DETAILED ACTION
Claims 1-20 are currently pending in the application 18/689,827, which was filed on 03/06/2024, listing the inventors as Byoungwook Ryu and Seoyeon Lee and the applicant as LG Electronics Inc.
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 .
Priority
Receipt is acknowledged of certified copies of papers required by 37 CFR 1.55.
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statements (IDS) submitted on 03/06/2024, 07/19/2024, 09/29/2025, 01/06/2026 have been considered by the 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.
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.
Claim(s) 1, 3-4, 6-11, 13-14, 16, and 18-19 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over US 2009/0235244 A1 to Enomori et al. (herein Enomori) in view of 2017/0017478 to Briggs et al. (herein Briggs) in further view of WO 2013/015656 A2 to Mikyung Ha (herein Ha).
Claim 1
Enomori shows a method of setting software for a home appliance (Enomori: figure 3; [0028], update/install latest version of software) comprising:
downloading software from a management server by the home appliance (Enomori: figure 3, elements 1217-1218; “user management server 2” is the claimed “management server”, and “information appliance-A 13” is a “home appliance”), transmitting a request for installation message to a user terminal by the management server (Enomori: figure 3, elements 1211-1212; the “update notification” is the claimed “request”, see [0048]-[0049] describing confirming the update notification/request at the user terminal; a user terminal is interpreted as a device that can be used as a user interface for the appliance, which is shown by Enomori [0082]-[0085], figure 5, and also [0025]), and receiving an installation request message from the user terminal by the management server (Enomori: figure 3, elements 1213-1214; the approval notifications are the claimed “request message from the user terminal”, which complete the upgrade request, see [0048]-[0049]);
transmitting an installation instruction message for the downloaded software to the home appliance by the management server based on the installation request message (Enomori: figure 3, elements 1217-1218);
installing the software by the home appliance after receiving the installation instruction message (Enomori: [0051], “… information appliance-A 13 carries out the update processing by executing the received latest software …”), and transmitting an installation complete message to the management server by the home appliance (Enomori: figure 3, elements 1219-1220; [0051]); and
wherein the user terminal is configured to remotely control the operating state of the home appliance or an operation required for setting the function of the home appliance (Enomori: [0082]-[0085], figure 5, by controlling the update/installation, the user terminal is at least controlling the operating state of the home appliance; [0082], the user terminal may be remote from the device being controlled by being elsewhere on the network).
Enomori does not explicitly state “transmitting a control instruction message or a function setting message instructing the user terminal to control the home appliance by checking an operating state of the home appliance or control a function setting based on the operating state of the home appliance by the management server”. Briggs demonstrates that it was known before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to require a home appliance to have power for software updates (Briggs: [0017], [0019], and figure 2), which corresponds to the claimed function setting message. Enomori shows a user terminal controlling a home appliance for the purposes of updating software (Enomori: figure 3). Ha demonstrates a remote application retrieving a home appliance’s operating state, for example power on/off (Ha: [319]-[324]). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to implement the upgrade process and system of Enomori with transmitting a function setting message to the user terminal (for example indicating a required power state) as suggested by the teachings of Briggs. Further, it would have been obvious to implement Enomori with transmitting to the user terminal a control instruction based on the appliance state or control the appliance’s state as needed for update as suggested by the teachings of Briggs, Enomori, and Ha (for example, enable Enomori to determine the appliance’s state as provided by Ha and control it according to needs of the software update to have appropriate power as suggested by Briggs). This implementation would have been obvious because one of ordinary skill in the art would have found: the process of updating software requires power and therefore the state of the power on/off must be managed for successful updates (Briggs: [0019]); the implementation of is an application of known elements yielding a predictable result; and both Enomori and Briggs are directed toward software updates, and Enomori, Briggs, and Ha are all directed toward user devices/appliances.
As such, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to implement the remotely controlling user terminal of Enomori with controlling the operating state of the home appliance or an operation required for setting the function of the home appliance based on the control instruction message or the function setting message as suggested by the teachings of Briggs and Ha. This implementation would have been obvious because one of ordinary skill in the art would have found: Enomori’s user terminal is designed for controlling based on communications; and as discussed above it is obvious for Enomori’s user terminal to receive such communications regarding a control instruction message or a function setting message.
Claim 3
Enomori, Briggs, and Ha show the method of setting the software for the home appliance of claim 1, wherein when the operating state of the home appliance is in a power-off state, the control instruction message is a notification message for notifying that a power of the home appliance is turned off and that the power needs to be turned on, and the method further comprising: displaying, by the user terminal, the notification message (Ha: figures 16-20; in view of Briggs teaching power is needed for updates).
Claim 4
Enomori, Briggs, and Ha show the method of setting the software for the home appliance of claim 1, wherein when the operating state of the home appliance is in a power-on state and in a state in which the function setting of the software cannot be set, the control instruction message is an instruction message for notifying a first time point in which the function setting of the software can be set, and the method further comprising: displaying, by the user terminal, a standby mode until the first time point (Briggs: figure 2, delay update).
