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 .
Response to Amendment
1. This office action is in response to communications filed 3/26/2026 Claims 1, 11 are amended. Claims 2-10, 12-14 are original. Claim 8 is canceled. Claim 15 is new.
Allowable Subject Matter
The indicated allowability of claim 8 is withdrawn in view of the newly discovered reference(s) to US Patent Application 2010/0123546. Rejections based on the newly cited reference(s) follow.
Claim(s) 1, 6, 9, 10, and 11, are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over U.S. Patent 9210357, Dong et al. (hereinafter Dong) in view of U.S. Patent Application 2010/0123546, Seo et al. (hereinafter Seo).
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 (pre-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.
Claims 5 and 7 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-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 pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the applicant), regards as the invention.
Claim 5 recites a “third command”, where there is no “2nd command” in any of the claims that claim 5 depends on. (currently only a 1st and a 3rd command). There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
Claim 7 recites the limitation "a fourth command" in line 3. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. Claim 7 depends from claim 6, which depends from claim 1; however, neither claim 1 nor claim 6 introduces a “second command” or “third command,” and claim 6 does not introduce any numbered command at all (it refers only to “another code’). It is therefore unclear what command the “fourth command” of claim 7 is intended to relate to, and how its numbering relates to the “first command” of claim 1 or the “third command” of claim 5 (which depends from claim 1 via a separate, parallel branch). Clarification is required as to the relationship, if any, between the numbered commands recited across the various dependent claims.
Claim 7 (revised to include the “user command” inconsistency), the claim recites “a fourth command being received” and later “the fourth user command,” and further recites “control the second communication module to transmit the control signal to the electronic device” without antecedent bases for “the electronic device” in this chain. While claim 6 (from which claim 7 depends) refers to “the electronic device” (with antecedent basis from claim 1), claim 7’s combination of “fourth command” / “fourth user command” introduces an inconsistency in terminology – it is unclear whether “command” and “user command” refer to the same element. Additionally, as noted above, there is no antecedent basis for “a fourth command” itself, since neither claim 1 nor claim 6 introduces a second or third command. Clarification is required.
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.
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.
1. Claim(s) 1, 6, 9, 10, and 11 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over U.S. Patent 9210357, Dong et al. (hereinafter Dong) in view of U.S. Patent Application 2010/0123546, Seo et al. (hereinafter Seo).
2. Regarding Claim 1, Dong discloses A remote control device (Fig. 2: 200 remote control, Col. 4 line 17), comprising:
a communication interface comprising communication circuitry (Fig. 2; 275 infrared transmitter and 280 Bluetooth component, Col. 4 line 62- Col. 5 line 12); and
at least one processor (Fig. 1: 220 processor), comprising processing circuitry connected to the communication interface (Fig. 1; Col. 4 lines 46-47, “The infrared transmitter 275 may be controlled by processor 220”), individually and/or collectively, configured to control the remote control device (Fig. 1: 200 remote control), wherein at least one processor (Fig. 1: 220 processor), individually and/or collectively, is configured to:
based on a communication channel (e.g., BT or IR) for communication with an electronic device (Fig. 2: 110 device) being formed through a first communication module (Fig. 1: 280 Bluetooth) of the communication interface (Fig. 2: 280 BT), receive a code indicating the electronic device from the electronic device through the first communication module (col. 6 lines 31-45, wireless pairing channel established; col. 7 lines 1-14, device identification exchanged during pairing); and
based on a first command being received after the communication channel is released (Col. 5 lines 58-61, “In addition to sending the event code via the first transmitter, the remote control 200 may also send information that can be used to pair the remote control 200 to the device 110 via the second transmitter.” Pairing/communication channel (e.g., Bluetooth/RF) being established for setup/pairing, and then user commands being sent afterward using the other communication method (e.g., IR)), and control a second communication module of the communication interface to transmit the control signal to the electronic device (Col. 4 lines “49-57, “The infrared transmitter 275 may be disposed on the housing of the remote control 200 such that the user is expected to point the remote control 200 at a device in order to reliably insure that the device is capable of receiving events generated by the remote control 200, such as commands sent in response to user pressing a button. In that regard, a device 110 may include an infrared detector 175 that is capable of detecting infrared signals generated by the remote control 200.”), and
wherein the first communication module (Fig. 2: 280 BT) and the second communication module (Fig. 2: 275 infrared transmitter; Col. 4 lines 49-50, “The infrared transmitter 275 may be disposed on the housing of the remote control 200”) comprising communication circuitry (Fig. 1: Col. 4 lines 46-47, “The infrared transmitter 275 may be controlled by processor 220”) and use a different communication method (IR vs BT).
However, Dong does not explicitly disclose add the code to a custom area of a control signal corresponding to the first command
Seo teaches add the code to a custom area of a control signal corresponding to the first command ([0038]-[0040], The control signal includes a leader pulse 32, a custom code 34, and a data code 36. The custom code 34 is a signal containing manufacturing company, kind, model number etc. – a dedicated/custom area within the control signal structure).
