FINAL REJECTION
The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
1. Claims 1-20 are presented for examination.
2. The text of those applicable section of Title 35, U.S. Code not included in this action can be found in the prior Office Action.
3. The rejections are respectfully maintained that is applicable to the amended claims for applicant's convenience.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
4. The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of 35 U.S.C. 112(a):
(a) IN GENERAL.—The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor or joint inventor of carrying out the invention.
The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112:
The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor of carrying out his invention.
5. Claims 1-20 rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(a) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), first paragraph, as failing to comply with the written description requirement. The claim(s) contains subject matter which was not described in the specification in such a way as to reasonably convey to one skilled in the relevant art that the inventor or a joint inventor, or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the inventor(s), at the time the application was filed, had possession of the claimed invention. In claims 1, 19 and 20, the specification, as originally filed, does not reasonably convey to one of ordinary skill in the art that inventors were in possession of these limitations at the time of filing, provide description for “an acquisition part for acquiring operation information on a group of operations including a plurality of device operations continuously performed by an operator within a certain period to a plurality of devices disposed in a facility”. The limitation “a plurality of device operations continuously performed by an operator within a certain period” is all undefined in the specification. In specification on paragraph 75 describes “The operation tendency extraction part 122 extracts a group of operations continuously performed to a plurality of devices 3 disposed in the facility 4 as a group of operations that requires a determination as to whether to suggest collective control. The group of operations continuously performed means a plurality of operations performed within a certain time (e.g., five minutes)”. It is unclear what is actually being described and thus what is actually being claimed to the point where one of ordinary skill in the art would be unable to make or use the invention.
Claims 2-18 rejected because they incorporate the deficiencies of claim 1.
6. Claims 1-12, 17, 19 and 20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1)/(a)(2) as being anticipated by Packer et al. (Packer), US patent no. 10019739 B1.
As per claim 1, Packer teaches a control method by an information processing apparatus [figures 1, 2], comprising:
acquiring operation information on a group of operations including
a plurality of device operations continuously performed by an operator within a certain period to a plurality of devices disposed in a facility [col. 4, lines 8-32];
calculating an operation cost required to perform the group of operations indicated by the operation information [figure 2; col. 5, lines 53-67];
generating, in a case that the operation cost is larger than a predetermined value, suggestion information indicative of a suggestion for performing by single
operation, simultaneous [col. 8, lines 60-65] and collective control of the group of operations indicated by the operation information to the devices [figure 2; col. 5, lines 31-44; col. 8, lines 34-67; col. 10, lines 31-37]; and outputting the suggestion information onto an operation terminal disposed in the facility to display the suggestion information for the operator to collectively control the plurality of devices [figure 3; col. 9, lines 8-11; col. 10, lines 31-37, col. 12, lines 14-21].
Packer teaches:
The utility management system 104 stores usage data in the usage database 105. The usage data is associated with one or more commodities consumed by the utility customers 101. The usage data may include usage information corresponding to usage of at least one of the one or more commodities for multiple utility customers (e.g., utility customers 101a, 101b ... 101n). The usage-information may include past usage information of the commodity during at least one of completed billing period and a current usage of the at least one of the one or more commodities during a completed portion of a current billing period. The usage data for a utility customer may be obtained from a corresponding monitoring device on a scheduled basis, periodic basis or a non-scheduled basis. The monitoring devices (e.g., monitoring devices 102a, 102b ... 102n) may relate to an advanced metering infrastructure (AMI). In this respect, the monitoring devices may be smart meters or, at least in part, include smart meter functionality for measuring electrical, water and/or natural gas consumption in the
property associated with the corresponding utility customer. For example, the usage data may consist of usage information corresponding to the property in its entirety such that usage information relating to one or more components in the property is disaggregated by the utility management system 104 and/or the billing management system 108. In an aspect, the utility management system 104 stores and forwards the
usage data to the billing management system 108 for usage alert processing. The utility management system 104 may forward the usage data to the billing management system 108 for storage and usage alert processing. The utility management system 104 described herein may refer to a utility company or an offsite third party service provider that is interfaced with the utility company.
The computing device may provide recommendations on how to modify usage so that actual usage can remain within the budgeted use for the specified budget period.
Recommendations may include set points or set point schedules that may be used on the climate control device. For example, using thermodynamic modeling and/or hourly or daily weather forecast data, the HVAC runtime based on a current thermostat setting can be determined including how much the HVAC runtime can be curtailed using a new set of set point schedules. Other techniques for providing recommended set points include (a) a rule-based suggestion (e.g., a suggestion to move one or more set points to be 1 or 2 degrees more efficient, or making the number of degrees suggested to be proportional to a “budgeted remaining use” and a “projected remaining use”) and (b) using linear regression or a similar scheme that predicts a number of degrees based on past usage to alter a set point schedule.
Other recommendations may be directed to other energy usage components on the property (e.g., time shifting washer/dryer usage, turning off lights, closing/opening windows when outside conditions satisfy certain characteristics, etc.). According to some implementations, the computing device may automatically adjust settings on the thermostat to modify usage so that actual usage can remain within the budgeted use for the specified budget period.
As per claim 2, Packer teaches in the acquisition of the operation information, information on a group of operations continuously performed to the devices with frequency greater than predetermined frequency during a predetermined period is
acquired as the operation information [figure 3; col. 6, lines 38-45; col. 8; lines 46-67; col. 10, lines 55-62].
