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 .
Status and Response to Amendments/Arguments
A request for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, including the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e), was filed in this application after final rejection. Since this application is eligible for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114. Applicant's submission filed on 12/02/2025 has been entered.
Claims 1-9, 11-16 are now pending.
The objection to claim 16 has been overcome, and the objection is withdrawn.
Applicant’s arguments with regard to the 35 U.S.C. 101 have been fully considered, but are not persuasive. Preliminarily, the Examiner points to MPEP 2106.05(b): "[I]n Mayo, the Supreme Court emphasized that satisfying the machine-or-transformation test, by itself, is not sufficient to render a claim patent-eligible, as not all transformations or machine implementations infuse an otherwise ineligible claim with an 'inventive concept.'". In this instance, categorizing the first event is a mental process, and the three categories being the events pertinent to the door of an elevator constitute a mere field of use. Finally, see MPEP 2106.04(a)(2): “Nor do the courts distinguish between claims that recite mental processes performed by humans and claims that recite mental processes performed on a computer”. Therefore, the fact that the categorization is performed by a controller and sensors do not rescue the claim from ineligibility. Finally, the Examiner underscores that the claimed sensing and categorizing could be performed by a human where the sensor/s are the eyes and categorizing controller is the mind. The claimed subject matter therefore also qualifies as a mental process generally tied to the field of elevators (with doors), which are being claimed to be performed by a controller. The 35 USC 101 rejections are therefore maintained.
Applicant’s arguments with respect to the prior art rejections of claims 1-16 have been considered but are moot because of the new grounds of rejection.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 101
35 U.S.C. 101 reads as follows:
Whoever invents or discovers any new and useful process, machine, manufacture, or composition of matter, or any new and useful improvement thereof, may obtain a patent therefor, subject to the conditions and requirements of this title.
Claims 1-9, 11-16 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 101 because the claimed invention is directed to an abstract idea without significantly more. The claims recite the analysis and categorization of data. This judicial exception is not sufficiently integrated into a practical application because the claims do not recite a practical application for the categorization of the first event. The claims do not include additional elements that are sufficient to amount to significantly more than the judicial exception because the one or more sensors and the controller are merely extra-solution components that are generic. Following the MPEP test for products and processes MPEP § 2106:
Step 1: The claims are to a machine/apparatus/method.
Step 2A Prong One: The claims are directed to an abstract idea of data categorization, which could be performed by a human where the sensor/s are the eyes and categorizing controller is the mind. The claimed subject matter therefore also qualifies as a mental process.
Step 2A Prong Two: The claims do not integrate the categorization into a practical application, since no application of said categorization is claimed.
Step 2B: The claims do not include additional elements that are sufficient to amount to significantly more than the judicial exception because the one or more sensors and the controller are merely extra-solution components that are generic. See reponse to Applicant’s arguments above.
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 1-4, 9, 11, 12, 15 and 16 are is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Kusserow et al (US 20200198933).
Claims 1, 15 and 16: Kusserow et al teach ([0069]) an elevator monitoring system, comprising: one or more sensors (13); a controller (15) arranged to: acquire sensor data from the one or more sensors; analyze the sensor data to identify a first event (door motion) and a second event (cessation of motion/cessation of signal to actuator 5), the first event corresponding to an elevator door motion; categorize the event as a door open event/door close event/door reversal event based on the sensor data for the first event and the second event [0074-0075]. Claim 15 is the corresponding method. With regard to claim 16, [0002] teaches an elevator car configured to travel in an elevator shaft; a machine configured to control the elevator car {necessary for displacement).
Claims 2 and 3: [0058] teaches the one or more sensors comprises an accelerometer and the controller is arranged to acquire accelerometer data, wherein the controller is arranged to analyze the accelerometer data to identify the first event.
Claim 4: See [0074], open/close/reversal all consist of identifying a period of elevator door motion between two periods of the elevator door being stationary.
Claim 9: [0076] teaches that the controller is arranged to categorize the first event based on a correspondence of the sensor data for the first event and the sensor data for the second event ()
Claim 11: [0027] teaches that categorizing the first event comprises adjusting a counter corresponding to a category (number of door openings/closings in [0040]).
Claim 12: [0075] discloses categorizing the first event is based on an amount of time between the first event and the second event.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to MICHELLE M IACOLETTI whose telephone number is (571)270-5789. The examiner can normally be reached 8 am -5 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, Allana Bidder can be reached at 571 272 5560. 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.
/MICHELLE M IACOLETTI/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2877