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
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.
Claim(s) 1-3, and 9-11 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a1) as being taught by Yoo (PGPUB 2012/0145487).
With respect to claim 1, Yoo teaches a system for controlling the movement of an elevator car between floors of a multi- floor structure, the system comprising:
at least one hall push button (22) on each floor accessible to the elevator car (10);
a car operating panel (23) in the elevator car, the car operating panel including, for each floor, at least one car push button (24), wherein each push button (paragraph 005) has a switching element associated (inherent, button activates switch) with the push button;
an elevator control system (100) configured to respond to the activation of the hall push button or the car push button for one of the floors for causing the elevator car (paragraph 036) to move to said floor; and
at least one voice controller (400) configured for causing the elevator control system to move the elevator car to said floor in response to the voice controller (paragraph 062) receiving a predetermined audio prompt from a user.
With respect to claim 2, Yoo teaches wherein the voice controller is operative (paragraph 033) in parallel with said at least one hall push button.
With respect to claim 3, Yoo teaches wherein the voice controller is operative (paragraph 033) in parallel with said at least one car push button.
With respect to claim 9, Yoo teaches retrofit voice actuated system configured to be coupled to an existing system for controlling the movement of an elevator car between floors of a multi-floor structure, the existing system comprising at least one hall push button on each floor accessible to the elevator car, a car operating panel in the elevator car, the car operating panel including, for each floor, at least one car push button, wherein each push button has a switching element associated with the push button, and an elevator control system configured to respond to the activation of the hall push button or the car push button for one of the floors for causing the elevator car to move to said floor, wherein the retrofit voice actuated system comprises:
at least one voice controller operative for causing the elevator control system to (paragraph 036) move the elevator car to said floor in response to the voice controller (paragraph 062) receiving a predetermined audio prompt from a user.
With respect to claim 10, Yoo teaches wherein the voice controller is operative (paragraph 033) in parallel with said at least one hall push button.
With respect to claim 11, Yoo teaches wherein the voice controller is operative (paragraph 033) in parallel with said at least one car push button.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
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.
Claim(s) 4-8, and 12-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Yoo (PGPUB 2012/0145487) in view of Gazdzinski (US 7,711,565).
With respect to claim 4, Yoo does not teach wherein the voice controller includes a motion sensor configured to sense motion in the elevator car and, in response to the motion sensor sensing motion in the elevator car, the voice controller outputting an audio prompt.
Gazdzinski teaches wherein the voice controller includes a motion sensor (fig. 11, 1140) configured to sense motion in the elevator car and, in response to the motion sensor sensing motion in the elevator car, the voice controller outputting an audio prompt (column 8, lines 22-41; voice prompt).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was made for elevator have motion sensor with prompt providing the advantage of touchless system as taught by Gazdzinski.
With respect to claim 5, Yoo teaches wherein: said at least one hall push button has a first voice controller (400) operative in parallel therewith.
Yoo does not teach said at least one car push button has a second voice controller operative in parallel therewith. It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was made for elevator control to have parallel VC controller, since it has been held that mere duplication of the essential working parts of a device involves only routine skill in the art. St. Regis Paper Co. v. Bemis Co., 193 USPQ 8.
With respect to claim 6, Yoo teaches wherein the first and second voice controllers are in communication with each other via a communication channel (paragraph 0017).
With respect to claim 7, Yoo teaches wherein the communication channel is wired (inherent), wireless, or a combination of wired and wireless.
With respect to claim 8, Yoo does not teach wherein the voice controller includes a processor and, operatively coupled to said processor, computer memory (RAM, ROM, and/or FLASH MEMORY), a speech processor, a microphone, an audio speaker, and at least one relay coupled in parallel with a switching element of the at least one hall push button or the at least one car push button.
Gazdzinski teaches wherein the voice controller (fig. 1, 104) includes a processor (125) and, operatively coupled to said processor, computer memory (RAM, ROM, and/or FLASH MEMORY), a speech processor (141), a microphone (118), an audio speaker (111), and at least one relay coupled in parallel with a switching element of the at least one hall push button or the at least one car push button.
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was made for VC of Yoo contain elements of Gazdzinski along with relay, since it has been held to be within the general skill of a worker in the art to select a known material on the basis of its suitability for the intended use as a matter of obvious design choice. In re Leshin, 125 USPQ 416
With respect to claim 12, Yoo does not teach wherein the voice controller includes a motion sensor configured to sense motion in the elevator car and, in response to the motion sensor sensing motion in the elevator car, the voice controller outputting an audio prompt.
