DETAILED ACTION
The following is a Non-Final Office Action in response to the Amendment received on 31 December 2025. Claims 1, 5, 6, 8-10, 12, 13, 16 and 17 have been amended. Claims 7, 11, 14, 15 and 18-20 have been cancelled. Claims 21-27 have been added. Claims 1-6, 8-10, 12, 13, 16, 17 and 21-27 are now pending in this application.
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 .
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.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 31 December 2025 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive. Upon further consideration, a new ground(s) of rejection is made in view of US 2019/0353369 A1 to George et al., US 2019/0257542 A1 to Matsuoka et al. and US 2010/0187219 A1 to Besore et al.
Drawings
The amendments to the specification were received on 31 December 2025. These corrections are acceptable.
Claim Objections
The amendments to the claims were received on 31 December 2025. These corrections are acceptable.
Claim 26 is objected to under 37 CFR 1.75 as being a substantial duplicate of claim 21. When two claims in an application are duplicates or else are so close in content that they both cover the same thing, despite a slight difference in wording, it is proper after allowing one claim to object to the other as being a substantial duplicate of the allowed claim. See MPEP § 608.01(m).
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.
Claim 13 is 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 13 recites the limitation “temperature range” in several lines. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. Differentiate between both temperature ranges by including the peak savings mode or the normal operating mode at each occurrence.
The amendments to the claims were received on 31 December 2025. The corrections to claims 5 and 6 are acceptable.
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) 1-3, 8, 9, 21-23 and 25-27 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over US 2019/0353369 A1 to George et al. in view of US 2019/0257542 A1 (US 10,697,662 B2) to Matsuoka et al.
As per claim 1, the George et al. reference discloses a system comprising: a processor (see [0075], “CCM 20, monitoring module 28”) for controlling temperature (“interior temperature T.sub.IN”) within a space (“target space”) and provide information for a display (see 0047], “display 26”), the processor (“CCM 20, monitoring module 28”) configured to: define a first temperature range (see [0054], “temperature high tolerance T.sub.HT and temperature low tolerance T.sub.LT”) for a normal operating mode (“regular mode”); perform an optimization in the normal operating mode; receive an indication (see [0080], “warning message”) from a source (“alert module 34”) of an occurrence of a peak period (“peak-period”); provide an indication (“warning message”) of the peak period (“peak-period”) prior (see [0081], “before”) to the peak period (“peak-period”) on the display (“display 26”); and operate in a peak savings mode (see [0055], “peak energy or away mode”) for the peak period (“peak-period”) and perform preheating (see [0080], “PRE-HEATED”) or precooling (see [0082], “PRE-COOLED”) prior to the peak period (“peak-period”).
The George et al. reference does not expressly disclose the further limitations taught by the Matsuoka et al. reference, namely: perform an optimization (see [0127], “original schedule of setpoint temperatures is optimized”) in the normal operating mode (“heating mode, cooling mode”).
Before the invention was filed, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art to modify the adjustment module of the central control module or unit (CCM) as taught by the George et al. reference to optimize the original schedule of setpoint temperatures as taught by the Matsuoka et al. reference.
One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to modify the adjustment module of the central control module or unit (CCM) to optimize the original schedule of setpoint temperatures so that the schedule migrates from the original schedule to a more energy-efficient schedule.
As per claim 2, the George et al. reference discloses the processor (“CCM 20, monitoring module 28”) is configured to: obtain the first temperature range (“temperature high tolerance T.sub.HT and temperature low tolerance T.sub.LT”) from user selections (see [0046], “human machine interface (HMI), such as a keyboard, a touch sensitive pad or screen, a mouse, a trackball, a voice recognition system”).
As per claim 3, the George et al. reference discloses the processor (“CCM 20, monitoring module 28”) is configured provide the indication of the peak period (“peak-period”) as a time period (see [0076], “predetermined time period (e.g., in next 10 hours)”) for the peak period (“peak-period”).
As per claim 8, the George et al. reference discloses the processor (“CCM 20, monitoring module 28”) is coupled to a wireless interface (see [0048], “interface module 42”) and the indication of the occurrence (“communicating data”) is received from the wireless interface (“interface module 42”).
As per claim 9, the George et al. reference does not expressly disclose the further limitations taught by the Matsuoka et al. reference, namely: the indication (see [0188], “useful iconic indicator”) of the peak period (“automated process has a beneficial impact on the environment”) comprises a demand response icon (“symbol of a gear along with a symbol of a leaf embedded therein”).
