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, 2, 5-7, 10-12, and 16-20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Hamasaki (US 10,100,989) in view of Hsu (US 2015/0102919).
Regarding claim 1, Hamasaki discloses a modular smart light method for providing safety illumination during a user's operation of a vehicle, the method comprising:
attaching a modular smart light 2 to a front mount 50 (figure 7A), the modular smart light programmed to display a plurality of light operations, including a headlight operation 24, a taillight operation 26, a blinking operation (column 3, lines 20-27);
determining whether the modular smart light is oriented in a front orientation or a rear orientation (figures 7A, 7B);
determining with a sensor of the smart light (col 4, lines 42-43);
operating the modular smart light in a front orientation mode based upon the determination that the modular smart light is in the front orientation (figure 7A);
switching (column 3, lines 20-27) the modular smart light from operating in the front orientation mode to operating the modular smart light in a rear orientation mode based upon the determination that the modular smart light has moved from the front orientation to a rear orientation (figure 7B); and
attaching the modular smart light to a rear mount (figure 7B);
wherein the headlight operation is displayed in the front orientation mode (figure 7A), and the taillight operation is displayed in the rear orientation mode (figure 7B, column 3, lines 20-27, col. 4, lines 26-32).
Hamasaki does not disclose a left turn signal operation, and a right turn signal operation; a sensor for determining whether the modular smart light is oriented in a front orientation or a rear orientation; and switching the smart light based upon the determination of the sensor. Hsu teaches the use of a left turn signal operation 343, and a right turn signal operation 343; a sensor 32, 325, for determining whether the modular smart light is oriented in a front orientation or a rear orientation; and switching the smart light based upon the determination of the sensor (paragraph 21). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to include a left turn signal operation, and a right turn signal operation; a sensor for determining whether the modular smart light is oriented in a front orientation or a rear orientation; and switching the smart light based upon the determination of the sensor to the method of Hamasaki as taught by Hsu for the purpose of effectively providing safety illumination during a user’s operation of a vehicle.
Regarding claim 17, Hamasaki discloses a modular smart light system for providing safety illumination during a user's operation of a vehicle, the system comprising:
a modular smart light 2 attached to a front mount 50 (figure 7A), the modular smart light configured to display a plurality of light operations, including a headlight operation 24, a taillight operation 26, a blinking operation (column 3, lines 20-27);
a sensor (column 4, lines 42-43); and
a processor U2 (col. 4, lines 26-30) configured to operate the modular smart light in a front orientation mode based upon the determination of the modular smart light being in the front orientation;
wherein the processor is configured to switch the modular smart light from operating in the front orientation mode to operating the modular smart light in a rear orientation mode based upon the determination of the modular smart light having moved from the front orientation to a rear orientation (figures 7A, 7B);
wherein the headlight operation is configured to be displayed in the front orientation mode, and the taillight operation is configured to be displayed in the rear orientation mode (figure 7B, column 3, lines 20-27, col. 4, lines 26-32).
Hamasaki does not disclose a left turn signal operation, and a right turn signal operation; a sensor for determining whether the modular smart light is oriented in a front orientation or a rear orientation; and switching the smart light based upon the determination of the sensor. Hsu teaches the use of a left turn signal operation 343, and a right turn signal operation 343; a sensor 32, 325, for determining whether the modular smart light is oriented in a front orientation or a rear orientation; and switching the smart light based upon the determination of the sensor (paragraph 21). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to include a left turn signal operation, and a right turn signal operation; a sensor for determining whether the modular smart light is oriented in a front orientation or a rear orientation; and switching the smart light based upon the determination of the sensor to the system of Hamasaki as taught by Hsu for the purpose of effectively providing safety illumination during a user’s operation of a vehicle.
