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 .
Response to Amendment
Receipt is acknowledged of applicants’ amendment filed December 5, 2025. Claim 10 has been canceled without prejudice. Claims 1-9 and 11-26 are pending and an action on the merits is as follows.
Rejections of claims 9 and 20 under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph have been withdrawn.
Applicants’ arguments with respect to claims have been considered and are addressed below.
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 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.
This application currently names joint inventors. In considering patentability of the claims the examiner presumes that the subject matter of the various claims was commonly owned as 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 owned as 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 1-9, 11 and 14-21 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Koba (US 9,561,933 B2) in view of Itoh (US 9,667,952 B2), further in view of Witczak et al. (US 10,155,639 B2).
Claims 1 and 14: Koba discloses an elevator system and method of providing information to elevator passengers, comprising elevators (A, B) (column 3 lines 8-10), and a display (indicator 12) shown in Fig. 1 to be in a lobby, configured to show a plurality of images related to information on service floors and elevator cars that are each visible by a plurality of passengers and visible from a viewing direction, as shown in Fig. 9 (column 8 lines 13-19). A destination entry device (service floor input portion 6) utilized be at least some passengers to enter input, in which the destination entry device allows passengers to place a request for elevator service via an interface configured to receive input from each of a plurality of passengers (users) indicating an intended destination (service floor) of each passenger (column 3 lines 25-26). A processor determines passenger information (information on an assigned car) for each passenger (column 4 lines 35-44), and causes a display to display first and second passenger information for a first and second passenger respectively, to be visible to the passengers, as shown in Fig. 9.
This reference fails to disclose a plurality of location sensors configured to provide an indication of locations of the plurality of passengers within the lobby, at least one location sensor to be at the destination entry device and other location sensors to be spaced throughout the lobby, viewing directions of each passenger to be determined based on an indication of a location of a respective passenger relative to one or more displays of the plurality of displays, the displayed first passenger information to be visible from a first viewing direction that is based on a location of the first passenger relative to the display, the displayed second passenger information to be visible from a second viewing direction that is based on a location of the second passenger relative to the display, where the second viewing direction is different than the first viewing direction, and a location of each of the first and second passengers to be tracked once the first and second passengers move away from an initial position where a floor request was entered using the plurality of location sensors, such that a display of the plurality of displays is selected that is best situated to display the first and second passenger information based on a tracked location of the first and second passengers, respectively, relative to a selected display. This reference further fails to disclose the display to be one of a plurality of displays in the lobby, where the plurality of displays include at least a first display on one side of one elevator car of the one or more elevator cars in the lobby and a second display on an opposite side of the one elevator car in the lobby.
However Itoh teaches a system and method of providing information corresponding to destination floors of an elevator system to people (column 23 lines 52-58), where a display displays a plurality of images (content) that are each visible from a respective viewing direction (column 1 lines 46-50), such that displayed first and second information (content) is visible from a first and second viewing direction that is determined based on an indication of a location of a respective first and second person (viewer) relative to a display, respectively (column 6 lines 18-37), and the second viewing direction is different than the first viewing direction (column 1 lines 46-50). A plurality of location sensors included in a sensor unit (20) provide an indication of locations (positions) of a plurality of persons (column 5 lines 11-17). At least one location sensor (20) is shown in FIG. 1 to be included in information processing device (1), where the information processing device is described as a destination entry device when being adopted for an elevator (column 23 lines 52-57), and other location sensors (detectors 9) (column 7 lines 9-19) are spaced throughout the lobby (column 7 lines 32-36). A location of each of the first and second passengers is tracked once the first and second passengers move away from an initial position using user position information (column 11 lines 31-38) acquired by image analysis from data of the plurality of location sensors (column 5 lines 24-34). A display is selected that is best situated (within a viewable range) to display the first and second passenger information based on an acquired location of the first and second passenger relative to a selected display (column 22 lines 4-7).
