Ex Parte Ho et al

Patent Trial and Appeal Board

Nov 13, 2018

15476106 (P.T.A.B. Nov. 13, 2018)

UNITED STA TES p A TENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE
APPLICATION NO. FILING DATE
15/476,106 03/31/2017
75589 7590 11/15/2018
Matheson Keys & Kordzik PLLC
7004 Bee Cave Rd.
Bldg. 1, Suite 110
Austin, TX 78746
FIRST NAMED INVENTOR
Horace C. Ho
UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
United States Patent and Trademark Office
Address: COMMISSIONER FOR PATENTS
P.O. Box 1450
Alexandria, Virginia 22313-1450
www .uspto.gov
ATTORNEY DOCKET NO. CONFIRMATION NO.
5299-03302 8441
EXAMINER
CRAWFORD, JASON
ART UNIT PAPER NUMBER
2844
NOTIFICATION DATE DELIVERY MODE
11/15/2018 ELECTRONIC
Please find below and/or attached an Office communication concerning this application or proceeding.
The time period for reply, if any, is set in the attached communication.
Notice of the Office communication was sent electronically on above-indicated "Notification Date" to the
following e-mail address(es):
kkordzik@mathesonkeys.com
jkeys@mathesonkeys.com
smaze@mathesonkeys.com
PTOL-90A (Rev. 04/07)
UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE
BEFORE THE PATENT TRIAL AND APPEAL BOARD
Ex parte HORACE C. HO, MARK QUILLING, REBECCA FRANK,
REBECCA M. HO, and NA V SOOCH 1
Appeal2018-002417
Application 15/476,106
Technology Center 2800
Before BRADLEY R. GARRIS, JEFFREY T. SMITH, and
MICHAEL G. McMANUS, Administrative Patent Judges.
GARRIS, Administrative Patent Judge.
DECISION ON APPEAL
Pursuant to 35 U.S.C. § 134, Appellant appeals from the Examiner's
final rejection of claims 6-16 under 35 U.S.C. § 103 as unpatentable over
Morchon (US 2013/0285574 Al, published October 31, 2013) in view of
Feng (US 2011/0234366 Al, published September 29, 2011). We have
jurisdiction under 35 U.S.C. § 6.
1 Appellant is the Applicant, Ketra, Inc., which is identified as the real party
in interest (Appeal Br. 1 ).
Appeal2018-002417
Application 15/476,106
We AFFIRM.
Appellant claims a lighting control system comprising a plurality of
lamps interconnected by a wireless network, a subset of the lamps
corresponding to a group of lamps having the same pre-defined scene ( e.g.,
lighting brightness/intensity (see, e.g., Spec. ,r 68)) or show content stored
therein, and a control device comprising a button to activate the group of
lamps at substantially the same time based on their stored content (sole
independent claim 6).
A copy of representative claim 6, taken from the Claims Appendix of
the Appeal Brief, appears below.
A lighting control system, comprising:
a plurality of lamps interconnected within a residence by a wireless network;
a subset of the plurality of lamps corresponding to a group of lamps having
the same pre-defined scene or show content stored therein based on their
function and location within the residence; and
a control device comprising a button which is configured to forward a
groupcast message addressed to only the group of lamps and to activate the
group of lamps at substantially the same time based on their stored content.
Because Appellant does not present separate arguments specifically
directed to the dependent claims (Appeal Br. 3-7), claims 7-16 will stand or
fall with their parent independent claim 6.
We will sustain the Examiner's rejection for the reasons expressed in
the Final Office Action, the Answer, and below.
2
Appeal2018-002417
Application 15/476,106
In rejecting claim 6, the Examiner finds that Morchon discloses a
lighting control system of the general type claimed except Morchon's
control device does not include a button to forward the groupcast message
(Final Action 2-3). The Examiner finds that Feng teaches a lighting control
system comprising a control device having such a button and concludes that
it would have been obvious to provide Marchand's control device with a
button to forward the groupcast message as taught by Feng (id. at 3).
Appellant does not contest the Examiner's proposed combination of
Morchon and Feng but instead disputes the Examiner's finding that
Morchon's lighting control system comprises a group of lamps having the
same pre-defined scene or show content stored therein as claimed (Appeal
Br. 3-7). According to Appellant, "Morchon describes groupcasting a
function F ... and depending upon the unique location, address, temperature
and/or external source values stored in each lamp, lamp output is controlled"
(id. at 6). Appellant contends "[ t ]hus, the only content stored in lamps 22 of
Garcia Morchon are unique location/position, network addresses,
temperatures, etc. given to each lamp[, and] [t]here is no scene or show
content stored in the lamps" (id.).
The Examiner responds by explaining that predetermined functions
are loaded in the internal storage of Morchon's lamps or luminaires and that
when a group of lamps/luminaires is selected via a groupcasted function,
"each of the luminaires 22 will then draw out [the desired] pre-stored
content (predefined functions) from their internal storage" ( Ans. 3 ( citing,
e.g., Morchon ,r,r 6, 75, 80)).
3
Appeal2018-002417
Application 15/476,106
In reply, Appellant argues that "[p ]redetermined functions within
lmninaires 22 ... absolutely cannot be scenes since to do so would be to ...
ignore the explicit statement [in Morchon's ,r 66] that the invention enables
multicast messaging and control 'without making use of scenes'" (Reply
Br. 3).
Appellant's argument incorrectly interprets paragraph 66 of Morchon
as stating that the invention does not make use of scenes. The paragraph
discloses "a multicast (broadcast) message according to the invention
enables to flexibly set the light levels at the luminaires to individual,
differentiated, values without making use of scenes" (Morchon ,r 66). When
properly interpreted, this disclosure teaches it is Morchon's multicast
message that does not make use of scenes. Such an interpretation is
supported by Morchon's disclosure as a whole including the paragraph 6
teaching of a multicast or groupcast message that compresses "the
distributed light settings using one or more functions in order to reduce the
communicational overhead [whereby] [ e Jach luminaire addressed by the
multicast message can recover its particular light setting by evaluating the
function( s )" (Morchon ,r 6). 2
The argument also lacks persuasive merit because Appellant fails to
explain how Morchon's group of luminaires would be able to produce a
desired scene ( e.g., a desired light brightness setting) without making use of
2 Appellant's Specification similarly teaches reducing network message
traffic, for example, by groupcasting only a button number associated with
group addresses (Spec. ,r 73).
4
Appeal2018-002417
Application 15/476,106
scenes as argued. We reiterate that Morchon expressly teaches "[ e Jach
lmninaire addressed by the multicast message can recover its particular light
setting by evaluating the function(s)" (i-f 6 (emphasis added)). The record
before us supports the Examiner's above determination that each luminaire
of Morchon's group recovers its desired light setting or scene from content
internally stored in the luminaire by evaluating the groupcast function
associated with such a scene.
For the above-stated reasons and those given by the Examiner, we
sustain the§ 103 rejection of claims 6-16 as unpatentable over Morchon in
view of Feng.
The decision of the Examiner is affirmed.
No time period for taking any subsequent action in connection with
this appeal may be extended under 37 C.F.R. § 1.136(a). See 37 C.F.R. §
1.136(a)(l )(iv).
AFFIRMED
5