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 .
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on 04/23/2025. The submission is in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statement is being considered by the examiner.
Drawings
The drawings were received on 11/27/2024. These drawings are accepted.
Claim Objections
Claims 6, 8, 13, and 15 are objected to because of the following informalities: Claim 6, 2nd line recites “USB interface or an ARGB”, both terms “USB”/”ARGB” should be spelt out at least once. Similar term issues present in claim 13, line 2. Claim 8, 2nd line recites “HDMI, DP, or USB”, all three such terms should be spelt out at least once. Similar term issues present in claim 15, line 2. Appropriate correction is required.
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.
Claims 1-7, 9-14, and 16-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over KINSTLE, III (USPGPUB No. 2018/0341297 A1) in view of Coleman et al. (USPGPUB No. 2021/0112647 A1).
Referring to claim 1, Kinstle discloses a transmission line device, comprising {“smart computer case 100”, see Fig. 1 [0011], 1st sentence}:
a connector including {“MCU 101 communicates with the host computer [a connector on] USB bus through USB interface”, see Fig. 1, [0019]}:
a first connection interface {“USB interface 204”, see Fig. 2 [0019]}; and
a circuit board {“probes the USB bus [on an appropriate circuit board] of the host computer”, see Fig. 3 [0021], last two sentences} coupled to the first connection interface {“smart computer case [board] has three slots available for [coupling to] installing RGB LED lighting strips and only two RGB LED lighting strips have been installed in the smart computer case,”, see Fig. 3 [0025]}; and
a transmission cable {“an end-user may configure the RGB lighting effects, and fan speed control through a user interface [and an appropriate transmission cable].”, see Figs. 2 and 4 [0019], last two sentences} connected to the connector with a first end of the transmission cable {first send of said couple as claimed “end-user's configuration inputs can be communicated to MCU 101 through USB interface 204,”, see Fig. 2 [0019], last sentence}, including:
an electric transmission part coupled {“micro controller unit”, see Figs. 1, 2, and 4 [0028], 1st sentence} to the first connection interface through the circuit board {“micro controller unit associated [connected] with the control and monitoring of various components”, see Figs. 1, 2, and 4 [0028], 1st sentence} and configured to transmit at least one electrical signal {“there be only one LED port through which MCU 101 can control each of the addressable RGB LEDs associated with any lighting” through an appropriate electrical signal, see Fig. 4 [0028]} from the first connection interface to a second end of the transmission cable {“there may be more than [second end] 2 LED ports for controlling addressable”, see Fig. 4 [0028]};
Kinstle does not appear to explicitly disclose a light-emitting part coupled to the circuit board and having at least one light-emitting element; wherein the light-emitting part receives, from the circuit board, a light control signal configured to control the at least one light-emitting element.
However, Coleman discloses a light-emitting part coupled {“AVLED comprises a multi-sensor hardware component comprising two or more sensors” ([0106], 1st sentence) such AVLED includes light-emitting part “inorganic light emitting diode, organic light emitting diode, active matrix organic light emitting diode, micro-light” ([0034], 1st two sentences)} to the circuit board {“integrated component that can be placed on a rigid or flexible circuit board”, see Fig. 3 and 4 [0106]} and having at least one light-emitting element {“AVLED comprises a spatial array light source comprising a micro-LED array wherein each micro-LED”, see Fig. 3 and 4 [0037]}; wherein the light-emitting part receives, from the circuit board, a light control signal {“[light control signal] determining the ambient lighting map includes turning off (or reducing) light flux output for one or more (preferably all) light emitting devices in environment”, [0289], 1st sentence} configured to control {“emitting devices controllable by the system comprising one or more AVLEDs”, see Figs. 3 and 4 [0289]} the at least one light-emitting element {“controllable by the system comprising one or more AVLEDs, light emitting devices with a constant relative angular light output profile…”, see Figs. 3 and 4 [0289]}.
Kinstle and Coleman are analogous because they are from the same field of endeavor, managing/coordinating light source(s) electronically.
Before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, having the teachings of Kinstle and Coleman before him or her, to modify Kinstle’s “smart computer case 100” along with “micro controller unit” incorporating Coleman’s “light feature map” and appropriate control signals (see Figs. 3 and 4, [0289]).
