DETAILED ACTION
This is the first action in response to US application 18/091,284, filed 29 December, 2022, as a continuation-in-part of US applications Nos. 17/733,778, 17/733,715, and 17/733,737, all of which were filed on April 29, 2022. All claims 1-20 are pending and have been fully considered.
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 Objections
Claims 9 and 19 are objected to for the informalities indicated below.
Claim 9 is objected to because the limitation “information regarding whether the environment associated with an ozone concentration in the environment” is grammatically unclear. It is suggested the claim be drafted as follows, which represents how the claim has been interpreted: “information regarding
Claim 19 includes the same limitation (lines 4-5) and should be adjusted similarly.
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.
The factual inquiries for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows:
1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art.
2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue.
3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art.
4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness.
This application currently names joint inventors. In considering patentability of the claims the examiner presumes that the subject matter of the various claims was commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the claimed invention(s) absent any evidence to the contrary. Applicant is advised of the obligation under 37 CFR 1.56 to point out the inventor and effective filing dates of each claim that was not commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the later invention in order for the examiner to consider the applicability of 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(C) for any potential 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) prior art against the later invention.
Claims 1-11, and 16-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Gupta et al. (US 2021/0398230 A1) in view of Gilling et al. (US 2022/0331473 A1, filed 19 April, 2021).
Regarding claim 1, Gupta teaches a system (facility management system 10—[0019]; hotel management system 50—[0033]) comprising:
one or more motion sensors (16, 26, 58) in an environment (space 14, space 24, room 56), the motion sensors configured to sense motion within the environment (each space 14 includes one or more sensors 16, the sensors 16 including occupancy sensors such as motion sensors—[0019]; space 24 is an example of space 14, and occupancy sensor 26 is an example of a sensor 16—[0026]; each guest room 56 includes one or more sensors 58, the sensors including occupancy sensors such as motion sensors—Fig. 3, [0033]);
one or more cleaning devices (22,34, 62) arranged in the environment (sanitizer 22 includes one or more sanitizing elements that are disposed within each of the spaces 14, including one or more UV lamps disposed within each space 14—[0022]; sanitizer 34 located within space 24—[0026]; each guest room 56 includes sanitizer 62—[0035]), an individual cleaning device configured to generate ozone and emit ultraviolet-c (UVC) light in the environment (UV lamps of sanitizer 22 disposed within each space 14—[0022]; sanitizer 34 can be provided in various configurations and can emit UV-C light for disinfecting surfaces—[0029]; sanitizer 62 provides UV light such as UV-C light that disinfects contacted surfaces—[0035]; ozone may be generated as a result of performing UV sterilization—[0048]);
one or more processors (controller 20 coupled with sensors 16 and sanitizer 22 through network 18—[0020]; controller 38 connected with sensor 26 and sanitizer 34—see Fig. 2, [0028], [0030]-[0032]; controller 72 coupled with remote server 54—see Fig. 3, [0040]).
Gupta further discloses a non-transitory computer readable medium storing instructions to be executed by a process (claim 39), wherein the instructions of the medium (claim 39: receiving an air quality parameter, calculating an air quality index, calculating a pathogen risk index, and displaying the parameters and calculated values) correspond to the functions of the controllers (72) disclosed by Gupta ([0047]-[0048] discuss a controller, such as the controller 72, which receives an indication of current air quality, and calculates and displays an indoor air quality index and/or an infection risk index). Accordingly, the controllers (20, 38, 72) of Gupta are fairly implied to comprise a processor and a memory storing instructions to be executed by the processors. Also, it would otherwise be obvious to configure the controllers (20, 38, or 72) of Gupta as a device comprising a processor and memory storing instructions because such configuration of a controller is conventional (as evidenced at least by claim 29 of Gupta) and provides the benefit of enabling the adjustment of system functions by updating or reprogramming the software instructions stored on the memory.
