DETAILED ACTION
Notice of 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 .
Claim 9 is cancelled. Claim(s) 1-8 and 10- 26 are pending.
Claim 1 and 24 are allowable but are objected to. Claims 2-8 and 10-23 are objected to based on their dependencies on claim 1. Claims 3-4 are rejected under 35 USC 112(b).
Claim 25 is allowed.
Claim 26 is rejected under 35 USC 103.
Response to Amendment
This Office Action is responsive to the amendment filed on 11/26/2025.
Claims 1, 5-7, 14, 16-18, 21 and 24 -26 are amended and are being fully considered by the examiner.
In response to applicant’s amendments to claims, all the claim objections of claims 1-8 and 10-24 as set forth in the previous office action has been withdrawn. Applicant’s amendments introduces new claim objections as set forth in this office action.
In response to applicant’s amendments to claims, all the 35 USC § 112 rejections of claims 1-8 and 10-26 as set forth in the previous office action has been withdrawn. Applicant’s amendments introduces new 35 USC § 112 rejections as set forth in this office action.
Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL.
Claim Objections
Claim(s) 1-8, 10-23 and 24 is/are objected to because of the following informalities:
Regarding Claim(s) 1 and 24:
Claims recite, “according to the deployed setting and logic” at the end of the claims, these are erroneous terms, because earlier claim amendments recite, “deploy(s) the at least one setting and the at least one logic.” Therefore, considering the clarity and consistencies of these terms, the proper terms would be the deployed at least one setting and at least one logic.
For the examination purpose, in broadest reasonable interpretation, this limitation is construed as, according to the deployed at least one setting and at least one logic.
Regarding Claims 3, 8 and 16-17:
The following claims recite:
Claim 3 recites, “the selected template” in lines 2-3;
Claim 8 recites, “each template” in line 3 and “the selected template” in multiple places;
Claim 16 recites, “the plurality of templates” in lines 2-3;
Claim 17 recites, “one or more of the templates” in line 2.
These limitations related to “template” are not consistent with the amendments of parent claim 1 that makes it erroneous and unclear, because parent claim 1 is amended to recite “space template.” In the current amendments, claim 1 was amended to recite “space template” and “the selected space template.”
For the examination purpose, in broadest reasonable interpretation, these limitations are construed as:
Claim 3: “the selected template” is construed as the selected space template.
Claim 8: “each template” is construed as each space template and “the selected template” is construed as the selected space template;
Claim 16: “the plurality of templates” is construed as the plurality of space templates;
Claim 17: “one or more of the templates” is construed as one or more of the space templates.
Claims 2-8 and 10-23:
Claims 2-8 and 10-23 are also objected to based on their dependencies on claim 1.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
35 U.S.C. 112(b)
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(b):
(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.
Claims 3-4 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention.
-Unclear limitations and/or insufficient antecedent basis:
Regarding claim 3:
Claim recites, “the space control system.” There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim, because parent claim 1 amendments recites, “the respective space control system” and doesn’t particularly separate “the space control system;” therefore, it’s not clear what exact space control system is referred to by the space control system recited by claim 3.
For the examination purpose, in broadest reasonable interpretation, this limitation is construed as the respective space control system.
Dependent Claim 4:
Based on its dependency in claim 3, claims 4 is also rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) for the same reasons.
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 (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) 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, 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.
The text of those sections of Title 35, U.S. Code not included in this action can be found in a prior Office action.
The factual inquiries for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows:
Determining the scope and contents of the prior art.
Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue.
Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art.
Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness.
Claim(s) 26 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Anderson’86 et al. (US20200287786A1) in view of Salunke et al. (US20210270488A1) [hereinafter Salunke], and further in view of Steele et al. (US20150198938A1) [hereinafter Steele].
