Ex Parte Bergman et alDownload PDFPatent Trial and Appeal BoardDec 30, 201613559489 (P.T.A.B. Dec. 30, 2016) Copy Citation United States Patent and Trademark Office 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 APPLICATION NO. FILING DATE FIRST NAMED INVENTOR ATTORNEY DOCKET NO. CONFIRMATION NO. 13/559,489 07/26/2012 Gabriel A. Bergman H0031403-1161.1639101 2983 90545 7590 HONEY WET ,T ,/STW Patent Services 115 Tabor Road P.O. Box 377 MORRIS PLAINS, NJ 07950 EXAMINER AZAD, MD ABUL K ART UNIT PAPER NUMBER 2127 NOTIFICATION DATE DELIVERY MODE 01/04/2017 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): patentservices-us @ honey well, com Honeywell.USPTO@STWiplaw.com PTOL-90A (Rev. 04/07) UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE BEFORE THE PATENT TRIAL AND APPEAL BOARD Ex parte GABRIEL A. BERGMAN, CHRISTOPHER GOH, DAN MURR, and PATRICK HUDSON Appeal 2016-002175 Application 13/559,489 Technology Center 2100 Before ELENI MANTIS MERCADER, CARL W. WHITEHEAD JR., and JOYCE CRAIG, Administrative Patent Judges. MANTIS MERCADER, Administrative Patent Judge. DECISION ON APPEAL Appeal 2016-002175 Application 13/559,489 STATEMENT OF CASE Appellants appeal under 35 U.S.C. § 134 from a rejection of claims 1— 26. We have jurisdiction under 35 U.S.C. § 6(b). We reverse. THE INVENTION The claimed invention is directed to a master HVAC schedule for an HVAC controller that may be stored on an external server accessible over a computer network. The external server maintains the master HVAC schedule, and translates a portion of the master HVAC schedule into a basic HVAC schedule that is executable by an HVAC controller. The external server may deliver the basic HVAC schedule to an HVAC controller according to a predetermined schedule. In some cases, the external server may deliver an updated basic HVAC schedule to the HVAC controller in response to a user initiated change made to the master HVAC schedule or upon restoration of a lost network connection between the HVAC controller and the external server. Abstract. Claim 1, reproduced below, is illustrative of the claimed subject matter: 1. A server accessible over a computer network, the server comprising: an input/output port for sending and/or receiving data via the computer network; a data storage device; a controller coupled to the input/output port and the data storage device, the controller configured to: maintain a master HVAC schedule having up to 366 days, the master HVAC schedule being capable of being updated by a user over the computer network via the input/output port of the server; 2 Appeal 2016-002175 Application 13/559,489 translate a sub-portion of the master HVAC schedule into a basic HVAC schedule, wherein the basic HVAC schedule has at least one less day than the master HVAC schedule; and deliver the basic HVAC schedule to an HVAC controller over the computer network via the input/output port of the server. REFERENCE The prior art relied upon by the Examiner in rejecting the claims on appeal is: Steinberg US 2012/0086562 A1 Apr. 12, 2012 REJECTION The Examiner made the following rejection: Claims 1—26 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 102(b) as being anticipated by Steinberg. ANALYSIS Appellants argue, inter alia, that Steinberg does not disclose the limitation of “translate a sub-portion of the master HVAC schedule into a basic HVAC schedule” as recited in claim 1 (App. Br. 7). Appellants argue the Examiner is correct that paragraph 96 of Steinberg discloses the load control device 108 may communicate with other devices on a network, but the Examiner is incorrect that Steinberg discloses the claimed step of translating “a sub-portion of the master HVAC schedule into a basic HVAC schedule, wherein the basic HVAC schedule has at least one less day than the master HVAC schedule”, particularly when taken in context with the other elements of claim 1 (App. Br. 7). According to Appellants, having the ability to communicate bi-directionally does not teach translating a portion 3 Appeal 2016-002175 Application 13/559,489 of a master HVAC schedule into a basic HVAC schedule, particularly when read in combination with the other elements of claim 1 (App. Br. 7). We are persuaded by Appellants’ argument with respect to claim 1. The Examiner points us to the bi-directional communication performed by the network or interface card but provides no evidence regarding the limitation of “translate a sub-portion of the master HVAC schedule into a basic HVAC schedule” as recited in claim 1 (Ans. 19-20). Accordingly, we reverse the Examiner’s rejection of claim 1. We also reverse claims 2—13 for the same reason as stated above. Appellants further argue with respect to independent claim 14 that Steinberg does not disclose memory within an HVAC controller, and does not describe storing at least one day of a programmable HVAC schedule (App. Br. 13). Appellants also argue that Steinberg does not disclose that HVAC schedule information is provided from the server to the HVAC controller (App. Br. 15). We are persuaded by Appellants’ arguments. We agree with the Examiner’s findings that Steinberg discloses that a user establishes programming schedules through screen 370 including a 24 hour period and saves the program by clicking on save button 394 (para. 103, Fig. 6B, see Row 372; Ans. 25). The load control device 108 includes a motion sensor or other means of detecting occupancy, this information can be used to change the state of the load control device and associated heating or cooling systems directly, and that information can also be transmitted to remote server 106 (para. 104; see Fig. 6B presenting the current day of the local HVAC controller to save (update) into the memory element 4 Appeal 2016-002175 Application 13/559,489 256; Ans. 25). The Examiner further points to bi-directional communication between the server and the HVAC controller and adjustments made locally or remotely on the connected server (para. 98; Ans. 25). However, the Examiner’s findings fall short of providing sufficient evidence that Steinburg discloses the limitation of “receive an updated HVAC schedule having scheduling data for at least one entire day from the remote server via the communications port” as recited in claim 14. We note Steinberg teaches the server receives updated changes and then verifies such changes and either saves changes in a database and thus allows the HVAC to perform the changes or questions the user regarding preferences and changing the HVAC settings accordingly (see paras. 105, 106, and see Ans. 25). This may suggest it would have been obvious for the remote server to allow the implemented changes to take place at the HVAC thereby teaching the disputed limitation but that is an obviousness analysis, not an anticipation analysis. Therefore we are constrained by the record before us to reverse the Examiner’s rejections of claims 14, 20, and 23. We also reverse claims 15—19, 21, 22, and 24—26 for the same reasons. DECISION For the above reasons, the Examiner’s rejection of claims 1—26 are reversed. REVERSED 5 Copy with citationCopy as parenthetical citation