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 status
This action is in response to applicant filed on 03/08/2026
Claims 1, 11 have been amended.
Claims 8, 9 and 20 have been previously cancelled.
Claims 21-23 are
Claims 1-7, 10-19 and 21-23 are pending for examination.
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.
Claim(s) 1-7, 10-19 and 21-23 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Merjanian et al. (US 2017/0318147) in view of Thomas et al. (US 2005/0198063) and further in view of Molloy et al. (US 2018/0365942).
Regarding claim 1: The combination of Merjanian, Thomas and Molloy recite a method with the functional limitation of claim 11 and therefore is rejected for the same reasons of claim 11 below.
Regarding claim 2: The combination of Merjanian, Thomas and Molloy disclose the method of claim 1, wherein receiving an emergency location generated by a triggering device, comprises: receiving device-based hybrid location (overlapping location) generated by a mobile phone where the mobile phone is the triggering device (Merjanian: ¶0147).
Regarding claim 3: The combination of Merjanian, Thomas and Molloy disclose the method of claim 1, further comprising: receiving an emergency alert generated by the triggering device (Merjanian: Fig. 22, step 2210, 2220, ¶0145).
Regarding claim 4: The combination of Merjanian, Thomas and Molloy disclose the method of claim 3, further comprising: receiving the emergency alert generated by the triggering device comprising sensor data gathered by the triggering device (Merjanian: ¶0145: the NME may request location data from the user's device, such as for example from a GPS component of the user's device.).
Regarding claim 5: The combination of Merjanian, Thomas and Molloy disclose the method of claim 1, wherein determining that the emergency location is within a geofence associated with a building asset managed by the CSP comprises: receiving communication from the CSP regarding at least one state of a physical asset managed by the CSP (Merjanian: Fig. 19C, ¶0089).
Regarding claim 6: The combination of Merjanian, Thomas and Molloy disclose the method of claim 1, further comprising: identifying the notification procedure associated with the CSP from a notification procedure database comprising a plurality of notification procedures associated with a respective plurality of CSPs (Merjanian: ¶0147).
Regarding claim 7: The combination of Merjanian, Thomas and Molloy n disclose the method of claim 3, further comprising: receiving the emergency alert generated by the triggering device, comprising the emergency location. (Merjanian: Fig. 22, step 2210, 2220, ¶0145).
Regarding claim 10: The combination of Merjanian and Thomas disclose the method of claim 9, further comprising: receiving the emergency location from the ESP, wherein the emergency location is associated with an emergency call received by the ESP (Merjanian: Fig. 22, step 2210, 2220, ¶0145).
Regarding claim 11: Merjanian disclose an emergency management system (EMS) comprising:
a non-volatile, non-transitory memory (Fig. 17, ¶0153: RAM, ROM);
a network component (Fig. 17, item 1724, ¶0156); and
at least one processor (Fig. 17, item 1704), operatively coupled to the non-volatile, non- transitory memory and to the network component, the at least one processor operative to:
receive an emergency location generated by a triggering device (Fig. 22, step 2210, 2220, ¶0145);
retrieve a plurality of geofences (security zones) associated with a respective plurality of building assets managed by a respective plurality of CSPs (Fig. 22, step 2230, ¶0052, ¶0146) ;
determine that the emergency location is within a geofence associated with a building asset managed by a CSP from the plurality of CSPs (Fig. 21-22, step 2230,¶0146); and
executing a notification procedure associated with building asset and the CSP to notify the CSP of an emergency occurring at the building asset, in response to determining that the emergency location is within the geofence associated with the building asset managed by the CSP and sensor data, (Fig. 22, step 2250, ¶0147).
Merjanian does not explicitly disclose receiving communication from a connected smart building, where the connected smart building is the building asset, where the connected smart building is a building asset comprising control information for remote access and control of the connected smart building and providing, to an emergency service provider (ESP), a graphical user interface (GUI) through an emergency response application, the GUI operatively to remotely access and control the connected smart building.
In analogous art regarding building monitoring, Thomas disclose receiving communication from a connected smart building, where the connected smart building is the building asset, where the connected smart building is a building asset comprising control information for remote access and control of the connected smart building and providing, to an emergency service provider (ESP), a graphical user interface (GUI) through an emergency response application, the GUI operatively to remotely access and control the connected smart building (¶0093).
Before the effective filing date, it would have been obvious to the one of the ordinary skill in the art to include the feature of receiving communication from a connected smart building, where the connected smart building is the building asset, where the connected smart building is a building asset comprising control information for remote access and control of the connected smart building and providing, to an emergency service provider (ESP), a graphical user interface (GUI) through an emergency response application, the GUI operatively to remotely access and control the connected smart building, as disclose by Thomas, to the step of determining that the emergency location is within a geofence associated with a building asset managed by the CSP of Merjanian. The motivation is to provide remote control and hence allowing the system to handle the emergency without a physical presence in the building.
