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 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.
Claim 27 is 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.
Claim 27 recites the limitation "the processor" in line 4. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. It’s not clear whether this is a new processor or the same processing unit.
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.
Claims 13-18, 20, 23, 24, 26 and 27 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Michel et al. in a view of Van Der Meijden rt al. US 2005/0150728 A1.
Regarding claim 13, Michel et al. disclose
A method for installing an elevator system [0001], the method comprising steps of: using an at least partially installed traveling body as a movable working platform (fig. 1, items 7 and 12) in the elevator system during an installation of the elevator system, wherein the traveling body is supported by a traction means (item 13) [0040], and the traveling body has an electronic safety brake (item 7. Item 7 is coupled to item 12); creating an operating state of the electronic safety brake by using a control unit (item 22) adapted to control the electronic safety brake [0039], the control unit including a safety sensor (item 23), a processing unit (analysis device) and a signal output; connecting the signal output to the electronic safety brake; generating a control signal (actuation) by the processing unit at the signal output [0043] , wherein the control signal controls activation of the electronic safety brake; detecting an unsafe operating state (Via movement data) of the working platform by the safety sensor; controlling the signal output due to the detection of an unsafe operating state by the processing unit such that the electronic safety brake is activated by the control signal [0039-0042].
Michel et al. does not disclose but Van discloses and removing the control unit (a control panel) when the installation of the elevator system is complete [0034] (It should be note that the frame is temporarily built to place the control panel. Hence, the control panel is also temporarily placed).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective fling date of the claimed invention to remove the control unit when the installation of the elevator system is complete as disclosed by Van in Michel’s teachings so that the elevators have to be able to serve floors as high as possible. (Van’s paragraph 0002)
Regarding claim 14, Michel et al. disclose wherein safety sensor is a slack- cable contact (cable device) that activates the electronic safety brake when a lower limit value for a tensile force on the traction means is undershot [0019].
Regarding claim 15, Michel et al. disclose including a step of supplying the control unit exclusively via a mobile energy source [0046, 0049] (It should be noted that item 14 can be removed).
Regarding claim 16, Michel et al. disclose wherein the mobile energy source. is a battery [0046].
Regarding claim 17, Michel et al. disclose wherein including a step of activating the electronic safety brake by actuating an emergency switch (a switch) of the control unit [0012].
Regarding claim 18, Michel et al. disclose including a step of tensioning (open) the electronic safety brake by the control signal applying a flow of current to the electronic safety brake, and activating the electronic safety brake by switching off the flow of current [0044].
Regarding claim 20, Michel et al. disclose including a step of winding a cable of the control unit onto a winding aid of the control unit, wherein the cable is one of a power cable adapted to supply power to the control unit, a safety sensor cable (fig. 2 shows signals from sensors to analysis device) connecting the safety sensor to the control unit, and a signal cable adapted to connect the control unit to the electronic safety brake [0039] (see figs 1 and 2 for detail).
Regarding claim 23, Michel et al. disclose additional steps of: mounting a lowermost rail section; and movably mounting the traveling body onto the lowermost rail section [0040].
Regarding claim 24, Michel et al. disclose including a step of lifting the traveling body along the lowermost rail section by a winch (via support rollers 6) [0040].
Regarding claim 26, Michel et al. disclose wherein the step of connecting the signal output includes establishing an electrical connection to the electronic safety brake with a signal output cable (fig. 1 shows a cable from item 7).
Regarding claim 27, Michel et al. disclose
a control unit adapted to perform the method according to claim 13, the control unit comprising: the processing unit; the safety sensor connected to the processor; and the signal output connected to the electronic safety brake of the traveling body (see claim 13 rejection for detail).
Claim 19 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Michel et al. in a view of Van and further in a view of Wei US 2020/0307952 A1.
Regarding claim 19, Michel and Van do not disclose but Wei et al. disclose including a step of transporting the control unit (fig. 1, item 160) to and from the elevator system (item 10) by a handle (handheld) adapted for carrying the control unit [0056].
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective fling date of the claimed invention to transport the control unit using a handle as taught by Wei in Michel’s teachings to configure corresponding stoppable floor information set for an elevator cabin of an elevator system (Wei’s paragraph 0002).
Claims 21, 22 and 25 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Michel et al. in a view of Van and further in a view of Liebetrau et al. US 6102163.
Regarding claim 21, Michel and Van do not disclose but Liebetrau et al. disclose including a step of temporarily attaching the control unit (the control box) to the traveling body (car) with a quick fastening system (mounting means) (column 1, lines 43-59).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective fling date of the claimed invention to a step of temporarily attaching the control unit to the traveling body with a quick fastening system as disclosed by Liebetrau to make possible maintenance and servicing of such an elevator car in simple manner without increasing the size of the car by adding large external attachments (Liebetrau’s column 1, lines 10-19).
Regarding claim 22, Michel and Van do not disclose but Liebetrau et al. disclose wherein the quick fastening system is a hook or clamp (mounting means) (column 1, lines 43-59).
Regarding claim 25, a combination of Michel, Van and Liebetrau disclose including a step of attaching the control unit to the traveling body by a quick fastening system (see claim 21 rejection for detail).
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Fauconnet et al. (US 2020/0048041 A1) disclose an elevator electrical safety actuator controller.
AMMON (CA2220582A1) discloses lift installation with drive unit in the lift shaft.
CHIDA (CN1328525A) discloses an elevator maintenance operation control.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to BICKEY DHAKAL whose telephone number is (571)272-3577. The examiner can normally be reached 8:30-4:30 PM.
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, Jessica Han can be reached at 5712722078. 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.
/BICKEY DHAKAL/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2896