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 .
DETAILED ACTION
Claims 1 – 2 and 4 – 18 and 20 - 22 are pending in the application.
Claims 1 - 12 are withdrawn due to a restriction/election requirement.
Claim 3 is either withdrawn or cancelled; and claim 19 is cancelled.
Claims 21 and 22 are new.
DETAILED ACTION
Priority
Acknowledgment is made of applicant's claim for domestic benefit based on U.S. Patent Application No. 17/404,670, filed August 17, 2021, entitled "Residential Water Utilization Tracking," which is a division of U.S. Patent Application No. 16/392,309, filed April 23, 2019, entitled "Irrigation Control Utilizing Water Authority Data," now U.S. Patent No. 11,150,672, issued October 19, 2021, which is a continuation of U.S. Patent Application No. 15/424,061, filed February 3, 2017, entitled "System and Method for an Improved Sprinkler Control System," now U.S. Patent No. 10,274,969, issued April 30, 2019, which is a continuation of U.S. Patent Application No. 14/271,225, filed May 6, 2014, now U.S. Patent No. 9,594,366, issued March 14, 2017, entitled "System and Method for an Improved Sprinkler Control System.”
Even though, this application repeats a substantial portion of prior applications as cited above, it adds disclosure not presented in the prior application(s). For example, the prior filed application(s) do/does not disclose the amended claim 13 elements of: “receiving, by the central controller from the user device, a water usage data from a utility meter collection device for a property including the multiple irrigation zones;” [Emphasis added by Examiner]. Because this application names the inventor or at least one joint inventor named in the prior application(s), it may constitute a continuation-in-part of the prior application. Should applicant desire to claim the benefit of the filing date of the prior application, attention is directed to 35 U.S.C. 120, 37 CFR 1.78, and MPEP § 211 et seq. The presentation of a benefit claim may result in an additional fee under 37 CFR 1.17(w)(1) or (2) being required, if the earliest filing date for which benefit is claimed under 35 U.S.C. 120, 121, 365(c), or 386(c) and 1.78(d) in the application is more than six years before the actual filing date of the application.
Claim Objections
Claim 3 is objected to because of the following informalities: Claim 3 is both withdrawn and cancelled. Appropriate correction is required.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of 35 U.S.C. 112(a):
(a) IN GENERAL.—The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor or joint inventor of carrying out the invention.
Claim 13 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(a) as failing to comply with the written description requirement. The claim contains subject matter which was not described in the specification in the parent disclosure in such a way as to reasonably convey to one skilled in the relevant art that the inventor or a joint inventor at the time the application was filed, had possession of the claimed invention. The element of “receiving, by the central controller from the user device, a water usage data from a utility meter collection device for a property including the multiple irrigation zones:” is not disclosed in the parent application and therefore is rejected under 35 USC §112(a) as a new matter rejection. See MPEP §201.07. The interpretation of this element is that the central controller receives water usage data from a meter which includes multiple data regarding usage for multiple irrigation zones. The central controller receives this water usage data via a user device. Thus, under a plain language interpretation, the user device first receives usage data for the zones from the water meter and then relays it to the central controller. This was not discloses in the original disclosure. Claims 14 – 18 and 20 – 22 depend from claim 13 and are also rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(a). Appropriate action is required.
Claim 22 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(a) as failing to comply with the written description requirement. The claim contains subject matter which was not described in the specification in the parent disclosure in such a way as to reasonably convey to one skilled in the relevant art that the inventor or a joint inventor at the time the application was filed, had possession of the claimed invention. The element of “receiving, by the central controller, an on time and an off time of the one or more valves; and determining the water usage data per irrigation zone by analyzing the on time and the off time of the one or more valves against the water usage data detected by the utility meter collection device” is not disclosed in the parent application and therefore is rejected under 35 USC §112(a) as a new matter rejection. See MPEP §201.07.
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.
Claim 13 is 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. The claims contain the limitation: “…receiving, by the central controller from the user device, a water usage data from a utility meter collection device for a property including the multiple irrigation zones.” This element is absent from the originally filed specification and disclosure of the original application and therefore is new matter. See explanation above under 35 USC 112(a); and also see MPEP §201.07. Claims 14 – 18 and 20 – 22 depend from claim 13 and are also rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b). Appropriate action is required.
