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 .
Drawings
The drawings are objected to under 37 CFR 1.83(a). The drawings must show every feature of the invention specified in the claims. Therefore,
“ said CTs being configured to measure the output current in each zone of the modular power supply system” in claim 8,
must be shown or the feature(s) canceled from the claim(s). No new matter should be entered.
Corrected drawing sheets in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(d) are required in reply to the Office action to avoid abandonment of the application. Any amended replacement drawing sheet should include all of the figures appearing on the immediate prior version of the sheet, even if only one figure is being amended. The figure or figure number of an amended drawing should not be labeled as “amended.” If a drawing figure is to be canceled, the appropriate figure must be removed from the replacement sheet, and where necessary, the remaining figures must be renumbered and appropriate changes made to the brief description of the several views of the drawings for consistency. Additional replacement sheets may be necessary to show the renumbering of the remaining figures. Each drawing sheet submitted after the filing date of an application must be labeled in the top margin as either “Replacement Sheet” or “New Sheet” pursuant to 37 CFR 1.121(d). If the changes are not accepted by the examiner, the applicant will be notified and informed of any required corrective action in the next Office action. The objection to the drawings will not be held in abeyance.
Claim Objections
Claims 1 and 11 are objected to because of the following informalities:
Claim 1 recites “the casing of an outdoor lighting modular power supply”, which should have been “the casing of the outdoor lighting modular power supply” instead.
Claim 1 recites “facilitate the switching of the output voltage of said modular power supply”, which should have been “facilitate switching of an output voltage of said outdoor lighting modular power supply” instead.
Claim 11 recites “facilitate the switching of the output voltage of said modular power supply”, which should have been “facilitate switching of an output voltage of said modular power supply” instead.
Appropriate correction is required.
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.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
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.
Claims 2-6, 8 and 9 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.
Claims 2-4 recite “a switch mechanism”. It’s not clear if this is the same or different than the switch mechanism mentioned in claim 1. In order to examine this application, examiner will assume the limitation is “the switch mechanism”.
Claims 5-6 depend on claim 4.
Claim 5 recites “The dynamic voltage switching system of Claim 4, further including a power supply unit configured to provide power to said dynamic voltage switching system, including said wireless communication technology module”. It’s not clear if the wireless communication technology module is included in the power supply unit or included in the dynamic voltage switching system. Based on Fig. 10, it appears that wireless communication technology module is not part of the power supply unit. Further clarification is required.
Claim 8 recites “the output current in each zone of the modular power supply system”. There is a lack of antecedent basis. It’s unclear if a modular power supply system is the same as an outdoor lighting modular power supply. It’s also unclear where each zone is located. Clarification is required.
Claim 9 recites “from the mobile application”. There is a lack of antecedent basis. Examiner will assume claim 9 depends on claim 4 instead of claim 1.
Double Patenting
The nonstatutory double patenting rejection is based on a judicially created doctrine grounded in public policy (a policy reflected in the statute) so as to prevent the unjustified or improper timewise extension of the “right to exclude” granted by a patent and to prevent possible harassment by multiple assignees. A nonstatutory double patenting rejection is appropriate where the conflicting claims are not identical, but at least one examined application claim is not patentably distinct from the reference claim(s) because the examined application claim is either anticipated by, or would have been obvious over, the reference claim(s). See, e.g., In re Berg, 140 F.3d 1428, 46 USPQ2d 1226 (Fed. Cir. 1998); In re Goodman, 11 F.3d 1046, 29 USPQ2d 2010 (Fed. Cir. 1993); In re Longi, 759 F.2d 887, 225 USPQ 645 (Fed. Cir. 1985); In re Van Ornum, 686 F.2d 937, 214 USPQ 761 (CCPA 1982); In re Vogel, 422 F.2d 438, 164 USPQ 619 (CCPA 1970); In re Thorington, 418 F.2d 528, 163 USPQ 644 (CCPA 1969).
A timely filed terminal disclaimer in compliance with 37 CFR 1.321(c) or 1.321(d) may be used to overcome an actual or provisional rejection based on nonstatutory double patenting provided the reference application or patent either is shown to be commonly owned with the examined application, or claims an invention made as a result of activities undertaken within the scope of a joint research agreement. See MPEP § 717.02 for applications subject to examination under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA as explained in MPEP § 2159. See MPEP § 2146 et seq. for applications not subject to examination under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA . A terminal disclaimer must be signed in compliance with 37 CFR 1.321(b).
