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 .
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement(s) (IDS) submitted on 3-5-2024 and 6-5-2024 are in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statement(s) are acknowledged by the examiner.
Claim Objections
Claim 1 is objected to because of the following informalities: there should be a ‘;’ at the end of the following claim limitations instead of a ‘,’:
‘a call request,’ in line 5;
‘routing data,’ in line 6; and
‘receivers,’ in line 9. Appropriate correction is required.
Claim 19 is objected to because of the following informalities: the claim limitations: ‘the video data depicts the caller at least one of’ does not make sense. Appropriate correction is required.
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.
Claim(s) 1, 7, 10, 13-18, and 21 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by EP 3039659 by Scalisi et al, hereinafter Scalisi (International Publication: WO 2015/031812 cited as prior art in IDS filed by Applicant on 6-5-2024).
Regarding claim 1, Scalisi discloses an apparatus (i.e. computers or computer processors or machines) (paragraph: 0278), comprising:
a processor (paragraph: 0278); and
a memory operably coupled to the processor, the memory storing instructions to cause
the processor to (paragraph: 0278):
receive, from an intercom system (Fig. 1, 200; i.e. communication system including a security system Fig, 1, 202 such as a doorbell) (paragraph: 0031), a call request (i.e. talking with a visitor; a doorbell communication request) (paragraphs: 0010, 0030),
receive, in response to the call request, routing data (i.e. assigning a first priority to a first remote computing device and sending the doorbell communication request to the first remote computing device due to the first priority) (paragraph: 0010),
modify (i.e. privileges set by an administrator), based on the routing data, a first call routing sequence (i.e. a first user with a first remote computing device and a first priority) associated with a first set of receivers (i.e. a first user with a first remote computing device and other recipients) to produce a second call routing sequence (i.e. a second user with a second remote computing device and a second priority) associated with a second set of receivers (i.e. a second user with a second remote computing device and other recipients) (paragraphs: 0111, 0112), and
cause, in response to the call request and based on the second call routing
sequence, a message (i.e. sending the communication request) to be sent to a compute device (i.e. a second remote computing device) associated with a receiver (i.e. a second user) from the second set of receivers (paragraphs: 0111, 0112).
Regarding claim 7, Scalisi discloses the apparatus of claim 1, wherein:
the routing data includes presence data (i.e. priority of second user; allowed to be notified of communication request by administrator) associated with the receiver; and the instructions to cause the processor to modify the first call routing sequence include
instructions to one of add a receiver identifier associated with the receiver to the first call
routing sequence (i.e. simultaneously notifying) or increase a priority of the receiver identifier in the first call routing sequence, based on the presence data (paragraphs: 0110-0112).
Regarding claim 10, Scalisi discloses the apparatus of claim 1, wherein: the routing data includes schedule data (i.e. simultaneously notifying); and the instructions to cause the processor to modify the first call routing sequence include instructions to replace, based on the schedule data, the first call routing sequence with the second call routing sequence selected from a plurality of predefined call routing sequences (i.e. managed by the administrator) that includes the first call routing sequence and the second call routing sequence (paragraphs: 0110-0112).
Regarding claim 13, Scalisi discloses the apparatus of claim 1, wherein: the routing data includes status data (i.e. priority of second user; allowed to be notified of communication request by administrator) associated with the compute device; and the instructions to cause the processor to modify the first call routing sequence include instructions to, based on the status data, one of add a receiver identifier associated with the receiver to the first call routing sequence (i.e. simultaneously notifying) or increase a priority of the receiver identifier in the first call routing sequence (paragraphs: 0110-0112).
Regarding claim 14, Scalisi discloses the apparatus of claim 1, wherein the message is associated with at least one of Short Message Service (SMS), a telephone call, an email, or a mobile push notification (paragraphs: 0090-0092, 0110-0112).
Regarding claim 15, Scalisi discloses a non-transitory, processor-readable medium (i.e. computers or computer processors or machines) (paragraph: 0278) storing instructions that, when executed by a processor (paragraph: 0278) cause the processor to (paragraph: 0278):
receive a call request associated with a caller (i.e. talking with a visitor; a doorbell communication request) (paragraphs: 0010, 0030-0031);
generate a receiver identifier (i.e. priority; paragraph: 0111) based on at least one of (1) badge event data (i.e. time of day, user location, facial recognition or non-recognition of visitors, and/or number of recent visitors; user specified conditions) associated with a receiver (i.e. a user) (paragraphs: 0087, 0278)
or (2) video data (i.e. facial recognition or non-recognition of visitors, and/or number of recent visitors; user specified conditions) associated with the caller (paragraph: 0235)
generate a modified (i.e. privileges set by an administrator) call routing sequence (i.e. a second user with a second remote computing device and a second priority)
based on the receiver identifier and a predefined call routing sequence (i.e. a first user with a first remote computing device and a first priority) that is different from the modified call routing sequence, the modified call routing sequence including the receiver identifier (i.e. a second user with a second remote computing device and a second priority),
and cause a message (i.e. sending the communication request) to be sent to a compute device (i.e. a second remote computing device) associated with the receiver (i.e. a second user) based on the modified call routing sequence (paragraphs: 0111, 0112).
