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 .
Information Disclosure Statement
The Information Disclosure Statement filed on 04/25/2024 have been acknowledged and considered by examiner.
Claim Interpretation
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(f):
(f) Element in Claim for a Combination. – An element in a claim for a combination may be expressed as a means or step for performing a specified function without the recital of structure, material, or acts in support thereof, and such claim shall be construed to cover the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification and equivalents thereof.
The following is a quotation of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph:
An element in a claim for a combination may be expressed as a means or step for performing a specified function without the recital of structure, material, or acts in support thereof, and such claim shall be construed to cover the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification and equivalents thereof.
The claims in this application are given their broadest reasonable interpretation using the plain meaning of the claim language in light of the specification as it would be understood by one of ordinary skill in the art. The broadest reasonable interpretation of a claim element (also commonly referred to as a claim limitation) is limited by the description in the specification when 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is invoked.
As explained in MPEP § 2181, subsection I, claim limitations that meet the following three-prong test will be interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph:
(A) the claim limitation uses the term “means” or “step” or a term used as a substitute for “means” that is a generic placeholder (also called a nonce term or a non-structural term having no specific structural meaning) for performing the claimed function;
(B) the term “means” or “step” or the generic placeholder is modified by functional language, typically, but not always linked by the transition word “for” (e.g., “means for”) or another linking word or phrase, such as “configured to” or “so that”; and
(C) the term “means” or “step” or the generic placeholder is not modified by sufficient structure, material, or acts for performing the claimed function.
Use of the word “means” (or “step”) in a claim with functional language creates a rebuttable presumption that the claim limitation is to be treated in accordance with 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph. The presumption that the claim limitation is interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is rebutted when the claim limitation recites sufficient structure, material, or acts to entirely perform the recited function.
Absence of the word “means” (or “step”) in a claim creates a rebuttable presumption that the claim limitation is not to be treated in accordance with 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph. The presumption that the claim limitation is not interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is rebutted when the claim limitation recites function without reciting sufficient structure, material or acts to entirely perform the recited function.
Claim limitations in this application that use the word “means” (or “step”) are being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, except as otherwise indicated in an Office action. Conversely, claim limitations in this application that do not use the word “means” (or “step”) are not being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, except as otherwise indicated in an Office action.
The following limitations are interpreted as invoking 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph:
Claim 1, “a current measuring section arranged to measure a current...” The term “section” is a generic placeholder (nonce term). The limitation recites the function of measuring current but does not recite sufficient structure for performing the function. The corresponding structure in the disclosure is a non-contact sensor (11) arranged to receive electromagnetic radiation. Therefore, the interpretation is a non-contact electromagnetic sensor and equivalents thereof.
Claim 1, “an on/off determining section arranged to determine that the electrical equipment is powered on...” The term “section” is a generic placeholder (nonce term). The limitation recites function without reciting sufficient structure. The corresponding structure in the disclosure is a processor or computer executing a program of instructions to compare measured current values against a recorded threshold value. Therefore, the interpretation is a processor/computer programmed to perform threshold comparison and equivalents thereof.
Claim 3, “a threshold value deriving section... on-current deriving section... off-current deriving section...” The term “section” is a generic placeholder (nonce term). The limitations recite the function of deriving values via arithmetic operations but do not recite sufficient structure. The corresponding structure in the disclosure is a processor or computer programmed to subtract the off-current value from the on-current value and multiply by a predetermined coefficient. Therefore, the interpretation is a processor/computer programmed to perform the recited arithmetic algorithms and equivalents thereof.
Claim 9, “an on-current derivation instructing section... and an off-current derivation instructing section...” The term “section” is a generic placeholder (nonce term). The limitation recites the function of instructing derivation but does not recite sufficient structure. The corresponding structure in the disclosure is a button to be pressed down by a user. Therefore, the interpretation is a user-operable button and equivalents thereof.
Claim 10, “an on/off-current derivation instructing section arranged to instruct... for derivation...” The term “section” is a generic placeholder (nonce term). The limitation recites function without sufficient structure. The corresponding structure in the disclosure is a button to be pressed down by a user. Therefore, the interpretation is a user-operable button and equivalents thereof.
