DETAILED ACTION
Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status
The present application is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
________________________________________
Information Disclosure Statement
The Information Disclosure Statement filed July 21, 2026 has been considered.
________________________________________
References Used
Reference 1 (Primary) - US 10,628,679 B1.
Reference 2 - US 5,454,326 A.
Reference 3 - US 2021/0347389 A1.
Reference 4 - US 2017/0166227 A1.
Reference 5 - US 2018/0162417 A1.
Reference 6 - US 4,049,999 A.
________________________________________
Claim Rejections - 35 U.S.C. 103
Claims 1, 7, 9, 15, 17, and 18 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Reference 1 in view of Reference 2.
Claims 4 and 12 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Reference 1 in view of Reference 2 and Reference 3.
Claims 3 and 11 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Reference 1 in view of Reference 2 and Reference 4.
Claims 8 and 16 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Reference 1 in view of Reference 2, Reference 5 and Reference 6.
Claim 1 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 over Reference 1 in view of Reference 2.
Claim Text
(L1) A circulating cableway having a number of cableway stations and a number of cableway vehicles which can be moved with a conveyor cable between the cableway stations, (L2) wherein a boarding region for passengers for boarding the cableway vehicles is provided in a first cableway station, (L3) wherein a control unit is provided for controlling the circulating cableway, (L4) wherein a detection device is provided in the first cableway station which is designed to detect passengers present in the boarding region and to determine a passenger type for each of the detected passengers, (L5) wherein the control unit is designed to operate the circulating cableway in a specified safe operating mode when at least one determined passenger type is a specified safety passenger type, the cableway comprising: (L6) a conveyor belt positioned in the boarding region for conveying the passengers in a movement direction of the cableway vehicles, the conveyor belt having a conveyor belt drive unit for driving the conveyor belt; (L7) wherein the control unit is configured to control the conveyor belt drive unit in the specified safe operating mode to reduce a conveyor belt speed of the conveyor belt to a specified or specifiable conveyor belt speed.
Analysis
(L1) Reference 1 describes a ski lift whose looped cable runs between bull wheels at its two ends and carries chairs between loading and unloading locations (description of Fig. 5). Reference 2 expressly provides cable 10 between two terminals and chairs 11 attached by fixed grips 12 (drawing and description of the preferred embodiment). (L2) Reference 1 monitors the on-boarding area where riders wait for an approaching chair (Figs. 1, 2 and 5; claim 31). (L3) Its ski lift problem detection system 104 controls ski lift motor controller 106 through inference processing module 228 and problem detection rules and settings storage 216 (Figs. 1-2, 5 and 7). (L4) Video camera 102, video processing module 224 and artificial intelligence engine 226 detect riders and distinguish normal riders from a rider under a predetermined size in the loading zone; the reference expressly includes the detected states of multiple riders (description of Fig. 2; claims 31, 41-42). Applying that individual size classification to each detected rider supplies the passenger-type determination; this per-rider application of the disclosed classifier, rather than mere detection of an occupied chair, is the proposed implementation. (L5) The system matches the detected situation to a stored rule and commands slowdown or stopping while that situation exists (Fig. 7; claims 7-8). Selecting its slowdown response when any rider is classified below the selected size supplies the specified safety-type mode. (L6) Reference 2 provides conveyor belt 16, end drums 17 and motor 19, collinear with cable 10 and carrying riders toward pickup by chairs 11 (drawing; claims 1 and 4). (L7) Central control unit 23 receives cable speed from cable speed detector 24 and adjusts belt speed according to that speed; time delay relay 27 can adjust admission delay automatically with cable speed (summary; claims 4-5). Incorporating that loading system into Reference 1 makes the commanded cable slowdown reduce the belt to its corresponding selected lower speed while preserving the belt/cable ratio and speed-dependent admission timing. The disclosed example ratio is between one-half and one-third. This is a coordinated cable-and-belt slowdown, not an assertion that Reference 1 alone discloses a boarding belt.
Motivation
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to equip Reference 1's automatically monitored ski lift with Reference 2's synchronized loading belt, and use the detected below-size rider's slowdown rule to control that integrated system, to ease pickup for the identified rider without losing the timed relationship between the rider and the approaching chair. Reference 1 already identifies the small-rider boarding condition and permits a slowdown response; Reference 2 addresses the relative pickup speed and expressly adjusts belt speed and gate delay with cable speed. Applying the classifier to each boarding rider and selecting the protective response when one such rider is detected makes technical sense because a single vulnerable rider creates the disclosed boarding concern. The predictable result is slower, coordinated boarding rather than an isolated belt-speed change that disrupts chair arrival.
