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 .
Priority
Applicant’s claim for the benefit of a prior-filed application under 35 U.S.C. 119(e) or under 35 U.S.C. 120, 121, 365(c), or 386(c) is acknowledged. Applicant has not complied with one or more conditions for receiving the benefit of an earlier filing date under 35 U.S.C. 119(e) and 120 as follows:
The later-filed application must be an application for a patent for an invention which is also disclosed in the prior application (the parent or original nonprovisional application or provisional application). The disclosure of the invention in the parent application and in the later-filed application must be sufficient to comply with the requirements of 35 U.S.C. 112(a) or the first paragraph of pre-AlA 35 U.S.C. 112, except for the best mode requirement. See Transco Products, Inc. v. Performance Contracting, Inc., 38 F.3d 551, 32 USPQ2d 1077 (Fed. Cir. 1994).
The disclosure of the prior-filed application, parent applications, fails to provide adequate support or enablement in the manner provided by 35 U.S.C. 112(a) or pre-AlA 35 U.S.C. 112, first paragraph for one or more claims of this application. The claims recited and use elements “a sensor device’, “wireless communication module”, and “controller is configured to control the plurality of lighting elements based at least in part on information received from the sensor device” lack support in the specification and drawing of all the parent applications. Claims 1-25 are not entitled to the benefit of the prior applications: 17/329736, 16/940985, 16/559007, 15/901037, 15/448223.
Double Patenting
The nonstatutory double patenting rejection is based on a judicially created doctrine grounded in public policy (a policy reflected in the statute) so as to prevent the unjustified or improper timewise extension of the “right to exclude” granted by a patent and to prevent possible harassment by multiple assignees. A nonstatutory double patenting rejection is appropriate where the conflicting claims are not identical, but at least one examined application claim is not patentably distinct from the reference claim(s) because the examined application claim is either anticipated by, or would have been obvious over, the reference claim(s). See, e.g., In re Berg, 140 F.3d 1428, 46 USPQ2d 1226 (Fed. Cir. 1998); In re Goodman, 11 F.3d 1046, 29 USPQ2d 2010 (Fed. Cir. 1993); In re Longi, 759 F.2d 887, 225 USPQ 645 (Fed. Cir. 1985); In re Van Ornum, 686 F.2d 937, 214 USPQ 761 (CCPA 1982); In re Vogel, 422 F.2d 438, 164 USPQ 619 (CCPA 1970); In re Thorington, 418 F.2d 528, 163 USPQ 644 (CCPA 1969).
A timely filed terminal disclaimer in compliance with 37 CFR 1.321(c) or 1.321(d) may be used to overcome an actual or provisional rejection based on nonstatutory double patenting provided the reference application or patent either is shown to be commonly owned with the examined application, or claims an invention made as a result of activities undertaken within the scope of a joint research agreement. See MPEP § 717.02 for applications subject to examination under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA as explained in MPEP § 2159. See MPEP § 2146 et seq. for applications not subject to examination under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA . A terminal disclaimer must be signed in compliance with 37 CFR 1.321(b).
The filing of a terminal disclaimer by itself is not a complete reply to a nonstatutory double patenting (NSDP) rejection. A complete reply requires that the terminal disclaimer be accompanied by a reply requesting reconsideration of the prior Office action. Even where the NSDP rejection is provisional the reply must be complete. See MPEP § 804, subsection I.B.1. For a reply to a non-final Office action, see 37 CFR 1.111(a). For a reply to final Office action, see 37 CFR 1.113(c). A request for reconsideration while not provided for in 37 CFR 1.113(c) may be filed after final for consideration. See MPEP §§ 706.07(e) and 714.13.