Claim 11, “a notifying section arranged to notify...” The term “section” is a generic placeholder (nonce term). The limitation recites the function of notifying without sufficient structure. The corresponding structure in the disclosure is a display arranged to show the user an indication. Therefore, the interpretation is a visual display and equivalents thereof.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(b):
(b) CONCLUSION.—The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph:
The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the applicant regards as his invention.
Claims 1-13 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as failing to set forth the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor, or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the applicant regards as the invention.
Claims 1, 12, and 13 recite that the threshold value is: "...equal to or higher than a current upper limit below which the electrical equipment is definitely powered off, and equal to or lower than a current lower limit above which the electrical equipment is definitely powered on."
The term "definitely" is a term of degree or a subjective term that lacks an objective standard for measurement in the art. Whether a state is "definite" is not a fixed physical constant; it varies based on the specific electrical characteristics of the device, the sensitivity of the measuring sensor, and environmental noise levels.
MPEP 2173.05(b): A claim is indefinite when it contains a term of degree and the specification fails to provide an objective standard for determining that degree. While the specification provides exemplary numerical values (0.05 A-
m
a
x
and 0.65 A
m
a
x
), these specific values are not incorporated into the independent claims. A person of ordinary skill in the art is left to guess at the precise boundaries of when a state transition is "definite," making it impossible to determine the metes and bounds of the claim.
Claims 2-11 are rejected for being dependent on a rejected claim.
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 1-13 are directed to an operational status determining apparatus, method, and non-transitory computer-readable medium, which are considered to be a machine, process, and manufacture respectively. Therefore, claims 1-13 fall into one of the four statutory categories of invention.
Claims 1-13 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 101 because the claimed invention is not directed to patent eligible subject matter.
101 Analysis – Step 1: Statutory Category
The independent claims are rejected under 35 U.S.C. §101 because the claimed invention is directed to an apparatus, method, and computer-readable medium, which are statutory categories of invention (Step 1: Yes).
101 Analysis – Step 2A Prong 1: Judicial Exception Recited
The claimed invention is directed to a judicial exception (i.e., a law of nature, a natural phenomenon, or an abstract idea). The abstract idea falls under the “Mental Processes” and "Mathematical Relationships" Groupings.
The independent claims recite "determine that the electrical equipment is powered on when the current is higher than a threshold value, while determine that the electrical equipment is powered off when the current is lower than the threshold value" and define the threshold value as being "equal to or higher than a current upper limit... and equal to or lower than a current lower limit." These limitation(s), as drafted, are a process that, under its broadest reasonable interpretation, covers performance of the limitation in the mind. The claim limitations encompass a person looking at a measurement of current and comparing it to a known upper and lower limit to determine the status of the equipment. Furthermore, the derivation of the threshold value (as seen in Claim 3) is a mathematical relationship. The mere nominal recitation of "an operational status determining apparatus" or "current measuring section" does not take the claim limitation(s) out of the mental process grouping and merely functions to automate the comparison steps. Thus, the claims recite an abstract idea. (Step 2A – Prong 1: Judicial exception recited: Yes).
101 Analysis – Step 2A Prong 2: Practical Application
The independent claims recite the additional limitations/elements of a current measuring section; an on/off determining section; an electrical equipment; and a power cable.
The current measuring section is recited at a high level of generality (claimed generically) and operates in its ordinary capacity (measuring current) such that it does not use the judicial exception in a manner that imposes a meaningful limit on the judicial exception. The additional limitations of a power cable and electrical equipment are merely the environment in which the abstract idea operates. These elements, even in combination, do not integrate the abstract idea into a practical application because they do not improve the functioning of a computer or any other technology. Instead, they merely function to provide a field of use for the mental process of data comparison.
The claim(s) is/are directed to the abstract idea (Step 2A—Prong 2: Practical Application?: No).
101 Analysis – Step 2B: Inventive Concept
As discussed with respect to Step 2A Prong Two, the additional elements in the claim amount to no more than insignificant extra-solution activity. Under the 2019 PEG, a conclusion that an additional element/limitation is insignificant extra-solution activity in Step 2A should be re-evaluated in Step 2B.
Here, the steps/additional elements were considered to be extra-solution activities in Step 2A, and thus they are re-evaluated in Step 2B to determine if they are more than what is well-understood, routine, conventional activity in the field. To show that the set of additional elements in combination are well-understood, routine, and conventional, the Examiner identifies that the use of generic sensors (current measuring sections) and processors (determining sections) to perform the basic functions of data gathering and comparison are ubiquitous in the electrical arts. For instance, US Patent 7,123,176 (Jordanov) demonstrates the routine use of digital processors for signal averaging and thresholding, and JP 2006109634 A (Tsuboi) demonstrates the routine use of non-contact current sensors to determine appliance status. Together, these references illustrate that the hardware and the sequence of data-gathering steps claimed are standard components used in their expected manner.
