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 February 3, 2026. Claims 1-20 are pending and an action on the merits is as follows.
Election/Restrictions
Applicants’ election of Species I and Species A in the reply filed on February 3, 2026 is acknowledged. Because applicant did not distinctly and specifically point out the supposed errors in the restriction requirement, the election has been treated as an election without traverse (MPEP § 818.01(a)).
Claims 4-6, 11-13, 16 and 18 are withdrawn from further consideration pursuant to 37 CFR 1.142(b) as being drawn to a nonelected species, there being no allowable generic or linking claim.
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement filed June 24, 2024 fails to comply with 37 CFR 1.98(a)(3)(i) because it does not include a concise explanation of the relevance, as it is presently understood by the individual designated in 37 CFR 1.56(c) most knowledgeable about the content of the information, of each reference listed that is not in the English language. It has been placed in the application file, but the information referred to therein has not been considered.
Claim Objections
Claims 2 and 10 are objected to because of the following informalities:
Claim 2 includes the limitation “wherein the first location is located at a an escalator”. This limitation should be changed to state “wherein the first location is located at an escalator”
Claim 10 includes the limitation “located at a top of an escalator located and the second location”. This limitation should be changed to state “located at a top of an escalator and the second location”.
Appropriate correction is required.
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, 17, 19 and 20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Larmuseau et al. (US 2019/0185291 A1).
Claims 1, 19 and 20: Larmuseau et al. discloses a method and system for generating an elevator call using a mobile device, and a computer program product embodied on a non-transitory computer readable medium, including instructions that, when executed by a processor, cause the processor to perform steps comprising: detecting (sensing) a first advertisement (wireless signal) by a personal mobile terminal emitted by a wireless signal apparatus (120) (page 4 paragraph [0061]). The wireless signal apparatus is a first beacon, located at a first location in an elevator landing area and the first beacon is configured to emit the first advertisement (page 4 paragraph [0058]) a first selected range away from the first beacon, where the range is adjustable based on movement speed of a person (page 5 paragraph [0073], page 7 paragraph [0081]). It is determined that an individual will be boarding an elevator system based on at least the first location of the first beacon, and the elevator call is transmitted to a dispatcher of the elevator system based on determining that the individual will be boarding the elevator system (page 5 paragraph [0068]).
Claim 17: Larmuseau et al. discloses a method as stated above, where the elevator call is automatically transmitted by the personal mobile terminal (200) based on determining that the individual will be boarding the elevator system (page 5 paragraph [0068]). The personal mobile terminal is described as a mobile device (smart cell phone) using an application to perform functions including transmit the elevator call (page 4 paragraph [0062]).
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.
The text of those sections of Title 35, U.S. Code not included in this action can be found in a prior Office action.
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 2, 3, 7-10, 14 and 15 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Larmuseau et al. (US 2019/0185291 A1) in view of Hanninen et al. (US 2020/0239273 A1).
Claim 2: Larmuseau et al. discloses a method as stated above, but fails to disclose the first location to be located at an escalator which extends from a lower landing to an upper landing.
However Hanninen et al. teaches a method for an elevator system, where at least one secondary base station (520) located at an escalator (550) communicates with a mobile terminal (mobile phone) inside a building (230) (page 4 paragraph [0045]). The escalator extends from a lower landing to an upper landing, as shown in FIG. 5.
Given the teachings of Hanninen 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 method disclosed in Larmuseau et al. with providing the first location to be located at an escalator which extends from a lower landing to an upper landing. Doing so would “enable one or more mobile terminals residing almost anywhere inside the building [to] use the mobile network” as taught in Hanninen et al. (page 4 paragraph [0045]).
Claim 3: Larmuseau et al. modified by Hanninen et al. discloses a method as stated above, where the first location is shown in FIG. 5 of Hanninen et al. to be located at a top of the escalator, and the bottom of the escalator is located at the lower landing and the top of the escalator is located at the upper landing.
Claim 7: Larmuseau et al. discloses a method where an advertisement emitted by a first beacon located at an elevator landing area as a first location is detected, the first beacon emits the advertisement a first selected range away from the first beacon in which the first selected range is adjustable based on a moving speed of a person, and determines that an individual will be boarding the elevator system based on at least the first location of the first beacon, as stated above. This reference fails to disclose a second advertisement emitted by a second beacon to be detected, the second beacon to be located at a second location and the second beacon to be configured to emit the second advertisement a second selected range away from the second beacon; and to determine that the individual will be boarding the elevator system based on at least the first location of the first beacon and the second location of the second beacon.
However Hanninen et al. teaches a method for an elevator system, where at least one secondary base station (520) is located at an escalator (550) and communicates with a mobile terminal (mobile phone) inside a building (230) (page 4 paragraph [0045]).
Given the teachings of Hanninen 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 method disclosed in Larmuseau et al. with providing a second beacon to be located at an escalator as a second location, the second beacon to emit a second advertisement to be detected, and to determine that the individual will be boarding the elevator system based on at least the first location of the first beacon and the second location of the second beacon. When a first and second person are moving at different speeds close to the first and second beacon respectively, the first selected range and a second selected range that the second advertisement is emitted away from the second beacon would be different as shown in Larmuseau et al. page 7 paragraph [0081]). Doing so would “enable one or more mobile terminals residing almost anywhere inside the building [to] use the mobile network” as taught in Hanninen et al. (page 4 paragraph [0045]).
