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 .
DETAILED OFFICE ACTION
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on 2024-09-08 in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97 has been considered by the examiner and made of record in the application file.
Claim Status
Claims 9-16 are pending in this application and are under examination in this Office Action. Claims 1-8 have been canceled. No claims have been allowed.
Claim Objections
Claim 9 is objected to because of the following informality:
Regarding claim 9,
Claim 9 recites "at least two light sources, each light source being configured to emit an emitting beam; and a at least one photoreceiver." The phrase "and a at least one photoreceiver" is grammatically incorrect because the article "a" improperly precedes "at least one." Appropriate correction is required, for example, by amending the phrase to recite "and at least one photoreceiver."
Drawings
The drawings are objected to under 37 CFR 1.83(a). The drawings must show every feature of the invention specified in the claims. Therefore, the claimed limitation within claim 14 is not shown within the drawings, namely that the Li-Fi module further comprises "a casing to protect said at least two light sources and said at least one photoreceiver." The specification expressly states that the Li-Fi module may include "a casing (not shown in the figures)." Figures 1-3 show the Li-Fi module 100, light sources 110, photoreceiver 120, device 130, rigid printed circuit boards 140, flexible printed circuit boards 150, seat 220, backrest 222, headrest 223, and Li-Fi devices 300, but no figure shows or labels the claimed casing or its protective relationship with the at least two light sources and the at least one photoreceiver.
Nor is it shown, as mentioned within claim 15, that "the Li-Fi module [is] positioned in an emission cone of the Li-Fi device." Figures 1-3 do not show an emission cone emitted by a light source of the Li-Fi device 300 in which the Li-Fi module 100 is positioned. Although Figure 1 shows emission cones 111, those emission cones are associated with the light sources 110 of the Li-Fi module 100, not with the Li-Fi device 300. The specification distinguishes these features by explaining that the emission cone of the Li-Fi device corresponds to the emission cone of the light source of the Li-Fi device 300, and the specification further states that the light source of the Li-Fi device 300 is not shown in the figures.
Nor is it shown, as mentioned within claim 16, that each Li-Fi device comprises "a light source and a photoreceiver." Figures 1-3 identify Li-Fi devices 300 generally, but no figure shows or labels a light source or a photoreceiver of each Li-Fi device. The specification states that a Li-Fi
device 300 preferably includes a light source and a photoreceiver "not shown in the figures." These feature(s) must be shown or the feature(s) canceled from the claim(s). No new matter should be entered.
Corrected drawing sheets in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(d) are required in reply to the Office action to avoid abandonment of the application. Any amended replacement drawing sheet should include all of the figures appearing on the immediate prior version of the sheet, even if only one figure is being amended. The figure or figure number of an amended drawing should not be labeled as "amended." If a drawing figure is to be canceled, the appropriate figure must be removed from the replacement sheet, and where necessary, the remaining figures must be renumbered and appropriate changes made to the brief description of the several views of the drawings for consistency. Additional replacement sheets may be necessary to show the renumbering of the remaining figures. Each drawing sheet submitted after the filing date of an application must be labeled in the top margin as either "Replacement Sheet" or "New Sheet" pursuant to 37 CFR 1.121(d). If the changes are not accepted by the examiner, the applicant will be notified and informed of any required corrective action in the next Office action. The objection to the drawings will not be held in abeyance.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112(b)
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.
Claim 12 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor, or for pre-AIA the applicant regards as the invention.
Regarding claim 12,
Claim 12 recites "The seat of claim of claim 10, wherein the sensor is an inclinometer or a time-of-flight distance sensor." The phrase "claim of claim 10" is grammatically defective and does not clearly and properly identify the base claim from which claim 12 depends. As written, it is unclear whether claim 12 is intended to depend directly from claim 10, to refer to some portion or subject matter of claim 10, or to include an inadvertently duplicated phrase. Therefore, the claim language does not provide a clear boundary for the claimed dependent subject matter. Accordingly, the metes and bounds of claim 12 are not reasonably certain, and claim 12 is indefinite.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112(d)
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(d):
(d) REFERENCE IN DEPENDENT FORMS. —Subject to subsection (e), a claim in dependent form shall contain a reference to a claim previously set forth and then specify a further limitation of the subject matter claimed. A claim in dependent form shall be construed to incorporate by reference all the limitations of the claim to which it refers.
Claim 12 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(d) as being of improper dependent form for failing to properly reference a claim previously set forth.
Regarding claim 12,
Claim 12 recites "The seat of claim of claim 10, wherein the sensor is an inclinometer or a time-of-flight distance sensor." A dependent claim must contain a reference to a claim previously set forth and then specify a further limitation of the subject matter claimed. The phrase "claim of claim 10" does not properly recite a reference to one previously set forth claim in a clear dependent form. To the extent applicant intended claim 12 to depend from claim 10, claim 12 should be amended to properly recite, for example, "The seat of claim 10, wherein the sensor is an inclinometer or a time-of-flight distance sensor." Accordingly, claim 12 is in improper dependent form under 35 U.S.C. 112(d).
Claim Rejections – 35 U.S.C. § 103
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 103 which forms the basis for the 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.
As reiterated by the Supreme Court in KSR, and as set forth in MPEP 2141 (R-01.2024), II, the factual inquiries of Graham v. John Deere Co., 383 U.S. 1, 148 USPQ 459 (1966), applied for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. §103, are summarized as follows:
Determining the scope and content of the prior art;
Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue;
Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art; and
Considering objective evidence indicative of obviousness or non-obviousness, if present.