Claim 3 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 over Reference 1 in view of Reference 2 and Reference 4.
Claim Text
(L1) The circulating cableway according to claim 1, (L2) wherein the detection device further comprises at least one camera configured to capture a number of images of the boarding region and an evaluation unit configured to detect the passengers present in the boarding region from the number of images captured by the at least one camera and to ascertain the passenger type for each detected passenger; (L3) wherein the at least one camera comprises at least one of a 3D camera and an infrared camera; and (L4) wherein the evaluation unit comprises an image recognition model.
Analysis
(L1) The complete Reference 1 and Reference 2 combination and analysis of claim 1 are incorporated. (L2) Reference 1 provides video camera 102, video processing module 224 and artificial intelligence engine 226 to generate image sequences of the loading area and identify the below-size rider, with the per-rider classifier application identified in the parent analysis (Figs. 1-2 and 5; claim 31). (L3) Reference 4 expressly provides image acquisition device 40 as an infrared thermal camera viewing boarding area 24, including the passengers approaching the chairs (Fig. 1; claim 5). Substituting this disclosed boarding-area camera for camera 102 supplies the infrared alternative. (L4) Reference 1 expressly uses a trained image-recognition model in artificial intelligence engine 226, with curated normal and abnormal sequences, grayscale conversion and model validation (description of Fig. 2; claims 5-6). The modification trains and validates that model on the selected infrared camera's images; it does not assume an unchanged visible-light model necessarily classifies thermal images correctly.
Motivation
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to use Reference 4's infrared thermal boarding camera as the image source for Reference 1's trained recognition model in the synchronized system of Reference 2, to obtain the disclosed passenger-imaging capability through thermal contrast while retaining automatic detection of the safety category. Both references process digital boarding-area images to control lift operation, and Reference 1 expressly provides image preprocessing and training for the installation rather than a fixed camera-specific classifier. Training and validating the model on those camera images preserves the recognition task and predictably produces image-based classification with the selected infrared sensor.
Claim 4 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 over Reference 1 in view of Reference 2 and Reference 3.
Claim Text
(L1) The circulating cableway according to claim 1, (L2) wherein the determined safety passenger type comprises at least one of the following passenger types: passenger below a specified height, passenger above a specified height, passenger with snowboard, passenger with snowbike, passenger with wheelchair, passenger with bobsled or sled, passenger with monoski, passenger with bicycle, passenger with luggage, passenger with small child, passenger with pet, passenger with rescue equipment, a rescue sled, and passenger with walking aid.
Analysis
(L1) The complete Reference 1 and Reference 2 combination and analysis of claim 1 are incorporated. (L2) Reference 3 expressly determines whether each passenger is below predetermined height G using detection device 30, first presence detector 31, second presence detector 32 and data processing unit 40 at timing gates 20, including an example threshold of 1.25 m ([0035]-[0038], [0041], Figs. 1-2). Incorporating that below-height determination as the specified size category in the inherited slowdown control supplies the first listed alternative. Reference 1's generic predetermined size is not silently equated with a specifically measured height. Reference 3's additional accompaniment test remains a separate gate safeguard; the individual below-height result requests the slower cycle whether or not an adult accompanies the rider. No disclosure of every disjunctive alternative is asserted.
Motivation
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to use Reference 3's direct below-height determination as the size-based slowdown trigger in Reference 1's monitored lift with Reference 2's synchronized boarding belt, because the measured height supplies an objective threshold for identifying the small rider for whom the boarding response is needed. The height detector operates at the timed boarding approach and supplies an individual result before admission. Keeping its accompaniment safeguard separate while communicating the below-height result to the speed controller is technically compatible and predictably provides the synchronized reduced-speed cycle for that rider.
Claim 7 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 over Reference 1 in view of Reference 2.
Claim Text
(L1) The circulating cableway according to claim 1, further comprising: (L2) an access region adjacent to the boarding region; an automatic barrier device between the access region and the boarding region, configured to cyclically release passenger access to the boarding region; and wherein the detection device is configured to determine the passenger type in a region of the automatic barrier device.
