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’ preliminary amendment filed June 7, 2022. Claims 1-21 are pending and an action on the merits is as follows.
Specification
The title of the invention is not descriptive. A new title is required that is clearly indicative of the invention to which the claims are directed.
The specification is objected to because of the following informalities:
BRIEF SUMMARY OF THE INVENTION is not descriptive of the invention but instead references claims: See MPEP § 608.01(d). A brief summary or general statement of the invention as set forth in 37 CFR 1.73. The summary is separate and distinct from the abstract and is directed toward the invention rather than the disclosure as a whole. The summary may point out the advantages of the invention or how it solves problems previously existent in the prior art (and preferably indicated in the Background of the Invention). In chemical cases it should point out in general terms the utility of the invention. If possible, the nature and gist of the invention or the inventive concept should be set forth. Objects of the invention should be treated briefly and only to the extent that they contribute to an understanding of the invention.
Claim Objections
Claims 1, 3, 5, 7, 9, 12, 14-16, 18 and 19 are objected to because the following elements lack proper antecedent basis in the claim(s):
Claim 1 lines 2-3: “the position”
Claim 1 line 13: “the installation position data”
Claim 3 line 4: “the final end position”
Claim 5 lines 2-3: “the identification marker”
Claim 7 line 3: “the positions”
Claim 9 line 4: “said movement limit zone”
Claim 12 line 4:” the movement data”
Claim 14 line 9: “the end”
Claim 15 lines 2-3: “the identification of arriving”
Claim 15 line 3: “the linear position data”
Claim 16 line 2:” the safety buffer”
Claim 18 line 4: “the position data”
Claim 18 line 8: “the linear position”
Claim 19 line 4: “the elevator-system”
Claim 19 line 12: “the data”
Claim 19 line 12: “said movement limit zone”
Appropriate correction is required.
Claims 6, 12, 14, 18 and 19 is objected to because of the following informalities:
Claim 6 includes the limitation “in combination with the final limit marker(s)”. This limitation should be changed to state “in combination with the one or more final limit markers” for consistency.
Claim 12 includes the limitation “configured to synchronize the position data as coming from the encoder”. This limitation should be changed to state “configured to synchronize the position as coming from the encoder” for consistency.
Claim 12 includes the limitation “encoder with the data as issued by the signal strips identifier”. This limitation should be changed to state “encoder with the movement data as issued by the signal strips identifier” for consistency.
Claim 14 includes the limitation “by means of absolute position data deprived by a scale”. This limitation should be changed to state “by means of absolute position data derived by a scale”.
Claim 18 does not end with a period. See MPEP § 608.01(m)
Claim 19 includes limitations pertaining to “the (elevator) shaft”. These limitations should be changed to state “the hoistway” for consistency.
Appropriate correction is required.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(b):
(b) CONCLUSION.—The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph:
The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the applicant regards as his invention.
Claims 1-21 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor (or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the applicant), regards as the invention.
Claims 1 and 4 include the limitation “limit position identification marker(s) (installed) at one/each end of the hoistway”. However the claim further describes that the limit position marker(s) indicates a starting point for a final movement zone. It is unclear how a final movement zone can be started at the end of a hoistway since a final movement would include deceleration of an elevator car, and eventually stopping the elevator car. When positioned at the end of a hoistway, there is no additional space for an elevator car to move. It is further unclear how multiple limit position markers are to be arranged when each are installed at the end of the hoistway. For examining purposes, this limitation is interpreted as stating “limit position identification marker(s) (installed) near one/each end of the hoistway”.
Claims 1, 5, 6, 14, 15 and 18 include limitations pertaining to “the (limit position) identification marker”. However there is a lack of antecedent basis for the (limit position) identification marker as claim 1 previously described at least one limit position identification marker. It is unclear whether applicants intend to reference the at least one limit position identification marker, or further limit the at least one limit position identification marker to a single limit position identification marker. For examining purposes, these limitations are interpreted as pertaining to “the at least one limit position identification marker”.
Claims 1 and 7 include limitations pertaining to “said/the position data”. However it is unclear whether applicants intend to reference the installation position data or the parametrized position data. For examining purposes, these limitations are interpreted as pertaining to “said/the installation position data”.
Claim 6 includes the limitation “one or more final limit markers at one end of the hoistway”. However the claim further describes that the final limit marker(s) defines a starting point for a final movement zone. It is unclear how a final movement zone can be started at the end of a hoistway since a final movement would include deceleration of an elevator car, and eventually stopping the elevator car. When positioned at the end of a hoistway, there is no additional space for an elevator car to move. It is further unclear how multiple final limit markers are to be arranged when each are installed at the end of the hoistway. For examining purposes, this limitation is interpreted as stating “one or more final limit markers near one end of the hoistway”.
