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 .
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 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.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed June 25, 2026 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
Applicant argues, “Li fails to disclose the feature ‘wherein the control center is suitable for searching, by using the network interface module, whether a preset electronic device is connected to the local area network, and generating, when detecting that the preset electronic device is connected to the local area network, a control signal to disable the network camera’. People of ordinary skilled in the art would not be motivated to access the claimed feature based on the disclosure of Li because the trigger event, the determination procedure, and the main purpose of Li are different from the claimed invention.” And to support this argument, Applicant states that:
As shown in FIG. 3A of Li's disclosure (regenerated below), step 303 might be interpreted as corresponding to the feature of determining a preset electronic device being connected to the local area network, and step 305 might be interpreted as corresponding to the feature of stopping the network camera.
However, based on the disclosure of Li, the stop instruction for disabling the monitoring device is generated when first network connection information matches second network connection information (see step 305). The trigger event is very different from the claimed invention, which generates the control signal to disable the network camera when detecting that the preset electronic device is connected to the local area network.
In addition, based on the disclosure of Li, it is needed to acquire the second network connection information through the mobile terminal for determining whether to send the stop instruction or not. However, the claimed invention uses the control center of the network device to detect whether the preset electronic device is connected to the local area network for determining whether to disable the network camera or not. The determination procedure is quite different.
Moreover, in the claimed invention, the main purpose for disabling the network camera is to save electricity rather than privacy concern.
However, the Examiner notes Li discloses that the monitoring device, i.e., camera, is connected to a home network router/gateway (see column 1, lines 18-26, and column 3, lines 1-17), and when it is detected that the mobile terminal connects to the same network, i.e., the network information of the mobile terminal matches the network information of the camera, the stop instruction is sent to the monitoring device (see column 3, lines 41-45, column 6, line 41 – column 7, line 44, figure 3A: 305, and figure 3F). That is, the network connection information of the mobile terminal is used to detect whether the mobile terminal is connected to the home network, to which the camera is connected, and when it is detected that the mobile terminal connects to the home network, the stop instruction is sent to the camera.
And in response to applicant's argument that “the main purpose for disabling the network camera is to save electricity rather than privacy concern”, the Examiner notes that the fact that the inventor has recognized another advantage which would flow naturally from following the suggestion of the prior art cannot be the basis for patentability when the differences would otherwise be obvious. See Ex parte Obiaya, 227 USPQ 58, 60 (Bd. Pat. App. & Inter. 1985).
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 1-4 and 8-11 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Binder et al. (US Pub. 2013/0201316), in view of Li et al. (US Patent 10,237,464).
In regard to claim 1, note Binder discloses a network device, applicable to a local area network, the local area network having a network camera (figures 5f and 14), and the network device comprising a network interface module, suitable for being communicatively connected to the network camera and receiving image data from the network camera (paragraphs 0055, 0270, 0274, 0367, 0484, figure 5f: 50f, and figure 14: 143), an image recognition module, suitable for recognizing the image data, to generate a recognition result (paragraphs 0055, 0509-0513, figure 14: 147, and figure 18: 182), and a control center, suitable for controlling at least one Internet of Things (IoT) device in the local area network based on the recognition result (paragraphs 0268, 0484, 0518-0519, figure 14: 147, and figure 18: 182, 175), wherein the at least one Internet of Things device comprises the network camera (paragraph 0367, and figure 5f), and
Therefore, it can be seen that the primary reference fails to explicitly disclose that the control center is suitable for searching, by using the network interface module, whether a preset electronic device is connected to the local area network, and generating, when detecting that the preset electronic device is connected to the local area network, a control signal to disable the network camera.
In analogous art, Li discloses a network device that is suitable for searching whether a preset electronic device is connected to the local area network, and generating, when detecting that the preset electronic device is connected to the local area network, a control signal to disable the network camera (column 1, lines 18-26, column 3, lines 1-17, column 3, lines 41-45, column 6, line 41 – column 7, line 44, figure 3A: 305, and figure 3F; the monitoring device, i.e., camera, is connected to a home network router/gateway, and when it is detected that the mobile terminal connects to the same network, i.e., the network information of the mobile terminal matches the network information of the camera, the stop instruction is sent to the monitoring device). Li teaches that searching whether a preset electronic device is connected to the local area network, and generating, when detecting that the preset electronic device is connected to the local area network, a control signal to disable the network camera is preferred in order to prevent the leakage of privacy while the user is home (column 1, lines 24-26). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to modify the primary reference such that the control center is suitable for searching, by using the network interface module, whether a preset electronic device is connected to the local area network, and generating, when detecting that the preset electronic device is connected to the local area network, a control signal to disable the network camera, in order to prevent the leakage of privacy while the user is home, as suggested by Li.
