533Notice 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 .
DETAILED ACTION
This office action is in response to communication filed 11/18/25.
Response to Amendment
The examiner acknowledges the amendment of claims 1,11 and cancellation of claim 16..
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to claim(s) 1-5, 7-15, and 17-20 have been considered but are moot because the new ground of rejection does not rely on any reference applied in the prior rejection of record for any teaching or matter specifically challenged in the argument.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 103 which forms the basis for all obviousness rejections set forth in this Office action:
A patent for a claimed invention may not be obtained, notwithstanding that the claimed invention is not identically disclosed as set forth in section 102, if the differences between the claimed invention and the prior art are such that the claimed invention as a whole would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which the claimed invention pertains. Patentability shall not be negated by the manner in which the invention was made.
Claim(s) 1-5,7-14,15,17-20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Lobean et al. US Patent Application Publication 20120319814 in view of Finschi et al. US Patent Application Publication 20190020978 in view of Alqarni US Patent Application Publication 20180157227 in view of Albright US Patent Application Publication 20130205257 and further in view of Sandoval US Patent Application Publication 20050092831.
Regarding claim 1,3,10, Lobean teaches an indication system for generating an indication, wherein the system comprises:
at least one indication device (element 240 indicate the presence of a gait, paragraph 016-017),
at least one detection device configured to monitor at least one area inside a building to provide monitoring data (image acquisition device 130, paragraph 015), and
a control unit configured to:
detect based on the monitoring data obtained from the at least one detection device at least one predefined object with a specific need (disabled person in a wheelchair is detected, paragraph 015). Lobean is silent on teaching control the at least one indication device to generate a visual indication comprising guidance information to a gate device allocated for the detected at least one predefined object in response to the detection of the at least one predefined object. Finschi et al. in an analogous art teaches the use of an indicator device that provide guidance for a wheelchair bound person to a gate device (beacon device broadcast guidance to user’s mobile device, paragraph 035,037,42-43). Finschi teaches the at least one indication device comprises one or more displays on which the visual indication is displayed and/or one or more or projector devices configured to project the generated visual indication on a floor in a vicinity of the allocated gate device (paragraph 037user (an impaired person is directed to the elevator and not the step, paragraph 011, 042-44). Finschi teaches monitoring comprises tracking movements of the detected object within at least one monitoring area (paragraph 010,032,057). Finschi teaches the allocated gate device is configured to identify a user associated with the detected one predefined object (paragraph 041-0445). Lobean in view of Finschi et al. is silent on teaching the at least one indication device comprises one or more projector devices configured to project the generated visual indication on a location associated with the allocated gate device. Alqarni et al. in an analogous art teaches an indication device comprises one or more projector devices configured to project the generated visual indication on a location associated with the allocated gate device and the generated visual indication indicates access of the user for the allocated gate device (paragraph 013,039). Lobean in view of Finschi in view of Alqarni is silent on teaching the allocated gate device has a widened passageway with a width of the passageway that is greater than a width of a passageway for each of a portion of the remaining plurality of gate devices, the widened passageway of the allocated gate device being configured to accommodate the specific need of the user. Albright in an analogous art teaches providing a widened passage way in order to provide for the specific need of a user such as a user in a wheelchair or a user using a wide stroller and directing the users to such passageway (paragraph 032). Sandoval in an analogous art further teaches an entry way that include a plurality of gates and the gates included a widened passage way for accommodating wheelchair access (paragraph 051).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the invention to modify the system of Lobean as disclosed by Finschi in view of Alqarni because such modification represents an improvement over the system of Lobean by providing guidance to a wheelchair bound person to safely navigate his/her journey to the gate device. The modification of the passageway as disclosed by Albright in view of Sandoval allows the users with special need to be transported comfortably along the passageway.
Regarding claim 2, Lobean teaches the operation of the at least one detector is based on object recognition or pattern recognition (paragraph 015,017).
Regarding claim 4, Lobean teaches the monitored at least one area comprises an area surrounding at least the allocated gate device on at least one side of the allocated gate device (paragraph 015).
Regarding claim 5, Lobean teaches the object with the specific need is a wheelchair, rolling walker, stroller, luggage, trolley, a parcel delivery, and/or a specific outfit (paragraph 014-015).