MPEP 2106.05(d)(II) and Electric Power Group, LLC v. Alstom S.A., 830 F.3d 1350, 1354 (Fed. Cir. 2016) indicate that collecting information, analyzing it, and displaying certain results is a well-understood, routine, and conventional function. Further, elements recited at a high level of generality and those used for data gathering necessary to the performance of the abstract idea are not enough to render the claim significantly more than the abstract idea, see MPEP 2106.05(d)(II) and 2106.05(g).
The requirement that the threshold be between an "upper limit" and "lower limit" does not constitute an additional element, but rather represents specific numbers or logical boundaries within the processing of the abstract idea. Accordingly, the additional elements do not amount to an inventive concept. The claim is ineligible (Step 2B: Inventive Concept?: No).
Dependent claims 2-11 do not include any other additional elements that are sufficient to amount to significantly more than the judicial exception. For example, the use of a "non-contact sensor" (Claim 2) or "averaging" measurements (Claim 4) are shown to be well-understood, routine, and conventional activities in the field of electrical measurement by the aforementioned references (e.g., Tsuboi for sensors and Jordanov for averaging).. Therefore, claims 1-13 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. §101 as being directed to non-statutory subject matter.
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 (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 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.
Claims 1-7, 12, and 13 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over JP 2006109634 A (Tsuboi) in view of US 7123176 B1 (Jordanov).
With regards to claim 1, Tsuboi teaches an operational status determining apparatus (“electrical appliance operation detector” ([0001])), comprising:
a current measuring section arranged to measure a current through a power cable connected to an electrical equipment (“current sensor 14” which generates a voltage proportional to the AC current flowing through the "power cable 2a" ([0027])); and an on/off determining section arranged to determine that the electrical equipment is powered on when the current is higher than a threshold value, while determine that the electrical equipment is powered off when the current is lower than the threshold value (“power supply adjustment unit 15” which supplies a drive voltage to the transmitter when a DC voltage reaches a "preset voltage value" ([0030]) and does not supply the voltage if it does not reach the set value ([0033])), wherein the threshold value is:
equal to or higher than a current upper limit below which the electrical equipment is definitely powered off (Tsuboi teaches that the "standby power of the electric appliance is small" ([0019]) and the preset value is set such that this small voltage is lower than the set value ([0033])), and equal to or lower than a current lower limit above which the electrical equipment is definitely powered on (Tsuboi teaches that when the appliance is in an active state, the voltage is higher than the set voltage value to drive the transmitter ([0034]) and is "significantly different" from the standby state ([0019])).
While Tsuboi teaches a preset value, Tsuboi does not explicitly teach the digital signal processing of arranging a threshold between specific "definitely on" and "definitely off" limits. However, Jordanov teaches a digital peak detector that provides "controllable noise sensitivity" (Col. 5, line 38-39) by setting a "noise threshold" based on the "MIN peak value" which is used to "estimate the noise of the pulse waveform" (Col. 1, lines 44-47). This threshold is specifically placed above the noise floor (definitely off) and below the signal peak (definitely on) to optimize performance (Col. 3, lines 34-49).
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the appliance operation detector of Tsuboi by incorporating the thresholding logic of Jordanov wherein the threshold value is set between a "definitely off" upper limit and a "definitely on" lower limit. This would be done to achieve the "optimized performance" and "noise sensitivity" taught by Jordanov (Col. 3, line 34-49) to ensure the detector reliably distinguishes between standby and operating states.
With regards to claim 2, Tsuboi teaches the current measuring section is a non-contact sensor not in contact with the power cable (“current sensor 14” is a toroidal coil that receives AC current by passing the cable through a hole without direct electrical contact ([0027])).
With regards to claim 3, Tsuboi as modified teaches all of the limitations of the claimed invention, as noted above for claim 1, except:
further comprising: a threshold value deriving section arranged to derive the threshold value; an on-current deriving section arranged to derive an on-current value at which the electrical equipment is powered on; and an off-current deriving section arranged to derive an off-current value at which the electrical equipment is powered off, wherein the threshold value deriving section is arranged to subtract the off-current value from the on-current value and multiply by a predetermined coefficient to derive the threshold value.
