DETAILED ACTION
Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status
The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
This communication is in response to amendments filed on 09/23/2025.
In the application claims 1-3, 5-10, and 12-15 are pending.
Applicant’s arguments with respect to amended limitations in claims 1, 9 and 15 were fully considered; however, the arguments are not persuasive. Applicant argues, “that it would not be obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to combine Whitney in view of Russo with Baker in the manner proposed in the Office Action… “the claimed combination cannot change the principle of operation of the primary reference or render the reference inoperable for its intended purpose.” See MPEP § 2143.01, subsection VI. Baker requires “controlling signal lines for light mode control” and does not disclose that its lighting system could be used when the activation signal is received wirelessly. Baker at [0046] and [0097]. Accordingly, combining Baker with Whitney in view of Russo would require impermissibly changing the principle of operation of Baker. Additionally, Russo discloses that a “'FIRE 911' visual alarm display 130, as shown in FIG. 6, is comprised of a decal 156 having emergency information 158 placed thereon and is illuminated by the visual alarm module 126 to inform people outside of the house 116 that there is an emergency within the house 116.” Russo at [0078]. The display 130 of Russo is a decal that can be seen in the window at all times, even without the illumination that occurs when the system is activated. The display 130 of Russo is not configured “to be unnoticeable from an exterior of the window on which the receiver module is mounted until the at least one indicator light of the receiver module is activated” as recited in in claims 1, 9 and 15 as currently amended. Combining Russo with Baker in the manner proposed in the Office Action would require impermissibly changing the nature of operation of Russo, removing the visible “Fire 911” display.” Examiner respectfully disagrees. First, the Primary reference is Whitney, and the modification of Whitney in view of Russo and Baker will neither change the principle of operation of the primary reference (Whitney) nor render the reference (Whitney) inoperable for its intended purpose. The question is: would it be obvious for one of ordinary skilled in the art to modify the invention of Whitney and incorporate the teaching of Russo and Baker without (i) changing the principle of operation of Whitney and (ii) rendering Whitney inoperable for its intended purpose. The answer is, yes it would be obvious to combine the references. Whitney does not explicitly teach, “receiver module is configured to be mounted to the frame of a window” Whitney states, “LEDs are mounted on the face of the device for easy viewing.” Mounting the LEDs on a frame of a window as suggested by Russo (¶ 0074) will neither changing the principle of operation of Whitney nor rendering Whitney inoperable for its intended purpose. Whitney does not explicitly teach, “receiver module is configured to be … unnoticeable from an exterior of the window on which the receiver module is mounted until the at least one indicator light of the receiver module is activated.” Mounting the LEDs on a frame of a window as suggested by Russo and unnoticeable from an exterior until the at least one indicator light of the receiver module is activated, as suggested by Baker (¶ 014, 104) will neither changing the principle of operation of Whitney nor rendering Whitney inoperable for its intended purpose.
Applicant’s arguments with respect to amended limitations in claims 2 and 10 were fully considered; however, the arguments are not persuasive. Applicant argues, “Whitney does not actually teach that the receiver module includes a “power source within the receiver module housing that provides power to the receiver and the at least one indicator light”. Instead, Whitney teaches that that access point receives power from the device it is attached to, such as the thermostat. Whitney at [0060] (“power for the fire signaling device 402 and access point 420 comes from the devices they are attached to”) and [0081] (“The access point 702 also includes a power converter 714. The power converter 714 is also similar to the power converter shown in FIG. 5. It supplies power for the access point 702. The converter 714 shown is for use with the standard 24 VAC from a thermostat 716”). Additionally, the lighting system of Baker receives power “from the vehicle's electrical system” through wired connections. Baker at [0046], [0053], and [0097]. Accordingly, neither Whitney nor Baker discloses a receiver module that “includes a power source within the receiver module housing that provides power to the receiver and the at least one indicator light”. Moreover, modifying Baker to combine it with Whitney and Russo in a manner that would add a power source to receive module would impermissibly change the nature of operation of Baker by removing its required wired power connection to the vehicle’s electrical system. MPEP § 2143.01, subsection VI.” Examiner respectfully disagrees. The question is would it be obvious for one of ordinary skilled in the art to modify the invention of Whitney and incorporate the teaching of Russo and Baker without (i) changing the principle of operation of Whitney and (ii) rendering Whitney inoperable for its intended purpose. The answer is, yes. First, Whitney explicitly teaches, “access point 702 [claimed receiver module housing] also includes a power converter 714 [See Fig. 7]. The power converter 714 is also similar to the power converter shown in FIG. 5. It supplies power for the access point 702. The converter 714 shown is for use with the standard 24 VAC from a thermostat 716” The indicator 706 and receiver 710 receives power from power supply 714. Incorporation of the teaching from Russo with respect to “receiver module is configured to be mounted to the frame of a window.” as suggested by Russo (¶ 0074), and Baker with respect to, “receiver module is configured to be … unnoticeable from an exterior of the window on which the receiver module is mounted until the at least one indicator light of the receiver module is activated.” as suggested by Baker (¶ 014, 104) will neither changing the principle of operation of Whitney nor rendering Whitney inoperable for its intended purpose.