Regarding claim 7, Lobean et al. teaches the allocated gate device allow access via the allocated gate device in response to identification of the user associated with the detected at least one predefined object (paragraph 04-05,014-015).
Regarding claim 8, Lobean teaches the identification is based on a biometric technology (paragraph 04-05,014-015).
Regarding claim 9, Lobean is silent on teaching the allocated gate device is configured to instruct an elevator control system to generate an elevator call to allocate an elevator car for said user associated with the detected at least one predefined object in response to identification of the user associated with the detected at least one predefined object. Finschi et al. in an analogous art teaches the allocated gate device is configured to instruct an elevator control system to generate an elevator call to allocate an elevator car for said user associated with the detected at least one predefined object in response to identification of the user associated with the detected at least one predefined object (paragraph 040-041).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the invention to modify the system of Lobean as disclosed by Finschi et al. because such modification represents an improvement over the system of Lobean because such modification improves the accessibility and the safety of a wheelchair bound person in a building.
Regarding claim 11,13, and 20, Lobean et al. teaches a method for generating an indication, wherein the method comprising:
monitoring, by at least one detection device, at least one area inside a building to provide monitoring data (image acquisition device 130, paragraph 015),
detecting, by a control unit , at least one predefined object with a specific need based on the monitoring data obtained from the at least one detection device (disabled person in a wheelchair is detected, paragraph 015). Lobean is silent on teaching control the at least one indication device to generate a visual indication comprising guidance information to a gate device allocated for the detected at least one predefined object in response to the detection of the at least one predefined object. Finschi et al. in an analogous art teaches the use of an indicator device that provide guidance for a wheelchair bound person to a gate device (beacon device broadcast guidance to user’s mobile device, paragraph 035,037,42-43). Finschi teaches the at least one indication device comprises one or more displays on which the visual indication is displayed and/or one or more or projector devices configured to project the generated visual indication on a floor in a vicinity of the allocated gate device (paragraph 037remaining plurality of gate devices, the widened passageway of the allocated gate device being configured to accommodate the specific need of the user. Albright in an analogous art teaches providing a widened passage way in order to provide for the specific need of a user such as a user in a wheelchair or a user using a wide stroller and directing the users to such passageway (paragraph 032). Sandoval in an analogous art further teaches an entry way that include a plurality of gates and the gates included a widened passage way for accommodating wheelchair access (paragraph 051).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the invention to modify the system of Lobean as disclosed by Finschi in view of Alqarni et al. because such modification represents an improvement over the system of Lobean by providing guidance to a wheelchair bound person to safely navigate his/her journey to the gate device. The modification of the passageway as disclosed by Albright in view of Sandoval allows the users with special need to be transported comfortably along the passageway.
Regarding claim 12, Lobean teaches the operation of the at least one detector is based on object recognition or pattern recognition (paragraph 015,017).
Regarding claim 14, Lobean teaches the monitored at least one area comprises an area surrounding at least the allocated gate device on at least one side of the allocated gate device (paragraph 015).
Regarding claim 15, Lobean teaches the object with the specific need is a wheelchair (paragraph 014-015).
Regarding claim 17, Lobean et al. teaches providing access via the allocated gate device in response to identification of the user associated with the detected at least one predefined object (paragraph 04-05,014-015).
Regarding claim 18, Lobean teaches the identification is based on a biometric technology (paragraph 04-05,014-015).
Regarding claim 19, Lobean is silent on teaching the allocated gate device is configured to instruct an elevator control system to generate an elevator call to allocate an elevator car for said user associated with the detected at least one predefined object in response to identification of the user associated with the detected at least one predefined object. Finschi et al. in an analogous art teaches the allocated gate device is configured to instruct an elevator control system to generate an elevator call to allocate an elevator car for said user associated with the detected at least one predefined object in response to identification of the user associated with the detected at least one predefined object (paragraph 040-041).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the invention to modify the system of Lobean as disclosed by Finschi et al. because such modification represents an improvement over the system of Lobean because such modification improves the accessibility and the safety of a wheelchair bound person in a building.
Conclusion
Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a). Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a).
A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of the advisory action. In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the mailing date of this final action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to VERNAL U BROWN whose telephone number is (571)272-3060. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday, 8AM-5PM, 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, Steven Lim can be reached on 571 270 1210. 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.
/VERNAL U BROWN/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2686
Prosecution Insights