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
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) 127-130, 132, 135, and 146 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Fink (WO 2024/006540) in view of Ekkel (US 2023/0262154).
Regarding claim 127, Fink discloses a system comprising:
a chime 186; and
a doorbell 180, 182, 572, electrically coupled to the chime and configured to communicatively couple to a remote computing device 190, the doorbell spaced apart from the chime (paragraph 132), wherein the doorbell is communicatively isolated from the remote computing device such that the doorbell is configured to send an
alert by emitting a noise via the chime, or wherein the doorbell is communicatively
coupled to the remote computing device such that the doorbell is configured to send an
alert to the remote computing device 190 (p. 252).
Fink does not disclose the doorbell comprising a vacancy mode and an access point (AP) mode. Ekkel teaches the use of a doorbell comprising a vacancy mode and an access point (AP) mode (S1, S2, p. 111). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to include the doorbell comprising a vacancy mode and an access point (AP) mode to the system of Fink as taught by Ekkel for the purpose of effectively providing alert signals so that when the doorbell is in the vacancy mode, the doorbell is communicatively isolated from the remote computing device such that the doorbell is configured to send an alert by emitting a noise via the chime, and when the doorbell is in the AP mode, the doorbell is communicatively coupled to the remote computing device such that the doorbell is configured to send an alert to the remote computing device.
Regarding claim 128, Fink (as modified by Ekkel) discloses wherein the doorbell is configured to emit a light comprising a color, wherein the color is configurable by a user of the doorbell, and wherein the color is different when the doorbell is in the AP mode or the vacancy mode (Fink, p. 259).
Regarding claims 129-130, Fink (as modified by Ekkel) discloses all the claimed subject matter as set forth above in the rejection of claim 128, but does not disclose a communications chip configured to communicate with the remote computing device and a hub independently (claim 129); the communications chip being configured to
communicate via i) wireless fidelity (Wi-Fi), ii) Bluetooth, iii) cellular data, or iv) combinations thereof (claim 130). Ekkel further teaches the use of a communications chip configured to communicate with a remote computing device 14, 114, and a hub 10 independently (p. 102); the communications chip being configured to
communicate via i) wireless fidelity (Wi-Fi), ii) Bluetooth, iii) cellular data, or iv) combinations thereof (p. 27, p. 28). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to include a communications chip configured to communicate with the remote computing device and a hub independently; the communications chip being configured to
communicate via i) wireless fidelity (Wi-Fi), ii) Bluetooth, iii) cellular data, or iv) combinations thereof to the system of Fink as taught by Ekkel for the purpose of effectively providing alert signals.
Regarding claim 132, Fink (as modified by Ekkel) discloses all the claimed subject matter as set forth above in the rejection of claim 129, but does not disclose the doorbell comprising an actuator, and wherein the doorbell is configured to i) enter the AP mode from the vacancy mode through actuating the actuator, ii) enter the vacancy mode from the AP mode through actuating the actuator, or iii) both. Ekkel further teaches the use of an actuator 132, and wherein a doorbell is configured to i) enter the AP mode from the vacancy mode through actuating the actuator, ii) enter the vacancy mode from the AP mode through actuating the actuator, or iii) both (p. 111). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to include the doorbell comprising an actuator, and wherein the doorbell is configured to i) enter the AP mode from the vacancy mode through actuating the actuator, ii) enter the vacancy mode from the AP mode through actuating the actuator, or iii) both to the system of Fink as taught by Ekkel for the purpose of effectively providing alert signals.
Regarding claim 135, Fink (as modified by Ekkel) discloses wherein the doorbell is a first doorbell 180, the system comprising a second doorbell 140, and wherein i) the first doorbell, ii) the second doorbell, or iii) both are configured to enter the vacancy mode from the AP mode by an input from a master user (Fink, p. 133-p.135).
Regarding claim 146, Fink (as modified by Ekkel) discloses wherein the doorbell is a first doorbell 180 of a plurality of doorbells, the system further comprising at least a second doorbell 140, wherein one or more doorbells of the plurality of doorbells are in the AP mode and one or more doorbells of the plurality of doorbells are in the vacancy mode, and wherein the remote computing device of the user is configured to communicatively couple to a single doorbell of the plurality of doorbells, and wherein the master user has access to each all doorbells (paragraphs 133-135).
