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 .
This office action is responsive to the applicant’s correspondence filed on 09/16/2025.
Claims 14-24 are pending. Claims 14-17, 19, and 23-24 are amended.
Continued Examination Under 37 CFR 1.114
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and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114.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 09/16/2025 has been entered.
Response to Arguments
Regarding double patenting rejection:
Applicant's arguments filed 09/16/2025 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
To clarify, Examiner notes that under the broadest reasonable interpretation of the limitation “generic component model datasets” as indicated in the claim interpretation below, the generic component model dataset amounts to the component model data of the reference application having default values and including floor heights. Other limitations of measuring a floor height for each floor; generating a three-dimensional digital-double dataset; arranging component model dataset in sequence in the vertical direction for each floor level of the elevator; and replacing the component model dataset with measurement data are all taught in the reference application.
Regarding rejections under 35 USC § 102:
Regarding Applicant’s arguments based on newly amended subject matter, all arguments are addressed in the 102 rejection of the claims below.
With respect to the remarks, page 9, regarding measuring floor heights, the Examiner respectfully disagrees because Markku discloses measuring floor heights.
To clarify, the remarks alleges that Markku para [0079] and [0087] merely indicate that the scanning data is presented in the format of 3D coordinate measurements. Examiner notes that the scanning apparatus moves vertically and scans each floor and stores the coordinates x=length, y=width, z=height. Measuring the coordinates for height for each floor would provide the floor height for each floor. Para [0004] also discloses aligning the position of the door with the floor landings ([0004]: “Corresponding problems have been caused if the positions of the door openings of floor landings leading out from the hoistway are not quite aligned in the vertical direction.”). Para [0062] discloses that floor landings is one of the structures of the elevator measured by the scanning apparatus ([0062]: “When the objects being scanned are structures that are already installed, the structures are scanned with scanning apparatus at the elevator site. … Installed structures are considered here to be, for example, the shapes, i.e. walls, ceiling and floor, bounding the interior of the elevator hoistway and of the machine room that can be scanned at the installation site, i.e. in the final disposal location of the elevator. Likewise, the openings 0, or corresponding, of floor landings leading out of the hoistway are deemed to be installed structures.”). Fig. 1 also shows vertically measuring the structure including each of the floors. Therefore, this corresponds to the measurement data corresponding to the floor height for each floor on which the elevator lands.
Claim Interpretation
Claim 14-17 and 23-24 recite the limitation “generic component model datasets.” Specification does not disclose these limitations. However, specification page 13 lines 13-17 discloses that component model datasets are defined by characterizing properties B, T, H that are predefined with default values x, y, z. The remarks at the bottom of page 8 also alleges that the “generic component model datasets” are defined with default values, and these values are replaced with the measurement values. Therefore, the limitation “generic component model datasets” is interpreted as component model datasets having default values. The limitation “generic height characteristic” is accordingly interpreted as the default height value z.
Claim Objections
Claim 23 is objected to because of the following informalities: all instances of the limitations “data set” and “data sets” should read “dataset” and “datasets” respectively. Appropriate correction is required.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of 35 U.S.C. 112(a):
(a) IN GENERAL.—The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor or joint inventor of carrying out the invention.
The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112:
The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor of carrying out his invention.
Claims 14-24 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(a) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), first paragraph, as failing to comply with the written description requirement. The claim(s) contains subject matter which was not described in the specification in such a way as to reasonably convey to one skilled in the relevant art that the inventor or a joint inventor, or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the inventor(s), at the time the application was filed, had possession of the claimed invention.
Regarding claim 14, claim 14 recites the limitations “generic component model datasets” and “generic height characteristic”. There is no support for these limitations in specification. Specification at page 10 lines 1-4 discloses that the component model datasets are predefined with default values, but does not disclose that these default values are generic component model datasets. Therefore, “generic component model datasets” and “generic height characteristic” are new matter.
Claims 15-24 are rejected as reciting the similar limitations or by the virtue of their dependency on the rejected claim(s).