Regarding claim 26 (amended):
ANDERSON’86 disclose(s), A building control system for configuring and deploying electronic devices installed in a building comprising: [(¶44) “FIG. 1 illustrates a representative load control system 100 for configuring and/or controlling one or more control devices”… (¶271) “The area may be a room in a building,”
Examiner notes that ANDERSON’86’s overall control system is implemented in a building as a system for controlling devices in the building];
each space control system comprising: [(¶78) “Different zones may be separately controlled by sending lighting control instructions to a zone to set the zones to different lighting levels. The associated device identifiers of the identified lighting fixtures in a zone may be stored at the mobile device 150 and/or the system controller 140 as a defined zone configuration 194 for controlling the lighting fixtures in the defined zone.”].
a plurality of electronic devices adapted to communicate via a space network to control at least one load installed in the space; [(¶45) “Each of the lighting fixtures 120 a-120 c may have a respective lighting load(s) 122 a-122 c (e.g., LED light sources) and a respective lighting control device 124 a-124 c (e.g., an LED driver) for controlling an amount of power provided to the respective lighting load(s) of the lighting fixture. The load controller 121 may be coupled to the lighting control devices 124 a-124 c via a communication link 125 (e.g., a wired digital communication link).”];
a memory that stores device data comprising unique identifiers that uniquely identify each of the electronic devices within the building control system and which are associated with respective distinct device identifiers that distinguish the electronic devices within the space control system; [(¶78) “Different zones may be separately controlled by sending lighting control instructions to a zone to set the zones to different lighting levels. The associated device identifiers of the identified lighting fixtures in a zone may be stored at the mobile device 150 and/or the system controller 140 as a defined zone configuration 194 for controlling the lighting fixtures in the defined zone. The zone configurations 194 may be sent in messages to the system controller 140 and/or the lighting fixtures in the defined zone for being stored for controlling the lighting fixtures according to the zone configurations 194.”… (¶39) “Devices may be associated with one another by storing identifiers of the devices together in memory.”… (¶58) “The control device beacons” “include a unique identifier that identifies the corresponding control devices” “a control device beacon may include a serial number or another unique identifier that corresponds to a respective load control device.”… (¶86) “the particular beacon identifier” “stored in memory of the control devices.”];
at least one processor adapted to: [(¶163) “processing device 360 (e.g., a personal computer or a laptop). The processing device 360” “on which design software may be executed for configuring (e.g., claiming, diagnostics, association, etc.) and/or controlling the design of the load control system within a load control environment.”];
assign at least one inter-device relationship to at least two device identifiers of the one of the space control systems; [(¶82) “The associated device identifiers of the identified lighting fixtures in a zone may be stored at the mobile device 150 and/or the system controller 140 as a defined zone configuration 194 for controlling the lighting fixtures in the defined zone.”… (¶84) “The configuration data may include representations of the control devices (e.g., the lighting fixtures 210 a-210 d, the occupancy sensor 234, the remote control devices 236, the sensors 216 a-216 d, etc.) in the load control system 200, as well as configuration identifiers (e.g., fixtures, groups, zones, areas, and/or locations) of the control devices.” “configuration data may define the functionality of the control devices, for example, how the lighting fixtures 210 a-210 d respond to the occupancy sensor 234, and/or the remote-control device 236.”
Examiner notes that, in broadest reasonable interpretation, claimed inter device relationship means any device related relationship (e.g.; connected devices, or how devices connect to each other or communicate with each other),
ANDERSON’86 disclose, configuration data with inter device relationship such as relationship between devices such as how lighting fixtures 210 a-are connected and this inter device relationship is associated with at least two or more devices fixtures 210 a-210 d, such as associated device identifiers of the identified lighting fixtures];
create a space template defining a type of space within the building and comprising the device identifiers and the assigned at least one inter-device relationship of the one of the space control systems; [(¶233) “The areas 506 may be identified by building, floor, room, or other area identifier. The areas 506 may be partitioned by subareas. The user interface 500 may indicate a number 508 of lighting control devices within each area 506 and/or a number 509 of lighting control devices within the project (e.g., as determined from the control database).”… (¶117) “The lighting control devices of the lighting fixtures 210 a-210 d may each transmit control device beacons that include their unique identifiers”… (¶121) “automatically select the unique identifiers in the beacons for being configured”… (¶122) “As the lighting fixtures 210 b-210 d are selected, the lighting fixtures may be automatically added to a group of control devices (e.g., a temporary group, zone, or other group of control devices) for collective configuration”… (¶125) “the control device beacons of the lighting fixtures 210 a-210 d that are received at the mobile device 250 with a received signal indicator strength greater than −5 dBm may be discovered and the unique identifiers may be associated with configuration identifiers in storage for being collectively controlled in the load control environment 201.”
