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 .
Continued Examination Under 37 CFR 1.114
A request for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, including the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e), was filed in this application after final rejection. Since this application is eligible for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114. Applicant's submission filed on 11/18/2025 has been entered.
Responses to Amendments and Arguments
The amendments filed 11/12/2025 have been entered. Claim 1 is amended. Claims 1, 10, 12-15, and 17-20 remain pending in the application.
Applicant's amendments filed 11/12/2025 with respect to the interpretation under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph have been fully considered and Applicant does not present any specific argument as to the interpretation. Thus, the interpretation under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph has been held and updated as per the claims amendment.
Applicant’s amendments and arguments filed 11/12/2025, with respect to the rejection of claims 1, 10, 12-15 and 17-20 under 35 U.S.C. 103 have been fully considered but are not persuasive.
On pages 9-10 of the Remarks, Applicant alleges that Paragraphs [0006] and [0019] of Tanaka are further cited as disclosing an "infrared sensor configured to independently measure a temperature in each of a plurality of sectors" However, paragraph [0006] only discloses an infrared sensor combined to a proximity sensor so that the temperature is determined at a required distance of the skin. Tanaka does not, however, teach any correction of the measured temperature of the body using the ambient temperature measurement, as currently claimed. … None of these passages teaches that the value of the body temperature is corrected by means of the other sensors, as currently claimed. … Applicant asserts that no known prior art, including the art of record, teaches that:
the infrared sensor measures and corrects the body temperature by measuring the temperature in a plurality of sectors so as to correct the measured value of the body by the ambient temperature, the measure value of the body temperature is further corrected according to the parameters of the other sensors, and the additional sensor guarantee that the temperature is measured in a suitable operation range.
Examiner respectfully disagrees.
At least paragraphs 0005-0006, 0019 and 0102 of TANAKA teach an infra sensor to measure a body temperature in a plurality of sectors or locations (i.e., the first distance to the fourth distance with each other) used to correct the measured body temperature by comparing the measured values each other and correcting the measured body temperature by using the data (i.e., the magnitude of the tilt angle of the mortar-shaped portion 1C of the main unit 1R) to enable a more accurate body temperature to be measured. (See the modified details addressed below).
Claim Rejections – 35 USC § 112(a)
The following is a quotation of the 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.
The following is a quotation of the paragraph of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112:
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 of carrying out his invention.
Claims 1, 10, 12-15, and 17-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(a) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), first Paragraph, as failing to comply with the written description requirement. The claim(s) contains subject matter which was not described in the specification in such a way as to reasonably convey to one skilled in the relevant art that the inventor or a joint inventor, or for pre-AIA the inventor(s), at the time the application was filed, had possession of the claimed invention.
In Claim 1, claim limitation “the body temperature being further corrected using data provided by the at least one additional sensor” (emphasis added) renders the claim indefinite, because it is lack of the written description requirement. It fails to disclose a specific structure and/or feature how and/or with what factor/characteristics/parameter/calibration of the data to correct the measured body temperature. Examiner notes that paragraph 0026 merely discloses “In order to make a correction to the infrared-based human body temperature measurement and have a more exact and precise value, the direct measurement of the infrared sensor may be carried out in particular based on a value measured in the sector 665; it is corrected based on data supplied by other sensors, in particular the ambient temperature sensor, the relative humidity sensor, the ambient light sensor and the UV index sensor, and it is also corrected by a measurement of the ambient temperature, for example measured in the sector 643”. Examiner notes that no descriptions related to the claim limitation are disclosed in the instant application.
In Claim 1, claim limitation “guarantee correct usage operation of said device” (emphasis added) renders the claim indefinite, because it is lack of the written description requirement. It fails to disclose a specific structure and/or feature how and/or with what data/parameter/calculation/calibration to guarantee correct usage operation of the device. Examiner notes that paragraph 0027 merely discloses “In order to guarantee correct usage operation of the product, the measurements from various sensors, in particular from the ambient temperature sensor, the relative humidity sensor, the ambient light sensor and the UV index sensor, are used in order to guarantee that the infrared sensor operates within predefined operating ranges, within limits. This guarantees and safeguards optimum efficiency of the measurements carried out by the infrared sensor”. Examiner notes that no descriptions related to the claim limitation are disclosed in the instant application.