Claim 8 includes the limitation “wherein the position data of the identification markers”. However it is unclear whether applicants intend to reference the installation position data, the parametrized position data, or the positions of the identification markers. For examining purposes, this limitation is interpreted as stating wherein the positions of the identification markers.
Claim 9 includes the limitation “comprised for adjusting the data in the memory”. However it is unclear whether applicants intend to reference the installation position data, the parametrized position data, or some other data. For examining purposes, this limitation is interpreted as stating “comprised for adjusting the installation position data in the memory”.
Claim 15 is directed to “The method of running a controller of the elevator safety system according to claim 1, wherein”. However there is a lack of antecedent basis for “the method”, as claim 1 is directed to an elevator. It is unclear whether applicants intend claim 15 to depend from claim 1, or the method of claim 14. For examining purposes, this claim is interpreted as being directed to “The method of running a controller of the elevator safety system according to claim 14, wherein”.
Claim 19 includes the limitation “when the car passes the registration markers during”. However there is a lack of antecedent basis for “the registration markers”. It is unclear whether applicants intend to reference the identification markers, or introduce new elements into the claim. For examining purposes, this limitation is interpreted as stating “when the car passes the identification markers during”.
Claims 2, 3, 10-12, 13, 16, 17, 20 and 21 depend from at least claim 1 and therefore inherit all claimed limitations. These claims do not correct the deficiencies of claim 1.
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.
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 1-11 and 13-21 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Hovi et al. (US 9,981,825 B2) in view of Ginsberg et al. (US 11,535,488 B2).
Claim 1: Hovi et al. discloses an elevator safety system, comprising: an electronic safety controller running software (column 7 lines 27-31) for monitoring a position of an elevator car within a hoistway in the proximity of the top end of the hoistway (column 8 lines 8-15), and a position measurement device (reader 9) for measuring the elevator car position at each floor, the position measurement device being communicatively connected to the electronic safety controller for moving the elevator car to a stopping floors (column 5 lines 44-54). At least one limit position identification marker (marking piece 8, end limit identifier 7, elongated marking piece 17) is shown in Fig. 1a to be installed near one end of the hoistway (4) and indicating a starting point for a final movement zone for the car in the direction to the hoistway's end
for providing continuous positioning signals of the elevator car (column 8 lines 5-15). Therefore the at least one limit position identification marker comprises a scale for measuring a continuous position of an elevator car moving along the at least one limit position identification marker. Installation position data of said at least one limit position identification marker is stored in a memory of the safety controller to properly identify when the elevator car is near the end of the hoistway, as is recognized in the art. This reference fails to disclose the at least one limit position identification marker to measure an absolute position of the elevator car, and the installation position data to be stored as parametrized position data for being able to adjust said installation position data in the memory.
However Ginsberg et al. teaches an elevator safety system, where position identification markers measure an absolute position of an elevator car (column 4 lines 32-34). Installation position data (calculated positions of landings) is stored as parametrized position data for being able to adjust said installation position data in the memory for fine tuning (column 9 lines 44-46).
Given the teachings of Ginsberg 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 elevator safety system disclosed in Hovi et al. with providing the at least one limit position identification marker to measure an absolute position of the elevator car, and the installation position data to be stored as parametrized position data for being able to adjust said installation position data in the memory. Doing so would allow installation position data to be “electronically adjusted for after installation, thus reducing the need to adjust components in the elevator shaft after installation is completed [while] provid[ing] improved sensing of actual landing accuracy for system health monitoring” as taught in Ginsberg et al. (column 13 lines 57-62), when an elevator rope stretches over time.
Claim 2: Hovi et al. modified by Ginsberg et al. discloses an elevator safety system where the at least one limit position identification marker includes a scale for measuring an absolute position of the elevator car, and installation position data of the at least one limit position identification marker is stored in memory, as stated above. A length of the final movement zone is defined in the memory by means of final end position data corresponding to absolute position data of a top end of the hoistway readable from the scale, as shown in Hovi et al. (column 8 lines 5-15).
Claim 3: Hovi et al. modified by Ginsberg et al. discloses an elevator safety system as stated above, where the safety controller is disclosed in Hovi et al. to trigger an emergency stop via disconnecting a power supply to a motor when the car reaches the final end position of the final movement zone (distance traveled exceeds a threshold value) (column 9 lines 10-16).
Claim 4: Hovi et al. modified by Ginsberg et al. discloses an elevator safety system as stated above, where two limit position identification markers (end limit identifier 7, elongated marking piece 17) are shown in Fig. 1a of Hovi et al. to be near the top end of the hoistway, constituting a respective final limit zone. These references fail to disclose two limit position identification markers to be near a bottom end of the hoistway constituting a respective final limit zone.
