DETAILED ACTION
This non-final rejection is responsive to the claims filed 20 November 2023. Claims 1-20 are pending. Claims 1, 10, and 16 are independent claims.
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 .
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 101
35 U.S.C. 101 reads as follows:
Whoever invents or discovers any new and useful process, machine, manufacture, or composition of matter, or any new and useful improvement thereof, may obtain a patent therefor, subject to the conditions and requirements of this title.
Claims 16-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 101 because the claimed invention is directed to non-statutory subject matter.
Claims 16-20 describe a “computer-readable medium”.
Further, Applicant's specification, fails to explicitly define the scope of “computer-readable medium”. The broadest reasonable interpretation of a claim drawn to a computer readable medium (also called machine readable medium and other such variations) typically covers forms of non-transitory tangible media and transitory propagating signals per se in view of the ordinary and customary meaning of computer readable media, particularly when the specification is silent. See MPEP 2111.01. A claim that covers both statutory and non-statutory embodiments (under the broadest reasonable interpretation of the claim when read in light of the specification and in view of one skilled in the art) embraces subject matter that is not eligible for patent protection and therefore is directed to non-statutory subject matter. See MPEP §2106.
Thus, in giving the term its plain meaning (see MPEP 2111.01), the claimed “computer-readable medium” is considered to include data signals per se. Data signals per se are not statutory as they fail to fall into one of the four statutory categories of invention.
As an additional note, a non-transitory computer readable medium having executable programming instructions stored thereon is considered statutory as non-transitory computer readable media excludes transitory data signals.
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 1-9 and 16-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Webberley (US 2020/0370870 A1) hereinafter known as Webberley.
Regarding independent claim 1, Webberley teaches:
A method for controlling atmospheric effects in a venue, the method comprising: initializing a haze-control system; (Webberley: ¶[0026]; Webberley teaches an apparatus for monitoring and controlling haze. Fig. 9A (164) and ¶[0040] teaches starting the controller of the apparatus. ¶[0012] teaches placing sensors in a place.)
querying and receiving data from at least one sensor; (Webberley: Fig. 9A and ¶[0028], ¶[0030], and ¶[0040]; Webberley teaches querying one or more sensors.)
analyzing sensor-data received from the at least one sensor; (Webberley: Figs. 9A-9C and ¶[0046]; Webberley teaches querying one or more sensors.)
making a determination whether the sensor-data substantially agrees with a pre-determined target level of an environmental effect; and (Webberley: Figs. 9A-9C and ¶[0046]; Webberley teaches checking whether the haze density/level is above a trigger point.)
based on a determination that the sensor-data does not agree substantially with the pre-determined target level of the environmental effect, sending a command signal to one or more haze generators to vary a haze production level; and (Webberley: Figs. 9A-9C and ¶[0046]-¶[0047]; Webberley teaches turning on the haze generators.)
...
An embodiment of Webberley doesn’t explicitly teach but another embodiment of Webberley teaches:
based on a determination that the sensor-data does agree substantially with the pre-determined target level of the environmental effect, making a determination whether additional haze sequences remain to be completed within the venue. (Webberley: ¶[0034]; Webberley teaches a user setting a set point for the haze level and maintaining a haze level. Further, the apparatus can automatically trigger off or deactivate the haze generator based on the monitored haze levels. The foregoing teaches determining whether additional haze sequences remain.)
Webberley is in the same field of endeavor as the present invention, as it is directed to generating haze at a venue. It would have been obvious, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to a person of ordinary skill in the art, to combine a venue haze generator that monitors and controls the level of haze in a venue to further determine whether to continue monitoring and controlling the haze levels. As such, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to combine these teachings because the combination would allow automatic deactivation based on reached haze levels, as suggested by Webberley: ¶[0034].
Regarding claim 2, Webberley further teaches the method of claim 1.
Webberley further teaches:
wherein a number of the at least one sensor is chosen based on an overall volume within an environment in which the atmospheric effects in the venue are to be controlled. (Webberley: ¶[0033]; Webberley teaches choosing at least three sensors, positioned at different locations or places and reading the haze level, which is a certain amount of micrograms per cubed meter. The apparatus engages based on the user’s set haze level.)