Double Patenting
The nonstatutory double patenting rejection is based on a judicially created doctrine grounded in public policy (a policy reflected in the statute) so as to prevent the unjustified or improper timewise extension of the “right to exclude” granted by a patent and to prevent possible harassment by multiple assignees. A nonstatutory double patenting rejection is appropriate where the conflicting claims are not identical, but at least one examined application claim is not patentably distinct from the reference claim(s) because the examined application claim is either anticipated by, or would have been obvious over, the reference claim(s). See, e.g., In re Berg, 140 F.3d 1428, 46 USPQ2d 1226 (Fed. Cir. 1998); In re Goodman, 11 F.3d 1046, 29 USPQ2d 2010 (Fed. Cir. 1993); In re Longi, 759 F.2d 887, 225 USPQ 645 (Fed. Cir. 1985); In re Van Ornum, 686 F.2d 937, 214 USPQ 761 (CCPA 1982); In re Vogel, 422 F.2d 438, 164 USPQ 619 (CCPA 1970); In re Thorington, 418 F.2d 528, 163 USPQ 644 (CCPA 1969).
A timely filed terminal disclaimer in compliance with 37 CFR 1.321(c) or 1.321(d) may be used to overcome an actual or provisional rejection based on nonstatutory double patenting provided the reference application or patent either is shown to be commonly owned with the examined application, or claims an invention made as a result of activities undertaken within the scope of a joint research agreement. See MPEP § 717.02 for applications subject to examination under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA as explained in MPEP § 2159. See MPEP § 2146 et seq. for applications not subject to examination under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA . A terminal disclaimer must be signed in compliance with 37 CFR 1.321(b).
The filing of a terminal disclaimer by itself is not a complete reply to a nonstatutory double patenting (NSDP) rejection. A complete reply requires that the terminal disclaimer be accompanied by a reply requesting reconsideration of the prior Office action. Even where the NSDP rejection is provisional the reply must be complete. See MPEP § 804, subsection I.B.1. For a reply to a non-final Office action, see 37 CFR 1.111(a). For a reply to final Office action, see 37 CFR 1.113(c). A request for reconsideration while not provided for in 37 CFR 1.113(c) may be filed after final for consideration. See MPEP §§ 706.07(e) and 714.13.
The USPTO Internet website contains terminal disclaimer forms which may be used. Please visit www.uspto.gov/patent/patents-forms. The actual filing date of the application in which the form is filed determines what form (e.g., PTO/SB/25, PTO/SB/26, PTO/AIA /25, or PTO/AIA /26) should be used. A web-based eTerminal Disclaimer may be filled out completely online using web-screens. An eTerminal Disclaimer that meets all requirements is auto-processed and approved immediately upon submission. For more information about eTerminal Disclaimers, refer to www.uspto.gov/patents/apply/applying-online/eterminal-disclaimer.
Claim 14 is provisionally rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claim 2 of copending Application No. 17/600,045 (reference application). Although the claims at issue are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other as shown below:
Instant application claims
Reference application claims
Claim 14:
during at least one measuring run, moving an elevator car of an existing elevator system to each floor of the existing elevator system and recording, with a measuring device measurement data representing a floor height for each floor
generating, and storing in a storage medium, a three-dimensional digital-double dataset representative of the existing elevator system from generic component model datasets,
wherein the generic component model datasets comprise at least a generic height characteristic, by: arranging in sequence one above the other in a vertical direction a plurality of generic component model datasets corresponding to a number of floors in the existing elevator system, and
for each of the plurality of generic component model datasets, replacing the generic height characteristic with the floor height of the floor recorded with the measuring device during the measuring run
Claim 2:
approaching each floor level of the existing elevator installation at least once by at least one measuring run with the existing or to be modernized elevator installation, recording at least those measurement data representing floor heights by a measuring device
wherein the three-dimensional digital replica data record of the existing or modernized elevator installation is generated by the computer program product from component model data records and stored in a storage medium
the component model data records configured as a floor section component model data record and/or the component model data records configured as a shaft section component model data record are arranged in a recorded sequence one above the other in the vertical direction for each floor level of the elevator installation detected by the measuring run, and
the default values of the characterizing property that defines the height distance with respect to the next component model data record are replaced in these component model data records in each case by the corresponding floor heights determined from the measurement data
This is an anticipatory provisional nonstatutory double patenting rejection because the patentably indistinct claims have not in fact been patented.
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.
(a)(2) the claimed invention was described in a patent issued under section 151, or in an application for patent published or deemed published under section 122(b), in which the patent or application, as the case may be, names another inventor and was effectively filed before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claim(s) 14-16, 18, and 24 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) and 102(a)(2) as being anticipated by Markku et al. (US20150158699A1), hereinafter Markku.
