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 .
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 1-4 and 6-8 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over North et al. (US 4467527) “North”, in view of Hopkins (US 5689545) “Hopkins”.
Regarding claim 1, North discloses a level system (10), comprising: a level module (16) comprising a sensor (116), a display (22), and control elements (126) configured to provide level indications (48) on the display based on data (132, 130, 134) collected by the sensor; and at least one level extrusion (12), the level extrusion comprising a structural arrangement (94) configured to independently receive and retain (Column 6; lines 65-70, and Column 7; lines 1-5) the level module (16).
North does not disclose a set of one or more illumination elements.
Hopkins teaches one or more illumination elements (30, 32, 34, 36, 38).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to include Hopkins’ one or more illumination elements in North’s level system, giving a user more direct visual indication of leveling status and adjustment direction.
Regarding claim 2, North discloses the level system as described in claim 1.
North does not disclose an endcap.
Hopkins teaches an endcap (end portions of 16).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to include Hopkins’ one or more illumination elements placed in an endcap in North’s level system, giving a user more direct visual indication of leveling status and adjustment direction.
Regarding claim 3, North discloses the level system as described in claim 1.
North does not disclose the set of one or more illumination elements are selectively controlled to provide one or more visual lighting cues.
Hopkins teaches the set of one or more illumination elements (30, 32, 34, 36, 38) are selectively controlled (18) to provide one or more visual lighting cues (Column 3; lines 1-20).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to have Hopkins’ set of one or more illumination elements selectively controlled to provide one or more visual lighting cues in North’s level system, giving a user more direct visual indication of leveling status and adjustment direction.
Regarding claim 4, North discloses the level system as described in claim 3.
North does not disclose a visual cue provides a movement direction.
Hopkins teaches a visual cue (Illuminated LEDs 30, 32, 34, 36, 38) provides a movement direction (Column 3; lines 18-22).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to use Hopkins’ visual cue to provide a movement direction in North’s level system, giving a user more direct visual indication of leveling status and adjustment direction.
Regarding claim 6, North discloses the level system as described in claim 1.
North does not disclose the set of one or more illumination elements comprise one of: an LED, an LED strip, and a discrete illumination bulb or fixture.
Hopkins teaches the set of one or more illumination elements (30, 32, 34, 36, 38) comprise one of: an LED (“LED”), an LED strip, and a discrete illumination bulb or fixture.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to use Hopkins’ an LED as one or more illumination elements in North’s level system, giving a user more direct visual indication of leveling status and adjustment direction.
Regarding claim 7, North and Hopkins disclose the level system as described in claim 1, wherein the set of one or more illumination elements (Hopkins; 30, 32, 34, 36, 38) is powered by the control elements (North; 126) in the level module (North; 16).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to use North’s control elements to power Hopkins’ one or more illumination elements, more reliably giving a user direct visual indication of leveling status and adjustment direction.
Regarding claim 8, North and Hopkins disclose the level system as described in claim 1, wherein the level extrusion (North; 12) comprises a pair of endcaps (Hopkins; end portions of 16), and each endcap comprises the set of one or more illumination elements (Hopkins; 30, 32, 34, 36, 38).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to use Hopkins’ endcaps with illumination elements in North’s level system, giving a user more direct visual indication of leveling status and adjustment direction.
Claims 9-11 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over in North view of Hopkins.
Regarding claim 9, North discloses a level (10), comprising: an extrusion (12) configured to be positioned on a surface (“planar surface”) and to provide a level indication (48).
North does not disclose at least one cap positioned at an end; thereof at least one lighting element configured in the at least one cap; and a control element responsive to a position or orientation to selectively control the at least one lighting element to output a visual cue, the visual cue providing a visual indication of a direction of movement to facilitate a level determination.
Hopkins teaches at least one cap positioned at an end (end portions of 16); thereof at least one lighting element (30, 32, 34, 36, 38) configured in the at least one cap; and a control element (18) responsive to a position or orientation (Column 3; lines 8-13) to selectively control the at least one lighting element to output a visual cue (Column 3; lines 1-20), the visual cue providing an visual indication (30, 32, 34, 36, 38) of a direction of movement to facilitate a level determination (Column 3; lines 18-22).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to use Hopkins’ lighting element in a cap to provide a visual cue in North’s level, giving a user more direct visual indication of leveling status and adjustment direction.
Regarding claims 10 and 11, North discloses the level as described in claim 9, further including a level module (16) configured to be coupled within an opening (Column 6; lines 65-70, and Column 7; lines 1-5) in the extrusion (12), the level module including at least one display (22) on which the level indication (48) is output.
North does not disclose the at least one lighting element includes a light emitting diode (LED).
Hopkins teaches the at least one lighting element (30, 32, 34, 36, 38) includes a light emitting diode (“LED”).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to use an LED as Hopkins’ lighting element in North’s level, giving a user a more reliable visual indication of leveling status and adjustment direction.
Claim 5 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over North and Hopkins, in view of Zhuang (DE 102013108928) “Zhuang”.
Regarding claim 5, North and Hopkins disclose the level system as described in claim 3.
Neither North or Hopkins disclose a color, a color transition, a set of different colors, illumination of a given light frequency, and a light strobe.
Zhuang disclose a color (“ LED color”), a color transition, a set of different colors, illumination of a given light frequency (“blinking”), and a light strobe (“LED flashing”).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to use Zhuang’s a color, color transition, set of different colors, illumination of given light frequency, and a light strobe in North’s level system, giving a user more direct visual indication of leveling status and adjustment direction.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ANNA JOSEPHINE SAUNDERS whose telephone number is (571)272-6528. The examiner can normally be reached 7:30-5:00 EST.
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, Peter Macchiarolo can be reached at 571-272-2375. 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.
/ANNA JOSEPHINE SAUNDERS/Examiner, Art Unit 2855
/PETER J MACCHIAROLO/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2855
Prosecution Insights