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
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) 21-26, 29-33, 37-40 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over US Patent Application Publication 2009/0234512 to Ewing et al. (Ewing) in view of US Patent Application Publication 2017/0256941 to Bowers et al. (Bowers).
Claim 21
With regard to an electric current sensor configured to measure current passing through an electric outlet; Ewing teaches collecting power usage data indicative of electrical current flow through electrical outlets (par. 80; Fig. 17, collect power usage data 1201; par. 62; Fig. 7, power outlets 302-316, toroidal inductors 302a-316a).
With regard to a wireless network interface configured to process data from the first sensor and the second sensor, to transmit the data to an access hub, and to process commands from the access hub; Ewing teaches that the power outlet module communicates with external components to send data and received data and commands (par. 62; Fig. 7; Fig. 17, control flow response command 1207, turn outlet on or off 1209; par. 138 disclosing a wireless network).
With regard to wherein the access hub is coupled to a router to create a private access point for the device, Ewing teaches using routers to communicate data between devices on the network (pars. 5, 6, 138, routers are common means of transmitting data between devices on a network).
Ewing does not teach a proximity sensor configured to detect an object relative to the electric outlet. Bowers teaches a presence module to detect the presence of a user or electronic device (pars. 90-92). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify the power management, as taught by Ewing, to include a presence module, as taught by Bowers, because then energy conservation would have been facilitated (Bowers, par. 2).
Claim 22
Ewing teaches a relay switch that can open or close to stop or conduct current through a circuit in the electric outlet in response to a command wherein the wireless network interface is further configured to transmit commands to the relay switch (par. 62; Fig. 7, Fig. 17, control flow response command 1207, turn outlet on or off 1209; par. 80, 138, 139).
Claim 23
Ewing teaches a second relay that can open or close to stop or conduct current through a second circuit in the electric outlet in response to a command received by the wireless network interface (par. 62; Fig. 7, Fig. 17, control flow response command 1207, turn outlet on or off 1209; par. 80).
Claim 24
Ewing does not teach that the object is an user. Bowers teaches a presence module to detect the presence of a user or electronic device (pars. 90-92). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify the power management, as taught by Ewing, to include a presence module, as taught by Bowers, because then energy conservation would have been facilitated (Bowers, par. 2).
Claim 25
Ewing does not teach that the object is an electronic device. Bowers teaches a presence module to detect the presence of a user or electronic device (pars. 90-92). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify the power management, as taught by Ewing, to include a presence module, as taught by Bowers, because then energy conservation would have been facilitated (Bowers, par. 2).
Claim 26
Ewing does not teach that the electronic device is a smartphone. Bowers teaches detecting the presence of a smartphone (pars. 90-92). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify the power management, as taught by Ewing, to include a presence module, as taught by Bowers, because then energy conservation would have been facilitated (Bowers, par. 2).
Claim 29
Ewing teaches that the first sensor is configured to measure current with a sample rate between 0.1Hz and 30kHz (par. 73, 120 samples per second).
Claim 30
With regard to receiving, from an access hub coupled to a router configured to create a private access point for a power outlet, power use data representing power use of the power outlet; Ewing teaches collecting power usage data indicative of electrical current flow through electrical outlets and that the power outlet module communicates with external components to send data and received data and commands and using routers to communicate between devices on the network (par. 80; Fig. 17, collect power usage data 1201; par. 62; Fig. 7, power outlets 302-316, toroidal inductors 302a-316a; par. 138 disclosing a wireless network; pars. 5, 6, 138, routers are common means of transmitting data between devices on a network).
With regard to developing a power usage profile using the power use data and the proximity data and transmitting, to the access hub, a command based on the power usage profile to change states in response to a condition; Ewing teaches generating a trend report and displaying power usage and control flow response and commands to turn an outlet on or off (Fig. 17, generate trend report 1219, display power usage data 1201, pars. 80, 81; Figs. 7, 17, control flow response command 1207, turn outlet on or off, 1209).
Ewing does not teach receiving, from the access hub, proximity data representing an object relative to the power outlet. Bowers teaches a presence module to detect the presence of a user or electronic device (pars. 90-92). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify the power management, as taught by Ewing, to include a presence module, as taught by Bowers, because then energy conservation would have been facilitated (Bowers, par. 2).
Claim 31
Ewing does not teach that the condition is a proximity of the object to the power outlet. Bowers teaches a presence module to detect the presence of a user or electronic device (pars. 90-92). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify the power management, as taught by Ewing, to include a presence module, as taught by Bowers, because then energy conservation would have been facilitated (Bowers, par. 2).
Claim 32
Ewing does not teach that the condition is a time of day. Bowers teaches referencing a time zone (par. 92). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at a time before the effective filing date to modify the power management, as taught by Ewing, to include referencing a time zone, as taught by Bowers, because then power would have been saved by turning off outlets at times that the user is not expected to be in the location (Bowers, par. 2).
