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 Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(b):
(b) CONCLUSION.—The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph:
The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the applicant regards as his invention.
Claim 7 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor (or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the applicant), regards as the invention.
Claim 7 recites the limitation "the predetermined command" in line 1. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 101
35 U.S.C. 101 reads as follows:
Whoever invents or discovers any new and useful process, machine, manufacture, or composition of matter, or any new and useful improvement thereof, may obtain a patent therefor, subject to the conditions and requirements of this title.
Claims 1, 7, 8, 9, 10, 12, 14, 15 and 16 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 101 because the claimed invention is directed to an abstract idea without significantly more.
Regarding claim 1, this claim is drawn to a controller that performs the steps of “determine”, “compare” and “determine” which can be all be performed via mental process using routine mathematical calculations based on known pre-solution variables.
This judicial exception is not integrated into a practical application because the claim does not include additional elements or steps that integrate the abstract idea into a practical application. The claim additionally recites a generic memory and a generic processer performing the steps of “determine”, “compare” and “determine”. The processing function is recited at a high-level of generality such that it is only drawn to conventional computing function. Furthermore, the claim does not recite active steps for integrating the abstract idea into a practical application. Specifically, there is no active step of detecting/measuring the electrical measurement and no active step of transmitting signals in the event device loop.
The claim does not include additional elements that are sufficient to amount to significantly more than the judicial exception because, as noted above, the other claimed elements of a memory and a processor perform routine processing functions as claimed and are recited with a high-level of generality. Mere instructions to apply an exception using a generic computer component cannot provide an inventive concept.
Regarding claim 7, this claim limits the predetermined command to be a priority command but does not include additional elements that are sufficient to amount to significantly more than the judicial exception.
Regarding claim 8, this claim recites the steps of “calculating” and “assigning” that can be performed via mental processing using routine mathematical calculations based on known variables and does not include additional elements that are sufficient to amount to significantly more than the judicial exception.
Regarding claim 9, this claim is drawn to a non-transitory computer readable medium having computer readable instructions stored thereon that are executable by a processor to perform the steps of “determine”, “compare” and “determine” which can be all be performed via mental process using routine mathematical calculations based on known pre-solution variables.
This judicial exception is not integrated into a practical application because the claim does not include additional elements or steps that integrate the abstract idea into a practical application. The claim additionally recites a generic processer performing the steps of “determine”, “compare” and “determine”. The processing function is recited at a high-level of generality such that it is only drawn to conventional computing function. Furthermore, the claim does not recite active steps for integrating the abstract idea into a practical application. Specifically, there is no active step of detecting/measuring the electrical measurement and no active step of transmitting signals in the event device loop.
The claims does not include additional elements that are sufficient to amount to significantly more than the judicial exception because, as noted above, the other claimed element of a processor performs routine processing functions as claimed and is recited with a high-level of generality. Mere instructions to apply an exception using a generic computer component cannot provide an inventive concept.
Regarding claim 10, this claim recites the steps of “determine” that can be performed via mental processing using routine mathematical calculations based on known variables and does not include additional elements that are sufficient to amount to significantly more than the judicial exception.
Regarding claim 12, this claim recites the steps of “determine” that can be performed via mental processing using routine mathematical calculations based on known variables and does not include additional elements that are sufficient to amount to significantly more than the judicial exception.
Regarding claim 14, this claim recites the steps of “monitor” that can be performed via mental/visual processing using routine mathematical calculations based on known variables and does not include additional elements that are sufficient to amount to significantly more than the judicial exception.
Regarding claim 15, this claim recites the steps of “determine” that can be performed via mental processing using routine mathematical calculations based on known variables and does not include additional elements that are sufficient to amount to significantly more than the judicial exception.
Regarding claim 16, this claim recites that the change in the event loop includes an addition, removal or fault of an event device. This observation can be performed mentally by a user and does not include additional elements that are sufficient to amount to significantly more than the judicial exception.
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 (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 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.
(a)(2) the claimed invention was described in a patent issued under section 151, or in an application for patent published or deemed published under section 122(b), in which the patent or application, as the case may be, names another inventor and was effectively filed before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claims 1-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) and/or 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) as being anticipated by Escofet Via et al. (hereafter Escofet)(US PgPub 2022/0319305).