This application currently names joint inventors. In considering patentability of the claims, the examiner presumes that the subject matter disclosed in the prior art was created by another (i.e., not by the inventive entity) unless proven otherwise. Applicant is advised of the obligation under 37 C.F.R. § 1.56 to point out the inventor and effective filing dates of each claim, and any
evidence of common ownership/assignment as of the effective filing date, so that the examiner may properly consider the applicability of 35 U.S.C. § 102(b)(2)(C) for any potential 35 U.S.C. § 102(a)(2) prior art against the claimed invention(s).
Claims 9, 14 and 15 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103 as being unpatentable over Puertolas et al. (FR3097178A1) in view of Noshad et al. (US20190082520A1), further in view of Jerrett et al. (GB2496452A), further in view of Mizukami et al. (US20110302616A1).
Claim 9
Puertolas teaches a passenger seat environment for an aircraft and a support installed on an upper part of the backrest of the seat. More specifically, Puertolas teaches that the support is installed at the upper part of the backrest and carries a Li-Fi data communication device:
“The invention relates to a support (10) intended to be installed, in a reversible manner, at the level of an upper part (523) of a backrest (52) removed from a seat (50) ... a data communication device (14) according to Li-Fi technology connected to the plate (11).” [Puertolas, translation, p. 1, Abstract].
“The invention is intended in particular for an application in the aeronautical field, to equip an aircraft.” [Puertolas, translation, p. 1].
“Figure 1 illustrates three 50-passenger airplane seats, of the economy class type, arranged one behind the other. Conventionally, a seat 50 comprises a seat 51 and a backrest 52. The backrest 52 is preferably connected to the seat 51.” [Puertolas, translation, p. 4-5].
“The support 10 is intended to be installed, reversibly, on the upper part 523 of the backrest 52 previously removed.” [Puertolas, translation, p. 5].
Thus, Puertolas teaches a seat having a backrest, and a Li-Fi communication device positioned at an upper portion of the backrest. Puertolas also teaches that the Li-Fi communication device is configured to communicate with an associated remote communication device placed in the aircraft, preferably in the ceiling:
“The support has a data communication device configured and oriented to allow two-way communication with a remote communication device placed in an environment close to the seat equipped with the support.” [Puertolas, translation, p. 3].
“The support 10 further comprises a data communication device according to Li-Fi technology, called communication device 14, as illustrated in Figures 2, 7 and 10.” [Puertolas, translation, p. 7].
“The communication device 14 of the support is intended to be associated with a suitable communication device placed in the aircraft, called a remote communication device (not shown in the figures). The remote communication device is connected in particular with central processing units of the on-board multimedia systems (IFE). The remote communication device is preferably placed in a ceiling of the aircraft.” [Puertolas, translation, p. 7].
“The communication device 14 of the support and the remote communication device advantageously allow the establishment of a two-way data communication, that is to say: in the direction of so-called downlink communication, a transmission of entertainment data and/or internet data to the equipment, in the direction of so-called upward communication, a transmission of entertainment data and/or internet data from the equipment.” [Puertolas, translation, p. 7].
Puertolas further teaches that the Li-Fi communication device includes a transmitter/light source and a receiver/photodiode:
“In a manner known per se, the communication device 14 of the support comprises a transmitter 141 and a receiver 142. Said transmitter is configured to transmit a specific signal in the direction of a receiver disposed in the remote communication device. The receiver 142 of said communication device 14 of the medium is configured to receive a specific signal from a transmitter disposed in the remote communication device.” [Puertolas, translation, p. 7].
“More specifically, the communication device comprises, as transmitter 14, a light source adapted to emit, preferably in the infrared range, a modulated optical signal of the Li-Fi type, said first signal.” [Puertolas, translation, p. 7].
“The light source is for example a light-emitting diode (LED) or a laser.” [Puertolas, translation, p. 7].
“The communication device comprises, as receiver 142, a module for acquiring a modulated optical signal of the Li-Fi type, said second signal, coming from the transmitter of the remote communication device. Said acquisition module of the communication device 14 of the
support is suitable for detecting the variations in intensity of the second signal. The acquisition module converts the optical signal intensity variation data into a digital signal for the equipment. In an exemplary embodiment, the acquisition module is a photodiode.” [Puertolas, translation, p. 7].
Jerrett teaches the adjustable-in-inclination backrest aspect of claim 9. Specifically, Jerrett teaches an aircraft seat having a backrest movable between a reclined position and a taxi/takeoff/landing position, thereby establishing a backrest inclination range:
“An aircraft seat 1 has a backrest 6 and footrest 7 that are movable between a reclined position and a Taxi, Take-off or Landing (TTL) position by means of actuators 3a,3b via a control panel 9.” [Jerrett, p. 1, Abstract].
“Aircraft seats are often fitted with motorized control systems for adjusting the relative position and orientation of their constituent parts. Typically, the aircraft seat is configured to move between an upright 'normal' position, to either a 'relaxed', 'reclined' or 'sleep' position, or somewhere in between by virtue of one of more actuators.” [Jerrett, p. 6, lines 5-9].
“The aircraft seat 1 has a taxi, take-off or landing position (hereinafter, 'TTL position'), and a first and second actuator 3a, 3b for moving a backrest 6 and a footrest 7 of the aircraft seat 1 away from or towards the TTL position.” [Jerrett, p. 10, lines 12-16].
Accordingly, Jerrett teaches a backrest adjustable in inclination with an angle of inclination within a predefined range between upright/TTL and reclined/sleep positions. The combination of Puertolas and Jerrett therefore teaches the claimed seat with an adjustable-in-inclination backrest and a Li-Fi module positioned at an upper portion of the backrest.