Regarding claim 14, Markku discloses
during at least one measuring run, moving an elevator car of an existing elevator system to each floor of the existing elevator system and recording, with a measuring device measurement data representing a floor height for each floor ([0056]: “In the method the structures (i.e. one or more structures) of an elevator are scanned with scanning apparatus, which collects scanning data relating to the shape and/or surface patterning of the structures being scanned. The scanning data is recorded in memory, e.g. in digital memory.”) ([0073]: “Preferably the scanning apparatus 1 is moved in at least the vertical direction of the space, preferably for at least most of the vertical height, in which case the structure of the space S, M, I will be scanned to a large extent in the vertical direction of the elevator for the three-dimensional model.”) ([0076]: “According to one implementation method the position data of the scanning apparatus 1 is collected during scanning by means of an acceleration sensor … The position data can comprise coordinate data (x=length, y=width, z=height)”) ([0062]: “When the objects being scanned are structures that are already installed, the structures are scanned with scanning apparatus at the elevator site. … Installed structures are considered here to be, for example, the shapes, i.e. walls, ceiling and floor, bounding the interior of the elevator hoistway and of the machine room that can be scanned at the installation site, i.e. in the final disposal location of the elevator. Likewise, the openings 0, or corresponding, of floor landings leading out of the hoistway are deemed to be installed structures.”) (Fig. 1),
Examiner notes that the scanning apparatus moves vertically and scans each floor and stores the coordinates x=length, y=width, z=height. Measuring the coordinates for height for each floor would provide the floor height for each floor. Para [0004] also discloses aligning the position of the door with the floor landings ([0004]: “Corresponding problems have been caused if the positions of the door openings of floor landings leading out from the hoistway are not quite aligned in the vertical direction.”). Para [0062] discloses that the floor landings are one of the structures of the elevator measured by the scanning apparatus ([0062]: “When the objects being scanned are structures that are already installed, the structures are scanned with scanning apparatus at the elevator site. … Installed structures are considered here to be, for example, the shapes, i.e. walls, ceiling and floor, bounding the interior of the elevator hoistway and of the machine room that can be scanned at the installation site, i.e. in the final disposal location of the elevator. Likewise, the openings 0, or corresponding, of floor landings leading out of the hoistway are deemed to be installed structures.”). Fig. 1 also shows vertically measuring the structure including each of the floors. Therefore, this corresponds to the measurement data corresponding to the floor height for each floor on which the elevator lands.
generating, and storing in a storage medium, a three-dimensional digital-double dataset representative of the existing elevator system from generic component model datasets ([0007]: “a database is formed about a plurality of known devices, said database comprising device-specific information of the elevators”) ([0071]: “In any of the aforementioned three embodiments whatsoever it is advantageous to link the aforementioned the three-dimensional model(s) of the structure(s) to form at least a part of the data that is in the database and is linked to the elevator-identification of the elevator in question, which database comprises a plurality of elevator-identifications and the data of an identified elevator connected to each elevator-identification. The elevator database is, in practice, preferably an elevator database managed by the elevator manufacturer or by a customer responsible for an elevator plurality. The database can be situated e.g. in a central computer. … A three-dimensional model can be brought out of the database on the basis of its identification, in which case an elevator structure can be inspected very precisely according to need.”) ([0059]: “For example, a three-dimensional model of the old elevator hoistway and/or of the components in it can be formed with the method. In this way the modification need of the structure in question can be determined or, on the basis of the three-dimensional model, the plan of an elevator being fabricated can be modified or adapted in respect of other structures”) ([0039]: “The aforementioned three-dimensional model is preferably recorded in memory in digital format.”)
