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 § 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 16-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim 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.
Claim 16 recites the limitation "the terminal communication unit" in line 9 (see Preliminary Amendment of 03/06/2024). There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. The term “a terminal communication” of line 2 lacks the word “unit” (likely a typographical oversight). Appropriate correction is required.
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 a software upgrade for a home appliance (Enomori: figure 3) 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 upgrade request message to the user terminal which is interlocked with the home appliance 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 “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 receiving upgrade 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 of the downloaded software to the home appliance by the management server based on the upgrade 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 when the software installation is completed (Enomori: figure 3, elements 1219-1220; [0051]).
Enomori does not explicitly state “transmitting an upgrade function setting message to the user terminal by the management server” or “transmitting a control instruction message instructing the user terminal to control the home appliance by checking an operating state of the home appliance or to control the upgrade function setting suitable for 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 upgrade 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 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.
Claim 3
Enomori, Briggs, and Ha show the method of setting the software upgrade 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 the power of the home appliance is turned off and that the power need 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 upgrade for the home appliance of claim 1, wherein when the operating state of the home appliance is a power-on state and a state in which the upgrade function setting of the home appliance is not available, the control instruction message is an instruction message for a first time point at which the function setting of the home appliance is available, 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 upgrade 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 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 upgrade 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 upgrade for the home appliance of claim 7, wherein transmitting the installation instruction message includes
transmitting an upgrade preparation message of the software to the user terminal interlocked with the home appliance (Enomori: figure 3, elements 1207) and receiving an upgrade 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 upgrade request message (Enomori: figure 3, element 1217-1218).
Claim 9
Enomori, Briggs, and Ha show the method of setting the software upgrade for the home appliance of claim 7, before the step of transmitting the installation instruction message by the management server, further comprising:
outputting, by the home appliance, first notification information and 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, an upgrade preparation message of the software to the user terminal interlocked with the home appliance (Enomori: figure 3, elements 1207); and
receiving, by the management server, an upgrade 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 upgrade 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 when the software installation is completed by the home appliance (Enomori: figure 3, elements 1219-1220; [0051]); and
transmitting, by the management server, an upgrade 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 be installed to a home appliance (Enomori: figure 2, elements 201 and 301); and
wherein based on the control of the server controller, the server communication unit transmits an upgrade preparation message of the software to a user terminal interlocked with the home appliance (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 receives an upgrade 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
the server communication unit transmits an installation instruction message of the software to the home appliance based on the upgrade request message and receives 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).
Enomori does not explicitly state “the server controller checks an operating state of the home appliance” and “the server communication unit transmits one or more of a control instruction message or an upgrade function setting message for instructing to control the home appliance or the upgrade function setting suitable for 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 upgrade 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 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.
Enomori does not explicitly state “a server controller configured to generate an output instruction message for instructing the home appliance to output an installation notification message of the software, and to control the server communication unit to transmit the output instruction message”. 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 a power-off state, the control instruction message is a notification message for notifying that the power of the home appliance is turned off and that the power needs to be turned on manually (Ha: [0325]-[327], showing the need to turn on manually).
Claim 14
Enomori, Briggs, and Ha show the management server of claim 11, wherein when the operating state of the home appliance is a power-on state and a state in which the upgrade function setting of the home appliance is not available, the control instruction message is an instruction message for a first time point at which the function setting of the home appliance is available (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 upgrade for the home appliance of claim 1, wherein when the operating state of the home appliance is a power-off state, the control instruction message is an instruction message instructing to control the power of the home appliance, and the method further comprising: outputting, by the user terminal, an interface configured 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 upgrade for the home appliance of claim 1, wherein when the operating state of the home appliance is a power-on state and a state in which the upgrade function setting of the home appliance is available until a second time point, the control instruction message is an instruction message for the second time point, and the method further comprising: displaying, by the user terminal, that the upgrade function setting is available until 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.
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