CTNF 18/619,651 CTNF 87549 DETAILED ACTION The present office action is responsive to the applicant’s filling the application on 03/28/2024. The application has claims 1-17 present. All present claims have been examined. The Information Disclosure Statements (IDS) and cited references filed 02/01/2024 and 08/06/2025, have been reviewed by the examiner. Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status 07-03-aia AIA 15-10-aia The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA. Examiner Notes Examiner cites particular columns, paragraphs, figures and line numbers in the references as applied to the claims below for the convenience of the applicant. Although the specified citations are representative of the teachings in 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 that, in preparing responses, the applicant fully consider the references in their 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. The entire reference is considered to provide disclosure relating to the claimed invention. The claims & only the claims form the metes & bounds of the invention. Office personnel are to give the claims their broadest reasonable interpretation in light of the supporting disclosure. Unclaimed limitations appearing in the specification are not read into the claim. Prior art was referenced using terminology familiar to one of ordinary skill in the art. Such an approach is broad in concept and can be either explicit or implicit in meaning. Examiner's Notes are provided with the cited references to assist the applicant to better understand how the examiner interprets the applied prior art. Such comments are entirely consistent with the intent & spirit of compact prosecution. Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102 07-06 AIA 15-10-15 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. 07-07-aia AIA 07-07 The following is a quotation of the appropriate paragraphs of 35 U.S.C. 102 that form the basis for the rejections under this section made in this Office action: A person shall be entitled to a patent unless – 07-08-aia AIA (a)(1) the claimed invention was patented, described in a printed publication, or in public use, on sale, or otherwise available to the public before the effective filing date of the claimed invention. 07-15-aia AIA Claim(s) 1-9, 12, 13, 15, 16 and 17 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102 (a)(1) as being anticipated by Logan et al. (US 20160231718) . In regards to claims (1, 16 and 17), Logan discloses a method, comprising: at a coordinated trajectory planning component of an electronic device: detecting a set of one or more inputs (see abstract and at least para 23-46: teaches user preferences that the user can set. Para 25: “ Most operating systems already have the user enter simple preferences for the operation of the device at installation time, additional steps could be added this process to interrogate the user to enter data into the preference table ”. Para 26: “ It is envisioned that the user would enter the preferences through a keyboard, touchscreen, by verbally answering questions ”) ; determining, using the set of one or more inputs, a set of two or more coordinated output trajectories that include: a first output trajectory for a first physical output component and a first target execution time for the first output trajectory (see at least para 32-60: provides various examples where the preferences that had been input and saved are used in order to take actions (trajectories as output control for an output components) of devices and peripherals and control such different devices. For example. on para 36:” a profile for 6:00 AM could bring the Wall Street Journal app up on the tablet, request that the thermostat increase the temperature to 71 degrees, and turn on all of the lights in the kitchen area .”. Para 58: “ The most primitive means for negotiating preferences is statically, where the first user sets the preference permanently. This is not an algorithm but the setting of a value. In the doctor's waiting room example, this is the equivalent to the staff setting the station, perhaps on a medical information station, and then locking the control panel. The preference table for the TV ” ); and a second output trajectory for a second physical output component and a second target execution time for the second output trajectory, wherein the second physical output component is different from the first physical output component (see at least para 32-60: provides various examples where the preferences that had been input and saved are used in order to take actions and control different devices. The devices are different, like a tv, a thermostat or temperature control, the lights of a room. For example, two different components are controlled based on the preferences on para 36:” a profile for 6:00 AM could bring the Wall Street Journal app up on the tablet, request that the thermostat increase the temperature to 71 degrees, and turn on all of the lights in the kitchen area. ”. Para 58: “ The most primitive means for negotiating preferences is statically, where the first user sets the preference permanently. This is not an algorithm but the setting of a value. In the doctor's waiting room example, this is the equivalent to the staff setting the station, perhaps on a medical information station, and then locking the control panel. The preference table for the TV ” ); providing, to the first physical output component, the first output trajectory and the first target execution time; and providing, to the second physical output component, the second output trajectory and the second target execution time (see at least para 32-60: the different example show the system using the preferences for times and