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 .
DETAILED ACTION
Claims 2-3, 5-9, 11-15, 33-35 have been examined and claims 4,10,16-32 have been canceled.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 2-3, 5-9, 11-13 are allowed.
The following is an examiner’s statement of reasons for allowance:
Prior art made of record fails to teach,
As per claim 2,
A computer-implemented method for processing fire safety and occupant safety information, comprising:
receiving, with a processing unit, communications containing data related to physical characteristics of a fire in a building and accessing a memory containing a physical layout of the building; and
applying algorithms and machine learning, with the processing unit, to the data related to the physical characteristics of the fire in the building, and the physical layout of the building to construct with Computational Fluid Dynamics software, a virtual, dynamic, real-time computer model of a current state of the fire; and
applying algorithms and machine learning, with the processing unit, to the data related to the physical characteristics of the fire in the building, and the physical layout of the building to construct with Computational Fluid Dynamics software, a virtual, dynamic, real-time probabilistic computer model of a predicted physical development and path of the fire in the building, over time; and
applying the computer model of the current state of the fire and the computer model of the predicted physical development and path of the fire in the building to a pre-determined policy defining actions to be taken in response to different fire hazard scenarios, to determine an appropriate policy-based response, wherein the communications further comprise one or more proposed or pre-determined firefighting interventions and the method further comprises generating, with the processing unit, a simulated result of the proposed or pre-determined firefighting interventions; and
incorporating the simulated result into the computer model of the predicted physical development and path of the fire in the building.
The examiner found no suggestions or motivations to combine similar teachings from prior art made of record to overcome the limitations as discussed above individually and in combination in respect the claimed invention as a whole.
Claims 14-15,33-35 would be allowable if rewritten to overcome the rejection(s) under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), 2nd paragraph, set forth in this Office action and to include all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
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 33 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 33 recites the limitation "the construction material" in line 2. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. Claim 2 amends to recite “the physical layout of the building to construct with Computational Fluid Dynamics software, a virtual, dynamic, real-time computer model of a current state of the fire;” and “the physical layout of the building to construct with Computational Fluid Dynamics software, a virtual, dynamic, real-time probabilistic computer model of a predicted physical development and path of the fire in the building, over time”. However, it does not specific what is construction material of the building.
Claim 33 is depending on canceled claim 1. According to the claim structure, claim 33 should be depended on claim 2. Correction is required.
The claim subject matter of claim 33, “the memory further contains the…. methods of the building” is indefinite because it is not clear what is included as method of the building? The bound of the claim limitation cannot be determined.
Claims 14-15, 34-35 are 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.
Claims 14, 15 and 33 are depending on canceled claim 1. According to the claim structure, claims 14 and 15 should be depended on claim 2. Correction is required.
Claims 34-35 are depended on claim 15 that requires correction on dependency
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 extension fee 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 HOI C LAU whose telephone number is (571)272-8547. The examiner can normally be reached on Monday-Friday, 8:30am-5:00Pm EST.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Davetta Goins can be reached on (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 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. 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 you have questions on 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.
/HOI C LAU/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2689
Prosecution Insights