DEATILED 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 .
Continued Examination Under 37 CFR 1.114
A request for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, including the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e), was filed in this application after final rejection. Since this application is eligible for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114. Applicant's submission filed on 8/22/2025 has been entered.
Claim Status
Claims 33-34, 41-46 and 48-54 are pending for examination.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 8/22/2025 have been fully considered.
Applicant’s arguments with respect to claim 33 and similar claims 41 and 42 have been considered but are moot because the new ground of rejection relies a new combination of prior arts for any teaching or matter specifically challenged in the arguments.
Zea teaches the canopy 110 includes one or more cameras 150 that can be selectively activated by a user based on the input of the user but fails to teach the activation of the cameras is caused upon expiry of a preconfigured duration of delay.
However, in the same field of detection system, Ribacoff (Pat. No.: 5,635,981) teaches a visitor identification system (VIS) is configured to activate a second camera 14 in response to a detection of an intruder. The activation of the second camera is considered to be an equivalent to Zea’s deployment of smoke after the detection of a shooter. Ribacoff further teaches the VIS causes a first camera 12 to activate after a predetermined period of time after the activation of the second camera. In other words, the first camera activates upon expiry of a preconfigured duration of delay after the activation of the second camera or in Zea’s case, after the activation of the smoke generator. See Col. 3 line 43- 51, “FIG. 2 shows a recorder/playback device 18 connected a switch 16, which, in turn, is connected to first camera 12 and second camera 14. Switch 16 preferably controls which signals are recorded, i.e. signals from first camera 12 and/or signals from second camera 14, upon the happening of an event. In a particularly preferred embodiment a detector 46 activates second camera 14 when a particular motion is detected and re-activates first camera 12 after a predetermined period of time.”.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Zea’s canopy to activate the camera upon expiry of a predetermined delay after the deployment of smoke to assist the user to evaluate the situation.
According to the teachings, suggestions and motivations provided by the cited prior arts and the reasons stated in the office action, the rejection is sustained.
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.
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.
Claims 33-34, 41-46 and 48-49 and 52-54 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Zea (Pat. No.: US 10,942,011 B1) in view Ribacoff (Pat. No.: 5,635,981).
Regarding claim 33, Zea teaches a security apparatus comprising:
one or more processors configured to, in response to identifying a need for outputting light-obscuring material (Fig. 1, Col. 3 line 48 – 51, “The canopy 110 can include a controller that issues a signal to the motor to lower the roll-up door 105. The controller can be any type of processor. In one example, the controller receives sensor signals from the gunshot detection unit 155, fire detector, and from a wireless transceiver to determine when to deploy the roll-up door 105, siren 115, smoke machine 145, sprinkler 140, or LED 120. The wireless transceiver can be connected to a WIFI network in an example.”. The canopy received a signal to activate the smoke machine.):
instruct an output device to output light-obscuring material into an environment (Col. 2 line 41-47, “The canopy can also include a smoke sprayer (i.e., smoke sprinkler assembly) that begins spraying smoke during deployment. The smoke can be created using prefabricated smoke cartridges or liquid fog droplets, such as by pumping a glycol and water mixture across a heating element. Preloaded smoke powder can also be used in an example. The smoke can further limit the shooter's vision.”); and
after the output device has commenced outputting the light-obscuring material, instruct a camera to cause the camera to detect a signal (Col. 7 line 59-63, “Additionally, the user can select video icons to see those particular video feeds. In one example, when the user sees the shooter on a video feed, the GUI can be used to deploy the zone that includes the source of the video feed. This can help the user more easily trap and disable the shooter.”. The user selects the video after the activation of the smoke generator.).
Zea fails to teach the activation of the camera is caused upon expiry of a preconfigured duration of delay.
However, in the same field of detection system, Ribacoff teaches a visitor identification system configured to activate a second camera in response to a detection of an intruder (equivalent to Zea’s deployment of smoke after the detection of a shooter) and causes a first camera to activate after a predetermined period of time. See Col. 3 line 43- 51, “FIG. 2 shows a recorder/playback device 18 connected a switch 16, which, in turn, is connected to first camera 12 and second camera 14. Switch 16 preferably controls which signals are recorded, i.e. signals from first camera 12 and/or signals from second camera 14, upon the happening of an event. In a particularly preferred embodiment a detector 46 activates second camera 14 when a particular motion is detected and re-activates first camera 12 after a predetermined period of time.”.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Zea’s canopy to activate the camera upon expiry of a predetermined delay after the deployment of smoke to assist the user to evaluate the situation.
