DETAILED ACTION
The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
Claim status
Claims 1-21 are currently pending for examination.
Claim Objections
Claim 15 objected to because of the following informalities: “an emergency vehicle” in line 8 should be “the emergency vehicle”. Appropriate correction is required.
Claim 16 objected to because of the following informalities: “a stop engine condition” in lines 5-6 should be “the stop engine condition”. Appropriate correction is required.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status.
The following is a quotation of 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 –
(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.
Claims 1, 2, 4, 6, 11, 13 and 14 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Tallinger (US 2009/0256697).
For claim 1, Tallinger discloses a lightbar configured to couple with an emergency vehicle [E.g. 0014: an emergency vehicle light bar with a message display…the system includes a lighting subsystem and a light bar structure upon which the lighting subsystem is mounted. The lighting subsystem has a display that incorporates both warning signal lights and a programmable message display], the lightbar comprising:
one or more warning lights configured to emit an emergency flash pattern [E.g. 0041: a second set of LEDs which are used for emergency signaling (e.g., flashing.), 0018: the light bar is visible from the front, rear and sides of the vehicle when used as a light bar with flashers, and is visible from the front and rear when used as a message bar. A different message or flasher pattern can be displayed on the front and rear of the light bar/message display, and letters can be reversed as to be readable from a rear view mirror on either side; 0062, 0044]; and
an indicator light configured to display one or more status indicators of the emergency vehicle [E.g. 0041: a first set of LEDs which are used to display messages, 0053: A first set of the LEDs is used to form a textual display for communicating messages to persons around the vehicle. The "textual" display may display not only alphanumeric characters but also non-alphanumeric characters (e.g., "-", "/", etc.) and graphics (e.g., arrows or other symbols.); 0062, 0044].
For claim 2, Tallinger discloses wherein the one or more warning lights are a first warning light and a second warning light [E.g. 0053: A second set of the LEDs is used in place of traditional warning signal lights ("flashers") and may be used to display flashing red and blue patterns or other patterns that may be appropriate for particular emergency situations. The intensities of the LEDs of the different sets may be different and, in one embodiment, the LEDs of the second set (the signal lights) are higher-intensity LEDs than the LEDs of the first set (the message display), 0055: The number of rows and number of columns of the LEDs in the display may vary from one embodiment to another. Greater numbers of rows and/or columns enable more detailed messages or graphics to be displayed. Greater numbers of LEDs can also increase the visibility of the display. LEDs of the message display, as well as warning signal LEDs, may be of one or more colors. The various LEDs may also have different intensities].
For claim 4, Tallinger discloses wherein the indicator light and the one or more warning lights are combined into a single light source [E.g. 0014: The lighting subsystem has a display that incorporates both warning signal lights and a programmable message display].
For claim 6, Tallinger discloses wherein the indicator light is configured to emit a colored light indicative of the one or more status indicators of the emergency vehicle [E.g. 0055: LEDs of the message display, as well as warning signal LEDs, may be of one or more colors].
For claim 11, Tallinger discloses wherein the one or more warning lights are configured to stop emitting the emergency flash pattern while the indicator light emits displays one or more status indicators of the emergency vehicle [E.g. 0062: It may later be desirable to discontinue the use of the flashing signal lights and instead display a textual or graphical message to direct traffic around the accident. Since the officer can control the display using a remote control, this can be accomplished without having to return to the vehicle. This same remote control can also be used to control the display and/or emergency signal lights when the officer is in the vehicle, 0041: The LEDs of the first and second sets are distributed throughout the display field, so that the viewable area of the display may alternately be used to display messages or flashing signals].
For claim 13, Tallinger discloses wherein the one or more warning lights and the indicator light are controlled independently [E.g. 0022: The message and lights may be controlled through a dedicated control box or through a laptop located in the vehicle. The signal from the control box or laptop may be transmitted via a cable or short range wireless signal such as zigbee. From a pop-up program on the laptop or within the control box, the operator may choose from a list of standard flasher patterns and/or messages, or may type in custom messages to be displayed in the front and/or rear of the display. The message may be displayed as normal text or in reverse such that it can be seen correctly in a rearview mirror of another vehicle, 0062: It may later be desirable to discontinue the use of the flashing signal lights and instead display a textual or graphical message to direct traffic around the accident. Since the officer can control the display using a remote control, this can be accomplished without having to return to the vehicle. This same remote control can also be used to control the display and/or emergency signal lights when the officer is in the vehicle].
For claim 14, Tallinger discloses wherein the one or more warning lights are communicatively coupled to a first circuit, and wherein the indicator light is coupled to a second circuit [E.g. 0062: It may later be desirable to discontinue the use of the flashing signal lights and instead display a textual or graphical message to direct traffic around the accident. Since the officer can control the display using a remote control, this can be accomplished without having to return to the vehicle. This same remote control can also be used to control the display and/or emergency signal lights when the officer is in the vehicle, 0022-0023, 0044].