The combination of Merjanian and Thomas does not explicitly disclose in- building sensor circuitry in response to sensor data detected by the in-building sensor circuitry
determining a notification procedure associated with the building asset and the CSP and indicate an event corresponding to the sensor data detected by the in-building sensor circuitry.
In analogous art regarding building monitoring, Molloy disclose in- building sensor circuitry in response to sensor data detected by the in-building sensor circuitry (Fig. 4A, sensor devices 215, ¶0061)
determining a notification procedure associated with the building asset and the CSP and indicate an event corresponding to the sensor data detected by the in-building sensor circuitry (¶0061-0062).
Before the effective filing date, it would have been obvious to the one of the ordinary skill in the art to include the feature of in- building sensor circuitry in response to sensor data detected by the in-building sensor circuitry, determining a notification procedure associated with the building asset and the CSP and indicate an event corresponding to the sensor data detected by the in-building sensor circuitry, as disclose by Molloy, to the system of the combination of Merjanian and Thomas. The motivation is to provide specific notification procedure information to the user so the user can be guided to safety.
Regarding claim 12: The combination of Merjanian, Thomas and Molloy disclose the system of claim 11, wherein the notification procedure comprises contact information for an organizational contact (police) associated with the CSP.(Merjanian: ¶0060)
Regarding claim 13: The combination of Merjanian, Thomas and Molloy disclose the system of claim 11, wherein the notification procedure specifies one or more recipients to be notified. (Merjanian: ¶0060)
Regarding claim 14: The combination of Merjanian, Thomas and Molloy disclose the system of claim 13, wherein the notification procedure defines a pathway of execution based at least in part on input received from the one or more recipients (Merjanian: Fig. 3, ¶0072-0074).
Regarding claim 15: The combination of Merjanian, Thomas and Molloy disclose the system of claim 11, wherein the at least one processor is further operative to: receive a user identifier associated with the emergency location; and execute the notification procedure associated with the CSP by transmitting a notification message to the CSP comprising the user identifier (Merjanian: ¶0114).
Regarding claim 16: The combination of Merjanian, Thomas and Molloy disclose the system of claim 11, wherein the at least one processor is further operative to: identify the notification procedure associated with the CSP from a notification procedure database comprising a plurality of notification procedures associated with the plurality of CSPs (Merjanian: Fig. 3, ¶0072-0074).
Regarding claim 17: The combination of Merjanian, Thomas and Molloy disclose the system of claim 11, wherein the at least one processor is further operative to: receive communication from the CSP regarding at least one state of a physical asset managed by the CSP. (Merjanian:. 19C, ¶0089).
Regarding claim 18: The combination of Merjanian, Thomas and Molloy disclose the system of claim 11, wherein the at least one processor is further operative to: receive device-based hybrid location generated by a mobile phone where the mobile phone is the triggering device (Merjanian: ¶0147).
Regarding claim 19: The combination of Merjanian, Thomas and Molloy disclose the system of claim 11, wherein the at least one processor is further operative to: receive an emergency alert generated by the triggering device comprising the emergency location. (Merjanian: Fig. 22, step 2210, 2220, ¶0145).
Regarding claim 21: The combination of Merjanian, Thomas and Molloy disclose the system of claim 11, wherein indicate an event corresponding to the sensor data detected by the in-building sensor circuitry, comprises: providing a description of the event on the GUI (Molloy: ¶0062).
Regarding claim 22: The combination of Merjanian, Thomas and Molloy disclose the system of claim 11, wherein the at least one processor is operative to indicate an event corresponding to the sensor data detected by the in-building sensor circuitry wherein the in-building sensor circuitry comprises at least one of: a smoke alarm, a thermometer, a carbon monoxide sensor, a pressure sensor, a humidity sensor, a vibration sensor, a magnetic field sensor, a sound sensor, a radiation sensor, a hazardous chemical sensor, an acidsensor, a base sensor, a reactive compound sensor, a volatile organic compound sensor, or a smog sensor and the at least one processor is further operative to: indicate the event corresponding to the sensor data by providing a description of the event on the GUI (Molloy: ¶0061).
Regarding claim 23: The combination of Merjanian, Thomas and Molloy disclose the system of claim 11, further comprising: the in-building sensor circuitry, operatively coupled to the network component via a network connection, and to the at least one processor (Molloy: Fig. 5); and wherein the in-building sensor circuitry is a sensor selected from the group consisting of: a smoke alarm, a thermometer, a carbon monoxide sensor, a pressure sensor, a humidity sensor, a vibration sensor, a magnetic field sensor, a sound sensor, a radiation sensor, a hazardous chemical sensor, an acid sensor, a base sensor, a reactive compound sensor, a volatile organic compound sensor, and a smog sensor. (Molloy: ¶0061).
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to the claim(s) have been considered but are moot because the new ground of rejection does not rely on any reference applied in the prior rejection of record for any teaching or matter specifically challenged in the argument.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to OMAR CASILLASHERNANDEZ whose telephone number is (571)270-5432. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday, 8:30AM-4:30PM.
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, Davetta Goins can be reached at (571) 272-2957. 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.
/OMAR CASILLASHERNANDEZ/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2689