Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status
The present application is being examined under the pre-AIA first to invent provisions.
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and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114.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 11/24/25 has been entered.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to the rejection(s) of claim(s) 1-18 under 35 U.S.C. 103 have been fully considered and are persuasive. Therefore, the rejection has been withdrawn. However, upon further consideration, a new ground(s) of rejection is made in view of US20040133314 to Ehlers et al.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
The following is a quotation of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 103(a) which forms the basis for all obviousness rejections set forth in this Office action:
(a) A patent may not be obtained though the invention is not identically disclosed or described as set forth in section 102 of this title, if the differences between the subject matter sought to be patented and the prior art are such that the subject matter as a whole would have been obvious at the time the invention was made to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which said subject matter pertains. Patentability shall not be negatived by the manner in which the invention was made.
The factual inquiries set forth in Graham v. John Deere Co., 383 U.S. 1, 148 USPQ 459 (1966), that are applied for establishing a background for determining obviousness under pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 103(a) are summarized as follows:
1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art.
2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue.
3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art.
4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness.
Claims 1-2, 8-11, and 17-18 are rejected under pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 103(a) as being unpatentable over US20090200245 to Steinbrueck et al. (hereinafter “Steinbrueck”), in view of US20130131874 to Shupe et al. (hereinafter “Shupe”), in view of US20120029705 to Broniak et al. (hereinafter “Broniak”), in view of US20040133314 to Ehlers et al (hereinafter “Ehlers”).
As per claim 1, Steinbrueck substantially discloses a system for monitoring and controlling aquatic equipment (Steinbrueck, see Fig. 4 and its corresponding paragraphs), comprising:
a variable speed pump (Steinbrueck, see Fig. 4 element 26 and its corresponding paragraphs);
a controller configured to determine operational parameters of the variable speed pump and to control operation of the variable speed pump (Steinbrueck, see Fig 4, its corresponding paragraphs and [0007]); and
a wireless communication subsystem operatively coupled to the controller (Steinbrueck, see Fig 4 element 36, and its corresponding paragraphs);
wherein the wireless communication subsystem is configured to transmit one or more of the operational parameters of the variable speed pump to a first device over a wireless connection (Steinbrueck, see Fig. 4, its corresponding paragraphs and [0007]);
wherein the wireless communication subsystem is configured to receive one or more control parameters from the first device (Steinbrueck, see Fig. 4, its corresponding paragraphs and [0007]); and
wherein the controller controls operation of the variable speed pump based on the one or more control parameters (Steinbrueck, see Fig. 4, its corresponding paragraphs and [0007])
Steinbrueck does not explicitly disclose transmitting information over a WiFi wireless connection, transmitting information to a second device over a Bluetooth wireless connection, wherein at least one of the first device or the second device displays a scheduler screen that allows a user to schedule a plurality of operation events for the variable speed pump, each event of the plurality of operation events including a user-adjustable speed at which to operate the variable speed pump during said event.
However, Shupe in an analogous art discloses transmitting information over a WiFi wireless connection (Shupe, see [0034]-[0035], Fig. 1 and [0037], it is noted that 802.11 network standard is WiFi wireless connection), transmitting information to a second device over a Bluetooth wireless connection (Shupe, see [0034]-[0035], Fig. 1 and [0037]), wherein the second device displays a scheduler screen that allows a user to schedule a plurality of operation events (Shupe, see Fig. 2 and its corresponding paragraphs).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art at the time of invention was made to incorporate the teaching of Shupe into the system of Steinbrueck. The modification would be obvious because one of the ordinary skill in the art would want to achieve the predictable result of efficient failover and uninterrupted communication in the event of a connection issue of a network by having both WiFi connection and Bluetooth connection.
The combination of Steinbrueck and Shupe does not explicitly disclose schedule a plurality of operation events for the variable speed pump, each event of the plurality of operation events including a user-adjustable speed at which to operate the variable speed pump during said event.
However, Broniak in an analogous art discloses schedule a plurality of operation events for the variable speed pump, each event of the plurality of operation events including a user-adjustable speed at which to operate the variable speed pump during said event (Broniak, see [0035]).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art at the time of invention was made to incorporate the teaching of Broniak into the above combination of Steinbrueck and Shupe. The modification would be obvious because one of the ordinary skill in the art would want to provide a user the freedom to interact with the pool pump schedule without having to be standing physically in close proximity to the unit, or even be at home (Broniak, see [0035]).
