DETAILED ACTION
The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
Response to Amendment
Applicant’s amendment filed on 05/15/2026 has been entered. Claims 1-12 are pending in this application.
Applicant’s amendments to the claims have overcome the objection previously set forth in the Non-Final Office Action mailed 02/20/2026.
Claim Objections
Claims 7 and 12 are objected to because of the following informalities:
Claim 7, line 2: “an edge computer” should be -- the edge computer -- in order to refer back to the first instance as recited in claim 1
Claim 12: “the illumination lamp” should be -- an illumination lamp -- to recite the first instance
Appropriate correction is required.
Claim Interpretation
Claim 1 recites a term “an edge computer”. According to the applicant’s specification, the term “edge computer” is a Multi-access/Mobile Edge Computing (MEC) server. A MEC server refers to a node placed at the outer boundary (edge) of a wireless network for communication.
Claim 7 recites the limitation “wherein the plurality of assemblies include at least one of an assembly comprising an edge computer, an assembly comprising a radio communication apparatus configured to perform radio communication with a radio communication terminal, an assembly comprising a camera configured to capture an image of an area near the multifunctional pole, an assembly comprising a sensor, and an assembly comprising an illumination lamp” (underlined for emphasis). Since the claim recites “the plurality of assemblies include at least one of” followed by a list of different types of assemblies, the claim language suggests one of the assemblies is required to meet the claim. If the limitation is not as intended and the claim includes multiple assemblies, then the “at least one” should be deleted.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
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 1-2, 7, and 9-12 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over WANG (CN 112483997), and in view of HENDRIX (US 2020/0227817) and DEEFY (US 2020/0355327).
Regarding claim 1, WANG discloses a multifunctional pole comprising
a plurality of assemblies (1, 2, 3, Fig.1), each of the plurality of assemblies having a predetermined function,
wherein the plurality of assemblies are coupled to each other to form the pole (as seen in Fig.1, when assembled, the assemblies 1, 2, 3 form the pole),
the plurality of assemblies individually functions and communicate with each other (as seen in Fig.2, the assemblies 1, 2, 3 were considered to generally individually function and communicate with each other), and
sensor information (32, 21, Fig.7).
WANG fails to disclose the plurality of assemblies comprise an assembly comprising an edge computer analyzing at least acquired sensor information, an assembly configured to output signals, and the assembly configured to output signals controls a content of the output signals based on an analysis result of the assembly comprising the edge computer.
However, HENDRIX discloses an edge computer (62, Fig.5; as seen in para[0030], the “edge computer” was considered to be the edge computer CPU module 62).
However, DEEFY discloses a control unit analyzing at least acquired sensor information (as seen in Fig.4, the control unit receives sensor information from the sensor and controls the dimmer unit based on the sensor information), and an assembly configured to output signals controls a content of the output signals based on an analysis result of the control unit (as seen in Fig.4, the dimmer unit controls output signals based on the sensor information of the control unit to control the properties of the light source).
Therefore, in view of HENDRIX, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to incorporate an edge computer as taught by HENDRIX to the assembly of WANG in order to provide a computer or processor within a network.
Therefore, in view of DEEFY, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to incorporate a computer analyzing sensor information and an assembly controls output signals based on the sensor information as taught by DEEFY to the assembly of WANG modified by HENDRIX in order to control the properties of the light source.
Regarding claim 2, WANG further discloses wherein each of the plurality of assemblies comprises a first interface (101, Fig.1) and a second interface (201, Fig.1), and when a first assembly (1, Fig.1) is coupled to a second assembly (2, Fig.1), the first interface of the first assembly is connected to the second interface of the second assembly (as seen in Fig.1, when assembled, the first interface 101 is connected to the second interface 201).
Regarding claim 7, WANG further discloses wherein the plurality of assemblies include at least one of an assembly comprising a camera (21, Fig.1) configured to capture an image of an area near the multifunctional pole, an assembly comprising a sensor (32, Fig.1), and an assembly comprising an illumination lamp (33, Fig.1).
Regarding claim 9, WANG further discloses wherein a cross-sectional shape of the plurality of assemblies in a plane perpendicular to a longitudinal direction is elliptical or oblong (as seen in Fig.1, the cross-sectional shape of the assemblies 1, 2, 3 was considered to be elliptical).
Regarding claim 10, WANG modified by HENDRIX and DEEFY fails to disclose wherein respective thicknesses of the plurality of assemblies are equal to each other.
Regarding “wherein respective thicknesses of the plurality of assemblies are equal to each other”, as seen in Fig.1 of WANG, the pole is tapered such that the bottom assembly is larger and the top assembly is smaller. However, one of ordinary skill in the art would have recognized that poles (such as streetlight poles or traffic light poles) typically can be either a tapered pole or a non-tapered pole. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to incorporate thicknesses of the plurality of assemblies are equal to each other to the assemblies of WANG modified by HENDRIX and DEEFY in order to provide an alternative shape of the pole.