wherein the generic component model datasets comprise at least a generic height characteristic ([0073]: “Preferably the scanning apparatus 1 is moved in at least the vertical direction of the space, preferably for at least most of the vertical height, in which case the structure of the space S, M, I will be scanned to a large extent in the vertical direction of the elevator for the three-dimensional model.”) ([0076]: “According to one implementation method the position data of the scanning apparatus 1 is collected during scanning by means of an acceleration sensor … The position data can comprise coordinate data (x=length, y=width, z=height)”) ([0062]: “When the objects being scanned are structures that are already installed, the structures are scanned with scanning apparatus at the elevator site. … Installed structures are considered here to be, for example, the shapes, i.e. walls, ceiling and floor, bounding the interior of the elevator hoistway and of the machine room that can be scanned at the installation site, i.e. in the final disposal location of the elevator. Likewise, the openings 0, or corresponding, of floor landings leading out of the hoistway are deemed to be installed structures.”) (Fig. 1), by:
arranging in sequence one above the other in a vertical direction a plurality of generic component model datasets corresponding to a number of floors in the existing elevator system ([0034]: “Preferably before performing the scanning a reference point is defined, in relation to which the position data collected during the scanning is defined.”) ([0035]-[0038]: “In one preferred embodiment in each collection phase collecting position data is connected to the collected data, which collecting position data preferably comprises the prevailing position data of the scanning apparatus (more particularly the position data of the receiver collecting data). In this way the scanning data collected from the different positions can be situated in relation to each other for forming a larger entity from the parts. … In one preferred embodiment the aforementioned three-dimensional model is linked to form at least a part of the data that is in the database and is linked to the elevator-identification of the elevator in question, which database comprises a plurality of elevator-identifications and the data of an identified elevator connected to each elevator-identification. … In one preferred embodiment in the method a computer program is executed, which program forms a three-dimensional model on the basis of scanning data”) ([0051]: “Preferably the scanning data relating to the shape of structures being scanned comprises data about the shape and the dimensions of the structure being scanned. In this way a three-dimensional model can be formed to be of corresponding shape to the scanned structure and its exact dimensions are known, in which case the three-dimensional can be combined with other three-dimensional models, e.g. for determining the compatibility (e.g. from the viewpoint of space usage) of the structures described by them. Exact dimension data could, however, be determined otherwise also, such as e.g. by means of reference measurements.”) ([0037]: “In one preferred embodiment the aforementioned three-dimensional model is linked to form at least a part of the data that is in the database and is linked to the elevator-identification of the elevator in question, which database comprises a plurality of elevator-identifications and the data of an identified elevator connected to each elevator-identification. In this way a database can be formed”), and
Markku discloses scanning the elevator structure vertically and obtaining measurement data with respect to a reference point. Markku also discloses situating different components in relation to each other using the reference point and coordinate points. Therefore, Markku discloses arranging in sequence one above the other in a vertical direction the obtained data to obtain a three-dimensional model.
for each of the plurality of generic component model datasets, replacing the generic height characteristic with the floor height of the floor recorded with the measuring device during the measuring run ([0007]: “a database is formed about a plurality of known devices, said database comprising device-specific information of the elevators … the scanning data is compared to the data of the aforementioned database”) ([0072]: “As a part of the method (e.g. when later processing collected and recorded data) a program can be executed, which is arranged to identify the structures of an elevator, more particularly elevator devices such as e.g. an overspeed governor, motor or other electronic device, directly from the scanning data or from a three-dimensional model formed on the basis of the scanning data, by comparing the scanning data to the data of known structures and elevator devices contained in a structure database, more particularly a database containing device-specific data.”) ([0040]: “In one preferred embodiment in the method a program is executed, which is arranged to identify the structures of an elevator, more particularly elevator devices such as e.g. an overspeed governor, motor or other electronic device, from the scanning data or from a three-dimensional model formed on the basis of the scanning data, by comparing the scanning data to the data of known structures contained in a structure database, e.g. a device database.”) ([0044]: “In one preferred embodiment after the formation of a three-dimensional model the scanned structure is modified. For example, in this case a structure bounding an elevator space scanned in the scanning phase, of which structure a three-dimensional model has earlier been formed, and/or the elevator structures (such as parts or devices) that is/are inside the elevator space scanned in the scanning phase, of which structures a three-dimensional model has earlier been formed, is/are modified.”) ([0060]: “In one embodiment applying to the collection of general information the formation of a three-dimensional model in the aforementioned manner is a part of the collection of data about an existing elevator, e.g. for updating the database.”).
Examiner notes that Markku discloses collecting scanning data, storing it in a database, and generating a three-dimensional model based on the scanning data (by vertically arranging the measured data) ([0035]-[0038]: “In one preferred embodiment in each collection phase collecting position data is connected to the collected data, which collecting position data preferably comprises the prevailing position data of the scanning apparatus (more particularly the position data of the receiver collecting data). In this way the scanning data collected from the different positions can be situated in relation to each other for forming a larger entity from the parts. … In one preferred embodiment the aforementioned three-dimensional model is linked to form at least a part of the data that is in the database and is linked to the elevator-identification of the elevator in question, which database comprises a plurality of elevator-identifications and the data of an identified elevator connected to each elevator-identification. … In one preferred embodiment in the method a computer program is executed, which program forms a three-dimensional model on the basis of scanning data”).