Gazdzinski teaches wherein the voice controller includes a motion sensor (fig. 11, 1140) configured to sense motion in the elevator car and, in response to the motion sensor sensing motion in the elevator car, the voice controller outputting an audio prompt (column 8, lines 22-41; voice prompt).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was made for elevator have motion sensor with prompt providing the advantage of touchless system as taught by Gazdzinski.
With respect to claim 13, Yoo teaches wherein: said at least one hall push button has a first voice controller (400) operative in parallel therewith.
Yoo does not teach said at least one car push button has a second voice controller operative in parallel therewith. It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was made for elevator control to have parallel VC controller, since it has been held that mere duplication of the essential working parts of a device involves only routine skill in the art. St. Regis Paper Co. v. Bemis Co., 193 USPQ 8.
With respect to claim 14, Yoo teaches wherein the first and second voice controllers are in communication with each other via a communication channel (paragraph 0017).
With respect to claim 15, Yoo teaches wherein the communication channel is wired (inherent), wireless, or a combination of wired and wireless.
With respect to claim 16, Yoo does not teach wherein the voice controller includes a processor and, operatively coupled to said processor, computer memory (RAM, ROM, and/or FLASH MEMORY), a speech processor, a microphone, an audio speaker, and at least one relay coupled in parallel with a switching element of the at least one hall push button or the at least one car push button.
Gazdzinski teaches wherein the voice controller (fig. 1, 104) includes a processor (125) and, operatively coupled to said processor, computer memory (RAM, ROM, and/or FLASH MEMORY), a speech processor (141), a microphone (118), an audio speaker (111), and at least one relay coupled in parallel (fig. 1, 104 VC receives signal from 114, and is in parallel with signal going to 121) with a switching element of the at least one hall push button or the at least one car push button.
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was made for VC of Yoo contain elements of Gazdzinski along with relay, since it has been held to be within the general skill of a worker in the art to select a known material on the basis of its suitability for the intended use as a matter of obvious design choice. In re Leshin, 125 USPQ 416
With respect to claim 17, Yoo teaches a method for controlling the movement of an elevator car between floors of a multi- floor structure comprising: (a) receiving by a voice controller from (paragraph 062) a user a user audio prompt for an elevator car to move to one of the (paragraph 036) floors; and
Yoo does not teach (b) in response to step (a), converting by the voice controller the user audio prompt to a signal that causes a relay in parallel with a switching element associated with a push button of an existing system to activate thereby causing an elevator control system of the existing system to move the elevator car to said floor.
Gazdzinski teaches converting by the voice controller (fig. 1, 104 VC receives signal from 114, and is in parallel with signal going to 121) the user audio prompt to a signal that causes a relay in parallel with a switching element associated with a push button of an existing system to activate thereby causing an elevator control system of the existing system to move the elevator car to said floor.
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was made for VC of Yoo to contain relay, since it has been held to be within the general skill of a worker in the art to select a known material on the basis of its suitability for the intended use as a matter of obvious design choice. In re Leshin, 125 USPQ 416
With respect to claim 18, Yoo teaches wherein the push button is a hall push button (fig. 1, 22) on a floor accessible to the elevator car or a car push button of a car operating panel (fig. 1, 23) in the elevator car.
With respect to claim 19, Yoo does not teach further including, prior to step (a), in response to a motion sensor sensing motion, the voice controller outputting an audio prompt requesting the user to speak the user audio prompt.
Gazdzinski teaches further including, prior to step (a), in response to a motion sensor sensing (fig. 11, 1140) motion, the voice controller outputting an audio prompt requesting the user to speak the user audio prompt (column 8, lines 22-41; voice prompt).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was made for elevator have motion sensor with prompt providing the advantage of touchless system as taught by Gazdzinski.
With respect to claim 20, Yoo does not teach wherein step (a) includes multiple audio prompts from the user and, between at least one pair of user audio prompts, an audio prompt from the voice controller for the user to include in a subsequent user audio prompt specific information.
Gazdzinski teaches wherein step (a) includes multiple audio prompts from the user and, between at least one pair of user audio prompts, an audio prompt from the voice controller for the user to include in a subsequent user audio prompt specific information (column 8, lines 22-41; column 9, lines 1-36). It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was made for elevator have motion sensor with prompt providing the advantage of touchless system as taught by Gazdzinski.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ERICK DAVID GLASS whose telephone number is (571)272-8395. The examiner can normally be reached Mon-Fri_8-5pm.
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, Eduardo Colon-Santana can be reached at 571-272-2060. 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.
/ERICK D GLASS/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2846