Claim 8: Larmuseau et al. modified by Hanninen et al. discloses a method as stated above, where Hanninen et al. teaches at least one secondary base station to be located at the escalator (page 4 paragraph [0045]). One location is shown in FIG. 5 to be located at a top of the escalator. These references fail to disclose the first location to be located at a bottom of the escalator, such that the second location is located a top of the escalator.
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 first location to be located at a bottom of the escalator, such that the second location is located a top of the escalator, since it has been held that rearranging parts of an invention involves only routine skill in the art. In re Japikse, 86 USPQ 70. Doing so would allow “people flow analysis or for rescue operation in case of emergency” as taught in Hanninen et al. (page 4 paragraph [0050]).
Claim 9: Larmuseau et al. modified by Hanninen et al. discloses a method as stated above, where a location of a beacon is shown in Fig. 2 of Larmuseau et al. to be at an elevator bank (elevator landing area 410) of the elevator system. Hanninen et al. teaches at least one secondary base station to be located at the escalator (page 4 paragraph [0045]). One location is located at a top of the escalator, and a bottom of the escalator is located at a lower landing and an elevator bank is located at an upper landing, as can be seen from FIG. 5. These references fail to disclose the first location to be located at a bottom of the escalator, such that the second location is located at the elevator bank.
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 first location to be located at a bottom of the escalator, such that the second location is located at the elevator bank, since it has been held that rearranging parts of an invention involves only routine skill in the art. In re Japikse, 86 USPQ 70. Doing so would allow “people flow analysis or for rescue operation in case of emergency” as taught in Hanninen et al. (page 4 paragraph [0050]).
Claim 10: Larmuseau et al. modified by Hanninen et al. discloses a method as stated above, where a location of a beacon is shown in Fig. 2 of Larmuseau et al. to be at an elevator bank (elevator landing area 410) of the elevator system. Hanninen et al. teaches at least one secondary base station to be located at the escalator (page 4 paragraph [0045]), shown in FIG. 5 to be located at a top of the escalator, where a top of the escalator is located at an upper landing and an elevator bank is located at an upper landing. The first location then is located at the top of the escalator and the second location is located at the elevator bank.
Claim 14: Larmuseau et al. discloses a method where an advertisement emitted by a first beacon located at an elevator landing area as a first location is detected, the first beacon emits the advertisement a first selected range away from the first beacon in which the first selected range is adjustable based on a moving speed of a person, and determines that an individual will be boarding the elevator system based on at least the first location of the first beacon, as stated above. This reference fails to disclose a second and third advertisement emitted by a second and third beacon respectively to be detected, the second and third beacon to be located at a second and third location respectively, the second beacon to be configured to emit the second advertisement a second selected range away from the second beacon, and the third beacon to be configured to emit the third advertisement a third selected range away from the third beacon; and to determine that the individual will be boarding the elevator system based on at least the first location of the first beacon, the second location of the second beacon, and the third location of the third beacon.
However Hanninen et al. teaches a method for an elevator system, where at least one secondary base station (520) is located at an escalator (550) and communicates with a mobile terminal (mobile phone) inside a building (230) (page 4 paragraph [0045]).
Given the teachings of Hanninen 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 method disclosed in Larmuseau et al. with providing a second and third beacon to be located at a second and third location respectively, the second and third beacon to emit a second and third advertisement respectively to be detected, and to determine that the individual will be boarding the elevator system based on at least the first location of the first beacon, the second location of the second beacon, and the third location of the third beacon. It has been held that a 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. When a first, second, and third person are moving at different speeds close to the first, second, and third beacon respectively, the first selected range, a second selected range that the second advertisement is emitted away from the second beacon, and a third selected range that the third advertisement is emitted away from the third beacon would be different as shown in Larmuseau et al. page 7 paragraph [0081]). Doing so would “enable one or more mobile terminals residing almost anywhere inside the building [to] use the mobile network” as taught in Hanninen et al. (page 4 paragraph [0045]).
Claim 15: Larmuseau et al. modified by Hanninen et al. discloses a method as stated above, where a location of a beacon is shown in Fig. 2 of Larmuseau et al. to be at an elevator bank (elevator landing area 410) of the elevator system. Hanninen et al. teaches at least one secondary base station to be located at the escalator (page 4 paragraph [0045]), shown in FIG. 5 to be located at a top of the escalator, where a bottom of the escalator is located at a lower landing and a top of the escalator and elevator bank are located at an upper landing. These references fail to disclose the first location to be located at a bottom of the escalator, such that the second location is located at top of the escalator and the third location is located at the elevator bank.
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 first location to be located at a bottom of the escalator, such that the second location is located at top of the escalator and the third location is located at the elevator bank, since it has been held that a 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. It has further been held that rearranging parts of an invention involves only routine skill in the art. In re Japikse, 86 USPQ 70. Doing so would allow “people flow analysis or for rescue operation in case of emergency” as taught in Hanninen et al. (page 4 paragraph [0050]).
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. US 2019/0263627 A1, US 2019/0202657 A1, US 2019/0152741 A1, US 10,207,893 B2, US 2019/0023528 A1, US 2017/0349402 A1 pertaining to multiple beacons used to monitor movement of passengers.
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 26, 2026