DETAILED ACTION
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 .
Response to Amendment
This office action is responsive to amendment filed on 12/11/2025. The Examiner has acknowledged claims 1-3 have been amended. Claims 1-3 have been presented for examination and are rejected.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's argument, filed on December 11th, 2025 has been entered and carefully considered.
Applicant’s arguments, with respect to claim objection of claims 1-3 have been fully considered and are persuasive. Therefore, the objection has been withdrawn.
Applicant's arguments with respect to amended claims1-3 under 35 USC § 103 have been considered, but they are not persuasive.
Applicant argues in substance that: Davis disclosed the steps “smartphone communicates with the system administrator via Wi-Fi Direct or WLAN; the system administrator communicates with the lighting modules via Zigbee Mesh; all control commands must be forwarded through the system administrator, and lighting modules do not have direct communication capabilities.”
In response, the Examiner respectfully disagrees and finds this argument unpersuasive. After further review of the prior art applied, the Examiner contends that the reference still reads on the claimed invention.
First, either claim 1 or Specification does not illustrate direct communication.
Claim 1 recites “the server module is used to enable communication between a mobile terminal app and the lighting module,” it’s broad and since there is no discloser whether communication between a mobile terminal app and the lighting module is a direct communication, it does not matter if the communication is supported by system administrator or gateway device, Davis clearly show the capability of establishing communication between smart phone device and lighting module. Therefore, Davis teaches the claim limitation. Also, paragraph [0034] discloses further a system microcontroller uses shared wireless communications, network Wi-Fi and Wi-Fi Direct connection individually or concurrently, a Zigbee mesh connection, and the ability to support Bluetooth and/or NFC, to link a smartphone with a lighting module. The setup facilitates RF communication, supporting separate antennas for different frequencies, such as 2.4 GHz and 5 GHz, to manage concurrent connections.
Applicants argues in substance that: Applicant finds no disclosure regarding S1, “a user employs a mobile terminal app to initiate Bluetooth and performs device search within the lighting module through a Wi-Fi Mesh mode”
Davis clearly show the capability of initiating a communication between smart phone device and lighting module via a peer-to-peer Bluetooth communication link using by the Product App to enter parameters for establishing a Wi-Fi Direct access point/group participant or network Wi-Fi communications link, see paragraphs [0034, 0055]. Davis further discloses commands from system administrator to lighting module 300b pass through lighting module 300a where they are propagated onto the mesh network. Depending on the mesh topology, commands pass through lighting module 300c to lighting module 300b, or may pass directly from lighting module 300a to lighting module 300b (i.e., lighting module comprises various group of smart lights, the Product App preferably sending commands to the designated group of four lighting modules to execute the chosen off command)).
Applicants argues in substance that: “regarding S5 specifically, Davis appears to teach away from "the data information is fed back to the mobile terminal app via Wi-Fi Mesh".
In response, the Examiner respectfully disagrees with Applicant's argument because Davis discloses the limitation in paragraph [0037] a system administrator receives a Wi-Fi Direct response to a device discovery message (i.e., data information fed back), the smartphone and system administrator will negotiate which device will be the group owner in accordance with the Wi-Fi Alliance Wi-Fi Direct specification, and a 1:1 or peer-to-peer Wi-Fi Direct communication link will be established. [0009] discloses The lighting module preferably utilizes a wireless mesh communications (i.e., Wi-Fi Mesh) standard capable of forming a mesh network with other lighting modules.
Applicants are interpreting the claims very narrow without considering the broad teaching of the reference to meet the claimed language. During patent examination, the pending claims must be "given their broadest reasonable interpretation consistent with the specification." >The Federal Circuit's en banc decision in Phillips v. AWH Corp., 415 F.3d 1303, 75 USPQ2d 1321 (Fed. Cir. 2005) expressly recognized that the USPTO employs the "broadest reasonable interpretation" standard:
The Patent and Trademark Office ("PTO") determines the scope of claims in patent applications not solely on the basis of the claim language, but upon giving claims their broadest reasonable construction "in light of the specification as it would be interpreted by one of ordinary skill in the art." In re Am. Acad. of Sci. Tech. Ctr., 367 F.3d 1359, 1364[, 70 USPQ2d 1827] (Fed. Cir. 2004).
In view of such, the rejection is maintained as follows:
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
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.
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.
Claim 1 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Davis et al. (US 20160037615 hereinafter Davis) in view of Li et al. (CN 104507231 hereinafter Li).