Examiner notes that ANDERSON’86 discloses, plural device identifiers (claimed at least two that is more than one) and plural template identifiers (claimed at least two that is more than one) and further teaches, creating configuration data that is associated with lighting fixture identifiers that are unique to those lighting fixtures and includes device associations for example connection relationship between lighting fixtures such as lighting fixture connections that is in the configuration data associated with at least two lighting fixture identifiers];
apply the space template to…one of the space control systems by applying the at least one inter-device relationship in the space template to electronic devices with matched device identifiers. [(¶82) “control device may be claimed by selecting a configuration identifier with which to associate the control device.” “The control device may be associated with the configuration identifier by creating an association between the configuration identifier and the unique identifier of the control device.”… (¶84) “the configuration data may be configured, for example, by the mobile device 250 while the mobile device is claiming and/or associating the control devices with the configuration identifier of the control device in the configuration data. The configuration data may be transmitted to the control devices”… (¶171) “the configuration data may define functionality of the control devices (e.g., how lighting fixtures respond to the occupancy sensors and/or the remote-control devices). The configuration data may define lighting control configuration information including control parameters” “The control parameters may be used by the control devices and/or system controller to control electrical loads during normal operation (e.g., after the method 400 is complete).”
Examiner notes that, regarding the matched device identifiers, Anderson’86’ discloses, applying the configuration data including the device connection relationship that matches the associated device identifier (that is claimed applying at least one of the settings in the template to electronic devices)], but doesn’t explicitly disclose, and
However, Salunke discloses, a plurality of space control systems installed in spaces located within the building, [(¶50) “Still referring to FIG. 2, BMS 200 is shown to include a system manager 202; several zone coordinators 206, 208, 210 and 218; and several zone controllers 224, 230, 232, 236, 248, and 250.”];
apply the space template to another one of the space control systems [(¶83) “configuration data 434, 444, and 454 contain configuration data corresponding to devices associated with controller 430, 440, and 450, respectively.”… (¶84) “Controller 430 may be designated as the source controller for a cloning process. Device manager 402 may be configured to retrieve a listing of properties or configuration template from controller 430 for processing in the cloning sequence.”… (¶85) “Controllers 440 and 450 may be designated as the destination device for cloning.” “cloning may be performed with only one of controllers 440 and 450, or more than controllers 440 and 450.” “the device manager 402 is configured to retrieve values corresponding to properties in the configuration data prior to cloning the controllers 440 and 450. Cloning controllers 440 and 450 may include sending configuration data or property values to the controllers 440 and 450 to overwrite or augment configuration data 444 and 454, respectively. Controllers 440 and 450 may be cloned sequentially or in parallel.”],
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the filing date of the claimed invention to have combined plurality of space control systems installed in spaces located within the building and capability of applying the template to another one of the space control systems to allow to configure multiple controllers quickly and from a single location thereby increasing efficiency and convenience of multiple system configuration from one location taught by Salunke with the system taught by ANDERSON’86 in order to have a reasonable expectation of success such as to allow to configure multiple controllers quickly and from a single location thereby increasing efficiency and convenience of multiple system configuration from one location [Salunke: (¶38) “The present disclosure allows a technician to configure multiple controllers of the same type quickly and from a single location,”], but Salunke doesn’t explicitly disclose, and
Steele discloses, assign distinct device identifiers to each unique identifier of the electronic devices of one of the space control systems; [(¶8) “wherein the input from the user includes a first identifier for the first component and a second identifier for the second component; wherein each of the first and second identifiers is an electronic serial number corresponding to each of the first and second components; wherein the electronic serial number for each of the first and second components is based on identifier information captured by the user's mobile device using one or more input devices coupled to the user's mobile device;”].
