DETAILED ACTION
Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status
The present application is being examined under the pre-AIA first to invent provisions.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of 35 U.S.C. 112(a):
(a) IN GENERAL.—The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor or joint inventor of carrying out the invention.
The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112:
The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor of carrying out his invention.
Claim 9 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(a) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), first paragraph, as failing to comply with the written description requirement. The claim(s) contains subject matter which was not described in the specification in such a way as to reasonably convey to one skilled in the relevant art that the inventor or a joint inventor, or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the inventor(s), at the time the application was filed, had possession of the claimed invention.
Claim 9 has been amended to recite “applying scaling to the entered text in the customized layout.” This limitation lacks written description support in the originally-filed Specification.
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 pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 103(a) which forms the basis for all obviousness rejections set forth in this Office action:
(a) A patent may not be obtained though the invention is not identically disclosed or described as set forth in section 102, if the differences between the subject matter sought to be patented and the prior art are such that the subject matter as a whole would have been obvious at the time the invention was made to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which said subject matter pertains. Patentability shall not be negated by the manner in which the invention was made.
Claims 1-5, 8, and 10-12 is/are rejected under pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 103(a) as being unpatentable over Hunter (US 20060158438 A1) and Putt et al. (US 5661658 A)[hereinafter “Putt”].
Regarding Claim 1, Hunter discloses the updating of a screen layout of a device by uploading the device a customizable screen layout from an external computing device [See Paragraph [0006]].
Putt discloses a programmable display for a utility meter [Abstract – “Apparatus for monitoring electrical parameters in an electrical system includes a display on which values of the various monitored electrical parameters are displayed, several at a time.”].
It would have been obvious to permit the display to be configured by use of an external computing device through the communication interface [communications link 20 of Putt] because doing so would eliminate the need for each utility meter to include that capability (i.e., the customization of many utility meters could be accomplished with a single computing device through the communication interface) and would represent a cost savings. Doing so would also allow for customization after the utility meter has been installed.
The combination would disclose:
providing a display screen layout selection to a user [Paragraph [0006] of Hunter] to show measured values for a utility meter system, wherein the user can choose one of a previously-programmed layout, a predefined layout with customizable labeling, or a custom layout [Column 4 lines 19-23 of Putt – “FIGS. 4A and 5B illustrate an exemplary set of custom screens 53 and 55 which display the 14 parameters chosen by the operator. At any time, the operator may call up these displays by pressing the UP or DN push buttons 41 and 43 on the operator panel 19 until the CUSTOM LED 39' lights.”];
receiving a selection from a user and retrieving the selected display screen from a first memory unit [Paragraph [0006] of Hunter];
uploading the selected display screen to a utility meter [Paragraph [0006] of Hunter], the utility meter including a housing [Housing of the metering device 1 of Putt], at least one sensor connected to a utility system, at least one analog to digital converter positioned in the housing and connected to the at least one sensor, at least one processor positioned in the housing, at least one meter memory unit connected to the processor [Column 2 lines 28-41 of Putt – “Turning to FIG. 1 the monitor or metering device 1 of the invention is used to monitor and analyze an ac electric power system 3 such as a power distribution system. The power distribution system 3 illustrated has three phase conductors 5A, 5B and 5C, a neutral conductor 5N and a ground conductor 5G. Current transformers 7A, 7B, 7C, 7N and 7G sense current flowing in each of these conductors while phase-to-neutral voltages are sensed by the potential transformers 9A, 9B and 9C, and neutral to ground voltage is sensed by transformer 9N. A microcomputer 10 includes a ranging circuit 11 which converts the current and voltage signals from -10 to 0 to +10 volt signals for conversion by an analog to digital (A/D) converter 13 for input to a digital processor 15.”], and a meter display screen [See Fig. 2 and Column 3 lines 1-4 of Putt – “FIG. 2 is an illustration of the front panel 19 which forms the user interface. A major feature of the front panel 19 is a display 21, which in the exemplary embodiment of the invention is an eight line gas plasma display.”];
storing the selected display in the meter memory unit; and displaying the selected screen layout on the meter display screen [Column 4 lines 19-23 of Putt – “FIGS. 4A and 5B illustrate an exemplary set of custom screens 53 and 55 which display the 14 parameters chosen by the operator. At any time, the operator may call up these displays by pressing the UP or DN push buttons 41 and 43 on the operator panel 19 until the CUSTOM LED 39' lights.”].