Claim 33
Ewing teaches transmitting the power use data and the proximity data to a cloud storage (Fig. 2, network manager 28; par. 53).
Claim 37
With regard to a memory configured to store instructions; and a processor configured to execute the instructions to perform operations; Ewing teaches a processor and memory (par. 132; Fig. 18, processor 1614, memory 1616).
With regard to receiving, from an access hub configured to create a private access point for power outlets, first data representing power use of one or more power outlets; Ewing teaches collecting power usage data indicative of electrical current flow through electrical outlets (par. 80; Fig. 17, collect power usage data 1201; par. 62; Fig. 7, power outlets 302-316, toroidal inductors 302a-316a).
With regard to developing a usage profile based on the first data and the second data; Ewing teaches generating a trend report and displaying power usage (Fig. 17, generate trend report 1219, display power usage data 1201, pars. 80, 81).
With regard to transmitting, to the access hub, commands to one or more power outlets to change states based on the power usage profile; Ewing teaches controlling the flow and turning an outlet on or off using routers to communicate data between devices on the network (Figs. 7, 17, control flow response command 1207, turn outlet on or off 1209; pars. 5, 6, 138, routers are common means of transmitting data between devices on a network).
Ewing does not teach receiving second data representing proximity data relative to the one or more power outlets. Bowers teaches a presence module to detect the presence of a user or electronic device (pars. 90-92). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify the power management, as taught by Ewing, to include a presence module, as taught by Bowers, because then energy conservation would have been facilitated (Bowers, par. 2).
Claim 38
Ewing teaches storing the first data (pars. 9, 77, 78, 97); developing power usage profiles based on the first data and the second data for each of the power outlets; and displaying the power usage profiles (Fig. 17, generate trend report 1219, display power usage data 1201, pars. 80, 81).
Claim 39
Ewing teaches that the access hub is in wireless communication with the one or more power outlets via the router (pars. 5, 6, 138, routers are common means of transmitting data between devices on a network).
Claim 40
Ewing teaches transmitting, to the access hub, commands to turn on or off the power outlet (Figs. 7, 17, turn outlet on or off, 1209). Ewing does not teach that the command is when an object is detected to be in proximity to t he power outlet. Bowers teaches a presence module to detect the presence of a user or electronic device (pars. 90-92). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify the power management, as taught by Ewing, to include a presence module, as taught by Bowers, because then energy conservation would have been facilitated (Bowers, par. 2).
Claim(s) 27, 28 and 34-36 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Ewing in view of Bower as applied to claims 21 and 32 above, and further in view of US Patent Application Publication 2015/0280410 to Elderbaum (Elderbaum).
Claim 27
Ewing and Bowers teach all the limitations of claim 21 upon which claim 29 depends. Ewing and Bowers do not teach that the device is contained within a housing that is sized to replace a standard electric outlet. Elderbaum teaches an intelligent support box that can fit in a standard electric outlet space. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify the power management combination, as taught by Ewing and Bowers, to include an intelligent outlet sized, as taught by Elderbaum, because then replacing standard outlets would have been facilitated without requiring other changes to the structure.
Claim 28
Ewing teaches that the housing has connectors that connect the housing into openings in the standard electric outlet (Fig. 3, plug 72).
Claim 34
Ewing and Bowers teach all the limitations of claim 32 upon which claim 37 depends. Ewing and Bowers do not teach transmitting a notification request to a device requesting confirmation of a characteristic of the power usage profile. Elderbaum teaches requesting confirmation of certain information (Claim 10). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify the power management combination, as taught by Ewing and Bowers, to include requesting confirmation of certain information, as taught by Elderbaum, because then changes in status would have been known before making commands.
Claim 35
Ewing and Bowers teach all the limitations of claim 32 upon which claims 37 and 38 depend. Ewing and Bowers do not teach that the characteristic is a type of device connected to the power outlet. Elderbaum teaches requesting confirmation of installing and removing particulars (Claim 10). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify the power management combination, as taught by Ewing and Bowers, to include requesting confirmation of installing and removing particulars, as taught by Elderbaum, because then changes in status would have been known before making commands.
Claim 36
Ewing and Bowers teach all the limitations of claim 32 upon which claims 37 and 39 depend. Ewing and Bowers do not teach that the characteristic is a power-off schedule. Elderbaum teaches requesting conformation of load on-off (Claim 10). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify the power management combination, as taught by Ewing and Bowers, to include requesting confirmation of load on-off, as taught by Elderbaum, because then changes in status would have been known before making commands.
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 21-40 are rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claims 1-20 of U.S. Patent No. 11,552,436. Although the claims at issue are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other because all the limitations of the claims in the present application are found in the claims of the ‘436 patent.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to MANUEL L BARBEE whose telephone number is (571)272-2212. The examiner can normally be reached M-F: 9-5:30..
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, Shelby A Turner can be reached on 571-272-6334. 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.
/MANUEL L BARBEE/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2857
Prosecution Insights