Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status
The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
Claim 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.
This application includes one or more claim limitations that do not use the word “means,” but are nonetheless being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, because the claim limitation(s) uses a generic placeholder that is coupled with functional language without reciting sufficient structure to perform the recited function and the generic placeholder is not preceded by a structural modifier. Such claim limitation(s) is/are:
“electronic module” in claim 1 ([0020]),
“transmission device” in claim 1 ([0031]),
“warning component” in claim 5 ([0063]), and
“adjustment component” in claim 6 ([0064]).
Because this/these claim limitation(s) is/are being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, it/they is/are being interpreted to cover the corresponding structure described in the specification as performing the claimed function, and equivalents thereof.
If applicant does not intend to have this/these limitation(s) interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, applicant may: (1) amend the claim limitation(s) to avoid it/them being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph (e.g., by reciting sufficient structure to perform the claimed function); or (2) present a sufficient showing that the claim limitation(s) recite(s) sufficient structure to perform the claimed function so as to avoid it/them being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph.
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 1-18 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 1 recites the phrase “[a] system for wired/wireless - online/offline”. Because the claim uses “/” instead of the conventional use of “and” or “or”, the claim fails to make clear whether the system is wired or wireless, online or offline, etc. Are these claimed written in the alternative or written as in combination? One of ordinary skill would not be apprised of the claim scope. The claim recites further phrases such as “cloud/server” which are unclear. Claim 14 recites the same limitations and is rejected according to the same rationale. Further claims 2, 13, 15, 16, 17, 18 include phrases using “/”. The balance of claims are rejected based on dependence. For the purposes of rejection, all phrases of “/’ will be interpreted to mean “or”.
Claim 1 recites the limitation "a UV source or sources" in line 5. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. The claim previously recites “UV sources” in lines 2-3. The claim fails to make clear whether these are the same or different elements. This rejection is not comprehensive to all instances of the phrase, and other instances are rejected according to the same rationale.
Claim 1 recites the limitation "a UV sensor or sensors" in line 8. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. The claim previously recites “UV sensor or sensors” in line 5. The claim fails to make clear whether these are the same or different elements. This rejection is not comprehensive to all instances of the phrase, and other instances are rejected according to the same rationale.
Claim 1 recites the limitation "a cloud/server" in line 11. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. The claim previously recites “a cloud/server” in line 9. The claim fails to make clear whether these are the same or different elements. This rejection is not comprehensive to all instances of the phrase, and other instances are rejected according to the same rationale.
Claim 1 recites the phrase “a user interface specific to the system installed on a cloud/server or offline environment”. The claim as constructed fails to make clear whether the system comprises a “server” or merely a user interface. For the purposes of rejection, the phrase is interpreted to include only the user interface, which thus lack essential subject matter of the server. To overcome the rejection, Applicant should amend the claim to specifically recite the hardware supporting the user interface.
Claim 6 recites the phrase “warning component”, which invokes 112(f) as stated above. However, the supporting disclosure fails to clearly link or associate the disclosure structure to the claimed function. Accordingly, the claims are indefinite. See MPEP 2181(III).
Claim 8 recites the phrase “the gateway” in line 1-2. There is insufficient antecedent basis for the limitation in the claim.
Claim 9 recites the phrase “the intervention” in line 1. There is insufficient antecedent basis for the limitation in the claim.
Claim 9 recites the phrase “the warnings” in line 3. There is insufficient antecedent basis for the limitation in the claim.
Claim 12 recites the phrase “the necessary warnings” in line 1. There is insufficient antecedent basis for the limitation in the claim.
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.
Claim(s) 1 and 5-18 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over XING et al. (CN 118175183 A, published 06/11/2024) in view of BAARMAN et al. (US 20020313850 A1).
Regarding claims 1 and 14, XING discloses a system and method for wired/wireless - online/offline communication-based continuous, real-time proportional and radiometric measurement, processing, and monitoring of the output of UV sources that generate UV radiation that can be used in water disinfection, surface disinfection, air and room disinfection processes and for non-disinfection purposes (“background technology” describes a UV fluid disinfection monitoring system and method of using, see para. 1; FIGURE 1), comprising:
providing a UV sensor or sensors 2 which are positioned where a UV source or sources are located and continuously measures the output of the UV source or sources and transmits output information to an electronic module (sensing layer 2 for monitoring UV sources comprising photoelectric detectors 22 and other sensors; “Specific implementation Examples” (SIE), para. 2);
providing an electronic module 23 which processes the data received from UV sensor or sensors (controller 23 performs data interaction in combination with network transmission layer 3, where data interaction between layers is a processing step; SIE, para. 2);
providing a transmission device 3 which transmits processed data to a cloud/server or an offline medium (network transmission layer 3 transmits data to application service layer 4, which comprises a backend server module 41, databased module 43, and online page development module 44; SIE, para. 3); and
providing a user interface specific to the system installed on a cloud/server or offline environment, displaying data, time-dependent graphs of the processed signal received via the electronic module, calibration setting, the working hours of the UV sources, theoretical remaining life of the UV source or sources and other information which can be requested by the user (service application layer 4 enables data monitoring via web page display and custom programming via API, with data development including time-dependent graphs (e.g. FIG 2), operating hours, and requested other data; SIE; para. 2-13).