Regarding claim 19, Hamasaki discloses a modular smart light to display a plurality of light operations, including a headlight operation 24, a taillight operation 26, a blinking operation (column 3, lines 20-27);
determining whether the modular smart light is oriented in a front orientation or a rear orientation (figures 7A, 7B);
determining with a sensor of the smart light (col 4, lines 42-43);
operating the modular smart light in a front orientation mode based upon the determination that the modular smart light is in the front orientation (figure 7A);
switching (column 3, lines 20-27) the modular smart light from operating in the front orientation mode to operating the modular smart light in a rear orientation mode based upon the determination that the modular smart light has moved from the front orientation to a rear orientation (figure 7B);
wherein the headlight operation is displayed in the front orientation mode (figure 7A), and the taillight operation is displayed in the rear orientation mode (figure 7B, column 3, lines 20-27, col. 4, lines 26-32).
Hamasaki does not disclose a non-transitory computer-readable storage medium having program instructions stored thereon, that when executed by at least one processor, cause the at least one processor to perform steps comprising programming, a left turn signal operation, and a right turn signal operation; a sensor for determining whether the modular smart light is oriented in a front orientation or a rear orientation; and switching the smart light based upon the determination of the sensor. Hsu teaches the use of a non-transitory computer-readable storage medium 312 having program instructions stored thereon, that when executed by at least one processor 311, cause the at least one processor to perform steps comprising programming (figure 2A, p. 23), a left turn signal operation 343, and a right turn signal operation 343; a sensor 32, 325, for determining whether the modular smart light is oriented in a front orientation or a rear orientation; and switching the smart light based upon the determination of the sensor (paragraph 21). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to include a non-transitory computer-readable storage medium having program instructions stored thereon, that when executed by at least one processor, cause the at least one processor to perform steps comprising programming, a left turn signal operation, and a right turn signal operation; a sensor for determining whether the modular smart light is oriented in a front orientation or a rear orientation; and switching the smart light based upon the determination of the sensor to the smart light of Hamasaki as taught by Hsu for the purpose of effectively providing safety illumination during a user’s operation of a vehicle.
Regarding claims 2, 18, and 20, Hamasaki (modified by Hsu) discloses all the claimed subject matter as set forth above in the rejection of claim 1, but does not disclose automatically switching a display side of the left turn signal operation and right turn signal operation based upon the determination of the sensor. Hsu further teaches the use of automatically switching a display side of the left turn signal operation 343 and right turn signal operation 343 based upon the determination of the sensor (p. 21). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to include automatically switching a display side of the left turn signal operation and right turn signal operation based upon the determination of the sensor to the method of Hamasaki as taught by Hsu for the purpose of effectively providing safety illumination during a user’s operation of a vehicle.
Regarding claim 5, Hamasaki (modified by Hsu) discloses wherein determining, with the sensor, whether the modular smart light is oriented in the front orientation or the rear orientation comprises detecting a position of the modular smart light relative to the mount (Hamasaki, figures 7A-7B).
Regarding claim 6, Hamasaki discloses wherein detecting the position of the modular smart light relative to the mount includes one or more of the following: detecting a wireless signal from the mount; detecting a magnetic field from the mount; and detecting a physical shape of the mount (figures 7A-7B).
Regarding claim 7, Hamasaki discloses wherein the front mount is located on one of the following: a front of the vehicle (figure 7A), a front of a helmet, and a front of a backpack; wherein the rear mount is located on one of the following: a rear of the vehicle (figure 7B), a rear of the helmet, and a rear of the backpack.
Regarding claim 10, Hamasaki discloses wherein the modular smart light can be at least partially received within a cradle 6, 30, of the front mount and/or a cradle (6, 30) of the rear mount in a plurality of different relative orientations, including a positive relative orientation and a negative relative orientation (figures 7A-7C); and wherein the cradle of the front mount and/or a cradle of the rear mount are asymmetrically-shaped such that the modular smart light is physically blocked from being fully received by the cradle in the negative relative orientation, and fully received by the cradle in the positive relative orientation (figures 7A-7B).
Regarding claim 11, Hamasaki (modified by Hsu) discloses wherein determining, with the sensor of the modular smart light, whether the modular smart light is oriented in the front orientation or the rear orientation is performed prior to the attaching the modular smart light to the front mount (figures 7A-7B).
