DETAILED ACTION
This communication is in response to applicant’s Remarks which is filed on April 17, 2026.
Response to Arguments
In view of applicant’s amendment to amend the Specification to correct the typographical error, therefore, examiner has withdrawn the objection of the Specification.
The replacement drawing(s) were received on April 17, 2026. These drawing are accepted. In view of applicant’s amendment to Drawings, therefore, examiner has withdrawn the objection of the Drawings.
Applicant’s arguments, see page 1 to 11, filed on April 17, 2026, with respect to the rejection(s) of claim(s) 1-20 under 35 U.S.C 102 and 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 Therefore, the rejection has been withdrawn.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 Buckingham et al. and Rogers et al.
In response to Applicant’s argument that Rogers et al.’s electronic system for monitoring a physical parameter includes the ADM is not analogous art, it has been held that the determination that a reference is from a nonanalogous art is twofold. First, we decide if the reference is within the field of the inventor’s endeavor. If it is not, we proceed to determine whether the reference is reasonably pertinent to the particular problem with which the inventor was involved. In re Wood, 202 USPQ 171, 174. In this case, the electronic system for monitoring a physical parameter includes the ADM comprising an accumulation mode sensor for measuring the physical parameter by generating electrical energy associated with the physical parameter in response to the surrounding condition. the wake-up event is generated to trigger the SoC to operates in a run mode in which the physical parameter is wirelessly transmitted to a receiver and the stored electrical energy in the energy storing device is discharged. Therefore, the Rogers et al.’s electronic system is within the field of the inventor’s endeavor.
In response to applicant’s argument that there is no teaching, suggestion, or motivation to combine the references, the examiner recognizes that obviousness may be established by combining or modifying the teachings of the prior art to produce the claimed invention where there is some teaching, suggestion, or motivation to do so found either in the references themselves or in the knowledge generally available to one of ordinary skill in the art. See In re Fine, 837 F.2d 1071, 5 USPQ2d 1596 (Fed. Cir. 1988), In re Jones, 958 F.2d 347, 21 USPQ2d 1941 (Fed. Cir. 1992), and KSR International Co. v. Teleflex, Inc., 550 U.S. 398, 82 USPQ2d 1385 (2007). In this case, Buckingham et al. pertains to the electronic lock systems include a solar panel arrangement for receiving the light signals and converting them to electrical power and using the wake-up circuit to awakens and is activated the electronic lock system and Rogers et al. disclose monitoring the physical parameter to triggers the electronic system from the sleep mode to the run mode. Therefore, the Rogers et al.’s electronic system is within the field of endeavor of the Buckingham et al.’s reduced power electronic lock system.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status.
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.
The factual inquiries for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 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 1-5, 7-9, 11, 12, 14-16 and 18-19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Buckingham et al. (US# 8,354,914) in view of Rogers et al. (US# 11,666,240).
Referring to Claim 1, Buckingham et al. disclose a method of waking an electronic device (212) (column 2 lines 24 to 64; see Figures 1 to 5), comprising:
generating a unit of power in a power unit (24) in an electronic device (212) (i.e. A power signal generator 38 is also connected to the primary access control electronics 32. The generator 38 is disposed for generating the electromagnetic power signal 26 which is received by the storage device 24 of the door lock unit 12. The energy storage device 24 may then correspondingly comprise a solar panel arrangement for receiving the light signals 26 and converting them to electrical power. Alternatively and/or additionally, the power signal generator 38 and the energy storage device 24 may comprise split air gap transformers or any other type of magnetic or capacitive coupling arrangements suitable for facilitating transmission and reception of the electromagnetic signal 26) (column 4 lines 5 to 31; column 4 lines 57 to 66; see Figures 1 to 3),
powering the electronic device (12) with the unit of power (24) (i.e. the conversion of the electromagnetic emissions to electrical energy is done in much the same manner as known operations concerning RFID tags. In the case of the invention, the electrical energy is stored in a capacitive circuit of the energy storage device 24 for on-demand use by the secondary access control circuit 16 of the door lock unit 12) (column 4 line 66 to column 5 line 3; column 8 lines 21 to 30; see Figures 3 to 5).
However, Buckingham et al. did not explicitly disclose measuring a physical characteristic of an output of the power unit in a power condition reading device wherein the physical characteristic reflects an external event that affected the output of the power unit and waking the electronic device based on the physical characteristic.
