www.uspto.gov
`
`UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
`United States Patent and TrademarkOffice
`Address; COMMISSIONER FOR PATENTS
`P.O. Box 1450
`Alexandria, Virginia 22313-1450
`
`16/429,625
`
`06/03/2019
`
`JUNICHI MORITA
`
`731456.524C1
`
`1975
`
`Seed IP Law Group LLP/Panasonic (PIPCA)
`701 5th Avenue, Suite 5400
`Seattle, WA 98104
`
`HAMMOND,DEDET KHALIEAH
`
`2896
`
`08/06/2020
`
`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):
`USPTOeAction @ SeedIP.com
`
`pairlinkdktg @seedip.com
`
`PTOL-90A (Rev. 04/07)
`
`

`

`
`
`Disposition of Claims*
`1-2 and 4-15 is/are pending in the application.
`)
`Claim(s)
`5a) Of the above claim(s) ___ is/are withdrawn from consideration.
`CC) Claim(s)
`is/are allowed.
`Claim(s) 1-2 and 4-15 is/are rejected.
`S)
`) O Claim(s)___is/are objected to.
`C) Claim(s
`are subjectto restriction and/or election requirement
`)
`S)
`* If any claims have been determined allowable, you maybeeligible to benefit from the Patent Prosecution Highway program at a
`participating intellectual property office for the corresponding application. For more information, please see
`http://www.uspto.gov/patents/init_events/pph/index.jsp or send an inquiry to PPHfeedback@uspto.gov.
`
`) )
`
`Application Papers
`10) The specification is objected to by the Examiner.
`11)0) The drawing(s) filedon__ is/are: a)) accepted or b)() objected to by the Examiner.
`Applicant may not request that any objection to the drawing(s) be held in abeyance. See 37 CFR 1.85(a).
`Replacement drawing sheet(s) including the correction is required if the drawing(s) is objected to. See 37 CFR 1.121 (d).
`
`Priority under 35 U.S.C. § 119
`12)0) Acknowledgment is made of a claim for foreign priority under 35 U.S.C. § 119(a)-(d)or (f).
`Certified copies:
`c)X None ofthe:
`b)L) Some**
`a)L) All
`1... Certified copies of the priority documents have been received.
`2.1.) Certified copies of the priority documents have been received in Application No.
`3.1.) Copies of the certified copies of the priority documents have been received in this National Stage
`application from the International Bureau (PCT Rule 17.2(a)).
`* See the attached detailed Office action for a list of the certified copies not received.
`
`Attachment(s)
`
`1)
`
`Notice of References Cited (PTO-892)
`
`Information Disclosure Statement(s) (PTO/SB/08a and/or PTO/SB/08b)
`2)
`Paper No(s)/Mail Date
`U.S. Patent and Trademark Office
`
`3) (J Interview Summary (PTO-413)
`Paper No(s)/Mail Date
`(Qj Other:
`
`4)
`
`PTOL-326 (Rev. 11-13)
`
`Office Action Summary
`
`Part of Paper No./Mail Date 20200803
`
`Application No.
`Applicant(s)
`16/429,625
`MORITAetal.
`
`Office Action Summary Art Unit|AIA (FITF) StatusExaminer
`DEDEI K HAMMOND
`2896
`Yes
`
`
`
`-- The MAILING DATEofthis communication appears on the cover sheet with the correspondence address --
`Period for Reply
`
`A SHORTENED STATUTORY PERIOD FOR REPLYIS SET TO EXPIRE 3 MONTHS FROM THE MAILING
`DATE OF THIS COMMUNICATION.
`Extensions of time may be available underthe provisions of 37 CFR 1.136(a). In no event, however, may a reply betimely filed after SIX (6) MONTHSfrom the mailing
`date of this communication.
`If NO period for reply is specified above, the maximum statutory period will apply and will expire SIX (6) MONTHSfrom the mailing date of this communication.
`-
`- Failure to reply within the set or extended period for reply will, by statute, cause the application to become ABANDONED (35 U.S.C. § 133}.
`Any reply received by the Office later than three months after the mailing date of this communication, evenif timely filed, may reduce any earned patent term
`adjustment. See 37 CFR 1.704(b).
`
`Status
`
`1) Responsive to communication(s) filed on 4/28/2020.
`LC} A declaration(s)/affidavit(s) under 37 CFR 1.130(b) was/werefiled on
`
`2a)(J This action is FINAL. 2b))This action is non-final.
`3) An election was madeby the applicant in responseto a restriction requirement set forth during the interview
`on
`; the restriction requirement and election have been incorporated into this action.
`4\(Z Since this application is in condition for allowance except for formal matters, prosecution as to the merits is
`closed in accordance with the practice under Exparte Quayle, 1935 C.D. 11, 453 O.G. 213.
`
`

