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 .
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 8/ have been fully considered but they are not persuasive. In reference to applicant’s argument with respect to the amendment to claim 1, Kocher teaches various alternatives to protecting the keyhole 10. Figure 8 describes a unit 54 mounted on the doorframe using screw holes 19, wherein unit 54 includes a plate 64 covering a through-hole 58 that when aligned with keyhole 10 of the doorframe 4 allows emergency personnel to access the keyhole. Kocher further describes said plate 64 moves from moves from a first position to a second position (see description given in fig. 8 and corresponding description). Another example of a blocking member is described in fig. 13 and corresponding description when a slide gate 72 moves from one position to a second position to cover or uncover the keyhole 10 on doorframe 4. Therefore, the rejection of claim 1 will be modified to include the new added limitations.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
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.
Claim(s) 1, 7-15, and 18-22 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Kocher (US Patent 7237655), of record.
Claim 1 and 22, Kocher a hoistway access control arrangement and a method for controlling access to an elevator hoistway, the control algorithm comprises: a control station 6; a communication device 51 (or energization control circuit 130) for communicating with an external user interface such as remote control unit 134 and an auxiliary release mechanism comprising electromagnets 20, spring 24, blocking member 64 having an access hole 58 (or figure 13, item 72), and a keyhole 10 provided in an elevator doorframe 4, wherein member 64 blocks access to keyhole 10 in a first position and in a second position keyhole hole 10 aligns with access hole 58 so that an authorized person can introduce a key 8 through said access hole 58 and keyhole 10 of the doorframe 4 to actuate unlocking bit 12 and release a landing door 2. Additionally, the access control arrangement is configured to lock and unlock the blocking member 64 in response to a signal from the communication device to the electromagnet 20, wherein an original request to move the blocking member can be received by the communication device from remote unit 134 (see for example col. 9 lines 54-67 where Kocher describes the interaction between a control unit and remote control units operated by maintenance or emergency personal).
Claim 7, Kocher teaches electromagnets 20 for controlling the locking position of disc 28.
Claim 8, Kocher teaches the use electromagnets 20, coil 146, or motor 82 as actuators for controlling release of different types of blocking members.
Claim 9, Kocher teaches the use of an actuator to control the blocking member.
Claim 10, as shown in fig. 5 above, the electromagnet 20 is disposed substantially in the same location with the blocking member.
Claim 11, as described in figures 5, 8, and 12, Kocher teaches the blocking member being arranged to be rotated around.
Claim 12, Kocher describes in fig. 13 a blocking member arranged to be linearly slid between a first and a second position.
Claim 13, Kocher describes in fig, 1 a notch on a surface 4 in a conveyor system (see item 10).
Claim 14, Kocher describes doorframe 4 being part of landing door 2.
Claim 15, Kocher describes the use of a mobile device 134.
Claim 18, Kocher teaches in col. 9 lines 59-61 authorized personnel transmitting an unlock signal 136 from a remote-control unit 134.
Claim 19, Kocher teaches a conveyor system comprising a door 2; a manually key operated mechanism using key 8 and keyhole 10 in doorframe 4 to gain access to door 2; and an access control arrangement as described above in the rejection of claim 1.
Claim 20, Kocher teaches the conveyor system being an elevator (see fig. 1 and corresponding description.
Claim 21, Kocher teaches elevator system 1 comprising one or more landing doors 2.
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.
Claim(s) 2-6, 16-17, and 23 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kocher (US Patent 7237655), of record and Beauchaud et al (US Publication 20180134521), of record.
Claim 2, the difference between the teachings of Kocher and the limitation of claim 2 is that claim 2 recites that the communication device uses wireless communication to communicate with the blocking member.
However, Beauchaud et al teaches an authorization device for an unlocking key in an elevator system comprising: an authorization device 102 in the form of an electronic chip or circuit board configured to enable wireless communication, wherein device 102 communicates with the elevator system that includes controller 316, a landing door 206, a frame 208, a keyway 210 located in the frame which is part of a locking mechanism of the landing door lock (see paragraph 0037) , and unlocking key 200, wherein the authorization device allows the locking mechanism to be unlocked and the landing door 206 to be opened.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one person of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was filed to use wireless communication in the control system taught by Kocher, since wireless systems allow real-time communication between components and service personnel and provide for faster troubleshooting.
Claims 3-6, Beauchaud et al teaches the use of wireless communication, the specific type of wireless systems is considered a design choice, and it would depend on the intend use of the control system or device.
Claims 16-17, Beauchaud et al teaches the use of wireless communication.
Claim 23 is rejected for the same reasons given above in the rejection of claim 2.
Conclusion
THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. 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 Rina I Duda whose telephone number is (571)272-2062. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 8-4 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, Eduardo Colon Santana can be reached at (571) 272-2060. 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.
/RINA I DUDA/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2837