Regarding claim 3, Webberley further teaches the method of claim 1.
Webberley further teaches:
further comprising controlling a level of haze by at least one parameter selected from haze particle-size measurements and a concentration level of the haze. (Webberley: ¶[0033]; Webberley teaches the apparatus engaging based on the user’s set haze level and based on the haze level measurements from the sensors.)
Regarding claim 4, Webberley further teaches the method of claim 3.
Webberley further teaches:
wherein the at least one parameter to determine the level of haze is integrated in both time and spatial volume to determine a desired level of haze particulates being generated. (Webberley: ¶[0033]; Webberley teaches the apparatus engaging based on the user’s set haze level and based on the haze level measurements from the sensors. Further, ¶[0030] teaches the haze generator being triggered and controlled at predetermined time periods to maintain a desired haze level.)
Regarding claim 5, Webberley further teaches the method of claim 3.
Webberley further teaches:
wherein the level of the haze is integrated as a function of time to determine when exposure levels have reached potentially harmful levels to a performer within the venue. (Webberley: ¶[0030] and ¶[0037]; Webberley teaches the haze generator being triggered and controlled at predetermined time periods to maintain a desired haze level. Furthermore, Webberley teaches setting haze levels based on health issues.)
Regarding claim 6, Webberley further teaches the method of claim 1.
Webberley further teaches:
further comprising providing a substantially consistent visual effect of the atmospheric effects, the visual effect being substantially independent of the venue in which a live production is performed. (Webberley: ¶[0037]; Webberley teaches setting haze levels based on desired effect.)
Regarding claim 7, Webberley further teaches the method of claim 1.
Webberley further teaches:
further comprising spatially integrating readings from the at least one sensor to determine a spatial distribution of the haze. (Webberley: Fig. 9C and ¶[0046] and ¶[0049]; Webberley teaches monitoring haze densities of one more sensors.)
Regarding claim 8, Webberley further teaches the method of claim 1.
Webberley further teaches:
further comprising determining a temporal distribution of the haze across a defined spatial extent within the venue. (Webberley: ¶[0030]; Webberley teaches triggering the haze generator at predetermined time periods. Further, Fig. 9C and ¶[0046]; Webberley teaches monitoring haze densities of one more sensors.)
Regarding claim 9, Webberley further teaches the method of claim 1.
Webberley further teaches:
further comprising comparing readings from each of the at least one sensor with a pre-determined level of haze that is correlated with a given scene of a performance within the venue. (Webberley: Fig. 9C and ¶[0037]; Webberley teaches the user setting haze levels are ranges that are frequently incorporated in TV talent shows.)
Regarding claims 16-20, these claims recite a system and a computer-readable medium that performs the function of claims 1-9; therefore, the same rationale for rejection applies.
Claims 10-13, 15 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Webberley (US 2020/0370870 A1) hereinafter known as Webberley in view of Lemmons (US 2004/0015983 A1) hereinafter known as Lemmons.
Regarding independent claim 10, Webberley teaches:
at least one sensor; (Webberley: ¶[0026]; Webberley teaches an apparatus for monitoring and controlling haze. Fig. 9A (164) and ¶[0040] teaches starting the controller of the apparatus. ¶[0012] teaches placing sensors in a place.)
a server configured to collect data from the at least one sensor, the server further to analyze the collected data and make a determination whether sensor- data from the collected data substantially agrees with a pre-determined target level of an environmental effect, the server further configured to control one or more haze generators based on the determination the sensor-data does not substantially agree with the pre-determined target level of the environmental effect; (Webberley: Figs. 9A-9C and ¶[0028], ¶[0037], and ¶[0046]-¶[0049]; Webberley teaches the user setting a haze level and the system checking whether the haze density/level is above a trigger point and controlling haze generator.)
at least one dashboard to view at least analyzed versions of the collected data, the at least one dashboard further to control the server; and (Webberley: Fig. 4 and ¶[0032]; Webberley teaches a display that shows the set haze levels.)