The combination of Steinbrueck, Shupe and Broniak does not explicitly disclose each event of the plurality of operation events displayed in the scheduler screen having an associated screen element displayed in the scheduler screen and selectively actuable by the user to activate the event.
Ehlers in an analogous art discloses each event of the plurality of operation events displayed in the scheduler screen having an associated screen element displayed in the scheduler screen and selectively actuable by the user to activate the event (Ehlers, see Fig. 4G, Fig. 4H, Fig. 4I and [0324]-[0326], it is noted that by selecting the name on the date/day type drop down list (i.e. associated screen element actuable by the user), the event (i.e. corresponding schedule for that day type) is activated).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art at the time of invention was made to incorporate the teaching of Ehlers into the above combination of Steinbrueck, Shupe and Broniak. The modification would be obvious because one of the ordinary skill in the art would want to achieve predictable result of fast selection of events (schedules) by the user by displaying all the events that are selectable on a user interface.
As per claim 2, the rejection of claim 1 is incorporated, Steinbrueck further discloses an RS-485 communications interface connecting the variable speed pump to the controller (Steinbrueck, see [0018]).
As per claim 8, the rejection of claim 1 is incorporated, Steinbrueck further discloses the controller is configured to receive one or more control parameters from a pool or spa control system (Steinbrueck, see Fig 4, its corresponding paragraphs and [0007]).
As per claim 9, the rejection of claim 1 is incorporated, Steinbrueck further discloses wherein the at least one of the first device includes a user interface configured to display one or more of the operational parameters of the variable speed pump and configured to receive one or more control parameters for controlling the variable speed pump (Steinbrueck, see Fig. 4, Fig. 7, their corresponding paragraphs and [0007]).
As per claim 10, Steinbrueck substantially discloses a system for monitoring and controlling aquatic equipment (Steinbrueck, see Fig. 4 and its corresponding paragraphs), comprising:
a variable speed pump (Steinbrueck, see Fig. 4 element 26 and its corresponding paragraphs);
a controller configured to determine operational parameters of the variable speed pump and to control operation of the variable speed pump (Steinbrueck, see Fig 4, its corresponding paragraphs and [0007]); and
a wireless communication system operatively coupled to the controller (Steinbrueck, see Fig 4 element 36, and its corresponding paragraphs);
wherein the wireless communication subsystem is configured to transmit one or more of the operational parameters of the variable speed pump to a device over a wireless connection (Steinbrueck, see Fig. 4, its corresponding paragraphs and [0007]);
wherein the wireless communication subsystem is configured to receive one or more control parameters from the device (Steinbrueck, see Fig. 4, its corresponding paragraphs and [0007]); and
wherein the controller controls operation of the variable speed pump based on the one or more control parameters (Steinbrueck, see Fig. 4, its corresponding paragraphs and [0007]).
Steinbrueck does not explicitly disclose transmitting information over a WiFi or a Bluetooth wireless connection, wherein at least one of the first device or the second device displays a scheduler screen that allows a user to schedule a plurality of operation events for the variable speed pump, each event of the plurality of operation events including a user-adjustable speed at which to operate the variable speed pump during said event.
However, Shupe in an analogous art discloses transmitting information over a WiFi or a Bluetooth wireless connection (Shupe, see [0034]-[0035], Fig. 1 and [0037]), wherein the second device displays a scheduler screen that allows a user to schedule a plurality of operation events (Shupe, see Fig. 2 and its corresponding paragraphs).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art at the time of invention was made to incorporate the teaching of Shupe into the system of Steinbrueck. The modification would be obvious because one of the ordinary skill in the art would want to achieve the predictable result of efficient failover and uninterrupted communication in the event of a connection issue of a network by having both WiFi connection and Bluetooth connection.
The combination of Steinbrueck and Shupe does not explicitly disclose schedule a plurality of operation events for the variable speed pump, each event of the plurality of operation events including a user-adjustable speed at which to operate the variable speed pump during said event.
However, Broniak in an analogous art discloses schedule a plurality of operation events for the variable speed pump, each event of the plurality of operation events including a user-adjustable speed at which to operate the variable speed pump during said event (Broniak, see [0035]).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art at the time of invention was made to incorporate the teaching of Broniak into the above combination of Steinbrueck and Shupe. The modification would be obvious because one of the ordinary skill in the art would want to provide a user the freedom to interact with the pool pump schedule without having to be standing physically in close proximity to the unit, or even be at home (Broniak, see [0035]).
