DETAILED ACTION
This Office action responds to papers filed on 29 August 2025.
Claims 10-20 are pending and presented for examination. Claims 1-9 have been withdrawn from examination.
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 .
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments, filed August 29, 2025, with respect to the rejection(s) of claim(s) 10-20 under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by US Patent Publication No. US 2013/0117078 A1 to Welk, Ill et al.. have been fully considered and are persuasive. Therefore, the rejection has been withdrawn. However, upon further consideration, a new ground(s) of rejection is made in view of US Patent Publication No. US 2013/0117078 A1 to Welk, III et al. and U.S. Patent No. US 3,783,556 to Cook as stated herewith.
The rejection of claim 18 under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AlA), second paragraph, as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter is withdrawn in light of the amendments made.
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.
Claim(s) 10-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over US Patent Publication No. US 2013/0117078 A1 to Welk, Ill et al. in view of U.S. Patent No. US 3,783,556 to Cook.
The reference of prior art to Welk, III et al. (herein after “Welk”) teaches of a management and control system for a designated functional space having at least one portal. In doing so, the limitations of the instant invention as presented are taught as explained herein below.
Regarding independent claim 10 a fail-safe programmable logic controller (PLC) circuit for controlling a gate, said PLC circuit comprising:
• a PLC including a first input terminal and a second input terminal – (taught in paragraph [0101] as “… first customer terminal 10 is mounted on a post 14, which is situated on a driver's side of the entrance ramp 12. A similar, second customer terminal 16 is provided on an exterior wall of the building 2 adjacent to the door 8”);
• a light curtain switch electrically coupled to the first and second input terminals, said light curtain switch configured to be responsive to a signal from an optical light curtain device that is configured to detect an object in a light curtain, wherein the light curtain switch transmits a stop signal to stop movement of the gate in response to the signal from the optical light curtain device – (taught in paragraph [0114] as “the electric eye system 62 may be embodied as an infrared light beam transmitter and receiver for detecting the passage of vehicles or people past the vehicle entrance 4. Of course, other types of electric eye systems may be employed to detect the passage of vehicles or people past the vehicle entrance 4, such as an ultra-sonic transmitter/receiver set”);
• a bump strip switch electrically coupled to the first and second input terminals, said bump strip switch being responsive to a signal from a bump strip positioned on a bottom edge of the gate that indicates that the gate has hit an object to stop movement of the gate – (taught in paragraph [0116] as a loop detector comprising a weight sensor. This is deemed to be commensurate with a bump strip switch as a loop detector is considered to detect vehicular traffic traveling or stopping in a roadway);
• a laser camera switch electrically coupled to the first and second input terminals, said laser camera switch being responsive to a signal from a laser camera that indicates that an item is in a travel area of the gate to stop movement of the gate – (taught in paragraph [0102] as “a first camera 3 is provided on a post 5 attached to the building 2. The first camera 3 has a view of the outside portions of the vehicle entrance 4, the vehicle exit 6 and the access door 8”) and
• a floor loop detection switch electrically coupled to the first and second input terminals, said floor loop detection switch configured to be closed when a floor loop detector detects metal, wherein the floor loop detection switch is separate from the bump strip switch is responsive to the floor loop detector that detects metal and the bump strip switch is responsive to the bump strip on the bottom edge of the gate hitting the object - (Welk teaches this in paragraph [0116] wherein “loop detectors 78, 80 may be embodied as coils of wire, which act as metal detectors … loop detectors may be employed to detect the presence of a vehicle, such as a weight sensor. A typical weight sensor would include a loop-shaped area formed in the entrance ramp which transmits a surface weight to a sensor beneath”. Also, Welk teaches the loop detectors as items 78 and 80, and transmitter/receiver as items 74 and 76 in Fig. 2. Although, Welk teaches the use of a floor loop detector with a switch, to more specifically state the use of a “floor loop detection switch configured to be closed when a floor loop detector detects metal” the prior art of Cook is relied upon. In column 2 at lines 37-42, Cook describes the loop detector and switch as “a treadle switch 36 is operated by a vehicle sensing device such as a driveway bell hose 34 and provides a sensor signal to the control system indicating that a vehicle is positioned in the travel lane to enter the doorway. An emergency reverse sensor such as safety edge 38 is mounted on the door to operate an emergency reverse switch 39 in the event that an object is obstructing the path of the door” (emphasis on commensurate elements). The switch is numbered as item 36 and the safety edge or bottom edge of the gate is labeled as item 38 as depicted in Fig. 1. Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to have modified the above mentioned invention of Welk with that of Cook so as to achieve a more dependable gate system without causing damage to an object or vehicle).
In claim 11 the fail-safe PLC circuit for controlling a gate of claim 10, continues by stating wherein the light curtain device comprises self-monitoring circuitry, a transmitter, and a receiver, wherein the transmitter is aligned with the receiver and comprises one or more light emitting component configured to send a plurality of light pulses to the receiver according to a frequency pattern thereby forming the light curtain. Taught by Welk taught in paragraphs [0113]- [0114] as “the electric eye system 62 may be embodied as an infrared light beam transmitter and receiver for detecting the passage of vehicles or people past the vehicle entrance 4. Of course, other types of electric eye systems may be employed to detect the passage of vehicles or people past the vehicle entrance 4, such as an ultra-sonic transmitter/receiver set”. The electric eye system is commensurate with the light curtain as claimed as it is an infrared light beam transmitter and receiver set that is arranged proximate the vehicle entrance which is able to detect movement of vehicles and/or people. It is well known that infrared beams are used in security systems to detect movement or the presence of objects that break the beam, triggering alarms or other actions.