The difference between Puertolas in view of Jerrett and the claim is that the combination does not expressly teach at least two aligned light sources disposed on the upper backrest and respectively associated with sub-ranges of the backrest inclination range such that a light source associated with the current sub-range is active. However, within analogous optical wireless communication art, Noshad teaches replacing a single wide beam with multiple narrow-beam LEDs and selecting the LED that points toward the receiver to maintain optical communication as relative position and angle change.
“In visible light communication systems, signal coverage is limited by the beam angle of the light source and the distance between the target. When the target moves from one site to another, signal transmission can be interrupted.” [Noshad, ¶ [0003], p. 16].
“In some configurations, the transmitter may be configured to select one of a plurality of light emitting diodes to provide an optical emission to a receiver optically coupled to the transmitter. The exact light emitting diode selected may change as the transmitter, receiver or both are moved from one position to another position. The use of a plurality of narrow beam width light emitting diodes together can provide a wide-angle transmitter for more reliable optical communication between devices.” [Noshad, ¶ [0004], p. 16].
“In a first aspect, an optical wireless communication device configured to provide optical communication with another optical wireless communication device comprises a processor, a receiver electrically coupled to the processor, and a transmitter electrically coupled to the processor, wherein the transmitter comprises a plurality of narrow beam width light emitting diodes each electrically coupled to the processor.” [Noshad, ¶ [0005], p. 16].
“In another embodiment, the transmitter comprises at least three narrow beam width light emitting diodes each providing a beam cone, wherein the three narrow light beam light emitting diodes are positioned so a central axis of the beam cones diverge from each other.” [Noshad, ¶ [0006], p. 16].
“In some examples, the optical wireless communication system is configured to select one of the plurality of narrow beam width light emitting diodes of the second optical wireless communication device to provide a first optical emission from the second transmitter to the first receiver based on a first position of the second optical wireless communication device relative to a position of the first optical wireless communication device and is configured to select a different one of the plurality of narrow beam width light emitting diodes of the second optical wireless communication device to provide a second optical emission from the second transmitter to the first receiver based on a second position of the second optical wireless communication device relative to the position of the first optical wireless communication device.” [Noshad, ¶ [0007], p. 16-17].
Noshad further teaches an actual multi-source transmitter and processor-controlled selection of the source used for optical transmission:
“In certain embodiments, a transmitter 200 may comprise a plurality of individual and independent light emitting diodes 210-218 as shown in FIG. 2. While the illustration shown in FIG. 2 comprises five light emitting diodes 210-218, fewer or more than five LED's can be present. In some instances, two, three, four, five, six, seven, eight, nine, ten or more than ten individual LEDs may be present in the transmitter 200.” [Noshad, ¶ [0056], p. 20].
“The processor 230 may comprise executable instructions to permit selection of one or more of the LED's 210-218 for optical transmission to an optically coupled receiver (not shown). To increase the overall “width” of the transmitter 200 additional LEDs may be present in the transmitter 200 to provide additional independent light channels.” [Noshad, ¶ [0056], p. 20].
“In certain configurations and as noted in more detail below, the OWC device can be configured to select the best LED that points towards a receiver for data transmission. This LED selection is based on the response that the other receiver receives from the first transmitter.” [Noshad, ¶ [0058], p. 20].
“In some instances, as the position of the OWC device 320 is moved relative to the position of the OWC device 310, the exact angle between the devices 310, 320 can change. When this angle change occurs, proper optical transmission between the OWC devices 310, 320 may be interrupted.” [Noshad, ¶ [0059], p. 20].
“As the position of the OWC device is changed (as shown in FIG. 4B), it may be desirable to use LED 426 to provide an optical emission to the receiver 410 to provide better optical communication between the receiver 410 and the OWC device comprising the LEDs 422, 424 and 426. Depending on the exact angle, however, the particular LED used may change from time to time as the angle between the OWC devices changes. This change permits dynamic adjustment of the system to reduce or avoid communication disruptions.” [Noshad, ¶ [0059], p. 20].
“In certain configurations, the exact positioning of one NBWLED compared to another NBWLED may vary. An illustrative configuration is shown in FIG. 5. The outer LEDs (512 and
516) are tilted away from each other, and the central LED (514) is generally positioned to provide a beam with a central axis that is orthogonal to the transmitter housing 510.” [Noshad, ¶ [0060], p. 20].
However, within analogous art, Mizukami further confirms that in aircraft cabin visible-light communication, the backrest position and angle affect the orientation of a light receiving sensor disposed at an upper area of the seat:
“The seat electronics box 18 on the Zone end receives the illuminating light from the OLED 20 via a light receiving sensor attached to an upper area of the seat. The light receiving sensor does not always face upward depending on the position and angle of the backrest of the seat, but as long as the light receiving sensor is within the range of the illuminating light source, the light receiving sensor will not fail to receive light.” [Mizukami, ¶ [0039], p. 10].