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the filing date of the claimed invention to have combined the capability of assigning distinct device identifiers to each unique identifier of the electronic devices of one of the space control systems in order to enable efficient and flexible setup and configuration of a building automation system taught by Steele with the system taught by ANDERSON’86 and Salunke in order to have a reasonable expectation of success such as to enable efficient and flexible setup and configuration of a building automation system [Steele: (¶4) “enable efficient and flexible setup and configuration of a building automation system”].
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 1 and 24 would be allowable if rewritten or amended to overcome the claim objections, set forth in this Office action.
Claim 25 is allowed.
Reasons for Indicating Allowable Subject Matter and Allowance
Claims 1 and 24 are indicated to have allowable subject matter. Claim 25 is allowed.
The following is an examiner’s statement of reasons for indicating allowable subject matter of claims 1 and 24 and allowance of claim 25:
35 USC § 112 rejections of claim 25 is withdrawn:
In response to applicant’s amendments to claim 25, all the 35 USC § 112 rejections as set forth in the previous office action has been withdrawn.
35 USC § 102 rejections withdrawn:
In response to applicant’s amendments to claim 1, all the 35 USC § 102 rejections of claims 1-8 and 10-23 as set forth in the previous office action has been withdrawn.
35 USC § 103 rejections withdrawn:
In response to applicant’s amendments to claims 24 and 25, all the 35 USC § 103 rejections of claims 24 and 25 as set forth in the previous office action has been withdrawn.
Applicant’s arguments are persuasive:
Anderson'86's configuration identifiers are not distinct and do not distinguish any of the devices within the space control system as required by the present claims - they are only meant to define a configuration that can be associated with one or more devices in a space.
Anderson '86 also fails to teach "a plurality of space templates defining different types of spaces within the building, wherein each space template comprises a plurality of distinct template identifiers, at least one setting associated with each of the template identifiers, and at least one logic defining at least one relationship between at least two template identifiers". Because Anderson '86 configuration identifiers are not distinct, they cannot define a particular relationship between two devices that can be applied and interconnect two separate electrical devices in a space. Notably, Anderson '86 does not teach any means of taking a configuration of a plurality of devices in one room or space and being able to deploy it to a second set of a plurality of devices in another similar space.
Anderson '30 merely discloses system controllers 160 and 162 in different
rooms, but nothing is taught in Anderson '30 how to migrate a configuration of a plurality of devices in one room to a plurality of devices in another room.
However, Salunke does not disclose a method of creating a template having settings and logical interconnections for a plurality of devices and being able to configure another system or another space that also has a plurality of devices with these settings and logical interconnections.
(Pages 10-12)
In the remarks filled on 11/26/2025, applicant’s arguments as described above are persuasive. In response to applicant’s arguments regarding the amendments of claims 1 and 24-25, all the 35 U.S.C. § 102 rejections of claims 1-8 and 10-23 and 35 U.S.C. § 103 rejections of claims 24-25 as set forth in the previous office action has been withdrawn.
Claims 1-8 and 10-23 indicated to have allowable subject matter:
Regarding Claim 1:
Regarding the previously presented claim, Anderson’86 et al. (US20200287786A1) discloses all the elements of previously presented claim as described in the previous office action mailed on 08/27/2025.
Regarding the amended claim, Anderson’30 et al. (US20170279630A1) discloses a plurality of space control systems adapted to be installed in spaces located within the building and each comprising: [¶51: The load control environment 100 may include one or more system controllers (such as system controllers 160, 162)…
¶74: a user 132 having a network device 128 may be in room 102. The network device 128 in room 102 may be connected to system controller 160. The system controller 160 may be referred to as a gateway system controller… as the user moves to room 104, the network device 128 may disconnect from the wireless network provided by system controller 160 and the network device 128 may connect to the wireless network provided by system controller 162.
Examiner notes that, Anderson’30 discloses, system controllers 160, 162 etc. shown in Anderson’30 figures 1A-1B within room 102 and 104].