Markku then discloses using this model and database as a basis for elevator inspection and identifying discrepancy between the actual elevator and the model data, and modifying this structure or updating the database as necessary ([0004]: “A problem has been that the positioning of individual structures does not always fully correspond to the plan. … For example, problems might arise if the shape of the elevator hoistway does not fully correspond to the plan or is otherwise not of the type of the prevailing assumption.”) ([0037]: “In this way a database can be formed, from which can be brought forth accurate and reliable data of the desired elevator on the basis of its identification and a structure of it can be inspected without going to the site.”) ([0040]: “In one preferred embodiment in the method a program is executed, which is arranged to identify the structures of an elevator, more particularly elevator devices such as e.g. an overspeed governor, motor or other electronic device, from the scanning data or from a three-dimensional model formed on the basis of the scanning data, by comparing the scanning data to the data of known structures contained in a structure database, e.g. a device database.”) ([0043]: “In this way a three-dimensional model can function as a part of the design process, enabling the selection or adaptation of later structures on the basis of the real elevator structure.”) ([0044]: “In one preferred embodiment after the formation of a three-dimensional model the scanned structure is modified. For example, in this case a structure bounding an elevator space scanned in the scanning phase, of which structure a three-dimensional model has earlier been formed, and/or the elevator structures (such as parts or devices) that is/are inside the elevator space scanned in the scanning phase, of which structures a three-dimensional model has earlier been formed, is/are modified.”) ([0057]: “A three-dimensional model and/or type data offer real and reliable data about the shape of structures, which data can be reliably utilized for determining the later placement or modification need of the structure in question. Likewise, the needs relating to placement or modification of structures to be installed in the future in the proximity of a scanned structure can be determined in advance on the basis of the model.”) ([0072]: “As a part of the method (e.g. when later processing collected and recorded data) a program can be executed, which is arranged to identify the structures of an elevator, more particularly elevator devices such as e.g. an overspeed governor, motor or other electronic device, directly from the scanning data or from a three-dimensional model formed on the basis of the scanning data, by comparing the scanning data to the data of known structures and elevator devices contained in a structure database, more particularly a database containing device-specific data.”) ([0060]: “In one embodiment applying to the collection of general information the formation of a three-dimensional model in the aforementioned manner is a part of the collection of data about an existing elevator, e.g. for updating the database.”). This aligns with the problem the present invention is trying to solve as disclosed at specification page 1, and corresponds to the replacement of the default generic values with the scanned measurements.
Furthermore, Examiner notes that the default generic value under broadest reasonable interpretation amounts to pre-stored data in a database (default values) which one can modify based on current, up-to-date data. Moreover, Markku teaches such database being from an elevator manufacturer, which would mean that the data stored in the database are default generic values from a manufacturer ([0071]: “In any of the aforementioned three embodiments whatsoever it is advantageous to link the aforementioned the three-dimensional model(s) of the structure(s) to form at least a part of the data that is in the database and is linked to the elevator-identification of the elevator in question, which database comprises a plurality of elevator-identifications and the data of an identified elevator connected to each elevator-identification. The elevator database is, in practice, preferably an elevator database managed by the elevator manufacturer or by a customer responsible for an elevator plurality. The database can be situated e.g. in a central computer. … A three-dimensional model can be brought out of the database on the basis of its identification, in which case an elevator structure can be inspected very precisely according to need.”). Accordingly, Markku anticipates claim 1.
Regarding claim 15, Markku discloses
wherein each generic component model dataset has predefined interfaces, via which the generic component model datasets are connected to one another and positioned relative to one another ([0076]: “Before performing the scanning a reference point is defined, in relation to which the position data collected during the scanning is defined.”) ([0034]: “Preferably before performing the scanning a reference point is defined, in relation to which the position data collected during the scanning is defined.”) ([0035]-[0038]: “In one preferred embodiment in each collection phase collecting position data is connected to the collected data, which collecting position data preferably comprises the prevailing position data of the scanning apparatus (more particularly the position data of the receiver collecting data). In this way the scanning data collected from the different positions can be situated in relation to each other for forming a larger entity from the parts. … In one preferred embodiment the aforementioned three-dimensional model is linked to form at least a part of the data that is in the database and is linked to the elevator-identification of the elevator in question, which database comprises a plurality of elevator-identifications and the data of an identified elevator connected to each elevator-identification. … In one preferred embodiment in the method a computer program is executed, which program forms a three-dimensional model on the basis of scanning data”) ([0039]: “In one preferred embodiment the aforementioned three-dimensional model is formed to be presentable to the user visually by means of a computer (preferably on a computer display).”),
wherein corresponding characterizing properties of each generic component model dataset to be added are automatically replicated with the corresponding characterizing properties of the generic component model dataset provided for the connection via the interface ([0035]: “In this way the scanning data collected from the different positions can be situated in relation to each other for forming a larger entity from the parts.”) ([0075]: “In this way recordings achieved with a number of data collections can be situated in relation to each other in a position corresponding to the actual structure and an integral scanning result for a large area from a series of interconnected scans that apply to small areas.”).
