DETAILED ACTION
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, 15 and 16 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Bae et al (US Pub. No. 2011/0010090 A1) in view of Ayotte (US Patent No. 10,693,557 B1).
Regarding claim 1, Bae et at al teaches a control device for an access point comprising an input/output interface connected to a communication link, a transmitting stage adapted to convert a first signal from said input/output interface into a transmitted light signal, and a receiving stage adapted to convert a received light signal into a second signal passed on to said input/output interface (para [0022]; “Referring to FIG. 1, a common VLC system includes at least one lighting device 103 and at least one terminal 105 for performing data transmission/reception with the lighting device 103. The lighting device 103, which is comprised of LEDs or LDs, serves as lighting and performs data transmission/reception using visible light… the lighting device 103 may be part of a network 102 by being combined with an external content server 101, thereby more efficiently implementing the VLC system.”),
wherein the control device is arranged either to disable said receiving stage when said input/output interface receives a first signal from said communication bus, and to enable said receiving stage when said input/output interface no longer receives a first signal from said communication bus, or to disable said transmitting stage when said receiving stage receives a light signal, and to enable said transmitting stage when said receiving stage no longer receives a light signal (the term “either … or” suggest a choice between two distinct alternatives, implying that one option must be selected, and both cannot be chosen simultaneously, creating an exclusive decision or division. In this instance the second limitation “…disable said transmitting stage when said receiving stage receives a light signal, and to enable said transmitting stage when said receiving stage no longer receives a light signal” is selected. Bae et al para [0033] teaches “In FIG. 3A, the lighting device 301 has both the VLC transmission module and the VLC reception module, but the terminal 203 has only the reception function. In this case, the terminal 203 cannot send a data request to the lighting device 301. However, the lighting device 301 with a reception function does not start transmitting data before receiving the request.”; para [0036]; “…if a lighting device has both a transmission module and a reception module, the lighting device selects a mode based on a request received from a terminal. Accordingly, the lighting device having both the transmission and reception modules operates in the transmit mode only when it receives a request from the terminal in the receive mode, in order to send a response to the request.”).
Bae et al teaches transmitting module and receiving module connected and in communication with server (para [0022]; “… the lighting device 103 may be part of a network 102 by being combined with an external content server 101, thereby more efficiently implementing the VLC system.”) and differs from the claimed invention in that Bae et al does not specifically teach an input/output interface connected to a communication bus. Ayotte teaches optical communication system comprising
an input/output interface connected to a communication bus using a communication protocol. Ayotte teaches optical communication system comprising
an input/output interface connected to a communication bus using a communication protocol (col. 1, lines 54-59; “The dual fidelity access points includes (1) one or more transceivers configured to communicate with the plurality of devices via a radio frequency (RF) communication protocol; and (2) one or more light emitting diodes (LEDs) configured to emit light in accordance with a light fidelity (LiFi) communication protocol.”; col. 8, lines 42-47; “The bus interface 164 is configured to exchange data with the network controller 120 via a communication bus therebetween. For example, the communication bus may be an Ethernet connection, a power line communication (PLC) connection, or any other known arrangement for connecting vehicle access points to a centralized network controller.”). Therefore, it would have been obvious to an artisan of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention to modify the optical communication system of Bae et al, by providing an input/output interface connected to a communication bus using a communication protocol, as taught by Ayotte, in order to reduce wiring and cost, simplified installation, enhanced reliability through error detection, and efficient, prioritized data sharing among multiple devices.
Regarding claim 15, the combination of Bae et al as modified by Ayotte teaches an access point comprising an input/output interface suitable for connection to a communication bus using a communication protocol, a transmitting stage adapted to convert a first signal from said input/output interface into a transmitted light signal, and a receiving stage adapted to convert a received light signal into a second signal passed on to said input/output interface, and a control device according to claim 1 (para [0022]; “Referring to FIG. 1, a common VLC system includes at least one lighting device 103 and at least one terminal 105 for performing data transmission/reception with the lighting device 103. The lighting device 103, which is comprised of LEDs or LDs, serves as lighting and performs data transmission/reception using visible light… the lighting device 103 may be part of a network 102 by being combined with an external content server 101, thereby more efficiently implementing the VLC system.”).