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
7. 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 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.
8. 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.
9. Claim 3 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Tallinger.
For claim 3, Although Tallinger fails to expressly disclose wherein the indicator light is disposed between the first warning light and the second warning light, Tallinger teaches the indicator light is positioned close to the first warning light and the second warning light [E.g. 0053-0054, 0020-0024]. However, having the indicator light is disposed between the first warning light and the second warning light fails to yield unexpected results; it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Tallinger to include the indicator light disposed between the first warning light and the second warning light in order to satisfy system needs and/or environment requirement, also because such modification would have been considered a mere design consideration which fails to patentable distinguish over Tallinger.
10. Claims 5, 12, 15, 17, 20 and 21 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Tallinger in view of Chang (TW M481027 U; translation is used).
For claim 5, Tallinger fails to expressly disclose wherein the one or more status indicators of the emergency vehicle include a water level of a water tank of the emergency vehicle, a charge level of the emergency vehicle, a presence of a stop-engine condition of the emergency vehicle, or a combination thereof.
However, as shown by Chang, it was well known in the art of emergency vehicles to include one or more status indicators of the emergency vehicle include a water level of a water tank of the emergency vehicle [Pages 2-3].
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art of emergency vehicles before the effective filling date of the claimed invention modify Tallinger with the teaching of Chang in order to allow quick observation of the water level in the tank of the emergency vehicle so that the vehicle can be timely and effectively deployed to a firefighting mission.
For claim 12, Tallinger fails to expressly disclose wherein the emergency vehicle is a firetruck.
However, as shown by Chang, it was well known in the art of emergency vehicles that the emergency vehicle is a firetruck [Pages 2-3].
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art of emergency vehicles before the effective filling date of the claimed invention modify Tallinger with the teaching of Chang in order to have an emergency vehicle that can be deployed to a firefighting mission, also it is merely combining prior art elements according to known methods to yield predictable results.
For claim 15, Tallinger discloses a system configured to display a one or more status indicators of an emergency vehicle [see claim 1 analysis], comprising:
the lightbar of claim 1 [see claim 1 analysis];
Tallinger fails to expressly disclose a plurality of sensors; and a processor, wherein the processor is configured to: receive a plurality of signals from the plurality of sensors; and direct the indicator light of the light bar to display the one or more status indicators of an emergency vehicle based on the plurality of signals.
However, as shown by Chang, it was well known in the art of emergency vehicles to include a sensor; and a processor, wherein the processor is configured to: receive a plurality of signals from the sensor; and direct the indicator light of the light bar to display the one or more status indicators of an emergency vehicle based on the plurality of signals [Pages 2-3].
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art of emergency vehicles before the effective filling date of the claimed invention modify Tallinger with the teaching of Chang in order to allow quick observation of water level in a tank of the emergency vehicle so that the vehicle can be timely and effectively deployed to a firefighting mission.
Chang fails to expressly disclose a plurality of sensors.
Although Chang fails to expressly disclose a plurality of sensors, Chang teaches receive a plurality of signals from the sensor [see analysis above]. However, having a plurality of sensors instead of a sensor fails to yield unexpected results; it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Chang to include a plurality of sensors in order to satisfy system needs and/or environment requirement, also because such modification would have been considered a mere design consideration which fails to patentable distinguish over Chang.
For claim 17, Tallinger in view of Chang further teaches wherein the plurality of sensors includes a transducer and the processor is further configured to: receive a water level signal from the transducer, wherein the water level signal corresponds to a water level of a water tank of the emergency vehicle; and direct the indicator light to emit light indicative of the water level of the water tank [Chang; Pages 2-3].
For claim 20, Tallinger discloses wherein the processor is further configured to: direct the indicator light to emit light; and turn off the one or more warning lights [E.g. 0041: The LEDs of the first and second sets are distributed throughout the display field, so that the viewable area of the display may alternately be used to display messages or flashing signals, 0062: It may later be desirable to discontinue the use of the flashing signal lights and instead display a textual or graphical message to direct traffic around the accident. Since the officer can control the display using a remote control, this can be accomplished without having to return to the vehicle. This same remote control can also be used to control the display and/or emergency signal lights when the officer is in the vehicle].
For claim 21, Tallinger discloses a speaker, wherein the speaker is configured to emit an auditory alert in combination with the indicator light [E.g. 0045: Functional portion 120 typically includes a set of emergency signal lights and speakers for a siren and a public address system (e.g., a loudspeaker.)].
11. Claims 7-9 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Tallinger in view of Miller et al. (Miller; US 2023/0415641).