...
Webberley does not explicitly teach but Lemmons teaches:
a database coupled to be accessible by the server, the database including a lookup table of a plurality of pre-determined target levels of environmental effects for the venue. (Lemmons: Fig. 5 and ¶[0038]; Lemmons teaches a user preference database 544 that communicates with a user preference controller. The database stores user preference to determine the intensity of environmental effects. ¶[0024] further teaches environmental effects such as fog and smell.)
Webberley and Lemmons are in the same field of endeavor as the present invention, as the references are directed to managing environmental effects. It would have been obvious, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to a person of ordinary skill in the art, to combine a system that generates haze based on user preferences as taught in Webberley with further using a database to determine levels as taught in Lemmons. As such, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to modify the teachings of Webberley to include teachings of Lemmons because the combination would allow efficiently accessing user preferences, as suggested by Lemmons: ¶[0038].
Regarding claim 11, Webberley in view of Lemmons further teaches the system of claim 10.
Webberley further teaches:
wherein the at least one dashboard is configured to display metrics and data from the system, the display including at least one type of representation selected from numerical, graphical, and visual representations. (Webberley: Fig. 4 and ¶[0032]; Webberley teaches a display that shows the set haze levels.)
Regarding claim 12, Webberley in view of Lemmons further teaches the system of claim 10.
Webberley further teaches:
wherein multiple distributed ones of the at least one sensor are located spatially in the venue to count aerosolized particles from the one or more haze generators in a substantially real-time manner within a selected spatial volume. (Webberley: ¶[0026] and ¶[0033]; Webberley teaches choosing at least three sensors, positioned at different locations or places and reading the haze level, which is a certain amount of micrograms per cubed meter. The sensors monitor particulate matter.)
Regarding claim 13, Webberley in view of Lemmons further teaches the system of claim 10.
Webberley further teaches:
wherein the at least one dashboard is configured to operate as a local intranet. (Webberley: Fig. 4 and ¶[0032]; Webberley teaches a display that shows the set haze levels. The display is local to the haze generator.)
Regarding claim 15, Webberley in view of Lemmons further teaches the system of claim 10.
Webberley further teaches:
further comprising a central computer processor that is configured to aggregate the collected data and analyzes a composite haze environment for a selected time element. (Webberley: ¶[0030]; Webberley teaches triggering the haze generator at predetermined time periods. Further, Fig. 9C and ¶[0046]; Webberley teaches monitoring haze densities of one more sensors. Fig. 4 and ¶[0032] further shows a display that shows the haze levels. Fig. 8 and ¶[0038] teaches a microcontroller which reads real-time haze data and transmits to the controller of the apparatus. Accordingly, the foregoing teaches running the haze generator at predetermined time intervals and displaying the data during those time periods. Furthermore, the system determines whether a set point has been reached and controls the haze generator accordingly.)
Claim 14 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Webberley in view of Lemmons in view of Blackley (US 2016/0370335 A1) hereinafter known as Blackley.
Regarding claim 14, Webberley in view of Lemmons further teaches the system of claim 10.
Webberley in view of Lemmons does not explicitly teach but Blackley teaches:
wherein the at least one sensor includes at least one sensor type selected from optical particle-counters (OPCs) and condensation particle-counters (CPCs). (Blackley: ¶[0166]; Blackley teaches optical sensors for measuring vapor density.)
Blackley is in the same field of endeavor as the present invention, as the references are directed to managing environmental effects. It would have been obvious, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to a person of ordinary skill in the art, to combine a system that generates haze based on user preferences as taught in Webberley with further using a optical sensors as taught in Blackley. As such, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to modify the teachings of Webberley and Lemmons to include teachings of Blackley because the combination would allow efficiently measuring the density, as suggested by Blackley: ¶[0166].
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ALEX OLSHANNIKOV whose telephone number is (571)270-0667. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 9:30-6.
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, Scott Baderman can be reached at 571-272-3644. 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.
/ALEKSEY OLSHANNIKOV/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2118