Accordingly, Gupta fairly teaches that the system further comprises one or more non-transitory computer-readable media storing instructions executable by the one or more processors (as discussed above, Gupta fairly suggests configuring controllers 20, 38, and 72 as computer-readable media storing instructions for execution by a processor).
The controllers of Gupta are configured to activate the sanitizers in a condition when the motion sensor does not detect motion (controller activates sanitizer when guest room is currently unoccupied—Fig. 4, step 90; controller receives indication of current occupancy within each guest room—Fig. 4, step 84; see [0047]; occupancy sensor is a motion sensor—[0019], [0033], [0041]—and it is clear that detecting motion in the room is indicative of the room being occupied). Accordingly, the instructions of the controller of Gupta generally includes controlling the one or more cleaning devices to generate ozone and emit the UVC light in the environment (Fig. 4, step 90); receiving a motion signal from the one or more motion sensors indicating that motion is detected within the environment (Fig. 4, step 86).
Gupta further teaches the controller ending the operation of the sanitizer if is detected by a door sensor (42) that a person has entered the room (to stop the sanitizer 34 if someone ignores the warning and opens the entry door 40…the space 24 may include a door opening sensor 42 that is configured to provide an indication to the controller 38 that the entry door 40 is open or is being opened…the controller 38 is configured to instruct the sanitizer 34 to stop operating when the door opening sensor 42 provides an indication that the entry door 40 is open or will be opened—[0031]). Gupta thus further suggest the controller memory including instructions wherein: upon determining that the motion is detected by the one or more door opening sensors, controlling the one or more cleaning devices to stop generating the ozone and emitting the UVC light in the environment (see [0031] and discussion above regarding how the controller of Gupta is understood to comprise instruction stored on a memory).
Nonetheless, Gupta does not clearly teach that the motion sensors (16,26,58) provides the detection that cause the sanitizer to deactivate, and it is not clear that the door sensors (42) of Gupta necessarily constitute motion sensors consistent with the instant claim. Thus, despite teaching similar functions, Gupta does not clearly teach the full instruction sequence of claim 1 comprising: controlling the one or more cleaning devices to generate ozone and emit the UVC light in the environment; receiving a motion signal from the one or more motion sensors indicating that motion is detected within the environment; and upon determining that the motion is detected by the one or more motion sensors, controlling the one or more cleaning devices to stop generating the ozone and emitting the UVC light in the environment.
However, in the analogous art of UV sanitization of spaces (title, abstract) with systems capable of generating ozone (185 nm light selected for ozone disinfection—[0025]), Gilling teaches a controller configured as a processor executing instructions (software) stored on a computing device ([0031]), wherein the controller is configured to deactivate light sources (22) in response to a detection of an occupant in a space by a motion sensors (36); this provides improved safety of the occupant when the light source emits ultraviolet light at wavelengths harmful to humans skin ([0032]). Therefore, it would be obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art to modify the software instructions of the controller of Gupta to include instructions for deactivating the cleaning devices when motion is detected by the motion detectors for the benefit of improving safety by preventing the exposure of human skin to harmful ultraviolet light (see Gilling at [0032]). It is noted that such a feature would be useful in the system of Gupta in instances when the door sensor (42) fails to operate appropriately or if an occupant manages to enter a room without using the door (40).
Regarding claim 2, Gupta in view of Gilling teaches the system of claim 1. Gupta teaches a heating, ventilation, and air conditioning (HVAC) system associated with the environment (space 24 includes HVAC system 30—[0026]; each guest room 56 includes an HVAC system 60—[0034]), the HVAC system being operated by the controller (controller 72 may not ventilate an unrented room—[0045]; see Figs. 2-3). Gupta suggests operating the HVAC system (30), which includes an air purifier (32), in response to a detection of poor air quality ([0028]); poor air quality is caused in part by high levels of ozone (see [0028], [0048] and claim 28). Gupta also recognized that it is advantageous to conserve energy by not operating the HVAC in empty rooms ([0056]); extending this teaching provides some suggestion to only operate the HVAC system when occupancy is detected. Also, combining the teachings of Gupta discussed above, it would be evident to a person having ordinary skill in the art that the sequence of operations encoded into the instructions of the claimed non-transitory computer readable medium—wherein said sequence involves first activating a UV and ozone generating device, then deactivating the UV and ozone generating device upon detection of motion in an environment, and subsequently or simultaneously controlling an HVAC system to activate blower fan upon the detection of motion—would provide the benefit of removing ozone from the environment in which motion was detected (i.e., activating the blower of the HVAC will assist in removing ozone from the room) to reduce the risk of harming or irritating the person that moved into the environment during the sanitization process. Therefore, it would be obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art to configure the system of Gupta to include instructions for activating the HVAC system—including a blower fan thereof—in response to the detection of motion for the benefit of further improving the safety of the system (see discussion above with respect to reducing human exposure to ozone).