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 two limit position identification markers to be near a bottom end of the hoistway constituting a respective final limit zone, 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. Doing so would allow “monitoring the risk of slackening of a traction rope of a counterweighted elevator” as taught in Hovi et al. (column 1 lines 16-19) while the elevator car is at a top or bottom of the hoistway.
Claim 5: Hovi et al. modified by Ginsberg et al. discloses an elevator safety system as stated above, where at least one limit position identification marker (marking piece 8) is disclosed in Hovi et al. to be an identification marker of a terminal landing (column 5 lines 44-45), as can be seen from Fig. 1a.
Claim 6: Hovi et al. modified by Ginsberg et al. discloses an elevator safety system as stated above, where the safety system is disclosed in Hovi et al. to comprise a final limit marker (end limit identifier 7) shown in Fig. 1a to be at one end of the hoistway installed consecutively to a limit position identification marker (marking piece 8) towards an outermost end of the hoistway, wherein the limit position identification marker in combination with the final limit marker define the starting point of the final movement zone of the car (column 7 line 62 through column 8 line 15).
Claim 7: Hovi et al. modified by Ginsberg et al. discloses an elevator safety system as stated above, where identification markers (marking pieces 8) are disclosed in Hovi et al. to be installed in the hoistway at every floor to indicate a location of the elevator car at a respective floor (column 5 lines 44-51). Therefore the positions of the identification markers are stored in the memory of the safety controller, and can be used
for calibrating (fine tuning) the installed position data of the car as outputted by
the position measurement device as shown in Ginsberg et al. (column 9 lines 44-46).
Claim 8: Hovi et al. modified by Ginsberg et al. discloses an elevator safety system where the positions of the identification markers are stored in memory to indicate a location of the elevator car, and installation position data is stored as parametrized position data, as stated above. Therefore positions of the identification markers are stored as parametrized position data corresponding to each floor, respectively.
Claim 9 Hovi et al. modified by Ginsberg et al. discloses an elevator safety system where installation position data is stored as parametrized position data for being able to adjust said installation position data in the memory, as stated above. Therefore the system includes means for adjusting the installation data in the memory to adjust the at least one limit position identification marker and adapt said movement limit zone, as shown in Ginsberg et al. (column 9 lines 44-46).
Claim 10: Hovi et al. modified by Ginsberg et al. discloses an elevator safety system as stated above, where the means for adjusting the position data includes a manual user interface to activate a testing function for monitoring the elevator car position, as shown in Hovi et al. (column 4 lines 59-62).
Claim 11: Hovi et al. modified by Ginsberg et al. discloses an elevator safety system as stated above, where the position measurement device is disclosed in Hovi et al. to comprise a reader (9) for reading said at least one limit position identification marker (column 7 lines 62-65).
Claim 13: Hovi et al. modified by Ginsberg et al. discloses an elevator safety
system as stated above, where an elevator system is shown in Fig. 1a of Hovi et al. to comprise the elevator safety system.
Claim 14: Hovi et al. modified by Ginsberg et al. discloses an elevator safety system where the at least one limit position identification marker comprises a scale for measuring an absolute position of an elevator car moving along the at least one limit position identification marker, as stated above. A controller is disclosed in Hovi et al. to run according to a method comprising monitoring by means of the at least one limit position identification marker (end limit identifier 7) whether the car has passed the starting point of the final movement zone; and if the safety controller detected that the car has passed the starting point of the final movement zone during a monitoring program, allocating the final movement zone for a further movement in this direction while continuously monitoring the position of the car within the final movement zone by means of absolute value data derived by the scale corresponding to said at least one limit position identification marker (elongated marking piece 17) (column 8 lines 5-15). An emergency stop is triggered in case distance traveled by the elevator car exceeds a threshold value from the starting point of the final movement zone (column 3 lines 54-57). These references fail to disclose the emergency top to be triggered in case an end of the final movement zone has been identified.
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 threshold value to correspond to an end of the final movement zone, since it has been held that where the general conditions of a claim are disclosed in the prior art, discovering the optimum or working ranges involves only routine skill in the art. In re Aller, 105 USPQ 233. The emergency stop then would be triggered in case the end of the final movement zone has been identified. Doing so would indicate “a risk of slackening of the traction rope” as taught in Hovi et al. (column 2 lines 7-10), and allow “the elevator [to be] removed from service and information about the removal from service [to be] recorded in non-volatile memory … [and] starting of the next run of the elevator [to be] prevented]” (column 3 lines 54-62).
Claim 15: Hovi et al. modified by Ginsberg et al. discloses an elevator safety system where the at least one limit position identification marker comprises a scale for measuring an absolute position of an elevator car moving along the at least one limit position identification marker, as stated above. Identification of arriving at the end of the final movement zone is disclosed in Hovi et al. to be realized by means of the linear position data of the car as being output by the position measurement device corresponding to absolute position data readable from a scale as comprised by the limit position identification marker (column 8 lines 8-15).