Regarding claim 34, Zea in the combination teaches a security system comprising the apparatus of claim 33 (see rejection for claim 33) and at least one device selected from a group consisting of: a control hub; a server; and a monitoring station;
the at least one device comprising the monitoring station (Col. 2 line 14-18, “The canopy can also include a controller that causes various events to occur in response to a deployment command. The deployment command can be detected based on any deployment condition, such as a detection of a gunshot or a command received from a command center.” and Col. 4 line 34-39, “The command application that runs on the command device can include a graphical user interface (“GUI”) that allows a user, such as a school resource officer, to select which canopies to deploy or open.”. The canopy communicates with a command center or command device);
wherein the at least one device is configured to transmit a trigger to the one or more processors, wherein the one or more processors identifies the need for outputting light-obscuring material based on receiving the trigger (Col. 3 line 50-54, “In one example, the controller receives sensor signals from the gunshot detection unit 155, fire detector, and from a wireless transceiver to determine when to deploy the roll-up door 105, siren 115, smoke machine 145, sprinkler 140, or LED 120.” and col. 5 line 3-5, “If needed, the GUI can be used to issue the deployment command. This can include closing the door 105 or simply activating disorientation features.”. The user transmits a signal via the command device to the canopy to activate the smoke machine.),
wherein the monitoring station is configured to receive data from a detector and/or camera and to present the data to an operator via a display, such that an operator may decide whether or not to trigger the output of the light-obscuring material, wherein the received data from the camera corresponds to one or more images taken in response to detection of a security related event (Col. 2 line 32-40, “The canopy can include additional devices that also activate during deployment, in an example. For example, one or more cameras can activate, and the controller can send a live feed for display in a control room or on devices maintained by authorities. For example, a laptop with a shield application can receive and display feeds from multiple cameras at multiple different canopies. This can allow law enforcement to track the shooter's location and see where a great need for intervention exists.” and Col. 3 line 50-54, “In one example, the controller receives sensor signals from the gunshot detection unit 155, fire detector, and from a wireless transceiver to determine when to deploy the roll-up door 105, siren 115, smoke machine 145, sprinkler 140, or LED 120.”. The user receives video feed from the canopy camera to determine whether intervention is needed. The intervention includes activation of the smoke machine to disorientate the intruder.),
wherein the monitoring station is further configured to receive data based on the signal detected by the camera for verification of whether the object of interest is in the environment after the transmitting of the trigger to the one or more processors (Col. 7 line 59-63, “Additionally, the user can select video icons to see those particular video feeds. In one example, when the user sees the shooter on a video feed, the GUI can be used to deploy the zone that includes the source of the video feed. This can help the user more easily trap and disable the shooter.”. The user selects the video camera feed associated with the canopy that had deployed smoke to help the user to assess the situation.), wherein the object of interest is a person, wherein the monitoring station is configured to present the data to an operator for human analysis to determine whether the object of interest is present in the environment after the outputting of the light-obscuring material (Col. 5 line 43-57, “Other features of the canopy 110 can be used for tracking or negotiating with the shooter. For example, the canopy 110 can be equipped with multiple video cameras 150. This can allow authorities to see where the shooter is and what they are doing.”. The camera feed allows the user to see the intruder).
Regarding claim 41, recites a method for the security apparatus of claim 1. Therefore, it is rejected for the same reasons.
Regarding claim 42, recites a CRM for the security apparatus of claim 1. Therefore, it is rejected for the same reasons.
Regarding claim 43, Zea in the combination teaches the apparatus of claim 33, further comprising a detector configured to detect a security related event (abstract, detect active shooter), wherein in response to a detected security related event the apparatus is configured to transmit a notification that a security related event has occurred, wherein the identifying of the need is in response to receiving a trigger, wherein the one or more processors are configured to receive the trigger from a control hub, server or monitoring station (Col. 3 line 48 – 51, “The canopy 110 can include a controller that issues a signal to the motor to lower the roll-up door 105. The controller can be any type of processor. In one example, the controller receives sensor signals from the gunshot detection unit 155, fire detector, and from a wireless transceiver to determine when to deploy the roll-up door 105, siren 115, smoke machine 145, sprinkler 140, or LED 120. The wireless transceiver can be connected to a WIFI network in an example.”. and Col. 5 line 6-15, “In one example, the GUI can display the floorplan of the structure that includes the shield system. The floorplan can include icons that represent locations of canopies 110. The floorplan can also be segregated into zones, allowing the user to control all canopies 110 within a zone at the same time. When a canopy 110 detects a gunshot, the detecting canopy 110 and/or zone in which it resides can be highlighted on the GUI. This can allow the user to quickly deploy canopies 110 in a zone where a threat exists, such as by selecting individual canopies 110 or the entire zone.”. The canopy transmits a notification to the GUI of the command device based on the detection of an active shooter. The user of command device triggers the smoke generator to deter the shooter).
Regarding claim 44, Ribacoff in the combination teaches the apparatus of claim 43, wherein the detector comprises a motion sensor (Col. 3 line 1 - 3, “Additionally, the VIS is preferably equipped with automated activating means such as a motion detector, actuator or similar triggering device.”).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Zea’s canopy with a motion sensor to improve detection accuracy and to improve safety.