Regarding claim 3, Gupta in view of Gilling teaches the system of claim 1. Gupta further teaches a termination switch (an emergency “off” switch may be provided in the room that allows someone in the room to immediately turn off the sanitizer—[0031]); the operations further comprising: determining that the termination switch is triggered; and upon determining that the termination switch is triggered, controlling the one or more cleaning devices to stop generating the ozone and emitting the UVC light in the environment (from [0031], it is clear that when the off switch is triggered, the system operates to turn off the sanitizer, which thus stops the generation of ozone and emission of UVC light; encoding such function into the instructions of the controller is obvious for the evident benefit of achieving a centralized control system with reprogrammable operations) .
Regarding claim 4, Gupta in view of Gilling teaches the system of claim 1. Gupta further teaches a display component associated with the environment (controller 72 includes a display 74 for displaying information—[0040]), the display component being configured to present information associated with an ozone concentration in the environment (at block 92, controller may be configured to display a dashboard that includes air quality parameters, including ozone levels—[0048]; dashboard 100 includes ozone icon 120—Fig. 5, [0050]).
Regarding claim 5, Gupta in view of Gilling teaches the system of claim 1. Gupta further teaches occupancy sensors (16, 26, 58) which determine when the environment is unoccupied (sensors 16 within space 14 include occupancy sensors which provide an indication of when the space 14 is occupied and not occupied—[0024]; occupancy sensor 26—[0026]; sensors 58 include occupancy sensors such as PIR sensors, mmWave sensors, motion sensors, and/or microphones—[0033]). In operation, the cleaning devices (sanitizers) are not activated (block 90) until an indication is received from the occupancy sensors (block 84) confirming that the environment is currently unoccupied (see Fig. 4). Thus, Gupta teaches the system further comprises an access control system; the operations further comprising: determining, by an access control system associated with the environment, that a condition (room is currently unoccupied) is satisfied; and upon determining that the condition is satisfied, controlling the one or more cleaning devices to perform a sanitization process in the environment (see steps 84 and 90 of Fig. 4).
Regarding claim 6, it is noted that the method claim essentially comprises steps corresponding to the instructions stored within the non-transitory storage media of claim 1. Accordingly, Gupta teaches a method comprising: controlling one or more cleaning devices (22,34,62) of a cleaning system (10, 50) to perform a sanitization process in an environment (14, 24, 56) (see [0022], [0029], [0035]), the sanitization process comprising an ozone-based cleaning process (ozone generated as a result of performing UV sterilization—[0048]; block 90, 92, and 94 of Fig. 4 clearly involve activating the UV light sources to perform sanitization process).
As discussed with respect to claim 1 above, Gupta teaches motion sensors (16,26,58) which are used to detect a lack of occupancy in a room before the sanitizer is activated (see Fig. 4, steps 84, 90, discussed at [0047]; also see [0019], [0033], [0041]). While this implies that the motion sensors prevent operation of the cleaning devise when motion is detected, Gupta is not explicitly clear in teaching that detecting motion would cease the operation of previously activating cleaning devices.
Gupta does teach door sensors (42) which detect a person entering the environment during a sanitization process, wherein the controller is configured to stop the sanitization process upon receiving a door open signal from the door sensor (42) ([[0031]). The door sensor (42) of Gupta does not clearly constitute a motion sensor consistent with the instant claim.
