [0058]) via a light source operatively coupled to the control circuit (110) disposed in the respective illuminated electrical load control device (light source 112 illuminates user interface 114, as broadly claimed);
receive output data provided by each of a plurality of ambient light sensors (a plurality of ambient light sensors 154 included in the plurality of control devices 110+112+114 (only one shown in Fig. 1); [0056]; [0074]);
receive a signal indicative of an occupancy condition in a space from at least one occupancy sensor (152; [0065]-[0066]) and
vary an intensity of the light source in the illuminated electrical load control device to correspond to the generated ambient light data ([0065]-[0066]).
Abraham fails to specifically teach that the control circuitry varies the intensity of the light source to correspond to “aggregated ambient light data” determined using the output data provided by each of the plurality of ambient light sensors.
However, Taipale, in the same field of endeavor, teaches that the control circuitry varies the intensity of the light source to correspond to “aggregated ambient light data” determined using the output data provided by each of the plurality of ambient light sensors ([0094], lines 17-24).
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to have provided the plurality of sensors as taught by Abraham, and have aggregated the data provided by them as taught by Taipale, in order to reduce the total power consumed by the load control system, as evidenced by Taipale ([0094], lines 16-17).
Although the combination of Abraham in view of Taipale teaches the one or more illuminated electrical load devices, the combination fails to teach or suggest that the devices are backlit and that they are insertable into a wallbox.
However, Wyatt, teaches backlit controllable devices insertable into a wallbox (see, Fig. 5, controllable light source 11 backlighting user actuable element 12; col. 10, lines 16-33; Fig. 11; col. 13, lines 39-55; see also, wall plate 14; Fig. 1).
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to have provided the control devices as taught by the combination of Abraham in view of Taipale with the backlight as taught by Wyatt, in order to aid a user in detecting a switch position in a dimly lit room, as evidenced by Wyatt (Abstract).
Regarding Claim 18, the combination of Abraham in view of Taipale and further in view of Wyatt, as applied to Claim 17, further teaches wherein the one or more backlit electrical load control devices comprises a plurality of communicatively coupled backlit electrical load control devices (a plurality of load control devices 110+112+114 (only one shown in Fig. 1); [0056]; [0074] in Abraham, as modified by Wyatt); and
wherein the instructions that cause the control circuit to vary the output intensity level of the light source in the plurality of backlit electrical load control devices proportional to the aggregated ambient light data further cause the control circuitry to:
for each of the plurality of backlit electrical load control devices (a plurality of load control devices 110+112+114 (only one shown in Fig. 1); [0056]; [0074] in Abraham, as modified by Wyatt):
vary the output intensity level of the light source in the respective backlit electrical load control device in unison with the varying the output intensity level of the light sources in the remaining backlit electrical load control devices ([0056]; [0058] in Abraham, as modified by Wyatt).
Regarding Claim 19, the combination of Abraham in view of Taipale and further in view of Wyatt, as applied to Claim 17, further teaches wherein the instructions that cause the control circuit to determine the aggregated ambient light level using the received ambient light level data (daylight sensor 154; [0065] in Abraham) further cause the control circuit to:
for each of the one or more backlit electrical load control devices (a plurality of load control devices 110+112+114 (only one shown in Fig. 1); [0056]; [0074] in Abraham, as modified by Wyatt):
combine the received ambient light level data (daylight sensor 154; [0065]; occupancy sensor 152; [0065] in Abraham) using an algorithm to determine the aggregated ambient light level data ([0193]-[0194] in Taipale).
Regarding Claim 20, the combination of Abraham in view of Taipale and further in view of Wyatt, as applied to Claim 17, further teaches wherein the instructions that cause the control circuit to combine the received ambient light level data using an algorithm to determine the aggregated ambient light level data further cause the control circuit (110 in Abraham) to:
combine the received ambient light sensor output data (daylight sensor 154; [0065]; occupancy sensor 152; [0065]) using at least one of:
an arithmetic mean of the received ambient light level data; or a weighted average of the received ambient light level data ([0193]-[0194] in Taipale).
Regarding Claim 21, the combination of Abraham in view of Taipale and further in view of Wyatt, as applied to Claim 17, further teaches wherein the instructions that cause the control circuit (110 in Abraham) to combine the received ambient light level data (daylight sensor 154; [0065]; occupancy sensor 152; [0065] in Abraham) using the weighted average of the received ambient light level data ([0193]-[0194] in Taipale), further cause the control circuit to:
combine the received ambient light level data (daylight sensor 154; [0065] in Abraham) using weighted values, each of the weighted values based on the distance between the respective ambient light sensor and the respective backlit electrical load control device ([0193]-[0194] in Taipale).
Regarding Claim 22, the combination of Abraham in view of Taipale, as applied to Claim 17, further teaches wherein the instructions that cause the control circuit (110 in Abraham) to determine the aggregated ambient light level using the received ambient light level data, further cause the control circuit to:
receive data representative of the aggregated ambient light level data from a communicatively coupled system controller (150 in Abraham; [0056]; [0074]).