Claim 16: Hovi et al. modified by Ginsberg et al. discloses an elevator safety system as stated above, where Hovi et al. discloses that if the safety controller detects that a counterweight has arrived at a safety buffer before the elevator car arrives at an end of the final movement zone, the safety controller is triggering an emergency stop (column 2 lines 33-40). Adjustment of the end of the final moving zone data can then be made, as shown in Ginsberg et al. (column 9 lines 44-46).
Claim 17: Hovi et al. modified by Ginsberg et al. discloses an elevator safety system as stated above, where an elevator run to be prevented until the end of the final movement zone has been adjusted, as shown in Hovi et al. (column 9 lines 25-35).
Claim 18: Hovi et al. modified by Ginsberg et al. discloses an elevator safety system as stated above, where the position of the elevator car is disclosed in Hovi et al. to be recorded by means of the position measurement device and transferring position data to an elevator controller and/or the elevator safety controller (column 3 lines 39-49) and gaining therewith a linear position of the car (column 8 lines 8-15). The position data is calibrated (fine-tuned) as coming from the position measurement device by means of calibrating data from the at least one identification markers within the hoistway as shown in Ginsberg et al. (column 9 lines 44-46).
Claim 19: Hovi et al. modified by Ginsberg et al. discloses an elevator safety system as stated above, where a setup-run is shown in Ginsberg et al. to be started before putting the elevator-system into operation the first time by moving a car slowly in the hoistway between extreme outermost positions of the car in the hoistway, registering identification markers when the car passes the identification markers during movement in the hoistway, and storing the position data in the memory of the safety controller (column 13 lines 9-25). Limit position identification markers defining the starting point for the final movement zone of the car, respectively, then would be registered during the process, and position data of said limit position identification markers is recorded as parametrized data in the memory of the safety controller, which allows for adjustments to be made (column 9 lines 44-46).
Claim 20: Hovi et al. modified by Ginsberg et al. discloses an elevator safety system as stated above, where the end of the final movement zone data can be adjusted (fine-tuned) as shown in Ginsberg et al. (column 9 lines 44-46) by means of an interface to activate a testing function for monitoring the elevator car position, as shown in Hovi et al. (column 4 lines 59-62).
Claim 21: Hovi et al. modified by Ginsberg et al. discloses an elevator safety system as stated above, where a computer program embodied on a non-transitory computer readable medium and comprises program code adapted to cause the method to be executed on a data-processing unit, as shown in Hovi et al. (column 7 lines 27-34).
Claim 12 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Hovi et al. (US 9,981,825 B2) modified by Ginsberg et al. (US 11,535,488 B2) as applied to claims above, further in view of Härkönen et al. (US 8,869,945 B2).
Claim 12: Hovi et al. modified by Ginsberg et al. discloses an elevator safety system as stated above, where the position measurement device is disclosed in Hovi et al. to include an encoder indicating a movement of the elevator car (column 8 lines 16-19). Signal strips identifiers (marking pieces 8) act as identification markers to indicate linear door zone position data of the elevator car read by the reader (column 5 lines 44-51). These references fail to disclose the position of the car to be calculated by mathematically integrating movement data and the electronic safety controller to synchronize the position as coming from the encoder with data as issued by the signal strips identifier.
However Härkönen et al. teaches an elevator safety system, where an encoder indicates a movement of an elevator car and position of the car is mathematically calculated from movement data from the encoder and signal strip identifiers (magnets) act as identification markers to indicate linear door zone position data of the elevator car (column 6 line 56 through column 7 line 1). Position of the car then is calculated by integrating said movement data, as is recognized in the art. An electronic safety controller monitors movement of the elevator car in the door zone, and thereby synchronizes the position as coming from the encoder with data as issued by the signal strips identifier (column 9 lines 52-54).
Given the teachings of Härkönen 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 elevator safety system disclosed in Hovi et al. as modified by Ginsberg et al. with providing the position of the car to be calculated by mathematically integrating movement data and the electronic safety controller to synchronize the position as coming from the encoder with data as issued by the signal strips identifier. Doing so would allow monitoring of the elevator car “in the door zone that the elevator car stays in the door zone, or that it leaves the door zone by at the most the permitted distance” as taught in Härkönen et al. (column 9 lines 52-54), thereby “ensuring safety in an elevator system” (column 2 lines 59-61).
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. US 4,367,811, US 9,890,016 B2, US 2018/0201477 A1, US 2018/0229965 A1, US 12,280,987 B2 pertaining to adjustment of position identification markers.
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 January 23, 2026