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 .
Status of Claims
This action is responsive to Applicant’s claims filed 05/23/2025.
Claims 1-16 are currently pending and have been examined here.
Claims 2-16 are newly added.
Claim 1 has been amended.
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 1-16 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.
As per claims 1 and 9, each of the claims recites multiple requests to control the article. The claims, in their final line, then recite “in response to receiving the request, remotely controlling the article.” It would be unclear to one of ordinary skill in the art as to which “request” is referred to by “the request” in the final line, since multiple requests are recited, and then only a single request is referred back to by the claims. Therefore, one of ordinary skill in the art would not be reasonable apprised of the scope of the claimed invention, and claims 1 and 9 are rejected 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.
As per claims 2-8 and 10-16, these claims are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b), because they depend from claims 1 and 9 and do not cure the above deficiencies.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
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 the appropriate paragraphs of 35 U.S.C. 102 that form the basis for the rejections under this section made in this Office action:
A person shall be entitled to a patent unless –
(a)(1) the claimed invention was patented, described in a printed publication, or in public use, on sale, or otherwise available to the public before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claims 1-4, 6-12 and 14-16 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Bucuk, Asim (U.S. PG Pub. No. 20100274859; hereinafter "Bucuk").
As per claim 1, Bucuk teaches:
A method for controlling operation of an article, the method comprising:
Bucuk teaches a system and method for controlling operations of devices (articles). (Bucuk: paragraph [0008], abstract)
receiving, from an article and over a first wireless network, a communication including at least an article identifier, wherein the article includes an antenna for communicating and a sensor for detecting at least one interaction event;
Bucuk teaches that a user device may receive, using a radio connection (a first wireless network), the identifiers of all devices (any of which may comprise the article) within range of the device. (Bucuk: paragraph [0118, 120, 122]) Bucuk teaches that each device may have the capability of detecting other devices which are determined to be within a proximity of the device (an interaction event). (Bucuk: paragraph [0118])
in response to receiving the communication, authenticating the article on a second wireless network based at least on the article identifier and a first set of credentials provided by a first device;
Bucuk teaches that the user device may send the identifier of a device within its proximity, along with an identifier of the user device (a first set of credentials) to an authentication server over a GPRS connection in order to determine whether the user device may connect to and control the device within its proximity. (Bucuk: paragraph [0122, 153, 161-171])
granting, based on a second set of credentials, authority to enable the first device to control operation of the article;
Bucuk teaches that authority to control the device may be granted based on a second set of credentials in the form of a newly re-written Bluetooth name transferred to the car to unlock it. (Bucuk: paragraph [0169])
receiving, from a second device over a third wireless network, a request to control operation of the article, the request include a third set of credentials;
Bucuk teaches that the user device may send the identifier of a device within its proximity, along with an identifier of the user device (a first set of credentials) to an authentication server over a GPRS connection in order to determine whether the user device may connect to and control the device within its proximity. (Bucuk: paragraph [0122, 153, 161-171]) Bucuk teaches that this process may be repeated for other devices, and the first connection may comprise passing the credential over a WiFi network, RFID, or NFC connection. Id.
granting, based on the third set of credentials, authority for the second device to remotely control the operation of the article;
Bucuk teaches that the user device may send the identifier of a device within its proximity, along with an identifier of the user device (a first set of credentials) to an authentication server over a GPRS connection in order to determine whether the user device may connect to and control the device within its proximity. (Bucuk: paragraph [0122, 153, 161-171]) Bucuk teaches that this process may be repeated for other devices, and the first connection may comprise passing the credential over a WiFi network, RFID, or NFC connection. Id. Bucuk teaches that authority to control the device may be granted based on a second set of credentials in the form of a newly re-written Bluetooth name transferred to the car to unlock it. (Bucuk: paragraph [0169])
receiving, from either the first device or the second device, a request to remotely control the operation of the article;
Bucuk teaches that authority to control the device may be granted based on a second set of credentials in the form of a newly re-written Bluetooth name transferred to the car to unlock it. (Bucuk: paragraph [0169])
and in response to receiving the request, remotely operating the article.
Bucuk teaches that authority to control the device may be granted based on a second set of credentials in the form of a newly re-written Bluetooth name transferred to the car to unlock it. (Bucuk: paragraph [0169])
As per claim 2, Bucuk teaches all of the limitations of claim 1, as outlined above, and further teaches:
wherein the first wireless network is a short range wireless network.
Bucuk teaches that a user device may receive, using a radio connection (a first wireless network), the identifiers of all devices (any of which may comprise the article) within range of the device. (Bucuk: paragraph [0118, 120, 122]) Bucuk further teaches that the first network may comprise a local network or a short range wireless network in the form of Wi-Fi, NFC, Bluetooth, lrDA RFID. (Bucuk: paragraph [0163])
As per claim 3, Bucuk teaches all of the limitations of claim 1, as outlined above, and further teaches:
wherein the first wireless network is a local network.