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the upper-backrest Li-Fi communication device of Puertolas, as applied to the inclinable aircraft seat of Jerrett, by replacing the single Li-Fi emitter/light source of Puertolas with the plurality of selectable narrow-beam light sources and processor-controlled LED selection taught by Noshad. In the combined system, each light source would emit an emitting beam, and the light source whose beam is directed toward the associated ceiling/remote Li-Fi device would be active. The motivation is not merely to add more parts. Puertolas already teaches that the upper-backrest Li-Fi communication device must be oriented to communicate with a remote ceiling device. Jerrett teaches that an aircraft-seat backrest moves through upright, reclined, and intermediate positions, thereby changing the angular
orientation of the upper backrest. Mizukami expressly recognizes that, in an aircraft visible-light communication environment, a light receiving sensor at an upper area of a seat does not always face upward depending on the position and angle of the backrest. Noshad solves the same optical wireless alignment problem by providing multiple narrow-beam LEDs and selecting the LED that points toward the receiver when the relative position or angle changes. Accordingly, a person of ordinary skill would have had a specific reason to use Noshad in the Puertolas / Jerrett seat: to maintain a reliable Li-Fi optical link between the seat-back module and the ceiling Li-Fi device as the backrest reclines, without requiring a single high-power wide-angle emitter.
It further would have been obvious to align the multiple light sources on the upper backrest parallel to the median longitudinal plane of the seat. In an aircraft seat, recline movement changes the orientation of the upper backrest primarily in the fore-aft longitudinal median plane of the seat. The predictable placement of Noshad's multiple angularly directed beam sources on Puertolas's upper-backrest module would therefore be along the same plane in which the backrest inclination changes, because that placement causes the different LED beam cones to cover the angular sweep created by backrest recline. Placing the emitters in a lateral row unrelated to the recline plane would not predictably compensate for the backrest angle change. Thus, arranging the light sources so that the sources are aligned and disposed parallel to the seat's median longitudinal plane is the ordinary engineering implementation of Noshad's selectable beam concept in the aircraft-seat geometry taught by Puertolas and Jerrett.
It further would have been obvious to associate each light source with a respective sub-range of the predefined inclination range of the backrest. Noshad teaches that different LEDs are selected at different relative positions/angles and that the selected LED may change as the angle between the OWC devices changes. When the transmitter is fixed to an inclinable backrest as taught by Puertolas / Jerrett, those different relative positions correspond to different ranges of backrest inclination. A person of ordinary skill would have calibrated or assigned the beam cone of each LED to the corresponding backrest-inclination sub-range where that LED points most directly toward the remote Li-Fi receiver. Activating the light source associated with the sub-range in which the current backrest angle lies is therefore the predictable control implementation of Noshad's selected-LED teaching in the aircraft-seat Li-Fi environment.
Therefore, claim 9 would have been obvious over Puertolas in view of Noshad, further in view of Jerrett and Mizukami.
Claim 14
With respect to claim 14, all limitations of claim 9 are taught by Puertolas, Noshad, Jerrett and Mizukami. Claim 14 further recites that the Li-Fi module further comprises a casing to protect the at least two light sources and the at least one photoreceiver.
However, within analogous art, Puertolas expressly teaches that the communication device includes a transmitter and receiver in a protective casing and a casing/housing that protects and maintains the positioning of that protective casing:
“In particular embodiments of the invention, the communication device comprises a transmitter and a receiver arranged in a protective casing, the protective casing comprising a glazed portion facing the transmitter and the receiver. Such a glazed portion does not hinder the transmission/reception of optical signals originating from the data communication device or from the remote communication device.” [Puertolas, translation, p. 4].
“The transmitter 141 and the receiver 142 of the communication device 14 of the support are preferably arranged in a protective casing 143. Said protective casing preferably comprises a transparent glazed portion 144, facing the transmitter 141 and the receiver 142, so as not to interfere with the transmission/reception of the first and second signals.” [Puertolas, translation, p. 7].
“The protective casing 143 is preferably arranged in a casing 15 fixedly fixed to the front face 111 of the plate 11. The casing 15 preferably defines a hollow volume configured to receive the casing of the communication device. Such a casing 15 advantageously makes it possible to protect the protective casing 143 and therefore to maintain the positioning given to the protective casing.” [Puertolas, translation, p. 8].
It would have been obvious to retain the casing/protective housing arrangement of Puertolas when the transmitter/light source is modified to include multiple selectable LEDs as taught by Noshad. The same physical protection and orientation-maintaining functions remain necessary because the transmitter/light sources and photoreceiver are still mounted on the upper backrest in an aircraft cabin environment and must remain optically aligned with the remote
ceiling Li-Fi device. The predictable result is a Li-Fi module having a casing that protects the multiple light sources and the photoreceiver.
Therefore, claim 14 would have been obvious.
Claim 15
With respect to claim 15, all limitations of claim 9 are taught by Puertolas, Noshad, Jerrett and Mizukami. Claim 15 further recites an assembly comprising the seat of claim 9 and the Li-Fi device external to the seat, the Li-Fi module being positioned in an emission cone of the Li-Fi device.
However, within analogous art, Puertolas teaches an external remote communication device in the aircraft, preferably in the ceiling, and teaches orienting the seat communication device relative to the remote communication device so that transmission/reception can occur:
“The communication device 14 of the support is intended to be associated with a suitable communication device placed in the aircraft, called a remote communication device (not shown in the figures). The remote communication device is connected in particular with central processing units of the on-board multimedia systems (IFE). The remote communication device is preferably placed in a ceiling of the aircraft.” [Puertolas, translation, p. 7].
“Such a ball joint makes it possible to adjust the orientation of the protective casing 143, therefore of the communication device 14 of the support, relative to the remote communication device according to its location. The protective box 143 is oriented so that the
transmission/reception of the first and second signals between the two communication devices can be carried out.” [Puertolas, translation, p. 8].