The combination of Steinbrueck, Shupe and Broniak does not explicitly disclose each event of the plurality of operation events displayed in the scheduler screen having an associated screen element displayed in the scheduler screen and selectively actuable by the user to activate the event.
Ehlers in an analogous art discloses each event of the plurality of operation events displayed in the scheduler screen having an associated screen element displayed in the scheduler screen and selectively actuable by the user to activate the event (Ehlers, see Fig. 4G, Fig. 4H, Fig. 4I and [0324]-[0326], it is noted that by selecting the name on the date/day type drop down list (i.e. associated screen element actuable by the user), the event (i.e. corresponding schedule for that day type) is activated).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art at the time of invention was made to incorporate the teaching of Ehlers into the above combination of Steinbrueck, Shupe and Broniak. The modification would be obvious because one of the ordinary skill in the art would want to achieve predictable result of fast selection of events (schedules) by the user by displaying all the events that are selectable on a user interface.
As per claim 11, the rejection of claim 10 is incorporated, Steinbrueck further discloses an RS-485 communications interface connecting the variable speed pump to the controller (Steinbrueck, see [0018]).
As per claim 17, the rejection of claim 10 is incorporated, Steinbrueck further discloses the controller is configured to receive one or more control parameters from a pool or spa control system (Steinbrueck, see Fig 4, its corresponding paragraphs and [0007]).
As per claim 18, the rejection of claim 10 is incorporated, Steinbrueck further discloses wherein the device includes a user interface configured to display one or more of the operational parameters of the variable speed pump and configured to receive one or more control parameters for controlling the variable speed pump (Steinbrueck, see Fig. 4, Fig. 7, their corresponding paragraphs and [0007]).
Claims 3-5 and 12-14 are rejected under pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 103(a) as being unpatentable over Steinbrueck, in view of Shupe, in view of Broniak, in view of Ehlers, further in view of US20080144238 to Cline et al. (hereinafter “Cline”).
As per claim 3, the rejection of claim 1 is incorporated, Steinbrueck further discloses controlling one or more pool or spa devices (Steinbrueck, see Fig 4, its corresponding paragraphs and [0007]). The combination of Steinbrueck, Shupe, Broniak and Ehlers does not explicitly disclose the controller includes one or more relays for controlling one or more pool or spa devices. However, Cline in an analogous art discloses the controller includes one or more relays for controlling one or more pool or spa devices (Cline, see Fig. 13 and its corresponding paragraphs).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art at the time of invention was made to incorporate the teaching of Cline into the above combination of Steinbrueck, Shupe, Broniak and Ehlers. The modification would be obvious because one of the ordinary skill in the art would want to provide circuit protection by using relay and fuse (Cline, see [0060]).
As per claim 4, the rejection of claim 3 is incorporated, Steinbrueck further discloses the one or more pool or spa devices are controlled based on operational parameters of the variable speed pump (Steinbrueck, see Fig 4, its corresponding paragraphs and [0007]). Cline further discloses one or more pool so spa devices are controlled via the one or more relays (Cline, see Fig. 13 and its corresponding paragraphs).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art at the time of invention was made to incorporate the teaching of Cline into the above combination of Steinbrueck, Shupe, Broniak and Ehlers. The modification would be obvious because one of the ordinary skill in the art would want to provide circuit protection by using relay and fuse (Cline, see [0060]).
As per claim 5, the rejection of claim 3 is incorporated, Steinbrueck further discloses wherein the one or more pool or spa devices include a pump (Steinbrueck, see Fig 4, its corresponding paragraphs and [0007]).
As per claim 12, the rejection of claim 10 is incorporated, Steinbrueck further discloses controlling one or more pool or spa devices (Steinbrueck, see Fig 4, its corresponding paragraphs and [0007]). The combination of Steinbrueck, Shupe, Broniak and Ehlers does not explicitly disclose the controller includes one or more relays for controlling one or more pool or spa devices. However, Cline in an analogous art discloses the controller includes one or more relays for controlling one or more pool or spa devices (Cline, see Fig. 13 and its corresponding paragraphs).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art at the time of invention was made to incorporate the teaching of Cline into the above combination of Steinbrueck, Shupe, Broniak and Ehlers. The modification would be obvious because one of the ordinary skill in the art would want to provide circuit protection by using relay and fuse (Cline, see [0060]).
