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 .
This is a first office action in response to the instant application for letters patent filed on 29 October 2024. Claims 1-20 are presented for examination.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(b):
(b) CONCLUSION.—The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112 (AIA ), second paragraph:
The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the applicant regards as his invention.
Claim 19 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (AIA ), second paragraph, as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor (or for applications subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the applicant), regards as the invention.
Claim 19, line 8, recites the limitation "the home appliance". There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on 05/21/25 and 02/02/26 was filed before the mailing date of the first office action on the merits. The submission is in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statement is being considered by the examiner.
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.
The factual inquiries for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows:
1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art.
2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue.
3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art.
4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness.
This application currently names joint inventors. In considering patentability of the claims the examiner presumes that the subject matter of the various claims was commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the claimed invention(s) absent any evidence to the contrary. Applicant is advised of the obligation under 37 CFR 1.56 to point out the inventor and effective filing dates of each claim that was not commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the later invention in order for the examiner to 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 later invention.
Claim(s) 1-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Lee et al. hereinafter Lee Pub Number 20210297278.
As per claim 1, Lee teaches A home appliance system (see abstract, Internet home appliance system) comprising: a home appliance (see abstract, par 0027 home appliance) ; a terminal configured to determine recommended settings information based on input information (see par 0008, preset temperature, preset coffee; see par 0071 as well); and a server configured to: receive the recommended settings information from the terminal (see par 0008, 0065, and 0092-0094 discuss presetting/recommended information) ; store the received recommended settings information (see par 0092-0094); and transmit the recommended settings information to the home appliance, and a communication connection being established between the server and the home appliance, wherein the home appliance applies the recommended settings information (see par 0065 in regard to connection establishment; see par 0092-0094 for presetting/recommendation).
Lee does not mention that “based on the delivery of the home appliance being completed. To the extent that applicant argues that this feature is not disclosed by Lee, the Examiner (takes official notice) concludes that the system effectively completes all these steps such as recommended settings and connection establishing with the server for transmitting the recommended setting information to the home appliance so, as to end or complete a defined cycle. Therefore, one skill artisan before the effective date would suggest and acknowledge that the delivery of the home appliance is somehow implicit in the schema to effectively complete the cycle.
As per claim 2, Lee teaches the home appliance system of claim 1, wherein the server comprises: a first server configured to store the recommended settings information and to transmit the recommended settings information to the home appliance; and a second server configured to transmit delivery information to the first server (see fig 4 which discusses server which can be more than one server, see par 0068 and par 0092 for the recommendation and transmission; furthermore, see the reasoning statement of claim 1 in regard to delivery and transmission)).
As per claim 3, Lee teaches the home appliance system of claim 1, wherein the terminal is configured to: display a first user interface screen configured to guide registration of the home appliance using a management application, based on receiving delivery completion information of the home appliance; and display a second user interface screen configured to provide the recommended settings information, based on the management application being executed after the home appliance is registered (see fig 1-4; abstract) .
As per claim 4, Lee teaches the home appliance system of claim 1, wherein the terminal is configured to: display a first user interface screen configured to guide registration of the home appliance using a management application, based on receiving delivery completion information of the home appliance; and display a second user interface screen configured to provide the recommended settings information, based on the home appliance being registered (see fig 1-4 and abstract; par 0092).
As per claim 5, Lee teaches the home appliance system of claim 1, wherein the terminal is configured to: register the home appliance with a management application and display a user interface screen configured to provide the recommended settings information, based on receiving delivery completion information of the home appliance (see fig 3, item S80 and par 0065 and 0092).
As per claim 6, Lee teaches the home appliance system of claim 1, wherein the server is configured to transmit the recommended settings information to the home appliance, based on recipient information of the home appliance (see par 0065 and 0092-0094 which discusses setting and or recommendation).
As per claim 7, Lee teaches the home appliance system of claim 6, wherein the terminal is a terminal corresponding to the recipient information (see fig 5-7 for terminal).
As per claim 8, Lee implicitly teaches the home appliance system of claim 6, wherein a user interface screen provided to a recipient of the home appliance is configured differently from a user interface screen provided to a purchasing contractor of the home appliance, based on the recipient of the home appliance being different from the purchasing contractor of the home appliance (fig 7 shows a screen). It must be noted a skill artisan at the effective date of the invention as claimed would acknowledge that that a user interface screen would always be different than a contractor screen because their goals and purposes are different.
As per claim 9, Lee teaches the home appliance system of claim 1, wherein the terminal provides usage tips information of the home appliance (see fig 4-7, course).
As per claim 10-20, they contain the same limitations as claims 1-9 discussed above. Therefore, they are rejected under the same rationale.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to FRANTZ B JEAN whose telephone number is (571)272-3937. The examiner can normally be reached 8-5 M-F.
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, Glenton Burgess can be reached at 5712723949. 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.
/FRANTZ B JEAN/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2454