Claim Interpretation
Language solely recited in preamble recitations in claim(s) 1-3, 5-10, and 12-15. When reading the preamble in the context of the entire claim, the recitation “emergency room indication system and method” is not limiting because the body of the claim describes a complete invention and the language recited solely in the preamble does not provide any distinct definition of any of the claimed invention’s limitations. Thus, the preamble of the claim(s) is not considered a limitation and is of no significance to claim construction. See Pitney Bowes, Inc. v. Hewlett-Packard Co., 182 F.3d 1298, 1305, 51 USPQ2d 1161, 1165 (Fed. Cir. 1999). See MPEP § 2111.02.
Claimed “transmitter module” in claims 1-3, 5-10, 12-15 is interpreted to be “transmitter module 102 has a transmitter module housing 106 and a transmitter 108, and is installed connected to, but external to the smoke detector 200.” See ¶ 0017;
Claimed “receiver module” in claims 1-3, 5-10, 12-15 is interpreted to be “receiver module 104 includes a receiver module housing 122, a receiver 124 and at least one indicator light 126.”
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(f):
(f) Element in Claim for a Combination. – An element in a claim for a combination may be expressed as a means or step for performing a specified function without the recital of structure, material, or acts in support thereof, and such claim shall be construed to cover the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification and equivalents thereof.
The following is a quotation of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph:
An element in a claim for a combination may be expressed as a means or step for performing a specified function without the recital of structure, material, or acts in support thereof, and such claim shall be construed to cover the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification and equivalents thereof.
The claims in this application are given their broadest reasonable interpretation using the plain meaning of the claim language in light of the specification as it would be understood by one of ordinary skill in the art. The broadest reasonable interpretation of a claim element (also commonly referred to as a claim limitation) is limited by the description in the specification when 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is invoked.
As explained in MPEP § 2181, subsection I, claim limitations that meet the following three-prong test will be interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph:
(A) the claim limitation uses the term “means” or “step” or a term used as a substitute for “means” that is a generic placeholder (also called a nonce term or a non-structural term having no specific structural meaning) for performing the claimed function;
(B) the term “means” or “step” or the generic placeholder is modified by functional language, typically, but not always linked by the transition word “for” (e.g., “means for”) or another linking word or phrase, such as “configured to” or “so that”; and
(C) the term “means” or “step” or the generic placeholder is not modified by sufficient structure, material, or acts for performing the claimed function.
Use of the word “means” (or “step”) in a claim with functional language creates a rebuttable presumption that the claim limitation is to be treated in accordance with 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph. The presumption that the claim limitation is interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is rebutted when the claim limitation recites sufficient structure, material, or acts to entirely perform the recited function.
Absence of the word “means” (or “step”) in a claim creates a rebuttable presumption that the claim limitation is not to be treated in accordance with 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph. The presumption that the claim limitation is not interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is rebutted when the claim limitation recites function without reciting sufficient structure, material or acts to entirely perform the recited function.
Claim limitations in this application that use the word “means” (or “step”) are being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, except as otherwise indicated in an Office action. Conversely, claim limitations in this application that do not use the word “means” (or “step”) are not being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, except as otherwise indicated in an Office action.
This application includes one or more claim limitations that do not use the word “means,” but are nonetheless being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, because the claim limitation(s) uses a generic placeholder that is coupled with functional language without reciting sufficient structure to perform the recited function and the generic placeholder is not preceded by a structural modifier. Such claim limitation(s) is/are:
“sensor module… that senses… and emits” in claims 9-10, 12-14 is interpreted to be, “[a] sensor 204 in the smoke detector 200 senses smoke and generates an alarm signal,” See ¶ 0021.