In the same field of endeavor of a charging an electronic device, Rogers et al. teach that measuring a physical characteristic of an output of the power unit in a power condition reading device wherein the physical characteristic reflects an external event that affected the output of the power unit (i.e. the electronic system 100/200 includes an accumulation detection module (ADM) 120 for continuously measuring the physical parameter in terms of exposure dose in an accumulation mode. The ADM is a light-powered sensing system comprising at least one photodiode (PD) for continuously generating photocurrent with a magnitude that is proportional to an intensity of electromagnetic radiation in response to exposure to the electromagnetic radiation (EMR), e.g., emitted from a light surface 180, at least one capacitor (i.e., SC) coupled to the at least one PD in parallel for storing charges accumulated from the generated photocurrent of the at least one PD, and at least one transistor (i.e., MOS) having a source and a drain coupled to the at least one capacitor) (column 17 lines 45 to 61; see Figures 5A-5B); and
waking the electronic device (12) based on the physical characteristic (i.e. the LPCOMP monitors a voltage across the at least one capacitor when the SoC 110/210 operates in the sleep mode, and when the voltage is equal to or greater than a pre-defined threshold, generates a wake-up event that triggers the SoC 110/210 to operate in the run mode in which the controller wirelessly transmits a signal of the voltage converted by the at least one ADC to a receiver through the wireless communication module) (column 18 lines 5 to 19; see Figures 5a and 5B) in order monitor the physical parameters to activate the miniaturized electronic systems.
At the time of the effective filing date of the current application, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art to recognize the need for having the accumulation detection module for continuously measuring the physical parameter and wake-up to have the electronic device to operate in the run mode from the sleep mode when the voltage is greater than the pre-defined threshold taught by Rogers et al. in the energy storage device to receives solar to provide power to the door lock unit of Buckingham et al. because having the accumulation detection module for continuously measuring the physical parameter and wake-up to have the electronic device to operate in the run mode from the sleep mode when the voltage is greater than the pre-defined threshold would provide a reliable monitoring the voltage to wake-up the electronic system.
Referring to Claim 2, Buckingham et al. in view of Rogers et al. disclose the method of claim 1, Buckingham et al. disclose wherein the electronic device (12) comprises an electronic lock (i.e. a door lock unit) (column 3 lines 28 to 32; see Figures 1 to 5).
Referring to Claim 3, Buckingham et al. in view of Rogers et al. the method of claim 1, Rogers et al. disclose wherein the power unit comprises a solar cell (column 2 lines 1 to 2; column 31 lines 1 to 12).
Referring to Claim 4, Buckingham et al. in view of Rogers et al. disclose the method of claim 1, Rogers et al. disclose wherein the physical characteristic comprises one or more of a voltage level and a current level (i.e. the LPCOMP monitors a voltage across the at least one capacitor when the SoC operates in the sleep mode, and when the voltage is equal to or greater than a pre-defined threshold, generates a wake-up event that triggers the SoC to operate in the run mode in which the controller wirelessly transmits a signal of the voltage converted by the at least one ADC to a receiver through the wireless communication module, activates the at least one transistor to discharge the at least one capacitor and then returns the SoC to the sleep mode) (column 3 lines 21 to 40; column 19 lines 5 to 31; see Figures 17A and 17B).
Referring to Claim 5, Buckingham et al. in view of Rogers et al. disclose the method of claim 1, Buckingham et al. disclose wherein the external event comprises a moving object (302) (i.e. the dynamo 301 is actuated by movement of the door feature 302 and is capable of supplying sufficient electrical energy to the energy storage device 24 to impart the required charge on the device 24) (column 8 lines 21 to 35; see Figure 4).
Referring to Claim 6, Buckingham et al. in view of Rogers et al. disclose the method of claim 1, Buckingham et al. disclose further comprising: activating a radio transceiver (28) to detect a presence of an antenna (34) near the electronic device (12/312), and waking the electronic device (312) based on the physical characteristic and the presence of the antenna (i.e. after presenting the access card 42, the entrant maneuvers the door feature 302, e.g., the door handle, and activates the dynamo 301 which sends a power signal to the energy storage device 24. The power signal is received by the storage device 24 and, as mentioned above, is converted therein to stored energy. Further, in response to the power signal, the energy storage device 24 awakens the lock unit 312. Upon verification of the access card 42, the control assembly 314 transmits an `unlock` signal 30 via the wireless transceivers 34 and 28 to the awakened lock unit 312 which then unlocks the locking mechanism 18 and confirms such unlocking to the control unit 314 via the transceivers) (column 8 lines 53 to 67; see Figure 4).