Claims 10, 12-15, and 17-20 are also rejected by virtue of their dependency on claim 1.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 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.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph:
The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the applicant regards as his invention.
Claim 1, 10, 12-15, and 17-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor (or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the applicant), regards as the invention.
In Claim 1, claim limitations of “the body temperature being further corrected using data provided by the at least one additional sensor” (emphasis added) guarantee correct usage operation of said device” (emphasis added) respectively render the claim indefinite, because of lack of the written description requirement set forth above. The claim limitation of “the body temperature being further corrected using data provided by the at least one additional sensor” (emphasis added) renders the claims indefinite because it is unclear to indicate a correcting process/operation, for example, whether the body temperature is adjusted/corrected/calibrated by using/analyzing/comparing/calculating the difference of values measured in the first and second sectors, and/or the sensed values measured by the additional sensor. It is unclear how and/or with what factor/characteristics/parameter/calibration of the data to use the temperature data measured by the infrared sensor to correct the measured body temperature.
The claim limitation of “guarantee correct usage operation of said device” (emphasis added) renders the claim indefinite, because it is unclear what the “guarantee … operation” is indicative of, and/or how and/or with what data/parameter/calculation/calibration the correct usage operation of the device is guaranteed. Examiner notes that paragraph 0027 merely discloses “In order to guarantee correct usage operation of the product, the measurements from various sensors, in particular from the ambient temperature sensor, the relative humidity sensor, the ambient light sensor and the UV index sensor, are used in order to guarantee that the infrared sensor operates within predefined operating ranges, within limits. This guarantees and safeguards optimum efficiency of the measurements carried out by the infrared sensor”. Examiner notes that no descriptions related to the claim limitation are disclosed in the instant application.
Claims 10, 12-15, and 17-20 are also rejected by virtue of their dependency on claim 1.
Claim Interpretation
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: “means for correcting the temperatures” in Claim 1, and “remote processing means”, “means for wireless communication” in Claims 12-14, which are interpreted as described in Figs. 1, 2 and its related descriptions (paragraphs 0019-0025, 0072).
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.
1. Claims 1, 10, 12-15, 17 and 19-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Fadell et al. (US 20140266669 A1, hereinafter referred to as “Fadell”, cited in IDS dated 04/21/2023) in view of TANAKA (US 20160157732 A1, hereinafter referred to as “TANAKA”).
Regarding Claim 1, Fadell teaches a monitoring device (Fig. 1; smart-home environment 100, smart wall switches 108; Para 0028), comprising:
an infrared sensor (Fig. 5, passive IR sensors 528) configured to measure … in each of a plurality of sectors, all of the sectors existing with a single measurement cone (Para 0148, “included are sensors 428 such as temperature, humidity, occupancy, ambient light, fire, smoke, carbon monoxide, active proximity, passive infrared motion, ultrasound, CCD/video camera, etc.”; Para 0171, “one or more passive IR sensors 528 are provided for occupancy sensing. Having multiple ultrasonic sensor 524 and/or passive IR sensors 528 enhance the occupancy sensing capabilities of the detector. Because they are typical mounted in unobstructed locations, high on walls of often-occupied rooms,”);
at least one additional sensor (Fig. 4A, 428; Para 0148, “included are sensors 428 such as temperature, humidity, occupancy, ambient light, …”) selected from the group consisting of:
a barometric pressure sensor (Fig. 4A, 428; Para 0087, “some or all of the network-connected devices are equipped with pressure sensors, such as digital air pressure sensors, digital barometric pressure sensors, etc. These pressure sensors may be, for example, resonant types that measure changes in air density, thermal types that measure changes in thermal conductivity of air, ionization types that measure changes in the flow of ions in air, force collector types (e.g., bellow, diaphragm, piston) that measure deflection”).
