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 following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(f):
(f) Element in Claim for a Combination. – An element in a claim for a combination may be expressed as a means or step for performing a specified function without the recital of structure, material, or acts in support thereof, and such claim shall be construed to cover the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification and equivalents thereof.
The following is a quotation of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph:
An element in a claim for a combination may be expressed as a means or step for performing a specified function without the recital of structure, material, or acts in support thereof, and such claim shall be construed to cover the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification and equivalents thereof.
The claims in this application are given their broadest reasonable interpretation using the plain meaning of the claim language in light of the specification as it would be understood by one of ordinary skill in the art. The broadest reasonable interpretation of a claim element (also commonly referred to as a claim limitation) is limited by the description in the specification when 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is invoked.
As explained in MPEP § 2181, subsection I, claim limitations that meet the following three-prong test will be interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph:
(A) the claim limitation uses the term “means” or “step” or a term used as a substitute for “means” that is a generic placeholder (also called a nonce term or a non-structural term having no specific structural meaning) for performing the claimed function;
(B) the term “means” or “step” or the generic placeholder is modified by functional language, typically, but not always linked by the transition word “for” (e.g., “means for”) or another linking word or phrase, such as “configured to” or “so that”; and
(C) the term “means” or “step” or the generic placeholder is not modified by sufficient structure, material, or acts for performing the claimed function.
Use of the word “means” (or “step”) in a claim with functional language creates a rebuttable presumption that the claim limitation is to be treated in accordance with 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph. The presumption that the claim limitation is interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is rebutted when the claim limitation recites sufficient structure, material, or acts to entirely perform the recited function.
Absence of the word “means” (or “step”) in a claim creates a rebuttable presumption that the claim limitation is not to be treated in accordance with 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph. The presumption that the claim limitation is not interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is rebutted when the claim limitation recites function without reciting sufficient structure, material or acts to entirely perform the recited function.
Claim limitations (means for obtaining, means for determining, means for detecting, means for allocating and means for causing in claim 8) in this application that use the word “means” (or “step”) are being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, except as otherwise indicated in an Office action. Conversely, claim limitations in this application that do not use the word “means” (or “step”) are not being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, except as otherwise indicated in an Office action.
Claim Objections
Claims 4, 5, 10-12, 19 and 20 are objected to because of the following informalities: the phrase “a destination floor” in line 2 should be re-written as “the destination floor”. It should be noted that “destination floor” has been already disclosed in claims 1 and 8. Appropriate correction is required.
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 1-17 and 19-21 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over KAWAI JP2013216408A in a view of Oda et al. US 2022/0194737 A1.
Regarding claim 8, KAWAI discloses
An apparatus (fig. 1) for allocating an elevator of an elevator system, the apparatus comprising: means (item 9) for obtaining image data associated with an area associated with a plurality of elevators [0020];
means for determining (shooting means), based on the image data, parameter data (floor area and height) associated with the automated guided vehicle [0018-0020];
means (item 23) for obtaining, information indicating (boarded by which elevator) a destination floor for the automated guided vehicle [0018];
means for allocating (item 23) an elevator car (item 5) for the automated guided vehicle by taking into account at least the parameter data and the destination floor [0018-0020]; and means for causing (item 23) transmission of information identifying the allocated elevator car to the automated guided vehicle [0018-0020].
KAWAI does not disclose but Oda et al. disclose means for detecting (fig. 1, item 180), based on the image data, an automated guided vehicle (item 100) [0031, 0033, 0054].
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to use means for detecting based on the image data as disclosed by Oda in KAWAI’s teachings to improve the operation efficiency including entire facility (Oda’s paragraph 0005)
Regarding claim 1, a combination of KAWAI and Oda discloses
A method for allocating an elevator of an elevator system, the method comprising the steps of: obtaining image data associated with an area associated with a plurality of elevators; detecting, based on the image data, an automated guided vehicle; determining, based on the image data, parameter data associated with the automated guided vehicle; obtaining information indicating a destination floor for the automated guided vehicle; allocating an elevator car for the automated guided vehicle by taking into account at least the parameter data and the destination floor; and causing transmission of information identifying the allocated elevator car to the automated guided vehicle (see claim 8 rejection for detail).
Regarding claims 2 and 9, KAWAI discloses
, wherein the parameter data comprises at least one of a size (height) and moving speed of the automated guided vehicle [0020].
Regarding claims 3 and 19, KAWAI discloses
, wherein the step of obtaining information indicating a destination floor for the automated guided vehicle comprises: further comprises the step of obtaining the information indicating the destination floor for the automated guided vehicle based on wirelessly transmitted data from the automated guided vehicle [0013].
Regarding claims 4 and 20, KAWAI discloses
,wherein the step of obtaining information indicating a destination floor for the automated guided vehicle comprises: further comprises the step of obtaining the information indicating the destination floor for the automated guided vehicle based on the image data [0018-0020].
Regarding claim 5, KAWAI discloses
, wherein the step of obtaining the information indicating a destination floor for the automated guided vehicle based on the image data comprises: further comprises the step of obtaining the information indicating the destination floor for the automated guided vehicle by recognizing, based on the image data, the information indicating the destination floor from a display of the automated guided vehicle [0018-0020].
Regarding claims 6 and 21, KAWAI discloses
, wherein the step of causing transmission of information identifying the allocated elevator car to the automated guided vehicle comprises: further comprises the step of causing transmission of the information identifying the allocated elevator car to the automated guided vehicle using a display associated with the elevator system [0020].
Regarding claim 7, KAWAI discloses, wherein the step of obtaining image data associated with an area associated with a plurality of elevators comprises: further comprises the step of obtaining the image data from at least one camera [0018-0020].
Regarding claim 10, KAWAI discloses
,wherein the means for obtaining information indicating a destination floor for the automated guided vehicle are configured to obtain the information indicating the destination floor for the automated guided vehicle based on wirelessly transmitted data from the automated guided vehicle [0013].
Regarding claim 11, KAWAI discloses, wherein the means for obtaining information indicating a destination floor for the automated guided vehicle are configured to obtain the information indicating the destination floor for the automated guided vehicle based on the image data [0018-0020].
Regarding claim 12, KAWAI discloses, wherein the means for obtaining the information indicating a destination floor for the automated guided vehicle based on the image data are configured to obtain the information indicating the destination floor for the automated guided vehicle by recognizing, based on the image data, the information indicating the destination floor from a display of the automated guided vehicle [0018-0020].
Regarding claim 13, KAWAI discloses, wherein the means for causing transmission of information identifying the allocated elevator car to the automated guided vehicle are configured to cause transmission of the information identifying the allocated elevator car to the automated guided vehicle using a display associated with the elevator system [0020].
Regarding claim 14, KAWAI discloses, wherein the means for obtaining image data associated with an area associated with a plurality of elevators are configured to obtain the image data from at least one camera [0018-0020].
Regarding claim 15, KAWAI discloses
An elevator system comprising: a plurality of elevators [0006]; and the apparatus of claim 8 (see claim 8 rejection for details).
Regarding claim 16, KAWAI discloses at least one camera configured to provide the image data about the area associated with the plurality of elevators [0020].
Regarding claim 17, KAWAI discloses
A computer program embodied on a non-transitory computer-readable medium and comprising program code, which when executed by at least one processing unit, causes an apparatus (fig. 1) to perform the method of claim 1 (see claim 1 rejection for detail) (KAWAI’s elevator control device inherently has a memory and processing unit to perform the method).
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Osawa et al. (US 11,834,295 B2) disclose an elevator operation managing device.
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