Analysis
(L1) The complete Reference 1 and Reference 2 combination and analysis of claim 1 are incorporated. (L2) Reference 2 places automatic gate 20 at the upstream end of conveyor belt 16 and cyclically opens it for the waiting group using chair passage detector 22 and time delay relay 27 (drawing; claims 1 and 5). The queue side of the gate is the adjacent access region. Positioning Reference 1's video camera 102 to include that gate region allows artificial intelligence engine 226 to classify the group being admitted; Reference 1 expressly permits cameras at different positions and angles covering the loading area (description of Fig. 2). This gate-region placement is the proposed modification, not a claim that Reference 1 illustrates gate 20.
Motivation
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to direct Reference 1's boarding camera toward Reference 2's cyclic admission gate so that the safety classification is associated with the passengers actually admitted next, rather than with a different group elsewhere in the queue. Reference 1 permits installation-specific camera views, and Reference 2 defines the gate at which each boarding group enters the belt. Including that region in the image coverage provides a timely slowdown request and predictably preserves group-specific, synchronized admission.
Claim 8 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 over Reference 1 in view of Reference 2, Reference 5 and Reference 6.
Claim Text
(L1) The circulating cableway according to claim 1, further comprising: (L2) a second cableway station that includes an exit region for passengers for exiting the cableway vehicles; wherein the control unit is configured to operate the circulating cableway in a fixed safe operating mode at an exit time at which a cableway vehicle is located in the exit region with a passenger for which a specified safety passenger type was determined in the first cableway station; (L3) wherein each cableway vehicle has a unique vehicle ID; and (L4) wherein the control unit is configured to determine the exit time on the basis of the unique vehicle ID.
Analysis
(L1) The complete Reference 1 and Reference 2 combination and analysis of claim 1 are incorporated. (L2) Reference 1 monitors the second-station off-boarding area and commands protective slowdown through ski lift motor controller 106 (Figs. 3-5 and 7). Reference 6 expressly restores a passenger's departure low-speed state at that seat's arrival at disembarking station 24, through speed control device 26 and shift register 36; adjustable time delay device 44 permits deceleration before the disembarking point (cols. 1-3, Fig. 1; claims 1-4). In the proposed combination, the inherited automatically determined below-size safety category supplies the stored slowdown request instead of manual selector switch 32. (L3) Reference 5 provides identifier 31 distinguishing each vehicle, electronic control unit 26 and non-volatile memory 29 associating the identifier with the compartment image and passenger type ([0036]-[0043], Fig. 1). Associate the inherited first-station safety classification and requested mode with that vehicle record after confirming boarding in departure area 22 ([0046]). (L4) Use Reference 5's identifier-associated position, updated from rotary encoder 35 and cable travel, to determine when that vehicle reaches the second-station exit ([0043]-[0044]). This replaces Reference 6's anonymous seat-pulse register with the identified vehicle record while retaining its arrival-time replay and deceleration allowance. Replay the stored reduced-speed mode through the inherited coordinated cable/belt controller. The ID-based automatic-classification trigger is the stated combination, not an express disclosure attributed to Reference 6 alone.
Motivation
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to carry the inherited automatically selected boarding slowdown forward to the same passenger's exit using Reference 6's departure-to-arrival replay and Reference 5's identified vehicle and occupant record. Reference 6 expressly addresses passengers who need slower boarding and disembarking; Reference 5 preserves passenger characteristics and location after boarding. Using that record prevents the slowdown request from being associated with a different chair and allows the existing controller to anticipate arrival. The encoder-based position follows actual cable travel despite intervening speed changes, and the inherited belt control continues to follow cable speed. These compatible control operations predictably provide the stored protective mode while the identified passenger exits.
Claim 9 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 over Reference 1 in view of Reference 2.
Claim Text
(L1) A method for operating a circulating cableway having a number of cableway stations and a number of cableway vehicles movable between the number of cableway stations using a conveyor cable, wherein the circulating cableway is controlled by a control unit, (L2) wherein a boarding region for passengers for boarding the cableway vehicles is provided in a first cableway station, (L3) wherein passengers present in the boarding region are detected by a detection device, and a passenger type is ascertained for each of the detected passengers, (L4) wherein the control unit operates the circulating cableway in a specified safe operating mode when at least one of the ascertained passenger types is a specified safety passenger type, the method comprising the steps of: (L5) providing a conveyor belt in the boarding region for conveying the passengers in a direction of movement of the cableway vehicles; and (L6) while operating in the specified safe operating mode, reducing a conveyor belt speed of the conveyor belt to a specified or specifiable conveyor belt speed.