Regarding claim 16, Markku discloses
wherein an elevator car component model dataset is arranged in a virtual shaft formed by at least generic component model dataset ([0020]: “In one preferred embodiment the aforementioned space is one or more of the following: an elevator hoistway, a machine room, an interior of an elevator car.”) ([0065]: “Likewise, the guide rails or other elevator components installed in the elevator hoistway or in the machine room, including also the elevator car if it is already in the hoistway, can be installed structures.”) and
motion profiles of the existing elevator car recorded during the measuring run are assigned as characterizing properties to the elevator car component model dataset in a hierarchy of the floor ([0076]: “According to one implementation method the position data of the scanning apparatus 1 is collected during scanning by means of an acceleration sensor … The position data can comprise coordinate data (x=length, y=width, z=height)”) ([0073]: “Preferably the scanning apparatus 1 is moved in at least the vertical direction of the space, preferably for at least most of the vertical height, in which case the structure of the space S, M, I will be scanned to a large extent in the vertical direction of the elevator for the three-dimensional model.”).
Regarding claim 18, Markku discloses
wherein the three-dimensional digital-double dataset is retrieved from a storage medium ([0039]: “The aforementioned three-dimensional model is preferably recorded in memory in digital format.”) ([0056]: “The scanning data is recorded in memory, e.g. in digital memory.”) and
displayed on a screen in a static and/or dynamic manner as a virtual elevator system ([0039]: “In one preferred embodiment the aforementioned three-dimensional model is formed to be presentable to the user visually by means of a computer (preferably on a computer display).”),
reproducing at least the height distances of the floors in the correct ratio to one another ([0076]: “The position data can comprise coordinate data (x=length, y=width, z=height)”) ([0035]: “In this way the scanning data collected from the different positions can be situated in relation to each other for forming a larger entity from the parts.”).
Regarding claim 24, claim 24 is substantially similar to claim 1, and therefore the similar analysis is applicable. Furthermore, Markku discloses
A non-transitory computer readable medium storing instructions that configure one or more processors ([0056]: “It is advantageous to convey with a memory, or to send scanning data for the formation of a three-dimensional model and/or of type data, from the location at which the scanning is performed to the system performing the task, e.g. to a computer that is remote from the scanning location. It is, however, also possible to form a three-dimensional model and/or type data immediately on site with means integrated into the scanning apparatus itself or with apparatus in the proximity of the scanning apparatus, in which case the means preferably comprise a computer.”) ([0038]: “In one preferred embodiment in the method a computer program is executed”) ([0039]: “The aforementioned three-dimensional model is preferably recorded in memory in digital format.”) ([0079]: “The scanning apparatus can comprise a memory for recording scanning data and/or other data, such as position data, and a drive unit of the memory, such as e.g. a computer.”).
Claim(s) 17 and 19-22 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Markku in view of Reghetti et al. (US20100251028A), hereinafter Reghetti.
Regarding claim 17, Markku discloses
wherein spatial dimensions of an existing elevator car are recorded as measured values and the default values of the assigned characterizing properties of the elevator car component model dataset are replaced by the measured spatial dimensions ([0056]: “In the method the structures (i.e. one or more structures) of an elevator are scanned with scanning apparatus, which collects scanning data relating to the shape and/or surface patterning of the structures being scanned.”) ([0020]: “In one preferred embodiment the aforementioned space is one or more of the following: an elevator hoistway, a machine room, an interior of an elevator car.”) ([0065]: “Likewise, the guide rails or other elevator components installed in the elevator hoistway or in the machine room, including also the elevator car if it is already in the hoistway, can be installed structures.”) ([0051]: “Preferably the scanning data relating to the shape of structures being scanned comprises data about the shape and the dimensions of the structure being scanned.”) ([0060]: “In one embodiment applying to the collection of general information the formation of a three-dimensional model in the aforementioned manner is a part of the collection of data about an existing elevator, e.g. for updating the database.”).
Markku does not explicitly disclose
wherein the default values of the characterizing properties of the generic component model datasets are checked using a collision checking routine and,
in the case of colliding dimensions, corresponding characterizing properties are adapted to the projections leading to collisions.