controlling the output devices. The devices are different, like a tv, a thermostat or temperature control, the lights of a room. For example, two or three different components are controlled based on the preferences on para 36: “From 6:00 PM to 7:00 PM, for instance, the preference table could be set to Dinner, where the phone was set to block all phone calls, text messages, and emails. In addition, the phone could send the user's preferences to the audio system requesting soft music and that the lights be dimmed in the dining room, but at full intensity in the kitchen ” or “ a profile for 6:00 AM could bring the Wall Street Journal app up on the tablet, request that the thermostat increase the temperature to 71 degrees, and turn on all of the lights in the kitchen area. ”. Para 58: “ The most primitive means for negotiating preferences is statically, where the first user sets the preference permanently. This is not an algorithm but the setting of a value. In the doctor's waiting room example, this is the equivalent to the staff setting the station, perhaps on a medical information station, and then locking the control panel. The preference table for the TV ” ). In regards to claim 2, Logan discloses wherein the set of one or more inputs includes one or more user inputs (see para 25-26, 36 multiple inputs that control different output devices: Para 25 -26 mentions “ populating the table is for the user to enter the data manually. Most operating systems already have the user enter simple preferences for the operation of the device at installation time, additional steps could be added this process to interrogate the user to enter data into the preference table”, “the user would enter the preferences through a keyboard, touchscreen ”. On para 36 provides examples for at least different inputs that control 3 different output devices “ From 6:00 PM to 7:00 PM, for instance, the preference table could be set to Dinner, where the phone was set to block all phone calls, text messages, and emails. In addition, the phone could send the user's preferences to the audio system requesting soft music and that the lights be dimmed in the dining room, but at full intensity in the kitchen ”). In regards to claim 3, Logan discloses wherein the set of one or more inputs includes one or more non-user inputs (see at least para 27-28: user preferences obtained or mined from other apps “ in conjunction to manual entry, an intelligent device could automatically mine information from other applications. For instance, the intelligent device could interrogate the NEST thermostat application and determine that the user typically sets the temperature at 69 degrees Fahrenheit. The temperature field in the preference table could then be automatically set to 69 degrees. Or the music preferences section of the table could be populated by interrogating the Pandora application and web site for data on the user's preference for music. ”). In regards to claim 4, Logan discloses wherein the first output trajectory is different from the second output trajectory (Different inputs that control 3 different output devices. See at least para 36 “ From 6:00 PM to 7:00 PM, for instance, the preference table could be set to Dinner, where the phone was set to block all phone calls, text messages, and emails. In addition, the phone could send the user's preferences to the audio system requesting soft music and that the lights be dimmed in the dining room, but at full intensity in the kitchen ”). In regards to claim 5, Logan discloses wherein determining the set of two or more coordinated output trajectories includes blending a first predefined output trajectory and a second predefined output trajectory together to form a blended output trajectory (see at least para 54-64, 72-75: teaches examples of different was to negotiate and blend in order to determine the actions to control output devices e.g. voting, average to control temperature or tv and other output devices. An example on para 73: “ In FIG. 3 the three devices Device 1, Device 2, and Device 3 have temperatures 70, 75, and 67 degrees. Averaging these three preferences gives a parameter of 70.6 degrees, which will make everyone fairly happy” ). In regards to claim 6, Logan discloses wherein the set of two or more coordinated output trajectories include one or more of: a jerk-limited output trajectory; a Bézier curve output trajectory; a preset output trajectory ; a manual motion output trajectory; and an acceleration limited output trajectory (see at least para 32-60: the different example shows the system using the preferences for preset times and controlling the output devices. The devices are different, like a tv, a thermostat or temperature control, the lights of a room. For example, two or three different components are controlled based on the preferences on para 36: “From 6:00 PM to 7:00 PM, for instance, the preference table could be set to Dinner, where the phone was set to block all phone calls, text messages, and emails. In addition, the phone could send the user's preferences to the audio system requesting soft music and that the lights be dimmed in the dining room, but at full intensity in the kitchen ” or “ a profile for 6:00 AM could bring the Wall Street Journal app up on the tablet, request that the thermostat increase the temperature to 71 degrees, and turn on all of the lights in the kitchen area. ”). In regards to claim 7, Logan discloses wherein determining the set of two or more coordinated output trajectories includes using a set of one or more motion policies that specify coordination between output trajectories of the set of two or more coordinated output trajectories (see at least para 188-190: “ preferences to other drivers may allow several