Analysis
(L1) Reference 1 operates a looped cable between end bull wheels with chairs, using ski lift problem detection system 104 and ski lift motor controller 106 (description of Fig. 5). Reference 2 expressly operates cable 10 and fixed-grip chairs 11 between two terminals with central control unit 23. (L2) Reference 1 captures the loading area where riders board an approaching chair. (L3) Video camera 102, video processing module 224 and artificial intelligence engine 226 detect the riders and recognize a rider under a predetermined size in that area; multiple-rider states are expressly contemplated (Figs. 1-2 and 5; claims 31, 41-42). Applying this disclosed size classifier to each detected rider is the proposed passenger-type determination. (L4) Inference processing module 228 selects the stored response to the matched situation and commands slowdown or stopping through motor controller 106 (Fig. 7; claims 7-8). Selecting slowdown when any rider is below the selected size supplies the safety-type-triggered mode. (L5) Reference 2 conveys riders toward the chairs on conveyor belt 16, collinear with cable 10 and driven by motor 19 (drawing; claims 1 and 4). (L6) Its central control unit 23 adjusts belt speed according to cable speed detector 24, and time delay relay 27 is automatically adjustable according to cable speed (summary; claims 4-5). Operating this loading system with Reference 1's slowdown command reduces both cable and belt speed, retaining their selected ratio and adjusting the admission delay. The belt therefore reaches the specified corresponding reduced speed without changing the required rider/chair pickup relationship.
Motivation
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to perform Reference 1's rider-classification and automatic slowdown operations with Reference 2's synchronized belt-loading operations, to respond to the detected small rider while maintaining timed pickup. The first reference supplies the reason to slow the lift for a detected boarding problem, and the second supplies the belt/cable speed relation and automatically adjustable admission delay. Evaluating each rider with the disclosed classifier and triggering the mode when one rider meets the safety category is compatible with the existing rule-based control. The predictable result is a coordinated lower-speed boarding cycle for that group.
Claim 11 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 over Reference 1 in view of Reference 2 and Reference 4.
Claim Text
(L1) The method according to claim 9, further comprising the steps of: (L2) capturing a number of images of the boarding region with at least one camera; detecting the passengers in the boarding region with an evaluation unit using the number of images recorded by the at least one camera, the evaluation unit determining the passenger type for each detected passenger; (L3) wherein the at least one camera is at least one of a 3D camera or an infrared camera; and (L4) wherein the evaluation unit comprises an image recognition model.
Analysis
(L1) The complete Reference 1 and Reference 2 combination and analysis of claim 9 are incorporated. (L2) Reference 1 provides video camera 102, video processing module 224 and artificial intelligence engine 226 to generate image sequences of the loading area and identify the below-size rider, with the per-rider classifier application identified in the parent analysis (Figs. 1-2 and 5; claim 31). (L3) Reference 4 expressly provides image acquisition device 40 as an infrared thermal camera viewing boarding area 24, including the passengers approaching the chairs (Fig. 1; claim 5). Substituting this disclosed boarding-area camera for camera 102 supplies the infrared alternative. (L4) Reference 1 expressly uses a trained image-recognition model in artificial intelligence engine 226, with curated normal and abnormal sequences, grayscale conversion and model validation (description of Fig. 2; claims 5-6). The modification trains and validates that model on the selected infrared camera's images; it does not assume an unchanged visible-light model necessarily classifies thermal images correctly.
Motivation
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to use Reference 4's infrared thermal boarding camera as the image source for Reference 1's trained recognition model in the synchronized system of Reference 2, to obtain the disclosed passenger-imaging capability through thermal contrast while retaining automatic detection of the safety category. Both references process digital boarding-area images to control lift operation, and Reference 1 expressly provides image preprocessing and training for the installation rather than a fixed camera-specific classifier. Training and validating the model on those camera images preserves the recognition task and predictably produces image-based classification with the selected infrared sensor.
Claim 12 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 over Reference 1 in view of Reference 2 and Reference 3.
Claim Text
(L1) The method according to claim 9, (L2) wherein at least one of the following passenger types is specified as the specified safety passenger type: passenger below a specified height, passenger above a specified height, passenger with snowboard, passenger with snowbike, passenger with wheelchair, passenger with bobsled or sled, passenger with monoski, passenger with bicycle, passenger with luggage, passenger with small child, passenger with pet, passenger with rescue equipment, a rescue sled, and passenger with walking aid.