“The casing 15 preferably comprises at least one opening 151, glazed or not, facing the transparent glazed portion 144 of the protective casing 143, so as not to hinder the transmission/reception of the first and second signals between the two detection devices. communication. Said opening of the housing 15 is arranged opposite the remote communication device. In the example where the remote communication device is arranged in the ceiling of the aircraft, said opening is opposite the ceiling, on an upper part of the casing, as illustrated in FIGS. 7 to 10.” [Puertolas, translation, p. 8].
Noshad additionally teaches that an optical wireless transmitter/receiver pair communicates by directing an optical emission from one optical wireless communication device to a receiver of another device:
“an optical wireless communication system configured to provide and receive information from an area network to an electronic device is described. In some configurations, the optical wireless communication system comprises a first optical wireless communication device configured to couple to the area network, the first optical wireless communication device comprising a first transmitter and a first receiver each electrically coupled to a first processor, and a second optical wireless communication device configured to couple to the electronic device, wherein the second optical wireless communication device comprises a second transmitter and a second receiver each electrically coupled to a second processor.” [Noshad, ¶ [0007], p. 16].
It would have been obvious that the upper-backrest Li-Fi module of the combined Puertolas / Noshad system is positioned in the emission cone or optical coverage region of the external ceiling Li-Fi device. Puertolas teaches that the seat communication device and remote ceiling communication device exchange bidirectional optical signals, and that the protective casing/opening is oriented so that the signals can be transmitted and received. For such bidirectional optical Li-Fi communication to occur, the Li-Fi module must be within the emission cone or field of view of the external Li-Fi device. Positioning the module within that emission cone is therefore a necessary and predictable arrangement for the assembly and would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art.
Therefore, claim 15 would have been obvious.
Claims 10-12 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103 as being unpatentable over Puertolas et al. in view of Noshad et al., further in view of Jerrett et al. and Mizukami et al., and further in view of Meyer (US11577629B2).
Claim 10
With respect to claim 10, all limitations of claim 9 are taught by Puertolas, Noshad, Jerrett and Mizukami as discussed above. Claim 10 further recites that the Li-Fi module includes a sensor to detect a position of the backrest and determine the angle of inclination of the backrest, and a controller configured to control the at least two light sources according to the angle of inclination of the backrest.
However, within analogous art, Jerrett expressly teaches position encoders for producing a position signal representing the position of the aircraft seat and a controller receiving that position signal:
“The actuators include position encoders for producing a position signal indicating if the seat is in the TTL position.” [Jerrett, p. 1, Abstract].
“The first and second actuators 3a, 3b include position encoders (not shown) for producing a position signal representing the position of the aircraft seat 1. In this embodiment, the position signal is either positive or negative, indicating that the aircraft seat is in or out of the TTL position respectively.” [Jerrett, p. 10, lines 15-19].
“The aircraft seat 1 also has a control panel 8 (which, in this embodiment, includes a controller 5) and a interface unit 9. The control panel 8 allows the seat occupant to command the first and second actuators 3a, 3b to move (thus moving the backrest 6 and footrest 7 away from or towards the TTL position) and is configured to receive the position signal from the actuators 3a, 3b.” [Jerrett, p. 10, lines 20-25].
“That is, the controller 5 receives the position, occupancy and belt signals from the position encoders, occupancy sensor 10 and seat-belt sensor 14 respectively. Firstly, the controller 5 checks if the seat 1 is in the TTL position by checking whether it has received a positive or negative signal from the position encoders.” [Jerrett, p. 11, lines 10-16].
Meyer further confirms that a known vehicle-seat management system includes a seat back, powered seat-adjustment actuators that incline or tilt the seat back, and sensors including an inclinometer:
“Various embodiments of the system can be used within automobiles, trains, and/or airplanes, as examples.” [Meyer, col. 2, lines 27-31].
“FIG. 1 illustrates a passenger 100 seated in a vehicular seat 105. A typical vehicular seat includes a head rest 110, a seat back 115, and a seat bottom 120.” [Meyer, col. 2, lines 44-48; FIG. 1].
“System 200 includes various powered seat adjustment actuators configured to move seat back 115 and seat bottom 120 in various manners, thereby altering the seating position formed by the seat.” [Meyer, col. 2, lines 49-55; FIG. 2].
“A fourth actuator A4 and a fifth actuator A5 operate to incline or tilt the seat back along an I axis and the seat bottom along a T axis, respectively.” [Meyer, col. 2, lines 65-67; col. 3, lines 1-2; FIG. 2].
“Sensor as used herein means a device that senses or measures a speed parameter and records, indicates, or otherwise responds to it. Examples of sensors include, but are not limited to, a Hall Effect sensor, a potentiometer, an encoder (linear, rotary, and/or optical), an accelerometer, a tilt sensor, a rangefinder, an inclinometer, a photodiode, motion detector, or a combination of any of the previous.” [Meyer, col. 16, lines 37-43].
Noshad teaches the controller/processor aspect that controls which light source is used for optical transmission based on position/angle relationship:
“The processor 230 may comprise executable instructions to permit selection of one or more of the LED's 210-218 for optical transmission to an optically coupled receiver.” [Noshad, ¶ [0056], p. 20].
“In operation, the response received by the receiver 314 can be used to determine which one or more of the LEDs 324, 326, 328 should provide the optical emission to the receiver 314.” [Noshad, ¶ [0058], p. 20].
