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 .
Claim Interpretation
The “computer program product comprising one or more computer readable storage media” of Claim 20 is understood to have the meaning given in paragraph [00101] which excludes transitory embodiments.
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.
Claim(s) 1, 10-11 , and 20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by (PGPUB: 20200046040 A1).
Regarding claims 1, 11, and 20. A system, comprising:
an infrared camera configured to capture one or more infrared images of a user (see Fig. 19, paragraph 152, an optical tag having an optical pattern embodied thereon may be a retroreflective tag with a machine-readable code. The machine-readable code may be printed with infrared absorbing ink to enable an infrared camera to obtain images that can be readily processed to identify the machine-readable code);
an image processing circuitry coupled to the infrared camera (see Fig. 19, item 6 and 28), wherein the image processing circuitry is configured to perform operations including:
detecting an optical tag within the one or more infrared images (see Fig. 19, paragraph 152, the mirror film is infrared transparent such that the machine-readable code is not visible in ambient light but readily detectable within images obtained by an infrared camera (e.g., with some instances of image capture device 28)), wherein the optical tag is disposed on a respiratory protective device (see Fig. 19, item 13A, 22A, and 23A); and in response to detecting the optical tag within the one or more infrared images, generating a notification indicating that the user is wearing a respiratory protective device (see Fig. 1, paragraph 151, optical patterns 22, 23 are embodied on a surface of a PPE 13 to be visible such that image capture device 28 may obtain images of the optical patterns 22, 23 when workers 10 are working in the environments 8; see Fig. 1, paragraph 152, the mirror film is infrared transparent such that the machine-readable code is not visible in ambient light but readily detectable within images obtained by an infrared camera (e.g., with some instances of image capture device 28) . The machine-readable code may be a unique identifier within the scope of PPE managed by PPEMS 6. PPEMS 6 may use the machine-readable code to uniquely identify the optical tag 22, 23 and the corresponding PPE 13, component thereof, or item 26 to which the optical tag 22, 23 is affixed. An optical tag can be adhered to different types of PPE 13, such as protective eyewear, helmets, face shields, ear muffs, fall protection harness, coveralls, or respirators).
Regarding claim 10. The method of claim 1, further comprising:
determining respiratory protective devices usage among a plurality of users based, at least in part, on detected optical tags (see Fig. 1, paragraph 151, optical patterns 22, 23 are embodied on a surface of a PPE 13 to be visible such that image capture device 28 may obtain images of the optical patterns 22, 23 when workers 10 are working in the environments 8); and
detecting duplicate respiratory protective devices among the plurality of users based on detecting unique codes embedded in the optical tags (see Fig. 1, paragraph 152, the mirror film is infrared transparent such that the machine-readable code is not visible in ambient light but readily detectable within images obtained by an infrared camera (e.g., with some instances of image capture device 28) . The machine-readable code may be a unique identifier within the scope of PPE managed by PPEMS 6. PPEMS 6 may use the machine-readable code to uniquely identify the optical tag 22, 23 and the corresponding PPE 13, component thereof, or item 26 to which the optical tag 22, 23 is affixed. An optical tag can be adhered to different types of PPE 13, such as protective eyewear, helmets, face shields, ear muffs, fall protection harness, coveralls, or respirators).
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) 2 and 12 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kanukurthy (PGPUB: 20200046040 A1) in view of Patton (PGPUB: 20240015260 A1).
Regarding claims 2 and 12. The combination does not expressly teach the system of claim 11, wherein the one or more infrared images are captured using a visible light blocking filter.
Patton teaches while the illuminator 720 is active or the ON message 722 is asserted, the filter 710 places a visible light filter or an IR filter to block all visible light and allow only IR spectrums of light to pass through the light path to the image sensor (see Fig. 5, paragraph 109).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Kanukurthy by Patton for providing an IR filter to block all visible light and allow only IR spectrums of light to pass through the light path to the image sensor, as wherein the one or more infrared images are captured using a visible light blocking filter. Therefore, combining the elements from prior arts according to known methods and technique would yield predictable results.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 3-9 and 13-19 objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to XIN JIA whose telephone number is (571)270-5536. The examiner can normally be reached 9:00 am-7:30pm.
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, Gregory Morse can be reached at (571)272-3838. 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.
/XIN JIA/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2663