Regarding Claim 2, Putt discloses prompting the user to enter text for displayed data if the predefined layout with customizable labeling is selected [Column 4 lines 19-23 – “FIGS. 4A and 5B illustrate an exemplary set of custom screens 53 and 55 which display the 14 parameters chosen by the operator. At any time, the operator may call up these displays by pressing the UP or DN push buttons 41 and 43 on the operator panel 19 until the CUSTOM LED 39' lights.”].
Regarding Claim 3, Putt discloses prompting the user to select meter data to be displayed if the custom layout is selected [Column 4 lines 19-23 – “FIGS. 4A and 5B illustrate an exemplary set of custom screens 53 and 55 which display the 14 parameters chosen by the operator. At any time, the operator may call up these displays by pressing the UP or DN push buttons 41 and 43 on the operator panel 19 until the CUSTOM LED 39' lights.”].
Regarding Claim 4, Putt discloses assigning a screen number to the selected display screen [The figure numbers for Figs. 3, 4A, and 4B of Putt].
Regarding Claim 5, Putt discloses that assigning the screen number is performed by the user [The figure numbers for Figs. 3, 4A, and 4B of Putt].
Regarding Claim 8, Hunter discloses the updating of a screen layout of a device by uploading the device a customizable screen layout from an external computing device [See Paragraph [0006]].
Putt discloses a programmable display for a utility meter [Abstract – “Apparatus for monitoring electrical parameters in an electrical system includes a display on which values of the various monitored electrical parameters are displayed, several at a time.”].
It would have been obvious to permit the display to be configured by use of an external computing device (through use of a display screen layout editor) through the communication interface [communications link 20 of Putt] because doing so would eliminate the need for each utility meter to include that capability (i.e., the customization of many utility meters could be accomplished with a single computing device through the communication interface) and would represent a cost savings. Doing so would also allow for customization after the utility meter has been installed.
The combination would disclose:
providing a display screen layout editor to a user [Paragraph [0006] of Hunter] to show measured values for a utility meter system in a customized layout; prompting the user to select meter data to be displayed in the customized layout [Column 4 lines 19-23 of Putt – “FIGS. 4A and 5B illustrate an exemplary set of custom screens 53 and 55 which display the 14 parameters chosen by the operator. At any time, the operator may call up these displays by pressing the UP or DN push buttons 41 and 43 on the operator panel 19 until the CUSTOM LED 39' lights.”];
prompting the user to enter text for displayed data in the customized layout [Column 4 lines 19-23 of Putt – “FIGS. 4A and 5B illustrate an exemplary set of custom screens 53 and 55 which display the 14 parameters chosen by the operator. At any time, the operator may call up these displays by pressing the UP or DN push buttons 41 and 43 on the operator panel 19 until the CUSTOM LED 39' lights.” The user selects the desired text.];
receiving the selected meter data to be displayed and ordering the selected meter data to form the customized layout [Column 4 lines 19-23 of Putt – “FIGS. 4A and 5B illustrate an exemplary set of custom screens 53 and 55 which display the 14 parameters chosen by the operator. At any time, the operator may call up these displays by pressing the UP or DN push buttons 41 and 43 on the operator panel 19 until the CUSTOM LED 39' lights.”];
uploading the selected display screen to a utility meter [Paragraph [0006] of Hunter], the utility meter including a housing [Housing of the metering device 1 of Putt], at least one sensor connected to a utility system, at least one analog to digital converter positioned in the housing and connected to the at least one sensor, at least one processor positioned in the housing, at least one meter memory unit connected to the processor [Column 2 lines 28-41 of Putt – “Turning to FIG. 1 the monitor or metering device 1 of the invention is used to monitor and analyze an ac electric power system 3 such as a power distribution system. The power distribution system 3 illustrated has three phase conductors 5A, 5B and 5C, a neutral