drivers to agree, via their preference tables, to synchronize their cruise control speed so that the multiple cars could travel down the highway at the same speed ”). In regards to claim 8, Logan discloses further comprising: detecting a second set of one or more inputs corresponding to the first physical output component; in response to detecting the second set of one or more inputs corresponding to the first physical output component and in accordance with a determination that the second set of one or more inputs indicates that a set of one or more coordination criteria is not satisfied by the set of two or more coordinated output trajectories, determining, using the second set of one or more inputs, an updated set of two or more coordinated output trajectories that is different from the set of two or more coordinated output trajectories; and in response to determining the updated set of two or more coordinated output trajectories, providing, to at least one of the first physical output component and the second physical output component, an updated output trajectory of the updated set of two or more coordinated output trajectories (see at least para 55 and 60-62 discuses making determination and using preferences that when a last user enters the output will update to their preferences: See para 50 “ preferences can reflect the desires of a group through some process for the negotiation of the preferences. The negotiation process compiles the desires of individuals into a collective preference. The negotiation can be a singular event or can occur continually. In the example of the TV in the doctor's waiting room, the station can be set by the first person in the room (static), or through a negotiation between those in the room when the TV is turned on (singular negotiation), or the station can change dynamically as people enter and leave (dynamic negotiation)”. In regards to claim 9, Logan discloses wherein determining the updated set of two or more coordinated output trajectories is performed while at least a portion of the set of two or more coordinated output trajectories is performed (see at least para 55 and 60-62 discuses making determination and using preferences multiple users are sending control signals, the system makes determination and the output will update to their preferences. Performing the preference of one user while updating to the other user: See para 50 “ preferences can reflect the desires of a group through some process for the negotiation of the preferences. The negotiation process compiles the desires of individuals into a collective preference. The negotiation can be a singular event or can occur continually. In the example of the TV in the doctor's waiting room, the station can be set by the first person in the room (static), or through a negotiation between those in the room when the TV is turned on (singular negotiation), or the station can change dynamically as people enter and leave (dynamic negotiation. On para 60-62: [0060] “In the waiting room example, each person, as they arrive, changes the channel to the station they desire to watch. In the preference table world, the TV preference table is overwritten by each new intelligent device that sends a preference to the TV. In some embodiments, there may be a delay in changing the preferences so that the TV channel is not changed for someone walking through the room without waiting. In another embodiment, the location mechanism is precise enough to determine which device is associated with a chair and which are moving or talking with a nurse. This may use an indoor positioning system or an enhanced GPS system”). In regards to claim 12, Logan discloses further comprising: performing one or more time synchronization operations directed to coordinating output trajectory execution (teaches examples of synchronization see at least para 36: “ the time of day could be used to determine which preference table is used. From 6:00 PM to 7:00 PM, for instance, the preference table could be set to Dinner, where the phone was set to block all phone calls, text messages, and emails. In addition, the phone could send the user's preferences to the audio system requesting soft music and that the lights be dimmed in the dining room, but at full intensity in the kitchen. Similarly, a profile for 6:00 AM could bring the Wall Street Journal app up on the tablet, request that the thermostat increase the temperature to 71 degrees, and turn on all of the lights in the kitchen area”). In regards to claim 13, Logan discloses, wherein the coordinated trajectory planning component provides the first output trajectory and the first target execution time via a first network that includes one or more of ethernet-based communication and controller area network (CAN)-based communication (see at least para 26:” The Preferences tool (or app) could be web based, local network based ,”. On para 106: “Since preferences are sent over a network, either Bluetooth, WiFi, Cellular, Internet or other…”). In regards to claim 15, Logan discloses wherein the set of two or more coordinated output trajectories include output trajectories for one or more physical output components of the following: one or more display generation components; one or more audio output components; one or more movement components; one or more light output components; and one or more opacity control components (see at least para 32-60, 188-190: provides various examples where the preferences that had been input and saved are used in order to take actions (trajectories as output control for an output components) of devices and peripherals and control such different devices like thermostats, tv and car preferences. For example on para 36:” a profile for 6:00 AM could bring the Wall Street Journal app up on the tablet, request that the thermostat increase the temperature to 71 degrees, and turn on all of the lights in the kitchen area .”