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 .
Specification
The lengthy specification has not been checked to the extent necessary to
determine the presence of all possible minor errors. Applicant's cooperation is
requested in correcting any errors of which applicant may become aware in the
specification.
Examiner Notes
Examiner cites particular columns, paragraphs, figures and line numbers in the references as applied to the claims below for the convenience of the applicant. Although the specified citations are representative of the teachings in the art and are applied to the specific limitations within the individual claim, other passages and figures may apply as well. It is respectfully requested that, in preparing responses, the applicant fully consider the references in their entirety as potentially teaching all or part of the claimed invention, as well as the context of the passage as taught by the prior art or disclosed by the examiner. The entire reference is considered to provide disclosure relating to the claimed invention. The claims & only the claims form the metes & bounds of the invention. Office personnel are to give the claims their broadest reasonable interpretation in light of the supporting disclosure. Unclaimed limitations appearing in the specification are not read into the claim. Prior art was referenced using terminology familiar to one of ordinary skill in the art. Such an approach is broad in concept and can be either explicit or implicit in meaning. Examiner's Notes are provided with the cited references to assist the applicant to better understand how the examiner interprets the applied prior art. Such comments are entirely consistent with the intent & spirit of compact prosecution.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(d):
(d) REFERENCE IN DEPENDENT FORMS.—Subject to subsection (e), a claim in dependent form shall contain a reference to a claim previously set forth and then specify a further limitation of the subject matter claimed. A claim in dependent form shall be construed to incorporate by reference all the limitations of the claim to which it refers.
The following is a quotation of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, fourth paragraph:
Subject to the following paragraph [i.e., the fifth paragraph of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112], a claim in dependent form shall contain a reference to a claim previously set forth and then specify a further limitation of the subject matter claimed. A claim in dependent form shall be construed to incorporate by reference all the limitations of the claim to which it refers.
Claims 5 and 13-14 rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(d) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, 4th paragraph, as being of improper dependent form for failing to further limit the subject matter of the claim upon which it depends, or for failing to include all the limitations of the claim upon which it depends.
Claim 5 recite “The method of claim 3 The method of claim 2 wherein the physical barriers include at least two of the following: …”
Claim 13 recites “The method of claim 11 The method of claim 2 wherein the physical barriers include at least two of the following: …” and claim 14 depends on claim 13.
Applicant may cancel the claim(s), amend the claim(s) to place the claim(s) in proper dependent form, rewrite the claim(s) in independent form, or present a sufficient showing that the dependent claim(s) complies with the statutory requirements.
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 1-14 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 101 because the claimed invention is directed to non-statutory subject matter. These claims are directed to an abstract idea without significantly more.
As to claim 1,
Step 1: Claim 1 is directed to a method. Therefore, the claim is eligible under Step 1 for being directed to processes.
Step 2A Prong One
Claim 1 recites
a. creating a digital twin model of the location; (mental process)
b. using the digital twin model to create numerous permutations of the various security plans for the location. (mental process)
The claimed concept is a method of determining security plans using a copy of the location (e.g. duplicate a map) directed to “Mental Process” grouping. These limitations can be performed in a human mind or using pen and paper.
Therefore, claim 1 is an abstract idea.
Step 2A Prong Two
The claim did not recite additional elements. Note that, simply implementing the abstract idea on a generic computer is not a practical application of the abstract idea.
The judicial exception is not integrated into a practical application.
Step 2B:
The same analysis of Step 2A Prong Two applies here in 2B. The present claim does not recite any limitation that would integrate a judicial exception into a practical application at Step 2A or provide an inventive concept in Step 2B. See MPEP 2106.05(d).
Thus, claim 1 is not patent eligible. Same conclusion for dependent claims of claim 1. See below.