With respect to claim 1, Davis teaches a multi-protocol combined loT networking method, comprising a lighting module, and a server module, wherein the lighting module comprises various smart light devices, the control module is used to achieve integration of multiple protocols for loT networking (Davis, see paragraphs [0005-0007] Wi-Fi peer-to-peer technology, as used herein, “Zigbee” refers to the Zigbee Alliance Zigbee specifications and standards, Zigbee RF4CE specifications and standards, Zigbee 2012 (i.e., these all use different protocols, it’s interpreted as being equivalent to multiple protocols). Wi-Fi Direct and Bluetooth are peer-to-peer communication technologies. Peer-to-peer communication networking (i.e., equivalent to IoT networking). Paragraph [0079] further discloses commands from system administrator to lighting module 300b pass through lighting module 300a where they are propagated onto the mesh network. Depending on the mesh topology, commands may pass through lighting module 300c to lighting module 300b, or may pass directly from lighting module 300a to lighting module 300b (i.e., lighting module comprises various group of smart lights (i.e., equivalent to IoT devices), the Product App preferably sending commands to the designated group of four lighting modules to execute the chosen off command). The protocols (i.e., equivalent to multiple protocols) and operation of Zigbee wireless mesh networks are standards and specifications determined by the Zigbee Alliance ), and
the server module is used to enable communication between a mobile terminal app and the lighting module (Davis, see FIGS. 1 to 4 and paragraphs [0027, 0034] the Product App is downloaded to smart phone (i.e., equivalent to mobile terminal app) and configures to operate and control one or more lighting modules 300. FIG. 4 and paragraph [0075] discloses further smart phone, system administrator 200 and multiple lighting modules 300a, 300b, and 300c, and the communications systems connecting each of the elements. Wi-Fi WLAN has an access point 400. Access point 400 has Internet connection 402), as well as to store status information of the lighting module; and the multi-protocol combined loT networking method further comprises following steps:
S1: a user employs a mobile terminal app to initiate Bluetooth and performs device search within the lighting module through a Wi-Fi Mesh mode (Davis, see paragraphs [0020 0034] a Bluetooth peer-to-peer connection between a smartphone. Para. [0034] a system microcontroller uses shared wireless communications, network Wi-Fi and Wi-Fi Direct connection individually or concurrently, a Zigbee mesh connection, and the ability to support Bluetooth and/or NFC, to link a smartphone with a lighting module. The setup facilitates RF communication, supporting separate antennas for different frequencies, such as 2.4 GHz and 5 GHz, to manage concurrent connections. Paragraphs [0055, 0079] further discloses a peer-to-peer Bluetooth communication link between smartphone 10 and system administrator 200 may be used by the Product App to enter parameters for establishing a Wi-Fi Direct access point/group participant or network Wi-Fi communications link);
S2: upon successful discovery, connection with devices is established (Davis, see paragraphs [0035-0037] a network Wi-Fi device will receive a device discovery message from the system administrator as if from a Wi-Fi access point and be able to establish a communications link with a smartphone if the right is granted by the system administrator. The procedure of establishing a communications link between a Wi-Fi Direct device and network Wi-Fi devices are defined in the Wi-Fi Alliance specifications and would be understood by practitioners of ordinary skill in communications systems protocols);
S3: when a single device needs to be controlled, the single device is configured with Wi-Fi and then connected for control (Davis, see FIG. 3 and paragraphs [0067-0069, 0071] Lighting module 300 may be used to control the power supplied to a mains voltage lamp without ballast 312. In this environment, lighting module 300 is preferably directly connected between the mains power light switch and lamp/luminaire 314 to be controlled. A user through the Product App running on smartphone 10 can send commands to lighting module 300 via system administrator 200, causing the lamp to be switched on/off or set to an intermediate level, commonly called dimming);
S4: when multiple devices need to be controlled, multiple devices are searched and connected at a same time in S1, and multiple devices are connected through the Wi-Fi Mesh mode (Davis, see FIG. 4 and paragraphs [0075, 0079] smart phone , system administrator 200 and multiple lighting modules 300a, 300b, and 300c, and the communications systems connecting each of the elements. Wi-Fi WLAN has an access point 400. Access point 400 has Internet connection 402. … FIG. 4, system administrator 200 preferably communicates with lighting modules 300a, 300b, and 300c wirelessly using Zigbee. Zigbee is a wireless mesh networking standard, such that communications between system administrator 200 and any lighting module are routed throughout the mesh network, passing through intermediate devices on the way to the recipient. …); and
S5: one of the multiple devices transmits data to the server module through a router, and the data information is fed back to the mobile terminal app via Wi-Fi Mesh (Davis, see [0009] the lighting module preferably utilizes a wireless mesh communications (i.e., Wi-Fi Mesh) standard capable of forming a mesh network with other lighting modules. Paragraph [0037] a system administrator receives a Wi-Fi Direct response to a device discovery message (i.e., data information fed back), the smartphone and system administrator will negotiate which device will be the group owner in accordance with the Wi-Fi Alliance Wi-Fi Direct specification, and a 1:1 or peer-to-peer Wi-Fi Direct communication link will be established. paragraph [0080] further discloses in order for Product App running on smartphone 10 to send control data to a lighting module, it would preferably send the necessary commands to system administrator 200 either peer-to-peer or via WLAN…).