Claim 6
Enomori, Briggs, and Ha show the method of setting the software for the home appliance of claim 1, further comprising: transmitting, by the management server, an output instruction message for instructing the home appliance to output an installation notification of the software to the home appliance, after the downloading software to the home appliance from the management server; and outputting, by the home appliance, the installation notification (Enomori: figure 3, element 1219).
Claim 7
Enomori, Briggs, and Ha show the method of setting the software for the home appliance of claim 6, further comprising: transmitting, by the management server, an installation instruction message for installing the software to the home appliance, after transmitting the output instruction message (Enomori: figure 3, element 1221-1222).
Claim 8
Enomori, Briggs, and Ha show the method of setting the software for the home appliance of claim 7, wherein transmitting the installation instruction message includes
transmitting a preparation message of the software to the user terminal (Enomori: figure 3, elements 1207) and receiving the installation request message for requesting to install the software from the user terminal by the management server (Enomori: figure 3, elements 1213-1214); and
transmitting, by the management server, the installation instruction message to the home appliance based on the installation request message (Enomori: figure 3, element 1217-1218).
Claim 9
Enomori, Briggs, and Ha show the method of setting the software for the home appliance of claim 7, wherein before transmitting the installation instruction message by the management server, the method further comprising:
transmitting, by the home appliance, a first notification output complete message to the management server (Enomori: figure 3, elements 1219-1220; [0051]);
transmitting, by the management server, a preparation message of the software to the user terminal (Enomori: figure 3, elements 1207); and
receiving, by the management server, the installation request message for requesting to install the software from the user terminal (Enomori: figure 3, elements 1213-1214; the approval notifications are the claimed “request message from the user terminal”, which complete the upgrade request, see [0048]-[0049]).
Claim 10
Enomori, Briggs, and Ha show the method of setting the software for the home appliance of claim 7, further comprising:
installing the software in the home appliance after receiving the installation instruction message, and transmitting the installation complete message to the management server by the home appliance (Enomori: figure 3, elements 1219-1220; [0051]); and
transmitting, by the management server, a complete message to the user terminal after receiving the installation complete message from the home appliance (Enomori: figure 3, element 1226).
Claim 11
Enomori shows a management server (Enomori: figure 2, elements 2 and 3) comprising:
a server communication unit configured to transmit software to communicate with a user terminal and home appliance;
a server controller configured to:
send software to be installed to the home appliance (Enomori: figure 2, elements 201 and 301); and
send a preparation message of the software to the user terminal (Enomori: figure 3, elements 1211-1212; the “update notification” is the claimed “preparation message”, see [0048]-[0049] describing confirming the update notification/request at the user terminal; a user terminal “interlocked” with an appliance is interpreted as a device that can be used as a user interface for the appliance, which is shown by Enomori [0082]-[0085], figure 5, and also [0025]), and receive an installation request message for requesting to install the software from the user terminal (Enomori: figure 3, elements 1213-1214; the approval notifications are the claimed “request message from the user terminal”, which complete the upgrade request, see [0048]-[0049]), and
send an installation instruction message of the software to the home appliance based on the installation request message and receive an installation complete message from the home appliance (Enomori: [0051], “… information appliance-A 13 carries out the update processing by executing the received latest software …”; figure 3, elements 1219-1220),
wherein the user terminal is configured to remotely control the operating state of the home appliance or an operation required setting the function of the home appliance (Enomori: [0082]-[0085], figure 5, by controlling the update/installation, the user terminal is at least controlling the operating state of the home appliance; [0082], the user terminal may be remote from the device being controlled by being elsewhere on the network).
Enomori does not explicitly state “check an operating state of the home appliance” and “send a control instruction message or a function setting message for instructing to control the home appliance or control a function setting based on the operating state of the home appliance to the user terminal”. Briggs demonstrates that it was known before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to require a home appliance to have power for software updates (Briggs: [0017], [0019], and figure 2), which corresponds to the claimed function setting message. Enomori shows a user terminal controlling a home appliance for the purposes of updating software (Enomori: figure 3). Ha demonstrates a remote application retrieving a home appliance’s operating state, for example power on/off (Ha: [319]-[324]). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to implement the upgrade process and system of Enomori with transmitting an upgrade function setting message to the user terminal (for example indicating a required power state) as suggested by the teachings of Briggs. Further, it would have been obvious to implement Enomori with transmitting to the user terminal a control instruction based on the appliance state or control the appliance’s state as needed for update as suggested by the teachings of Briggs, Enomori, and Ha (for example, enable Enomori to determine the appliance’s state as provided by Ha and control it according to needs of the software update to have appropriate power as suggested by Briggs). This implementation would have been obvious because one of ordinary skill in the art would have found: the process of updating software requires power and therefore the state of the power on/off must be managed for successful updates (Briggs: [0019]); the implementation of is an application of known elements yielding a predictable result; and both Enomori and Briggs are directed toward software updates, and Enomori, Briggs, and Ha are all directed toward user devices/appliances.