an ambient temperature sensor (Fig. 4A, 428; Para 0148, “included are sensors 428 such as temperature, humidity, occupancy, ambient light, fire, smoke, carbon monoxide, active proximity, passive infrared motion, ultrasound, CCD/video camera, etc.”; Para 0217, “a temperature sensor situated inside of the thermostat's housing measure the ambient temperature of air”);
a motion sensor (Fig. 4A, 428; Para 0039, “occupancy/motion sensors”; Para 0148);
a sound level sensor (Fig. 4A, 428; claim 13, “wherein the home devices include at least one of a carbon monoxide sensor, a smoke sensor, a motion sensor, a temperature sensor, a light sensor, a sound sensor”);
a relative humidity sensor (Fig. 4A, 428; Para 0039, “occupancy/motion sensors”; Para 0148, “included are sensors 428 such as temperature, humidity, occupancy, ambient light, fire, smoke, carbon monoxide, active proximity, passive infrared motion, ultrasound, CCD/video camera, etc.”);
an ambient light sensor (Fig. 4A, 428; Para 0039, “any number and type of sensors, such as smoke/fire/heat sensors, carbon monoxide/dioxide sensors, occupancy/motion sensors, ambient light sensors, temperature sensors, humidity sensors, and the like”);
a sensor for measuring a UV index (Fig. 4A, 428; Para 0038, “an ultrasonic or passive IR sensor”);
a particle sensor (Fig. 4A, 428; Para 0172, “the air quality sensors 538 can measure levels of particulate, dust, pollen, mold, etc detection”; Para 0148, “included are sensors 428 such as temperature, humidity, occupancy, ambient light, fire, smoke, carbon monoxide, active proximity, passive infrared motion, ultrasound, CCD/video camera, etc.”);
a sensor for determining an air quality (Para 0172, “the air quality sensors 538 can measure levels of particulate, dust, pollen, mold, etc detection.”);
a sensor capable of sensing particles (Fig. 4A, 428; Para 0172, “the air quality sensors 538 can measure levels of particulate, dust, pollen, mold, etc detection”; Para 0148, “included are sensors 428 such as …, smoke, carbon monoxide); and
a satellite-based geographical position sensor (Para 0103, “using IPS and/or other indoor localization techniques, the application on the mobile device 166 could use the mobile device's gyroscope, magnetometer, accelerometer, and altimeter to obtain location information.”).
Fadell teaches an infrared sensor used for sensing occupancy in rooms by detecting infrared motion/presence of humans in the rooms. Fadell fails to explicitly disclose an infrared sensor configured to measure the temperature of a human body by independently measuring temperature in each of a plurality of sectors, all of the sectors existing with a single measurement cone. Note that an infrared sensor is well-known in the art to sense occupancy by measuring quantity of infrared radiated from an object. TANAKA teaches an infrared sensor configured to measure the temperature of a human body by independently measuring temperature in each of a plurality of sectors, all of the sectors existing with a single measurement cone (Para 0005, “an infrared sensor for measuring a body temperature is capable of measuring the body temperature”; Para 0006, “The infrared sensor is adapted so as to measure the quantity of infrared radiated from a measuring object portion, such as a human skin, thereby measuring a temperature of the measuring object portion, that is, the body temperature”; Para 0019, “a controller configured to calculate the body temperature of the human body based on quantity of infrared from the infrared sensor when the distance sensor detects …”; Para 0102, “by comparing the first distance to the fourth distance with each other, the MCU 83 judges, when measuring the body temperature with use of the infrared thermometer 1 … corrects the measured body temperature”).
Fadell fails to explicitly disclose, but TANAKA teaches means (MCU 83) for correcting the temperatures of said human body measured by the infrared sensor in the plurality of sectors, the body temperature being measured in a first sector and ambient temperature being simultaneously measured in a second sector, the body temperature being further corrected performed using data (the magnitude of the tilt angle of the mortar-shaped portion 1C of the main unit 1R) provided by the at least one additional sensor, wherein said at least one additional sensor is further adapted to guarantee correct usage operation of said device (Para 0005- 0006; Para 0019, “a controller configured to calculate the body temperature of the human body based on quantity of infrared from the infrared sensor when the distance sensor detects …”; Para 0102, “by comparing the first distance to the fourth distance with each other, the MCU 83 judges, when measuring the body temperature with use of the infrared thermometer 1 … corrects the measured body temperature depending on the magnitude of the tilt angle of the mortar-shaped portion 1C of the main unit 1R to the human skin, thereby enabling a more accurate body temperature to be measured.”).