Regarding claim 1, Escofet discloses a controller for command transmission based on an electrical measurement in an event system (Figures 1-2, Element 12), comprising: a memory (Figure 2, Element 26); and a processor (Figure 2, Element 12 and Paragraph 0083 where the control panel includes a controller) configured to execute executable instructions stored in the memory to: determine an electrical measurement in an event device loop including a number of event devices connected to an event device panel (Figure 1, Elements 14, 16, 18 and Paragraphs 0005-0012, 0080 and 0082 where remote event devices in a device loop provide relative current values to the control panel); compare the electrical measurement to a threshold value (Paragraphs 0025, 0082 and 0094 where received current values are compared to a current threshold value); and determine, based on the comparison of the electrical measurement to the threshold value, a plurality of commands to be transmitted to the event devices in the event device loop (Figure 1 and Paragraphs 0079-0091 where commands such as alarm commands, polling commands and calibration commands are transmitted to the devices in the loop based on the detected currents relative to the current threshold value).
Regarding claim 2, Escofet discloses wherein the processor is configured to execute the instructions to: determine, in response to the electrical measurement being less than the threshold value, the plurality of commands to include a predetermined command and a non-predetermined command; and transmit the predetermined command and the non-predetermined command to the number of event devices (Figure 1 and Paragraphs 0079-0091 where commands such as alarm commands, polling commands and calibration commands are transmitted to the devices in the loop based on the detected currents relative to the current threshold value).
Regarding claim 3, Escofet discloses wherein the non-predetermined command is a non-priority command (Paragraphs 0079-0091 where the polling and calibration commands are non-priority commands).
Regarding claim 4, Escofet discloses wherein the processor is configured to execute the instructions to: determine, in response to the electrical measurement being greater than the threshold value, the plurality of commands to include only a predetermined command; and transmit only the predetermined command to the number of event devices (Figure 1 and Paragraphs 0079-0091 where only an alarming command is transmitted to the device(s) when the detected current is higher than a current threshold value).
Regarding claim 5, Escofet discloses wherein the processor is configured to execute the instructions to: schedule a subsequent electrical measurement in response to the electrical measurement being greater than the threshold value; and compare the subsequent electrical measurement to the threshold value in response to the subsequent electrical measurement being determined (Paragraphs 0006, 0016, 0030 and 0086-0096 where the alarm system enters a calibration mode and current values at all of the event devices are detected and compared to a current threshold value).
Regarding claim 6, Escofet discloses wherein the processor is configured to execute the instructions to transmit the predetermined command and a non-predetermined command to the number of event devices in response to the subsequent electrical measurement being less than the threshold value (Figure 1 and Paragraphs 0079-0091 where commands such as alarm commands, polling commands and calibration commands are transmitted to the devices in the loop based on the detected currents relative to the current threshold value. An alarming/emergency condition is also triggered when the detected current is below the current threshold value).
Regarding claim 7, Escofet discloses wherein the predetermined command is a priority command (Figure 1 and Paragraphs 0079-0091 where commands such as alarm commands, polling commands and calibration commands are transmitted to the devices in the loop based on the detected currents relative to the current threshold value).
Regarding claim 8, Escofet discloses wherein the processor is configured to execute the instructions to determine the threshold value by: calculating a maximum current value on the event device loop when all of the event devices on the event device loop are activated at a same time; and assigning the maximum current value as the threshold value (Paragraphs 0006, 0016, 0030 and 0086-0096 where the alarm system enters a calibration mode and current values at all of the event devices are detected and a new current threshold value is calculated).
Regarding claim 9, Escofet discloses a non-transitory computer readable medium having computer readable instructions stored thereon that are executable by a processor to (Figures 1-2, Element 12): determine a current value in an event device loop including a number of event devices connected to an event device panel (Figure 1, Elements 14, 16, 18 and Paragraphs 0005-0012, 0080 and 0082 where remote event devices in a device loop provide relative current values to the control panel); compare the current value to a threshold current (Paragraphs 0025, 0082 and 0094 where received current values are compared to a current threshold value); and determine, based on the comparison of the current value to the threshold current, a plurality of commands to be transmitted to the event devices in the event device loop, wherein the plurality of commands include a predetermined command and a non-predetermined command (Figure 1 and Paragraphs 0079-0091 where commands such as alarm commands, polling commands and calibration commands are transmitted to the devices in the loop based on the detected currents relative to the current threshold value).