Thus, despite teaching similar functions, Gupta does not teach the claimed sequence of steps wherein, after activating the cleaning device, the next step is receiving a motion signal from one or more motion sensors indicating that motion is detected within the environment, and upon determining that the motion is detected by the one or more sensors, controlling the one or more cleaning devices to stop the sanitization process in the environment
However, as substantially discussed with respect to claim 1 above, it would be obvious to modify the system of Gupta in view of Gilling such that the method of operating the system of Gupta include steps of deactivating the cleaning devices when a detection of motion by the motion sensors is received (as seen in Gilling at [0032]) for the benefit of improving safety by preventing the exposure of human skin to harmful ultraviolet light (see Gilling at [0032]). It is noted that such a step would be useful when operating the system of Gupta in instances when the door sensor (42) fails to operate appropriately or if an occupant manages to enter a room without using the door (40).
Also, it is noted that it could be argued that the method of Gupta is not “ozone-based”, as Gupta discusses the generation of ozone as incidental to the UV sterilization ([0048]). However, Gilling suggests selecting a UV light which emits light having a 185 nm wavelength for ozone disinfection ([0025]), such that it would be obvious to modify the method of Gupta to include emitting 185 nm ultraviolet light for the benefit of generating ozone for disinfection of the environment.
Regarding claim 7, Gupta in view of Gilling teaches the method of claim 6. The method steps of claim 7 correspond to the instructions of the non-transitory computer readable medium of claim 2. Accordingly, see the discussion of claim 2 above regarding the obviousness of modifying the method of operating the system of Gupta to include a step of controlling a heating ventilation and air condition system associated with the environment to activate a blower fan to circulate air into the environment when motion is detected in the environment, for the benefit of reducing the levels of ozone a person moving in the environment is exposed to and for the benefit of reducing the activation of the HVAC system when a room is unoccupied to conserve energy.
Regarding claim 8, Gupta in view of Gilling teaches the method of claim 6. Gupta further teaches determining that a termination switch is triggered, the termination switch being arranged in and/or proximate to the environment; and upon determining that the termination switch is triggered, controlling the one or more cleaning devices to stop the sanitization process in the environment (an emergency “off” switch may be provided in the room that allows someone in the room to immediately turn off the sanitizer—[0031]; it is thus clear that the triggering the off switch located within the room causes the cleaning device to stop operating).
Regarding claim 9, Gupta in view of Gilling teaches the method of claim 6. Gupta further teaches presenting, via a display component associated with the environment, information regarding … an ozone concentration in the environment (controller 72 includes a display 74 for displaying information—[0040]; at block 92, controller may be configured to display a dashboard that includes air quality parameters, including ozone levels—[0048]; dashboard 100 includes ozone icon 120—Fig. 5, [0050]).
Regarding claim 10, Gupta in view of Gilling teaches the system of claim 1. As discussed with respect to claim 5 above, Gupta further teaches that operation of the device comprises determining, by an access control system associated with the environment, that a condition is satisfied; and upon determining that the condition is satisfied, controlling the one or more cleaning devices to perform the sanitization process in the environment (see Fig. 4: the cleaning devices are only activated in block 90 after receiving a signal that the room is currently unoccupied at block 84 from occupancy sensors; the occupancy sensors fairly define at least part of an access control system, see sensors 16 at [0024], occupancy sensor 26 at [0026], and sensors 58 at [0033]).
Regarding claim 11, Gupta in view of Gilling teaches the method of claim 10. As discussed with respect to claim 2 above, Gupta teaches a heating, ventilation, and air conditioning (HVAC) system associated with the environment (space 24 includes HVAC system 30—[0026]; each guest room 56 includes an HVAC system 60—[0034]), the HVAC system being operated by the controller (controller 72 may not ventilate an unrented room—[0045]; see Figs. 2-3). Gupta also recognized that it is advantageous to conserve energy by not operating the HVAC in empty rooms ([0056]). It would be obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art to extend this teaching by modifying the system of Gupta such that the operational instructions include determining that a number of people in the environment is less than a threshold number (i.e., that the space is unoccupied, such that the number of occupants is 0 and is less than a threshold of 1), and upon determining the number of people in the environment is less than the threshold, instructing the HVAC system to stop working for the benefit of not wasting energy by ventilating an unoccupied room.