2. The method of claim 1 wherein the digital twin model comprises at least one of the following: physical barriers and sensors present at the location. (data description)
3. The method of claim 2 wherein the physical barriers include at least one of the following: buildings, fences (or other barriers), roads, terrain, gates, doors. (data description)
4. The method of claim 2 wherein the physical barriers include at least two of the following: buildings, fences (or other barriers), roads, terrain, gates, doors. (data description)
5. The method of claim 3 The method of claim 2 wherein the physical barriers include at least two of the following: buildings, fences (or other barriers), roads, terrain, gates, doors. (data description)
6. The method of claim 1 wherein the step of creating numerous permutations of the various security plans for the location is accomplished by using a security system design software. (mere instructions to apply an exception in accordance with MPEP 2106.05(f) (1) and (3). For example, the claim recites only the idea of a solution or outcome i.e., the claim fails to recite details of how a solution to a problem is accomplished.)
7. The method of claim 6 wherein the numerous permutations are generated by Monte-Carlo / stochastic generated solutions. (math concept)
8. The method of claim 6 wherein the security system design software comprises a library which further comprises information about at least one of alarms, sensors, cameras, barriers, gates, responders, vehicles, and weapons that either are, or could be, present at the location. (data description)
Same conclusion for independent claim 9 and dependent claims. The claim(s) does/do not include additional elements that are sufficient to amount to significantly more than the judicial exception. In particular, the claim limitations do not recite a combination of additional elements that tie or “integrate the invention into a practical application”.
Thus, claims 1-14 are not patent eligible.
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.
Claim(s) 1-14 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Krylov (US 2019/0347366).
Claim 1. A method of designing a security plan for a location, said method comprising:
a. creating a digital twin model of the location; and
Krylov [0036] “The said technical result is achieved by the fact that for the method of computer-aided design and analysis of physical protection systems libraries of dynamic mathematical models of technical security equipment, engineering security means, intruders and security service are created, the model of the facility to be guarded is created [correspond to digital twin model of the location], in the territory of the facility to be guarded elements of technical security equipment and engineering security means are created, security service dynamic mathematical model is set, threat dynamic mathematical model is created, within the scope of which intruders dynamic mathematical models are set, simulation is carried out, and then facility vulnerability estimate is created.”
In light of applicants’ specification page 2, examiner interpreted “digital twin model of the location” as a copy /duplicated model of the location.
Krylov [0086] “The stage of guarded facility creation as a drawing or a plan is carried out using available design elements: original drawing, library elements of the specific areas and infrastructure.”
b. using the digital twin model to create numerous permutations of the various security plans for the location.
Krylov [0093] “Then, the plan of PPS and, particularly, PSS in the territory of the facility is corrected and updated on the basis of the estimation results and analysis recommendations. This stage is repeated until the facility protection project that meets all requirements is created.”
Krylov [0098] “The facility drawing in.dxf format can be loaded from AutoCAD to the simulation environment. This drawing is a facility map in which you can draw as in a work field or locate ESM, SE, infrastructure elements, etc. from the library. Also, in this plan you can place user (expert) intrusion trajectories, intruder occurrence zones, etc. Using various combinations of PPS elements (locating of various types of fences, security borders creation, disposition of cameras and detectors, etc.) you can obtain an unique structure in the facility. This structure can be subject to many computational experiments in order to study intruder intrusion to the facility territory at the stated points. All computational experiments re carried out in the environment using a mathematical simulation program block. …”
Claims 2 and 10
wherein the digital twin model comprises at least one of the following: physical barriers and sensors present at the location.
Krylov [0098] “The facility drawing in.dxf format can be loaded from AutoCAD to the simulation environment. This drawing is a facility map in which you can draw as in a work field or locate ESM, SE, infrastructure elements, etc. from the library. Also, in this plan you can place user (expert) intrusion trajectories, intruder occurrence zones, etc. Using various combinations of PPS elements (locating of various types of fences, security borders creation, disposition of cameras and detectors, etc.) you can obtain an unique structure in the facility. This structure can be subject to many computational experiments in order to study intruder intrusion to the facility territory at the stated points. All computational experiments re carried out in the environment using a mathematical simulation program block. …”
Claims 3 and 11
wherein the physical barriers include at least one of the following: buildings, fences (or other barriers), roads, terrain, gates, doors.