Regarding the amended claim, Steele et al. (US20150198938A1) discloses, a list of a plurality of distinct device identifiers that distinguish the electronic devices within the space control systems [(¶8) “wherein the input from the user includes a first identifier for the first component and a second identifier for the second component; wherein each of the first and second identifiers is an electronic serial number corresponding to each of the first and second components; wherein the electronic serial number for each of the first and second components is based on identifier information captured by the user's mobile device using one or more input devices coupled to the user's mobile device;”].
However, regarding the amended claim, none of the Anderson’86 et al. (US20200287786A1), Anderson’30 et al. (US20170279630A1), Steele et al. (US20150198938A1), or any of the other prior arts listed in all the previous correspondence taken either alone or in obvious combination disclose, A system, specifically including:
at least one memory that stores:
a plurality of space templates defining different types of spaces within the building, wherein each space template comprises a plurality of distinct template identifiers, at least one setting associated with each of the template identifiers, and at least one logic defining at least one relationship between at least two template identifiers; and
a list of a plurality of distinct device identifiers that distinguish the electronic devices within the space control systems and which match the template identifiers of each of the space templates;
at least one processor that, for at least one space control system:
associates each of the unique identifiers of the plurality of electronic devices with one of the device identifiers;
compares the associated device identifiers with template identifiers of a space template selected from the plurality of space templates; and
for each device identifier that matches a template identifier of the selected space template, deploys the at least one setting and the at least one logic associated with the matched template identifier to the respective space control system to control the electronic device associated with the matched device identifier according to the deployed setting and logic.
(in combination with other elements of the claim)
having all the claimed features of applicant’s instant invention, including:
A building control system for configuring and deploying electronic devices installed in a building comprising:
a plurality of space control systems adapted to be installed in spaces located within the building and each comprising:
a plurality of electronic devices; and
a load controller adapted to communicate with the plurality of electronic devices via a space network to control an operation of at least one load installed in the space, wherein the load controller stores device data comprising unique identifiers that uniquely identify each of the electronic devices within the building control system;
at least one memory that stores:
a plurality of space templates defining different types of spaces within the building, wherein each space template comprises a plurality of distinct template identifiers, at least one setting associated with each of the template identifiers, and at least one logic defining at least one relationship between at least two template identifiers; and
a list of a plurality of distinct device identifiers that distinguish the electronic devices within the space control systems and which match the template identifiers of each of the space templates;
at least one processor that, for at least one space control system:
associates each of the unique identifiers of the plurality of electronic devices with one of the device identifiers;
compares the associated device identifiers with template identifiers of a space template selected from the plurality of space templates; and
for each device identifier that matches a template identifier of the selected space template, deploys the at least one setting and the at least one logic associated with the matched template identifier to the respective space control system to control the electronic device associated with the matched device identifier according to the deployed setting and logic.
Claims 2-8 and 10-23 are indicated to have allowable subject matter based on their dependencies on claim 1.
Claim 24 indicated to have allowable subject matter:
Regarding Claim 24:
Regarding the previously presented claim, Anderson’86 et al. (US20200287786A1) and Anderson’30 et al. (US20170279630A1) disclose all the elements of previously presented claim as described in the previous office action mailed on 08/27/2025.
Regarding the amended claim, Steele et al. (US20150198938A1) discloses, a list of a plurality of distinct device identifiers that distinguish the electronic devices within the space control systems [(¶8) “wherein the input from the user includes a first identifier for the first component and a second identifier for the second component; wherein each of the first and second identifiers is an electronic serial number corresponding to each of the first and second components; wherein the electronic serial number for each of the first and second components is based on identifier information captured by the user's mobile device using one or more input devices coupled to the user's mobile device;”].
However, regarding the amended claim, none of the Anderson’86 et al. (US20200287786A1), Anderson’30 et al. (US20170279630A1), Steele et al. (US20150198938A1), or any of the other prior arts listed in all the previous correspondence taken either alone or in obvious combination disclose, A system, specifically including:
at least one memory that stores:
a plurality of space templates defining different types of spaces within the building, wherein each space template comprises a plurality of distinct template identifiers, at least one setting associated with each of the template identifiers, and at least one logic defining at least one relationship between at least two template identifiers; and
a list of a plurality of distinct device identifiers that distinguish the electronic devices within the space control systems and which match the template identifiers of each of the space templates;
at least one processor, wherein for at least one of the space control systems,
the at least one processor is adapted to:
associate each of the unique identifiers of the plurality of electronic devices with one of the device identifiers;
compare the associated device identifiers with template identifiers of a space template selected from the plurality of space templates; and
for a device identifier that matches a template identifier of the selected space template, deploy the at least one setting and the at least one logic associated with the matched template identifier to the at least one space control system to control the electronic device associated with the matched device identifier according to the deployed setting and logic.