`

`Application/Control Number: 16/429,625
`Art Unit: 2896
`
`Page 2
`
`Notice of Pre-AlA 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.
`
`Information Disclosure Statement
`
`The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on March 18, 2020is in compliance with
`
`the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statementis being considered by
`
`the examiner.
`
`Receipt is acknowledged of applicant’s amendmentfiled on April 28, 2020. Claims 1, 4-6 and 9
`
`have been amended. Claim 3 has been cancelled. Claims 10-15 have been added. Claims 1-2 and 4-15
`
`are pending.
`
`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-AlA 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 ofrejection 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 ordinaryskill in the art to which the
`claimed invention pertains. Patentability shall not be negated by the manner in which the invention
`was made.
`
`

`

`Application/Control Number: 16/429,625
`Art Unit: 2896
`
`Page 3
`
`This application currently names joint inventors. In considering patentability of the claims the
`
`examiner presumesthat the subject matter of the various claims was commonly ownedas 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 ownedas 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 1-2 and 4-6, 9-13 and 15 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over
`
`Davis et al. (Pub. No.: US 2013/0335313); hereinafter referred to as “Davis”.
`
`RegardingClaim 1, Davis teaches, in Figures 1-4, a communication control device comprising: a
`
`performance position determiner that determines, from amongfirst to Nth zones(N is an integer
`
`greater than or equal to 2) (102) each used to display information by using differencesin light emission
`
`states of light emitters included in a plurality of slave devices (106), the first zone and the second zone in
`
`which the information is to be displayed, on a basis of the information and positions of the plurality of
`
`slave devices ([0007], [0018-0019]), wherein the performance position determiner calculates a density
`
`of the plurality of slave devices in each of the first to Nth zones on a basis of the positions of the
`
`plurality of slave devices ([0020], [0024]) and a performancecontroller (140) that transmits, to each of
`
`the plurality of slave devices, a first control command that controls the light emission state of the light
`
`emitter in order to display the information at a plurality of positions between the zones ([0036-0038)).
`
`Davis teaches a plurality of zones (102). Davis does not explicitly teach a first or second zone.
`
`Prior to the effective filing date, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to modify
`
`the communication control device taught by Davis by including a first and second zone, since the
`
`numbering of zonesis arbitrary and a mere matter of design choice based on the physical layout of the
`
`venue in which the images would be displayed.
`
`

`

`Application/Control Number: 16/429,625
`Art Unit: 2896
`
`Page 4
`
`RegardingClaim 2, Davis teaches the communication control device according to Claim 1,
`
`wherein the information is in the form ofa still image ([0016]).
`
`RegardingClaim 4, Davis teaches the communication control device according to Claim 3,
`
`wherein the performanceposition determiner determines, from amongthe first to Nth zones, the one
`
`having the highest density of the plurality of slave devices and determines, from amongthe first to Nth
`
`zones, the one having the second highest density of the plurality of slave devices ([0024]). Davis teaches
`
`determining the density of the slave devices across zones, and adjusting the image data accordingly.
`
`Davis teaches a plurality of zones (102). Davis does not explicitly teach determining a first or
`
`second zone.Prior to the effectivefiling date, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the
`
`art to modify the communication control device taught by Davis by including a first and second zone
`
`based on slave device density, since the numbering of zonesis arbitrary and a mere matter of design
`
`choice based on the physical layout of the venue in which the images would bedisplayed.
`
`Regarding Claim 5, Davis teachesa plurality of zones (102). Davis does not explicitly teach
`
`determining a first zone, a second zone or a third zone. Prior to the effectivefiling date, it would have
`
`been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to modify the communication control device taught by
`
`Davis by including a first, second and third zone based on slave device density, since the numbering of
`
`zonesis arbitrary and a mere matter of design choice based on the physical layout of the venue in which
`
`the images would bedisplayed.
`
`Regarding Claim 6, Davis teachesa plurality of zones (102) and teachesdisplaying images across
`
`zones(see Figure 1). Davis does not explicitly teach determining a first zone, a second zone or a third
`
`zone.Prior to the effectivefiling date, it would have been obvious to one of ordinaryskill in the art to
`
`modify the communication control device taught by Davis by including a first, second and third zone
`
`based on slave device density, since the numbering of zonesis arbitrary and a mere matter of design
`
`choice based on the physical layout of the venue in which the images would bedisplayed.
`
`