However, Reghetti teaches collision checking routine and adapting dimensions ([0204]: “For instance, with the execution of an appropriate command, inventive systems and methods can perform a check of objects within a drawing to determine if any conflicts exist between any objects.”) ([0116]: “While dimensions can be processed as a whole group, other embodiments of the invention enable the user to select and alter individual dimensions”).
Markku and Reghetti are analogous to the claimed invention because they are in the same field of CAD modeling.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to incorporate this concept of checking collisions in CAD objects and adapting dimensions into Markku to check for collisions between objects or values in the model when modifications are made to them, and adapt the corresponding object or value in order to resolve the collision.
One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to make this modification because doing so allows one to resolve conflicts that could arise when modifications are made to the model (Reghetti, [0010]: “With multiple designers participating in the design and review processes on various versions of the CAD drawings for a particular object, a number of problems can arise with respect to managing modifications, identifying and/or resolving conflicts, the reconciliation of 2D and 3D drawings, coordinating associations between related drawings and the like.”).
Therefore, the combination of Markku and Reghetti teaches
wherein the default values of the characterizing properties of the generic component model datasets are checked using a collision checking routine (Reghetti, [0204]: “For instance, with the execution of an appropriate command, inventive systems and methods can perform a check of objects within a drawing to determine if any conflicts exist between any objects.”) and,
in the case of colliding dimensions, corresponding characterizing properties are adapted to the projections leading to collisions (Reghetti, [0204]: “For instance, with the execution of an appropriate command, inventive systems and methods can perform a check of objects within a drawing to determine if any conflicts exist between any objects.”) (Reghetti, [0116]: “While dimensions can be processed as a whole group, other embodiments of the invention enable the user to select and alter individual dimensions”).
Regarding claim 19, Marrku discloses
components of an elevator system in a database ([0056]: “In the method the structures (i.e. one or more structures) of an elevator are scanned with scanning apparatus, which collects scanning data relating to the shape and/or surface patterning of the structures being scanned. The scanning data is recorded in memory, e.g. in digital memory.”) ([0037]: “In one preferred embodiment the aforementioned three-dimensional model is linked to form at least a part of the data that is in the database and is linked to the elevator-identification of the elevator in question, which database comprises a plurality of elevator-identifications and the data of an identified elevator connected to each elevator-identification. In this way a database can be formed”) ([0045]: “structures preferably comprise one or more of the following: an elevator car, the device(s) of the elevator, or parts of said device(s), such as an overspeed governor, an elevator control unit, a hoisting machine or parts thereof, a guide rail/guide rails of the elevator, such as the guide rail/guide rails of the elevator car and/or counterweight, the rope(s) of the elevator, such as suspension ropes.”); and
the three-dimensional digital-double dataset ([0056]: “On the basis of the collected scanning data a three-dimensional model is formed”) ([0071]: “A three-dimensional model can be brought out of the database on the basis of its identification”) ([0039]: “The aforementioned three-dimensional model can preferably be presented in this way with a CAD program.”).
Markku does not explicitly disclose selecting a component via a graphical user interface and inserting the component into a model via an interface.
However, Reghetti teaches selecting a component via a graphical user interface ([0019]: “selecting one of the references, storing in the first data structure an identification of the external drawing corresponding to the selected reference”) ([0105]: “The “Pick Layers” button returns the user to the drawing editor and prompts the user to select objects.”) and inserting the component into a model via an interface ([0019]: “attempting with the second session to link (e.g., bind) the corresponding external drawing to the first CAD drawing”) ([0074]: “The “Insert” function inserts the selected X-ref into the drawing”).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to incorporate such functionalities of CAD into Markku to select component model datasets of components of an elevator system from a database via a graphical user interface and insert them into the three-dimensional digital-double dataset via an interface.
One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to make this modification because such functionalities allow users to visually make modifications to the model, making it convenient (Reghetti, [0126]: “Rather, each drawing is opened and reviewed visually to make a determination as to its type”) (Reghetti, [0119]: “As each X-ref is modified, the main architect is able to see the changes reflected on the main drawing.”).