Before the invention was filed, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art to modify the display module of the interactive display as taught by the George et al. reference to indicate a peak-period or a peak savings mode as taught by the Matsuoka et al. reference.
One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to modify the display module of the interactive display to indicate a peak-period or a peak savings mode to illustrate an appropriate status or information message on the interactive display.
As per claim 21, the George et al. reference discloses a system comprising: a processor (see [0075], “CCM 20, monitoring module 28”) for controlling temperature (“interior temperature T.sub.IN”) within a space (“target space”) and provide information for a display (see 0047], “display 26”), the processor (“CCM 20, monitoring module 28”) configured to: define a first temperature range (see [0054], “temperature high tolerance T.sub.HT and temperature low tolerance T.sub.LT”) for a normal operating mode (“regular mode”); receive an indication (see [0080], “warning message”) from a source (“alert module 34”) of an occurrence of a peak period (“peak-period”); provide an indication (“warning message”) of the peak period (“peak-period”) prior (see [0081], “before”) to the peak period (“peak-period”) on the display (“display 26”) wherein the indication of the peak period comprises a demand response icon; and operate in a peak savings mode (see [0055], “peak energy or away mode”) for the peak period (“peak-period”) and perform preheating (see [0080], “PRE-HEATED”) or precooling (see [0082], “PRE-COOLED”) prior to the peak period (“peak-period”).
The George et al. reference does not expressly disclose the further limitations taught by the Matsuoka et al. reference, namely: the indication (see [0188], “useful iconic indicator”) of the peak period (“automated process has a beneficial impact on the environment”) comprises a demand response icon (“symbol of a gear along with a symbol of a leaf embedded therein”).
Before the invention was filed, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art to modify the display module of the interactive display as taught by the George et al. reference to indicate a peak-period or a peak savings mode as taught by the Matsuoka et al. reference.
One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to modify the display module of the interactive display to indicate a peak-period or a peak savings mode to illustrate an appropriate status or information message on the interactive display.
As per claim 22, the George et al. reference discloses the processor (“CCM 20, monitoring module 28”) is configured to perform an optimization in the normal operating mode.
The George et al. reference does not expressly disclose the further limitations taught by the Matsuoka et al. reference, namely: perform an optimization (see [0127], “original schedule of setpoint temperatures is optimized”) in the normal operating mode (“heating mode, cooling mode”).
Before the invention was filed, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art to modify the adjustment module of the central control module or unit (CCM) as taught by the George et al. reference to optimize the original schedule of setpoint temperatures as taught by the Matsuoka et al. reference.
One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to modify the adjustment module of the central control module or unit (CCM) to optimize the original schedule of setpoint temperatures so that the schedule migrates from the original schedule to a more energy-efficient schedule.
As per claim 23, the George et al. reference discloses the processor (“CCM 20, monitoring module 28”) is configured to obtain the first temperature range (“temperature high tolerance T.sub.HT and temperature low tolerance T.sub.LT”) from user selections (see [0046], “human machine interface (HMI), such as a keyboard, a touch sensitive pad or screen, a mouse, a trackball, a voice recognition system”).
As per claim 25, the George et al. reference discloses the processor (“CCM 20, monitoring module 28”) is coupled to a wireless interface (see [0048], “interface module 42”) and the indication of the occurrence (“communicating data”) is received from the wireless interface (“interface module 42”).
As per claim 26, the George et al. reference does not expressly disclose the further limitations taught by the Matsuoka et al. reference, namely: the indication (see [0188], “useful iconic indicator”) of the peak period (“automated process has a beneficial impact on the environment”) comprises a demand response icon (“symbol of a gear along with a symbol of a leaf embedded therein”).
Before the invention was filed, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art to modify the display module of the interactive display as taught by the George et al. reference to indicate a peak-period or a peak savings mode as taught by the Matsuoka et al. reference.
One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to modify the display module of the interactive display to indicate a peak-period or a peak savings mode to illustrate an appropriate status or information message on the interactive display.
As per claim 27, the George et al. reference discloses the processor (“CCM 20, monitoring module 28”) is configured to wirelessly (see [0048], “interface module 42”) receive weather information and in the normal operating mode is configured to determine temperature setpoints in response to the weather information.
The George et al. reference does not expressly disclose the further limitations taught by the Matsuoka et al. reference, namely: receive weather information (see [0034], “weather data”) and in the normal operating mode (see [0127], “heating mode, cooling mode”) is configured to determine temperature setpoints (see [0034], “set scheduled temperature setpoints”) in response to the weather information (“weather data”).