Claim 22 is 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. The claims contain the limitation: “…receiving, by the central controller, an on time and an off time of the one or more valves; and determining the water usage data per irrigation zone by analyzing the on time and the off time of the one or more valves against the water usage data detected by the utility meter collection device.” This element is absent from the originally filed specification and disclosure of the original application and therefore is new matter.
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 13, 14, 16, 17, 20, and 21 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Pourzia (WO 2009100060 A1), herein “Pourzia,” in view of Endrizzi et al. (US PG Pub. No. 20150081115), herein “Endrizzi” in view or Henry (US PG Pub. No. 20220106775), herein “Henry.”
Regarding claim 13,
Pourzia teaches a method of generating an irrigation schedule for a sprinkler controller associated with an irrigation zone comprising: (Par. 0067, second to last line: “…the ASP server can retrieve (276) information concerning the irrigation controller’s baseline irrigation schedule, modify (278) the irrigation schedule to comply with the new regulations and provide (280) the updated schedule to the irrigation controller.” See also Par. 0063 that equates an access point synonymously with an ASP server. Par. 0063, three lines from the bottom: “When the irrigation controller obtains weather based modifications to its irrigation schedule from an access point or" an ASP server, the likelihood that the irrigation controller is able to obtain modifications is higher due to almost continual network availability.” See also figure 6 and Par. 0030: “FIG. 6 is a flow chart showing a process for providing a baseline irrigation schedule to an irrigation controller in accordance with an embodiment of the invention.” Par. 0056: “A process for setting up an irrigation controller in accordance with an embodiment of the invention is shown in FIG. 6. The process 110 includes binding (112) an irrigation controller to a client application, and defining (114) the irrigation zones served by the irrigation system controlled by the irrigation controller. The definition of the irrigation zones can include providing a name for the irrigation zone (in one or more languages), information concerning the type of irrigation system, the plants within the irrigation zone, the soil type, the grade of the zone (i.e., potential for runoff), and/or any other information relevant to determining the irrigation requirements of the zone. In addition to defining irrigation zones, the process involves obtaining (116) the geographic location of the irrigation system. In many embodiments, a zip code is provided. In other embodiments, a street address or other geographic information is provided. The geographic information and the definition of the zones can then be used to determine (118) a baseline irrigation schedule for each zone, which is provided (120) to the irrigation controller and the irrigation controller. At which point, the irrigation controller is ready for operation.” See also Par. 0058.)
and generating, by the central controller, the irrigation schedule for the sprinkler controller based on the watering restriction data. (Par. 0067: “When water regulations change, the new water regulations can be provided to an ASP server and the new regulations used to modify the baseline irrigation schedule of all irrigation controllers known to the ASP server. A process for updating the irrigation schedule of an irrigation controller in response to modifications to water usage regulations is shown in FIG. 13. The process 270 includes receiving (272) updated water usage regulations, and determining (274) irrigation controllers and/or client applications impacted by the new regulations. For irrigation systems that include a client application, the new regulations can be communicated to the client application. When the irrigation controller is connected via an access point that communicates directly with an ASP server,, the ASP server can retrieve (276) information concerning the irrigation controller.sup.'s baseline irrigation schedule, modify (278) the irrigation schedule to comply with the new regulations and provide (280) the updated schedule to the irrigation controller. In many embodiments, the ASP server and/or the client application provides users with notification of the change in watering regulations and impact that the changes may have on specific plants in specific zones.” Par. 0042: “In a number of embodiments, the irrigation control system includes an application or ASP server that can query irrigation controllers for information. In several embodiments, the ASP server aggregates information regionally and can provide municipal authorities with information concerning water usage and water savings and provides water authorities with the ability to automatically incorporate water restrictions into irrigation schedules. In other embodiments, the ASP server can provide access to authorized third parties, such as landscape contractors, enabling the third parties to remotely adjust the baseline watering schedule.” See also Par. 0052 and 0061 (water zones with water restrictions).)