Regarding claim 16, the claim is essentially directed toward a computer memory which stores instructions directly corresponding to the steps of claim 6, and the claim further corresponds to the non-transitory computer readable media of the system of claim 1. As discussed with respect to claim 1 above, Gupta teaches controllers which are fairly suggested to include one more non-transitory computer-readable media storing instructions that, when executed, cause one or more processors to perform operations (see discussion of claim 39 and [0047]-[0048] of Gupta with respect to instant claim 1 above).
Gupta further teaches the controllers functioning to control one or more cleaning devices (22,34,62) of a cleaning system (10, 50) to perform a sanitization process in an environment (14,24,56) (Fig. 4, step 90), the sanitization process comprising an ozone- based cleaning process (ozone generated—[0048]), implying software instructions stored on the controller for such function.
As discussed with respect to claims 1 and 6 above, Gupta teaches motion sensors (16,26,58) which are used to detect a lack of occupancy in a room before the sanitizer is activated (see Fig. 4, steps 84, 90, discussed at [0047]; also see [0019], [0033], [0041]), and Gupta teaches door sensors (42) which detect a person entering the environment during a sanitization process, wherein the controller is configured to stop the sanitization process upon receiving a door open signal from the door sensor (42) ([[0031]).
While similar, these teachings of Gupta do not precisely correspond to the claimed instructions for: receiving a motion signal from one or more motion sensors indicating that motion is detected within the environment, and upon determining that the motion is detected by the one or more sensors, controlling the one or more cleaning devices to stop the sanitization process in the environment
However, Gilling teaches a controller configured as a processor executing instructions (software) stored on a computing device ([0031]), wherein the controller is configured to deactivate light sources (22) in response to a detection of an occupant in a space by a motion sensors (36); this provides improved safety of the occupant when the light source emits ultraviolet light at wavelengths harmful to human skin ([0032]). Therefore, it would be obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art to modify the software instructions of the computer-readable media of Gupta to include instructions for receiving a motion signal from one of the motions sensors when motion is detected in the environment, and deactivating the cleaning devices in response—as taught by Gilling—for the benefit of improving safety by preventing the exposure of human skin to harmful ultraviolet light (see Gilling at [0032]). It is noted that such a feature would be useful in the system of Gupta in instances when the door sensor (42) fails to operate appropriately or if an occupant manages to enter a room without using the door (40).
Also, as similarly noted with respect to claim 6 above, to the extent that the method of Gupta is not “ozone-based”, it would be obvious to modify the method of Gupta to include emitting 185 nm ultraviolet light for the benefit of generating ozone for disinfection of the environment, as substantially suggested by Gilling ([0025]).
Regarding claim 17, Gupta in view of Gilling teaches the one or more non-transitory computer-readable media of claim 16. The subject matter of claim 17 corresponds to that of claims 2 and 7. Accordingly, see the rejection of claim 2 above regarding the obviousness of configuring the memory device of the controller of Gupta to include instructions for activating a blower fan of an HVAC system in response to the detection of motion in the environment for the benefit of reducing the exposure of a human in the environment to ozone and for the benefit reducing the use of the HVAC system when people are not present to promote energy conservation (see rejection of claim 2 above).
Regarding claim 18, Gupta in view of Gilling teaches the one or more non-transitory computer-readable media of claim 16. As discussed with respect to claims 3 and 8 above, Gupta further teaches a termination switch, which is triggered to control the cleaning devices to stop the sanitization process ([0031]). To the extent that it is ambiguous if the controller of Gupta facilitates this function, it is noted that it would be obvious to configure the controller of Gupta to facilitate the function of the off switch for the evident benefit of achieving centralized control system with reprogrammable operations. Such modification entails encoding the controller memory of modified Gupta with instructions for determining that a termination switch is triggered; and upon determining that the termination switch is triggered, controlling the one or more cleaning devices to stop the sanitization process in the environment.