(in combination with other elements of the claim)
having all the claimed features of applicant’s instant invention, including:
A building control system for configuring and deploying electronic devices installed in a building comprising:
a plurality of space control systems installed in spaces located within the building, each space control system comprising:
a plurality of electronic devices adapted to communicate via a space network to control an operation of at least one load installed in the space, and associated with unique identification numbers that uniquely identify each of the electronic devices within the building control system;
at least one memory that stores:
a plurality of space templates defining different types of spaces within the building, wherein each space template comprises a plurality of distinct template identifiers, at least one setting associated with each of the template identifiers, and at least one logic defining at least one relationship between at least two template identifiers; and
a list of a plurality of distinct device identifiers that distinguish the electronic devices within the space control systems and which match the template identifiers of each of the space templates;
at least one processor, wherein for at least one of the space control systems,
the at least one processor is adapted to:
associate each of the unique identifiers of the plurality of electronic devices with one of the device identifiers;
compare the associated device identifiers with template identifiers of a space template selected from the plurality of space templates; and
for a device identifier that matches a template identifier of the selected space template, deploy the at least one setting and the at least one logic associated with the matched template identifier to the at least one space control system to control the electronic device associated with the matched device identifier according to the deployed setting and logic.
Claim 25 is allowed:
Regarding Claim 25:
Regarding the previously presented claim, Anderson’86 et al. (US20200287786A1) and Salunke et al. (US20210270488A1) disclose all the elements of previously presented claim as described in the previous office action mailed on 08/27/2025.
Regarding the amended claim, Steele et al. (US20150198938A1) discloses, respective distinct device identifiers that distinguish the electronic devices within the space control system; [(¶8) “wherein the input from the user includes a first identifier for the first component and a second identifier for the second component; wherein each of the first and second identifiers is an electronic serial number corresponding to each of the first and second components; wherein the electronic serial number for each of the first and second components is based on identifier information captured by the user's mobile device using one or more input devices coupled to the user's mobile device;”].
However, regarding the amended claim, none of the Anderson’86 et al. (US20200287786A1), Anderson’30 et al. (US20170279630A1), Salunke et al. (US20210270488A1), Steele et al. (US20150198938A1), or any of the other prior arts listed in all the previous correspondence taken either alone or in obvious combination disclose, A system, specifically including:
a memory that stores device data comprising unique identifiers that uniquely identify each of the electronic devices within the building control system and which are associated with respective distinct device identifiers that distinguish the electronic devices within the space control system;
at least one processor adapted to:
assign at least one setting to at least one device identifier of one of the space control systems;
assign at least one logic to at least two device identifiers of the one of the space control systems;
create a space template defining a type of space within the building and comprising the device identifiers and the assigned at least one setting and at least one logic of the one of the space control systems; and
apply the space template to another one of the space control systems by applying the at least one setting and the at least one of the logic in the space template to electronic devices with matched device identifiers.
(in combination with other elements of the claim)
having all the claimed features of applicant’s instant invention, including:
A building control system for configuring and deploying electronic devices installed in a building comprising:
a plurality of space control systems installed in spaces located within the building, wherein at least one space control system comprises
a plurality of electronic devices adapted to communicate via a space network to control at least one load installed in the space;
a memory that stores device data comprising unique identifiers that uniquely identify each of the electronic devices within the building control system and which are associated with respective distinct device identifiers that distinguish the electronic devices within the space control system;
at least one processor adapted to:
assign at least one setting to at least one device identifier of one of the space control systems;
assign at least one logic to at least two device identifiers of the one of the space control systems;
create a space template defining a type of space within the building and comprising the device identifiers and the assigned at least one setting and at least one logic of the one of the space control systems; and
apply the space template to another one of the space control systems by applying the at least one setting and the at least one of the logic in the space template to electronic devices with matched device identifiers.