The suggestion/motivation for doing so would have been to implement a processor on the AVLED or remote to the AVLED and in communication with the AVLED processes the image or light sensor input to identify one or more objects in the environment, determines one or more angular bins corresponding to the one or more objects by choosing an illuminance and/or color between the illuminance values for the spatial zones adjacent the central spatial zone being evaluated such that there is a smoother transition (no harsh illuminance or color boundaries, or visibly bright, dark, or colored spots or regions (Col man [0241] paraphrased).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to combine Coleman with Kinstle to obtain the invention as specified in the instant claim(s).
As per claim 2, the rejection of claim 1 is incorporated and Kinstle discloses wherein the connector further includes a light control interface coupled to the circuit board {“discover any [light control interface] smart case controllers (e.g., MCU 101) installed in the host computer”, see Fig. 3, [0021], last two sentences}; and wherein the light control signal is provided to the light-emitting part {“there be only one LED port through which MCU 101 can control each of the addressable RGB LEDs associated with any lighting” through an appropriate electrical signal, see Fig. 4 [0028]} from the light control interface through the circuit board {“smart computer case is flashed onto MCU 101 when MCU 101 is factory installed [along with the circuit board]”, see Fig. 3, [0027], 1st sentence}.
As per claim 3, the rejection of claim 2 is incorporated and Kinstle discloses wherein the light control interface is connected to a main part of the connector {“[main part] the LED hub/data distributor device”, see Fig. 4, [0029], 2nd sentence} through an extending cable {“[extending] controlled by MCU 101 by connecting strips of RGB LED lighting”, see Fig. 4, [0029], 2nd sentence}.
As per claim 4, the rejection of claim 1 is incorporated and Kinstle discloses wherein the light control interface is configured to connect an electrical device providing the light control signal {“MCU 101 can control the color, intensity and animation effects of each [electrical device] RGB LED individually and independently of the control of the other RGB LEDs”, see Figs. 1 and 2, [0017], 2nd sentence}; and wherein the light control signal corresponds to a status information {“analog temperature sensors, MCU 101 measures the [status information] voltage drop of the resistors in the temperature sensor”, see Fig. 2, [0019]} of the electrical device {“one or more strips of RGB LED lighting (not shown in FIG. 1) may be installed in any desired location on or in smart computer case 100”, see Fig. 1, [0014], 1st sentence}.
As per claim 5, the rejection of claim 4 is incorporated and Kinstle discloses wherein the first connection interface is configured to connect to the electrical device {“MCU 101 can control the color, intensity and animation effects of each [electrical device] RGB LED individually and independently of the control of the other RGB LEDs”, see Figs. 1 and 2, [0017], 2nd sentence} and receive the at least one electrical signal {“there be only one LED port through which MCU 101 can control each of the addressable RGB LEDs associated with any lighting” through an appropriate electrical signal, see Fig. 4 [0028]}; and wherein the status information includes a status for the electrical device {“analog temperature sensors, MCU 101 measures the [status information] voltage drop of the resistors in the temperature sensor”, see Fig. 2, [0019]} transmitting the at least one electrical signal {“The user interface also displays temperature output [represented as electrical signal] from the temperature sensors installed in the smart computer case”, see Fig. 3, [0026], last sentence}.
As per claim 6, the rejection of claim 2 is incorporated and Kinstle discloses wherein the light control interface is selected from an USB interface {“housed by the smart computer case through USB interface 204.”, see Fig. 4, [0028], last three sentences} or an ARGB interface {“each of the addressable RGB LEDs”, see Fig. 4, [0028]}.
As per claim 7, the rejection of claim 1 is incorporated and Coleman discloses wherein the light control signal is configured to control a luminescence spectrum, a luminescence frequency, a brightness {“compares the luminance, color, estimated color and/or estimated illuminance of two neighboring regions (or spatial zones) (and optionally [configured to control] increase the brightness if needed”, [0185], 1st sentence}, or a combination thereof of the light-emitting part {Examiner’s note: recitation “or” term renders this dependent claim as a Markush claim, thus the reference needs only disclose one group member to address the claim}.