. Para 58: “ The most primitive means for negotiating preferences is statically, where the first user sets the preference permanently. This is not an algorithm but the setting of a value. In the doctor's waiting room example, this is the equivalent to the staff setting the station, perhaps on a medical information station, and then locking the control panel. The preference table for the TV ”. On para 188-190: “ preferences to other drivers may allow several drivers to agree, via their preference tables, to synchronize their cruise control speed so that the multiple cars could travel down the highway at the same speed ”) . Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103 07-06 AIA 15-10-15 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. 07-20-aia AIA 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. 07-21-aia AIA Claim (s) 10-11 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Logan et al. (US 20160231718) as applied to claims above . In regards to claim 10, Logan doesn’t specifically teach wherein: the updated set of two or more coordinated output trajectories includes: a third output trajectory for the first physical output component different from the first output trajectory; and a third target execution time; and providing the updated output trajectory of the updated set of two or more coordinated output trajectories includes providing, to the first physical output component, at least one of the third output trajectory and the third target execution time. However, Logan provides examples where negotiating and updating for temperature, or tv or different phones settings each associated to different times based on the preferences entered. The output control signals for the output devices are determines under different circumstances which would update many times the different output devices (see FIG. 3 and at least para 36-38, 60-61 and 73-75, 248-249: One of the examples on para [0060] Another embodiment for the setting of parameters is that the last one to arrive sets the parameter. This, too, is not an algorithm but the setting of a value. In the waiting room example, each person, as they arrive, changes the channel to the station they desire to watch. In the preference table world, the TV preference table is overwritten by each new intelligent device that sends a preference to the TV. In some embodiments, there may be a delay in changing the preferences so that the TV channel is not changed for someone walking through the room without waiting. In another embodiment, the location mechanism is precise enough to determine which device is associated with a chair and which are moving or talking with a nurse. This may use an indoor positioning system or an enhanced GPS system. [0061] In one embodiment of the last one to arrive algorithm, when the last device to arrive leaves, the intelligent device removes that preference and returns to the preference previously set, should that device still be present. If no devices are detected, the intelligent device could turn the device off or to a default state. This is a standard computer science stacking algorithm. In the waiting room example, the TV would set the channel based on the last one to arrive; once that person left the waiting room, the TV would restore the preferences previously set, and check to see if the person who set that channel were still present in the waiting room. If not, the previous preferences would be used if that person were still in the waiting room. If no one was in the waiting room, the TV may turn off until another person arrived. [0062] Alternatively, multiple intelligent devices could negotiate amongst themselves and then decide that one intelligent device would send the negotiated preference to the TV for its implementation of a last one to arrive algorithm ”. On para [0248] Once we have updated the FIG. 3 table of preferences, the intelligent device performs a negotiation using one or more of the algorithms described in Section III above, and determines the parameter values to use. [0249] The intelligent device then changes its behavior 221 based on the new parameters or the user is advised to change his behavior based on the new parameter. Then the intelligent device returns to its search for devices 201 ). As such, it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to use these teachings taught by Logan to update the different output devices with the preferences and determinations based on multiple preference data and negotiation aspects based on each case, since a person skilled in the art who would have been motivated given it provides flexibility and improve management for control to output on each of the output devices. In regards to claim 11, Logan doesn’t specifically teach wherein: the updated set of two or more coordinated output trajectories includes: a fourth output trajectory for the second physical output component different from the second output trajectory; and a fourth target execution time; and providing the updated output trajectory of the updated set of two or more coordinated output trajectories includes providing, to the second physical output component, at least one of the fourth output trajectory and the fourth target execution time. However, Logan provides examples where negotiating and updating for temperature, or tv or different phones settings each associated to different times based on the preferences entered. The output control signals for the output devices are determines under different circumstances which would update many times the different output devices (see FIG. 3 and at least