As per claim 12 the fail-safe PLC circuit for controlling a gate of claim 10, further includes wherein the stop signal is transmitted to at least one of the first input terminal and the second input terminal. This feature is taught in paragraph [0111] as “the emergency/fire detector 56 is tied into a master management system of the building 2, and hence would signal trouble to the control system 40 under the circumstance of any emergency within the building 2”, and also in paragraph [0159] as “sending fault data via the modem or other connection 182 to a server or other central data storage, retrieval and management system provides a means by which the parking service company can be immediately informed of malfunctions in a parking barrier, so as to incur a minimal loss of parking revenue.”
Claim 13 the fail-safe PLC circuit for controlling a gate of claim 12, additionally states wherein the stop signal is transmitted to both the first input terminal and the second input terminal. Paragraph [0158] teaches of the reporting of a fault occurrence or stop signal which is displayed to a customer by the LCD screen or on a smartphone display. Displaying the fault occurrence or stop signal on more than one screen or terminal is necessarily taught since it is a matter of communicative connections.
With regard to claim 14, the fail-safe PLC circuit for controlling a gate of claim 10, states wherein the signal from the optical light curtain device is configured to be triggered based detecting the object in the light curtain and is further configured to close the light curtain switch thereby stopping movement of the gate. This element of the instant invention is addressed by Welk in paragraph [0114] where “the electric eye system 62 may be embodied as an infrared light beam transmitter and receiver for detecting the passage of vehicles or people past the vehicle entrance 4. Of course, other types of electric eye systems may be employed to detect the passage of vehicles or people past the vehicle entrance 4, such as an ultra-sonic transmitter/receiver set” is stated.
In claim 15 the fail-safe PLC circuit for controlling a gate of claim 10, states wherein the bump strip is positioned on a bottom edge of the gate. This is taught in Fig. 2 as items 78 and 82 where the loop detector or bump strips are located at the bottom of the gate or door.
As per claim 16, the fail-safe PLC circuit for controlling a gate of claim 10, also includes wherein the PLC circuit further comprises one or more additional safety devices to determine if two cars are tailgating. This feature is explained by Welk in paragraph [0140] where “a "vehicle-type tailgater" involves an unauthorized vehicle closely following an authorized vehicle past the entrance barrier 48 and into the parking area.” The use of additional safety devices is described in paragraph [0143] et seq.
Claim 17 states that the fail-safe PLC circuit for controlling a gate of claim 10, wherein the PLC circuit further comprises a sensor configured to detect whether an over-height vehicle is detected. In paragraph [0313] at 4. the device program identifying signals, sequences and sending the specified event as a time stamped event to the server is taught. Furthermore, in paragraph [0314] the signals are able to identify over height vehicles is stated.
Regarding claim 18 the fail-safe PLC circuit for controlling a gate of claim 10, the PLC circuit is stated as further comprising a down pressure switch, an up-pressure switch, and an emergency stop switch. In light of the above stated deficiencies of claim 18, Welk teaches the use of a switch in paragraph [0156] wherein “when the mode switch 176 is in the manual mode, the operation of the barriers is controlled by a push button” is recited.
In claim 19 the fail-safe PLC circuit for controlling a gate of claim 10, recites wherein the PLC further includes an output terminal configured to transmit a safety signal to a motor configured to control movement of the gate. This is taught by Welk in paragraph [0159] as “sending fault data via the modem or other connection 182 to a server or other central data storage, retrieval and management system provides a means by which the parking service company can be immediately informed of malfunctions in a parking barrier, so as to incur a minimal loss of parking revenue.”
As per claim 20 the fail-safe PLC circuit for controlling a gate of claim 19, wherein the motor includes either a close motor to close the gate or an open motor to open the gate. This aspect is explained by Welk in paragraph [0350] as “the controller would then activate a routine which would activate a lock release mechanism or provide an open command to the door motor operator. In this manner, access would be granted (or denied) at one or more access points at one or more facilities without the need of keys or keycards.”
For the reasons stated above, the limitations of the instant invention are taught and/or fairly suggested by the prior arts of record; thereby, rendering the instant claims unpatentable.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
U.S. Patent No. US 7,146,345 B2 Welk III et al.
Relates to a device for controlling and monitoring one or more entrances or exits or one or more controlled parking areas.
U.S. Patent No. US 6,945,303 B2 Welk III et al.
Relates to a system for controlling access to and egress from a parking area
U.S. Patent No. US 6,484,784 B1 Welk III et al.
Relates to a control device for closing and opening a door.
Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a). Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a).
A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of the advisory action. In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the mailing date of this final action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Sheela Rao whose telephone number is (571) 272- 3751. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Wednesday from 7:00 am to 1:00 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, Mohammad Ali, can be reached on (571) 272-4105. The fax number for the organization where this application or any proceeding papers has been assigned is (571) 273- 8300.
Information regarding the status of an application may be obtained from the Patent Application Information Retrieval (PAIR) system. Status information for published applications may be obtained from either Private PAIR or Public PAIR. It should be noted that status information for unpublished applications is available through Private PAIR only. For more information about the PAIR system, see http:// pair-direct.uspto.gov. Should any questions arise regarding access to the Private PAIR system, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative or access to the automated information system, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
/Sheela Rao/Examiner, Art Unit 2119 September 24, 2025
/MOHAMMAD ALI/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2119