DETAILED ACTION
Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status
The present application is being examined under the pre-AIA first to invent provisions.
Claim Status
Claims 1-30 are pending for examination.
Non-Statutory Double Patenting
The nonstatutory double patenting rejection is based on a judicially created doctrine grounded in public policy (a policy reflected in the statute) so as to prevent the unjustified or improper timewise extension of the “right to exclude” granted by a patent and to prevent possible harassment by multiple assignees. A nonstatutory double patenting rejection is appropriate where the conflicting claims are not identical, but at least one examined application claim is not patentably distinct from the reference claim(s) because the examined application claim is either anticipated by, or would have been obvious over, the reference claim(s). See, e.g., In re Berg, 140 F.3d 1428, 46 USPQ2d 1226 (Fed. Cir. 1998); In re Goodman, 11 F.3d 1046, 29 USPQ2d 2010 (Fed. Cir. 1993); In re Longi, 759 F.2d 887, 225 USPQ 645 (Fed. Cir. 1985); In re Van Ornum, 686 F.2d 937, 214 USPQ 761 (CCPA 1982); In re Vogel, 422 F.2d 438, 164 USPQ 619 (CCPA 1970); In re Thorington, 418 F.2d 528, 163 USPQ 644 (CCPA 1969).
A timely filed terminal disclaimer in compliance with 37 CFR 1.321(c) or 1.321(d) may be used to overcome an actual or provisional rejection based on nonstatutory double patenting provided the reference application or patent either is shown to be commonly owned with the examined application, or claims an invention made as a result of activities undertaken within the scope of a joint research agreement. See MPEP § 717.02 for applications subject to examination under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA as explained in MPEP § 2159. See MPEP § 2146 et seq. for applications not subject to examination under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA . A terminal disclaimer must be signed in compliance with 37 CFR 1.321(b).
The filing of a terminal disclaimer by itself is not a complete reply to a nonstatutory double patenting (NSDP) rejection. A complete reply requires that the terminal disclaimer be accompanied by a reply requesting reconsideration of the prior Office action. Even where the NSDP rejection is provisional the reply must be complete. See MPEP § 804, subsection I.B.1. For a reply to a non-final Office action, see 37 CFR 1.111(a). For a reply to final Office action, see 37 CFR 1.113(c). A request for reconsideration while not provided for in 37 CFR 1.113(c) may be filed after final for consideration. See MPEP §§ 706.07(e) and 714.13.
The USPTO Internet website contains terminal disclaimer forms which may be used. Please visit www.uspto.gov/patent/patents-forms. The actual filing date of the application in which the form is filed determines what form (e.g., PTO/SB/25, PTO/SB/26, PTO/AIA /25, or PTO/AIA /26) should be used. A web-based eTerminal Disclaimer may be filled out completely online using web-screens. An eTerminal Disclaimer that meets all requirements is auto-processed and approved immediately upon submission. For more information about eTerminal Disclaimers, refer to www.uspto.gov/patents/apply/applying-online/eterminal-disclaimer.
Claims 1-20 are rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claims 1-116 of U.S. Patent No.: 9,553,451 B2. Although the claims at issue are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other because the pending claims are obvious modification of the patented claims.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 101
35 U.S.C. 101 reads as follows:
Whoever invents or discovers any new and useful process, machine, manufacture, or composition of matter, or any new and useful improvement thereof, may obtain a patent therefor, subject to the conditions and requirements of this title.
Claims 21-30 are non-statutory under the most recent interpretation of the
Interim Guidelines regarding 35 U.S.C.101 because: the computer readable medium claimed is not positively disclosed in the specification as a statutory only embodiment. The broadest reasonable interpretation of a claim drawn to a computer readable medium (also called machine readable medium and other such variations) typically covers forms of non-transitory tangible media and transitory propagating signals per se in view of the ordinary and customary meaning of computer readable media, particularly when the specification is silent. See MPEP 2111.01. When the broadest reasonable interpretation of a claim covers a signal per se, the claim must be rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 101 as covering non-statutory subject matter. See In re Nuijten, 500 F.3d 1346, 1356-57 (Fed. Cir. 2007) transitory embodiments are not directed to statutory subject matter) and Interim Examination Instructions for Evaluating Subject Matter Eligibility Under 35 U.S.C. § 101, Aug. 24, 2009; p. 2. To overcome this rejection, the claim may be amended to recite “At least one non-transitory computer readable storge medium ... ”.
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 pre-AIA 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 –
(b) the invention was patented or described in a printed publication in this or a foreign country or in public use or on sale in this country, more than one year prior to the date of application for patent in the United States.
Claims 1-2, 5, 7-12, 15, 17-22, 25 and 27-30 are rejected under pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102(b) as being anticipated by Shorty (Pub. No.: US 2003/0109270 A1).
