NOTE
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 .
DETAILED ACTION
This non-final action is responsive to application filed on 03/12/2024. In this application, claims 1-9 and claims 1 being independent.
Priority
This application claims the benefit of U.S. Provisional Application No. 63/556,036, filed February 21, 2024, the disclosure of which is incorporated herein by reference in its entirety.
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on 03/12/2024, 08/19/2025, 09/09/2025 and 02/09/2026 are in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statement is being considered by the examiner.
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.
Claims 1-9 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 101 because the claimed invention is directed to an abstract idea without significantly more.
With respect to claim 1, the claim recites based on the first input and the second input, determining an effective time interval for the second operational mode that is effective to cause the smart home system to transition from a first operational mode to the second operational mode during the effective time interval. These are abstract idea including mental processes. For instance, a human can, in the human mind or on paper, calculate/determine an effective time interval that utilized to cause the smart home system to transition from a first operational mode to the second operational mode. Accordingly, the claim recites a judicial exception
This judicial exception is not integrated into a practical application. The claim also recites additional elements receiving a first input of a model for a second operational mode of the smart home system; receiving a second input of the model for the second operational mode of the smart home system. Receiving inputs is mere obtaining information and models is stated at high level and is just field of use or environment. Therefore, they are insignificant extra-solution activity. Accordingly, these additional element does not integrate the abstract idea into a practical application because it does not impose any meaningful limits on practicing the abstract idea
The claim does not include additional elements that are sufficient to amount to significantly more than the judicial exception. As discussed above with respect to integration of the abstract idea into a practical application, the additional elements receiving a first input of a model for a second operational mode of the smart home system; receiving a second input of the model for the second operational mode of the smart home system. Receiving inputs is mere obtaining information and models is stated at high level and is just field of use or environment. Therefore, they are insignificant extra-solution activity. Therefore, the claim is not patent eligible.
Claim 2 depends on claim 1, thus is having the same issue as shown above. Further, the claim also recites wherein the first input is a model learned by the electronic device, and wherein the learned model is based on historical data related to the operation of the smart home system. These elements clarify an abstract idea above, thus, are part of recitation of the abstract idea. Therefore, claim 2 also includes limitations are directed to an abstract idea without significantly more as discussed above.
Claim 2 depends on claim 1, thus is having the same issue as shown above. Further, the claim also recites wherein the first input is a model learned by the electronic device, and wherein the learned model is based on historical data related to the operation of the smart home system. These elements clarify an abstract idea above, thus, are part of recitation of the abstract idea. Therefore, claim 2 also includes limitations are directed to an abstract idea without significantly more as discussed above.
Claim 3 depends on claim 1, thus is having the same issue as shown above. Further, the claim also recites wherein the first input is a time window input by a user. These elements clarify an abstract idea above, thus, are part of recitation of the abstract idea. Therefore, claim 3 also includes limitations are directed to an abstract idea without significantly more as discussed above.
Claim 4 depends on claim 1, thus is having the same issue as shown above. Further, the claim also recites wherein the second input comprises: a sensing input; a user input; or both. These elements clarify an abstract idea above, thus, are part of recitation of the abstract idea. Therefore, claim 4 also includes limitations are directed to an abstract idea without significantly more as discussed above.
Claim 5 depends on claim 4, thus is having the same issue as shown above. Further, the claim also recites wherein the sensing input comprises an input that provides sensing of a presence of occupants in a structure where the smart home system is deployed. These elements clarify an abstract idea above, thus, are part of recitation of the abstract idea. Therefore, claim 5 also includes limitations are directed to an abstract idea without significantly more as discussed above.
Claim 6 depends on claim 5, thus is having the same issue as shown above. Further, the claim also wherein the structure is at a root of a hierarchy of states related to the structure, wherein the structure includes states of one or more rooms, wherein the structure or rooms include states of zero or more occupants, wherein the presence of an occupant propagates up the hierarchy, the method comprising: reconciling conflicts between the sensing input and the user input for an occupant to provide a consistent presence for the occupant in the hierarchy. These elements clarify an abstract idea above, thus, are part of recitation of the abstract idea. Therefore, claim 6 also includes limitations are directed to an abstract idea without significantly more as discussed above.
