Prosecution Insights
Last updated: April 19, 2026
Application No. 18/832,595

A METHOD AND AN ARRANGEMENT FOR OUTPUT CONFIGURATION OF A NETWORK DEVICE

Final Rejection §103
Filed
Jul 24, 2024
Examiner
TRA, ANH QUAN
Art Unit
2843
Tech Center
2800 — Semiconductors & Electrical Systems
Assignee
Lumenradio AB
OA Round
2 (Final)
73%
Grant Probability
Favorable
3-4
OA Rounds
2y 4m
To Grant
78%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 73% — above average
73%
Career Allow Rate
807 granted / 1110 resolved
+4.7% vs TC avg
Moderate +5% lift
Without
With
+5.3%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
2y 4m
Avg Prosecution
38 currently pending
Career history
1148
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
0.4%
-39.6% vs TC avg
§103
57.6%
+17.6% vs TC avg
§102
24.9%
-15.1% vs TC avg
§112
7.8%
-32.2% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 1110 resolved cases

Office Action

§103
DETAILED ACTION 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 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) 1-16 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Weaver (US 20170215247) in view of Bowers et al. (US 20130221852). As to claim 1, Weaver’s figures 4 and 7 show a method for output configuration of a network device (402A-402C, 406A) by means of a portable configurator (406B), wherein the network device has at least two outputs (provided by the lambs) connected to a respective output device (LED sets, ¶0072), wherein each output device has a characteristic output signal (colors), the method comprising: a) initiating communication (Bowers et al.’s step 405 teaches that the LEDs receive command to start calibration from external device. Therefore, it would have been obvious to use Weaver 406B to start the process in its figure 7 for the purpose of ensuring optimum performance) between the network device and the portable configurator; b) activating at least one of the output devices with respective output of the network device (by providing driving current to the lamp in Weaver’s step 702); c) detecting each characteristic output signal for each activation of the output devices (Weaver’s steps 704-706); d) transmitting information related to the detected output signal from the portable configurator to the network device (Weaver’s step 708); and e) storing the detected output signals mapping to respective output of the network device (step 714 teaches that “the tunable light module can receive the updated color mixing plan back from the cloud server”. ¶0078 teaches that “[o]ne or more of the functionalities of the wired controller 406A or the wireless controller 406B can be assisted by the light control service, including … storage of light adjustment history, storage of lamp module groups, storage of user preference of light settings, storage of conditional rules associated with light settings”. Bowers et al.’s step 435 also teaches that the adjustments of each LED string are stored. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art to storing the detected output signals mapping to respective output of the network device for the purpose of ensure precise illumination) for configuring a mapping of different characteristic output signals to respective outputs connected to different output devices. As to claim 2, the modified Weaver’s figures show the step of registering (receiving signals after step 708) the detected output signal in the portable configurator. As to claim 3, the modified Weaver’s figures show the step of receiving information about the characteristic output signals at the portable configurator from the network device (step 714). As to claim 4, the modified Weaver’s figures show the step of transmitting the stored detected output signals mapping to respective output to a network controller from the network device after step 714 (¶0072 teaches that “[t]he configurable lamp system 400 is able to produce a target light characteristic (e.g., CCT, hue, saturation, brightness, or any combination thereof) in response to receiving a light tuning command utilizing a color mixing plan”, further see Bower et al.’s ¶0084 and US 20110109445 which incorporated by Bowers et al.). Claims 5-8 recite similar limitations in claims above. Therefore, they are rejected for the same reasons. As to claim 9, Weaver’s figures disclose that the network device comprises at least one driver (318 in figure 3 that drives the LED sets of lamps) with the at least two outputs; and wherein the at least one driver is connected to a communication bus for communication with the communication circuit (306 in figure 3 or 406 in figure 4). As to claims 10 and 11, analogue bus and a serial bus are well known in the art. It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art to select analog or serial bus for the communication bus for the purpose of ensuring optimum performance (see Weaver’s ¶0057). As to claim 12, Weaver’s figures show that the at least one driver is a driver for a luminaire; and wherein the output devices are light sources of the luminaire (inherent). As to claim 13, Weaver’s figures show that the light sources of the luminaire are LED devices (inherent). As to claim 14, Weaver’s figures show that the characteristic output signal from the luminaire is light with different color for each LED device (¶0072). As to claim 15, Bower et al.’s ¶0143 teaches that the aspect of invention is being embodied in a computer-readable medium. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art to embody Weaver’s invention in a computer-readable storage medium storing computer program instructions which, when executed by a processor, cause the processor to perform the claimed method for the purpose of saving cost and providing more precise calibration. As to claim 16, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art to implement computer program instructions which, when executed by a processor, cause the processor to perform a claimed method for the purpose of ensuring precise performance. 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. Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ANH-QUAN TRA whose telephone number is (571)272-1755. The examiner can normally be reached Mon-Fri from 8:00 A.M.-5:00 P.M. 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, Lincoln Donovan can be reached at 571-272-1988. 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. /QUAN TRA/ Primary Examiner Art Unit 2842
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Jul 24, 2024
Application Filed
Oct 31, 2025
Non-Final Rejection — §103
Feb 03, 2026
Response Filed
Feb 18, 2026
Final Rejection — §103 (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12603411
READING DEVICE FOR SUPERCONDUCTING QUBIT
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 14, 2026
Patent 12603633
ACOUSTIC WAVE DEVICE, FILTER, AND MULTIPLEXER
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 14, 2026
Patent 12597909
BULK ACOUSTIC WAVE DEVICE INCLUDING PATTERNED ACOUSTIC MIRROR LAYERS TO REDUCE EFFECTIVE THICKNESS AND RELATED METHODS
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 07, 2026
Patent 12597903
FILTER AND ASSOCIATED RECEIVING CIRCUIT
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 07, 2026
Patent 12597940
CIRCUITRY AND METHOD FOR REDUCING ENVIRONMENTAL NOISE
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 07, 2026
Study what changed to get past this examiner. Based on 5 most recent grants.

AI Strategy Recommendation

Get an AI-powered prosecution strategy using examiner precedents, rejection analysis, and claim mapping.
Powered by AI — typically takes 5-10 seconds

Prosecution Projections

3-4
Expected OA Rounds
73%
Grant Probability
78%
With Interview (+5.3%)
2y 4m
Median Time to Grant
Moderate
PTA Risk
Based on 1110 resolved cases by this examiner. Grant probability derived from career allow rate.

Sign in with your work email

Enter your email to receive a magic link. No password needed.

Personal email addresses (Gmail, Yahoo, etc.) are not accepted.

Free tier: 3 strategy analyses per month