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 .
Claim Objections
Claim 3 is objected to because of the following informalities: The phrase “wherein the light matrix building block is further configured to decode digital information” should be omitted since it is redundant to features added to the independent claim. Appropriate correction is required.
Claim 8 is objected to because of the following informalities: In line 1 of the claim the “The” before “modular toy” should be replaced with an “A” for clarity. Appropriate correction is required.
Claim 18 is objected to because of the following informalities: The phrase “wherein the digital information to regulate the colour and intensity of each of the light emitting elements is provided as an indexed intensity and indexed colour” should be omitted since it is redundant to features added to the independent claim. Appropriate correction is required.
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 16-19 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.
Claim 16 recites the limitations of "the colour index", “the intensity index” and “the respective light emitting element” in lines 9-10. There is insufficient antecedent basis for these limitations in the claim. For the purposes of examination, the claim will be interpreted as “the digital information for a respective one of the light emitting elements is encoded in a single byte of information comprising a colour index and an intensity index, the controller configured to decode the byte to obtain the colour index and the intensity index for the respective light emitting element”.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(d):
(d) REFERENCE IN DEPENDENT FORMS.—Subject to subsection (e), a claim in dependent form shall contain a reference to a claim previously set forth and then specify a further limitation of the subject matter claimed. A claim in dependent form shall be construed to incorporate by reference all the limitations of the claim to which it refers.
The following is a quotation of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, fourth paragraph:
Subject to the following paragraph [i.e., the fifth paragraph of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112], a claim in dependent form shall contain a reference to a claim previously set forth and then specify a further limitation of the subject matter claimed. A claim in dependent form shall be construed to incorporate by reference all the limitations of the claim to which it refers.
Claims 2 and 14 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(d) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, 4th paragraph, as being of improper dependent form for failing to further limit the subject matter of the claim upon which it depends, or for failing to include all the limitations of the claim upon which it depends. The claims fail to further limit the claims on which they depend since they simply repeat limitations regarding the decoding digital information that provides indexed intensity and indexed colour. Applicant may cancel the claim(s), amend the claim(s) to place the claim(s) in proper dependent form, rewrite the claim(s) in independent form, or present a sufficient showing that the dependent claim(s) complies with the statutory requirements.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 103 which forms the basis for all obviousness rejections set forth in this Office action:
A patent for a claimed invention may not be obtained, notwithstanding that the claimed invention is not identically disclosed as set forth in section 102, if the differences between the claimed invention and the prior art are such that the claimed invention as a whole would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which the claimed invention pertains. Patentability shall not be negated by the manner in which the invention was made.
Claim(s) 1-8, 13-16 and 18 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Wellejus (WO2019/145405A1) and Ishizaki (JPH11284867A). Wellejus discloses a modular toy or educational construction set having a light matrix building block (400) and a peripheral building block device that are configured to be electronically connected to each other to enable a method of communication (page 17 lines 6-27). The light matrix building block (400) includes a housing with a plurality of separate light emitting elements arranged in a 2D pixelated grid on a face thereof (Fig. 7) and a controller (520) housed in the housing (Fig. 8) configured to control the light emitting elements individually in response to receiving and decoding digital information obtained from the building block device via a wired connection therewith (page 27 line 14-page 30 line 8). The light matrix block is further configured to determine whether a connected building block can provide power or whether it is configured in a digital communication status and based on that status the operation of the light matrix building block can be regulated or programmed to operate in a particular manner (Fig. 8, page 17 lines 6-27 & page 27 line 14-page 30 line 8). The digital information can include information for regulating both the color and intensity of each respective light emitting element of the plurality of lighting elements individually (page 14 line 22-page 15 line 7, page 28 lines 10-26 & page 30 lines 10-21). Wellejus discloses the basic inventive concept, with the exception of the digital information configured to regulate color and intensity of the light emitting elements individually by encoding the information in a single byte such that each of the color and intensity are encoded in four bits to provide indexed color and intensity information. Ishizaki discloses using digital information to regulate color and intensity, wherein the color and intensity are regulated within a single byte of information such that each of the intensity and color information are encoded in four bits to create indexed color and intensity information (page 4 paragraph 1). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art from the teaching of Ishizaki to regulate color and intensity using a single byte of information for the predictable result of controlling an output using a known signal to create a desired effect with increased visual interest and functionality.
Claim(s) 9-10, 12 and 17 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Wellejus and Ishizaki as applied above and further in view of Wang (WO2018/148911A1). Wellejus and Ishizaki disclose the basic inventive concept, with the exception of the building block device being a hub device or a battery device. Wang discloses a modular toy or educational construction set having a light matrix building block (30) and a building block device (10 or 40) that are configured to be electronically connected to each other to enable a method of communication (abstract, Fig. 2). The light matrix building block (30) includes a housing with a plurality of separate light emitting elements arranged in a 2D pixelated grid on a face thereof and a controller housed in the housing configured to control the light emitting elements from digital information obtained from the building block device via a wired connection therewith (paragraphs 7 and 37-40). The building block device can take the form of a hub device (40) with a controller that is configured to wirelessly receive encoded or modulated digital information from a user device (50) intended for the light matrix block using Bluetooth messaging and provide the digital information to the light matrix block (paragraphs 31-35 & 37-39). The building block device (10) can also take the form of a building block battery device (paragraph 37). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art from the teaching of Wang to modify the peripheral building blocks of Wellejus and Ishizaki to include hub or battery blocks for the predictable result of providing enhanced functionality to the created constructions by enabling more interesting and versatile control options.
Claim(s) 11 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Wellejus, Ishizaki and Wang as applied above and further in view of Le Cat (WO2019/063951A1). Wellejus, Ishizaki and Wang disclose the basic inventive concept, with the exception of the digital information received wirelessly using a Bluetooth Low Energy message. Le Cat discloses modular blocks that can send information using a Bluetooth Low Energy message to operate functional components (abstract, page 9 paragraphs 3-6). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to substitute the Bluetooth wireless communication of the applied references with a Bluetooth Low Energy communication as taught by Le Cat for the predictable result of using a known communication system to transmit information between blocks to achieve desired functioning and communication.
Claim(s) 19 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Wellejus and Ishizaki as applied for claim 18 above and further in view of Yamamoto (JPH08331487A). Wellejus and Ishizaki disclose the basic inventive concept with the exception of the intensity index provided as a gamma-level table. Yamamoto discloses using digital information to regulate color and intensity of pixels of a display, wherein the color and intensity of the pixels are regulated within a single byte of information such that each of the intensity and color information are encoded in four bits to create indexed color and intensity information from gamma-level tables (page 6 paragraphs 9-13). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art from the teaching of Yamamoto to regulate the intensity using a gamma-level table for the predictable result of controlling an output using a known signal to create a desired effect with increased visual interest and functionality.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to claim(s) 1-19 have been considered but are moot because the new ground of rejection does not rely on any reference applied in the prior rejection of record for any teaching or matter specifically challenged in the argument.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ALYSSA HYLINSKI whose telephone number is (571)272-2684. The examiner can normally be reached Mon - Fri 9:30 - 6:00.
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, Eugene Kim can be reached at 571-272-4463. 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.
/A.M.H/Examiner, Art Unit 3711 /EUGENE L KIM/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3711