Regarding claim 1, Shorty teaches a broadcast controller (Fig. 1, controller) comprising a control circuit, an actuator, and a radio-frequency (RF) communication circuit (para [0425] – [0441], the controller includes microprocessor, keypad and RF transceiver), wherein the control circuit is configured to:
begin operating in an association mode responsive to the actuator being actuated (para [0292], “The user sets the controller in device programming state, and is requested to specify which group the new device should be placed in.”); and
while operating in the association mode:
receive, via the RF communication circuit, a first digital message comprising a first unique identifier that is associated with a first commander (Fig. 3, para [0165], “In an alternative embodiment illustrated in FIG. 2, all controllers and all devices have pre-set unique identifiers 201 and 202 written in a memory during fabrication and which cannot be altered. The controllers of the system must learn the unique identifiers from all devices to be controlled by the controller.”, para [0293], “The user presses and holds a button on the device whereby the device sends its device identifier to listening controller as mentioned in 1.” and [0297], “The group table in non-volatile memory on the controller is updated with the new device identifier.” Controller receives and stores the unique device identifier from device 1 during pairing mode.);
transmit, via the RF communication circuit, a first query message comprising the first unique identifier that is associated with the first commander (para [0049] and para [0051], “transmitting a first signal from the controller for instructing a first device to discover other devices within its range, said signal comprising device identifiers from the device table,”. The controller transmits an instruction to device 1 to perform discovery of other devices.);
receive, via the RF communication circuit, a second digital message that is responsive to the first query message, the second digital message comprising a second unique identifier that is associated with a first energy controller (para [0052]- [0054], “receiving any third signals at the first device and storing data representing the device identifiers of the devices which transmitted the received third signals in the routing line in the memory of the first device.” and para [0055] -[0057], “receiving the fourth signal at the controller and storing the routing line in the routing table of the memory of the controller.”. The controller receives unique identifiers from devices 2, 3 that are connected to the controller via device 1. Device 1 being the repeater.); and
determine, based on the receipt of the second digital message comprising the second unique identifier that is associated with the first energy controller, that the first energy controller is responsive to the first commander (para [0055] Preferably, the memory of the controller is further adapted to store data representing a routing table indicating for each of the plurality of devices, other devices which each device can successfully transmit signals to and receive signals from, ” and para [0125], “determining a route to the specified device in the routing table, the route using one or more repeating devices, the first of which is the first repeating device, ” and para [0126], “transmitting a second routed signal from the controller at least once, said signal comprising the identifier of the specified device as a destination identifier and the identifiers of the one or more repeating devices from the route determined in step D as repeater identifiers,”. The controller stores the routing table that maps a path to device 3 via repeater device 1. A command to control device 3 includes the identifier of the repeater device 1 and the destination device 3).
Regarding claim 2, Shorty teaches the broadcast controller of claim 1, wherein the control circuit is configured to:
transmit, via the RF communication circuit, a second query message comprising the second unique identifier that is associated with the first energy controller (Fig. 8, the controller transmits an instruction to device 3 to perform discovery of devices 1, 2, 4 and 5);
receive, via the RF communication circuit, a third digital message in response to the second query message, wherein the third digital message comprises a plurality of unique identifiers that are associated with a plurality of commanders, wherein the first commander is one of the plurality of commanders (Fig. 8, the controller receives a routing table from device 3 after the discovery of device 1, 2 4 and 5); and
determine, based on the receipt of the third digital message comprising the plurality of unique identifiers that are associated with the plurality of commanders, that the first energy controller is responsive to each commander of the plurality of commanders (Fig. 8, the controller determines based on the routing table a plural of devices 1, 2, 4 and 5 that are responsive to the repeater device 3 and vice versa).
Regarding claim 5, Shorty teaches the broadcast controller of claim 1, wherein the control circuit is configured to:
while operating in the association mode:
receive, via the RF communication circuit, a third digital message comprising a third unique identifier that is associated with a second commander (para [0293], the controller receives the unique identifier of another new device during paring mode);
transmit, via the RF communication circuit, a second query message comprising the third unique identifier that is associated with the second commander;
receive, via the RF communication circuit, a fourth digital message that is responsive to the second query message, the fourth digital message comprising a fourth unique identifier that is associated with a second energy controller; and
determine, based on the receipt of the fourth digital message comprising the fourth unique identifier that is associated with the second energy controller, that the second energy controller is responsive to the second commander (paras [0050] – [0057]. The controller instructs the newly paired device to perform discovery of its nearby devices, and transmits the routing table back to the controller),
wherein the first commander and the first energy controller are associated with a first independent unit of a load control system (Fig. 16, the lamps and the toaster in the kitchen are considered as a first independent unit), wherein the second commander and the second energy controller are associated with a second independent unit of the load control system (fig. 16, the TV and lamp in the living room are considered as a second independent unit).