Pourzia does not teach user selection and interaction with the server and communicating to the server (central controller) water restriction data. However, Endrizzi teaches receiving, by a central controller, zone information including geolocation data for the irrigation zone, wherein the zone information is selected via a user interface displaying zone options on a user device; (Par. 0050: “The user may input or select the language of communication at 601. Next at 603, the user may be prompted to input or select the country in which the zones, which represent the real estate or landscape to be watered, reside. The user may be further prompted for information about its geographic location for refining the location of the zones at 605. For example, a user may be queried to input or select a zip code or other geographical area information to refine the geographical location of the watering zones.” See also Par. 0054, 0072, and 0074 cited below.)
receiving, by the central controller from the user device, water restriction data associated with the irrigation zone based on the geolocation data; (Par. 0024: “…irrigation control system 200 that communicates over network in order to benefit from user entered, municipal irrigation restrictions…” Par. 0054: “Referring now to FIG. 7, there is illustrated a method for setting up each zone of a smart irrigation system. At 729, the system may set up each zone individually. The system may prompt the user to input or select various parameters or criteria for each zone.” Par. 0072: “The irrigation parameters may correspond to irrigation zones controlled by the controller. The parameters may be sourced from a user 1013…” Par. 0044 (geolocation for zones). Par. 0074: “…the system and method may comprise generating an irrigation protocol within the irrigation server based, at least partially, on the irrigation parameters received and the calendaring data.” Examiner’s Note - See also Par. 0074 that states that a schedule (irrigation protocol) is generated by the server using the irrigation parameters that are sourced (input) from a user. Par. 0024: “As disclosed above, an irrigation server may reach out to a municipal database and retrieve the restriction rules automatically over the network/internet connection. In an embodiment, after receiving notice that the municipal government has set watering restrictions a user may enter those restrictions manually through the online account…” Par. 0030: “In an implementation, user communication may be facilitated through a mobile application on a mobile device configured for communicating with the irrigation protocol server 225.”)
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 combined a method of using a server to generate or change an irrigation schedule based on water usage regulations and send the schedule to an irrigation controller as in Pourzia with a user that selects parameters which includes both water restriction data and zone information and send that information to a server which creates a schedule (irrigation protocol) as in Endrizzi in order to optimize irrigation protocols that are in compliance with municipal restrictions. (Abstract and Par. 0017).
Endrizzi and Pourzia also teaches actuating, by the sprinkler controller, one or more valves according to the irrigation schedule. (Par. 0023: “It will be appreciated, as illustrated in FIG. 1, that a landscape may have a complex mix of zones or zone types, with each zone having separate watering needs. Many current watering systems employ a controller 110 for controlling the timing of the opening and closing of the valves within the plumbing system, such that each zone may be watered separately. These controllers 110 or control systems usually run on low voltage platforms and control solenoid type valves that are either completely open or completely closed by the actuation from a control signal. Often control systems may have a timing device to aid in the water intervals and watering times. Controllers have remained relatively simple, but as disclosed herein below in more detail, more sophisticated controllers or systems will provide optimization of the amount of water used through networked connectivity and user interaction as initiated by the system.” See Pourzia paragraphs 0043 and 0053.)
Pourzia and Endrizzi do not teach the amended portion of a method of using a user device to receive metering data from zones and sending to a central controller the data. However, Henry does teach receiving, by the central controller from the user device, a water usage data from a utility meter collection device for a property including the multiple irrigation zones (Par. 0047: “In some embodiments, the user application 380 is a software application executable by an electronic processor of the user device 120. The electronic processor of the user device 120 executes the user application 380 to interface or interact with the server 110, the meter subsystem 105, or a combination thereof. As one example, the user application 380 may provide a user interface (for example, a graphical user interface) for receiving user input from an irrigation entity. The user application 380 may transmit the user input to the server 110, the meter subsystem 105, or a combination thereof. The user input may include, for example, field data (such as a soil type, an irrigated area, a soil texture, a crop type, a crop season duration, a location, a water district, and the like). As another example, the user application 380 may receive the meter data from the meter subsystem 105 (for example, through a low energy Bluetooth connection as described above with respect to the transmitter 230) and transmit the meter data to the server 110 (for example, through a cellular connection). As yet another example, the user application 380 may provide a user interface (for example, a graphical user interface) for providing (or displaying) information to an irrigation entity, such as a displayable report including water use data, field data, failure data, peer performance data, and the like. As yet another example, the user application 380 may provide a user interface (for example, a graphical user interface) for facilitating and managing digital water assets, such as a banking of a water right (for example, conserving water in one crop year for use in a subsequent crop year), an exchange or trade of water rights (for