The USPTO Internet website contains terminal disclaimer forms which may be used. Please visit www.uspto.gov/patent/patents-forms. The actual filing date of the application in which the form is filed determines what form (e.g., PTO/SB/25, PTO/SB/26, PTO/AIA /25, or PTO/AIA /26) should be used. A web-based eTerminal Disclaimer may be filled out completely online using web-screens. An eTerminal Disclaimer that meets all requirements is auto-processed and approved immediately upon submission. For more information about eTerminal Disclaimers, refer to www.uspto.gov/patents/apply/applying-online/eterminal-disclaimer.
Claims 1-21, 24-25 are rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claims 1-25 of U.S. Patent No. 12,129,995. Although the claims at issue are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other because, despite the claim recitations are merely reworded to recite the same limitation in different language and some of the limitations have been grouped in a slightly different manner, the instant claims are broader than and thus anticipated by the patent claims. All the elements and limitations are found in the patent claims 1-21, 24-25.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status.
The following is a quotation of the appropriate paragraphs of 35 U.S.C. 102 that form the basis for the rejections under this section made in this Office action:
A person shall be entitled to a patent unless –
(a)(1) the claimed invention was patented, described in a printed publication, or in public use, on sale, or otherwise available to the public before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claim(s) 1-5, 7-8, 10-11, 15-18, 20-25 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Altamura et al. (2015/0102731).
Claim 1, Altamura discloses a decorative lighting system (Figs. 1-2, 4, 15, 24). comprising:
a sensor device (sensor 86, Figs. 15, 24);
a wiring harness (20, 40a-40b, Fig. 4) comprising an insulated conductor (inherent element of strings/wires 20) of and a plurality of lighting elements (bulb/lamp 22, Fig. 1);
a controller (Control Box 88, Figs. 15, 24) in communication with the wiring harness (strings/wires 20 wrap around Christmas tree) and the sensor device (sensor 86), the controller comprising a processor (see P[0279]-[0280],... Micro controller...), a memory (inherent element, see P0193]...a pre-made function stored on the controller 26...), and a wireless communication module (see P[0199]... The control box can include a radio receiver/transmitter, Bluetooth.RTM., WIFI, etc....); and
wherein the controller is configured to control the plurality of lighting elements based at least in part on information received from the sensor device (see P[0231]-[0243] and P[0288]-[0290]).
Claim 2, Altamura discloses the decorative lighting system of claim 1, wherein the plurality of lighting elements are incandescent lights, LED lights (Fig. 19 and see P[0188]... LED 46 (FIGS. 16-19 and 23) may include an RGB color set of three colors independently controllable LED chips 50/50a or one or more colors with (or without) a white LED 48/48a...), or fiber optic lights.
Claim 3, Altamura discloses the decorative lighting system of claim 1, wherein the plurality of lighting elements comprise variable-color LED lights (see P[0188]…LED 46 (FIGS. 16-19 and 23) may include an RGB color set of three colors independently controllable LED chips 50/50a or one or more colors with (or without) a white LED 48/48a...).
Claim 4, Altamura discloses the decorative lighting system of claim 1, wherein the sensor device comprises an optical sensor (see P[0236],...Sensors can be types currently known as photocells,... PIR (passive infra-red)...).
Claim 5, Altamura discloses the decorative lighting system of claim 1, wherein the sensor device comprises an audio sensor (see P[0288]-[0290]... a sensor 86 which may be a microphone or an input for an audio feed, such as music....).
Claim 7, Altamura discloses the decorative lighting system of claim 1, wherein the controller is configured to receive luminous intensity data from the sensor device (see P[0066]... an ambient light sensor for measuring ambient light before illumination
of the lamps and further matching the illumination of the LEDs to reproduce said ambient color temperature; and see P[0088]-[0089],... using a color sensor to copy/detect the color of a sensed object..... converting the detected color information into a digital signal comprising RBG color intensities... ).
Claim 8, Altamura discloses the decorative lighting system of claim 1, wherein the controller is configured to receive human movement data from the sensor device (see P[0243],... as a person walks past the sensor the PIR detects the motion and tells the lighting controller to change function....).