Regarding claim 12, Hamasaki discloses wherein the vehicle includes: a bicycle, an electric scooters, a hover board, and a skateboard (column 1, lines 20-24).
Regarding claim 16, Hamasaki (modified by Hsu) discloses all the claimed subject matter as set forth above in the rejection of claim 1, but does not disclose adjusting at least one visual parameter of the plurality of light operations of the modular smart light via wireless communication with a first electronic device; and controlling the modular smart light to display the left turn signal operation, and to display a right turn signal operation with a second electronic device. Hsu teaches the use of adjusting at least one
visual parameter of a plurality of light operations of a modular smart light via wireless communication with a first electronic device 4 (paragraph 23); and controlling the modular smart light to display the left turn signal operation, and to display a right turn signal operation with a second electronic device (figure 4). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to include adjusting at least one visual parameter of the plurality of light operations of the modular smart light via wireless communication with a first electronic device; and controlling the modular smart light to display the left turn signal operation, and to display a right turn signal operation with a second electronic device to the method of Hamasaki as taught by Hsu for the purpose of effectively providing safety illumination during a user’s operation of a vehicle.
Claim(s) 3-4 and 13-14 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Hamasaki and Hsu as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Juang (US 2013/0285802).
Regarding claim 3, Hamasaki (modified by Hsu) discloses all the claimed subject matter as set forth above in the rejection of claim 1, but does not disclose the sensor being a position sensor configured to measure angular position of the modular smart light. Juang teaches the use of a sensor being a position sensor configured to measure angular position of a modular smart light (p. 23 ). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to include the sensor being a position sensor configured to measure angular position of the modular smart light to the method of Hamasaki (modified by Hsu) as taught by Juang for the purpose of effectively determining the position of the smart light.
Regarding claim 4, Hamasaki (modified by Hsu and Juang) discloses all the claimed subject matter as set forth above in the rejection of claim 1, but does not disclose the sensor including one or more of the following: a gyroscope and an accelerometer. Hsu teaches the use of the sensor including one or more of the following: a gyroscope 325 and an accelerometer 323. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to incorporate the sensor including one or more of the following: a gyroscope and an accelerometer to the method of Hamasaki as taught by Hsu for the purpose of effectively determining the position of the smart light.
Regarding claim 13-14, Hamasaki (modified by Hsu) discloses all the claimed subject matter as set forth above in the rejection of claim 1, and further discloses switching the modular smart light from operating in the front orientation mode to operating the modular smart light in a rear orientation mode based upon the determination of the sensor that the modular smart light has moved from the front orientation to a rear orientation (column 2, lines 39-47), but does not disclose determining, with the sensor of the modular smart light, an angular orientation of the modular smart light; determining that the angular orientation of the modular smart light has changed more than an angular threshold during a predetermined period of time (claim 13); the angular threshold being greater than or equal to 45° angular threshold and the predetermined period of time is greater than or equal to ten seconds (claim 14). Juang teaches the use of determining, with a sensor of a modular smart light, an angular orientation of the modular smart light (p. 23); determining that the angular orientation of the modular smart light has changed more than an angular threshold during a predetermined period of time (claim 23). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to incorporate determining, with the sensor of the modular smart light, an angular orientation of the modular smart light; determining that the angular orientation of the modular smart light has changed more than an angular threshold during a predetermined period of time to the method of Hamasaki (modified by Hsu) as taught by Juang for the purpose of effectively determining the position of the smart light. Also, according to MPEP 2144.05, II. ROUTINE OPTIMIZATION, A) Optimization Within Prior Art Conditions or Through Routine Experimentation, note In re Geisler, 116 F.3d 1465, 43 USPQ2d 1362 (Fed. Cir. 1997); Smith v. Nichols, 88 U.S. 112, 118-19 (1874) (a change in form, proportions, or degree "will not sustain a patent"); In re Williams, 36 F.2d 436, 438 (CCPA 1929) ("It is a settled principle of law that a mere carrying forward of an original patented conception involving only change of form, proportions, or degree, or the substitution of equivalents doing the same thing as the original invention, by substantially the same means, is not such an invention as will sustain a patent, even though the changes of the kind may produce better results than prior inventions."). See also KSR Int’l Co. v. Teleflex Inc., 550 U.S. 398, 416 (2007) (identifying "the need for caution in granting a patent based on the combination of elements found in the prior art."). The concept of changing the angular threshold and the predetermined period of time in this claim involves only change of proportions of the materials, or the result of “routine optimization”. It would have been a “routine optimization” for a person having ordinary skill in the art to elect the angular threshold being greater than or equal to 45° angular threshold and the predetermined period of time is greater than or equal to ten seconds to the method of Hamasaki (modified by Hsu) as taught by Juang for the purpose of effectively determining the position of the smart light.