conductor 5N and a ground conductor 5G. Current transformers 7A, 7B, 7C, 7N and 7G sense current flowing in each of these conductors while phase-to-neutral voltages are sensed by the potential transformers 9A, 9B and 9C, and neutral to ground voltage is sensed by transformer 9N. A microcomputer 10 includes a ranging circuit 11 which converts the current and voltage signals from -10 to 0 to +10 volt signals for conversion by an analog to digital (A/D) converter 13 for input to a digital processor 15.”], and a meter display screen [See Fig. 2 and Column 3 lines 1-4 of Putt – “FIG. 2 is an illustration of the front panel 19 which forms the user interface. A major feature of the front panel 19 is a display 21, which in the exemplary embodiment of the invention is an eight line gas plasma display.”];
storing the selected display in the meter memory unit; and displaying the selected screen layout on the meter display screen [Column 4 lines 19-23 of Putt – “FIGS. 4A and 5B illustrate an exemplary set of custom screens 53 and 55 which display the 14 parameters chosen by the operator. At any time, the operator may call up these displays by pressing the UP or DN push buttons 41 and 43 on the operator panel 19 until the CUSTOM LED 39' lights.”].
Regarding Claim 10, Putt discloses limiting meter data to be displayed based on the data formatting [Column 4 lines 19-23 – “FIGS. 4A and 5B illustrate an exemplary set of custom screens 53 and 55 which display the 14 parameters chosen by the operator. At any time, the operator may call up these displays by pressing the UP or DN push buttons 41 and 43 on the operator panel 19 until the CUSTOM LED 39' lights.”].
Regarding Claim 11, Putt discloses assigning a screen number to the selected display screen [The figure numbers for Figs. 3, 4A, and 4B of Putt].
Regarding Claim 12, Putt discloses assigning the screen number is performed by the user [The figure numbers for Figs. 3, 4A, and 4B of Putt].
Claims 7, 14-17, 19, and 20 is/are rejected under pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 103(a) as being unpatentable over Hunter (US 20060158438 A1), Putt et al. (US 5661658 A)[hereinafter “Putt”], and Rotvold et al. (US 20040153594 A1)[hereinafter “Rotvold”].
Regarding Claim 7, Hunter and Putt fail to disclose that the selected screen layout includes defined data associated with a register of a Modbus map and the at least one processor associates the Modbus registers with locations in the meter memory where measured and calculated data are stored to display the selected screen layout on the meter display screen.
However, Rotvold discloses the use of look-up tables and a Modbus map in obtaining process parameters [See Paragraph [0015]]. It would have been obvious to use such functionalities in order to readily facilitate displaying parameters of interest from memory.
Regarding Claim 14, Hunter and Putt fail to disclose that the selected meter data is associated with a register of a Modbus map and the at least one processor associates the Modbus registers with locations in the meter memory where measured and calculated data are stored to display the selected screen layout on the meter display screen.
However, Rotvold discloses the use of look-up tables and a Modbus map in obtaining process parameters [See Paragraph [0015]]. It would have been obvious to use such functionalities in order to readily facilitate displaying parameters of interest from memory.
Regarding Claim 15, Hunter and Putt fail to disclose that a first look-up table associates the selected meter data with the register of the Modbus map and the at least one processor employs a second look-up table to determine the location in the meter memory.
However, Rotvold discloses the use of look-up tables and a Modbus map in obtaining process parameters [See Paragraph [0015]]. It would have been obvious to use such functionalities in order to readily facilitate displaying parameters of interest from memory.
Regarding Claim 16, Hunter discloses the updating of a screen layout of a device by uploading the device a customizable screen layout from an external computing device [See Paragraph [0006]].
Putt discloses a programmable display for a utility meter [Abstract – “Apparatus for monitoring electrical parameters in an electrical system includes a display on which values of the various monitored electrical parameters are displayed, several at a time.”].