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art to modify the remote control device of Dong to add the device-identifying code to a custom area of the IR control signal corresponding to the first command, as taught by Seo. Both references operate in the same field of remote control communication systems using IR transmission, and the motivation to combine would be to ensure that control signals transmitted after the pairing channel is released are recognized by and directed to the correct target electronic device, thereby preventing unintended control of other devices in the same environment.
3. Regarding Claim 6, Dong discloses The remote control device of claim 1, further comprising:
memory storing the code (Fig. 1: 230 Memory, 270 Remote UID; Col. 4 lines 60, “the memory 230 may contain a table of command codes 265.” Col. 6 lines23-25, “Once paired, the device 110 may store information that identifies the remote control 200 with which it has been paired.” Col. 6 lines 15-27, “device 110 may store the Remote ID 270 in its own memory (shown in FIG. 1 as Paired Remote UID 177).”);
wherein at least one processor, individually and/or collectively, is configured to:
based on another code being received from the electronic device while the communication channel is formed (Col. 6 lines 60-62, “When the old device receives the Remote ID, the device checks whether it has been paired with that particular remote by checking the stored Paired Device ID 277.” Col. 6 lines62-67, “If the received Remote ID matches the stored Paired Device ID 277, the device may take no further action beyond processing the event code. If the received Remote ID does not match the stored Paired Device ID 277 (as would be the case with respect to the new device).” This received Remote ID- not matching the previously stored code- constitutes “another code” received during the pairing/channel-formation process (Col. 6 line 67- Col. 7 line 1, “the device automatically initiates the pairing process with the remote control 200.”), update the code to the another code (Col. 6 lines 39-40, “the remote control 200 may be paired with a different device without requiring the user to affirmatively request the pairing.” Col. 6 lines 25-27, device 110 stores the Remote ID 270 in its own memory as Paired Remote UID 177). Since the device automatically initiates pairing with the new remote upon receiving the non-matching code, and once paired stores the new Remote ID as the Paired Remote UID, the device’s stored code is necessarily replaced/updated from the old Paired Device UID to the new Remote ID received from the electronic device.).
4. Regarding Claim 9, Dong discloses The remote control device of claim 1, wherein the first communication module is a bidirectional wireless communication module (Fig. 1: 280 Bluetooth) comprising wireless communication circuitry (Claim 1, “a processor configured to execute instructions; a first transmitter; a second transmitter”), and
wherein the second communication module is a one-way wireless communication module (“The infrared transmitter 275”) comprising wireless communication circuitry (Fig. 1: Col. 4 lines 46-47, “The infrared transmitter 275 may be controlled by processor 220”).
5. Regarding Claim 10, Dong discloses The remote control device of claim 9, wherein the first communication module is a Bluetooth module (Fig. 1: 280 Bluetooth), comprising Bluetooth circuitry, and
wherein the second communication module is an infrared communication module (“The infrared transmitter 275”),
comprising infrared communication circuitry (“The infrared transmitter 275”).
6. Regarding Claim 11, Dong discloses A method of controlling a remote control device (Fig. 2: 200 remote control, Col. 4 line 17), the method comprising:
based on a communication channel (e.g., BT or IR) for communication with an electronic device (Fig. 2: 110 device) being formed through a first communication module (Fig. 2: 280 BT) included in the remote control device (Fig. 2: 200 remote control, Col. 4 line 17),
receiving a code indicating the electronic device from the electronic device through the first communication module (col. 6 lines 31-45, wireless pairing channel established; col. 7 lines 1-14, device identification exchanged during pairing); and
based on a first command being received after the communication channel is released (Col. 5 lines 58-61, “In addition to sending the event code via the first transmitter, the remote control 200 may also send information that can be used to pair the remote control 200 to the device 110 via the second transmitter.” Pairing/communication channel (e.g., Bluetooth/RF) being established for setup/pairing, and then user commands being sent afterward using the other communication method (e.g., IR)),
and controlling a second communication module included in the remote control device to transmit the control signal to the electronic device (Col. 4 lines “49-57, “The infrared transmitter 275 may be disposed on the housing of the remote control 200 such that the user is expected to point the remote control 200 at a device in order to reliably insure that the device is capable of receiving events generated by the remote control 200, such as commands sent in response to user pressing a button. In that regard, a device 110 may include an infrared detector 175 that is capable of detecting infrared signals generated by the remote control 200.”),
wherein the first communication module (Fig. 2: 280 BT) and the second communication module (Col. 4 lines “49-57, “The infrared transmitter 275”),
each comprise communication circuitry and use a different communication method (IR vs BT).
However, Dong does not explicitly disclose adding the code to a custom area of a control signal corresponding to the first command
Seo teaches adding the code to a custom area of a control signal corresponding to the first command ([0038]-[0040], The control signal includes a leader pulse 32, a custom code 34, and a data code 36. The custom code 34 is a signal containing manufacturing company, kind, model number etc. – a dedicated/custom area within the control signal structure).
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art to modify the remote control device of Dong to add the device-identifying code to a custom area of the IR control signal corresponding to the first command, as taught by Seo. Both references operate in the same field of remote control communication systems using IR transmission, and the motivation to combine would be to ensure that control signals transmitted after the pairing channel is released are recognized by and directed to the correct target electronic device, thereby preventing unintended control of other devices in the same environment.