`

`Application/Control Number: 16/429,625
`Art Unit: 2896
`
`Page 5
`
`RegardingClaim 8, Davis teachesa plurality of zones (102) and teachesdisplaying images across
`
`zones(see Figure 1). Davis does not explicitly teach determining a first zone, a second zone or a third
`
`zone.Prior to the effectivefiling date, it would have been obvious to one of ordinaryskill in the art to
`
`modify the communication control device taught by Davis by including a first, second and third zone
`
`based on slave device density, since the numbering of zonesis arbitrary and a mere matter of design
`
`choice based on the physical layout of the venue in which the images would bedisplayed.
`
`RegardingClaim 9, Davis teaches, in Figures 1-4, a communication control system comprising: a
`
`communication control device; at least one master device ([140]) connected to the communication
`
`control device (master device and control device are one unit) ; and a plurality of slave devices (106)
`
`wirelessly connected to the at least one master device ([0037]), each of a plurality of the slave devices
`
`including a light emitter ([0005]), wherein the communication control device includes a performance
`
`position determiner that determines, from amongfirst to Nth zones(N is an integer greater than or
`
`equal to 2) (102) each used to display information by using differencesin light emission statesoflight
`
`emitters included in the plurality of slave devices ([0007], [0018-0019]), the zones in which the
`
`information is to be displayed, on a basis of the information and positions of the plurality of slave
`
`devices and further includes a performance controller that transmits, to each of the plurality of slave
`
`devices, a first control command that controls the light emission state of the light emitter in order to
`
`display the information at a plurality of positions between the zones, wherein the performanceposition
`
`determiner calculates a density of the plurality of slave devices in each of the first to Nth zones ona
`
`basis of the positions of the plurality of slave devices and determines the zones on a basis of densities of
`
`the plurality of slave devices in the first to Nth zones ([0020, 0024]), and wherein each of the slave
`
`devices controls the light emission state of the light emitter on a basis of the first control command
`
`received via the at least one master device.
`
`

`

`Application/Control Number: 16/429,625
`Art Unit: 2896
`
`Page 6
`
`Davis teaches a plurality of zones (102). Davis does not explicitly teach a first or second zone.
`
`Prior to the effective filing date, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to modify
`
`the communication control device taught by Davis by including a first and second zone, since the
`
`numbering of zonesis arbitrary and a mere matter of design choice based on the physical layout of the
`
`venue in which the images would be displayed.
`
`Regarding Claim 10, Davis teaches, in Figures 1-4, a communication control device comprising: a
`
`performance position determiner (140) that determines, from amongfirst to Nth zones (N is an integer
`
`greater than or equal to 2) (102) each used to display information by using differencesin light emission
`
`states of light emitters included in a plurality of slave devices (106), the zones in which the information
`
`is to be displayed, on a basis of the information and positions of the plurality of slave devices ([0020]);
`
`and a performancecontroller that transmits, to each of the plurality of slave devices, a first control
`
`command that controls the light emission state of the light emitter in order to display the information at
`
`a plurality of positions between the first zone and the second zone ([0032]).
`
`Davis teaches a plurality of zones (102). Davis does not explicitly teach determining a first zone,
`
`a second zone or a third zone. Prior to the effectivefiling date, it would have been obvious to one of
`
`ordinary skill in the art to modify the communication control device taught by Davis by includingafirst,
`
`second and third zone based on slave device density, since the numbering of zonesis arbitrary and a
`
`mere matter of design choice based on the physical layout of the venue in which the images would be
`
`displayed.
`
`Regarding Claim 11, Davis teaches the communication control device according to Claim 10,
`
`wherein the information is in the form ofa still image ([0016]).
`
`Regarding Claim 12, Davis teaches the communication control device according to Claim 10,
`
`wherein the performanceposition determiner determines, from amongthe first to Nth zones, the one
`
`having the highest density of the plurality of slave devices and determines, from amongthe first to Nth
`
`