XING does not specify the display data comprising a ‘calibration setting’ or ‘theoretical remaining life’. In the same field of endeavor, BAARMAN discloses an apparatus and method of UV disinfection comprising providing a means for tracking, displaying, and modifying UV source calibration parameters ([0134-0135]), with the benefit of monitoring the lifetime of the source output. In light of the teachings of BAARMAN, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the invention to combine with the teachings of XING. It further would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the invention to apply a known technique (displaying calibration data and/or source lifetime data) to a similar device (UV disinfection system) in the same way. See KSR Int'l Co. v. Teleflex Inc., 550 U.S. 398, 415-421, 82 USPQ2d 1385, 1395-97 (2007).
Regarding claims 5 and 15, XING discloses the system configured to detect UV output and/or any other monitored parameter is below or above a permissible set level determined in the electronic module and displays a measured result (setting thresholds via algorithms; SIE, para. 2-13), but does not explicitly specify a warning component that generates an audible and/or visible warning. However, visible or audible notifications for threshold crossing is well known and it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the invention to provide in the device of XING.
Regarding claim 6, XING discloses wherein the system comprises an adjustment component which performs: selecting the type of transmission device (network transmission layer 3 adopts the communication mode of the NB-IoT networking module 31 and the 4G forwarding module 32 to ensure real-time update and transmission of data; SIE, para 12).
Regarding claim 7, XING discloses the transmission device is wireless (e.g. 4G module 32; FIG 1).
Regarding claim 8, XING discloses the system comprises a connection cable set which includes a connection cable and in-line cable connectors that provide the electrical and data connectivity between the UV sensor and a gateway (FIG 1 shows photoelectric sensor 21 connected to controller 23).
Regarding claim 9, XING discloses providing a user interface via an API within the service application layer 4 that enables monitoring and display of measured values (SIE, para. 1-14). Providing visual warnings when a monitored threshold value is exceeded is known in the art, and would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the invention.
Regarding claims 10 and 16, XING discloses the system comprising at least one ambient condition measuring sensor which is positioned in devices utilizing UV technology or in the environment where the UV source is located to measure the ambient conditions according to their characteristics (temperature and humidity sensors 22; SIE, para. 2).
Regarding claims 11 and 17, XING discloses the ambient condition measuring sensor is a temperature sensor measures the temperature of the environment and a relative humidity sensor which measures the relative humidity of the environment (temperature and humidity sensors 22; SIE, para. 2).
Regarding claims 12 and 18, XING discloses the user interface provides the capability of notification to the user in the form of screen, e-mail, and SMS (API enables display and monitoring data of device information to the user; HTTPS is directly involved in email handling and implicitly TCP and SSL/TLS; CoAP specifically includes support for SMS as a transport mechanism). Providing screen, email and SMS notifications are well-known communication protocols within the level of skill in the art that would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the invention.
Regarding claim 13, XING does not disclose wherein the electronic module assigns master/slave modules and transmits information received from a multi-module structure to the user interface as one single module. However, master/slave assignment is known in the art of network systems for streamlining communication and enforcing synchronization and central control. Applying a known technique (master/slave assignment) to a similar device (distributed UV sensing network) in the same way (streamline communication) would have been an obvious step to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the invention. KSR Int'l Co. v. Teleflex Inc., 550 U.S. 398, 415-421, 82 USPQ2d 1385, 1395-97 (2007).
Claim(s) 2-4 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over XING et al. (CN 118175183 A, published 06/11/2024) in view of BAARMAN et al. (US 20020313850 A1), and BECKER et al. (US 20140340240 A1).
Regarding claim 2, XING discloses a sensing layer 2 comprising multiple boxes each comprising a controller 23 (FIG 2), but does not specify a gateway and a panel mount connector which connects the UV sensor to the gateway in order to allow connection of multiple sensors, and which transmits data received from sensors to the electronic module and also provides power from the gateway to said sensor. In the same field of endeavor, BECKER discloses a distributed remote sensing system comprising UV sensors 120 connected to a gateway 110, wherein the gateway includes a panel mount connection (i.e. ethernet RJ45 port mount; [0018]; FIG 1), with the arrangement providing distributed remote sensing with improved reliability through redundancy ([0008]). In light of the teachings of BECKER, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the invention to combine with the teachings of XING and BAARMAN. Furthermore, it is known in the art that the Ethernet protocol is capable of providing power devices via PoE, and would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the invention.
Regarding claim 3, BECKER discloses sensor to gateway connections as ethernet, which are known to provide DC power via PoE ([0018]).
Regarding claim 4, BECKER discloses wherein the system comprises an Ethernet connection, wherein providing power via PoE is known in the art. Furthermore, Switching Mode Power Supply (SMPS) or switchers, convert AC energy to DC energy or vice versa, are known in the art of network systems for regulating power between devices. Applying a known technique (incorporating SMPS in a network) to a similar device (distributed UV sensing network) in the same way (improve power distribution) would have been an obvious step to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the invention. KSR Int'l Co. v. Teleflex Inc., 550 U.S. 398, 415-421, 82 USPQ2d 1385, 1395-97 (2007).
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
ZENG et al. (CN 203206269 U) discloses an intelligent control system for a home comprising a gateway, controller, and sensing subsystems.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to CASEY BRYANT whose telephone number is (571)270-7329. The examiner can normally be reached M-F // 7-3P 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, UZMA ALAM can be reached at 571-272-3995. 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.
CASEY BRYANT
Primary Examiner
Art Unit 2884
/CASEY BRYANT/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2884
/UZMA ALAM/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2884