Prosecution Insights
Last updated: April 19, 2026
Application No. 18/044,792

SAFETY DEVICE FOR CONTROLLING SAFETY-RELEVANT UCM AND UDM FUNCTIONS IN AN ELEVATOR SYSTEM

Non-Final OA §102
Filed
Mar 10, 2023
Examiner
ISMAIL, SHAWKI SAIF
Art Unit
2837
Tech Center
2800 — Semiconductors & Electrical Systems
Assignee
Inventio AG
OA Round
1 (Non-Final)
58%
Grant Probability
Moderate
1-2
OA Rounds
4y 11m
To Grant
97%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 58% of resolved cases
58%
Career Allow Rate
66 granted / 114 resolved
-10.1% vs TC avg
Strong +39% interview lift
Without
With
+39.0%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
4y 11m
Avg Prosecution
7 currently pending
Career history
121
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
14.0%
-26.0% vs TC avg
§103
38.7%
-1.3% vs TC avg
§102
33.2%
-6.8% vs TC avg
§112
11.1%
-28.9% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 114 resolved cases

Office Action

§102
DETAILED ACTION This communication is in response to application filed on March 10, 2023. Claims 1-9 were cancelled and claims 10-24 were filed in the preliminary amendment on March 10, 2023. Claims 10-24 are currently pending and are being considered on the merits. 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 . Drawings The drawings filed on March 10, 2023 are accepted. Information Disclosure Statement The information disclosure statements (IDS) submitted on May 24, 2023 and December 02, 2024 have been considered. The submission is in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, an initialed and dated copy of Applicant's IDS form 1449 filed are attached to the instant Office action. 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 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. (FP 7.08.aia) Claims 10-24 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Doane U.S Patent No. 4,367,810. As to claim 10, Doane teaches a safety device for controlling safety-relevant functions in an elevator system (Refer to at least (FIGS 1-2); Cab controller 33, 34, mounted on the elevator car to control safety functions including door operation and car motion inhibiting), the safety device comprising: an input for receiving input signals from a first component of the elevator system, wherein the input signals provide information regarding current conditions within the elevator system (The cab controller receives signals from: Door position transducer 17 (FIG. 2, element 17; (FIG. 3), element 16; Load weighing transducers 18 (FIG. 2) Secondary position transducer (SPT) 19, 32, 33 (FIGS. 1-2); Car call buttons, switches 12a, 12b (FIG. 2); Door motor current feedback 16 (FIG. 2, 3). These signals provide “current conditions” such as car position, door position, car speed, door status, load, etc.); a signal processing unit receiving and processing the input signals to generate a first control signal and a second control signal both based on the input signals (Microcomputer 1 in the cab controller (FIG. 2), elements 1–6; including microprocessor 2, RAM 3, ROM 4, processes input signals via software routines (FIGS. 4–9) and generates: First control signal: Car motion inhibit relay signal (activate car motion inhibit relay flag, (FIG. 9) steps 8/12; output on line 16, FIG. 10). Second control signal: Door motor control signal (door motor relay control, (FIG. 9) steps 5/6; controls relay 24, (FIG. 3). Both signals are generated by the same microcomputer based on processing the same input signals (e.g., door position, car position, communication status).); a first output connected to the signal processing unit for transmitting the first control signal to a second component of the elevator system to control the second component such that an unintended travel movement of a car of the elevator system is prevented (The cab controller outputs the car motion inhibit relay signal via line 16 (FIG. 10) to relay coil 13, which controls relay contact 11. Opening contact 11 deenergizes main relay coil 10, opening contact 5, thereby removing power from motor field 1 and brake pick-up coils 2, preventing car motion. This occurs when safety conditions are detected (e.g., door not closed outside door zone, communication failure, etc.; (FIGS. 5-6, 9).); and a second output connected to the signal processing unit for transmitting the second control signal to a third component of the elevator system to control the third component such that an unintended movement of a car door of the car is prevented (The cab controller outputs a door motor relay control signal (FIG. 9), steps 5/6; Description para. (40)) to deenergize relay 24 (FIG. 3) when door errors are detected (general door error flag set, (FIG. 9) step 3). Deenergizing relay 24 disconnects amplifier 22 from door motor 14 and applies dynamic braking via resistor 28, preventing door motion (FIG. 3)). As to claim 11, Doane teaches the safety device according to claim 10 wherein the safety device further comprises: a signal input interface at the input for receiving the input signals from the first component of the elevator system; and a control unit connected to the signal processing unit, the first output and the second output for transmitting the first control signal and the second control signal (I/O modules 8-11 (FIG. 2); serve as signal input interfaces receiving signals from sensors/buttons. The microcomputer’s control circuits 6 and address/data/control busses 7 coordinate transmission of control signals to outputs). As to claim 12, Doane teaches the safety device according to claim 10 wherein the input signals