para 36-38, 60-61 and 73-75, 248-249: One of the examples on para [0060] Another embodiment for the setting of parameters is that the last one to arrive sets the parameter. This, too, is not an algorithm but the setting of a value. In the waiting room example, each person, as they arrive, changes the channel to the station they desire to watch. In the preference table world, the TV preference table is overwritten by each new intelligent device that sends a preference to the TV. In some embodiments, there may be a delay in changing the preferences so that the TV channel is not changed for someone walking through the room without waiting. In another embodiment, the location mechanism is precise enough to determine which device is associated with a chair and which are moving or talking with a nurse. This may use an indoor positioning system or an enhanced GPS system. [0061] In one embodiment of the last one to arrive algorithm, when the last device to arrive leaves, the intelligent device removes that preference and returns to the preference previously set, should that device still be present. If no devices are detected, the intelligent device could turn the device off or to a default state. This is a standard computer science stacking algorithm. In the waiting room example, the TV would set the channel based on the last one to arrive; once that person left the waiting room, the TV would restore the preferences previously set, and check to see if the person who set that channel were still present in the waiting room. If not, the previous preferences would be used if that person were still in the waiting room. If no one was in the waiting room, the TV may turn off until another person arrived. [0062] Alternatively, multiple intelligent devices could negotiate amongst themselves and then decide that one intelligent device would send the negotiated preference to the TV for its implementation of a last one to arrive algorithm ”. On para [0248] Once we have updated the FIG. 3 table of preferences, the intelligent device performs a negotiation using one or more of the algorithms described in Section III above, and determines the parameter values to use. [0249] The intelligent device then changes its behavior 221 based on the new parameters or the user is advised to change his behavior based on the new parameter. Then the intelligent device returns to its search for devices 201 ). As such, it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to use these teachings taught by Logan to update the different output devices with the preferences and determinations based on multiple preference data and negotiation aspects based on each case, since a person skilled in the art who would have been motivated given, it provides flexibility and improve management for control to output on each of the output devices . 07-22-aia AIA Claim (s) 14 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Logan et al. (US 20160231718) as applied to claim s above and further in view of Matsuoka et al. (US20150167989) . In regards to claim 14, Logan doesn’t specifically teach wherein the coordinated trajectory planning component provides the first output trajectory as a parameterized curve. Matsuoka teaches wherein the coordinated trajectory planning component provides the first output trajectory as a parameterized curve (see para 94 teaches use of parameterized curve in the implementation of intelligent controls). As such, it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to use these teachings taught by Matsuoka in combination with Logan to use parameterized curve on implementations of intelligent controlling, since a person skilled in the art who would have been motivated given information can be utilized to adjust the control process ensuring that the system operates efficiently and accurately. Conclusion 07-101 Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to MARIO M VELEZ-LOPEZ whose telephone number is (571)270-7971. The examiner can normally be reached on M-F 10:30am-5:30pm ET. If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Scott Baderman, can be reached at telephone number 571-272-3644. 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 Patent Center and the Private Patent Application Information Retrieval (PAIR) system. Status information for published applications may be obtained from Patent Center or Private PAIR. Status information for unpublished applications is available through Patent Center and Private PAIR for authorized users only. Should you have questions about access to the Private PAIR system, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). 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) Form at https://www.uspto.gov/patents/uspto-automated- interview-request-air-form. /MARIO M VELEZ-LOPEZ/ Examiner, Art Unit 2118 /SCOTT T BADERMAN/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2118 Application/Control Number: 18/619,651 Page 2 Art Unit: 2118 Application/Control Number: 18/619,651 Page 3 Art Unit: 2118 Application/Control Number: 18/619,651 Page 4 Art Unit: 2118 Application/Control Number: 18/619,651 Page 5 Art Unit: 2118 Application/Control Number: 18/619,651 Page 6 Art Unit: 2118 Application/Control Number: 18/619,651 Page 7 Art Unit: 2118 Application/Control Number: 18/619,651 Page 8 Art Unit: 2118 Application/Control Number: 18/619,651 Page 9 Art Unit: 2118 Application/Control Number: 18/619,651 Page 10 Art Unit: 2118 Application/Control Number: 18/619,651 Page 11 Art Unit: 2118 Application/Control Number: 18/619,651 Page 12 Art Unit: 2118 Application/Control Number: 18/619,651 Page 13 Art Unit: 2118 Application/Control Number: 18/619,651 Page 14 Art Unit: 2118 Application/Control Number: 18/619,651 Page 15 Art Unit: 2118
Prosecution Insights