Referring to Claim 7, Buckingham et al. in view of Rogers et al. disclose the method of claim 1, Buckingham et al. disclose wherein the unit of power is stored in an energy storage component (24) (i.e. The energy storage device 24 may then correspondingly comprise a solar panel arrangement for receiving the light signals 26 and converting them to electrical power) (column 4 lines 23 to 31; column 8 lines 21 to 35; see Figures 1 to 4).
Referring to Claim 8, Buckingham et al. in view of Rogers et al. disclose the method of claim 1, Buckingham et al. disclose further comprising: selecting with a switch controlled by an output of a processor (16) whether to power the electronic device (212) with the unit of power (i.e. upon receipt of a wake-up signal 22, the wake-up circuit 20 sends an electrical charge to the secondary access control electronics 16 which awakens and is activated (i.e. selecting a switch). The wake-up signal generator 36, the emitted wake-up signal 22, the wake-up circuit 20, and the resulting activation of the door lock unit 10) (column 5 lines 26 to 32; column 7 lines 32 to 36; see Figures 1 and 3).
Referring to Claim 9, Buckingham et al. in view of Rogers et al. disclose the method of claim 1, Rogers et al. teach that wherein a measurement of the physical characteristic is stored in a buffer of samples (i.e. accumulation detection module (ADM) 120 for continuously measuring the physical parameter in terms of exposure dose in an accumulation mode. The ADM is a light-powered sensing system comprising at least one photodiode (PD) for continuously generating photocurrent with a magnitude that is proportional to an intensity of electromagnetic radiation in response to exposure to the electromagnetic radiation (EMR), e.g., emitted from a light surface 180, at least one capacitor (i.e., SC) coupled to the at least one PD in parallel for storing charges accumulated from the generated photocurrent of the at least one PD, and at least one transistor (i.e., MOS) having a source and a drain coupled to the at least one capacitor) (column 17 lines 45 to 61; see Figure 5A).
Referring to Claim 11, Buckingham et al. in view of Rogers et al. disclose the method of claim 9, Rogers et al. disclose further comprising comparing the measurement of the physical characteristic to a mean value of the buffer of samples (i.e. The deep sleep mode may be characterized as having an average deep sleep current in the electronic system that is less than or equal to 5 μA, 8 μA, or 10 μA. The shallow sleep mode may be characterized as having an average shallow sleep current that, while being very low, is, on average, greater than the average deep sleep current, such as greater than 5 μA, 8 μA or 10 μA. The ratio of deep to shallow sleep mode currents may be greater than or equal to 5, greater than or equal to 10, or greater than or equal to 20. In this manner, the overall system current may be substantially reduced, thereby increasing device longevity or lifetime) (column 25 lines 63 to column 26 line 12).
Referring to Claim 12, Buckingham et al. in view of Rogers et al. disclose the method of claim 9, Rogers et al. disclose further comprising calculating a standard deviation for the buffer of samples and waking the electronic device when the standard deviation for the buffer of samples is outside a threshold (i.e. when the stored electrical energy is equal to or greater than a pre-defined threshold, a wake-up event is generated to trigger the SoC to operates in a run mode in which the physical parameter associated with the stored electrical energy is wirelessly transmitted to a receiver and the stored electrical energy in the energy storing device is discharged) (column 19 line 52 to column 20 line 4; column 21 lines 16 to 34).
Referring to Claim 14, Buckingham et al. in view of Rogers et al. disclose the method of claim 1, Buckingham et al. disclose further comprising alerting a remote entity based on the physical characteristic (i.e. the message can, for example, be an alert that the power signal 26 has ceased and that the system 10, 100, 200 requires maintenance) (column 10 lines 11 to 19).
Referring to claims 15-19, Buckingham et al. in view of Rogers et al. disclose an electronic device, although different in scope from the claims 1, 2, 6 and 9, the claims 15-19 contains similar limitations in that the claims 1, 2, 6 and 9 already addressed above therefore claims 15-19 are also rejected for the same obvious reasons given with respect to the claims 1, 2, 6 and 9.
