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 .
This action is responsive to communications filed 12/4/23. Claims 1-19 have been examined and are pending.
Priority
The current application claims priority to Application No. KR-20210073668-A, filed on 6/7/21. Receipt is acknowledged of certified copies of papers required by 37 CFR 1.55. The current application is entitled to an effective filing date of 6/7/21
Claim Objections
Claims 10 - 18 are objected to because of the following informalities. Appropriate correction is required.
Claim 10 recites: “A controlee in a wireless local area network (WLAN) system …” ; whereas the operations/actions performed by the “controlee”, which are notably the same as the method steps performed by a “controller” in claim 1:
(i) “acquiring, by [the] controller, media data;”
(ii) “analyzing, by the controller, a result based on the media data;”
(iii) “controlling, by the controller, a controlee based on the analyzed result”
would (logically) be performed by a “controller”, not by a “controlee”. As such, the term “A controlee” in claim 10 should be – A controller –
Note: This is also consistent with corresponding claim 10 of priority applications, which recite: “A controller …”
Claims 11-18 refer (directly or indirectly) to “the method” of claim 10, whereas (corrected) Claim 10 recites “A controller in a wireless local area network (WLAN) system”.
In order to avoid rejection under 35 U.S.C. 112(d) for improper claim dependency the term “method” should be – the controller –
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.
Claim 19 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 101 because the claimed invention is directed to non-statutory subject matter. The claim does not fall within at least one of the four categories of patent eligible subject matter (i.e. a process, machine, manufacture, or composition of matter) because the claimed “computer readable medium” is not limited to hardware only and as such may be directed to a signal per se.
Examiner notes that this rejection may be overcome by amending the claim to change the term “computer readable medium” to “non-transitory computer readable medium”
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
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)(2) the claimed invention was described in a patent issued under section 151, or in an application for patent published or deemed published under section 122(b), in which the patent or application, as the case may be, names another inventor and was effectively filed before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claims are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) as being clearly anticipated by Ansari et al (US 2010/0217837 A1)
Re: Claim 1, Ansari teaches: A method in a wireless local area network (WLAN) system (Ansari: [0057]-[0058]) of a smart home environment (Ansari: [0053]; [0184], [0187] ref FIG 15 “home automation”; [0205]), the method comprising:
acquiring, by a controller, media data (Ansari: [0080] “bidirectional communication” including “movement of files” between gateway and “home automation devices”, “transfer of media”; [0187] – [0189] ref FIG 15 Home Automation Controller 605, Home automation Control Node 625, <161, 166, 167>)
analyzing, by the controller, a result based on the media data [and] controlling, by the controller, a controlee based on the analyzed result (Ansari: [0080] –[0081] determining commands for “status and control of networked home automation devices”; [0187] – [0189] ref FIG15: <161, 166, 167>)
wherein the media data is obtained based on cable (Ansari: [0079]; [0271] “The STB may have a universal remote control, which allows the user to control TV/Cable …”), file input (Ansari: [0054], [0078] “configuration files”; [0080] “bidirectional communication” including “movement of files” between gateway and “home automation devices”, “transfer of media”; [0188] “gateway device registry”), broadcasting (Ansari: [0187] – [0188] ref FIG 15 <161, 166, 167>), and Internet streaming (Ansari: [0058] “media streaming”; [0059],[0069] “XMPP streaming”; [0080]).
Claims 10 and 19 do not teach or define any new limitations above claim 1. Therefore similar reasons for rejection apply.
Re: Claim 2, Ansari teaches the method of claim 1, wherein the controlee includes first and second controlees (Ansari: [0187]-[0188]; [0209])
Claim 11 does not teach or define any new limitations above claim 2. Therefore similar reasons for rejection apply.
Re: Claim 3, Ansari teaches the method of claim 2, further comprising:
performing, by the controller, commissioning (Ansari: “provisioning”) with the first and second controlees (Ansari: [0123]) based on the WLAN system (Ansari: [0125])
receiving, by the controller, configuration information (Ansari: “status”) on the first controlee from the first controlee (Ansari: [0209] “lamp”, “dimmer setting”);
receiving, by the controller, configuration information (Ansari: “status”) on the second controlee from the second controlee (Ansari: [0209] “thermostat”)
Claim 12 does not teach or define any new limitations above claim 3. Therefore, similar reasons for rejection apply.