However, Jordanov teaches a threshold value deriving section arranged to derive the threshold value (a "negating and scaling unit NEG 280" to establish a switching point (Col. 4, line 52-54));
an on-current deriving section arranged to derive an on-current value at which the electrical equipment is powered on (a peak register "PREG 220" for storing signal values (Col. 5, lines 10-20));
and an off-current deriving section arranged to derive an off-current value at which the electrical equipment is powered off (using a "MIN peak value" to estimate noise (Col. 1, lines 44-47)),
wherein the threshold value deriving section is arranged to subtract the off-current value from the on-current value and multiply by a predetermined coefficient to derive the threshold value (a "subtractor SUB 210" (Col. 4, line 42) and applying a "scaling factor of k" (Col. 4, line 52-54)
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the detector of Tsuboi as modified to further include the scaling logic of Jordanov wherein the detector further comprises a threshold value deriving section arranged to derive the threshold value; an on-current deriving section arranged to derive an on-current value at which the electrical equipment is powered on; and an off-current deriving section arranged to derive an off-current value at which the electrical equipment is powered off, wherein the threshold value deriving section is arranged to subtract the off-current value from the on-current value and multiply by a predetermined coefficient to derive the threshold value. This is a routine mathematical implementation of the noise threshold taught by Jordanov to ensure the threshold remains at a consistent relative position regardless of the absolute magnitude of the appliance’s power draw.
With regards to claim 4, Tsuboi as modified does not teach:
wherein the on-current deriving section is arranged to derive the on-current value as an average of measurements of the current.
However, Jordanov teaches that signal values in a peak detection system should be derived using statistical processing, specifically citing a "Digital Pulse Processor Using A Moving Average Technique" (Col. 1, line 30) and stating that signal estimation is performed "by averaging" (Col. 1, lines 44-47).
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the detector of Tsuboi as modified to further include the averaging of Jordanov wherein the on-current deriving section is arranged to derive the on-current value as an average of measurements of the current.. This would be done to mitigate "timing walk and timing jitter" (Col. 3, lines 35-37) and ensure a stable reference despite momentary current fluctuations.
With regards to claim 5, Tsuboi as modified does not teach:
wherein the on-current deriving section is arranged to, when the average of measurements of the current is higher than the on-current value + (a maximum of measurements of the current within a predetermined period of time - a minimum of measurements of the current within a predetermined period of time) / 2, set the average of measurements of the current as a new on-current value.
However, Jordanov teaches the dynamic updating of a peak register (PREG 220) using adaptive thresholds to handle signal fluctuations (Col. 5, lines 10-20). Jordanov teaches that the circuit exhibits "hysteresis" (Col. 5, lines 41-42) and uses "sign bit filtering techniques to improve noise sensitivity" (Col. 3, lines 28-30).
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the detector of Tsuboi as modified to further include the dynamic update logic of Jordanov wherein the on-current deriving section is arranged to, when the average of measurements of the current is higher than the on-current value + (a maximum of measurements of the current within a predetermined period of time - a minimum of measurements of the current within a predetermined period of time) / 2, set the average of measurements of the current as a new on-current value. Using the half-range (max-min)/2 as an update buffer is a routine mathematical application of Jordanov’s "hysteresis" and "timing protection" principles to ensure the on-current value stays calibrated to the actual peak without responding to noise.
With regards to claim 6, Tsuboi as modified does not teach:
wherein the off-current deriving section is arranged to derive the off-current value as an average of measurements of the current.
However, Jordanov teaches that the "MIN peak value" (off state) is used to estimate noise and that "This is done, for example, by averaging MIN peak values" (Col. 1, lines 44-47).
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the detector of Tsuboi as modified to further include the noise-averaging logic of Jordanov wherein the off-current deriving section is arranged to derive the off-current value as an average of measurements of the current to derive a stable off-current value that filters out environmental electrical noise.
With regards to claim 7, Tsuboi as modified does not teach:
wherein the off-current deriving section is arranged to, when the average of measurements of the current is lower than the off-current value - (a maximum of measurements of the current within a predetermined period of time - a minimum of measurements of the current within a predetermined period of time) / 2, set the average of measurements of the current as a new off-current value.