Therefore, the combination of Markku and Reghetti teaches
wherein further components of an elevator system are selected from a database via a graphical user interface (Markku, [0045]: “structures preferably comprise one or more of the following: an elevator car, the device(s) of the elevator, or parts of said device(s), such as an overspeed governor, an elevator control unit, a hoisting machine or parts thereof, a guide rail/guide rails of the elevator, such as the guide rail/guide rails of the elevator car and/or counterweight, the rope(s) of the elevator, such as suspension ropes.”) (Markku, [0037]: “In one preferred embodiment the aforementioned three-dimensional model is linked to form at least a part of the data that is in the database and is linked to the elevator-identification of the elevator in question, which database comprises a plurality of elevator-identifications and the data of an identified elevator connected to each elevator-identification. In this way a database can be formed”) (Markku, [0056]: “In the method the structures (i.e. one or more structures) of an elevator are scanned with scanning apparatus, which collects scanning data relating to the shape and/or surface patterning of the structures being scanned. The scanning data is recorded in memory, e.g. in digital memory.”) (Reghetti, [0019]: “selecting one of the references, storing in the first data structure an identification of the external drawing corresponding to the selected reference”) (Reghetti, [0105]: “The “Pick Layers” button returns the user to the drawing editor and prompts the user to select objects.”) and
inserted into the three-dimensional digital-double dataset via predefined interfaces (Markku, [0056]: “On the basis of the collected scanning data a three-dimensional model is formed”) (Markku, [0039]: “The aforementioned three-dimensional model can preferably be presented in this way with a CAD program.”) (Reghetti, [0019]: “attempting with the second session to link (e.g., bind) the corresponding external drawing to the first CAD drawing”) (Reghetti, [0073]: “In certain embodiments, the undo feature is only effective at undoing “Detach,” “Insert,” “Insert All,” “Bind” and “Bind All” commands.”) (Reghetti, [0074]: “The “Insert” function inserts the selected X-ref into the drawing”).
Regarding claim 20, Markku/Reghetti teaches
wherein at least counterweight, guide rail, shaft door, car door, drive component model datasets and suspension device component model datasets in different suspension means guiding variants are selected as component model datasets of components (Markku, [0045]: “In one preferred embodiment the structures being scanned comprise the structures bounding a space of the elevator and/or the structures that are inside a space of an elevator, and after the formation of the aforementioned three-dimensional model the elevator structures are installed into the aforementioned space, which structures preferably comprise one or more of the following: an elevator car, the device(s) of the elevator, or parts of said device(s), such as an overspeed governor, an elevator control unit, a hoisting machine or parts thereof, a guide rail/guide rails of the elevator, such as the guide rail/guide rails of the elevator car and/or counterweight, the rope(s) of the elevator, such as suspension ropes.”) (Markku, [0040]: “In one preferred embodiment in the method a program is executed, which is arranged to identify the structures of an elevator, more particularly elevator devices such as e.g. an overspeed governor, motor or other electronic device”) (Reghetti, [0019]: “selecting one of the references, storing in the first data structure an identification of the external drawing corresponding to the selected reference”) (Reghetti, [0105]: “The “Pick Layers” button returns the user to the drawing editor and prompts the user to select objects.”).
The already provided combination is applicable.
Regarding claim 21, Markku does not explicitly disclose
wherein the characterizing properties defined by measurement data are provided with a marker, so that they are distinguished from characterizing properties with default values.
However, Reghetti teaches designating specific data to distinguish them from other data ([0177]: “In certain further embodiments, the newly added objects can be further distinguished, such as being illustrated in a different color (or highlighted in some other way), from the unchanged objects in the revised drawing.”) ([0175]: “Any revisions that have or have not been made can be readily viewed to determine what the modifications are and whether those modifications, or lack thereof, are relevant to the user's work on the current drawing.”).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to incorporate such concept of designating a specific object in CAD into Markku to mark characterizing properties defined by measurement data so that they can be distinguished from characterizing properties with default values.
One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to make this modification because doing so allows one to distinguish between designated data and data that is not designated so that further operation can be performed selectively on desired data (Reghetti, [0177]: “In certain further embodiments, the newly added objects can be further distinguished, such as being illustrated in a different color (or highlighted in some other way), from the unchanged objects in the revised drawing.”) (Reghetti, [0175]: “Any revisions that have or have not been made can be readily viewed to determine what the modifications are and whether those modifications, or lack thereof, are relevant to the user's work on the current drawing.”).
Therefore, the combination of Markku and Reghetti teaches
wherein the characterizing properties defined by measurement data are provided with a marker, so that they are distinguished from characterizing properties with default values (Markku, [0056]: “In the method the structures (i.e. one or more structures) of an elevator are scanned with scanning apparatus, which collects scanning data relating to the shape and/or surface patterning of the structures being scanned. The scanning data is recorded in memory, e.g. in digital memory.”) (Reghetti, [0177]: “In certain further embodiments, the newly added objects can be further distinguished, such as being illustrated in a different color (or highlighted in some other way), from the unchanged objects in the revised drawing.”) (Reghetti, [0175]: “Any revisions that have or have not been made