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 .
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 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 –
(a)(1) the claimed invention was patented, described in a printed publication, or in public use, on sale, or otherwise available to the public before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claims 1, 2, 6-14 and 16-19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Lustenberger US 2015/0251875 A1.
Regarding claim 1, Lustenberger discloses,
A method for connecting a first device (Fig. 1, item 21.3) that is configured for moving to a non-moving network, comprising: transmitting data over a wired data line (Fig. 1 shows a wired data connecting item 21.3 to external center (Item 28), [0074, 0077]) from the first device to a second device (External center, item 28), wherein the second device is stationary (External); transmitting the data from the second device over a wireless network (Item 27) [0078]; receiving further data by the second device from the wireless network; and transmitting the further data from the second device to the first device [0082, 0083].
Regarding claim 2, Lustenberger discloses,
wherein: the first device is affixed to a lift (Item 9) in a hoistway (Item ) of an architectural structure [0070, 0074] and the second device is fixed within the architectural structure so that the second device is stationary when the lift moves; and the method includes operating the lift based on the further data [0074] (Fig. 1 shows item 21.3 is within an elevator whereas item 28 is an external to the elevator, which is a part of control system).
Regarding claim 6, Lustenberger discloses,
, wherein the first device is a card reader [0074].
Regarding claim 7, Lustenberger discloses,
, wherein the data represents a maintenance request (Via safety system to perform reset request) and/or a data audit request following the card reader reading a card, and the data further represents a maintenance update data and/or data responsive to the data audit request [0017, 0018].
Regarding claim 8, Lustenberger discloses,
, wherein the further data represents a firmware update for the card reader and operating the lift includes updating the firmware on the card reader [0029].
Regarding claim 9, Lustenberger discloses,
wherein the further data represents data responsive to the audit request and operating the lift includes illuminating on a lift control panel an updated set of floors available to the lift. [0024]
Regarding claim 10, Lustenberger discloses,
, wherein the lift is an elevator car [0070].
Regarding claim 11, Lustenberger discloses,
, wherein the wired data line is connected to an elevator rope in the hoistway (Fig. 1 shows the wired data line is coupled to a shaft).
Regarding claim 12, Lustenberger discloses,
, wherein the second device is installed in an elevator control room (External maintenance center) [0077].
Regarding claim 13, Lustenberger discloses,
A system (Fig. 1) comprising: a lift (Item 9) that is configured to move between levels in a hoistway (Item 2) of an architectural structure (Control System) [0070, 0074] (Item 9 inherently moves between floors using a shaft);
a first device (Item 21.3) fixed to the lift; and a second device (external center, item 28) fixed within the architectural structure (Refer to fig. 1) so that the second device is stationary (External) when the lift moves, the first device and the second device are configured for bi-directional data communication over a wired data line (Fig. 1 shows a wired data connecting item 21.3 to external center (Item 28). Fig. 1 also shows data flow back and forth between items 21.3 and 28 via the wired line), and the second device is configured as a transceiver to communicate over a wireless network (Item 27) within the architectural structure [0074, 0077, 0082, 0083].
Regarding claim 14, Lustenberger discloses,
, wherein the first device is a card reader [0074].
Regarding claim 16, Lustenberger discloses,
, wherein the lift is an elevator car (Item 9) [0074].
Regarding claim 17, Lustenberger discloses,
wherein the wired data line is connected to an elevator rope in the hoistway (Fig. 1 shows the wired data line is coupled to a shaft).
Regarding claim 18, Lustenberger discloses,
including an elevator control room in which the second device is installed (External maintenance center) [0077].
Regarding claim 19, Lustenberger discloses,
, wherein the wired data line comprises a CAN bus [0052, 0073].
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.
Claims 3-5 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Lustenberger US 2015/0251875 A1 in a view of Sudi et al. US 2020/0071126 A1.
Regarding claim 3, Lustenberger does not disclose but Sudi discloses,
including the second device (Fig. 3, item 12) obtaining location data representing a current physical location of the first device or the lift, and the second device transmitting the location data to the first device (Optical reader) [0042].
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to use location data as disclosed by Sudi in Lustenberger’s teachings to determine a location of the elevator.
Regarding claim 4, Lustenberger does not disclose but Sudi discloses,
including the first device transmitting the location data to a mobile device inside the lift over Bluetooth. [Sudi’s 0042]
Regarding claim 5, Lustenberger does not disclose but Sudi discloses, including the mobile device: displaying the location data; displaying information relevant to a next floor the lift is traveling to; and/or prompting a passenger to take predetermined actions available on the next floor [Sudi’s 0048].
Claims 15 and 20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Lustenberger US 2015/0251875 A1.
Regarding claim 15, Lustenberger does not explicitly say “wherein the wireless network is a mesh network”. However, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to use a mesh type network in Lustenberger’s teachings because the mesh type network is very reliable.
Regarding claim 20, Lustenberger does not explicitly say, “wherein the architectural structure is a hotel”. However, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to use the architectural in a hotel to implement safety system within the hotel.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Pahlke (US 2020/0048033 A1) discloses elevator communication system.
Herkel et al. (US 2019/0210837 A1) disclose an elevator control with a remote service center.
Atla et al. (US 2020/0130995 A1) disclose a system controller communicates with a first device.
Rajarapu et al. (US 2021/0147179 A1) disclose a mobile device configured to communicate over a network with a controller.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to BICKEY DHAKAL whose telephone number is (571)272-3577. The examiner can normally be reached 8:30-4:30 PM.
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, Jessica Han can be reached at 5712722078. 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.
/BICKEY DHAKAL/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2896
Prosecution Insights