Fadell and TANAKA are both considered to be analogous to the claimed invention because they are in the same field of infrared sensor. Note that, under the broadest reasonable interpretation, TANAKA teaches measuring the temperatures in a plurality of sectors (i.e., the first distance to the fourth distance with each other) used to correct the measured body temperature by comparing the measured values each other and correcting the measured body temperature by using the data (i.e., the magnitude of the tilt angle of the mortar-shaped portion 1C of the main unit 1R) to enable a more accurate body temperature to be measured. Therefore, it would have been obvious to someone of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Fadell to incorporate the teachings of TANAKA by providing an infrared sensor adapted to measure a temperature of a human body in a plurality of sectors and providing operations to enable a more accurate body temperature to be measured and corrected by using the data (i.e., the magnitude of the tilt angle of the mortar-shaped portion 1C of the main unit 1R), taught by TANAKA at least at paragraphs 0005-0006, 0019 and 0102.
Regarding Claim 10, Fadell teaches wherein the at least one additional sensor comprises a plurality of said sensors that are of one and the same type (Fig. 4A, 428; Para 0148, “included are sensors 428 such as temperature, humidity, occupancy, ambient light, fire, smoke, carbon monoxide, active proximity, passive infrared motion, ultrasound, CCD/video camera, etc.”).
Regarding Claim 12, it is dependent on Claim 1 and a system type claim having similar limitations as of Claim 1 above. Therefore, it is rejected under the same rationale as of Claim 1 above. The additional limitations of remote processing means (Para 0222, “processing system 1060”) and means for wireless communication with said remote processing means (Para 0229, “wireless communication components configured such that control communications with the HVAC system”) are taught by Fadell.
Regarding Claim 13, it is dependent on Claim 1 and a method type claim having similar limitations as of Claims 1 and 12 above. Therefore, it is rejected under the same rationale as of Claims 1 and 12 above. The additional limitations of deducing the presence of the person from temperatures measured in each said sector (Fig. 4A, 428; Para 0039, “control communications with the HVAC system, either directly or through a wall-mounted wirelessly communicating thermostat coupled to the HVAC system, are maintained and such that the temperature in the immediate vicinity of the occupant is maintained at their desired level. If the occupant then moves and settles into another location”) are taught by Fadell.
Regarding Claim 14, it is dependent on Claim 1 and a method type claim having similar limitations as of Claims 1 and 12 above. Therefore, it is rejected under the same rationale as of Claims 1 and 12 above. The additional limitations of measuring a temperature of the person in a first one of the plurality of sectors and simultaneously measuring an ambient temperature in a second one of the plurality of sectors with the infrared sensor (Para 0217, “a temperature sensor situated inside of the thermostat's housing measure the ambient temperature of air. Openings in the metallic portion 1024 promote air flow towards a temperature sensor”), and
calculating a temperature of the person by correcting the measured temperature of the person based on the measured ambient temperature (Pare 0148; Para 0222, Para 0229, “The localized-thermostat service robot 162 includes a temperature sensor, a processor, and wireless communication components configured such that control communications with the HVAC system, either directly or through a wall-mounted wirelessly communicating thermostat coupled to the HVAC system, are maintained and such that the temperature in the immediate vicinity of the occupant is maintained at their desired level. If the occupant then moves and settles into another location (e.g. to the living room couch to watch television), the localized-thermostat service robot 162 proceeds to move and park itself next to the couch and keep that particular immediate space at a comfortable temperature”; Note that under the broadest reasonable interpretation Fadell’s process for maintaining an occupant’s temperature at a desired level teaches this claimed feature.) and based on data from at least one of the additional sensors, wherein the additional sensor is one of said ambient temperature sensor, said relative humidity sensor, said ambient light sensor, and said UV index sensor (Para 0148, “included are sensors 428 such as temperature, humidity, occupancy, ambient light, fire, smoke, carbon monoxide, active proximity, passive infrared motion, ultrasound, CCD/video camera, etc.”).
Regarding Claim 15, Fadell teaches wherein the device is battery-operated and further comprises a current sensor configured to analyze and predict a remaining life of the battery (Para 0127, “low sensor batter”; Para 0148, 0153; Note that under the broadest reasonable interpretation the current sensor is merely configured to check a state of the battery and does not describe a specific feature/structure how to analyze and predict the remaining life of the battery. Under this interpretation, Fadell teaches the feature related to a battery state, as claimed).