Claim 10, Altamura discloses the decorative lighting system of claim 1, wherein the controller is configured to adjust a voltage applied to the plurality of lighting elements through the wiring harness (see P[0051]... this can be done by increasing voltage or current...).
Claim 11, Altamura discloses the decorative lighting system of claim 1, further comprising a wireless communication device (controller 30, Fig. 1 and see P[0178]... user controller is a wirelessly enabled device such as a smart phone, pc, tablet, etc... .) in communication with the controller.
Claims 15-18 are rejected as above claims because the elements and limitations are similar.
Claim 20, Altamura discloses the method of claim 16, wherein the determining, based on the detected input, an appropriate light setting comprises receiving, through a wireless communication device (see P[0199]... The control box can include a radio receiver/transmitter, Bluetooth.RTM., WIFI, etc....), a preferred light setting of a user
(see P[0199] and P[0255]... pre-programmed or programmed on the fly, on a PC or smart device 30 and then downloaded to the control box....).
Claim 21, Altamura discloses the method of claim 16, wherein the appropriate light setting comprises a brightness level (see P[0044]... change brightness/dim...).
Claim 22, Altamura discloses the method of claim 16, wherein the appropriate light setting comprises an illumination sequence (see P[0184]... combinations can be combined into a function and functions can be sequentially executed ...., and see P[0201]… chase individual colors through a string, one bulb at a time…).
Claim 23, Altamura discloses the method of claim 16, wherein the appropriate light setting comprises a color (see P[0041]... change the illumination color of said lamps responsive to that sensor... ).
Claim 24, Altamura discloses the method of claim 16, wherein the output is a voltage (see P[0051]... increasing the actual light intensity of one LED relative to the other until the desired color temperature is perceived, this can be done by increasing voltage...; and see P[0179]... the flow of the current/voltage to the string of lights....).
Claim 25, Altamura discloses the method of claim 16, wherein the output is a control signal (see P[0179]... commands can be sent to individual bulbs. These addressable bulbs or LEDs may have a local microprocessor and control unit to determine how much power to send to each LED to which the processor is associated and the type of flow control...).
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status.
The following is a quotation of 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) 6, 9, 12-14, 19 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Altamura et al. (2015/0102731).
Claims 6, 9 and 19, Altamura discloses the claimed invention except for wherein the sensor device comprises a thermal sensor. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill before the effective filing date of the claimed invention was made to provide the sensor device as a thermal sensor, since it has been held to be within the general skill of a worker in the art to select a known material on the basis of its suitability for the intended use as a matter of obvious design choice.
Claims 12-14, Altamura wherein the wiring harness is secured to an artificial tree (see Figs. 15, 24), therefore, Altamura discloses the claimed invention except for wherein the wiring harness is permanently secured to an artificial tree, an artificial garland, or an artificial wreath. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill before the effective filing date of the claimed invention was made to secure the wiring harness permanently to an artificial tree, an artificial garland, or an artificial wreath, since it has been held that forming in one piece an article which has formerly been formed in two pieces and put together involves only routine skill in the art.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Ruxton (6,285,140) disclose a decorative lighting system comprising: a temperature sensor device; plurality of lighting elements in a string; a controller in communication with the string and the temperature sensor device, the controller comprising a processor and a memory; and wherein the controller is configured to control the plurality of lighting elements based at least in part on information received from the temperature sensor device.
Loomis (2015/0359066) and HWA et al. (2016/0330823) discloses a decorative lighting system comprising: a sensor device; a wiring harness comprising an insulated conductor and a plurality of lighting elements; a controller in communication with the wiring harness and the sensor device, the controller comprising a processor, a memory, and a wireless communication module; and wherein the controller is configured to control the plurality of lighting elements based at least in part on information received from the sensor device.
/ANH Q TRAN/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2844 Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ANH Q TRAN whose telephone number is (571)272-1813. The examiner can normally be reached M-F: 9AM - 5PM.
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, Alexander H Taningco can be reached at 571-272-8048. 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 Q TRAN/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2844 12/13/25