example, a cryptocurrency or water credit associated with an irrigation entity's water rights or water allocation), or a combination thereof. As one example, a water jurisdiction that allows water banking may allow an irrigation entity to conserve water in one crop year and use it in a subsequent crop year.” See also Par. 0058 and claim 12. Par. 0038: “FIGS. 4A-4B schematically illustrate one example configuration of the meter subsystem 105 according to some embodiments. As seen in FIGS. 4A and 4B, the meter subsystem 105 may include eight measurement zones 405 (referred to herein collectively as “the measurement zones 405” and individually as “a first measurement zone 405A,” “a second measurement zone 405B,” and the like). Each of the measurement zones 405 may be separated by one or more straightening vanes 410. Accordingly, in some embodiments, each measurement zone 405 is formed or defined by the straightening vanes 410. FIG. 4B is a cross-sectional view of FIG. 4A. Each of the measurement zones 405 may be associated with a water sensor 210. In the illustrated example of FIG. 4B, the water sensors 210 are illustrated as paddle sensors including a paddle 415 and a paddlewheel sensor 420 associated with each paddle sensor. As seen in FIG. 4B, each water sensor 210 is wired (within a housing 425 separate from the water passageway) to the controller 200. As also seen in FIG. 4B, the human machine interface 205 may also be included within the housing 425.” Examiner’s Note – See figure 4A and 4B that depicts the meter subsystem 105 with different zones and sensors for each zone. See also Par. 0008, 0015, 0028 – 0034, 0042 – 0047, 0050, 0056, 0058, 0063 – that teach the meter subsystem (105) that communicates with a user, user application, or a human machine interface.)
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 combined a method of using a server to generate or change an irrigation schedule based on water usage regulations and send the schedule to an irrigation controller as in Pourzia with a user that selects parameters which includes both water restriction data and zone information and send that information to a server which creates a schedule (irrigation protocol) as in Endrizzi with interfacing a user device a metering system that has different zones wherein the user device sends the information to a central controller or a server as in Henry in order to have a user to control the water management during a season and manage water rights and water allocation to different zones. (Par. 0005 and 0047)
Regarding claim 14,
The previously cited references teach the limitations of claim 13 which claim 14 depends. Pourzia also teaches transmitting, by the central controller to the sprinkler controller, the irrigation schedule, wherein the sprinkler controller is configured to actuate one or more sprinkler valves based on the irrigation schedule. (Par. 0043: “A variety of different architectures can be used to implement an irrigation control system in accordance with an embodiment of the invention. In many embodiments, the irrigation control system includes a local irrigation controller that controls valves in an irrigation system to deliver water to one or more irrigation zones in accordance with a schedule known as an irrigation schedule.” Par. 0067: “ Updating Irrigation Schedules in Response to New Regulations [0068] The ability of an ASP server to communicate with a number of irrigation controllers and/or client applications provides the ability of a municipality to distribute and impose new watering regulations via an ASP server. In many environments irrigation water is obtained from remote geographic locations (e.g., communities fed by the Colorado River) and watering regulations may change in response to macro water usage patterns in addition to local weather conditions. When water regulations change, the new water regulations can be provided to an ASP server and the new regulations used to modify the baseline irrigation schedule of all irrigation controllers known to the ASP server. A process for updating the irrigation schedule of an irrigation controller in response to modifications to water usage regulations is shown in FIG. 13.” … Par. 0067, continued: “…the ASP server can retrieve (276) information concerning the irrigation controller.sup.'s baseline irrigation schedule, modify (278) the irrigation schedule to comply with the new regulations and provide (280) the updated schedule to the irrigation controller. In many embodiments, the ASP server and/or the client application provides users with notification of the change in watering regulations and impact that the changes may have on specific plants in specific zones.”)
Regarding claim 16,
The previously cited references teach the limitations of claim 13 which claim 16 depends. Endrizzi also teaches the water restriction data is a first set of water restriction data, and the method further comprises: receiving, by the central controller from a second user device, a second set of water restriction data; and generating, by the central controller, an updated irrigation schedule based on the first set of water restriction data and the second set of water restriction data. (Par. 0072: “Illustrated in FIG. 10 is a graphical representation of a method for providing optimized watering protocols that may be compliant with one or more parameters limiting the timing of irrigation periods. A method for providing an irrigation system having a controller connected to an irrigation server over computer network that may execute watering protocols in compliance with irrigation parameters such as restrictions set by municipalities. At 1010, the system may receive irrigation restrictions over the computer network. The irrigation parameters may correspond to irrigation zones controlled by the controller. The parameters may be sourced from a user 1013, a municipal database 1014, or other database having one or more restrictions that may be placed on a user's irrigation rights. For example, parameters may be defined by condominium or home owner associations or by any group or association that has rights to control water and irrigation in an area. At 1011, the method may comprise storing the irrigation parameters in memory within the system.” Examiner’s Note – See also that two user devices 234 and 231 may access the irrigation server 225 through the cloud 222.)