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to use the aircraft-seat position encoders and controller arrangement of Jerrett and the seat-back inclination/inclinometer teachings of Meyer with the multiple selectable LEDs of Noshad in the upper-backrest Li-Fi module of Puertolas. The reason is that Noshad teaches selecting the light source based on relative position and angle, while Jerrett teaches obtaining seat/backrest position information using position encoders and a controller, and Meyer confirms that known vehicle-seat systems include powered actuators that incline or tilt a seat back and known sensors including an inclinometer. In the combined reclining-seat Li-Fi system, the backrest position or inclination signal, obtained using a known seat-position sensor such as Jerrett's encoder or Meyer's inclinometer, provides the needed indication of which angular sub-range the backrest currently occupies. The controller then controls the light sources according to that angle so that the selected source points toward the ceiling/remote Li-Fi device. This is a predictable use of Jerrett's known seat-position sensing, Meyer's known inclination-sensor option, and Noshad's known selected-LED optical transmission to maintain the Puertolas aircraft-seat Li-Fi link during backrest recline.
Therefore, claim 10 would have been obvious.
Claim 11
With respect to claim 11, all limitations of claim 10 are taught by Puertolas, Noshad, Jerrett, Mizukami and Meyer. Claim 11 further recites that the controller is configured to activate the light source associated with the sub-range in which the angle of inclination of the backrest lies.
However, within analogous art, Noshad expressly teaches selecting and using the LED that corresponds to the current relative position/angle:
“the OWC device can be configured to select the best LED that points towards a receiver for data transmission.” [Noshad, ¶ [0058], p. 20].
“As the position of the OWC device is changed (as shown in FIG. 4B), it may be desirable to use LED 426 to provide an optical emission to the receiver 410 to provide better optical communication between the receiver 410 and the OWC device comprising the LEDs 422, 424 and 426.” [Noshad, ¶ [0059], p. 20].
“Depending on the exact angle, however, the particular LED used may change from time to time as the angle between the OWC devices changes. This change permits dynamic adjustment of the system to reduce or avoid communication disruptions.” [Noshad, ¶ [0059], p. 20].
It would have been obvious to configure the controller in the combined system to activate the light source associated with the current inclination sub-range because Noshad teaches that the selected LED changes as the relative angle changes and that the selected LED provides the optical emission to the receiver. When Noshad is implemented on the inclinable upper-backrest module of Puertolas and Jerrett, the relative angle change is caused by the backrest entering
different inclination sub-ranges. Activating only the LED associated with the present sub-range is the direct and expected way to obtain the Noshad benefit of reliable optical communication and reduced power consumption, rather than energizing a wide beam or energizing all LEDs without regard to angle.
Therefore, claim 11 would have been obvious.
Claim 12
For purposes of prior-art rejection only, and without withdrawing any separate 35 U.S.C. §112(b) rejection and 35 U.S.C. §112(d) rejection.
With respect to claim 12, all limitations of claim 10 are taught by Puertolas, Noshad, Jerrett, Mizukami, and Meyer as set forth above. Claim 12 further recites that the sensor is an inclinometer or a time-of-flight distance sensor. For purposes of prior-art rejection only, claim 12 is interpreted as reciting the sensor of claim 10 as one of the listed alternative sensor types.
However, within analogous art, Meyer teaches a vehicle seat management system having a seat back, actuators that move/incline the seat back, and sensors including an inclinometer:
“Various embodiments of the system can be used within automobiles, trains, and/or airplanes, as examples.” [Meyer, col. 2, lines 27-31].
“FIG. 1 illustrates a passenger 100 seated in a vehicular seat 105. A typical vehicular seat includes a head rest 110, a seat back 115, and a seat bottom 120.” [Meyer, col. 2, lines 44-48; FIG. 1].
“System 200 includes various powered seat adjustment actuators configured to move seat back 115 and seat bottom 120 in various manners, thereby altering the seating position formed by the seat.” [Meyer, col. 2, lines 49-55; FIG. 2].
“A fourth actuator A4 and a fifth actuator A5 operate to incline or tilt the seat back along an I axis and the seat bottom along a T axis, respectively.” [Meyer, col. 2, lines 65-67; col. 3, lines 1-2; FIG. 2].
“Sensor as used herein means a device that senses or measures a speed parameter and records, indicates, or otherwise responds to it. Examples of sensors include, but are not limited to, a Hall Effect sensor, a potentiometer, an encoder (linear, rotary, and/or optical), an accelerometer, a tilt sensor, a rangefinder, an inclinometer, a photodiode, motion detector, or a combination of any of the previous.” [Meyer, col. 16, lines 37-43].
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to implement the seat/backrest position sensor of Jerrett as an inclinometer as taught by Meyer because both references are in the vehicle-seat control field and both address controlling or monitoring a movable/inclinable seat back. Jerrett teaches using position encoders to determine seat/backrest position for control, while Meyer teaches that known vehicle-seat systems include a tiltable/inclinable seat back and that known sensors for vehicle-seat systems include encoders, accelerometers, tilt sensors, rangefinders, and inclinometers. In the claimed aircraft-seat Li-Fi module, the purpose of the sensor is to determine the angle of inclination of the backrest. An inclinometer is a known sensor type for measuring inclination/tilt. Substituting or selecting an inclinometer for the known backrest-position sensing function would merely have used a known sensor for its
known purpose, namely measuring a tilt/inclination parameter of an adjustable backrest. The predictable result would be the sensor of claim 10 implemented as an inclinometer as recited in claim 12.
Therefore, claim 12 would have been obvious.
Claim 13 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103 as being unpatentable over Puertolas et al. in view of Noshad et al., further in view of Jerrett et al. and Mizukami et al., and further in view of Preuschl (US20110299292A1).
