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 Interpretation
Observation: Claim 5 is a method claim introducing contingent limitations with terms "in a case". Examiner is not required to present evidence of the obviousness because the condition might not be met. Examiner is not required to reject these claims under BRI. See EMPEP 2111.04- II CONTIGENT LIMITATIONs "Therefore "[t]he Examiner did not need to present evidence of the obviousness of the [] method steps of claim 1 that are not required to be performed under a broadest reasonable interpretation of the claim
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 1-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as failing to set forth 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.
Regarding Claims 1, 8, and 15: The instant claims recite “the IOT device is capable of performing”. It is unclear whether the term “is capable of” would or would not perform the functions listed in the claim’s limitations. This would render the claims indefinite. For purpose of examination, examiner interprets this term as “the IoT device is
Regarding Claims 2-7, 9-14, 16-20: The dependent claims 2-7, 9-14, 16-20 are rejected as they depend on the independent claims 1, 8, and 15.
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 1-3, 5-6, 8-10, 12-13, 15-17, and 19-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a1) as being anticipated by CHO et al. (“CHO”, US 20210241925 A1) hereinafter CHO.
Regarding claim 1, CHO teaches a method, performed by an electronic device (Fig. 7, Fig. 5, Fig. 10, first server), for controlling an Internet of Things (IoT) device (Fig. 5, Fig. 7, Fig. 10, 330, 340, 350 IoT devices), the method comprising:
obtaining, by the electronic device, device information regarding a function that the IoT device is capable of performing ([0231-237] Fig. 15, collect status data of IoT device)([0150] Each of the plurality of IoT devices 330, 340, and 350 may transmit unique information (model name, firmware version, network ID, product specification, etc.) of the IoT device, current status data of the IoT device, and/or feedback to the control signal transmitted from the first server 110 to the first server 110. The first server 110 may grasp a status of each of the IoT devices 330, 340, and 350 through status data and feedback transmitted from each of the IoT devices 330, 340, and 350, and the first server 110 may grasp the control result of each of the IoT devices 330, 340, and 350);
obtaining, by the electronic device, context information related to a user's behavior ([0232] Fig. 15, The first server 110 learns the user's history using the IoT device or the history of the service provided through a function of the IoT device with artificial intelligence (S302))([0149, 0164, 0212, 0216]);
determining, by the electronic device, based on the device information and the context information, at least one recommended application for controlling the IoT device ([0231-0237] Fig. 15, he first server 110 searches for an application or software to be recommended to the user among applications or software registered in the second server 120 based on the learning result of the above-described history (S310).);
preloading, by the electronic device, data required to launch the at least one recommended application ([0231-0237] Fig. 15, the first server 110 downloads the application or software from the second server 120 (S320), The first server 110 executes the downloaded application or software on the first server 110 (S330), and the executing application or software generates a control signal or command for an individual IoT device (S340).); and
according to an external input signal for selecting at least one of the at least one recommended application, launching, by the electronic device, the selected at least one recommended application ([0231-0237] Fig. 15, the first server 110 downloads the application or software from the second server 120 (S320), The first server 110 executes the downloaded application or software on the first server 110 (S330), and the executing application or software generates a control signal or command for an individual IoT device (S340), When the user purchases or subscribes to an application or software from the second server 120, the first server 110 downloads the application or software from the second server 120 (S320))([0218] the user can conveniently purchase and drive apps.).
Regarding claim 2, CHO teaches the method of claim 1, further comprising
CHO teaches performing in advance an update required to launch the at least one recommended application ([0148-0150, 0178] Fig. 5, The first server 110 transmits the generated control signal or control command to the individual IoT device to enable to directly control the individual IoT device.).
Regarding claim 3, CHO teaches the method of claim 1, further comprising
CHO teaches rearranging the at least one recommended application according to a change in the context information ([0164] The first server 110 may learn the user's IoT device usage history using the data learning unit 132 of the AI processor 131 and classify applications or software to be recommended to the user. Further, the first server 110 may grasp the user's life pattern using the data learning unit 132 of the AI processor 131 and predict a product in which the user is expected to need or advertisement for the product to provide the product or the advertisement to the user.).
Regarding claim 5, CHO teaches the method of claim 1, further comprising:
CHO teaches in case that an application controlling the IoT device is used, determining, based on the device information and the context information, at least one recommended function that can be performed by the application;
preloading data required to execute the at least one recommended function ([0178] The first server 110 transmits the generated control signal or control command to the individual IoT device to enable to directly control the individual IoT device);
receiving an external input signal for selecting at least one of the at least one recommended function ([0175] Figs 9A-9B the refrigerator 350 may switch a mode of devices waiting for a user input to a power saving mode or may turn off power to minimize a power consumption amount)([0183-0186] the user service unit 1105 outputs the graphic g1 to the television 310 to enable the user to interact with the power consumption monitoring app 1201 a)([0188] Figs 9A-9B the graph i2 may set a predicted value or a warning value of a power consumption amount to enable the user to take an action according to the power consumption amount)([0206] Figs 9A-9B to enable the user to grasp the state of the air conditioner 320. Further, the user may interact with the graphic g2 to set an operation mode of the air conditioner 320.); and
redirecting to a menu for controlling the IoT device according to the received external input signal ([0175] Figs 9A-9B the refrigerator 350 may switch a mode of devices waiting for a user input to a power saving mode or may turn off power to minimize a power consumption amount)([0183-0186] the user service unit 1105 outputs the graphic g1 to the television 310 to enable the user to interact with the power consumption monitoring app 1201 a)([0188] Figs 9A-9B the graph i2 may set a predicted value or a warning value of a power consumption amount to enable the user to take an action according to the power consumption amount)([0206] Figs 9A-9B to enable the user to grasp the state of the air conditioner 320. Further, the user may interact with the graphic g2 to set an operation mode of the air conditioner 320.).