Before the invention was filed, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art to modify the adjustment module of the central control module or unit (CCM) as taught by the George et al. reference to determine temperature setpoints in response to the weather information as taught by the Matsuoka et al. reference.
One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to modify the adjustment module of the central control module or unit (CCM) to determine temperature setpoints in response to the weather information so that the schedule migrates from the original schedule to a more energy-efficient schedule.
Claim(s) 4, 10, 12, 16 and 24 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over US 2019/0353369 A1 to George et al. in view of US 2010/0187219 A1 (US 8,367,984 B2) to Besore et al.
As per claim 4, the George et al. reference does not expressly disclose the further limitations taught by the Besore et al. reference, namely: the processor (“CCM 20, monitoring module 28”) is configured to allow a user to exit the peak savings mode (see [0035], “override mode of energy savings”) using a user actuated input (see [0033], “user overrides”).
Before the invention was filed, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art to modify the adjustment module of the central control module or unit (CCM) as taught by the George et al. reference to provide an option to change or override the peak energy or away mode as taught by the Besore et al. reference.
One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to modify the adjustment module of the central control module or unit (CCM) to provide an option to change or override the peak energy or away mode in order to determine if priorities need to change to accomplish the system goals.
As per claim 10, the George et al. reference discloses a method of managing temperature in a space, the method comprising: using first temperature setpoints (see [0054], “temperature high tolerance T.sub.HT and temperature low tolerance T.sub.LT”) for a normal operating mode (“regular mode”); providing an indication (“warning message”) of a peak period (“peak-period”) prior (see [0081], “before”) to the peak period (“peak-period”) on the display (“display 26”) for a user, wherein the display (“display 26”) is part of a smart thermostat (see [0003-0006], “thermostat”); receiving an indication (see [0080], “warning message”) from a source (“alert module 34”) of an occurrence of the peak period (“peak-period”); operating in a peak savings mode (see [0055], “peak energy or away mode”) for the peak period (“peak-period”) and perform preheating (see [0080], “PRE-HEATED”) or precooling (see [0082], “PRE-COOLED”) prior to the peak period (“peak-period”); and exiting the peak savings mode in response to a user actuated input on the smart thermostat.
The George et al. reference does not expressly disclose the further limitations taught by the Besore et al. reference, namely: exiting the peak savings mode (see [0035], “override mode of energy savings”) in response to a user actuated input (see [0033], “user overrides”) on the smart thermostat (“thermostat”).
Before the invention was filed, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art to modify the adjustment module of the central control module or unit (CCM) as taught by the George et al. reference to provide an option to change or override the peak energy or away mode as taught by the Besore et al. reference.
One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to modify the adjustment module of the central control module or unit (CCM) to provide an option to change or override the peak energy or away mode in order to determine if priorities need to change to accomplish the system goals.
As per claim 12, the George et al. reference discloses defining a temperature range (see [0054], “temperature high tolerance T.sub.HT and temperature low tolerance T.sub.LT”) for the peak savings mode (“peak energy or away mode”) by prompting the user to input a maximum and minimum temperature (“temperature high tolerance T.sub.HT and temperature low tolerance T.sub.LT”) for the peak savings mode (“peak energy or away mode”).
As per claim 16, the George et al. reference discloses the indication of the occurrence (see [0048], “communicating data”) is received wirelessly (“interface module 42”).
As per claim 24, the George et al. reference does not expressly disclose the further limitations taught by the Besore et al. reference, namely: the processor (“CCM 20, monitoring module 28”) is configured to allow a user to exit the peak savings mode (see [0035], “override mode of energy savings”) using a user actuated input (see [0033], “user overrides”).
Before the invention was filed, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art to modify the adjustment module of the central control module or unit (CCM) as taught by the George et al. reference to provide an option to change or override the peak energy or away mode as taught by the Besore et al. reference.
One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to modify the adjustment module of the central control module or unit (CCM) to provide an option to change or override the peak energy or away mode in order to determine if priorities need to change to accomplish the system goals.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 5, 6 and 17 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.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Crystal J Barnes-Bullock whose telephone number is (571)272-3679. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday 8 am - 5 pm.
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, Robert Fennema can be reached at 571-272-2748. 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.
/CRYSTAL J BARNES-BULLOCK/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2117 21 March 2026