Claim 7 depends on claim 1, thus is having the same issue as shown above. Further, the claim also wherein the smart home system is deployed at a structure, wherein the structure is at a root of a hierarchy of states related to the structure, wherein the structure includes states of one or more rooms, wherein the structure or rooms include states of zero or more occupants, the method further comprising: based on the determining the effective time interval, propagating a new state down the hierarchy of states related to the structure. These elements clarify an abstract idea above, thus, are part of recitation of the abstract idea. Therefore, claim 7 also includes limitations are directed to an abstract idea without significantly more as discussed above.
Claim 8 depends on claim 1, thus is having the same issue as shown above. Further, the claim also wherein the smart home system is deployed at a structure, wherein the structure is at a root of a hierarchy of states related to the structure, wherein the structure includes states of one or more rooms, wherein the structure or rooms include states of zero or more occupants, the method further comprising: based on determining a change in a home or occupied presence in one of the one or more rooms, propagating a new presence state up the hierarchy of states related to the structure. These elements clarify an abstract idea above, thus, are part of recitation of the abstract idea. Therefore, claim 8 also includes limitations are directed to an abstract idea without significantly more as discussed above.
Claim 8 depends on claim 1, thus is having the same issue as shown above. Further, the claim also wherein the electronic device is one of: a cloud server; a hub; or a border route. These elements clarify an abstract idea above, thus, are part of recitation of the abstract idea. Therefore, claim 7 also includes limitations are directed to an abstract idea without significantly more as discussed above.
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 of this title, 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 1-2, 4-5 and 9 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Malhotra et al. (US 2016/0189532, Pub. Date: Jun. 30, 2016), in view of Burke et al. (US 2020/0347643, Pub. Date: Nov. 5, 2020).
As per claim 1, Malhotra discloses a method of managing modes in a smart home system (Malhotra para. [0029], automatic security system mode selection may allow a smart home environment to determine the current and expected occupancy of an environment and which mode a security system should be in based on the occupancy of the environment, and to automatically change the security system to that mode) by an electronic device (Malhotra fig. 1, Hub Computing Device 100 and para. [0040], The hub computing device may use the occupancy estimate to determine an appropriate mode for the security system of the smart home environment), the method comprising:
receiving a first input of a model (Malhotra para. [0059], The occupancy estimator 120 may also receive the occupancy model 141 from the storage 140. … the occupancy estimator 120 may be a machine learning system and the occupancy model 141 may be a set of weights for the machine learning system. The occupancy estimator 120 [model] may also use time of day, day of week, day of month, and month of year when generating the occupancy estimate; Malhotra para. [0060], The occupancy estimate may also indicate that all of the residents currently in the home are expected to exit the home within the next 2 minutes. For example, it may be 8:28 am on a weekday morning, and all of the residents of the home may leave for work or school around 8:30 am, which may have been learned by the machine learning system and encoded in the occupancy model 141) for a second operational mode (Malhotra para. [0059], The occupancy estimate generated by the occupancy estimator 120 may be received by the mode selector 130; Malhotra para. [0004], A second mode for the security system may be determined based on the occupancy estimate and mode rules; Malhotra para. [0031], The smart home environment may include a security system, which may include any number of modes. For example, the security system may include a stay mode and a vacation mode) of the smart home system (Malhotra para. [0029], automatic security system mode selection may allow a smart home environment to determine the current and expected occupancy of an environment and which mode a security system should be in based on the occupancy of the environment, and to automatically change the security system to that mode);
receiving a second input of the model (Malhotra para. [0060], The occupancy estimator 120 may receive signals including audio and video signals on which voice and face recognition has been performed, indications of motion from motion sensors such as the motion sensor 212, and other signals which may result in an occupancy estimate indicating that the two adults and the two children are in the home, and they are all located in the kitchen) for the second operational mode (Malhotra para. [0059], The occupancy estimate generated by the occupancy estimator 120 may be received by the mode selector 130; Malhotra para. [0004], A second mode for the security system may be determined based on the occupancy estimate and mode rules; Malhotra para. [0031], The smart home environment may include a security system, which may include any number of modes. For example, the security system may include a stay mode and a vacation mode) of the smart home system (Malhotra para. [0029], automatic security system mode selection may allow a smart home environment to determine the current and expected occupancy of an environment and which mode a security system should be in based on the occupancy of the environment, and to automatically change the security system to that mode); and
based on the first input and the second input (Malhotra para. [0069], an occupancy estimate may be generated based on the occupancy signals and the occupancy model), receiving an effective time interval for the second operational mode (Malhotra para. [0062-0063], The occupancy estimate generated by the occupancy estimator 120 may be received by the mode selector 130 … After determining an appropriate mode for the security system, the mode selector 130 may automatically change the mode of the security system, request authorization to change the mode; Malhotra para. [0064], The user may also be able to respond to the mode change request with an authorization including a delay period, so that the mode selector 130 may wait for the length of the delay period [effective time interval] before implementing a mode change) that is effective to cause the smart home system to transition from a first operational mode to the second operational mode during the effective time interval (Malhotra para. [0012], When the mode rules do not permit an automatic mode change for the security system, a delay period may be received from the computing device associated with the user. The length of the delay period may be waited before the mode of the security system may be changed from the first mode to the second mode when the response authorizes a mode change).