Regarding claim 17,
The previously cited references teach the limitations of claim 16 which claim 17 depends. Pourzia also teaches transmitting, by the central controller to the sprinkler controller, the updated irrigation schedule, wherein the sprinkler controller is configured to actuate one or more sprinkler valves based on the updated irrigation schedule. (Par. 0053: “Although a specific embodiment of an irrigation controller is shown in FIG. 3, irrigation controllers in accordance with embodiments of the invention can be constructed in a variety of ways. In many embodiments, other combinations of components are used to achieve bi-directional communication with an access point, coordinate irrigation schedules, and actuate irrigation valves in accordance with the irrigation schedule.” Par. 0004.)
Regarding claim 20,
The previously cited references teach the limitations of claim 13 which claim 20 depends. Pourzia also teaches the geolocation data includes zip code information. (Par. 0056: “In addition to defining irrigation zones, the process involves obtaining (116) the geographic location of the irrigation system. In many embodiments, a zip code is provided.”)
Regarding new claim 21,
The previously cited references teach the limitations of claim 13 which claim 21 depends. Henry also teaches wherein the water usage data is provided by a water authority data service in communication with the utility meter collection device. (The server 110 also accesses (or receives) a water metric (or allocation) associated with the irrigation entity (at block 710). A water metric is an amount of water that is assigned to a meter (for example, the meter subsystem 105) or an irrigation entity. In some embodiments, a regulatory body assigns the water metric for a set duration, such as a year. In a regulatory environment where water rights are assigned or allocations are imposed, the water metric may be populated with this allocation or water right. In a non-regulatory environment, the water metric is a voluntary metric assigned by a water management authority. In some embodiments, the water metric is stored in a memory of the server 110. Alternatively or in addition, the water metric is stored at a remote device or database. In such embodiments, the server 110 accesses the water metric from the remote device or database.”)
Claim 15 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Pourzia in view of Endrizzi in further view of Li et al. (US PG Pub. No. 20090099701), herein “Li.”
Regarding claim 15,
The previously cited references teach the limitations of claim 14 which claim 15 depends. They do not teach overriding a schedule or watering events by a user device. Li teaches comprising receiving, by the central controller from the user device, an event override request to override one or more watering events of the irrigation schedule. (Par. 0053: “For example, some embodiments can include a cancel all function 606, a cancel select function 608, a programs function 610, a stations option 612, a pump function 614, a weather function 616, a site status function 618, a diagnostics function 620, a site information function 622 and an options and/or management functions 624. Some of the functions can correspond with actions to be taken by the central control unit while other functions provide users with further functions associated with the selected function.” Par. 0054: “In some instances, the cancel all function 606 is included and allows a user to override an irrigation schedule that is currently active and/or is to be activated, generally within a window of time (e.g., within an hour, within 24 hours, or other such windows of time). Upon selection of the cancel all function 606 the central control communicates with satellite controllers that are currently implementing irrigation to halt irrigation…” See also Par. 0049, 0052, 0055, and 0056 and figure 6.)
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 combined a method of using a server to generate or change an irrigation schedule based on water usage regulations and send the schedule to an irrigation controller as in Pourzia with a user that selects parameters which includes both water restriction data and zone information and send that information to a server which creates a schedule (irrigation protocol) as in Endrizzi with a user that an work through or send to the central control unit different selectable options that changes irrigation activities or overrides an irrigation schedule as in Li in order to allow a user to specify watering parameters of the irrigation system. (Par. 0027)
Claim 18 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Pourzia in view of Endrizzi in further view of Alexanian (US PG Pub. No. 20120095604), herein “Alexanian.”