It would have been obvious to permit the display to be configured by use of an external computing device through the communication interface [communications link 20 of Putt] because doing so would eliminate the need for each utility meter to include that capability (i.e., the customization of many utility meters could be accomplished with a single computing device through the communication interface) and would represent a cost savings. Doing so would also allow for customization after the utility meter has been installed.
The combination would disclose:
receiving, at a utility meter [via the communications link 20 of Putt], a customized screen layout [Column 4 lines 19-23 of Putt – “FIGS. 4A and 5B illustrate an exemplary set of custom screens 53 and 55 which display the 14 parameters chosen by the operator. At any time, the operator may call up these displays by pressing the UP or DN push buttons 41 and 43 on the operator panel 19 until the CUSTOM LED 39' lights.”], the utility meter including a housing [Housing of the metering device 1 of Putt], at least one sensor connected to a utility system, at least one analog to digital converter positioned in the housing and connected to the at least one sensor, at least one processor positioned in the housing, at least one meter memory unit connected to the processor [Column 2 lines 28-41 of Putt – “Turning to FIG. 1 the monitor or metering device 1 of the invention is used to monitor and analyze an ac electric power system 3 such as a power distribution system. The power distribution system 3 illustrated has three phase conductors 5A, 5B and 5C, a neutral conductor 5N and a ground conductor 5G. Current transformers 7A, 7B, 7C, 7N and 7G sense current flowing in each of these conductors while phase-to-neutral voltages are sensed by the potential transformers 9A, 9B and 9C, and neutral to ground voltage is sensed by transformer 9N. A microcomputer 10 includes a ranging circuit 11 which converts the current and voltage signals from -10 to 0 to +10 volt signals for conversion by an analog to digital (A/D) converter 13 for input to a digital processor 15.”], and a meter display screen [See Fig. 2 and Column 3 lines 1-4 of Putt – “FIG. 2 is an illustration of the front panel 19 which forms the user interface. A major feature of the front panel 19 is a display 21, which in the exemplary embodiment of the invention is an eight line gas plasma display.”];
storing the customized screen layout in the meter memory unit, wherein the customized screen layout includes a selection of defined data; and receiving an input to display the customized screen layout [Column 4 lines 19-23 of Putt – “FIGS. 4A and 5B illustrate an exemplary set of custom screens 53 and 55 which display the 14 parameters chosen by the operator. At any time, the operator may call up these displays by pressing the UP or DN push buttons 41 and 43 on the operator panel 19 until the CUSTOM LED 39' lights.”].
Hunter and Putt fail to disclose a first look-up table associating the defined data with a register of a Modbus map; and employing a second look-up table, by the at least one processor, to determine the location of the defined data in the meter memory unit corresponding to the Modbus map.
However, Rotvold discloses the use of look-up tables and a Modbus map in obtaining process parameters [See Paragraph [0015]]. It would have been obvious to use such functionalities in order to readily facilitate displaying parameters of interest from memory.
Regarding Claim 17, Hunter and Putt fail to disclose that the second look-up table is stored in the meter memory unit.
However, Rotvold discloses the use of look-up tables and a Modbus map in obtaining process parameters [See Paragraph [0015]]. It would have been obvious to use such functionalities in order to readily facilitate displaying parameters of interest from memory. It would have been obvious to store the Modbus look-up table in the utility meter memory to facilitate displaying parameters from the utility meter memory.
Regarding Claim 19, Putt discloses that the utility system includes an electrical circuit [Fig. 1 of Putt] and the defined data includes voltage information [Fig. 3 of Putt].
Regarding Claim 20, Hunter and Putt fail to disclose that the second look-up table is received with the customized screen layout.
However, Rotvold discloses the use of look-up tables and a Modbus map in obtaining process parameters [See Paragraph [0015]]. It would have been obvious to use such functionalities in order to readily facilitate displaying parameters of interest from memory. It would have been obvious to store the Modbus look-up table in the utility meter memory to facilitate displaying parameters from the utility meter memory.
Claims 6 and 13 is/are rejected under pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 103(a) as being unpatentable over Hunter (US 20060158438 A1), Putt et al. (US 5661658 A)[hereinafter “Putt”], and Canada et al. (US 6297742 B1)[hereinafter “Canada”].