Claim(s) 8-9 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Hamasaki and Hsu as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Clyde (US 2016/0144917).
Regarding claims 8-9, Hamasaki (modified by Hsu) discloses all the claimed subject matter as set forth above in the rejection of claim 1, but does not disclose a magnetic attachment system (claim 8); the modular smart light being at least partially received within the front mount and/or the rear mount in a plurality of different relative orientations, including a positive relative orientation and a negative relative orientation; the magnetic attachment system comprising a plurality of magnets in a pattern of different polar orientations on the front mount and/or the rear mount; the pattern of different polar orientations being complimentary to a pattern of polar orientations of a plurality magnets on the modular smart light, such that the modular smart light is attracted to the front mount or the rear mount in the positive relative orientation, and the modular smart light is repelled from the front mount or the rear mount in the negative relative orientation (claim 9). Clyde teaches the use of a magnetic attachment system 108, 501 (p. 31, p. 32); a modular smart light being at least partially received within a front mount and/or a rear mount in a plurality of different relative orientations, including a positive relative orientation and a negative relative orientation (figures 5A, 5B, 6); the magnetic attachment system comprising a plurality of magnets 108, 501, in a pattern of different polar orientations on the front mount and/or the rear mount; the pattern of different polar orientations being complimentary to a pattern of polar orientations of a plurality magnets (108, 501) on the modular smart light, such that the modular smart light is attracted to the front mount or the rear mount in the positive relative orientation, and the modular smart light is repelled from the front mount or the rear mount in the negative relative orientation (figures 5A, 5B, 6). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to incorporate a magnetic attachment system; the modular smart light being at least partially received within the front mount and/or the rear mount in a plurality of different relative orientations, including a positive relative orientation and a negative relative orientation; the magnetic attachment system comprising a plurality of magnets in a pattern of different polar orientations on the front mount and/or the rear mount; the pattern of different polar orientations being complimentary to a pattern of polar orientations of a plurality magnets on the modular smart light, such that the modular smart light is attracted to the front mount or the rear mount in the positive relative orientation, and the modular smart light is repelled from the front mount or the rear mount in the negative relative orientation to the method of Hamasaki (modified by Hsu) as taught by Clyde for the purpose of effectively mounting the smart light to the vehicle.
Claim(s) 15 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Hamasaki and Hsu as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Poole (US 2019/0144062).
Regarding claim 15, Hamasaki (modified by Hsu) discloses all the claimed subject matter as set forth above in the rejection of claim 1, and further discloses an array of light-emitting diodes 24, 26, configured to display red and white (column 2, lines 48-58),
but does not disclose the array of light-emitting diodes configured to display red, green, and blue light. Poole teaches the use of an array of light-emitting diodes configured to display red, green, and blue light (paragraph 9). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to incorporate the array of light-emitting diodes configured to display red, green, and blue light to the method of Hamasaki (modified by Hsu) as taught by Poole for the purpose of effectively providing safety illumination during a user’s operation of a vehicle.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Yun and McAleese disclose lighting systems.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ANH V LA whose telephone number is (571)272-2970. The examiner can normally be reached 8:30 AM-5:00 PM.
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, Quan-Zhen Wang can be reached at 571-272-3114. 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.
/ANH V LA/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2685
ANH V. LA
Primary Examiner
Art Unit 2685
Al
December 30, 2025