Regarding claim 16, the combination of Bae et al as modified by Ayotte teaches the access point adapted to form part of a Light Fidelity optical wireless network (Ayotte: col. 3, lines 24-29; “Light fidelity (LiFi) communication involves encoding data by using a modulation technique, such as on-off keying (OOK) or color shift keying (CSK), and controlling lights, such as light emitting diodes (LEDs), to emit light indicative of the encoded data in accordance with the modulation technique.”).
Claim 2 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Bae et al (US Pub. No. 2011/0010090 A1) in view of Ayotte (US Patent No. 10,693,557 B1) and further in view of Huang et al (US Pub. No. 2016/0134370 A1).
Regarding claim 2, the combination of Bae et al as modified by Ayotte teaches wherein in the presence of an access point comprising a transmitting stage including a transmitting optoelectronic module and a receiving stage including a receiving optoelectronic module (para [0022]; “Referring to FIG. 1, a common VLC system includes at least one lighting device 103 and at least one terminal 105 for performing data transmission/reception with the lighting device 103. The lighting device 103, which is comprised of LEDs or LDs, serves as lighting and performs data transmission/reception using visible light… the lighting device 103 may be part of a network 102 by being combined with an external content server 101, thereby more efficiently implementing the VLC system.”), the control device is arranged either to disable said receiving optoelectronic module when said input/output interface receives a first signal from said communication bus, and to enable said receiving optoelectronic module when said input/output interface no longer receives a first signal from said communication bus, or to disable said transmitting optoelectronic module when said receiving stage receives a light signal, and to enable said transmitting optoelectronic module when said receiving stage no longer receives a light signal (the term “either … or” suggest a choice between two distinct alternatives, implying that one option must be selected, and both cannot be chosen simultaneously, creating an exclusive decision or division. In this instance the second limitation “…disable said transmitting stage when said receiving stage receives a light signal, and to enable said transmitting stage when said receiving stage no longer receives a light signal” is selected. Bae et al para [0033] teaches “In FIG. 3A, the lighting device 301 has both the VLC transmission module and the VLC reception module, but the terminal 203 has only the reception function. In this case, the terminal 203 cannot send a data request to the lighting device 301. However, the lighting device 301 with a reception function does not start transmitting data before receiving the request.”; para [0036]; “…if a lighting device has both a transmission module and a reception module, the lighting device selects a mode based on a request received from a terminal. Accordingly, the lighting device having both the transmission and reception modules operates in the transmit mode only when it receives a request from the terminal in the receive mode, in order to send a response to the request.”)..
The combination differs from the claimed invention in that the combination does not specifically teach a transmitting stage including a transmitting optoelectronic module adapted to convert a digital signal derived from a first signal into a light signal, and a receiving stage including a receiving optoelectronic module adapted to convert a received light signal into a digital signal representative of a second signal. However, conversion of signal into analog and digital domain is well known. Huang et al teaches optical communication system comprising a transmitting stage including a transmitting optoelectronic module adapted to convert a digital signal derived from a first signal into a light signal, and a receiving stage including a receiving optoelectronic module adapted to convert a received light signal into a digital signal representative of a second signal (para [0060]; “Reference may be made to FIG. 1, the visible light power-carrying communication system of the lighting facility end at least includes a transmitted information sequence generating module 11, a modulating module 12, a digital-to-analog converting module (DAC) 13, a visible light transmitter 14, a photoelectric detector (Photo Diode, PD) 15, an analog-to-digital converting module (ADC) 16, a demodulating module 17, a received information sequence deciding module 18, a power supplying module 19, etc.”). Therefore, it would have been obvious to an artisan of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention to modify the optical communication system of the combination, by providing convertor to convert signal into digital domain and convertor to convert signal into analog signal domain, as taught by Huang et al, in order to bridge analog domain and digital domain and provide enhanced signal quality, noise reduction, easy storage/transmission, precise processing, and versatility for digital systems such as microprocessors to interact with analog sensors such as optical transmitters and optical receivers.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 3-14 are objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed June 08, 2026 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
On page 3 of the remark, applicant states:
“Bae's lighting device 301 operates in a request-response paradigm. By default, the lighting device does not transmit. When the receiving stage receives a light signal (the "request"), the transmitting stage is enabled so that the lighting device may "send a response to the request." See Bae, paragraph [0036]. That is precisely the opposite of the claimed limitation. Claim 1 requires that the transmitting stage be disabled when the receiving stage receives a light signal; Bae teaches that the transmitting stage is enabled when the receiving stage receives a light signal. The causal relationship between optical reception and transmitter state in Bae is inverted from that of claim 1. The claim's complementary requirement - that the transmitting stage be re-enabled when the receiving stage no longer receives a light signal - is likewise absent from Bae. Bae transmits a response because a request was previously received, not because the optical link has become idle. Bae describes a higher-level mode-selection state machine (request response) rather than the claimed contemporaneous, signal-presence interlock that gates the optical stages of a single access point against its own reflected light.”