Analysis
(L1) The complete Reference 1 and Reference 2 combination and analysis of claim 9 are incorporated. (L2) Reference 3 expressly determines whether each passenger is below predetermined height G using detection device 30, first presence detector 31, second presence detector 32 and data processing unit 40 at timing gates 20, including an example threshold of 1.25 m ([0035]-[0038], [0041], Figs. 1-2). Incorporating that below-height determination as the specified size category in the inherited slowdown control supplies the first listed alternative. Reference 1's generic predetermined size is not silently equated with a specifically measured height. Reference 3's additional accompaniment test remains a separate gate safeguard; the individual below-height result requests the slower cycle whether or not an adult accompanies the rider. No disclosure of every disjunctive alternative is asserted.
Motivation
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to use Reference 3's direct below-height determination as the size-based slowdown trigger in Reference 1's monitored lift with Reference 2's synchronized boarding belt, because the measured height supplies an objective threshold for identifying the small rider for whom the boarding response is needed. The height detector operates at the timed boarding approach and supplies an individual result before admission. Keeping its accompaniment safeguard separate while communicating the below-height result to the speed controller is technically compatible and predictably provides the synchronized reduced-speed cycle for that rider.
Claim 15 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 over Reference 1 in view of Reference 2.
Claim Text
(L1) The method according to claim 9, further comprising the step of (L2) cyclically releasing the access for the passengers to the boarding region through an automatic barrier device located in a region between the boarding region and an access region and wherein the detection device ascertains the passenger types in the region of the barrier device.
Analysis
(L1) The complete Reference 1 and Reference 2 combination and analysis of claim 9 are incorporated. (L2) Reference 2 places automatic gate 20 at the upstream end of conveyor belt 16 and cyclically opens it for the waiting group using chair passage detector 22 and time delay relay 27 (drawing; claims 1 and 5). The queue side of the gate is the adjacent access region. Positioning Reference 1's video camera 102 to include that gate region allows artificial intelligence engine 226 to classify the group being admitted; Reference 1 expressly permits cameras at different positions and angles covering the loading area (description of Fig. 2). This gate-region placement is the proposed modification, not a claim that Reference 1 illustrates gate 20.
Motivation
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to direct Reference 1's boarding camera toward Reference 2's cyclic admission gate so that the safety classification is associated with the passengers actually admitted next, rather than with a different group elsewhere in the queue. Reference 1 permits installation-specific camera views, and Reference 2 defines the gate at which each boarding group enters the belt. Including that region in the image coverage provides a timely slowdown request and predictably preserves group-specific, synchronized admission.
Claim 16 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 over Reference 1 in view of Reference 2, Reference 5 and Reference 6.
Claim Text
(L1) The method according to claim 9, further comprising the step of, (L2) in an exit region provided for passengers for exiting a cableway vehicle in a second cableway station, operating the circulating cableway with the control unit in the specified safe operating mode at an exit time at which the cableway vehicle is located in the exit region with a passenger for which a safety passenger type was determined in the first cableway station; (L3) providing a unique vehicle ID for each cableway vehicle; and (L4) wherein the control unit ascertains the exit time on the basis of the unique vehicle ID.
Analysis
(L1) The complete Reference 1 and Reference 2 combination and analysis of claim 9 are incorporated. (L2) Reference 1 observes the second-station off-boarding area and initiates slowdown through ski lift motor controller 106 (Figs. 3-5 and 7). Reference 6 stores a departure low-speed state and restores it when the same seat reaches disembarking station 24, using speed control device 26 and shift register 36, with time delay device 44 allowing the required deceleration (cols. 1-3, Fig. 1; claims 1-4). Supply that stored request from the inherited automatic first-station safety classification instead of manual selector switch 32. (L3) Reference 5 retrieves identifier 31 for each vehicle and associates the compartment image and passenger type with that identifier in non-volatile memory 29 using electronic control unit 26 ([0036]-[0043], Fig. 1). Register the inherited first-station classification and requested mode against the identified vehicle after boarding is complete in departure area 22 ([0046]). (L4) Determine arrival at the exit from Reference 5's identifier-associated position, updated using rotary encoder 35 and actual cable travel ([0043]-[0044]), and replay the stored mode according to Reference 6's arrival-control teaching. The inherited cable/belt control remains coordinated during this exit-triggered slowdown. Replacing anonymous seat-order storage with the identified vehicle record and automatically selected mode is the proposed modification; neither identity nor classification is attributed to Reference 6 in isolation.