Malhotra does not explicitly disclose:
based on the first input and the second input, determining, by the model, an effective time interval for the second operational mode.
Burke teaches:
based on the first input and the second input, determining an effective time interval for the second state (Burke para. [0227], If minors are present in the designated area [first input regarding presence of minor], set the value of the time to wait parameter to at least the value associated with the high occupancy state transition sensitivity level. If the last motion detection ended in a particular area [second input regarding last motion], such as a bedroom area, and no motion was detected in the adjoining exit way, then a longer period of waiting is appropriate, in which case set the value of the time to wait parameter to the value associated with the low occupancy state transition sensitivity level; Burke para. [0099], where sensors used to monitor RF interference or organic material presence are placed in one or more locations throughout the building to determine the presence of individuals).
It would been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention to modify Malhotra in view of Burke in order to incorporate a model using inputs to determine an effective time interval for the second operational mode that is effective to cause the smart home system to transition from a first operational mode to the second operational mode during the effective time interval.
One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motived because it offers the advantage of minimizing costs, maximizing efficiency, and improving occupant comfort and enjoyment of the designated area. (Burke para. [0245).
As per claim 2, Malhotra-Burke discloses the method according to claim 1, as set forth above, Malhotra also discloses wherein the first input is a model learned by the electronic device (Malhotra para. [0061], The occupancy estimator 120 may also update the occupancy model 141. For example, if the hub computing device 100 receives feedback about the accuracy of the occupancy estimate from, for example, a user, or from cross-checking with a rules-based interpretation of the signals from the sensors 310 or other sources of data that may be relevant to location of occupants of the environment, then the occupancy model 141 may be further trained using any suitable machine learning techniques), and wherein the learned model is based on historical data related to the operation of the smart home system (Malhotra para. [0061], The occupancy estimator 120 may also update the occupancy model 141. For example, if the hub computing device 100 receives feedback about the accuracy of the occupancy estimate from, for example, a user, or from cross-checking with a rules-based interpretation of the signals from the sensors 310 or other sources of data that may be relevant to location of occupants of the environment, then the occupancy model 141 may be further trained using any suitable machine learning techniques).
As per claim 4, Malhotra-Burke discloses the method according to claim 1, as set forth above, Malhotra also discloses wherein the second input comprises:
a sensing input (Malhotra para. [0060], The occupancy estimator 120 may receive signals including audio and video signals on which voice and face recognition has been performed, indications of motion from motion sensors such as the motion sensor 212, and other signals which may result in an occupancy estimate indicating that the two adults and the two children are in the home, and they are all located in the kitchen);
a user input; or
both.