Because this/these claim limitation(s) is/are being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, it/they is/are being interpreted to cover the corresponding structure described in the specification as performing the claimed function, and equivalents thereof.
If applicant does not intend to have this/these limitation(s) interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, applicant may: (1) amend the claim limitation(s) to avoid it/them being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph (e.g., by reciting sufficient structure to perform the claimed function); or (2) present a sufficient showing that the claim limitation(s) recite(s) sufficient structure to perform the claimed function so as to avoid it/them being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph.
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.
Claim(s) 1-3, 5-7, 9-10, and 12-15 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Whitney (US 20050046563 A1), in view of Russo (US 2017/0140619 A1), and further in view of Baker (US 2022/0185177 A1).
Consider claim 1, Whitney teaches, an emergency room indication system for use with a wired fire detection system that includes at least one smoke detector (204 a-d), Whitney teaches, “a residence are aware of the presence of a fire in the residence, codes also require that each of the smoke detectors be interconnected. FIG. 2 is a wiring diagram illustrating the wiring of interconnected smoke detectors in an embodiment of the present invention.” See ¶ 0035, the emergency room indication system comprising:
a transmitter module (414) including a transmitter module housing (See Fig. 4) and a transmitter (414), Whitney teaches, “[t]he smoke detector 410 is in communication with a transmitter 414.” See ¶ 0052, Fig. 4 shows that transmitter (414) is housed separately from the smoke detector 410 and interconnected.);
a receiver module (702/710) including a receiver module housing (See Fig. 7), a receiver (710), Whitney teaches, “access point 702 also includes a wireless receiver or transceiver 710” See ¶ 0079, and at least one indicator light (706), Whitney teaches, “[a] visible LED 706 on the access point signals the current state of activity (described above).” See ¶ 0078;
wherein the transmitter (414) receives an alarm signal from a smoke detector (410), Whitney teaches, “[t]he smoke detector 410 is in communication with a transmitter 414. The connection between the smoke detector 410 and the transmitter [sic] 412 may be wired or wireless. The transmitter [sic] 412 monitors the smoke detector 410 constantly to determine if the smoke detector 410 is signaling the presence of a fire.” See ¶ 0052, and
With respect to wherein the transmitter (414) receives an alarm signal from a smoke detector (410), Whitney teaches, “[t]he smoke detector 410 is in communication with a transmitter 414. The connection between the smoke detector 410 and the transmitter [sic] 412 may be wired or wireless. The transmitter [sic] 412 monitors the smoke detector 410 constantly to determine if the smoke detector 410 is signaling the presence of a fire.” See ¶ 0052,
the transmitter module (414) sends an activation signal to a receiver module (710), Whitney teaches, “[w]hen a smoke detector 410 or other fire detection device, such as sprinkler system 416, has activity, it powers up the transmitter 414. The transmitter 414 sends a message via a communication channel, such as the RF ISM 902-927 MHz band or on a RS-485 multi-drop wired link. The transmitter 414 in the embodiment shown continues to transmit 414 a message periodically as long as the fire detection device is active.” See ¶ 0054, Whitney teaches, “[t]he transmitter 414 and access point 420 may utilize any type of communication” See ¶ 0055; and
the transmitter module (414) sends the activation signal wirelessly to the receiver module (710), Whitney teaches, “transmitters and access points are able to interact. In another embodiment, the transmitters are capable of transmitting a signal that is received by local emergency service providers when they approach the house, providing valuable information as to the location and status of active fire detection devices.” See ¶ 0055; Whitney teaches, “access point 702 receives a message from a transmitter (as described above)” See ¶ 0078. “receiver comprises a wireless receiver.” Published claim 2.
the receiver module receives the activation signal and activates the at least one indicator light, Whitney teaches, “access point according to the present invention may include one or more light-emitting diodes (LEDs) to reflect activity within the device. In one embodiment, the LEDs are mounted on the face of the device for easy viewing… “ See ¶ 0058:
LED
State
Condition
OFF
OFF
Not Ready
ON
Steady
Ready
ON
Blink
Alarm
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skilled in the art at the time of invention (effective filing date for AIA application) to modify the embodiment of Whitney shown in fig. 2, 4, 5, and 7 and design an smoke detector system where the smoke detector is interconnected with the transmitter as shown in Figs. 4 and 5 and wirelessly communicates with an access point shown in Fig. 4 and 7, wherein the access point comprises a receiver and an LED, as shown in Fig. 7, “a means for providing a notification that conditions indicating a hazard are present” as suggested by Whitney ¶ 0011.