Regarding claim 6, CHO teaches the method of claim 5, further comprising
CHO teaches rearranging the at least one recommended function according to a change in the context information ([0175] Figs 9A-9B the refrigerator 350 may switch a mode of devices waiting for a user input to a power saving mode or may turn off power to minimize a power consumption amount)([0183-0186] the user service unit 1105 outputs the graphic g1 to the television 310 to enable the user to interact with the power consumption monitoring app 1201 a)([0188] Figs 9A-9B the graph i2 may set a predicted value or a warning value of a power consumption amount to enable the user to take an action according to the power consumption amount)([0206] Figs 9A-9B to enable the user to grasp the state of the air conditioner 320. Further, the user may interact with the graphic g2 to set an operation mode of the air conditioner 320.).
Regarding claim 8, claim 8 is rejected with the same reasoning as claim 1.
Regarding claim 9, claim 9 is rejected with the same reasoning as claim 2.
Regarding claim 10, claim 10 is rejected with the same reasoning as claim 3.
Regarding claim 12, claim 12 is rejected with the same reasoning as claim 5.
Regarding claim 13, claim 13 is rejected with the same reasoning as claim 6.
Regarding claim 15, claim 15 is rejected with the same reasoning as claim 1.
Regarding claim 16, claim 16 is rejected with the same reasoning as claim 2.
Regarding claim 17, claim 17 is rejected with the same reasoning as claim 3.
Regarding claim 19, claim 19 is rejected with the same reasoning as claim 5.
Regarding claim 20, claim 20 is rejected with the same reasoning as claim 6.
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 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 set forth in Graham v. John Deere Co., 383 U.S. 1, 148 USPQ 459 (1966), that are applied 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.
Claims 4, 7, 11, 14, 18 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being un-patentable by CHO et al. (“CHO”, US 20210241925 A1) hereinafter CHO, in view of Yi et al. (“Yi”, US 20220256626 A1) hereinafter Yi.
Regarding claim 4, CHO teaches the method of claim 1, further comprising,
CHO does not explicitly teach, but Yi teaches
before the at least one recommended application is launched, pre-connecting the IoT device controlled by the at least one recommended application ([0054-0056] Fig. 2, Fig. 4, Fig. 7, As shown in FIG. 2, the mobile phone may establish a P2P Wi-Fi connection to the smart television by using a preset proprietary Wi-Fi protocol. After the Wi-Fi connection is established, the mobile phone can display the smart television as an online device in the smart home APP)([0110-0115] Fig. 7, the mobile phone may display a smart television 701 as an online device in the display interface 501, that is, the smart home device such as the smart television 701 is successfully added to the mobile phone).
It would have been obvious to a person skilled in the art, before the effective filing date of the invention, to modify CHO in view of Yi in order to provide connect the IoT device to the electronic device before starting the application on the electronic device to control the IoT device because it would allow the mobile phone and the electronic device to provide control on the IoT devices that has established a successful connection with the mobile device (Yi, [0004-0006]).
Regarding claim 7, CHO teaches the method of claim 5, further comprising,
CHO does not explicitly teach, but Yi teaches
before the at least one recommended function is executed, pre-connecting the IoT device performing the at least one recommended function ([0054-0056] Fig. 2, Fig. 4, Fig. 7, As shown in FIG. 2, the mobile phone may establish a P2P Wi-Fi connection to the smart television by using a preset proprietary Wi-Fi protocol. After the Wi-Fi connection is established, the mobile phone can display the smart television as an online device in the smart home APP)([0110-0115] Fig. 7, the mobile phone may display a smart television 701 as an online device in the display interface 501, that is, the smart home device such as the smart television 701 is successfully added to the mobile phone).
It would have been obvious to a person skilled in the art, before the effective filing date of the invention, to modify CHO in view of Yi in order to provide connect the IoT device to the electronic device before starting the application on the electronic device to control the IoT device because it would allow the mobile phone and the electronic device to provide control on the IoT devices that has established a successful connection with the mobile device (Yi, [0004-0006]).
Regarding claim 11, claim 11 is rejected with the same reasoning as claim 4.
Regarding claim 14, claim 14 is rejected with the same reasoning as claim 7.
Regarding claim 18, claim 18 is rejected with the same reasoning as claim 4.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to FADI HAJ SAID whose telephone number is (571)272-2833. The examiner can normally be reached on 8:00 AM - 5:00 PM EST. 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 Follansbee can be reached on 571-272-3964. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300.
Information regarding the status of an application may be obtained from the Patent Application Information Retrieval (PAIR) system. Status information for published applications may be obtained from either Private PAIR or Public PAIR. Status information for unpublished applications is available through Private PAIR only. For more information about the PAIR system, see https://ppair-my.uspto.gov/pair/PrivatePair. Should you have questions on access to the Private PAIR system, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative or access to the automated information system, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
/FADI HAJ SAID/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2444
Prosecution Insights