Motivation
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to perform Reference 6's automatic arrival-speed replay using Reference 5's vehicle, passenger and position association in the inherited image-controlled cableway method. A passenger requiring the slower boarding cycle also benefits from the disclosed slower disembarking cycle, and preserving the identified passenger's request avoids relying on an attendant to recognize that passenger again. Tracking actual cable travel makes the arrival trigger compatible with variable speed; the existing synchronized belt controller responds to the resulting cable-speed command. The predictable result is the specified protective mode at the exit time of the same classified passenger's vehicle.
Claim 17 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 over Reference 1 in view of Reference 2.
Claim Text
(L1) The method according to claim 9, (L2) wherein a conveying speed of the cableway vehicles in the specified safe operating mode is reduced to a specified or specifiable conveying speed.
Analysis
(L1) The complete Reference 1 and Reference 2 combination and analysis of claim 9 are incorporated. (L2) Reference 1's inference processing module 228 commands ski lift motor controller 106 to slow the lift in response to the selected boarding condition (Figs. 1, 5 and 7; claim 8). Its description of Fig. 5 identifies motor-driven bull wheels moving the cable and chairs. Reference 2's chairs 11 are coupled by fixed grips 12 to cable 10, so the cable-speed reduction reduces the vehicle conveying speed. The inherited combined control keeps motor 19 for conveyor belt 16 and time delay relay 27 coordinated with that reduced speed (Reference 2, drawing; claims 4-5).
Motivation
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to retain Reference 1's vehicle-drive slowdown when adding Reference 2's speed-matched boarding belt, because the lower chair speed addresses the detected boarding concern and keeps the chair's arrival coordinated with the slower belt. The fixed-grip chairs follow the motor-driven cable, so coordinated control of the existing drives predictably reduces vehicle conveying speed and belt speed together.
Claim 18 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 over Reference 1 in view of Reference 2.
Claim Text
(L1) The circulating cableway according to claim 1, wherein: (L2) a cableway drive device for driving the cableway vehicles is provided, the control unit configured to control the cableway drive device in the specified safe operating mode in order to reduce a conveying speed of the cableway vehicles to a specified or specifiable conveying speed.
Analysis
(L1) The complete Reference 1 and Reference 2 combination and analysis of claim 1 are incorporated. (L2) Reference 1's inference processing module 228 commands ski lift motor controller 106 to slow the lift in response to the selected boarding condition (Figs. 1, 5 and 7; claim 8). Its description of Fig. 5 identifies motor-driven bull wheels moving the cable and chairs. Reference 2's chairs 11 are coupled by fixed grips 12 to cable 10, so the cable-speed reduction reduces the vehicle conveying speed. The inherited combined control keeps motor 19 for conveyor belt 16 and time delay relay 27 coordinated with that reduced speed (Reference 2, drawing; claims 4-5).
Motivation
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to retain Reference 1's vehicle-drive slowdown when adding Reference 2's speed-matched boarding belt, because the lower chair speed addresses the detected boarding concern and keeps the chair's arrival coordinated with the slower belt. The fixed-grip chairs follow the motor-driven cable, so coordinated control of the existing drives predictably reduces vehicle conveying speed and belt speed together.
________________________________________
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments concerning the August 31, 2026 amendments have been fully considered. Applicant's distinction of DE 10134180 A1 is persuasive as to the prior ground but does not overcome the present rejection. That publication adjusts a lifting table according to body size; it is not relied upon for passenger-type-triggered reduction of boarding-belt speed and is identified below as art considered but not applied. The amended independent claims are instead addressed by the new combination of Reference 1 and Reference 2. Reference 1 supplies image-based classification of a rider, selection of the below-size rider condition, and an automatic slowdown command. Reference 2 supplies the boarding conveyor belt, its drive, cable-speed input, belt-speed adjustment, and speed-dependent admission timing. Applying Reference 1's passenger-type-triggered slowdown to the integrated Reference 2 loading system causes the boarding belt to operate at the corresponding selected lower speed when the specified safety passenger type is detected. Thus, the current ground does not equate table-height adjustment with the amended belt-speed limitation.