Referring to claims 9-14, and 16 are system claims reciting claim functionality corresponding to the device claims of claims 1-7, respectively, thereby rejected under the same rationale as claims 1-7 recited above, inter alia, as per claim 16, the rejection of claim 9 is incorporated and Coleman discloses wherein the electrical device further includes a light control output interface {“lighting effects of the RGB computer case fans and the installed RGB LED strips are [outputted and] visible from outside the smart computer case 100”, see Fig. 1 [0014], last sentence} arranged on a case of the electrical device {“smart computer case 100”, see Fig. 1 [0011], 2nd sentence} and coupled to the light control signal source {“ discover any smart case controllers (e.g., MCU 101) installed in the host computer”, see Fig. 3 [0021], last two sentences}.
As per claim 17, the rejection of claim 9 is incorporated and Coleman discloses wherein the light control signal source is selected from a mainboard {“single hardware component (such as an integrated component that can be placed on a rigid or [mainboard] flexible circuit board”, [0106]}, display board {“”, see Fig. []} or power supply of the electrical device {“AVLED… a component of one or more selected from the group: … computer, power supply, battery,”, [0283], 1st two sentences}.
Referring to claims 18, 19, and 20 are apparatus claims reciting claim functionality corresponding to the device claims of claims 9-17, respectively, thereby rejected under the same rationale as claims 9-17 recited above.
Claims 8 and 15 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over KINSTLE, III in view of Coleman and further in view of Tang et al. (USPGPUB No. 2022/0157222 A1, hereinafter referred to as Tang).
As per claim 8, the rejection of claim 1 is incorporated however neither Kinstle or Coleman appears to disclose wherein the first connection interface is selected from HDMI, DP or USB.
Furthermore, Tang discloses wherein the first connection interface {first connection interface “Redrivers may include an equalizer (such as equalizer circuitry, an equalizer IC, etc.) to amplify [connection interface] high-frequency signal components of signals ”, see Fig. 1, [0020]} is selected from HDMI, DP or USB {“Redriver”/”equalizer” being the operative component selected during “step 812” as the ”turning on” mean selecting one of three “CTLE equalizers” ([0091], last sentence; [0092] 1st sentence)) where each equalizer per protocol “HDMI”, “DISPLAYPORT” and “USB” (see Fig. , [0019], last sentence}.
Kinstle/Coleman and Tang are analogous because they are from the same field of endeavor, managing/coordinating light source(s) electronically.
Before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, having the teachings of Kinstle/Coleman and Tang before him or her, to modify Kinstle/Coleman’s device incorporating Tang’s “redriver 124” and functionality (see Figs. 8 and 9, [0085]).
The suggestion/motivation for doing so would have been to implement a redriver including two or more equalizers as continuous time linear equalizers, which can be configured to implement continuous time linear equalization (Tang [0022], last sentence paraphrased) in order to achieve data transfers at various data rates with improved signal integrity and reduced performance loss (Tang [0024], last sentence).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to combine Tang with Kinstle/Coleman to obtain the invention as specified in the instant claim(s).
As per claim 15 is a system claim reciting claim functionality corresponding to the device claims of claims 8, thereby rejected under the same rationale as claim 8 recited above.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. The following references are indicative of the current state of the art regarding claim 1’s “transmission line”, “first connection”, or “light-emitting part”: US 12495480 B2, US 12446135 B2, US 12432831 B2, US 12169060 B1, US 12129995 B2, US 20240224402 A1, US 11800624 B2, US 20220110196 A1, US 20210112647 A1, US 10856390 B2, US 20200045786 A1, US 20190174599 A1, US 20180341297 A1, US 20180220505 A1, US 20150338833 A1, US 20150257227 A1, AND US 20100327764 A1.
Contact Information
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to CHRISTOPHER A. BARTELS whose telephone number is (571)270-3182. The examiner can normally be reached on Monday-Friday 9:00a-5:30pm EST.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Dr. Henry Tsai can be reached on 571-272-4176. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300.
Information regarding the status of an application may be obtained from the Patent Application Information Retrieval (PAIR) system. Status information for published applications may be obtained from either Private PAIR or Public PAIR. Status information for unpublished applications is available through Private PAIR only. For more information about the PAIR system, see http://pair-direct.uspto.gov. Should you have questions on access to the Private PAIR system, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative or access to the automated information system, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
/C. B./
Examiner, Art Unit 2184
/HENRY TSAI/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2184