The filing of a terminal disclaimer by itself is not a complete reply to a nonstatutory double patenting (NSDP) rejection. A complete reply requires that the terminal disclaimer be accompanied by a reply requesting reconsideration of the prior Office action. Even where the NSDP rejection is provisional the reply must be complete. See MPEP § 804, subsection I.B.1. For a reply to a non-final Office action, see 37 CFR 1.111(a). For a reply to final Office action, see 37 CFR 1.113(c). A request for reconsideration while not provided for in 37 CFR 1.113(c) may be filed after final for consideration. See MPEP §§ 706.07(e) and 714.13.
The USPTO Internet website contains terminal disclaimer forms which may be used. Please visit www.uspto.gov/patent/patents-forms. The actual filing date of the application in which the form is filed determines what form (e.g., PTO/SB/25, PTO/SB/26, PTO/AIA /25, or PTO/AIA /26) should be used. A web-based eTerminal Disclaimer may be filled out completely online using web-screens. An eTerminal Disclaimer that meets all requirements is auto-processed and approved immediately upon submission. For more information about eTerminal Disclaimers, refer to www.uspto.gov/patents/apply/applying-online/eterminal-disclaimer.
Claim 11 is rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claim 1 of U.S. Patent No. 11,792,950 in view of Lim (US 9,363,870). Claim 1 of U.S. Patent No. 11,792,950 teaches everything in claim 11 except for a dynamic voltage switching system. However, Lim teaches a dynamic voltage switching system of an outdoor lighting modular power supply (Figs. 3-6; col. 1, lns. 13-24: “…outdoor lights…”), comprising: a) at least one relay (inside 111-113, see PC1~PC3, Figs. 4-6) operationally connected to a microcontroller unit (MCU) (102, Fig. 3) of the casing assembly of the outdoor lighting modular power supply, said at least one relay being configured to facilitate the switching of the output voltage of said modular power supply (col. 4, lns. 50-58); and b) means for communicating voltage level commands (claims 1-3: “…operating voltage level and supplying the DC power outputted via the AC/DC converter (132) to the RF switch controller (100)…”) from a switch mechanism (same as 100, Fig. 3) to said at least one relay to regulate the output voltage of the dynamic voltage switching system. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have the dynamic voltage switching system in U.S. Patent No. 11,792,950, as taught by Lim, in order to control and utilize the modular power supply system to power load such as outdoor lighting by using wireless communication technology module.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status.
The following is a quotation of the appropriate paragraphs of 35 U.S.C. 102 that form the basis for the rejections under this section made in this Office action:
A person shall be entitled to a patent unless –
(a)(1) the claimed invention was patented, described in a printed publication, or in public use, on sale, or otherwise available to the public before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claims 1-3, 7, 8 and 10 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Lim (US 9,363,870).
Regarding claim 1, Lim discloses a dynamic voltage switching system for a casing assembly of an outdoor lighting modular power supply (Figs. 3-6; col. 1, lns. 13-24: “…outdoor lights…”; a casing assembly not explicitly mentioned, but must have it in order to prevent from external damage), comprising:
a) at least one relay (inside 111-113, see PC1~PC3, Figs. 4-6) operationally connected to a microcontroller unit (MCU) (102, Fig. 3) of the casing assembly of the outdoor lighting modular power supply, said at least one relay being configured to facilitate the switching of the output voltage of said modular power supply (col. 4, lns. 50-58); and
b) means for communicating voltage level commands (claims 1-3: “…operating voltage level and supplying the DC power outputted via the AC/DC converter (132) to the RF switch controller (100)…”) from a switch mechanism (same as 100, Fig. 3) to said at least one relay to regulate the output voltage of the dynamic voltage switching system.
Regarding claim 2, Lim discloses the dynamic voltage switching system of claim 1, and Lim further discloses wherein said means for communicating voltage level commands from the switch mechanism to said at least one relay comprises a wireless communication technology module (103, Fig. 3) and said switch mechanism comprises a digital switch on a mobile device (can be digitally switched from 101 instead of a mechanical switch, Fig. 3).