`

`Application/Control Number: 16/429,625
`Art Unit: 2896
`
`Page 7
`
`zones, the one having the second highest density of the plurality of slave devices ([0024]). Davis teaches
`
`determining the density of the slave devices across zones, and adjusting the image data accordingly.
`
`Davis teaches a plurality of zones (102). Davis does not explicitly teach determining a first or
`
`second zone.Prior to the effectivefiling date, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the
`
`art to modify the communication control device taught by Davis by including a first and second zone
`
`based on slave device density, since the numbering of zonesis arbitrary and a mere matter of design
`
`choice based on the physical layout of the venue in which the images would bedisplayed.
`
`Regarding Claim 13, Davis teaches a plurality of zones (102) and teachesdisplaying images
`
`across zones(see Figure 1). Davis does not explicitly teach determining a first zone, a second zone ora
`
`third zone. Prior to the effective filing date, it would have been obvious to one of ordinaryskill in the art
`
`to modify the communication control device taught by Davis by including a first, second and third zone
`
`based on slave device density, since the numbering of zonesis arbitrary and a mere matter of design
`
`choice based on the physical layout of the venue in which the images would bedisplayed.
`
`Regarding Claim 15, Davis teaches a plurality of zones (102) and teaches displaying images
`
`across zones(see Figure 1). Davis does not explicitly teach determining a first zone, a second zone ora
`
`third zone. Prior to the effective filing date, it would have been obvious to one of ordinaryskill in the art
`
`to modify the communication control device taught by Davis by including a first, second and third zone
`
`based on slave device density, since the numbering of zonesis arbitrary and a mere matter of design
`
`choice based on the physical layout of the venue in which the images would bedisplayed.
`
`Claims 7 and 14 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Davis etal. (Pub.
`
`No.: US 2013/0335313); hereinafter referred to as “Davis”, in view of Regler et al. (Pub. No.: US
`
`2014/0184386); hereinafter referred to as “Regler”.
`
`

`

`Application/Control Number: 16/429,625
`Art Unit: 2896
`
`Page 8
`
`Regarding Claim 7, Davis teaches the communication control device according to claim 1,
`
`wherein the performance controller transmits control commands ([0024]). Davis does not explicitly
`
`teach the control commands being sent at predetermined regular intervals. Regler, in the same field of
`
`endeavor, teaches a communication control device comprising (see Figures 1-3) transmitting control
`
`command at predetermined regular intervals ([0050]). Prior to the effective filing date, it would have
`
`been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to modify the communication control device as taught by
`
`Davis to include transmitting control command at predetermined regular intervals as taught by Regler,
`
`to synchronize the emitted light with an audio source (Regler, [0050)).
`
`Regarding Claim 14, Davis teaches the communication control device according to claim 10,
`
`wherein the performance controller transmits control commands ([0024]). Davis does not explicitly
`
`teach the control commands being sent at predetermined regular intervals. Regler, in the same field of
`
`endeavor, teaches a communication control device comprising (see Figures 1-3) transmitting control
`
`command at predetermined regular intervals ([0050]). Prior to the effective filing date, it would have
`
`been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to modify the communication control device as taught by
`
`Davis to include transmitting control command at predetermined regular intervals as taught by Regler,
`
`to synchronize the emitted light with an audio source (Regler, [0050)).
`
`Response to Arguments
`
`Applicant amended the independentclaims 1 and 9 to include previously indicated allowable
`
`subject matter. However, upon further consideration, a new ground(s) of rejection is made in view of
`
`Davis et al. (Pub No.: US 2013/0335313).
`
`

`

`Application/Control Number: 16/429,625
`Art Unit: 2896
`
`Page 9
`
`Conclusion
`
`Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner
`
`should be directed to DEDEI K. HAMMOND whosetelephone numberis (571)270-7938. The examiner
`
`can normally be reached on M to F, 12pm - 8pm.
`
`Examiner interviewsare 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,
`
`Jessica Han can be reached on 571-272-2078. 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 accessto 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.
`
`/DEDEI K HAMMOND/
`Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2896
`
`