Regarding claim 11, WANG further discloses wherein the plurality of assemblies include assemblies (1, 2, 3, Fig.1) having a plurality of thicknesses, and an assembly (1, Fig.1) having a first thickness is coupled to the pole so that the assembly having the first thickness is positioned below an assembly (2, Fig.1) having a second thickness, the assembly having the second thickness being thinner than the assembly having the first thickness (as seen in Fig.1, the second thickness of the assembly 2 was considered to be thinner than the first thickness of the assembly 1 because the pole is tapered).
Claim 3 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over WANG (CN 112483997) modified by HENDRIX (US 2020/0227817) and DEEFY (US 2020/0355327), and in view of EGLO (DE 20209142).
Regarding claim 3, WANG modified by HENDRIX and DEEFY fails to disclose wherein each of the first interface and the second interface comprises a power supply terminal configured to supply power.
However, EGLO discloses a first interface (12, Fig.4) and a second interface (11, Fig.4) includes a power supply terminal configured to supply power.
Therefore, in view of EGLO, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to incorporate a power supply terminal as taught by EGLO to the first and second interface of WANG modified by HENDRIX and DEEFY in order to provide an alternative power connection to provide power to the assemblies.
Claim 4 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over WANG (CN 112483997) modified by HENDRIX (US 2020/0227817) and DEEFY (US 2020/0355327), and in view of LAMBESIS (US 11,339,963).
Regarding claim 4, WANG modified by HENDRIX and DEEFY fails to disclose wherein each of the first interface and the second interface comprises a communication terminal configured to perform signal communication.
However, LAMBESIS discloses a communication terminal (408, 410, 412, Fig.4) configured to perform signal communication (as seen in Figs.1A, 2A, and 4, each assembly has a power supply terminal 404, 406 and a communication terminal 408, 410, 412).
Therefore, in view of LAMBESIS, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to incorporate a communication terminal as taught by LAMBESIS to the assembly of WANG modified by HENDRIX and DEEFY in order to control the assemblies such as the lighting device.
Claims 5 and 12 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over WANG (CN 112483997) modified by HENDRIX (US 2020/0227817) and DEEFY (US 2020/0355327), and in view of DOAN (US 4,200,904).
Regarding claim 5, WANG modified by HENDRIX and DEEFY fails to disclose wherein the plurality of assemblies include an assembly comprising a traffic signal lighting device.
However, DOAN discloses a traffic signal lighting device (24, Fig.1).
Therefore, in view of DOAN, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to incorporate a traffic signal lighting device as taught by DOAN to the assembly of WANG modified by HENDRIX and DEEFY in order to provide multiple functions such as illumination from the lighting device and signals from the traffic signal device.
Regarding claim 12, WANG modified by HENDRIX, DEEFY, and DOAN as discussed above for claim 5 further discloses wherein the edge computer is configured to change a brightness of an illumination lamp in accordance with whether a person is present in a vicinity of the traffic signal lighting device (HENDEIX discloses the edge computer; DEFFY discloses controlling the brightness or intensity of an illumination lamp based on a motion sensor).
Claim 6 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over WANG (CN 112483997) modified by HENDRIX (US 2020/0227817), DEEFY (US 2020/0355327), and DOAN (US 4,200,904), and in view of JONES (US 2001/0054970).
Regarding claim 6, WANG modified by HENDRIX, DEEFY, and DOAN as discussed above for claim 5 further discloses a control (31, Fig.1 of DOAN).
WANG modified by DOAN fails to disclose wherein the plurality of assemblies include an assembly comprising a signal lighting device control circuit configured to control the traffic signal lighting device.
However, JONES discloses a signal lighting device control circuit (58c, 104, Figs.13 and 15) configured to control a traffic signal lighting device (22, Fig.15; para[0083]).
Therefore, in view of, JONES it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to incorporate a signal lighting device control circuit as taught by JONES to the assemblies of WANG modified by HENDRIX, DEEFY, and DOAN in order to control the traffic signal lighting device.
Claim 8 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over WANG (CN 112483997) modified by HENDRIX (US 2020/0227817) and DEEFY (US 2020/0355327), and in view of LI (CN 112413505).
Regarding claim 8, WANG modified by HENDRIX and DEEFY fails to disclose discloses wherein the plurality of assemblies include an assembly comprising a power supply apparatus configured to supply power to the other assemblies forming the pole.
However, LI discloses a power supply apparatus (17, Fig.1) configured to supply power to other units forming a pole.
Therefore, in view of LI, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to incorporate a power supply apparatus as taught by LI to the assembly of WANG modified by HENDRIX and DEEFY in order to provide power.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to the presented claims have been considered but are moot because the arguments do not apply to all of the combination of references being used in the current rejection.
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 extension fee 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 date of this final action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JAMES ENDO whose telephone number is (571)272-2782. The examiner can normally be reached Monday and Thursday 9AM-5PM.
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, JONG-SUK LEE can be reached at 571-272-7044. 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.
/J.M.E/Examiner, Art Unit 2875
/JONG-SUK (JAMES) LEE/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2875
Prosecution Insights