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.
7. Claim(s) 2 and 12 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Dong in view of Seo as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of KR 20150075827A Kwon [English Translation Provided].
8. Regarding Claim 2, Dong in view of Seo discloses The remote control device of claim 1, further comprising:
Memory (Fig. 1: 230 Memory), wherein at least one processor (Fig. 1: 220 processor), individually and/or collectively, is configured to:
map information about the communication channel and the code (Col. 4 lines 60-63 “memory 230 may contain a table of command codes 265, where the table 265 associates each function with an individual identifier to be transmitted via the infrared transmitter 275.”);
store the mapped information in the memory (Col. 2 lines 7-8, “a remote identifier stored in the memory”); and
based on the first command being received after the communication channel is released (Col. 5 lines 58-61, “In addition to sending the event code via the first transmitter, the remote control 200 may also send information that can be used to pair the remote control 200 to the device 110 via the second transmitter.” Pairing/communication channel (e.g., Bluetooth/RF) being established for setup/pairing, and then user commands being sent afterward using the other communication method (e.g., IR)),
Dong teaches mapped/associated information stored in memory
However, Dong in view of Seo does not explicitly disclose add the code to a control signal based on the mapped information stored in the memory.
Further, Kwon teaches add the code to a control signal based on the mapped information stored in the memory. (Page 7 para 3-4, “The remote controller in step S503 (200) may select a protocol corresponding to the identification information received in step S501. Specifically, the remote controller 200 may be selected to extract a protocol corresponding to the identification information received in step S501 from the database 340. For example, the remote controller 200 is a protocol corresponding to the identification information of the image display device 300, the IR protocol can be selected and extracted from the database 340. Further, the remote controller 200 may update the selected protocol based on a protocol that corresponds to the identification information received in the case and another group corresponding to the selected protocol, the protocol identification information received in step S501, step S501.” Identifier is combined with transmitted data).
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art to include the device-identifying code obtained during the pairing communication of Dong in view of Seo into the IR control signal transmitted after the pairing channel is released as taught by Kwon, in order to ensure that the control signal is recognized by the correct electronic device.
9. Regarding Claim 12, Dong discloses The method of claim 11, wherein the receiving includes:
mapping information about the communication channel and the code and storing the mapped information (Col. 4 lines 60-63 “memory 230 may contain a table of command codes 265, where the table 265 associates each function with an individual identifier to be transmitted via the infrared transmitter 275.”), and
wherein the controlling includes:
based on the first command being received after the communication channel is released (Col. 5 lines 58-61, “In addition to sending the event code via the first transmitter, the remote control 200 may also send information that can be used to pair the remote control 200 to the device 110 via the second transmitter.” Pairing/communication channel (e.g., Bluetooth/RF) being established for setup/pairing, and then user commands being sent afterward using the other communication method (e.g., IR)),
Dong teaches mapped/associated information stored in memory
However, Dong in view of Seo does not explicitly disclose adding the code to the control signal based on the mapped information.
Kwon teaches adding the code to the control signal based on the mapped information (Page 7 para 3-4, “The remote controller in step S503 (200) may select a protocol corresponding to the identification information received in step S501. Specifically, the remote controller 200 may be selected to extract a protocol corresponding to the identification information received in step S501 from the database 340. For example, the remote controller 200 is a protocol corresponding to the identification information of the image display device 300, the IR protocol can be selected and extracted from the database 340. Further, the remote controller 200 may update the selected protocol based on a protocol that corresponds to the identification information received in the case and another group corresponding to the selected protocol, the protocol identification information received in step S501, step S501.” Identifier is combined with transmitted data).
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art to include the device-identifying code obtained during the pairing communication of Dong in view of Seo into the IR control signal transmitted after the pairing channel is released as taught by Kwon, in order to ensure that the control signal is recognized by the correct electronic device.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 3, 4, 5, 7, 13, 14, and 15 are objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims. (Assuming correction of 112b above with respect to claims 5 and 7)
The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter:
Regarding Claim 3, Dong discloses The remote control device of claim 2, wherein at least one processor, individually and/or collectively, is configured to:
Dong does not explicitly disclose based on the communication channel for communication with another electronic device being reformed through the first communication module, re-receive the code indicating the another electronic device from the another electronic device through the first communication module;
remap information about the reformed communication channel and the re- received code; and
update the mapped information to the remapped information.
Regarding Claim 13, Dong discloses The method of claim 12, further comprising:
Dong does not explicitly disclose based on the communication channel for communication with another electronic device being reformed through the first communication module,
re-receiving the code indicating the another electronic device from the another electronic device through the first communication module; remapping information about the reformed communication channel and the re- received code; and updating the mapped information to the remapped information.
Claim 14 is dependent on claim 13.
Claim 15 is dependent on claim 14.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to OMER KHALID whose telephone number is (571)270-5997. The examiner can normally be reached Monday- Friday 9am-7pm.
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, John Miller can be reached at (571) 272-7353. 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.
/OMER KHALID/Examiner, Art Unit 2422
/BRIAN P YENKE/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2422
Prosecution Insights