Re: Claim 4, Ansari teaches the method of claim 3, further comprising:
inputting, by the controller, the media data (Ansari: [0080] “bidirectional communication” including “movement of files” between gateway and “home automation devices”, “transfer of media”);
decoding, by the controller, the input media data (Ansari: [0080] –[0081], format conversion);
extracting and analyzing, by the controller, the decoded media data (Ansari: [0080] –[0081] commands for “status and control of networked home automation devices”);
determining and transmitting, by the controller, a control command suitable for the first and second controlees based on the analyzed media data (Ansari: [0080] –[0081] commands for “status and control of networked home automation devices”); and
rendering, by the controller, the decoded media data (Ansari: [0081]-[0082]),
wherein the media data includes audio or video data (Ansari: [0080]-[0082]),
wherein the first and second controlees perform a command based on the control command (Ansari: [0080] – [0081] commands for “status and control of networked home automation devices”; [0187] – [0189] ref FIG 15 <161, 166, 167>).
Claim 13 does not teach or define any new limitations above claim 4. Therefore, similar reasons for rejection apply.
Re: Claim 5, Ansari teaches the method of claim 4, wherein when the first and second controlees are bulbs, the control command is a command for on/off, brightness, lighting color, and fade speed of the light bulb (Ansari: [0187] – [0188] ref FIG 15 : “light fixture/switch”, “dimmer switch”; [0207]-[0209] “lamp”, “desk lamp”, “dimmer” of the “controller map”; [0211] –[0212] “Sleep time” and “Night” scenes, “lights”/”lighting” device; [0213]).
Claim 14 does not teach or define any new limitations above claim 5. Therefore, similar reasons for rejection apply.
Re: Claim 6, Ansari teaches the method of claim 4, wherein when the first and second controlees are air conditioners, the control command is a command for on/off, temperature, wind strength, and timer of the air conditioner (Ansari: [0207]-[0209] “thermostats”, “HVAC Units” of the “controller” map; [0211] - [0212] “Sleep time” and “Night” scenes, “Thermostats”).
Claim 15 does not teach or define any new limitations above claim 6. Therefore, similar reasons for rejection apply.
Re: Claim 7, Ansari teaches the method of claim 3, including :
inputting, by the controller, the media data (Ansari: [0080] “bidirectional communication” including “movement of files” between gateway and “home automation devices”, “transfer of media”);
rendering, by the controller, the input media data (Ansari: [0081]-[0082]);
extracting and analyzing, by the controller, the rendered media data; and determining and transmitting, by the controller, a control command suitable for the first and second controlees based on the analyzed media data (Ansari: [0080] –[0081] commands for “status and control of networked home automation devices”),
wherein the media data includes audio or video data (Ansari: [0080]-[0082]),
wherein the first and second controlees perform a command based on the control command (Ansari: [0080] –[0081] commands for “status and control of networked home automation devices”; [0187] – [0189] ref FIG 15 <161, 166, 167>).
Claim 16 does not teach or define any new limitations above claim 7. Therefore, similar reasons for rejection apply.
Re: Claim 8, Ansari teaches the method of claim 3, wherein the configuration information on the first and second controlees includes a manufacturer name (Ansari:[0233]), product type (Ansari: [0188]; [0233]), device location (Ansari: [0233]), network status (Ansari: [0065]; [0226]), or current status of a device (Ansari: [0065]; [0226], [0233]).
Claim 17 does not teach or define any new limitations above claim 8. Therefore, similar reasons for rejection apply.
Re: Claim 9, Ansari teaches the method of claim 1, wherein the analysis result includes a bitrate (Ansari: [0123]) or compression information (codec) (Ansari: [0326] ref FIG 1C) of the media data
Claim 18 does not teach or define any new limitations above claim 9. Therefore, similar reasons for rejection apply.
Pertinent Prior Art
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Johnson et al (US 2019/0158353 A1) ([0250]; [0258]-[0259]; [0273]; [0530]; [0747]; [0793])
Kim et al (US 2016/0226732 A1) ([0023]; [0097] ref FIG. 1; [0129]; [0134] ref FIG. 3; [0141]; [0147] ref FIG. 5; [0151]-[0152] FIG. 6
Ando et al US 20170168472 A1 (Abstract: [0002]; [0180]-[0181]; [0285]; [0291]; [0332]-[0333]; [0654]-[0658]; [0667]; [0790]-[0791])
Horton et al US 20160261425 A1([0486] – [0499] ref FIG 42 – Environmental Control Devices; [0531]-[0534])
Bruhn et al (US 2017/0191693 A1)(Abstract; [0060]-[0061], [0096]; [0174]-[0177])
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ROBERT A SHAW whose telephone number is (571)270-5643. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 1pm-5pm.
Examiner interviews are available via telephone 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, Emmanuel Moise can be reached at (571)272-3865. 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.
/ROBERT A SHAW/Examiner, Art Unit 2455
/EMMANUEL L MOISE/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2455
Prosecution Insights