As per claim 5, Malhotra-Burke discloses the method according to claim 4, as set forth above, Malhotra also discloses wherein the sensing input comprises an input that provides sensing of a presence of occupants in a structure where the smart home system is deployed (Malhotra para. [0060], The occupancy estimator 120 may receive signals including audio and video signals on which voice and face recognition has been performed, indications of motion from motion sensors such as the motion sensor 212, and other signals which may result in an occupancy estimate indicating that the two adults and the two children are in the home, and they are all located in the kitchen; Malhotra para. [0034], the hub computing device may use signals received from the sensors to determine how many occupants, including people and pets, are in a home, based on motion sensing, voice, face, and motion recognition through cameras, changing light levels reported by light sensors, turning on and off of smart light switches, and detection of computing devices, such as smartphone or tablets, or fobs associated with residents of the home or guests in the home, or pets).
As per claim 9, Malhotra-Burke discloses the method according to claim 1, as set forth above, Malhotra also discloses wherein the electronic device is one of:
a cloud server;
a hub (Malhotra fig. 1, Hub Computing Device 100 and para. [0040], The hub computing device may use the occupancy estimate to determine an appropriate mode for the security system of the smart home environment); or
a border router.
Claim 3 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Malhotra et al. (US 2016/0189532, Pub. Date: Jun. 30, 2016), in view of Burke et al. (US 2020/0347643, Pub. Date: Nov. 5, 2020), in view of Cardona (US 2023/0268766, Filed Apr. 19, 2022).
As per claim 3, Malhotra-Burke discloses the method according to claim 1, as set forth above, Malhotra does not explicitly disclose wherein the first input is a time window input by a user.
Cardona teaches:
input is a time window input by a user (Cardona para. [0051], controller 108 may be configured to determine property usage indicating a presence of user 106 at property 104. In some embodiments, the property usage may be based upon a presence schedule inputted by user 106; Cardona para. [0095-0096], based upon the user's schedule, the model determines that it doesn't need to reach the minimum comfort temperature until 3 PM on Monday through Wednesday and at 6 PM on Thursday and Friday … the model retrieves the user's schedule from the user computer device 118).
It would been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention to further modify Malhotra in view of Cardona for the first input is a time window input by a user.
One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motived because it offers the advantage of automatic monitoring and adjusting of energy usage at a property (Cardona para. [0039])
Claim 6 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Malhotra et al. (US 2016/0189532, Pub. Date: Jun. 30, 2016), in view of Burke et al. (US 2020/0347643, Pub. Date: Nov. 5, 2020), in view of Kobzda (US 2015/0242081, Pub. Date: Aug. 27, 2015), in view of Warren et al. (US 2015/0347916, Pub. Date: Dec. 3, 2015).
As per claim 6, Malhotra-Burke discloses the method according to claim 5, as set forth above, Malhotra does not explicitly disclose wherein the structure is at a root of a hierarchy of states related to the structure, wherein the structure includes states of one or more rooms, wherein the structure or rooms include states of zero or more occupants, wherein the presence of an occupant propagates up the hierarchy, the method comprising:
reconciling conflicts between the sensing input and the user input for an occupant to provide a consistent presence for the occupant in the hierarchy.
Burke teaches:
states related to the structure (Burke para. [0228], With reference to FIGS. 1G and 4, embodiments of the invention 100, 400 cause a monitoring and control system to optionally receive input at 105 indicating the occupancy state of, or for, a designated area, such as a house, one or more rooms or areas in the house, a building, one or more rooms or areas in the building), wherein the structure includes states of one or more rooms (Burke para. [0228], With reference to FIGS. 1G and 4, embodiments of the invention 100, 400 cause a monitoring and control system to optionally receive input at 105 indicating the occupancy state of, or for, a designated area, such as a house, one or more rooms or areas in the house, a building, one or more rooms or areas in the building), wherein the structure or rooms include states of zero or more occupants (Burke para. [0095], An identified user's presence is set to “away” from the designated area when the monitoring and control system transitions to the lowest confidence level of occupancy state 210 and presumes at least that individual is, or all individuals are, no longer on the designated premises (e.g., no longer in the house, or a room therein), the presence of an occupant (Burke para. [0097], An identified user's presence is set to “present” in the designated area, or in one or more of a plurality of areas therein or portions thereof, upon a successful authentication of the identified user at a user interface of the monitoring and control system, such as at a panel or keypad located inside or at the security perimeter of the designated area, or located at the one or more of a plurality of areas therein or portions thereof).