With respect to, “wherein the receiver module is configured to be mounted to the frame of a window” Whitney states, “LEDs are mounted on the face of the device for easy viewing”; however, Whitney does not state that the receiver module is configured to be mounted to the frame of a window, nonetheless, in an analogous art, Russo teaches, “a wireless Bluetooth home safety 911 system which comprises a battery disposed in an enclosure that supplies power to a smoke sensor, a carbon monoxide sensor and a gas leak sensor. An audible alarm module, a visual alarm module and an escape route module are all disposed in the enclosure and can be activated by any one of the sensors. A “FIRE 911” visual alarm display is mounted on at least one window in a house and is remotely activated by the visual alarm module via Bluetooth protocol.” See ¶ 0032; Russo teaches, “A “FIRE 911” visual alarm display 130 is mounted on at least one window 132 in the house 116 that is remotely activated by the visual alarm module 126 via wireless Bluetooth signal 127 of a built-in internet router has transmitter 127A located inside enclosure 112 and receiver 127B inside display 130.” See ¶ 0074, and therefore, teaches, receiver module (127B) including a receiver module housing (Fig 1 shows separate housing for element 130), a receiver (127B) and at least one indicator light (i.e. visual alarm display). Russo teaches, “[w]hen smoke, carbon monoxide or a gas leak is detected in the house 116, the system 110 will automatically activate the audible alarm module 124, the visual alarm module 126 and the escape route module 128. If smoke is detected the audible alarm module 124 will inform the person 147 within the house 116 “HELP FIRE IS DETECTED, GET OUT”. If carbon monoxide is detected the audible alarm module 124 will inform the person 147 within the house 116 “HELP CARBON MONOXIDE IS DETECTED, GET OUT”. If a gas leak is detected the audible alarm module 124 will inform the person 147 within the house 116 “HELP A GAS LEAK IS DETECTED, GET OUT”. The colored light emitting diodes 150 of the visual alarm module 126 will flash and the two adjustable directional lights 154 of the escape route module 128 will illuminate the escape route. The emergency information 158 on the decal 156 of the “FIRE 911” visual alarm display 130 on the window 132 of the house 116 will be illuminated by the visual alarm module 126 (via a receiver 127B wireless Bluetooth signal 127).” See ¶ 0079.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skilled in the art at the time of invention (effective filing date for AIA application) to modify the invention of Whitney and “A “FIRE 911” visual alarm display is mounted on at least one window in a house and is remotely activated by the visual alarm module via Bluetooth protocol.” See ¶ 0032, as suggested by Russo, “[t]his will signal rescue teams the exact location of the emergency. The colored lights and audible alarm can also assist in warning occupants, neighbors, and people passing by that a fire or other urgent situation is occurring, allowing individuals to seek safety from their home.” See ¶ 0003.
With respect to, “the receiver module is configured to be … unnoticeable from an exterior of the window on which the receiver module is mounted until the at least one indicator light of the receiver module is activated” in an analogous art, Baker teaches, “lighting system for specialty lighting, which may be attached to a motor vehicle with a window (e.g., glass, plastic, etc.) that is light transmissive. The lighting system may include one or more light assemblies attached to the window (e.g., any glass of the vehicle including the roof) in an interior or exterior of the vehicle.” See ¶ 0008. “an emergency vehicle, may be purposed to keep lighting equipment concealed and generally non-conspicuous. It should also be understood that the present disclosure is not limited to integrated lighting configurations for specialty vehicles, and that the constructions and methods disclosed herein may be utilized in connection with any window or partially transparent portion, or fully transparent object, of a motor vehicle or in window applications outside the field of motor vehicles.” See ¶ 0045. “With reference to the illustrated embodiments of FIGS. 10 and 11, an optical translator 170 that includes one or more optical apertures 610 is provided by a light assembly 110′. FIG. 10 depicts a top view of the light assembly 110′ including an optical translator 170 and the light element 140. The light assembly 110′ is considered highly concealed from the exterior of the vehicle in this configuration. For instance, concealment is achieved when the optical translator 170 is produced in a dark color because the lighting system is not conspicuous when viewed from outside the vehicle.” See ¶ 0141. However, when emergency lights are activated the lights are visible “visible when the light is on” See ¶ 0140.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skilled in the art at the time of invention (effective filing date for AIA application) to modify the invention of Whitney-Russo and “to keep lighting equipment concealed and generally non-conspicuous” as suggested by Baker in an effort not draw unwanted attention.