Given the teachings of Itoh, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the elevator system and method disclosed in Koba with providing a plurality of location sensors configured to provide an indication of locations of the plurality of passengers within the lobby, at least one location sensor to be at the destination entry device and other location sensors to be spaced throughout the lobby, viewing directions of each passenger to be determined based on an indication of a location of a respective passenger relative to one or more displays of the plurality of displays, the displayed first passenger information to be visible from a first viewing direction that is based on a location of the first passenger relative to the display, the displayed second passenger information to be visible from a second viewing direction that is based on a location of the second passenger relative to the display, where the second viewing direction is different than the first viewing direction, and a location of each of the first and second passengers to be tracked once the first and second passengers move away from an initial position where a floor request was entered using the plurality of location sensors, such that a display of the plurality of displays is selected that is best situated to display the first and second passenger information based on a tracked location of the first and second passengers, respectively, relative to a selected display. Doing so would allow passengers to easily receive information regarding only their specific request since “contents prepared for each user … are outputted in a display direction corresponding to each user” as taught in Itoh (column 15 lines 36-38) when the passengers are within a viewable range of a display (column 11 lines 4-7). These references fail to disclose the display to be one of a plurality of displays in the lobby, where the plurality of displays include at least a first display on one side of one elevator car of the one or more elevator cars in the lobby and a second display on an opposite side of the one elevator car in the lobby.
However Witczak et al. teaches a system and method of providing information to elevator passengers, where an elevator car (28A) corresponds to a respective gate (32) (column 4 lines 5-9), and a plurality of displays (34) are shown in FIG. 5 to be in a lobby of floor (24), where the plurality of displays include at least a first display on one side of one elevator car of a plurality of gates, and therefore elevator cars in the lobby and a second display on an opposite side of the one elevator car in the lobby.
Given the teachings of Witczak et al., it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the elevator system and method disclosed in Koba as modified by Itoh with providing the display to be one of a plurality of displays in the lobby, where the plurality of displays include at least a first display on one side of one elevator car of the one or more elevator cars in the lobby and a second display on an opposite side of the one elevator car in the lobby. Doing so would allow each display to “provide information such as: this [elevator] is used only for arrivals, this [elevator] is not in service, this [elevator] is a VIP [elevator], or other similar messages notifying a waiting passenger to generally disregard the [elevator] for elevator travel” as taught in Witczak et al. (column 5 line 63 through column 6 line 3) when the one or more elevators are close to each other on the lobby, as shown in FIG. 5 of Witczak et al.
Claims 2 and 15: Koba modified by Itoh and Witczak et al. discloses an elevator system and method as stated above, where each of the displays have a single screen that simultaneously displays the first passenger information and the second
passenger information, as shown in FIGS. 2-7 of Itoh.
Claims 3 and 16: Koba modified by Itoh and Witczak et al. discloses an elevator system and method as stated above, where each of the displays is a parallel reality display known in the art to include a plurality of pixels that each are configured to simultaneously emit a plurality of colors, as shown in Itoh (column 4 lines 21-30, column 9 lines 53-56). The different colors of light are emitted in different directions to establish different displayed information on an associated display screen depending on the respective viewing direction such that the plurality of pixels are able to emit light of one color in one direction corresponding to the first viewing direction of the first passenger, and emit light of a different color in a different direction corresponding to the second viewing direction of the second passenger (column 9 lines 53-63).
Claims 4 and 17: Koba modified by Itoh and Witczak et al. discloses an elevator system and method where first and second passenger information is visible from a first and second viewing direction respectively, as stated above. The processor is disclosed in Koba to be configured to determine an elevator car assigned to carry each passenger to a respective intended destination (column 3 lines 52-60), and first and second passenger information indicating an elevator car assigned to carry the first and second passenger to the intended destination of the first and second passenger, respectively is displayed on notification portion (7) (column 5 lines 12-16). Due to the first and second passenger information being visible from a first and second viewing direction respectively, the displays would not be limited to displaying information for passengers boarding elevator cars that are closest to an associated display, but instead each display would only be limited by a particular passenger who has an accessible viewing direction to see information on the associated display, as is recognized in the art. These references fail to disclose the first and second passenger information displayed on the display to indicate an elevator car assigned to carry the first and second passenger.
However, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to provide the notification portion within the display, since it has been held that making various elements into an integral structure involves only routine skill in the art. In re Larson, 340 F.2d 965,968,144 USPQ 347,347 (CCPA 1965). Doing so would increase simplicity of use by passengers by allowing all visual information and notifications to be displayed on a single device.