Regarding claim 18,
The previously cited references teach the limitations of claim 13 which claim 18 depends. They do not teach municipality options regarding restrictions. Alexanian teaches the water restriction data is selected via the user interface displaying municipality options on the user device, the municipality options are based on the geolocation data for the irrigation zone, and the municipality options include at least one of a watering restriction or a fillable section to submit a watering restriction. (Par. 0040 – 0044: “The following are non-limiting examples of automation of restricted watering schedules as provided in embodiments of the present invention: [0041] 1. A schedule of governmentally or otherwise restricted/allowed watering times entered by the user into a controller. This schedule may be manually entered, received over the internet, downloaded into the irrigation controller using a USB port or a memory stick like device, or by YFI means, or displayed on a screen so that the user merely has to select the appropriate restrictions without having to enter any data on the screen. The user then enters the geographic location of the controller, (which may be automatically determined as part of the input of the governmental restrictions) by entry of a zip code, or the like. In many embodiments, once the geographic location is entered or determined, the embodiment also automatically programs the controller for smart watering using a water budgeting method. The controller may then be placed in communication with at least one environmental sensor to receive input used in performing periodic WBR calculations. The user can then select whether he wants to do automated water budgeting, restricted watering schedules, or a combination of both. The programming in the controller may then prevent watering on non-allowed days, and/or adjust watering (adjust start times or run times) according to the according to an applicable restricted watering schedule and/or periodically determined WBR. [0042] 2. Governmental or other watering restrictions may be programmed or downloaded into a portable module, along with historical environmental data for a geographic location. The module is then plugged into a host controller providing it with the watering restrictions and/or historical data for that location (such as temperature, solar radiation, relative humidity, wind, historical ET, etc.). Either the controller or the plug-in is placed in communication with at least one environmental sensor to receive input used to perform periodic WBR calculations. The user may then select either automated watering restrictions, automated water budgeting, or both. [0043] 3. Governmental or other watering restrictions could be provided from a central unit that sends both watering restrictions and/or the periodic (e.g. daily) water budget percentage (WBR) to local controllers. The controllers then use the data received to prevent watering and/or adjust their watering schedules. [0044] 4. Governmental or other watering restrictions are input or downloaded into a portable module, along with historical environmental data for a geographic location. The module is then attached to the output of a host controller and to at least one environmental sensor to receive input used to perform periodic WBR calculations. The user may then select either automated watering restrictions, automated water budgeting, or both. The module then cuts off irrigation when not allowed according to the governmental restrictions and/or limits irrigation according to the WBR.” See also paragraphs 0157 – 0160 that teach a screen that could be fillable.)
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 combined a method of using a server to generate or change an irrigation schedule based on water usage regulations and send the schedule to an irrigation controller as in Pourzia with a user that selects parameters which includes both water restriction data and zone information and send that information to a server which creates a schedule (irrigation protocol) as in Endrizzi with allowing a user having a display screen that can enter geographical information and governmental restrictions wherein the screen can be filled out as in Alexanian in order to manage landscape irrigation water and more specifically to automatically adjust irrigation based upon changing environmental conditions, geographic locations and/or government watering restriction regulations. (Par. 0003)
Allowable Subject Matter
Claim 22 may be allowable over prior art. However, this claim is rejected under 35 U.S.C. §112(a) and 35 U.S.C. §112(b) as being new matter not disclosed in the original or parent application. Reasons for allowance will be held in abeyance pending final recitation of the claims and pending resolving the new matter rejections. The prior art does not disclose: receiving, by the central controller, an on time and an off time of the one or more valves; and determining the water usage data per irrigation zone by analyzing the on time and the off time of the one or more valves against the water usage data detected by the utility meter collection device.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to all claims have been considered but are moot because the arguments do not apply in light of the new reference being used in the current rejection necessitated by amendment. Specifically, the new reference, Henry teaches the amended elements as rejected above. Examiner maintains that the parent application does not teach the amended portion of claim 13 as indicated above. New rejections of 35 U.S.C. §112(a) and 35 U.S.C. §112(b) were necessitated by amendment as state above. The new prior art reference and new rejections were based on the amended claims and therefore this action is a final action.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure:
Gardenswartz (US PG Pub. No. 20120078425) is also related to the instant application and teaches a server that communicates with a user device (101). Municipal restrictions for water usage is by way of wide area network communicating with the server that sends instructions to controllers (switching devices 106) that controls the valves. See also Par. 0035 that allows the user to input zone information.
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 CHAD G ERDMAN whose telephone number is (571)270-0177. The examiner can normally be reached Mon - Fri 7am - 3pm or 4pm 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, 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.
/CHAD G ERDMAN/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2116