Consider claim 2, the emergency room indication system of claim 1, wherein the receiver module further includes a power source (714) within the receiver module housing that provides power to the receiver (710) and the at least one indicator light, Whitney teaches, “power converter 714 is also similar to the power converter shown in FIG. 5. It supplies power for the access point 702.” See ¶ 0081.
Consider claim 3, the emergency room indication system of claim 1, wherein the transmitter module (414) is connected in line to wires (210) of a wired smoke detector (410) in a wired smoke detection system, Whitney teaches, “[t]he connection between the smoke detector 410 and the transmitter [sic] 412 may be wired or wireless.” See ¶ 0052; Fig. 4 shows that transmitter (414) and smoke detector 410 are interconnected. Fig. 2 shows the wired smoke detection system.
Consider claim 5, the emergency room indication system of claim 4, wherein the activation signal is a radio frequency signal, Whitney teaches, “[t]he wireless transmitter 514 in the embodiment shown is a radio capable of transmitting messages up to 300 feet. The radio transmits in the ISM frequency band of 902-927 MHz” See ¶ 0064.
Consider claim 6, the emergency room indication system of claim 1, wherein the at least one indicator light is a light emitting diode (706), Whitney teaches, “[a] visible LED 706 on the access point signals the current state of activity” See ¶ 0078; “access point according to the present invention may include one or more light-emitting diodes (LEDs) to reflect activity within the device. In one embodiment, the LEDs are mounted on the face of the device for easy viewing.” See ¶ 0058
Consider claim 7, the emergency room indication system of claim 1, wherein the at least one indicator light has a color that is green.
Previously Examiner took an Official Notice to a fact, that green color LEDs are well known in the prior art. Applicant did not challenge the Official Notice. If applicant does not traverse the examiner’s assertion of official notice, the examiner should clearly indicate in the next Office action that the common knowledge or well-known in the art statement is taken to be admitted prior art because applicant either failed to traverse the examiner’s assertion of official notice or that the traverse was inadequate, See MPEP 2144.03 C. Furthermore, this is considered an obvious design choice, See MPEP 2144.04 II A - In re Kuhle, 526 F.2d 553, 188 USPQ 7 (CCPA 1975) (the particular placement of a contact in a conductivity measuring device was held to be an obvious matter of design choice), and it is Examiner’s position that particular color green is analogous to the “particular placement of a contact” which was held to be an obvious matter of design choice.
Consider claim 9, an emergency room indication system comprising:
a smoke detector including a smoke detector housing,
a sensor module (fire sensing device 504) within the smoke detector housing, See Fig. 5, that senses smoke and emits an alarm signal, Whitney teaches, “a smoke detector sounds an alarm because a piece of toast has been burned.” See ¶ 0090;
With respect to, a transmitter module (514) within the smoke detector housing that is configured to receive the alarm signal, Whitney teaches, “[i]n the embodiment shown in FIG. 5, the transmitter 502 is external to the fire sensing device 504. In another embodiment, the transmitter 502 is contained within the housing of the fire-sensing device 504.” See ¶ 0072;
a receiver module including a receiver module housing, a receiver and at least one indicator light, wherein the receiver module is configured to be mounted to the frame of a window and to be unnoticeable from an exterior of the window on which the receiver module is mounted until the at least one light indicator light of the receiver module is activated;
wherein the receiver module receives the activation signal and activates the at least one indicator light,
wherein the transmitter module includes a transmitter that transmits an activation signal wirelessly to the receiver, See rejection of claim 1.
Consider claim 10, the emergency room indication system of claim 9, wherein the receiver module further includes a power source within the receiver module housing that provides power to the receiver and the at least one indicator light, See rejection of claim 2.
Consider claim 12, the emergency room indication system of claim 9, wherein the activation signal is a radio frequency signal, See rejection of claim 5.
Consider claim 13, the emergency room indication system of claim 9, wherein the at least one indicator light is a light emitting diode, See rejection of claim 6.
Consider claim 14, the emergency room indication system of claim 9, wherein the at least one indicator light has a color that is green, See rejection of claim 7.
Consider claim 15, an emergency room indication method comprising:
receiving by a transmitter module, the transmitter module including a transmitter module housing and a transmitter, an alarm signal generated by a smoke detector;
wirelessly transmitting from the transmitter module an activation signal;
receiving the activation signal by a receiver module, wherein the receiver module is configured to be mounted to the frame of a window and the receiver module includes a receiver module housing, a receiver and at least one indicator light; and
activating the at least one indicator light by the receiver module, See rejection of claim 1.