Bucuk teaches that a user device may receive, using a radio connection (a first wireless network), the identifiers of all devices (any of which may comprise the article) within range of the device. (Bucuk: paragraph [0118, 120, 122]) Bucuk further teaches that the first network may comprise a local network or a short range wireless network in the form of Wi-Fi, NFC, Bluetooth, lrDA RFID. (Bucuk: paragraph [0163])
As per claim 4, Bucuk teaches all of the limitations of claim 1, as outlined above, and further teaches:
wherein the second wireless network is a Wi-Fi network.
Bucuk further teaches that the second wireless network may comprise WiFi. (Bucuk: paragraph [0089-90, 100])
As per claim 6, Bucuk teaches all of the limitations of claim 1, as outlined above, and further teaches:
wherein the third wireless network is a Wi-Fi network.
Bucuk teaches that a user device may receive, using a radio connection (a first wireless network), the identifiers of all devices (any of which may comprise the article) within range of the device. (Bucuk: paragraph [0118, 120, 122]) Bucuk further teaches that the first network may comprise a local network or a short range wireless network in the form of Wi-Fi, NFC, Bluetooth, lrDA RFID. (Bucuk: paragraph [0163])
As per claim 7, Bucuk teaches all of the limitations of claim 1, as outlined above, and further teaches:
wherein the third wireless network is a telecommunications network.
Bucuk teaches that a user device may receive, using a radio connection (a first wireless network), the identifiers of all devices (any of which may comprise the article) within range of the device. (Bucuk: paragraph [0118, 120, 122]) Bucuk further teaches that the first network may comprise a local network or a short range wireless network in the form of Wi-Fi, NFC, Bluetooth, lrDA RFID. (Bucuk: paragraph [0163])
As per claim 8, Bucuk teaches all of the limitations of claim 1, as outlined above, and further teaches:
wherein the at least one interaction event comprises an increase or decrease in voltage.
Bucuk teaches that each device may have the capability of detecting other devices which are determined to be within a proximity of the device (an interaction event). (Bucuk: paragraph [0118]) In teaching a Bluetooth detection, Bucuk teaches that the interaction event may comprise a decrease in voltage. Id.
As per claim 9, Bucuk teaches the limitations of this claim which are substantially identical to those of claim 1, as outlined above, and further teaches:
A system comprising:
Bucuk teaches a system and method for controlling operations of devices (articles). (Bucuk: paragraph [0008], abstract)
at least one processor;
Bucuk teaches the implementation of the system and method on a computing device which may comprise a processor which executes code stored in memory in order to perform the functions of the system. (Bucuk: paragraph [0070, 88, 292-293])
and at least one memory, storing instructions which when executed by the at least one processor, cause the system to:
Bucuk teaches the implementation of the system and method on a computing device which may comprise a processor which executes code stored in memory in order to perform the functions of the system. (Bucuk: paragraph [0070, 88, 292-293])
As per claims 10-12 and 14-16, Bucuk teaches the limitations of these claims which are substantially identical to those of claims 2-4 and 6-8, and claims 10-12 and 14-16 are rejected for the same reasons as claims 2-4 and 6-8, as outlined above.
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.
The factual inquiries for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows:
1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art.
2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue.
3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art.
4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness.
This application currently names joint inventors. In considering patentability of the claims the examiner presumes that the subject matter of the various claims was commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the claimed invention(s) absent any evidence to the contrary. Applicant is advised of the obligation under 37 CFR 1.56 to point out the inventor and effective filing dates of each claim that was not commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the later invention in order for the examiner to consider the applicability of 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(C) for any potential 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) prior art against the later invention.
Claims 5 and 13 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Bucuk in view of Saylor, Michael J. (U.S. Patent No. 9,154,303; hereinafter "Saylor").
As per claim 5, Bucuk teaches all of the limitations of claim 1, as outlined above, but does not appear to explicitly teach:
wherein the second wireless network is a local network.
Saylor, however, teaches that a server may communicate with a client device in the field of credentialing through the use of a local area network. (Saylor: col. 4 lines 34-41, col. 16 lines 5-15) It can be seen that each element is taught by either Bucuk, or by Saylor. Using the LAN to communicate with the server, as taught by Saylor does not affect the normal functioning of the elements of the claim which are taught by Bucuk. Because the elements do not affect the normal functioning of each other, the results of their combination would have been predictable. Therefore, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, it would have been obvious to combine the teachings of Saylor with the teachings of Bucuk, since the result is merely a combination of old elements, and, since the elements do not affect the normal functioning of each other, the results of the combination would have been predictable.
As per claim 13, Bucuk in view of Saylor teaches the limitations of this claim which are substantially identical to those of claim 5, and claim 13 is rejected for the same reasons as claim 5, as outlined above.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to EMMETT K WALSH whose telephone number is (571)272-2624. The examiner can normally be reached Mon.-Fri. 6 a.m. - 4:45 p.m..
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, Resha Desai can be reached at 571-270-7792. 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.
/EMMETT K. WALSH/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3628