As per claim 13, the rejection of claim 12 is incorporated, Steinbrueck further discloses the one or more pool or spa devices are controlled based on operational parameters of the variable speed pump (Steinbrueck, see Fig 4, its corresponding paragraphs and [0007]). Cline further discloses one or more pool so spa devices are controlled via the one or more relays (Cline, see Fig. 13 and its corresponding paragraphs).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art at the time of invention was made to incorporate the teaching of Cline into the above combination of Steinbrueck, Shupe, Broniak and Ehlers. The modification would be obvious because one of the ordinary skill in the art would want to provide circuit protection by using relay and fuse (Cline, see [0060]).
As per claim 14, the rejection of claim 12 is incorporated, Steinbrueck further discloses wherein the one or more pool or spa devices include a pump (Steinbrueck, see Fig 4, its corresponding paragraphs and [0007]).
Claims 6-7 and 15-16 are rejected under pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 103(a) as being unpatentable over Steinbrueck, in view of Shupe, in view of Broniak, in view of Ehlers, further in view of US6003166 to Hald et al. (hereinafter “Hald”).
As per claim 6, the rejection of claim 1 is incorporated, Steinbrueck further discloses the controller receives information from one or more sensors (Steinbrueck, see Fig. 4 and its corresponding paragraphs). The combination of Steinbrueck, Shupe, Broniak and Ehlers does not explicitly disclose receives information from one or more temperature sensors.
However, Hald in an analogous art discloses receives information from one or more temperature sensors (Hald, see col. 10 lines 16-26).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art at the time of invention was made to incorporate the teaching of Hald into the above combination of Steinbrueck, Shupe, Broniak and Ehlers. The modification would be obvious because one of the ordinary skill in the art would want to prevent damaging the plumbing within the tub by avoid freezing (Hald, see col. 2 line 29 and col. 10 lines 16-26).
As per claim 7, the rejection of claim 6 is incorporated, Steinbrueck further discloses the controller provides control for variable speed pump (Steinbrueck, see Fig. 4 and its corresponding paragraphs). Hald further discloses provides for freeze protection for the tub (Hald, see col. 10 lines 16-26).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art at the time of invention was made to incorporate the teaching of Hald into the above combination of Steinbrueck, Shupe, Broniak and Ehlers. The modification would be obvious because one of the ordinary skill in the art would want to prevent damaging the plumbing within the tub by avoid freezing (Hald, see col. 2 line 29 and col. 10 lines 16-26).
As per claim 15, the rejection of claim 10 is incorporated, Steinbrueck further discloses the controller receives information from one or more sensors (Steinbrueck, see Fig. 4 and its corresponding paragraphs). The combination of Steinbrueck, Shupe, Broniak and Ehlers does not explicitly disclose receives information from one or more temperature sensors.
However, Hald in an analogous art discloses receives information from one or more temperature sensors (Hald, see col. 10 lines 16-26).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art at the time of invention was made to incorporate the teaching of Hald into the above combination of Steinbrueck, Shupe, Broniak and Ehlers. The modification would be obvious because one of the ordinary skill in the art would want to prevent damaging the plumbing within the tub by avoid freezing (Hald, see col. 2 line 29 and col. 10 lines 16-26).
As per claim 16, the rejection of claim 15 is incorporated, Steinbrueck further discloses the controller provides control for variable speed pump (Steinbrueck, see Fig. 4 and its corresponding paragraphs). Hald further discloses provides for freeze protection for the tub (Hald, see col. 10 lines 16-26).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art at the time of invention was made to incorporate the teaching of Hald into the above combination of Steinbrueck, Shupe, Broniak and Ehlers. The modification would be obvious because one of the ordinary skill in the art would want to prevent damaging the plumbing within the tub by avoid freezing (Hald, see col. 2 line 29 and col. 10 lines 16-26).
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JASON LIN whose telephone number is (571)270-3175. The examiner can normally be reached on Monday-Friday 9:30 a.m. – 6:00 p.m. PST.
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, Robert E. Fennema can be reached on (571)272-2748. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300.
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 http://pair-direct.uspto.gov. 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.
/JASON LIN/
Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2117