It would been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention to further modify Malhotra in view of Burke for the structure includes states of one or more rooms, wherein the structure or rooms include states of zero or more occupants and the presence of an occupant.
One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motived because it offers the advantage of minimizing costs, maximizing efficiency, and improving occupant comfort and enjoyment of the designated area. (Burke para. [0245]).
Malhotra-Burke does not explicitly disclose:
the structure is at a root of a hierarchy of states related to the structure, wherein the presence of an occupant propagates up the hierarchy;
reconciling conflicts between the sensing input and the user input for an occupant to provide a consistent presence for the occupant in the hierarchy.
Kobzda teaches:
the structure is at a root of a hierarchy of events related to the structure (Kobzda para. [0052], A containment hierarchy is a tree of components that has a top-level container as its root), event propagates up the hierarchy (Kobzda para. [0006], The main principle of bubbling is that after an event triggers on the deepest possible element, it then triggers on parents in nesting order. The bubbling goes to the top of objects hierarchy. When an event occurs on an object, it will bubble up to the parent object, triggering appropriate handlers).
Note: Burke teaches states related to the structure and the presence of an occupant (Burke para. [228&97]). However, Malhotra-Burke does not explicitly disclose structure is at a root of a hierarchy of states related to the structure, wherein the presence of an occupant propagates up the hierarchy. Kobzda teaches the event triggers on the deepest possible element and then goes to the top of hierarchy (Kobzda para. [0006&0052]).
Therefore, it would been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention to further modify Malhotra in view of Kobzda for propagating the presence of an occupant up a hierarchy of states related to the structure wherein the structure is a root of the hierarchy.
One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motived because it offers the advantage of enabling event delegation, which allows a single parent element to manage events.
Malhotra-Burke-Kobzda does not explicitly disclose:
reconciling conflicts between the sensing input and the user input for an occupant to provide a consistent presence for the occupant in the hierarchy.
Warren teaches:
reconciling conflicts between the sensing input and the user input for an occupant to provide a consistent presence for the occupant (Warren para. [0065], The time period data module 404 may make requests for information about time periods where no reliable data for determining occupancy exists. For example, if a time period exists where no occupancy is detected, but no door type event has occurred that could indicate that an occupant left the building, then the request could be directed to finding out the location of where the occupant was during that time. In another example, the request could be directed at determining the location of the occupant when the occupancy sensors and other types of indicators are sending conflicting details about occupancy; Warren para. [0032], the initial door type event is opening a front door, and the subsequent door type event is the opening of a back door).
Therefore, it would been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention to further modify Malhotra in view of Warren for reconciling conflicts between the sensing input and the user input for an occupant to provide a consistent presence for the occupant in the hierarchy.
One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motived because it offers the advantage of verifying the accuracy of data received from the occupancy sensors (Warren para. [0050]).
Claims 7-8 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Malhotra et al. (US 2016/0189532, Pub. Date: Jun. 30, 2016), in view of Burke et al. (US 2020/0347643, Pub. Date: Nov. 5, 2020), in view of Kobzda (US 2015/0242081, Pub. Date: Aug. 27, 2015).
As per claim 7, Malhotra-Burke discloses the method according to claim 1, as set forth above, Malhotra does not explicitly disclose wherein the smart home system is deployed at a structure, wherein the structure is at a root of a hierarchy of states related to the structure, wherein the structure includes states of one or more rooms, wherein the structure or rooms include states of zero or more occupants, the method further comprising:
based on the determining the effective time interval, propagating a new state down the hierarchy of states related to the structure.