However, Jordanov teaches a "tracking minimum" mode (Col. 6, lines 32-37) where the register is updated with samples that are less than the current value, and teaches "controllable noise sensitivity" (Col. 5, line 38) to prevent false updates from noise.
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Tsuboi as modified to further include Jordanov’s adaptive tracking wherein the off-current deriving section is arranged to, when the average of measurements of the current is lower than the off-current value - (a maximum of measurements of the current within a predetermined period of time - a minimum of measurements of the current within a predetermined period of time) / 2, set the average of measurements of the current as a new off-current value. Using a range-based guard band is a predictable application of Jordanov's "hysteresis" to ensure the off-current reference remains calibrated to the actual noise floor over time.
With regards to claim 12, Tsuboi teaches an operational status determining method for determining an operational status of an electrical equipment with using a current measuring section arranged to measure a current through a power cable connected to the electrical equipment (“current sensor 14” which generates a voltage proportional to the AC current flowing through the "power cable 2a" ([0027])),
comprising: determining that the electrical equipment is powered on when the current is higher than a threshold value, while determining that the electrical equipment is powered off when the current is lower than the threshold value (“power supply adjustment unit 15” which supplies a drive voltage to the transmitter when a DC voltage reaches a "preset voltage value" ([0030]) and does not supply the voltage if it does not reach the set value ([0033])),
wherein the threshold value is: equal to or higher than a current upper limit below which the electrical equipment is definitely powered off (Tsuboi teaches that the "standby power of the electric appliance is small" ([0019]) and the preset value is set such that this small voltage is lower than the set value ([0033])), and equal to or lower than a current lower limit above which the electrical equipment is definitely powered on (Tsuboi teaches that when the appliance is in an active state, the voltage is higher than the set voltage value to drive the transmitter ([0034]) and is "significantly different" from the standby state ([0019])).
While Tsuboi teaches a preset value, Tsuboi does not explicitly teach the digital signal processing of arranging a threshold between specific "definitely on" and "definitely off" limits. However, Jordanov teaches a digital peak detector that provides "controllable noise sensitivity" (Col. 5, line 38-39) by setting a "noise threshold" based on the "MIN peak value" which is used to "estimate the noise of the pulse waveform" (Col. 1, lines 44-47). This threshold is specifically placed above the noise floor (definitely off) and below the signal peak (definitely on) to optimize performance (Col. 3, lines 34-49).
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the appliance operation detector of Tsuboi by incorporating the thresholding logic of Jordanov wherein the threshold value is set between a "definitely off" upper limit and a "definitely on" lower limit. This would be done to achieve the "optimized performance" and "noise sensitivity" taught by Jordanov (Col. 3, line 34-49) to ensure the detector reliably distinguishes between standby and operating states.
With regards to claim 13, Tsuboi as modified by Jordanov does not explicitly teach:
A non-transitory computer-readable medium including a program of instructions for execution by a computer to perform said process.
However, Jordanov teaches that the signal processing, averaging, and threshold logic are performed by a “Digital Pulse Processor” (Col. 1, line 30) and the use of a “peak register (PREG 220)” (Col. 5, lines 10-20) to store and update values. A digital pulse processor performing average techniques and adaptive threshold updates described by Jordanov (Col. 3, lines 28-49) is inherently controlled by program of instructions executed by a processor.
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the detector of Tsuboi as modified by Jordanov to comprise a non-transitory computer-readable medium including a program of instructions for execution by a computer to perform said process because implementing digital signal processing algorithms as software instructions is a routine and predictable design choice. This implementation allows the operational status determining process “to deal with a plurality of electrical appliances with significantly different power consumptions” (Tsuboi; [0030]).
Claims 8-11 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over JP 2006109634 A (Tsuboi) in view of US 7123176 B1 (Jordanov) and further in view US 20170205451 A1 (Moinuddin).
With regards to claim 8, Tsuboi as modified by Jordanov does not explicitly teach:
wherein the off-current deriving section is arranged to derive the off-current value as a mode of measurements of the current within a period of time within which the electrical equipment is powered off.
However, Moinuddin teaches a power consumption monitoring system ([0022]) that identifies devices using a "statistical or probabilistic calculation" to determine likelihood ([0038]). Moinuddin specifically identifies utilizing "Speech Recognition Analysis (SRA)" ([0040], [0066]) and analyzing disaggregated portions of electrical signals to identify signatures ([0032]). Moinuddin further teaches that the device identifies signatures for when an appliance "should otherwise be turned off" ([0014]) and specifically characterizes the device during "termination" ([0035]).