Regarding claim 45, Ribacoff in the combination teaches the apparatus of claim 33, wherein the instructing of the camera is performed on or after commencement of outputting the light-obscuring material by the output device (Col. 3 line 43- 51, “FIG. 2 shows a recorder/playback device 18 connected a switch 16, which, in turn, is connected to first camera 12 and second camera 14. Switch 16 preferably controls which signals are recorded, i.e. signals from first camera 12 and/or signals from second camera 14, upon the happening of an event. In a particularly preferred embodiment a detector 46 activates second camera 14 when a particular motion is detected and re-activates first camera 12 after a predetermined period of time.”. The switch of the detector / canopy instructs the camera to activate after a predetermined delay.).
Regarding claim 46, Ribacoff in the combination teaches the apparatus of claim 33, wherein the one or more processors are further configured to activate the camera by switching the camera from an off or sleep state to an operational state in response to the instruction to the camera (Col. 3 line 43- 51, “FIG. 2 shows a recorder/playback device 18 connected a switch 16, which, in turn, is connected to first camera 12 and second camera 14. Switch 16 preferably controls which signals are recorded, i.e. signals from first camera 12 and/or signals from second camera 14, upon the happening of an event. In a particularly preferred embodiment a detector 46 activates second camera 14 when a particular motion is detected and re-activates first camera 12 after a predetermined period of time.”. The switch of the detector / canopy instructs the camera to re-activate after a predetermined delay from an off state to an on state).
Regarding claim 48, Ribacoff in the combination teaches the apparatus of claim 33, wherein the duration of delay is preconfigured to a value (Col. 3 line 43- 51, “In a particularly preferred embodiment a detector 46 activates second camera 14 when a particular motion is detected and re-activates first camera 12 after a predetermined period of time.”.) but fails to teach the delay is between 3 and 60 seconds.
However, it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Zea in view of Ribacoff’s predetermined period to have a value between 3 to 60 seconds after the activation of the smoke generator because it has been held that where general conditions of a claim are disclosed in the prior art, discovering the optimum or workable ranges involves only routine skill in the art. In re Aller, 105 USPQ 233.
Regarding claim 49, Zea in the combination teaches the apparatus of claim 43, further comprising the camera, wherein the output device, the camera and the detector are provided in a common housing (Figs. 1-2, canopy 110, 210 houses smoke machine 145, the camera 150 and the sensor 155).
Regarding claim 52, Zea in the combination teaches the apparatus of claim 33, wherein the camera comprises a visible light camera (Col. 5 line 53-56, “Other features of the canopy 110 can be used for tracking or negotiating with the shooter. For example, the canopy 110 can be equipped with multiple video cameras 150. This can allow authorities to see where the shooter is and what they are doing.”).
Regarding claim 53, Zea in the combination teaches the apparatus of claim 33, wherein light-obscuring material comprises smoke (Col. 5 line 46 – 52, “The canopy 110 can also include a smoke spraying machine 145 (also called a smoke sprinkler) that emits smoke or fog. The smoke can be created using prefabricated smoke cartridges, smoke power, or liquid fog droplets. In one example, the smoke spraying machine 145 can pump a glycol and water mixture across a heating element. The smoke can further limit the shooter's vision.”).
Regarding claim 54, recites a method for the security apparatus of claim 48. Therefore, it is rejected for the same reasons.
Claims 50-51 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Zea (Pat. No.: US 10,942,011 B1) in view of n view Ribacoff (Pat. No.: 5,635,981) as applied to claim 33, and further in view of Haskin (Pub. No.: US 2022/0046228 A1).
Regarding claim 50, Zea in the combination teaches the apparatus of claim 33, wherein the canopy includes a camera but fails to teach wherein the signal detected by the camera has a wavelength greater than an average particle size of the light-obscuring material so as to enable verification of whether an object of interest is in the environment when the object is obscured by the light-obscuring material.
However, in the same field of camera, Haskin teaches near-infrared thermal camera is configured to penetrate smoke, fog and haze to detect the presence of an object. See para [0079], “Thermal imaging, near-infrared illumination, and low-light imaging are the three most commonly used night vision technologies. Unlike the other two methods, thermal imaging works in environments without any ambient light Like near-infrared illumination, thermal imaging can penetrate obscurants such as smoke, fog and haze.”.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Zea’s camera with a thermal near-infrared camera to detect the presence of an intruder in an obscured environment to improve safety and tracking ability.
Regarding claim 51, Zea in the combination teaches the apparatus of claim 33, wherein the canopy includes a camera but fails to teach wherein the camera comprises a near-infrared camera.
However, in the same field of camera, Haskin teaches near-infrared thermal camera is configured to penetrate smoke, fog and haze to detect the presence of an object. See para [0079], “Thermal imaging, near-infrared illumination, and low-light imaging are the three most commonly used night vision technologies. Unlike the other two methods, thermal imaging works in environments without any ambient light Like near-infrared illumination, thermal imaging can penetrate obscurants such as smoke, fog and haze.”.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Zea’s camera with a thermal near-infrared camera to detect the presence of an intruder in an obscured environment to improve safety and tracking ability.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ZHEN Y WU whose telephone number is (571)272-5711. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday, 10AM-6PM, EST.
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, Quan-Zhen Wang can be reached at 571-272-3114. 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.
/ZHEN Y WU/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2685