Regarding Claims 6 and 13, Putt does disclose the use of a communication port in order to send and receive communications [communications link 20], but fails to disclose an optical port disposed on the face of the housing, the optical port configured to enable communication with an external device. However, using optical means for communicating with monitoring devices was well known at the time of invention [Column 9 lines 62-65 of Canada – “Data and information is transmitted to and from the monitor 100 through a communications port 154 (FIGS. 4 and 5), which is preferably a serial infrared (IR) data link.”]. It would have been obvious to communicate screen layout and related information to the device by using an optical port and wireless optical communication protocol because doing so would allow for the screen layout of the device to be updated without needing to physically interact with it (i.e., without needing to touch it).
Claim 18 is/are rejected under pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 103(a) as being unpatentable over Hunter (US 20060158438 A1), Putt et al. (US 5661658 A)[hereinafter “Putt”], Rotvold et al. (US 20040153594 A1)[hereinafter “Rotvold”], and Canada et al. (US 6297742 B1)[hereinafter “Canada”].
Regarding Claim 18, Putt does disclose the use of a communication port in order to send and receive communications [communications link 20], but fails to disclose an optical port disposed on the face of the housing, the optical port configured to enable communication with an external device. However, using optical means for communicating with monitoring devices was well known at the time of invention [Column 9 lines 62-65 of Canada – “Data and information is transmitted to and from the monitor 100 through a communications port 154 (FIGS. 4 and 5), which is preferably a serial infrared (IR) data link.”]. It would have been obvious to communicate screen layout and related information to the device by using an optical port and wireless optical communication protocol because doing so would allow for the screen layout of the device to be updated without needing to physically interact with it (i.e., without needing to touch it).
Claims 9 is/are rejected under pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 103(a) as being unpatentable over Hunter (US 20060158438 A1), Putt et al. (US 5661658 A)[hereinafter “Putt”], and Bier (US 5862395 A).
Regarding Claim 9, Hunter and Putt fail to disclose applying scaling to the entered text in the customized layout. However, Bier discloses such functionality [Column 24 lines 30-36 – “Moreover, the familiar layout capabilities of document editors can be used to compose control panels. Graphical editors can be used to create borders and icons, and text editors can be used to lay outlines or tables of buttons with appropriate colors, fonts, underlining and so forth. Such control panels inherit the ability of text editors to reformat text for different page sizes and scaling factors.”]. The use of such functionality would have been obvious in order to allow a user to more flexibly create a custom display.
Response to Arguments
Applicant argues:
PNG
media_image1.png
167
780
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Examiner’s Response:
The corresponding objection is hereby withdrawn.
Applicant argues:
PNG
media_image2.png
256
779
media_image2.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image3.png
661
777
media_image3.png
Greyscale
Examiner’s Response:
Hunter is not relied on as disclosing the referred-to limitations.
Applicant argues:
PNG
media_image4.png
366
775
media_image4.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image5.png
391
765
media_image5.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image6.png
434
787
media_image6.png
Greyscale
Examiner’s Response:
The Examiner respectfully disagrees. The language at issue is “the user can choose one of a previously-programmed layout, a predefined layout with customizable labeling, or a custom layout.” Only one of the three layouts is necessary for being selected per the claim language. Figs. 4A and 4B of Putt, as modified in view of Hunter, read on all three because they are “previously-programmed” (inherently) and “a predefined layout” (the layouts seen in Figs. 4A and 4B) and would be “customizable” or “custom” per Hunter.
Applicant argues:
PNG
media_image7.png
166
778
media_image7.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image8.png
166
782
media_image8.png
Greyscale
Examiner’s Response:
The Examiner respectfully disagrees. Hunter is directed to a method of customizing displays and Putt has a display that could be customized.