Burke teaches:
the smart home system is deployed at a structure (Burke para. [0002], Embodiments of the present invention relate to monitoring and control systems, and in particular to an electromechanical lock mechanism, and a monitoring and control system for a home, building or campus environment that can control the lock mechanism), states related to the structure (Burke para. [0228], With reference to FIGS. 1G and 4, embodiments of the invention 100, 400 cause a monitoring and control system to optionally receive input at 105 indicating the occupancy state of, or for, a designated area, such as a house, one or more rooms or areas in the house, a building, one or more rooms or areas in the building), wherein the structure includes states of one or more rooms (Burke para. [0228], With reference to FIGS. 1G and 4, embodiments of the invention 100, 400 cause a monitoring and control system to optionally receive input at 105 indicating the occupancy state of, or for, a designated area, such as a house, one or more rooms or areas in the house, a building, one or more rooms or areas in the building), wherein the structure or rooms include states of zero or more occupants (Burke para. [0095], An identified user's presence is set to “away” from the designated area when the monitoring and control system transitions to the lowest confidence level of occupancy state 210 and presumes at least that individual is, or all individuals are, no longer on the designated premises (e.g., no longer in the house, or a room therein)), the method further comprising:
based on the determining the effective time interval (Burke para. [0213], each occupancy state transition sensitivity level is associated with a schedule or period of time to delay or wait before transitioning to the selected confidence level regarding occupancy state of the designated area. In this embodiment, the monitoring and control system optionally receives input regarding learned behaviors of individuals that have occupied the designated area, and adjusts the associated schedule for transitioning to the selected confidence level regarding occupancy state of the designated area, or of a user with regard to the designated area, based thereon), propagating a new state (Burke para. [0095], An identified user's presence is set to “away” from the designated area when the monitoring and control system transitions to the lowest confidence level of occupancy state 210 and presumes at least that individual is, or all individuals are, no longer on the designated premises (e.g., no longer in the house, or a room therein); Burke para. [0082], The lowest confidence level of occupancy state 210 is selected when the designated area, or the one or more of a plurality of areas therein or portions thereof, is clearly not occupied by one or more authenticated users).
It would been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention to further modify Malhotra in view of Burke for the smart home system is deployed at a structure, states related to the structure, wherein the structure includes states of one or more rooms, wherein the structure or rooms include states of zero or more occupants and based on the determining the effective time interval, propagating a new state.
One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motived because it offers the advantage of minimizing costs, maximizing efficiency, and improving occupant comfort and enjoyment of the designated area. (Burke para. [0245]).
Malhotra-Burke does not explicitly disclose:
the structure is at a root of a hierarchy of states related to the structure;
propagating a new state down the hierarchy of states related to the structure.
Kobzda teaches:
the structure is at a root of a hierarchy of events (Kobzda para. [0052], A containment hierarchy is a tree of components that has a top-level container as its root);
propagating an event down the hierarchy (Kobzda para. [0007], In turn capturing is opposite to bubbling and starts at the top object in the hierarchy in order to propagate downwards in the hierarchy structure of the objects tree; Kobzda para. [0006], When an event occurs on an object, it will bubble up to the parent object, triggering appropriate handlers).
Note: Burke teaches states related to the structure and based on the determining the effective time interval, propagating a new state (Burke para. [82, 95 and 228]). Malhotra-Burke does not explicitly disclose the structure is at a root of a hierarchy of states related to the structure; propagating a new state down the hierarchy of states related to the structure. Kobzda teaches when an event starts at the top of a hierarchy and propagate downwards in the hierarchy (Kobzda para. [0006-0007]).
Therefore, it would been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention to further modify Malhotra in view of Kobzda for based on the determining the effective time interval, propagating a new state down the hierarchy of states related to the structure wherein the structure is a root of the hierarchy.
One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motived because it offers the advantage of providing ability to intercept events at a parent level for monitoring events before they reach their intended destination.
As per claim 8, Malhotra-Burke discloses the method according to claim 1, as set forth above, Malhotra does not explicitly disclose wherein the smart home system is deployed at a structure, wherein the structure is at a root of a hierarchy of states related to the structure, wherein the structure includes states of one or more rooms, wherein the structure or rooms include states of zero or more occupants, the method further comprising:
based on determining a change in a home or occupied presence in one of the one or more rooms, propagating a new presence state up the hierarchy of states related to the structure.