Krylov [0098] “The facility drawing in.dxf format can be loaded from AutoCAD to the simulation environment. This drawing is a facility map in which you can draw as in a work field or locate ESM, SE, infrastructure elements, etc. from the library. Also, in this plan you can place user (expert) intrusion trajectories, intruder occurrence zones, etc. Using various combinations of PPS elements (locating of various types of fences, security borders creation, disposition of cameras and detectors, etc.) you can obtain an unique structure in the facility. This structure can be subject to many computational experiments in order to study intruder intrusion to the facility territory at the stated points. All computational experiments re carried out in the environment using a mathematical simulation program block. …”
Claims 4 and 12
wherein the physical barriers include at least two of the following: buildings, fences (or other barriers), roads, terrain, gates, doors.
Krylov [0098] “The facility drawing in.dxf format can be loaded from AutoCAD to the simulation environment. This drawing is a facility map in which you can draw as in a work field or locate ESM, SE, infrastructure elements, etc. from the library. Also, in this plan you can place user (expert) intrusion trajectories, intruder occurrence zones, etc. Using various combinations of PPS elements (locating of various types of fences, security borders creation, disposition of cameras and detectors, etc.) you can obtain an unique structure in the facility. This structure can be subject to many computational experiments in order to study intruder intrusion to the facility territory at the stated points. All computational experiments re carried out in the environment using a mathematical simulation program block. …”
Claims 5 and 13
wherein the physical barriers include at least two of the following: buildings, fences (or other barriers), roads, terrain, gates, doors.
Krylov [0098] “The facility drawing in.dxf format can be loaded from AutoCAD to the simulation environment. This drawing is a facility map in which you can draw as in a work field or locate ESM, SE, infrastructure elements, etc. from the library. Also, in this plan you can place user (expert) intrusion trajectories, intruder occurrence zones, etc. Using various combinations of PPS elements (locating of various types of fences, security borders creation, disposition of cameras and detectors, etc.) you can obtain an unique structure in the facility. This structure can be subject to many computational experiments in order to study intruder intrusion to the facility territory at the stated points. All computational experiments re carried out in the environment using a mathematical simulation program block. …”
Claim 6. The method of claim 1 wherein the step of creating numerous permutations of the various security plans for the location is accomplished by using a security system design software.
Krylov [0007] “Integrated security system (ISS) is a set of technical and software tools for maintenance of safe condition, prevention, detection, counteraction and elimination of a set of threats to the subject of safety assurance. It is a component part of PPS, but not complete.”
Claim 7. The method of claim 6 wherein the numerous permutations are generated by Monte-Carlo / stochastic generated solutions.
Krylov [0110] “In PPS effectiveness indices calculation mode a computational stochastic experiment is carried out, when a confidential interval [p.sub.min, p.sub.max] is defined using Monte-Carlo method by multiple simulation runs, in which the value p (probability of success operation (effectiveness) of PPS under study) is determined with a probability P. Having carried out calculations in this mode for various values of PPS parameters you can obtain the function of PPS effectiveness and its elements' parameters' values. It is also provided the possibility of automatic building of parametric dependences and estimate of PPS effectiveness sensitivity to parameter values.”
Claims 8 and 14
wherein the security system design software comprises a library which further comprises information about at least one of alarms, sensors, cameras, barriers, gates, responders, vehicles, and weapons that either are, or could be, present at the location.
Krylov [0098] “The facility drawing in.dxf format can be loaded from AutoCAD to the simulation environment. This drawing is a facility map in which you can draw as in a work field or locate ESM, SE, infrastructure elements, etc. from the library. Also, in this plan you can place user (expert) intrusion trajectories, intruder occurrence zones, etc. Using various combinations of PPS elements (locating of various types of fences, security borders creation, disposition of cameras and detectors, etc.) you can obtain an unique structure in the facility. This structure can be subject to many computational experiments in order to study intruder intrusion to the facility territory at the stated points. All computational experiments re carried out in the environment using a mathematical simulation program block. …”
Regarding Claim 9, the same ground of rejection is made as discussed above for substantially similar rationale of claims 1 and 7.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to CHUEN-MEEI GAN whose telephone number is (469)295-9127. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 9:00 am to 4:00 pm EST.
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, Rehana Perveen can be reached at 571-272-3676. 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.
/CHUEN-MEEI GAN/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2189