Regarding claim 19, Gupta in view of Gilling teaches the one or more non-transitory computer-readable media of claim 16. Gupta further teaches presenting, via a display component associated with the environment, information regarding … an ozone concentration in the environment (controller 72 includes a display 74 for displaying information—[0040]; at block 92, controller may be configured to display a dashboard that includes air quality parameters, including ozone levels—[0048]; dashboard 100 includes ozone icon 120—Fig. 5, [0050]); Gupta suggests the function of displaying the air quality parameter (ozone level) be performed by a processor executing instructions form the non-transitory computer readable medium (see claim 39).
Regarding claim 20, Gupta in view of Gilling teaches the one or more non-transitory computer-readable media of claim 16. As discussed with respect to claims 5 and 10 above, Gupta further teaches the operations further comprising: determining, by an access control system associated with the environment, that a condition is satisfied; and upon determining that the condition is satisfied, controlling the one or more cleaning devices to perform the sanitization process in the environment (see Fig. 4; the cleaning devices are only activated in block 90 after receiving a signal that the room is currently unoccupied at block 84 from occupancy sensors; the occupancy sensors fairly defining at least part of an access control system—see sensors 16 at [0024], occupancy sensor 26 at [0026], and sensors 58 at [0033]—and the controller is understood to operate by executing software instructions stored on a computer readable medium, as discussed with respect to claims 1 and 16 above).
Claims 13-14 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Gupta et al. (US 2021/0398230 A1) in view of Gilling et al. (US 2022/0331473 A1), as applied to claims 6 above, and further in view of Neslser et al. (US 2021/0010701 A1).
Regarding claim 13, Gupta in view of Gilling teaches the method of claim 6. Gupta teaches that a building manager inputs an occupancy schedule to a controller (20) (preprogrammed occupancy schedule input by building manager—[0025]), and that a controller (72) associated with a remote server (54) can include a data entry device ([0040]). Furthermore, Gupta suggests determining a time to sanitize a room based on whether the room is rented or occupied ([0042]). Combining these teachings, Gupta suggests receiving schedule data input by a manager ([0025]) at a remote computing system (54/72) and controlling the one or more cleaning devices and the HVAC system based on the schedule data ([0024]; gateway provides/passes commands to the HVAC system 60 and sanitizers 62—[0039]).
Nonetheless, Gupta and Gilling are not clear in establishing steps of receiving, from a remote computing system, schedule data including information for at least one of: a time to start the sanitization process, a time to stop the sanitization process, a time to start an HVAC system, and a time to stop the HVAC system; and controlling the one or more cleaning devices and the HVAC system based on the schedule data.
However, in the analogous art of disinfection systems (title, abstract), Nesler teaches a disinfection system (450) including a controller (2500) which receives collected data (2540) and generates control commands for disinfectant mechanisms (2502), such as a disinfectant lighting system (2504) (disinfectant mechanism 2502 includes disinfectant lighting subsystem 2504 configured to use a disinfectant lighting such as UV light—[0271]-[0272]). The lighting system is activated based on a disinfection schedule (disinfection schedule defining when and where disinfection cycles occur—[0281]; disinfection schedule used by control signal generator to determine times at which control actions for the disinfectant mechanism 2502 occur—[0283]). In certain embodiments, the disinfection schedule can be provided by a remote computing system (HAIS 2526) ([0294]; also see [0289]). The system controller (2500) can provide disinfection data back to the remote computing system (HAIS 2526) ([0298]; [0322]). Nesler also teaches an HVAC system having an operation schedule ([0328]).