Claim 13
With respect to claim 13, all limitations of claim 9 are taught by Puertolas, Noshad, Jerrett and Mizukami as set forth above. Claim 13 further recites that each light source is soldered on a rigid printed circuit board and a flexible printed circuit board connects the rigid printed circuit boards together.
However, within analogous art, Preuschl teaches a rigid-flex mounting board for semiconductor light sources, including rigid support regions for mounting light sources and flexible support regions connecting the rigid support regions:
“The invention relates to a rigid-flex mounting board (“flexirigid support plate”) for at least one semiconductor light source, in particular an LED, a lamp device with at least one rigid-flex mounting board and a method for producing such a lamp device.” [Preuschl, ¶ [0001], p. 9].
“The rigid-flex (i.e. in part comparatively rigid and in part comparatively flexible) mounting board is installed as a mounting board for at least one semiconductor light source. The mounting board has at least one comparatively rigid support region for mounting the at least one semiconductor light source and a comparatively flexible support region, said flexible support region having been produced by thinning or narrowing of a rigid support region.” [Preuschl, ¶ [0005], p. 9].
“Any type of semiconductor light source is basically possible. The semiconductor light source can have one or more semiconductor emitters, in particular light emitting diodes (LEDs).” [Preuschl, ¶ [0006], p. 9].
“the Submount and the individual LED are advantageously electrically contacted by means of conventional connection types such as soldering to the mounting board.” [Preuschl, ¶ [0006], p. 9].
“The lamp device is fitted with at least one rigid-flex mounting board, at least one semiconductor light Source being mounted on at least one rigid-flex mounting board. This enables a lamp device to be provided whose light Sources can be inexpensively disposed compactly and in variety of configurations (position, alignment, etc.).” [Preuschl, ¶ [0016], p. 10].
“A driver for operating at least one of the semiconductor light Sources can preferably be mounted on at least one rigid support region. Electrical leads to the at least one semiconductor light source, and also between semiconductor light sources and between the
driver and a power terminal are present and can be routed e.g. via one or more wiring layers, e.g. via a copper layer, e.g. the copper cladding.” [Preuschl, ¶ [0017], p. 10].
“The rigid-flex mounting board can be used particularly advantageously with a retrofit lamp, the rigid-flex mounting board being at least partly accommodated in a translucent bulb.” [Preuschl, ¶ [0022], p. 10].
“FIG. 4A shows a sectional side view of another rigid-flex mounting board 11 ... having three rigid support regions 2 which are interconnected by two flexible, thinner Support regions 3, i.e. two rigid Support regions 2 are each connected by a flexible Support region 3. The upper sides of the rigid support regions 2 each contain a light emitting diode 12.” [Preuschl, ¶ [0048], p. 11].
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to mount the multiple LED/laser light sources of the combined Puertolas / Noshad upper-backrest Li-Fi module on the rigid-flex printed circuit arrangement of Preuschl. The combined seat module requires multiple light sources positioned at different angular orientations while remaining compact enough to be installed in the upper portion of an aircraft-seat backrest. Preuschl teaches the known solution for that exact physical packaging problem: multiple semiconductor light sources can be mounted on rigid support regions, with flexible support regions providing electrical connection and allowing the rigid regions to be bent or positioned at different orientations. Using soldered light sources on rigid PCB regions connected by a flexible PCB would have predictably provided stable mounting, compact routing, electrical interconnection, and angular placement for the multiple beams of Noshad in the Puertolas Li-Fi module. The modification would not change
the principle of operation of the Li-Fi system; it would merely provide a known circuit-board implementation for the multiple selectable light sources.
Therefore, claim 13 would have been obvious.
Claim 16 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103 as being unpatentable over Puertolas et al. in view of Noshad et al., further in view of Jerrett et al. and Mizukami et al., and further in view of Ayotte (US10693557B1) and Vargas (US20140226983A1).
Claim 16
With respect to claim 16, all limitations of claim 9 are taught by Puertolas, Noshad, Jerrett and Mizukami as set forth above. Claim 16 further recites an aircraft cabin comprising a plurality of seats of claim 9 and a plurality of Li-Fi devices, each Li-Fi module communicating with a corresponding Li-Fi device, each Li-Fi device comprising a light source and a photoreceiver.
However, within analogous art, Puertolas already teaches the aircraft cabin seat environment and the external remote ceiling Li-Fi device associated with the seat communication module:
“Figure 1 illustrates three 50-passenger airplane seats, of the economy class type, arranged one behind the other.” [Puertolas, translation, p. 4].
“The invention is described in the particular context of one of its preferred fields of application in which the support is intended to be installed on a seat arranged in a passenger cabin of an airliner.” [Puertolas, machine translation, p. 4].
“The communication device 14 of the support is intended to be associated with a suitable communication device placed in the aircraft, called a remote communication device (not shown in the figures). The remote communication device is connected in particular with central processing units of the on-board multimedia systems (IFE). The remote communication device is preferably placed in a ceiling of the aircraft.” [Puertolas, translation, p. 7].
Ayotte teaches applying Li-Fi communication in a vehicle/aircraft cabin having a plurality of seats and corresponding seatback devices, with overhead light systems and photodetectors for Li-Fi communication:
“In one embodiment, a system for providing dual fidelity communications on-board a vehicle that includes a plurality of seats having corresponding seatback devices installed thereat is provided.” [Ayotte, col. 1, lines 30-33].
“The system includes (1) a radio frequency (RF) router operatively connected to one or more wireless access points distributed throughout the vehicle; and (2) a light fidelity (LiFi) router operatively connected to a plurality of lights disposed within respective overhead light systems. Each of the lights are configured to emit light directed towards a photo-detector associated with a seat corresponding to the respective overhead light system (OLS).” [Ayotte, col. 1, lines 33-40].