Claims 6 and 17 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Buckingham et al. (US# 8,354,914) in view of Rogers et al. (US# 11,666,240) as applied to claims 1 and 15 and further in view of Gerhardt et al. (US# 10,708,410).
Referring to Claims 6 and 17, Buckingham et al. in view of Rogers et al. disclose the method and the electronic device of claims 1 and 15, however, Buckingham et al. in view of Rogers et al. did not explicitly disclose further comprising: activating a radio transceiver to detect a presence of an antenna near the electronic device, and waking the electronic device based on the physical characteristic and the presence of the antenna.
In the same field of endeavor of an electronic device, Gerhardt et al. teach that further comprising: activating a radio transceiver to detect a presence of an antenna near the electronic device, and waking the electronic device based on the physical characteristic and the presence of the antenna (i.e. when a user approaches the lock system (1300), they trigger an infrared, sound, radio or vibration sensor. The sensor consumes significantly less power that the radio transmission device required to communicate with a web service (1301) over protocols that may include but are not limited to TCP (Transmission Control Protocol)/IP (Internet Protocol)/UDP (User Datagram Protocol), HTTP (Hypertext Transfer Protocol), HTTPS (Hypertext Transfer Protocol Secure) and SSH (Secure Shell). This in turn will nearly instantly wake up the higher power consuming components of the system (1300) not already in use by the sensor. Once the locking system (1300) is awake and in a state where it may receive commands, it may either request status change commands from the web service (1301) or process queued commands from the web service directed at itself, such as Short Message Service commands sent to the web service to be relayed to the locking system) (column 10 lines 42 to 59; column 12 lines 11 to 11; see Figures 13 to 17) in order to save power in the locking system.
At the time of the effective filing date of the current application, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art to recognize the need for detecting the user through specific radio technology on the mobile device or the electronic credential to trigger the command on the locking system taught by Gerhardt et al. in the energy storage device to receives solar to provide power to the door lock unit of Buckingham et al. in view of Rogers et al. because detecting the user through specific radio technology on the mobile device or the electronic credential to trigger the command on the locking system would provide secure communication between the mobile device and the electronic lock system.
Claim 10 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Buckingham et al. (US# 8,354,914) in view of Rogers et al. (US# 11,666,240) as applied to claim 9, and further in view of Grana (US# 9,142,965).
Referring to Claim 10, Buckingham et al. in view of Rogers et al. disclose the method of claim 9, however, Buckingham et al. in view of Rogers et al. did not explicitly disclose further comprising passing the buffer of samples through a low pass filter.
In the same field of endeavor of a charging an electronic system, Grana teaches that passing the buffer of samples through a low pass filter (i.e. the notch filter (506) includes an inductor Ln and a capacitor Cn. The notch filter (506) acts as a low pass filter and relies on the internal capacity of the single chip micro controller (SCMC) of the local management unit (202x). A notch frequency of the notch filter (506) sits on the switching frequency to suppress noise. In one embodiment, additional or different filters can be used) (column 18 lines 39 to 48; see Figure 10B) in order to reduce noise for improve the energy production performance of the solar panels .
At the time of the effective filing date of the current application, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art to recognize the need for having the low pass filter sits on the switching frequency to suppress noise taught by Grana in the energy storage device to receives solar to provide power to the door lock unit of Buckingham et al. in view of Rogers et al. because adding the low pass filter sits on the switching frequency to suppress noise would improve the energy production performance of the solar panels for the electronic lock system.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 13 and 20 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.
Referring to claims 13 and 20, the following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter: the prior art fail to suggest limitations further comprising applying a machine learning based filter to the buffer of samples to detect one or more of a person moving toward the electronic device, a person moving away from the electronic device, a person moving past the electronic device, a change in lighting near the device.
Any comments considered necessary by applicant must be submitted no later than the payment of the issue fee and, to avoid processing delays, should preferably accompany the issue fee. Such submissions should be clearly labeled “Comments on Statement of Reasons for Allowance.”
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. Refer to the enclosed PTO-892 for details.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to NAM V NGUYEN whose telephone number is 571-272-3061. Fax number is (571) 273-3061. The examiner can normally be reached on 8:00AM-5:00PM Monday to Friday.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Quan-Zhen Wang can be reached on 571-272-3114. The fax phone numbers for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned are 571-273-8300 for regular communications.
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).
/NAM V NGUYEN/
Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2685
Prosecution Insights