As such, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to implement the remotely controlling user terminal of Enomori with controlling the operating state of the home appliance or an operation required for setting the function of the home appliance based on the control instruction message or the function setting message as suggested by the teachings of Briggs and Ha. This implementation would have been obvious because one of ordinary skill in the art would have found: Enomori’s user terminal is designed for controlling based on communications; and as discussed above it is obvious for Enomori’s user terminal to receive such communications regarding a control instruction message or a function setting message.
Enomori does not explicitly state “send an output instruction message for instructing the home appliance to output an installation notification message of the software”. However, Ha demonstrates a home appliance displaying notification/state messages (Ha: [13]-[14]). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to implement the upgrade message transmission and displays of Enomori, and Briggs with outputting an installation message on the home appliance as suggested by the teachings of Ha in view of Enomori and Briggs. This implementation would have been obvious because one of ordinary skill in the art would have found: in order for success, the process of updating software might need a user involvement and therefore communication (Briggs: [0019]), for example a notification of update/installation message; the implementation of is an application of known elements yielding a predictable result.
Claim 13
Enomori, Briggs, and Ha show the management server of claim 11, wherein when the operating state of the home appliance is in a power-off state, the control instruction message is a notification message for notifying that a power of the home appliance is turned off and that the power needs to be turned on (Ha: [0325]-[327], showing the need to turn on).
Claim 14
Enomori, Briggs, and Ha show the management server of claim 11, wherein when the operating state of the home appliance is in a power-on state and in a state in which the function setting of the software cannot be set, the control instruction message is an instruction message for notifying a first time point in which the function setting of the software can be set (Briggs: figure 2, delay update).
Claims 16, 18, and 19
The limitations of claims 16, 18, and 19 correspond to the limitations of claims 1 and 11 along with claims 3-4, 6-7, and 13-14. As such, the limitations of claims 16, 18, and 19 are rejected in a corresponding manner as the limitations of claims 3-4, 6-7, and 13-14.
Claim(s) 2, 5, 12, 15, 17, and 20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over US 2009/0235244 A1 to Enomori et al. (herein Enomori) in view of 2017/0017478 to Briggs et al. (herein Briggs) in view of WO 2013/015656 A2 to Mikyung Ha (herein Ha) in further view of US 2006/0101290 A1 to Yu-Min Ma (herein Ma).
Claim 2
Enomori, Briggs, and Ha do not explicitly show the method of setting the software for the home appliance of claim 1, wherein when the operating state of the home appliance is in a power-off state, the control instruction message is an instruction message for instructing to turn on a power of the home appliance, and the method further comprising: displaying, by the user terminal, an interface to turn on the power of the home appliance. Ma demonstrates that it was known before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to provide a device/appliance with an instruction to cause it to power “on” based on certain conditions (Briggs: [0015]-[0020]). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to implement the user terminal commanding a home appliance of Enomori with the home appliance being instructed to power on based on an operating condition as suggested by the teachings of Ma (for example, Enomori could implement Ma’s BIOS that is periodically configured to power “on” based on time). This implementation would have been obvious because one of ordinary skill in the art would have found: the process of updating software requires power and therefore the state of the power on/off must be managed for successful updates (Briggs: [0019]); the implementation of is an application of known elements yielding a predictable result; and both Enomori and Briggs are directed toward software updates, Enomori, Briggs, and Ha are all directed toward user devices/appliances, and Briggs, Ha, and Ma are directed toward device power state.
Claim 5
Enomori, Briggs, Ha, and Ma show the method of setting the software for the home appliance of claim 1, wherein when the operating state of the home appliance is in a power-on state and in a state in which the function setting of the software can be set at a second time point, the control instruction message is an instruction message for notifying the second time point in which the function setting of the software can be set, and the method further comprising: displaying, by the user terminal, that the function setting of the software can be set at the second time point (Briggs: figure 2, delay update; notifications of Enomori and Ha in view of Ma as in claim 2 and Ma [0018] showing scheduling of different time slots/periods).
Claims 12, 15, 17, and 20
The limitations of claims 12, 15, 17, and 20 correspond to the limitations of claims 2 and 5. As such, the limitations of claims 12, 15, 17, and 20 are rejected in a corresponding manner as the limitations of claims 2 and 5.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 04/13/2026 (herein Remarks) have been fully considered but they are not persuasive. The Remarks argue, “… the user terminal does not merely receive status updates or notifications, but is an active controller that performs specific operations for the appliance's function setting for the installed software at the home appliance …” (Remarks: page 9). However, as the above rejections indicate, it would have been obvious for the user terminal of Enomori to be an active controller with regard to the claimed “function setting”, in view of Briggs and Ha. As such, this argument is not persuasive.
Conclusion
Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a). 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.
Correspondence Information
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to WILLIAM H WOOD whose telephone number is (571)272-3736. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 7am-3pm.
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, Alexander Kosowski can be reached at (571)272-3744. 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.
/William H. Wood/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3992
Prosecution Insights