“As seen in FIG. 1A, each of seatback devices 106 are positioned on a back surface of one of seats 102. For example, seatback device 106-1 is affixed to the back of seat 102-1.” [Ayotte, col. 4, lines 20-25].
“Above each of the seats 102, the centralized dual fidelity communication system 100 includes an overhead light system (OLS) 112 that includes various interfaces.” [Ayotte, col. 4, lines 30-35].
“As described herein, the OLS 112 may be configured to support LiFi communications via the reading light. In one embodiment, the reading light include two LEDs, one LED for communicating light in the visible spectrum when the passenger has enabled the reading light and one LED for communicating light outside of the visible spectrum when the passenger has disabled the reading light.” [Ayotte, col. 4, lines 39-47].
“the seats 102 also include a respective photo-detector 108 operatively connected to the seatback device 106.” [Ayotte, col. 4, lines 53-56].
Vargas further teaches an aircraft cabin with Li-Fi access points at passenger seat locations, and expressly teaches that each Li-Fi access point includes a photoreceptor and light source:
“A media distribution system for aircraft comprises a processor, an optical encoder/decoder, and an optical backbone. The processor is configured to retrieve digital media from an in-flight media node. The optical encoder/decoder is configured to optically encode the digital media. The optical backbone is configured to carry the encoded digital media between the optical encoder/decoder and a Li-Fi access point at a passenger seat location.” [Vargas, Abstract, p. 1].
“FIG. 1 illustrates aircraft 10 with cabin 12 housing seats 14 with passenger locations 16, and media distribution system 18. Media distribution system 18 comprises network hub 20, network backbone 22, and Li-Fi access points 24.” [Vargas, ¶ [0007], p. 5].
“Li-Fi access points 24 are optical wireless access points configured to communicate with Li-Fi capable passenger devices such as laptops, Smartphones, and/or tablets at passenger locations 16. Each Li-Fi access point includes at least one photoreceptor and at least one light source such as a light emitting diode (LED) or LED array.” [Vargas, ¶ [0010], p. 5].
“In the illustrated embodiment, each seat 14 is provided with its own dedicated Li-Fi access point 24 shared by all passenger locations 16 on seat 15. In alternative embodiments, each passenger location 16 may be provided with its own dedicated Li-Fi access point.” [Vargas, ¶ [0010], p. 5].
“Li-Fi access points 24 may be situated in passenger lighting fixtures, such as overhead directional lighting fixtures or wash lighting fixtures.” [Vargas, ¶ [0010], p. 5].
“Access points 24 can be situated unobtrusively in directed lighting assembly 204 with exposed LEDs near overhead directional lights 206, as shown in FIG. 3. Alternatively or additionally, some embodiments of media distribution system 18 may situate access points 24 within wash lighting 202. Access points 24 in wash lighting 202 or directed lighting assembly 204 are well situated to maintain unobstructed line-of-sight with Li-Fi capable devices at or near passenger locations 16.” [Vargas, ¶ [0016], p. 6].
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to provide the Puertolas / Noshad upper-backrest Li-Fi module arrangement for a plurality of seats in an aircraft cabin and to
provide a corresponding plurality of ceiling/overhead Li-Fi devices. Puertolas teaches the seat/backrest Li-Fi module and remote ceiling device. Ayotte teaches a vehicle/aircraft cabin communication system having a plurality of seats and respective overhead Li-Fi light systems/photo-detectors associated with seats. Vargas teaches that an aircraft media distribution system includes Li-Fi access points at passenger seat locations, and that each access point includes at least one photoreceptor and at least one light source such as an LED or LED array. The reason to combine is straightforward: aircraft cabins require service for multiple passenger seats, and both Ayotte and Vargas teach scaling Li-Fi communications across passenger seats using overhead/cabin Li-Fi devices. Applying the same upper-backrest module of claim 9 to each seat and pairing each module with a corresponding overhead Li-Fi device would predictably provide each passenger seat with a dedicated or corresponding Li-Fi connection while preserving the same line-of-sight Li-Fi architecture already taught by Puertolas and Vargas.
It further would have been obvious that each external Li-Fi device includes a light source and a photoreceiver. Puertolas teaches bidirectional communication between the seat module and the remote communication device. Vargas expressly teaches that each Li-Fi access point includes both a photoreceptor and a light source, and Ayotte teaches overhead light systems and associated photodetectors for Li-Fi communication with seatback devices. A bidirectional Li-Fi link necessarily uses an optical transmitter/light source for transmitting in one direction and a photoreceiver/photodetector for receiving in the other direction. Therefore, including
both a light source and a photoreceiver in each external Li-Fi device would have been the predictable implementation of the bidirectional aircraft-cabin Li-Fi communication architecture.
Therefore, claim 16 would have been obvious.
It is noted that any citations to specific, pages, columns, lines, or figures in the prior art references and any interpretation of the reference should not be considered to be limiting in any way. A reference is relevant for all it contains and may be relied upon for all that it would have reasonably suggested to one having ordinary skill in the art. See MPEP 2123.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Mohammed Abdelraheem, whose telephone number is (571) 272-0656. The examiner can normally be reached Monday–Thursday.
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, David Payne, can be reached at (571) 272-3024. 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.
/MOHAMMED ABDELRAHEEM/Examiner, Art Unit 2635
/DAVID C PAYNE/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2635
Prosecution Insights