Regarding claim 3, Lim discloses the dynamic voltage switching system of claim 1, and Lim further discloses wherein said means for communicating voltage level commands from the switch mechanism to said at least one relay comprises a wireless communication technology module (103, Fig. 3) and said switch mechanism comprises a digital toggle switch on a mobile device (can be digitally switched from 101 instead of a mechanical switch, Fig. 3).
Regarding claim 7, Lim discloses the dynamic voltage switching system of claim 1, and Lim further discloses wherein said switch mechanism comprises a mechanical switch positioned on said casing assembly (col. 2, lns. 31-36, col. 2, lns. 60-67: “… mechanical switches…”).
Regarding claim 8, Lim discloses the dynamic voltage switching system of claim 1, and Lim further discloses at least two output current transformers (CTs) (121, Fig. 2 and 121, T1-T8 in Fig. 3) operationally connected to said MCU (as shown in Fig. 3), said CTs being configured to measure the output current in each zone of the modular power supply system (as shown in Figs. 4-6).
Regarding claim 10, Lim discloses the dynamic voltage switching system of claim 1, and Lim further discloses a power supply unit (150, Fig. 3) configured to provide power to said dynamic voltage switching system.
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 4-6 and 9 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Lim, and further in view of Mirsky (US 11,558,947).
Regarding claim 4, Lim teaches the dynamic voltage switching system of claim 1, and Lim further teaches wherein said means for communicating voltage level commands from the switch mechanism to said at least one relay comprises a wireless communication technology module (103, Fig. 3) and said switch mechanism comprises a digital toggle switch on a mobile device (can be digitally switched from 101 instead of a mechanical switch, Fig. 3), wherein said wireless communication technology module is configured to establish a wireless connection (col. 4, lns. 38-49: “…wireless switch signal from the remote controller 101…”) with a mobile device (101, Fig. 3).
Lim does not explicitly teach enabling communication with a mobile application, said mobile application being of a type installable on the mobile device. However, Mirsky teaches enabling communication with a mobile application, said mobile application being of a type installable on a mobile device (31, Fig. 2; col. 11, lns. 13-54: “…App engine…”; col. 14, ln. 36-col. 15, ln. 35: “…mobile device… zigbee…”). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to enabling communication with a mobile application, said mobile application being of a type installable on a mobile device in Lim, as taught by Mirsky, in order to allow the user to easily control the outdoor lighting from a modern mobile device, such as mobile devices that run on android or iOS.
Regarding claim 5 as best understood, Lim in view of Mirsky teaches the dynamic voltage switching system of claim 4, and Lim further teaches a power supply unit (150, Fig. 3) configured to provide power to said dynamic voltage switching system, including said wireless communication technology module (103, Fig. 3).
Regarding claim 6 as best understood, Lim in view of Mirsky teaches the dynamic voltage switching system of claim 4. Lim does not teach wherein said wireless communication technology module utilizes wireless communication protocols, including Wi-Fi, Bluetooth, or Zigbee, to establish a connection with said mobile application. However, Mirsky further teaches said wireless communication technology module utilizes wireless communication protocols, including Wi-Fi, Bluetooth, or Zigbee, to establish a connection with said mobile application (36, Fig. 2; col. 10, lns. 38-53: “…Zigbee, Wi-Fi…”; col. 14, ln. 36-col. 15, ln. 35: “…mobile device… zigbee…”). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have said wireless communication technology module utilizes wireless communication protocols, including Wi-Fi, Bluetooth, or Zigbee, to establish a connection with said mobile application in Lim in view of Mirsky, as taught by Mirsky, in order to utilize well-known protocol that is cost-effective, reliable and interoperable with different devices.
Regarding claim 9 as best understood, Lim in view of Mirsky teaches the dynamic voltage switching system of claim 4. Lim does not explicitly teach a memory storage unit operatively connected a printed circuit board supporting said MCU, said memory storage unit configured to retain voltage level data received from the mobile application. However, the Examiner hereby takes Official Notice of the conventionality of a memory storage unit operatively connected a printed circuit board supporting said MCU, said memory storage unit configured to retain voltage level data received from the mobile application. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the teachings of EON with that of Lim in view of Mirsky, since doing so would, predictably, memorize the user’s last command from the mobile device in case of power or other communication connection issues.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JAMES WU whose telephone number is (571)270-7974. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday, 9:00AM - 5:00PM.
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, Allen Parker can be reached at (303)297-4722. 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.
/JAMES WU/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2841