indicate a current position and a current speed of the car of the elevator system (Secondary position transducer (SPT) 19, 32, 33 provides car position relative to floor landings (FIGS. 1-2). Primary position transducer (PPT) 25, 26 provides car position and velocity is derived therefrom: “car velocity…may be determined from the change in the incremental count of the primary position transducer 25”). As to claim 13, Doane teaches the safety device according to claim 12 wherein the input signals indicate the current position and the current speed of the car for each possible position of the car along a travel path of the car and for each point in time during operation of the elevator system (PPT 25, 26 continuously tracks car position throughout the hoistway (quasi-absolute incremental encoder), and velocity is continuously derived. The cab controller processes these signals in real-time interrupt-driven routines). As to claim 14, Doane teaches the safety device according to claim 10 wherein the second component comprises a brake configured to brake or prevent a travel movement of the car (The “second component” controlled by the first control signal includes brake pick-up coils 2 (FIG. 10). Removing power from coils 2 engages spring-loaded brakes to arrest car motion: “the spring-loaded brakes…will be operable because the pick-up coils 2 will have no power”). As to claim 15, Doane teaches the safety device according to claim 10 wherein the third component comprises a door drive configured to move a door leaf of the car door between an open configuration and a closed configuration (The “third component” is door motor 14 with amplifier 22 and gears 13 (FIG. 3), which moves door 1 via linkage). As to claim 16, Doane teaches the safety device according to claim 15 wherein a door control signal transmitted by an elevator controller of the elevator system, depending on the input signals, is transmitted to the door drive as the second control signal or is filtered out (The car controller (operation controller) 15 sends door control commands (e.g., force door open) to the cab controller, FIG. 6 test 2). The cab controller’s safety checks (FIG. 6) determine whether to act on these commands or override them (e.g., force door closed if outside door zone, FIG. 6 steps 16-17). Additionally, the car controller can directly veto door motor operation via relay 25 (FIG. 3), effectively “filtering out” the cab controller’s door commands.) As to claim 17, Doane teaches the safety device according to claim 10 wherein all components forming the safety device are integrated in a common housing so as to form a unit (the cab controller is mounted on the car (FIG. 1), elements 33, 34 and based on a microcomputer with chips on a board (FIG. 2)). 18. An elevator system comprising: a first component supplying input signals that provide information regarding current conditions within the elevator system (sensors SPT, PPT, door transducer, buttons, etc.); a second component that in response to receiving a first control signal prevents an unintended travel movement of a car of the elevator system (brake/motor field power circuit (relay contact 5, motor field 1, brake coils 2, FIG. 10); a third component that in response to receiving a second control signal prevents an unintended movement of a car (door of the car door motor 14 with relay 24 (FIG. 3); and the safety device according to claim 10 controlling the second component and the third component by generating the first control signal and the second control signal based on the input signals from the first component (cab controller 33, 34). Claim 19-24 do not recite anything beyond claims 10-17 above; therefore, they are rejected under the same rationale. Conclusion The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure (refer to the attached 892). Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to SHAWKI SAIF ISMAIL whose telephone number is (571)272-3985. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 8a.m.-4:30p.m.. 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, Andrea Wellington can be reached at 571-272-4483. 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. /SHAWKI S ISMAIL/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2837
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Mar 10, 2023
Application Filed
Mar 05, 2026
Non-Final Rejection — §102 (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12603242
ELECTROMAGNETIC CONTACTOR CAPABLE OF EFFECTIVELY EXTINGUISHING ARC
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 14, 2026
Patent 12548709
COIL COMPONENT
2y 5m to grant Granted Feb 10, 2026
Patent 12528668
METHOD FOR TESTING SAFETY CHARACTERISTICS OF AN ELEVATOR
2y 5m to grant Granted Jan 20, 2026
Patent 12518914
COIL ASSEMBLY
2y 5m to grant Granted Jan 06, 2026
Patent 12500018
SOFT MAGNETIC CORE WITH BACKWALL AIR GAP
2y 5m to grant Granted Dec 16, 2025
Study what changed to get past this examiner. Based on 5 most recent grants.

AI Strategy Recommendation

Get an AI-powered prosecution strategy using examiner precedents, rejection analysis, and claim mapping.
Powered by AI — typically takes 5-10 seconds

Prosecution Projections

1-2
Expected OA Rounds
58%
Grant Probability
97%
With Interview (+39.0%)
4y 11m
Median Time to Grant
Low
PTA Risk
Based on 114 resolved cases by this examiner. Grant probability derived from career allow rate.

Sign in with your work email

Enter your email to receive a magic link. No password needed.

Personal email addresses (Gmail, Yahoo, etc.) are not accepted.

Free tier: 3 strategy analyses per month