Applicant argues:
PNG
media_image9.png
393
784
media_image9.png
Greyscale
…
PNG
media_image10.png
126
780
media_image10.png
Greyscale
Examiner’s Response:
The Examiner respectfully disagrees. Putt discloses prompting the user to enter text for displayed data if the predefined layout with customizable labeling is selected [Column 4 lines 19-23 – “FIGS. 4A and 5B illustrate an exemplary set of custom screens 53 and 55 which display the 14 parameters chosen by the operator. At any time, the operator may call up these displays by pressing the UP or DN push buttons 41 and 43 on the operator panel 19 until the CUSTOM LED 39' lights.”] in that existence of the UP or DN buttons prompts the user to use them and the use of the UP or DN buttons results in the chosen parameters being entered into the display as text (i.e., the parameter labels).
Applicant argues:
PNG
media_image11.png
305
791
media_image11.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image12.png
77
770
media_image12.png
Greyscale
Examiner’s Response:
The Examiner respectfully disagrees. Putt discloses prompting the user to select meter data to be displayed if the custom layout is selected [Column 4 lines 19-23 – “FIGS. 4A and 5B illustrate an exemplary set of custom screens 53 and 55 which display the 14 parameters chosen by the operator. At any time, the operator may call up these displays by pressing the UP or DN push buttons 41 and 43 on the operator panel 19 until the CUSTOM LED 39' lights.”] in that existence of the UP or DN buttons prompts the user to use them and the use of the UP or DN buttons results in the chosen parameters being displayed when the user selects the custom display.
Applicant argues:
PNG
media_image13.png
303
782
media_image13.png
Greyscale
Examiner’s Response:
The Examiner respectfully disagrees. Putt discloses assigning a screen number to the selected display screen [The figure numbers for Figs. 3, 4A, and 4B of Putt]. 3, 4A, and 4B are numbers.
Applicant argues:
PNG
media_image14.png
257
781
media_image14.png
Greyscale
Examiner’s Response:
The Examiner respectfully disagrees. Putt discloses assigning a screen number to the selected display screen [The figure numbers for Figs. 3, 4A, and 4B of Putt]. 3, 4A, and 4B are numbers. Someone (a user) assigned those numbers for those screens.
Applicant argues:
PNG
media_image15.png
346
767
media_image15.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image16.png
167
781
media_image16.png
Greyscale
Examiner’s Response:
The Examiner respectfully disagrees. Rotvold discloses the use of look-up tables and a Modbus map in obtaining process parameters [See Paragraph [0015]]. It would have been obvious to use such functionalities in combination with the utility meter of Putt in order to readily facilitate displaying parameters of interest from memory.
Applicant argues:
PNG
media_image17.png
529
771
media_image17.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image18.png
392
774
media_image18.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image19.png
349
779
media_image19.png
Greyscale
Examiner’s Response:
The Examiner respectfully disagrees. Rotvold discloses the use of look-up tables and a Modbus map in obtaining process parameters [See Paragraph [0015]]. It would have been obvious to use such functionalities in order to readily facilitate displaying parameters of interest from memory.
Regarding the specifics of the recited “first look-up table” and “second look-up table,” Rotvold correlates data defined with a register of a Modbus map [Fig. 3, “Modbus Register Number”] with defined data [Fig. 3, “Parameter”](this amounting to a first look-up table) and correlates location of the defined data in memory [Fig. 3, “Function Block Number”Paragraph [0039] – “The controller 80 causes the Fieldbus I/O module 86 to transmit messages on the segment 68a polling the field devices 36-42 for information pertaining to the function blocks and process control parameters contained therein.”] corresponding to the Modbus map [Fig. 3, “Modbus Register Number”] (this amounting to a second look-up table). Use of such a process with regards to utility meter data display would have read on the recited limitations.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure:
US 20050093708 A1 – Self Contained Power Disruption Alert Devices And Methods For Generating Audible Alerts
US 6792337 B2 – Method And System For Master Slave Protocol Communication In An Intelligent Electronic Device
US 20030040897 A1 – Man Machine Interface For Power Management Control Systems
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.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to KYLE ROBERT QUIGLEY whose telephone number is (313)446-4879. The examiner can normally be reached 9AM-5PM 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, Arleen Vazquez can be reached at (571) 272-2619. 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.
/KYLE R QUIGLEY/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2857