Therefore, it would be obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art to configure the system of Gupta for operation wherein the cleaning device and HVAC are controlled based on a schedule received from a remote server of a Health Authority Information source—as suggested by Nesler—for the benefit of operating the system in accordance with standards for appropriate disinfection set by health authorities (Nesler: without the information provided by the HAIS, the HVAC and disinfection system may otherwise be operated in a way that fosters the growth and/or transmission of diseases—[0523]; collecting data from HAIS 2526 allows components of disinfection system to operate with an optimal number of cycles, duration, and wavelength of light—[0289]). Such schedules at least define when a time to start the sanitization process (Neslser: for example, a disinfection technique scheduled to begin at 2:00am [based on disinfection schedule provided by HAIS 2626]—[0294]).
Regarding claim 14, Gupta in view of Gilling and Nesler teaches the method of claim 13. Gupta and Gilling do not clearly teach storing, in a storage component, data generated by the cleaning system during the sanitization process; and sending the data to the remote computing system.
However, Nesler suggests configuring a controller to collect data generating during a sanitization process (data collector 2518 receives data from sensors included in each of the plurality of disinfectant mechanisms 2502 and transmits received data between components off memory 216—[0281]) and transmitting data to a remote computing system (ending a disinfection technique includes transmitting various data to designated receivers, e.g., HAIS 2526—[0322], [0331]; data stored in database 2524 of memory 2516 is accessible from HAIS 2526—[0288]). Transmitting the data to the health authority would be expected to allow for a health authority to review and certify that the system is appropriately operating to achieve disinfection, and/or provide data for the health authority to study as part of research.
Therefore, it would be obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art to further modify the method of modified Gupta to include storing data during the sanitization process and sending it to a remote computing system of a health authority, as seen in Nesler, for the benefit of allowing validation of the disinfection procedure by the health authority.
Claim 15 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Gupta et al. (US 2021/0398230 A1) in view of Gilling et al. (US 2022/0331473 A1), as applied to claims 6 above, and further in view of Soderberg (US 2022/0339308 A1, filed 23 April, 2021).
Regarding claim 15, Gupta in view of Gilling teaches the method of claim 6. Gupta and Gilling do not particularly teach that the cleaning system further comprises a proportional-integral-derivative (PID) controller to control output of ozone into the environment.
However, in the analogous art of ozone sterilization techniques (title, abstract), Soderberg teaches a process (310, 415, 515, 615) wherein sanitization devices (206) generate ozone when activated and are regulated by a proportional-integral-derivative control loop which is understood to achieve and maintain a set ozone concertation for the duration of a treatment time ([0051], [0060], [0068], [0076]). The PID controller can avoid excessive or insufficient concentrations of ozone, which can allow reduced treatment times ([0069], [0077]), with a target range of 3-5 ppm recognized as sufficient for sanitization ([0031]). Therefore, it would be obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art to further modify the method of modified Gupta to include a PID controller for the benefit of regulating the level of ozone to a target level for the benefit of providing efficient and effective disinfection (consider Soderberg at [0069] and [0077]).
Allowable Subject Matter
Claim 12 is 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.
Claim 12, Gupta in view of Gilling teaches the method of claim 11. Gupta and Gilling do not teach a step of determining, by the access control system, that one or more weather conditions are suitable for performing the sanitization process in the environment; and upon determining that the one or more weather conditions are suitable for performing the sanitization process in the environment, controlling the one or more cleaning devices to perform the sanitization process in the environment. No prior art was found which fairly teaches or suggests the claimed step, especially in the context of a sequence of steps of disinfecting a space with ozone which further includes deactivating an HVAC when people are not present, activating an ozone generating device, and deactivating the ozone generating device when motion is detected. Accordingly, the subject matter of claim 12 is novel and non-obvious over the prior art.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to BRADY C PILSBURY whose telephone number is (571)272-8054. The examiner can normally be reached M-Th 7:30a-5:00p.
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, MICHAEL MARCHESCHI can be reached at (571) 272-1374. 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.
/BRADY C PILSBURY/Examiner, Art Unit 1799
/MICHAEL A MARCHESCHI/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 1799