Davis yet fails to explicitly disclose an MCU control module,
However, Li discloses an MCU control module (Li, see FIG. 1 and paragraphs [0025-0028] A kind of Internet of Things light fixture energy-saving controller based on ZigBee technology; For the transmission range problem of the wireless technology (as WIFI, Bluetooth) of current main flow, …FIG. 1 and [0028] Figure 1, a kind of Internet of Things light fixture energy-saving controller based on ZigBee technology, …a networked lamp energy saving controller based on ZigBee technology, wherein it comprises: the MCU control module is also connected with the second signal output port through the conversion module, the first signal output port and a second signal output port respectively connected with the lamp; the ZigBee module communicates with the gateway connection, the gateway and wireless routing communication connection. The wireless routing connected with the client end communication).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was effectively filed to combine the teaching of Davis with the teaching of Li to provide a system for a microcontroller unit (MCU) offer low-power consumption, compact design, and real-time processing capabilities, acting as the intelligent bridge in multi-protocol IoT networks. They facilitate simultaneous communication across different protocols (e.g., Bluetooth, Wi-Fi, Thread, Zigbee), enabling efficient decision-making, sensor data processing, and secure, cost-effective device management on a single chip.
Claim 2 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Davis et al. (US20160037615 hereinafter Davis) in view of Li et al. (CN 104507231 hereinafter Li) further in view of Guinn et al. (US 20230356095 hereinafter Guinn).
With respect to claim 2, Davis-Li teaches the multi-protocol combined loT networking method, yet fails to explicitly disclose wherein connection with other devices is also able to be established through the ESP-NOW mode after connection with the devices is established.
However, Guinn discloses wherein connection with other devices is also able to be established through the ESP-NOW mode after connection with the devices is established(Guinn, see paragraph [0236] the target mesh networks of FIGS. 15A, 15B, 15C are built around an ESP-NOW topology/protocol. The ESP-NOW protocol enables multiple devices to communicate with one another without using Wi-Fi, and is similar to low-power 2.4 GHz wireless connectivity utilized in certain low-power devices. In FIG. 15A, there is shown a Broadcast Mode in which small packet messages are broadcast to all devices from the root to the nodes).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was effectively filed to combine the teaching of Davis-Li with the teaching of Guinn provide a system for ESP-NOW, which is a peer-to-peer wireless communication protocol for low-power and low-cost in-situ Internet of Things devices. Also, the other advantage of establishing additional connections via ESP-NOW mode after an initial IoT network connection (Wi-Fi) is established is creating a hybrid, low-latency, and high-reliability communication system that operates concurrently without needing extra routers or gateways.
Claim 3 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Davis et al. (US20160037615 hereinafter Davis) in view of Li et al. (CN 104507231 hereinafter Li) further in view of Su et al. (CN 114599122 hereinafter Su).
With respect to claim 3, Davis-Li teaches the multi-protocol combined loT networking method, yet fails to explicitly disclose wherein the devices are able to be connected to each other in a BLE-Mesh mode through voice control by the user.
However, Su discloses wherein the devices are able to be connected to each other in a BLE-Mesh mode through voice control by the user (Su, see page 10, lines 44-60, the BW node can be a simple structure, a smaller shape of the device, such as intelligent voice patch or intelligent BW relay device. Intelligent voice pasting or intelligent BW relay device can be used as auxiliary sleeve piece intelligent sound box for selling, and it can be used for improving the covering effect and response speed of the home internet of things. For example, the voice intelligent can be a small device with voice receiving function comprising receiving user voice input of the microphone module, and the voice input through the WIFI Mesh recognition to the intelligent, receiving intelligent sound box based on the recognition (e.g., through the WiFi channel transmission of the Bluetooth Mesh (BLE-Mesh) data packet), after unpacking the Bluetooth Mesh data packet to broadcast for execution of the Bluetooth device to be addressed).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was effectively filed to combine the teaching of Davis-Li with the teaching of Su provide the method for combining BLE-Mesh (for peer-to-peer , device-to-device, and many-to-many communication), voice control, and multi-protocol IoT networking (interoperability) is creating a highly reliable, expansive, low-power, and user-friendly smart ecosystem that operates without a central hub or dependence on a constant internet connection.
Conclusion
THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. 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 nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) 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 mailing date of this final action.
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. See PTO-892 Notice of References Cited.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ELIZABETH KASSA whose telephone number is (571)270-0567. The examiner can normally be reached Monday -Friday 9 AM -6 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, Ario Etienne can be reached on 517-272-4001. 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.
05/05/2025
/ELIZABETH KASSA/Examiner, Art Unit 2457
/ARIO ETIENNE/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2457
Prosecution Insights