In regard to claim 2, note Binder discloses that the network interface module is a wiredly connected interface module (paragraph 0270; the router can be wired and/or wireless).
In regard to claim 3, note Binder discloses that the network interface module is a wirelessly connected interface module (paragraph 0270; the router can be wired and/or wireless).
In regard to claim 4, note Binder discloses that the image recognition module is a facial recognition module (paragraphs 0055, 0509-0513, figure 14: 147, and figure 18: 182).
In regard to claim 8, note Li discloses that the preset electronic device is a mobile device (column 3, lines 6-11, and figure 1: 120).
In regard to claim 9, note Binder discloses that the network device is a router (paragraphs 0270, 0274, 0484, and figure 14: 143).
In regard to claim 10, note Binder discloses a network control system, applicable to a local area network (figure 14), the network control system comprising a network camera (paragraph 0055, 0367, and figure 5f), an Internet of Things (IoT) device (paragraphs 0268, 0377, 0385, 0484), and a network device, comprising a network interface module, suitable for being communicatively connected to the network camera and the Internet of Things device, and receiving image data from the network camera (paragraphs 0055, 0270, 0274, 0367, 0484, figure 5f: 50f, and figure 14: 143), an image recognition module, suitable for recognizing the image data, to generate a recognition result (paragraphs 0055, 0509-0513, figure 14: 147, and figure 18: 182), and a control center, suitable for controlling the Internet of Things (IoT) device based on the recognition result (paragraphs 0268, 0484, 0518-0519, figure 14: 147, and figure 18: 182, 175).
Therefore, it can be seen that the primary reference fails to explicitly disclose that the control center is suitable for searching, by using the network interface module, whether a preset electronic device is connected to the local area network, and generating, when detecting that the preset electronic device is connected to the local area network, a control signal to disable the network camera.
In analogous art, Li discloses a network device that is suitable for searching whether a preset electronic device is connected to the local area network, and generating, when detecting that the preset electronic device is connected to the local area network, a control signal to disable the network camera (column 1, lines 18-26, column 3, lines 1-17, column 3, lines 41-45, column 6, line 41 – column 7, line 44, figure 3A: 305, and figure 3F; the monitoring device, i.e., camera, is connected to a home network router/gateway, and when it is detected that the mobile terminal connects to the same network, i.e., the network information of the mobile terminal matches the network information of the camera, the stop instruction is sent to the monitoring device). Li teaches that searching whether a preset electronic device is connected to the local area network, and generating, when detecting that the preset electronic device is connected to the local area network, a control signal to disable the network camera is preferred in order to prevent the leakage of privacy while the user is home (column 1, lines 24-26). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to modify the primary reference such that the control center is suitable for searching, by using the network interface module, whether a preset electronic device is connected to the local area network, and generating, when detecting that the preset electronic device is connected to the local area network, a control signal to disable the network camera, in order to prevent the leakage of privacy while the user is home, as suggested by Li.
In regard to claim 11, note Binder discloses that the network device is a router (paragraphs 0270, 0274, 0484, and figure 14: 143).
Claim 5 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Binder et al. (US Pub. 2013/0201316) in view of Li et al. (US Patent 10,237,464), and further in view of Xu et al. (US Patent 11,704,908).
In regard to claim 5, note the primary reference of Binder in view of Li discloses the network device, as discussed with respect to claim 1 above. Therefore, it can be seen that the primary reference fails to explicitly disclose that the image recognition module comprises an artificial intelligence (AI) processor.
In analogous art, Xu discloses a network device that performs image recognition using an artificial intelligence (AI) processor (column 3, line 1-21, and column 5, line 22-35). The Examiner notes that the use of artificial intelligence (AI) processors are widely used in the art for the improvement of the accuracy of image analysis and detection/recognition. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to modify the primary reference such that the image recognition module comprises an artificial intelligence (AI) processor, in order to improve the accuracy of image analysis and detection/recognition.
Conclusion
Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a). Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a).
A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of the advisory action. In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the mailing date of this final action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to CHRISS S YODER III whose telephone number is (571)272-7323. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 9:00-5:00 PM.
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, Lin Ye can be reached at (571) 272-7372. 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.
/C.Y./Examiner, Art Unit 2638
/LIN YE/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2638
Prosecution Insights