Regarding claim 7, Shorty teaches a broadcast controller of claim 1, wherein the first energy controller comprises a dimmer switch, a motorized window treatment, or a light-emitting diode (LED) driver (Fig. 16, para [0332], “In a second preferred embodiment, also referred to as Power & Lighting control, the system comprises a set of products for controlling the power level to electric appliances connected to the devices, such as lamps, air conditioning, and kitchen appliances.” and para [0037], “By selecting this mood, all lamps in the living room would be dimmed to a predetermined level creating desired lighting.”).
Regarding claim 8, Shorty teaches the broadcast controller of claim 1, wherein the first commander comprises an occupancy sensor, a remote controller, or a temperature sensor (Fig. 16, para [0337], “In another example, the mood comprises all thermostats 15 in the house and the settings are the desired room temperatures in each room. Hence by selecting the mood, a predetermined temperature set-up can be set around the house.”).
Regarding claim 9, Shorty teaches the broadcast controller of claim 1, wherein the control circuit is configured to:
transmit wireless control signals, via the RF communication circuit, to the first energy controller (para [0126], “transmitting a second routed signal from the controller at least once, said signal comprising the identifier of the specified device as a destination identifier and the identifiers of the one or more repeating devices from the route determined in step D as repeater identifiers,”. The controller is configured to transmit instruction to any connected device via its RF transceiver.).
Regarding claim 10, Shorty teaches the broadcast controller of claim 1, wherein the broadcast controller comprises a user interface (Fig. 12, and Fig. 15, the controller includes a display and control buttons) and one or more antennas (para [0426] – [0427], “The controllers and the devices according to the first and/or second embodiment have some common hardware such as: RF Transceiver”).
Regarding claim 11, recites a method for the controller of claim 1. Therefore, the claim is rejected for the same reason.
Regarding claim 12, recites a method for the controller of claim 2. Therefore, the claim is rejected for the same reason.
Regarding claim 15, recites a method for the controller of claim 5. Therefore, the claim is rejected for the same reason.
Regarding claim 17, recites a method for the controller of claim 7. Therefore, the claim is rejected for the same reason.
Regarding claim 18, recites a method for the controller of claim 8. Therefore, the claim is rejected for the same reason.
Regarding claim 19, recites a method for the controller of claim 9. Therefore, the claim is rejected for the same reason.
Regarding claim 20, recites a method for the controller of claim 10. Therefore, the claim is rejected for the same reason.
Regarding claim 21, recites a computer readable storage medium for the controller of claim 1. Therefore, the claim is rejected for the same reason.
Regarding claim 22, recites a computer readable storage medium for the controller of claim 2. Therefore, the claim is rejected for the same reason.
Regarding claim 25, recites a computer readable storage medium for the controller of claim 5. Therefore, the claim is rejected for the same reason.
Regarding claim 27, recites a computer readable storage medium for the controller of claim 7. Therefore, the claim is rejected for the same reason.
Regarding claim 28, recites a computer readable storage medium for the controller of claim 8. Therefore, the claim is rejected for the same reason.
Regarding claim 29, recites a computer readable storage medium for the controller of claim 9. Therefore, the claim is rejected for the same reason.
Regarding claim 30, recites a computer readable storage medium for the controller of claim 10. Therefore, the claim is rejected for the same reason.
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 pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 103(a) which forms the basis for all obviousness rejections set forth in this Office action:
(a) A patent may not be obtained though the invention is not identically disclosed or described as set forth in section 102, if the differences between the subject matter sought to be patented and the prior art are such that the subject matter as a whole would have been obvious at the time the invention was made to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which said subject matter 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 pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 103(a) 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 6, 16 and 16 are rejected under pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 103(a) as being unpatentable over Shorty (Pub. No.: US 2003/0109270 A1) in view of Carmen (Pub. No.: US 2008/0068204 A1).
Regarding claim 6, Shorty teaches the broadcast controller of claim 1, wherein each device 1-N includes a unique identifier but fails to expressly teach wherein the first unique identifier comprises a serial number of the first commander, wherein the second unique identifier comprises a serial number of the first energy controller.
However, in the same field of device identification, Carmen teaches the unique identifier comprises of the serial number of the device. See para [0021], “As in the prior art control systems, the serial number is used to uniquely identify each control device during initial addressing procedures.” and Claim 8 “wherein the unique identifier comprises a manufacturer serial number of the control device.”.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was made to modify Shorty’s unique identifier with the serial number of the device to uniquely identify the device.
Regarding claim 16, recites a method for the controller of claim 6. Therefore, the claim is rejected for the same reason.
Regarding claim 26, recites a computer readable storage medium for the controller of claim 6. Therefore, the claim is rejected for the same reason.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Newman (Pat. No.: US 7,498,952 B2) teaches pairing and controlling a plurality of electrical devices with a master controller.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ZHEN Y WU whose telephone number is (571)272-5711. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday, 10AM-6PM, 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, 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.
/ZHEN Y WU/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2685
Prosecution Insights