Claim 1 states:
“…disable said transmitting stage when said receiving stage
receives a light signal, and to enable said transmitting stage when said receiving stage no longer receives a light signal.”
The claim limitation “when” is a conditional term. In interpretating the claim to the broadest reasonable interpretation, the limitation of claim 1 has been interpreted as follow: transmit when no light signal is received and receive when no light is transmitted.
On para [0036], Bae et al teaches “…if a lighting device has both a transmission module and a reception module, the lighting device selects a mode based on a request received from a terminal. Accordingly, the lighting device having both the transmission and reception modules operates in the transmit mode only when it receives a request from the terminal in the receive mode, in order to send a response to the request.”).
Bae et al teaches that the lightning device (i.e., access point) select a mode, either a transmit mode or a receive mode depending on request received from terminal device. The lighting device is in the transmit mode when the terminal is in the receive mode in order to transmit light signal to the terminal. The lighting device is in the receive mode when the terminal is in the transmit mode in order to receive light signal from the terminal (Bae et al: para [0037]; “…a terminal recognizes the operation mode of a lighting device, and automatically switches its mode to be matched with the recognized operation mode.”). Bae et al further teaches (para [0037]; “… in the present invention, the terminal repeatedly determines whether a visible light signal has been received, for a predetermined time, and automatically stops the receive mode if there is no visible light signal received. In the case of a terminal having both a transmitter and a receiver, if there is no visible light signal received, it is preferable for the terminal to automatically switch to a transmit/receive mode in order to directly request data.”). Bae et al teaches the lightning device is in the receive mode in order to receive the “request data” from the terminal. At this time, the lightning device is not transmitting. Once the request data is analyzed, the lightning device switch to transmit mode in order to transmit data to the terminal device. It is also well known to an artisan of ordinary skill in the art that each mode (transmit or receive) is selected at a time in order to prevent crosstalk between signals from the lightning device and terminal.
Bae et al, on paragraph [0052] further teaches “According to embodiments of the present invention, it is possible to automatically switch to modes fitting service scenarios defined depending on configurations of lighting devices and terminals in the VLC-based LBS system. As a result, operation modes of the positioning services are automatically switched depending on the VLC transmission/reception functions of the users' terminals,…”
On page 3 of the remark, applicant states:
“Ayotte is silent on any interlock between an access point's transmitting and receiving stages. Ayotte does not disclose, suggest, or imply that a transmitting stage should be disabled when a receiving stage receives a light signal, that a transmitting stage should be re-enabled when a receiving stage no longer receives a light signal, or that a receiving stage should be disabled or re-enabled based on signals on the bus. Ayotte therefore does not supply what Bae lacks.”
Ayotte is a secondary prior art combined with Bae et al to teach communication bus using communication protocol.
In response to applicant's arguments against the references individually, one cannot show nonobviousness by attacking references individually where the rejections are based on combinations of references. See In re Keller, 642 F.2d 413, 208 USPQ 871 (CCPA 1981); In re Merck & Co., 800 F.2d 1091, 231 USPQ 375 (Fed. Cir. 1986).
Based on the broadest reasonable interpretation of the claim, the combined prior arts to Bae et al and Ayotte still read on the claimed subject matter.
Conclusion
THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a).
A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of the advisory action. In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the mailing date of this final action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to DALZID E SINGH whose telephone number is (571)272-3029. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 9-5 ET.
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, DAVID PAYNE can be reached at 571-272-3024. 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.
DALZID E. SINGH
Primary Examiner
Art Unit 2635
/DALZID E SINGH/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2635
Prosecution Insights