As per claim 3, Packer teaches the predetermined value is an operation cost that was required to perform a group of operations indicated by suggestion information whose suggestion for collective control is accepted in the past, and that calculated for output of the suggestion information [col. 6, lines 20-32; col. 8; lines 43-67].
As per claim 4, Packer teaches the predetermined value is arbitrarily determined by a user of the facility [col. 5, lines 53-65; col. 6, lines 12-20].
As per claim 5, Packer teaches the operation cost is a time required to perform the group of operations indicated by the operation information [col. 6, lines 38-44; col. 8, lines 34-67].
As per claim 6, Packer teaches the operation cost is the number of devices to which the group of operations indicated by the operation information is performed [col. 5, lines 53-67; col. 8, lines 34-67].
As per claim 7, Packer teaches each of the devices disposed in the facility is operated with a switch of the device or the operation screen included in an operation terminal disposed in the facility [figure 3; col. 8, lines 34-67], and the operation cost is the number of contacts by an operator with the switch or the operation screen from start to end of the group of operations indicated by the operation information [figures 2, 3; col. 7, lines 5-8; col. 8, lines 34-67].
As per claim 8, Packer teaches the operation cost is the number of operations that are included in the group of operations indicated by the operation information
and are unnecessary in view of specifications of the devices receiving the group of operations [figures 2, 3; col. 7, lines 5-8; col. 8, lines 34-67].
As per claim 9, Packer teaches the operation cost is a movement distance of an operator performing the group of operations from start to end of the group of operations indicated by the operation information [figures 2, 3; col. 8, lines 34-67; col. 10, lines 4-37].
As per claim 10, Packer teaches a sum of distances between respective performance positions of the operations in the group of operations indicated by the
operation information is calculated as the movement distance [col. 8, lines 34-67; col. 10, lines 4-37].
As per claim 11, Packer teaches a length of a traffic line of the operator from the start to the end of the group of operations indicated by the operation information
is calculated as the movement distance [col. 8, lines 34-67; col. 10, lines 4-37].
As per claim 12, Packer teaches the traffic line of the operator is acquired on the basis of information indicative of visit positions of the operator acquired by a sensor disposed in the facility [col. 8, lines 34-67; col. 10, lines 4-37; col. 13, lines 10-18].
As per claim 17, Packer teaches each of the devices disposed in the facility is operated with a switch of the device or a soft key displayed on an operation screen included in an operation terminal disposed in the facility, and the operation cost is a sum of a movement time required to move between switches used for the group of operations indicated by the operation information and required times to control the operations in the group of operations to the device [figures 2, 3; col. 7, lines 5-8; col. 8, lines 34-67].
As to claim 19, basically is the corresponding elements that are carried out the method of operating step in claim 1. Accordingly, claim 19 is rejected for the same reason as set forth in claim 1.
As per claim 20, directed to a computer-readable storage medium storing the instructions to perform the method of steps executed by the system as set forth in claim 19. Therefore, it is rejected on the same basis as set forth hereinabove.
Allowable Subject Matter
7. Claims 13-16 and 18 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.
8. The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter: the prior art of records do not teach: in claim 13, a sum of distances between a place where the operator stays in the facility for a longest time and respective performance positions of the operations in the group of operations indicated by the operation information is calculated as the movement distance; In claim 15, the operation cost is a fatigue degree indicative of a load on a body of the operator in performing the group of operations indicated by the operation information; in claim 18, in the calculation of the operation cost: in a case that there is at least one calculation method that was used for output of one or more suggestion information pieces whose suggestion was accepted with a probability not lower than a certain threshold among
one or more calculation methods that were used to calculate an operation cost in the past, the operation cost is calculated by a calculation method indicating the highest probability among the one or more calculation methods.
9. Examiner's note: Examiner has cited particular paragraphs and columns and line numbers in the references as applied to the claims above for the convenience of the applicant. Although the specified citations are representative of the teachings of the art and are applied to the specific limitations within the individual claim, other passages and figures may apply as well. It is respectfully requested from the applicant in preparing responses, to fully consider the references in entirety as potentially teaching all or part of the claimed invention, as well as the context of the passage as taught by the prior art or disclosed by the examiner. MPEP 2141.02 VI: “PRIOR ART MUST BE CONSIDERED IN ITS ENTIRETY, INCLUDING DISCLOSURES THAT TEACH AWAY FROM THE CLAIMS."
Response to Arguments
10. Applicant's arguments filed 07/22/26 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
11. In the remarks, applicants argued in substance that Packer fails to disclose " a plurality of device operations continuously performed by an operator within a certain period to a plurality of devices disposed in a facility; and suggestion information indicative of a suggestion for performing, by single operation simultaneous".
12. In response to applicant’s argument, Packer discloses the limitation above [col. 4, lines 8-32; col 8, lines 60-65].
Also see detailed action above.
Conclusion
13. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a). 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 extension fee 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 date of this final action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to CHUN CAO whose telephone number is (571)272-3664. The examiner can normally be reached on M-F 7:30 am-4:00 pm.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Kamini Shah can be reached on 571-272-2279. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300.
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).
/CHUN CAO/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2115
Prosecution Insights