Regarding Claim 17, Fadell teaches wherein the motion sensor is a three-axis accelerometer (Para 0103, “using IPS and/or other indoor localization techniques, the application on the mobile device 166 could use the mobile device's gyroscope, magnetometer, accelerometer, and altimeter to obtain location information”).
Regarding Claim 19, Fadell teaches wherein the sensor for determining air quality is configured to measure a concentration of a substance and/or a CO2 equivalent therein (Para 0027, “The smart hazard detector 104 may detect the presence of a hazardous substance or a substance indicative of a hazardous substance (e.g., smoke, fire, or carbon monoxide)”; Para 0053, “collect home data 202 … The collected home data 202 may also include, for example, power consumption data, occupancy data, HVAC settings and usage data, carbon monoxide levels data, carbon dioxide levels data,”; Para 0172, “the air quality sensors 538 can measure levels of particulate, dust, pollen, mold, etc detection.”).
Regarding Claim 20, it is a device type claim having similar limitations as of Claims 1, 15 and 16 above. Therefore, it is rejected under the same rationale as of Claims 1, 15 and 16 above.
2. Claim 18 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Fadell.
Fadell teaches wherein the particle sensor is capable of sensing particles of a size between 0.3 pm and 10 pm (Para 0039, “include any number and type of sensors, such as smoke/fire/heat sensors, carbon monoxide/dioxide sensors,”; Para 0053, “collect home data 202 … The collected home data 202 may also include, for example, power consumption data, occupancy data, HVAC settings and usage data, carbon monoxide levels data, carbon dioxide levels data,”; Para 0172, “the air quality sensors 538 can measure levels of particulate, dust, pollen, mold, etc detection”; Para 0148, “included are sensors 428 such as temperature, humidity, occupancy, ambient light, fire, smoke, carbon monoxide, active proximity, passive infrared motion, ultrasound, CCD/video camera, etc.”).
Fadell does not explicitly teach wherein the size of particles is ranged between 0.3 pm and 10 pm. It has been held that "[W]here the general conditions of a claim are disclosed in the prior art, it is not inventive to discover the optimum or workable ranges by routine experimentation." In re Aller, 220 F.2d 454, 456, 105 USPQ 233, 235 (CCPA 1955).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the vibration frequency taught by Feller to be in the claimed range in order to optimize sensing the particles as per a user’s interest and routine experimentation.
Citation of Pertinent Art
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Park et al. (US 20190138068 A) teaches a home automation control panel, global positioning system (GPS), a global navigation satellite system (GNSS), managing a battery capacity and the life cycle of the applications, and he sensor module 240 may include at least one of, for example, a gesture sensor 240A, a gyro sensor 240B, an atmospheric pressure sensor 240C, a magnetic sensor 240D, an accelerometer sensor 240E, a grip sensor 240F, a proximity sensor 240G, a color sensor (e.g., a red, green, blue (RGB) sensor) 240H, a biometric sensor 240I, a temperature/humidity sensor 240J, an illuminance sensor 240K, or an ultra violet (UV) sensor 240M.
Kinney et al. (US 20180144615 A) teaches seamless integration of scenes, or various configurations of home automation or settings of systems within the home, and/or actions, with monitoring systems, where a system uses sensor data collected from a monitoring system of a property, including motion sensor data, microphones, cameras, network connectivity data, etc., to determine the current state of the home., and in some implementations, based on the determined current state of the home, the monitoring system may take action based on commands provided without authentication information.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to BYUNG RO LEE whose telephone number is (571)272-3707. The examiner can normally be reached on Monday-Friday 8:30am-4:00pm.
Examiner interviews are available via telephone, in-person, and video conferencing using a USPTO supplied web-based collaboration tool. To schedule an interview, applicant is encouraged to use the USPTO Automated Interview Request (AIR) at http://www.uspto.gov/interviewpractice.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Lee Rodak can be reached on (571) 270-5628. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-2555.
Information regarding the status of an application may be obtained from the Patent Application Information Retrieval (PAIR) system. Status information for published applications may be obtained from either Private PAIR or Public PAIR. Status information for unpublished applications is available through Private PAIR only. For more information about the PAIR system, see https://ppair-my.uspto.gov/pair/PrivatePair. Should you have questions on access to the Private PAIR system, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative or access to the automated information system, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
/BYUNG RO LEE/Examiner, Art Unit 2858
/LEE E RODAK/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2858