Claims 5 and 6: Koba modified by Itoh and Witczak et al. discloses an elevator system where elevator cars to carry the first passenger and second passenger are determined according to the intended destination, as stated above. The elevator car assigned to carry the first passenger and second passenger can be the same elevator car, or different elevator cars according to a common or different destination, as is known in the art.
Claims 7 and 18: Koba modified by Itoh and Witczak et al. discloses an elevator system and method as stated above, where displayed first passenger information includes first infotainment content and the displayed second passenger infotainment content includes second, different infotainment content, as shown in Itoh (column 15 lines 36-44).
Claims 8 and 19: Koba modified by Itoh and Witczak et al. discloses an elevator system and method as stated above, where Koba discloses a plurality of elevator cars and a lobby (hall) where the plurality of passengers can respectively board one of the elevator cars (column 3 lines 11-12). The display is shown in Fig. 1 to be situated in the lobby, outside of the elevator cars.
Claims 9 and 20: Koba modified by Itoh and Witczak et al. discloses an elevator system and method as stated above, where Koba discloses a plurality of elevator cars (column 3 lines 11-12). Each of the plurality of elevator cars is further shown in Witczak et al. to include at least one display inside the elevator car (column 4 lines 65-67).
Claim 11: Koba modified by Itoh and Witczak et al. discloses an elevator system as stated above, where the at least one location sensor is shown in Itoh to be a camera that detects at least one identifying characteristic of a passenger in a field of view of the camera (column 5 lines 24-34).
Claim 21: Koba modified by Itoh and Witczak et al. discloses a method as stated above, where at least one location sensor (monocular camera) is shown in Itoh to provide an indication of a location of passengers (user) and wherein the processor determines the first and second viewing direction based on locations of first and second people (users), respectively (column 5 lines 24-34).
Claim 12 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Koba (US 9,561,933 B2) modified by Itoh (US 9,667,952 B2) and Witczak et al. (US 10,155,639 B2) as applied to claims above, further in view of Wedzikowski et al. (US 2019/0112149 A1).
Claim 12: Koba modified by Itoh and Witczak et al. discloses an elevator system as stated above, but fails to disclose at least one location sensor to include a wireless communication device that wirelessly communicates with a device carried by at least one of the passengers and provides an indication of a location of the at least one of the passengers based on communications with the device.
However Wedzikowski et al. teaches an elevator system, where at least one location sensor includes a wireless communication device that wirelessly communicates (page 1 paragraph [0008]) with a device carried by at least one of the passengers and provides an indication of a location of a passenger based on communications with the device for selectively displaying passenger information (call notification) for that passenger (page 4 paragraph [0049]).
Given the teachings of Wedzikowski et al., it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the elevator system and method disclosed in Koba as modified by Itoh and Witczak et al. with providing at least one location sensor to include a wireless communication device that wirelessly communicates with a device carried by at least one of the passengers and provides an indication of a location of the at least one of the passengers based on communications with the device. Doing so would allow “notifications [to] be displayed on screens located throughout the building where every member of [a] group currently resides, informing them of the current status of an elevator call” as taught in Wedzikowski et al. (page 4 paragraph [0044]).
Claims 13 and 22 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Koba (US 9,561,933 B2) modified by Itoh (US 9,667,952 B2) and Witczak et al. (US 10,155,639 B2) as applied to claims above, further in view of King (US 2017/0313546 A1).
Claims 13 and 22: Koba modified by Itoh and Witczak et al. discloses an elevator system and method as stated above, where the processor is configured to cause a display to display other information for at least one individual to be visible from a third viewing direction that is different than the first and second viewing directions, as can be seen from FIG. 2 of Itoh. Koba discloses that displayed information includes identification of an elevator car that is assigned to carry each passenger to a respective intended destination (column 7 lines 4-9). These references fail to disclose the displayed information to include an indication of an expected arrival time or wait time before an assigned elevator car will arrive at a landing where the elevator car can be boarded.
However King teaches an elevator system and method for providing information to elevator passengers, where displayed information includes an indication of an expected arrival time before an assigned elevator car will arrive at a landing where the elevator car can be boarded (page 5 paragraph [0041]).