Regarding claim 10, Escofet discloses wherein the computer readable instructions are executable by the processor to determine, in response to the current value being less than the threshold current, the command to be transmitted to include the predetermined command and the non-predetermined command (Figure 1 and Paragraphs 0079-0091 where commands such as alarm commands, polling commands and calibration commands are transmitted to the devices in the loop based on the detected currents relative to the current threshold value).
Regarding claim 11, Escofet discloses wherein the computer readable instructions are executable by the processor to transmit the predetermined command and the non-predetermined command to the number of event devices (Figure 1 and Paragraphs 0079-0091 where commands such as alarm commands, polling commands and calibration commands are transmitted to the devices in the loop based on the detected currents relative to the current threshold value).
Regarding claim 12, Escofet discloses wherein the computer readable instructions are executable by the processor to determine, in response to the current value being greater than the threshold current, the command to be transmitted to include only the predetermined command (Figure 1 and Paragraphs 0079-0091 where only an alarming command is transmitted to the device(s) when the detected current is higher than a current threshold value).
Regarding claim 13, Escofet discloses wherein the computer readable instructions are executable by the processor to transmit only the predetermined command and not the non-predetermined command to the number of event devices (Figure 1 and Paragraphs 0079-0091 where only an alarming command is transmitted to the device(s) when the detected current is higher than a current threshold value).
Regarding claim 14, Escofet discloses wherein the computer readable instructions are executable by the processor to monitor the event device loop for a change in the event device loop (Paragraphs 0018, 0053 and 0085 where additions and removals from the event loop are monitored).
Regarding claim 15, Escofet discloses wherein the computer readable instructions are executable by the processor to determine a revised threshold electrical measurement in response to the change being detected in the event device loop (Paragraphs 0006, 0016, 0030 and 0086-0096 where the alarm system enters a calibration mode and current values at all of the event devices are detected and a new current threshold value is calculated).
Regarding claim 16, Escofet discloses wherein the change in the event device loop includes at least one of: an addition of an event device to the number of event devices in the event device loop; removal of an event device from the number of event devices in the event device loop; and a fault occurring in an event device of the number of event devices in the event device loop (Paragraphs 0018, 0046, 0052, 0053 and 0085 where additions, removals and faults in the event loop are monitored).
Regarding claim 17, Escofet discloses a system for command transmission based on an electrical measurement in an event system (Figure 1), comprising: an event device loop including a number of event devices (Figure 1, Elements 14, 16 and 18); an event device panel connected to the number of event devices (Figure 1, Element 12); and a controller included in the event device panel (Figure 2, Element 12 and Paragraph 0083 where the control panel includes a controller), the controller configured to: determine a current value in the event device loop (Figure 1, Elements 14, 16, 18 and Paragraphs 0005-0012, 0080 and 0082 where remote event devices in a device loop provide relative current values to the control panel); compare the current value to a threshold current (Paragraphs 0025, 0082 and 0094 where received current values are compared to a current threshold value); transmit, in response to the current value being less than the threshold current, a plurality of commands to the number of event devices, wherein the plurality of commands include a predetermined command and a non-predetermined command (Figure 1 and Paragraphs 0079-0091 where commands such as alarm commands, polling commands and calibration commands are transmitted to the devices in the loop based on the detected currents being below the current threshold value); and in response to the current value being greater than the threshold current: transmit only the predetermined command to the number of event devices; and delay transmission of the non-predetermined command to the number of event devices (Figure 1 and Paragraphs 0079-0091 where only an alarming command is transmitted to the device(s) when the detected current is higher than a current threshold value and an emergency condition is determined).
Regarding claim 18, Escofet discloses monitor a voltage at the event device panel; and generate an alarm in response to the voltage exceeding a threshold voltage (Paragraphs 0021, 0046 0079-0091 where voltage is monitored in the event loop and alarms are triggered).
Regarding claim 19, Escofet discloses wherein: the number of event devices include a fire device; and the predetermined command is a command to activate the fire device in response to an event being detected (Figure 1 and Paragraphs 0079-0091 where control panel and event devices are provided in a fire detection loop).
Regarding claim 20, Escofet discloses wherein: the number of event devices include a fire device; and the predetermined command is a command to cause the fire device to perform an automatic self-test procedure (Paragraphs 0019, 0053, 0054, 0085 and 0088 where maintenance and calibration modes are entered automatically).
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to THOMAS D ALUNKAL whose telephone number is (571)270-1127. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 9AM-5PM.
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, BRIAN ZIMMERMAN can be reached at 571-272-3059. 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.
/THOMAS D ALUNKAL/
Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2686