Regarding Claim 23, the combination of Abraham in view of Taipale and further in view of Wyatt, as applied to Claim 17, further teaches wherein the one or more backlit electrical load control devices comprises a plurality of ganged, communicatively coupled, control devices (a plurality of load control devices 110+112+114 (only one shown in Fig. 1); [0056]; [0074] in Abraham, as modified by Wyatt); and
wherein the non-transitory, machine-readable, storage device that includes the instructions that cause the control circuitry to vary the output intensity level of the light source in the backlit electrical load control device proportional to the aggregated ambient light level (110 in Abraham), further cause the control circuit to:
for each of the plurality of backlit electrical load control devices (a plurality of load control devices 110+112+114 (only one shown in Fig. 1); [0056]; [0074] in Abraham, as modified by Wyatt):
receive ambient light level data from each of the plurality of ambient light sensors external to the backlit control device (daylight sensor 154; [0065] in Abraham); and
combine the received ambient light level data to determine the aggregated ambient light level using at least one of:
an arithmetic mean of the received ambient light level data; or
a weighted average of the received ambient light level data ([0193]-[0194] in Taipale).
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed June 11, 2026 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
Applicants’ arguments, as set forth in pages 13-15 of their response, in essence state that:
“Independent claims 1, 10, and 17 similarly recite an electric load control system that includes a variable intensity backlight source positioned to backlight at least a portion of a user actuatable element and control circuitry to vary the intensity level of the backlight source proportional to aggregated ambient light level data determined using the output data provided by each of the plurality of ambient light sensors. As best understood, the proposed combination of Abraham, Taipale, and Wyatt fails to teach, show, or suggest the desirability of an electric load control system in which output received from a plurality of ambient light sensors is aggregated and used to vary the intensity level of a light source used to backlight the user actuatable element proportional to the aggregated ambient light level data.” (Emphasis in original)
“Further, at best the proposed combination of Abraham, Taipale, and Wyatt would result in controlling the luminous output of a plurality of lamps in a space based an average light level measured using a plurality of daylight sensors (as per the teachings of Abraham and Taipale). The plurality of lamps would be controlled using a switch that includes a backlight that is turned ON and OFF (not varied proportional to) based on the average light level measured using a plurality of daylight sensors with respect to a threshold light level value (per the teachings of Abraham, Taipale, and Wyatt). Wyatt does not teach varying “… the intensity level of a light source used to backlight the user actuatable element proportional to the aggregated ambient light level data." No motivation exists to adjust the intensity of a backlight based on ambient light levels measured using a plurality of ambient light sensors.” (Emphasis in original)
The examiner cannot concur with Applicants’ arguments because, the combination of Abraham in view of Taipale and further in view of Wyatt, as set forth above, clearly teaches that responsive to an occupancy detection (via occupancy sensor 152 of Abraham), the control device (110+112+114 (only one shown in Fig. 1); [0056]; [0074] of Abraham) aggregates the signals (as taught by Taipale in [0094], lines 17-24, in particular) provided by the plurality of ambient light sensors (a plurality of ambient light sensors 154 included in the plurality of control devices 110+112+114 (only one shown in Fig. 1); [0056]; [0074] in Abraham) and uses the aggregated ambient light data to vary the level of illumination provided by the backlight (the backlight is taught by Wyatt in Fig. 5, see light source 11 backlighting the device) proportional to the determined aggregated ambient light level data (as taught by Taipale in [0094], lines 17-24, in particular).
The examiner notes that Wyatt is merely cited for modifying the light source of the illuminated electrical load control devices as taught by the combination of Abraham in view of Taipale, into backlit devices insertable into a wallbox. It is the combination of Abraham in view of Taipale that teaches the remaining claim limitations, as set forth in the rejection of the Claims above.
In response to applicant’s argument that there is no teaching, suggestion, or motivation to combine the references, the examiner recognizes that obviousness may be established by combining or modifying the teachings of the prior art to produce the claimed invention where there is some teaching, suggestion, or motivation to do so found either in the references themselves or in the knowledge generally available to one of ordinary skill in the art. See In re Fine, 837 F.2d 1071, 5 USPQ2d 1596 (Fed. Cir. 1988), In re Jones, 958 F.2d 347, 21 USPQ2d 1941 (Fed. Cir. 1992), and KSR International Co. v. Teleflex, Inc., 550 U.S. 398, 82 USPQ2d 1385 (2007).
In this case the motivation to combine Abraham, Taipale, and Wyatt is that it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to have provided the plurality of sensors as taught by Abraham, and have aggregated the data provided by them as taught by Taipale, in order to reduce the total power consumed by the load control system, as evidenced by Taipale ([0094], lines 16-17); and that it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to have provided the control devices as taught by the combination of Abraham in view of Taipale with the backlight as taught by Wyatt, in order to aid a user in detecting a switch position in a dimly lit room, as evidenced by Wyatt (Abstract).
In response to applicant's arguments against the references individually, one cannot show nonobviousness by attacking references individually where the rejections are based on combinations of references. See In re Keller, 642 F.2d 413, 208 USPQ 871 (CCPA 1981); In re Merck & Co., 800 F.2d 1091, 231 USPQ 375 (Fed. Cir. 1986).
For at least the reasons stated above, the rejections of Claims 1-23, as amended herein, are maintained.
Conclusion
THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. 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 nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) 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 mailing date of this final action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to PEDRO C FERNANDEZ whose telephone number is (571)272-7050. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 9-5 EST.
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, Alexander H Taningco can be reached at 1-(571) 272-8048. 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.
/PEDRO C FERNANDEZ/Examiner, Art Unit 2845
/ALEXANDER H TANINGCO/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2845
Prosecution Insights