For claim 7, Tallinger fails to expressly disclose wherein the indicator light is configured to emit a percentage light indicative of the one or more status indicators of the emergency vehicle.
However, as shown by Miller, it was well known in the art of emergency vehicles to include indicator light configured to emit a percentage light indicative of the one or more status indicators of the emergency vehicle [0073-0074, Figs. 14-17].
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art of emergency vehicles before the effective filling date of the claimed invention modify Tallinger with the teaching of Miller in order to allow quick and easy observation of battery charge level of the emergency vehicle when being outside the vehicle and thereby enhance the overall user convenience.
For claim 8, Tallinger fails to expressly disclose wherein the indicator light is configured to emit a flash pattern indicative of the one or more status indicators of the emergency vehicle.
However, as shown by Miller, it was well known in the art of emergency vehicles to include indicator light configured to emit a flash pattern indicative of the one or more status indicators of the emergency vehicle [0071, 0073].
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art of emergency vehicles before the effective filling date of the claimed invention modify Tallinger with the teaching of Miller in order to allow quick and easy observation of battery charge status of the emergency vehicle when being outside the vehicle and thereby enhance the overall user convenience.
For claim 9, Tallinger fails wherein the indicator light is configured to emit a graduated bar graph of light indicative of the one or more status indicators of the emergency vehicle.
However, as shown by Miller, it was well known in the art of emergency vehicles to include indicator light configured to emit a graduated bar graph of light indicative of the one or more status indicators of the emergency vehicle [Fig. 17, 0074, 0073].
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art of emergency vehicles before the effective filling date of the claimed invention modify Tallinger with the teaching of Miller in order to allow quick and easy observation of battery charge status of the emergency vehicle when being outside the vehicle and thereby enhance the overall user convenience.
12. Claim 10 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Tallinger in view of Official Notice.
For claim 10, Tallinger fails to expressly disclose wherein the one or more warning lights are configured to emit the emergency flash pattern while the indicator light emits displays one or more status indicators of the emergency vehicle.
However, examiner takes official notice that having one or more warning lights configured to emit emergency flash pattern while indicator light emits displays one or more status indicators of the emergency vehicle is well-known in the art of vehicles and would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art in order to enable communicating any desired message along with the emergency flash pattern and thereby enhance the overall user convenience and safety on the road.
13. Claims 16 and 19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Tallinger in view of Chang and further in view of Official Notice.
For claim 16, Tallinger in view of Chang fails to expressly disclose wherein the plurality of sensors includes a stop engine sensor and the processor is further configured to: receive a signal from the stop engine sensor indicative of a presence of a stop engine condition; and direct the indicator light to emit light indicative of the presence of a stop engine condition.
However, examiner takes official notice that having plurality of sensors including a stop engine sensor and a processor that receive a signal from the stop engine sensor indicative of a presence of a stop engine condition; and direct indicator light to emit light indicative of the presence of a stop engine condition is well-known in the art of vehicles and would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art in order to indicate to others in the vehicle surroundings that the vehicles has stopped so that others can maneuver accordingly and thereby enhance the overall safety on the road.
For claim 19, Tallinger disclose wherein the processor is further configured to: direct the indicator light to emit light [E.g. 0062, 0044]; and direct the one or more warning lights to emit light [E.g. 0062, 0044].
Tallinger in view of Chang fails to expressly disclose wherein the indicator light and the one or more warning lights are directed to emit light simultaneously.
However, examiner takes official notice that having indicator light and one or more warning lights directed to emit light simultaneously is well-known in the art of vehicles and would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art in order to enable communicating any desired message along with the warning lights and thereby enhance the overall user convenience and safety on the road.
14. Claim 18 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Tallinger in view of Chang and further in view of Miller.
For claim 18, Tallinger in view of Chang fails to expressly disclose wherein the processor is further configured to: receive a voltage signal indicative of a charge level of the emergency vehicle; and direct the indicator light to emit light indicative of the charge level of the emergency vehicle.
However, as shown by Miller, it was well known in the art of emergency vehicles to receive a voltage signal indicative of a charge level of the emergency vehicle; and direct indicator light to emit light indicative of the charge level of the emergency vehicle [0068, 0073-0074, Figs. 14-17].
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art of emergency vehicles before the effective filling date of the claimed invention modify Tallinger in view of Chang with the teaching of Miller in order to allow quick and easy observation of battery charge level of the emergency vehicle when being outside the vehicle and thereby enhance the overall user convenience.
Conclusion
15. The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to Applicant's disclosure: see PTO-892 Notice of Reference Cited.
16. Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to MOHAMED BARAKAT whose telephone number is (571)270-3696. The examiner can normally be reached on 9:00am-5:00PM.
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, Davetta Goins can be reached on (571) 272-2957. 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). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative or access to the automated information system, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
/MOHAMED BARAKAT/
Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2689