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the detector of Tsuboi as modified by Jordanov by incorporating the "mode" calculation teachings of Moinuddin. A person of ordinary skill in the art would recognize that calculating a "mode" is a specific statistical calculation that filters out infrequent spikes to find the most frequent steady-state noise floor, satisfying the "statistical calculation" taught by Moinuddin.
With regards to claim 9, Tsuboi as modified by Jordanov does not explicitly teach:
further comprising: an on-current derivation instructing section arranged to instruct the on-current deriving section to derive the on-current value; and an off-current derivation instructing section arranged to instruct the off-current deriving section to derive the off-current value, wherein the on-current derivation instructing section and the off-current derivation instructing section are separate from each other.
However, Moinuddin teaches a "calibration module 586" (Para [0064], [0067]) that performs a calibration cycle where a user is requested to "turn on and off the device" ([0068]). Moinuddin describes that the monitoring device receives signals indicating these transitions through an application on a smartphone ([0068]), allowing the system to characterize the device during "initialization" and "termination" ([0035]).
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the detector of Tsuboi as modified by Jordanov by incorporating the teachings of Moinuddin wherein the detector further comprises an on-current derivation instructing section arranged to instruct the on-current deriving section to derive the on-current value; and an off-current derivation instructing section arranged to instruct the off-current deriving section to derive the off-current value, wherein the on-current derivation instructing section and the off-current derivation instructing section are separate from each other. Providing "separate" instruction points is a routine and predictable UI implementation of the calibration cycle described in Moinuddin ([0068]), ensuring the processor is explicitly signaled when to sample the "on" signature versus the "off" signature to prevent data corruption between the two distinct operational states.
With regards to claim 10, Tsuboi as modified by Jordanov does not explicitly teach:
further comprising an on/off-current derivation instructing section arranged to instruct the on-current deriving section and the off-current deriving section for derivation, wherein the on/off-current derivation instructing section is arranged to: when receiving a first operation, instruct the on-current deriving section for derivation, while when receiving a second operation, instruct the off-current deriving section for derivation.
However, Moinuddin teaches a calibration process where the system records signatures in response to a user performing a series of events (turning the device on and off) in a sequence ([0035], [0068]).
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the detector of Tsuboi as modified by Jordanov by incorporating the teachings of Moinuddin wherein the detector further comprises an on/off-current derivation instructing section arranged to instruct the on-current deriving section and the off-current deriving section for derivation, wherein the on/off-current derivation instructing section is arranged to: when receiving a first operation, instruct the on-current deriving section for derivation, while when receiving a second operation, instruct the off-current deriving section for derivation. Using a single input component (e.g., a multi-function button or a sequential "Next" prompt in the smartphone app of Moinuddin) that triggers an "on" instruction upon a first operation and an "off" instruction upon a second operation is a routine design choice. A person of ordinary skill in the art would implement this to streamline the user experience during the calibration cycle taught in Moinuddin (Para [0068]), guiding the user through the state transitions in a fixed, predictable sequence.
With regards to claim 11, Tsuboi as modified by Jordanov does not explicitly teach:
further comprising a notifying section arranged to notify that the on/off-current derivation instructing section receives the first operation or the second operation.
However, Moinuddin teaches that the monitoring device utilizes "electronic displays" ([0015]) and provides feedback by "notifying the application" on a user's smartphone that the device is "ready to initiate a calibration cycle" or requesting specific actions ([0068]).
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the detector of Tsuboi as modified by Jordanov and Moinuddin by adding a notifying section (such as a display message or LED). This provides the predictable benefit of confirming to the user that their specific operation (first or second) was registered by the system, which is a standard functional requirement for interactive calibration as suggested by the smartphone-facilitated feedback loop in Moinuddin ([0068]).
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure:
US 11415633 B2 (Lee)
US 8838400 B2 (Inoue)
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to OSAMAH MURSHED whose telephone number is (571)272-9534. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday, 11 a.m. 8 p.m. ET..
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, Judy Nguyen can be reached at (571) 272-2258. 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.
/OSAMAH MURSHED/ Examiner, Art Unit 2858
/JUDY NGUYEN/ Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2858
Prosecution Insights