Applicant further argues that Reference 2 synchronizes its conveyor belt to the cable and does not independently reduce belt speed in response to passenger type. That argument does not defeat the proposed combination. Reference 2 is relied upon for the physical belt and its coordinated speed and admission controls, not for passenger classification. Reference 1 supplies the classified safety condition and the slowdown command. When that command reduces cable and chair speed, Reference 2's central control adjusts belt speed to the corresponding reduced speed while retaining the selected belt-to-cable ratio, and its time-delay control adjusts admission timing with cable speed. Claims 1 and 9 require reduction of the conveyor-belt speed to a specified or specifiable speed in the passenger-type-triggered safe operating mode; they do not require the cable speed to remain unchanged or require an isolated belt-only slowdown. The coordinated reduction therefore meets the amended control relationship without attributing an unshown independent passenger-type response to Reference 2.
Applicant's argument concerning the image-recognition limitation and the earlier reliance on DE 10 2014 110 506 A1 has also been considered. That publication is not applied in the present action. Claims 3 and 11 inherit the complete Reference 1 and Reference 2 combination and add Reference 4. As mapped above, Reference 1 expressly uses camera images, image preprocessing, curated normal and abnormal image sequences, model training, and validation in its artificial intelligence engine to recognize the boarding condition. Reference 4 supplies the infrared thermal camera viewing the boarding area. The proposed modification trains and validates Reference 1's recognition model on images from the selected Reference 4 sensor; it does not assume that an unchanged visible-light model will necessarily classify thermal images. The argument directed to the former camera ground therefore does not overcome the current Reference 1, Reference 2, and Reference 4 combination.
Applicant's argument concerning the former exit ground based on CN 203054585 U is likewise persuasive only as to that former ground. That publication is not applied here. Claims 8 and 16 inherit the Reference 1 and Reference 2 passenger classification and coordinated slowdown, then add Reference 5 and Reference 6. Reference 5 supplies a unique vehicle identifier, an occupant-associated record, and position updated from actual cable travel. Reference 6 supplies storage of a passenger's requested low-speed condition at departure and replay of that condition when the corresponding seat reaches the disembarking station, including allowance for deceleration before the exit point. The proposed combination stores the automatically determined safety classification against the identified vehicle and uses its tracked arrival to invoke the inherited safe mode for the same passenger at exit. It does not attribute automatic passenger classification to Reference 6 or the claimed identified-vehicle association to Reference 6 alone. Accordingly, the argument against the former Chinese reference does not overcome the present Reference 1, Reference 2, Reference 5, and Reference 6 grounds.
________________________________________
Claim Objections
Claims 2, 5, 6, 10, 13, and 14 are objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
Claims 2 and 10 require the category-responsive lift-platform height relationship. DE 10134180 A1 was considered for passenger-size-responsive lifting-table and boarding-platform height adjustment, but it does not teach the claimed relationship between a determined safety passenger type and the lift-platform height as recited.
Claims 5, 6, 13, and 14 require at least two different safety passenger types and distinct first and second safe operating modes in their complete inherited combinations. The closest applied and considered publications do not teach or suggest those complete two-type and two-mode relationships. Individual slow requests, child/adult height adjustment, arrival/departure checks, and generic mode changes do not supply the claimed control relationships.
________________________________________
Finality
Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a). 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.
________________________________________
Conclusion
Claims 1, 3, 4, 7-9, 11, 12, and 15-18 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103. Claims 2, 5, 6, 10, 13, and 14 are objected to as being dependent upon rejected base claims but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form to include all limitations of the respective base claim and any intervening claims.
The rejections of claims 1, 3, 4, 8-12, 14, and 15 under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) set forth in the Office action mailed June 5, 2026 are withdrawn in view of the amendments filed August 31, 2026.
________________________________________
Art Considered but Not Applied
DE 10134180 A1 was fully reviewed for passenger-size-responsive lifting-table and boarding-platform height adjustment but is not applied because it adjusts platform height according to body size and does not teach passenger-type-triggered reduction of boarding-belt speed as required by the amended independent claims.
US 7,387,194 B2 was compared for a passenger-conveyor slowdown request, but the applied primary supplies the closer image-based ski-lift safety response without substituting a passive signaling device.
US 2021/0024110 A1 was compared for vehicle identification and station-position monitoring, but its malfunction-control disclosure does not itself establish the required same-passenger safety-type association.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JASON C SMITH whose telephone number is (703)756-4641. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday 8:30 AM - 5:00 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, Joseph Morano can be reached at (571) 272-6684. 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.
/Jason C Smith/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3615
Prosecution Insights