Claim 8 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Whitney (US 2005/0046563 A1), in view of Russo (US 2017/0140619 A1), in view of Baker (US 2022/0185177 A1), and further in view of in view of Ashrafzadeh (US 2010/0102959 A1).
Consider claim 8, the emergency room indication system of claim 1, transmitter module (414/514) is configured to be installed in line with the at least one smoke detector (410), Whitney teaches, “[t]he smoke detector 410 is in communication with a transmitter 414. The connection between the smoke detector 410 and the transmitter [sic] 412 may be wired or wireless.” See ¶ 0052, Fig. 4 shows that transmitter (414) is housed separately from the smoke detector 410 and interconnected. “The differential wired transmitter 516 in the embodiment shown is an optional interface for use in environments where the wireless transmitter 514 is ineffective. The differential wired transmitter 516 consists of a RS-485 multi-drop differential signaling IC. Setup or control of this interface 516 by the µC 508 is unnecessary. In one embodiment, the wiring of this interface 516 is of a star or daisy chain configuration with a distance of up to 1000 feet.” See ¶ 0065;
Whitney does not teach that the transmitter module including a male adapter configured to connect to a wired smoke detector (504), and a female adapter configured to connect to a wired smoke detection system (i.e. “daisy chain configuration with a distance of up to 1000 feet.” See Whitney ¶ 0065 and Fig. 5), nonetheless, in an analogous art, Ashrafzadeh teaches, “sensing module associated with the container, a transmitter operably connected to the sensing module and configured to transmit an output of the sensor, and a power source module operably connected to the sensor module.” See ¶ 0008, Ashrafzadeh teaches, “FIG. 5D illustrates yet another example of a modular attribute sensing device 100d having a power module 110d with a battery 112d, a transmitter module 120d described below, a sensor module 140d with a gas sensor 142d and an accessory module 150d with an fan 152d. Transmitter module 120d includes a transceiver 122d, a processor 124d with a user authorization or a user authentication module 134d, and a battery 132. In this example, each of the modules is provided with a bus 180 so that they can be interconnected in any sequence. Each module 110d, 120d, a40d and 150d may include both a male and female connector in order to daisy chain a set of modules.” See ¶ 0095;
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skilled in the art at the time of invention (effective filing date for AIA application) to modify the combination of Whitney-Russo and have a Transmitter module 120d includes a transceiver 122d… [that] include[s] both a male and female connector in order to daisy chain a set of modules” as suggested by Ashrafzadeh in an effort to effectively daisy chain Whitney transmitter 502 shown in the embodiment of Fig. 5.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
US 20130307420 A1 Yoder; Benjamin Lee et al. Edge Lit Luminaires For Windows teaches, “A window unit that includes a window frame defining a frame perimeter and a glazing unit located within the frame perimeter. A window illumination element is on the glazing unit and produces an illuminated visual indicator in response to an activating signal. The activating signal may come from a smoke alarm or other alarm system. The window unit may also include additional illumination elements on the window frame or above the window and a speaker that responds to the activating signal.” Abstract, “For the exemplary embodiment shown in FIG. 3, light sources 114 are hidden or concealed from view.” See ¶ 0022.
US 20040012951 A1 Pylkki, Russell John et al. Fire safety window teaches, “A window unit that includes a window frame defining a frame perimeter and a glazing unit located within the frame perimeter. A window illumination element is on the glazing unit and produces an illuminated visual indicator in response to an activating signal. The activating signal may come from a smoke alarm or other alarm system. The window unit may also include additional illumination elements on the window frame or above the window and a speaker that responds to the activating signal.” Abstract. “The window unit 100 may also include a light 180. The light 180 can be a strobe light, a halogen light, an incandescent light, and the like. The light 180 can produce an illuminated visual indicator. The light can be located anywhere on the window frame 110. The light 180 may be recessed within the window frame 110 or flush with a surface of the window frame 110 or extend beyond the window frame 110.” See ¶ 0022. “In FIG. 5, the LEDs are positioned along the border of the glass unit, so that the LEDs 506 are fairly unobtrusive to the overall transparency of and view through the glass unit.” See ¶ 0045.
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 Omer S. Khan whose telephone number is (571)270-5146. The examiner can normally be reached 10:00 am to 8:00 pm 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, Brian A. Zimmerman can be reached on 571-272-3059. 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.
/Omer S Khan/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2686