Burke teaches:
the smart home system is deployed at a structure (Burke para. [0002], Embodiments of the present invention relate to monitoring and control systems, and in particular to an electromechanical lock mechanism, and a monitoring and control system for a home, building or campus environment that can control the lock mechanism), states related to the structure (Burke para. [0228], With reference to FIGS. 1G and 4, embodiments of the invention 100, 400 cause a monitoring and control system to optionally receive input at 105 indicating the occupancy state of, or for, a designated area, such as a house, one or more rooms or areas in the house, a building, one or more rooms or areas in the building), wherein the structure includes states of one or more rooms (Burke para. [0228], With reference to FIGS. 1G and 4, embodiments of the invention 100, 400 cause a monitoring and control system to optionally receive input at 105 indicating the occupancy state of, or for, a designated area, such as a house, one or more rooms or areas in the house, a building, one or more rooms or areas in the building), wherein the structure or rooms include states of zero or more occupants (Burke para. [0095], An identified user's presence is set to “away” from the designated area when the monitoring and control system transitions to the lowest confidence level of occupancy state 210 and presumes at least that individual is, or all individuals are, no longer on the designated premises (e.g., no longer in the house, or a room therein), the method further comprising:
based on determining a change in a home (Burke para. [0213], the monitoring and control system optionally receives input regarding learned behaviors of individuals that have occupied the designated area, and adjusts the associated schedule for transitioning to the selected confidence level regarding occupancy state of the designated area, or of a user with regard to the designated area, based thereon) or occupied presence in one of the one or more rooms, propagating a new presence (Burke para. [0095], An identified user's presence is set to “away” from the designated area when the monitoring and control system transitions to the lowest confidence level of occupancy state 210 and presumes at least that individual is, or all individuals are, no longer on the designated premises (e.g., no longer in the house, or a room therein); Burke para. [0082], The lowest confidence level of occupancy state 210 is selected when the designated area, or the one or more of a plurality of areas therein or portions thereof, is clearly not occupied by one or more authenticated users).
It would been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention to further modify Malhotra in view of Burke for the smart home system is deployed at a structure, states related to the structure, wherein the structure includes states of one or more rooms, wherein the structure or rooms include states of zero or more occupants and based on determining a change in a home or occupied presence in one of the one or more rooms, propagating a new presence state
Malhotra-Burke does not explicitly disclose:
wherein the structure is at a root of a hierarchy of states related to the structure;
propagating a new presence state up the hierarchy of states related to the structure.
Kobzda teaches:
the structure is at a root of a hierarchy of events (Kobzda para. [0052], A containment hierarchy is a tree of components that has a top-level container as its root);
propagating an event state up the hierarchy (Kobzda para. [0006], The main principle of bubbling is that after an event triggers on the deepest possible element, it then triggers on parents in nesting order. The bubbling goes to the top of objects hierarchy. When an event occurs on an object, it will bubble up to the parent object, triggering appropriate handlers).
Note: Burke teaches states related to the structure and based on determining a change in a home, propagating a new presence (Burke para. [82, 95 and 228]). Malhotra-Burke does not explicitly disclose the structure is at a root of a hierarchy of states related to the structure; propagating a new state down the hierarchy of states related to the structure. Kobzda teaches the event triggers on the deepest possible element and then goes to the top of hierarchy (Kobzda para. [0006&0052]).
Therefore, it would been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention to further modify Malhotra in view of Kobzda for propagating a new presence state up the hierarchy of states related to the structure wherein a root of the hierarchy of states related to the structure is the structure.
Therefore, it would been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention to further modify Malhotra in view of Kobzda for based on determining a change in a home or occupied presence in one of the one or more rooms, propagating a new presence state up the hierarchy of states related to the structure wherein the structure is a root of the hierarchy.
One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motived because it offers the advantage of enabling event delegation, which allows a single parent element to manage events.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Chung et al. (US 8941307) Light Control System Using Statement Of Personal Computer Which Is Applied To A Building For Energy Saving And Method Thereof;
Magielse et al. (US 20190230769) Lighting Control;
Fadell et al. (US 10735216) Handling Security Services Visitor At A Smart-Home;
Park et al. (US 20110196547) Apparatus For Controlling A Power Using A Smart Device And Method Thereof
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to VINH NGUYEN whose telephone number is (571)272-4487. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday: 7:30 AM - 5:30 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, KAMAL B DIVECHA can be reached at (571)272-5863. 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.
/VINH NGUYEN/Examiner, Art Unit 2453
/KAMAL B DIVECHA/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2453
Prosecution Insights