Claim(s) 134 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Fink and Ekkel as applied to claim 127 above, and further in view of Fu (US 10,665,072).
Regarding claim 134, Fink (as modified by Ekkel) discloses all the claimed subject matter as set forth above in the rejection of claim 127, but does not disclose the doorbell being configured to enter the vacancy mode from the AP mode after a duration of time passes wherein the doorbell is not communicatively coupled to the remote computing device. Fu teaches the use of a doorbell being configured to enter a vacancy mode from an AP mode after a duration of time passes wherein the doorbell is not communicatively coupled to a remote computing device (steps 338, 340, 344, and 346). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to include the doorbell being configured to enter the vacancy mode from the AP mode after a duration of time passes wherein the doorbell is not communicatively coupled to the remote computing device to the system of Fink (modified by Ekkel) as taught by Fu for the purpose of effectively providing alert signals.
Claim(s) 139-145 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Fink and Ekkel as applied to claim 127 above, and further in view of Scalisi (WO 2017/091826).
Regarding claims 139, 143, and 144, Fink (as modified by Ekkel) discloses all the claimed subject matter as set forth above in the rejection of claim 127, but does not disclose a light emitting diode (LED), the light emitting diode (LED) being configured to dim or brighten with respect to an ambient light level (claim 139); a non-auditory mode, when the doorbell is in the non-auditory mode, the doorbell being communicatively coupled to the remote computing device, and the doorbell being configured to prevent the noise being emitted from the chime and a noise being emitted from the remote computing device (claim 143); when the doorbell is in the non-auditory mode,
the doorbell being configured to send the alert to the remote computing device while the remote computing device lights up and outputs haptic feedback (claim 144).
Scalisi further discloses a light emitting diode (LED), the light emitting diode (LED) being configured to dim or brighten with respect to an ambient light level (page 16, lines 29-30, page 26, lines 24-25); a non-auditory mode, when a doorbell is in the non-auditory mode, the doorbell being communicatively coupled to a remote computing device, and the doorbell being configured to prevent the noise being emitted from a chime and a noise being emitted from the remote computing device (page 39, lines 20-30, page 40, lines 5-10); when the doorbell is in the non-auditory mode, the doorbell being configured to send the alert to the remote computing device while the remote computing device lights up and outputs haptic feedback (page 39, lines 20-30, page 40, lines 5-10).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to include a light emitting diode (LED), the light emitting diode (LED) being configured to dim or brighten with respect to an ambient light level; a non-auditory mode, when the doorbell is in the non-auditory mode, the doorbell being communicatively coupled to the remote computing device, and the doorbell being configured to prevent the noise being emitted from the chime and a noise being emitted from the remote computing device; when the doorbell is in the non-auditory mode, the doorbell being configured to send the alert to the remote computing device while the remote computing device lights up and outputs haptic feedback to the system of Fink (modified by Ekkel) as taught by Scalisi for the purpose of effectively controlling the light and the noise of the doorbell.
Regarding claim 140, Fink discloses wherein the doorbell further comprises a sleep mode, and wherein when the doorbell is in the sleep mode, the doorbell is communicatively coupled to the remote computing device, and the doorbell is configured to prevent the noise being emitted from the chime, a noise being emitted by the remote computing device or both (paragraph 234).
Regarding claim 141, Fink discloses wherein when the doorbell is in the sleep mode, the doorbell is configured to send the alert to the remote computing device without the remote computing device i) lighting up, ii) outputting haptic feedback, or iii) combinations thereof (paragraph 234).
Regarding claim 142, Fink discloses wherein the doorbell is configured to i) enter or ii) exit, the sleep mode at i) a predetermined time of day, ii) a predetermined duration, or iii) by an input from a user (par. 234).
Regarding claim 145, Fink discloses wherein the doorbell is configured to i) enter or ii) exit, the non-auditory mode at i) a predetermined time of day, ii) a predetermined duration, or iii) by an input from a user (par. 234).
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 131, 133, and 136-138 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.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
McRae discloses a smart doorbell system and method with chime listener.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ANH V LA whose telephone number is (571)272-2970. The examiner can normally be reached 8:30 AM-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, Quan-Zhen Wang can be reached at 571-272-3114. 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.
/ANH V LA/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2685
ANH V. LA
Primary Examiner
Art Unit 2685
Al
August 8, 2026
Prosecution Insights