It is for these reasons that applicant's invention defines over the prior art of the record.
Any comments considered necessary by applicant must be submitted no later than the payment of the issue fee and, to avoid processing delays, should preferably accompany the issue fee. Such submissions should be clearly labeled “Comments on Statement of Reasons for Allowance.”
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to claim(s) 26 have been considered but are moot because the new ground of rejection does not rely on any reference applied in the prior rejection of record for any teaching or matter specifically challenged in the argument.
Applicant responds
(a) 103 Rejection
Anderson '86 also fails to teach "a plurality of space templates defining different types of spaces within the building, wherein each space template comprises a plurality of distinct template identifiers, …
(Page(s): 11)
With respect to (a) above, Examiner appreciates the interpretative description given by Applicant in response.
In response to applicant’s amendments to the claims, a new grounds of rejections in view of Steele has been introduced.
Combination of Anderson’86, Salunke, and Steele disclose all the elements of claim 26 as described in the current office action.
Applicant’s arguments are fully considered, but for the above described reasons, the arguments are moot; therefore, claim 26 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 in view of the references as presented in the current office action.
Applicant's arguments filed 11/26/2025 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
Applicant responds
(b) 103 Rejection
Applicant further submits that independent claims 24 - 26 recite similar features as independent claim 1 and therefore are believed allowable for the same reasons as set forth above in relation to claim 1. (Page(s): 12)
With respect to (b) above, Examiner appreciates the interpretative description given by Applicant in response.
Claim 26 doesn’t recite similar features as the independent claims 1.
The difference between the features of claim 26 and allowable claim 1 are, claim 1 recites additionally features, such as setting associated with each of the template identifiers and logic defining relationship between template identifiers, specifically including,
a plurality of space templates defining different types of spaces within the building, wherein each space template comprises a plurality of distinct template identifiers, at least one setting associated with each of the template identifiers, and at least one logic defining at least one relationship between at least two template identifiers; and
a list of a plurality of distinct device identifiers that distinguish the electronic devices within the space control systems and which match the template identifiers of each of the space templates;
compares the associated device identifiers with template identifiers of a space template selected from the plurality of space templates; and
for each device identifier that matches a template identifier of the selected space template, deploys the at least one setting and the at least one logic associated with the matched template identifier to the respective space control system to control the electronic device associated with the matched device identifier according to the deployed setting and logic.
In response to applicant's argument that the references fail to show certain features of the invention, it is noted that the features upon which applicant relies (i.e., features similar to claim 1 as described above) are not recited in the rejected claim(s). Although the claims are interpreted in light of the specification, limitations from the specification are not read into the claims. See In re Van Geuns, 988 F.2d 1181, 26 USPQ2d 1057 (Fed. Cir. 1993).
Applicant’s arguments are fully considered, but for the above described reasons, the arguments are not persuasive; therefore, claim 26 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 in view of the references as presented in the current office action.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure is listed in the PTO-892 Notice of Reference Cited document.
Ackmann (US20180220513A1) - Scalable building control system, method, and apparatus:
(¶7) Systems, methods, and modes for a scalable building control system that can be scaled up from a single room control to an entire building control.
Wendt et al. (US20190190741A1) - Building automation system with commissioning device:
(¶14) Receive a beacon message comprising localizing information based on the beacon identifiers received by the building automation device, together with a network address identifying the building automation device in the digital network.
Morley (US20190363933A1) - Wirelessly configurable and networked system for building automation:
(¶6) Receive configuration data associated with the identifier and transmit the configuration data in response to receiving the identifier. The child device may operate based on at least the configuration data.
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 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 MOHAMMED SHAFAYET whose telephone number is (571)272-8239. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 8:30 AM-5:00 PM.
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, Kenneth Lo can be reached at (571) 272-9774. 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.
/M.S./
Patent Examiner,
Art Unit 2116
/KENNETH M LO/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2116