Given the teachings of King, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the elevator system and method disclosed in Koba as modified by Itoh and Witczak et al. with providing the displayed information to include an indication of an expected arrival time before an assigned elevator car will arrive at a landing where the elevator car can be boarded. Doing so would allow a user to choose to board an elevator that “has the quickest estimated time of arrival” as taught in King (page 1 paragraph [0008]) when multiple elevators have the same destination.
Claims 23 and 25 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Koba (US 9,561,933 B2) modified by Itoh (US 9,667,952 B2) and Witczak et al. (US 10,155,639 B2) as applied to claims above, further in view of Schuster (US 9,945,675 B2).
Claims 23 and 25: Koba modified by Itoh and Witczak et al. discloses an elevator system and method where first and second passenger information is displayed on a display for a first and second passenger respectively, as stated above. The first and second passenger information then is tailored information content for the first and second passenger respectively. These references fail to disclose the tailored information to be infotainment content for the first and second passenger based on a first and second passenger profile associated with the first and second passenger information, respectively, where the infotainment content includes one or more of: guidance for a path to follow after exiting an elevator car, details regarding an upcoming appointment or meeting for an associated passenger, entertainment information specific to an associated passenger, or advertising or media content that is of interest to or potentially relevant for an associated passenger.
However Schuster teaches an elevator system and method for providing information to elevator passengers, where infotainment content (travel information) for a passenger is displayed on a display based on a passenger profile associated with passenger information, where the infotainment content includes guidance for a path to follow to the user’s destination, and therefore a path after exiting an elevator car (column 4 lines 40-46).
Given the teachings of Schuster, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the elevator system and method disclosed in Koba as modified by Itoh and Witczak et al. with providing the tailored information to be infotainment content for the first and second passenger based on a first and second passenger profile associated with the first and second passenger information, respectively, where the infotainment content includes guidance for a path to follow after exiting an elevator car. Doing so would allow assistance to “a user in navigating through an unfamiliar area, such as a building”, as taught in Schuster (column 7 lines 5-7).
Claims 24 and 26 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Koba (US 9,561,933 B2) modified by Itoh (US 9,667,952 B2) and Witczak et al. (US 10,155,639 B2) as applied to claims above, further in view of Roth et al. (US 12,162,724 B2).
Claims 24 and 26: Koba modified by Itoh and Witczak et al. discloses an elevator system and method as stated above, where elevator information is simultaneously displayed to different people based on viewing direction, as taught in Itoh (column 9 lines 53-56). These references fail to disclose the elevator information to also be displayed to non-passengers, where non-passengers include one or more of: an elevator mechanic, an elevator technician, a building engineer, a building manager, or first responders.
However Roth et al. teaches an elevator system and method for providing information to elevator passengers, where elevator information is displayed to non-
passengers, including an elevator technician (column 2 lines 52-55).
Given the teachings of Roth et al., it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the elevator system and method disclosed in Koba as modified by Itoh and Witczak et al. with providing the elevator information to also be displayed to non-passengers, where non-passengers include an elevator technician. Doing so would “assist a technician to service the elevator system” “when an elevator car is removed from service”, as taught in Roth et al. (column 2 lines 52-55).
Response to Arguments
Applicants’ arguments filed December 5, 2025 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
Applicants state on page 2 of the response that “Roth does not disclose simultaneously displaying elevator information to non-passengers and passengers”. However it was shown that Itoh teaches displaying different information to different people simultaneously based on viewing directions of said different people (column 1 lines 46-50, column 6 lines 18-37). Roth et al. was relied on to teach displaying elevator information to non-passengers (column 2 lines 52-55). One cannot show nonobviousness by attacking references individually where the rejections are based on combinations of references. See In re Keller, 642 F.2d 413, 208 USPQ 871 (CCPA 1981); In re Merck & Co., 800 F.2d 1091, 231 USPQ 375 (Fed. Cir. 1986). Therefore the combined teaches of Koba, Itoh, Witczak et al. and Roth et al. properly render obvious applicants’ invention as required by Claims 24 and 26.
Conclusion
Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a). Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a).
A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of the advisory action. In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the mailing date of this final action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to CHRISTOPHER UHLIR whose telephone number is (571)270-3091. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 8:30-4.
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, Anita Coupe can be reached at 571-270-3614. 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.
/Christopher Uhlir/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3619 February 10, 2026