Regarding claim 16, the non-transitory, processor-readable medium of claim 15, wherein Scalisi discloses the instructions to generate the receiver identifier include instructions to generate the receiver identifier based on a predefined schedule of receiver availability (paragraphs: 0110, 0112).
Regarding claim 17, the non-transitory, processor-readable medium of claim 15, wherein Scalisi discloses the instructions to cause the message to be sent include instructions to cause the message to be sent to at least two compute devices associated with at least receivers (i.e. a second user with a second remote computing device and other recipients) (paragraphs: 0111, 0112) identified by the modified call routing sequence.
Regarding claim 18, the non-transitory, processor-readable medium of claim 17, Scalisi further storing instructions to cause the processor to delete (i.e. by administrator access) at least one receiver identifier from at least one of the predefined call routing sequence or the modified call routing sequence based on at least one of the badge event data or status data (i.e. no response) (paragraph: 0110, 0111).
Regarding claim 21, Scalisi discloses an apparatus (i.e. computers or computer processors or machines) (paragraph: 0278), comprising:
a processor (paragraph: 0278); and
a memory operably coupled to the processor, the memory storing instructions to cause
the processor to (paragraph: 0278):
receive a call request (i.e. talking with a visitor; a doorbell communication request) (paragraphs: 0010, 0030) via an intercom (Fig. 1, 200; i.e. communication system including a security system Fig, 1, 202 such as a doorbell) (paragraph: 0031) operably coupled to the processor;
receive at least one of (1) badge event data (i.e. time of day, user location, facial recognition or non-recognition of visitors, and/or number of recent visitors; user specified conditions) via an access control device (paragraphs: 0087, 0278)
operably coupled to the processor, or (2) video data (i.e. facial recognition or non-recognition of visitors, and/or number of recent visitors; user specified conditions) via a camera (paragraph: 0235) operably coupled to the processor, the intercom, the access control device,
and the camera being co-located at an ingress location (paragraphs: 0235, 0236); and
cause display, via a graphical user interface (i.e. user interface; Fig. 1, 240) (paragraphs: 0037, 0042-0044) operably coupled to the processor,
of a depiction of a modified (i.e. privileges set by an administrator) call routing sequence (i.e. a second user with a second remote computing device and a second priority) that is generated based on a predefined call routing sequence (i.e. a first user with a first remote computing device and a first priority) and the at least one of the badge event data or the video data (paragraphs: 0111-0114).
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.
Claim(s) 19 and 20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Scalisi as applied to claim 15 above and in further view of U.S. Pat. Appl. Publ. No. 2020/0349786 by Ho et al, hereinafter Ho.
Regarding claim 19, Scalisi teaches the non-transitory, processor-readable medium of claim 15, but fails to explicitly teach such a non-
transitory, processor-readable medium wherein: the video data depicts the caller at least one of (1) wearing a uniform or (2) in possession
of a package; and the instructions to generate the receiver identifier include instructions to detect, using a computer vision model and based on the video data, at least one of the uniform or the package.
However, Ho teaches such a non-transitory, processor-readable
medium wherein: the video data depicts the caller at least one of (1) wearing a uniform or (2) in possession of a package (paragraph: 0368); and the instructions to generate the receiver identifier include instructions to detect, using a computer vision model and based on the video
data, at least one of the uniform or the package (paragraph:0368).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to combine the video intercom system of Scalisi with the support for detecting a uniform of Ho, because such systems and methods allow for modifying call routing based on the recognition of a delivery person's uniform. Furthermore, both Scalisi and Ho are directed to systems and methods for video intercoms.
Regarding claim 20, Scalisi teaches the non-transitory, processor-readable medium of claim 15, but fails to explicitly teach such a non-transitory, processor-readable medium wherein the instructions to generate the receiver identifier include instructions to generate the
receiver identifier based on historical event data associated with the caller.
However, Ho teaches such a non-transitory, processor-readable medium wherein the instructions to generate the receiver identifier include instructions to generate the receiver identifier based on historical event data associated with the caller ("The behavior analysis module 2215 can use data from the identity store 2210 to track behaviors of a person in proximity to the locking device. Identity data in the identity store 2210 can be used to identify a reason for a particular person to be near the locking device. If the locking device is positioned on an exterior door of a house or apartment, the behavior analysis module 2215 can identify a person as a resident of the house or apartment based on when and how frequently the locking device detects the person. For example, the behavior analysis module 2215 can determine a person is a resident based on detecting that the person is in proximity to the locking device at an above-threshold frequency (e.g., at least once per day) and/or at particular times of day
(e.g., several hours at night). The behavior analysis module 2215 can identify that a person is a neighbor to the house or apartment where the locking device is located, based on how frequently the person is in proximity to the locking device, based on the person at certain times
being located in proximity to the locking device without entries or without frequent entries to the house or apartment,"; paragraph: 0372).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to combine the video intercom system of Scalisi with the support for historical event data of Ho, because such systems and methods allow for modifying call routing based on prior behavior of a visitor. Furthermore, both Scalisi and Ho are directed to systems and methods for video intercoms.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 2-6, 8, 9, 11, and 12 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.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. See PTO-892 Form.
Any response to this action should be mailed to:
Commissioner for Patents
P.O. Box 1450
Alexandria, VA 22313-1450
Or faxed to:
(571) 273-8300 (for formal communications intended for entry)
Or call:
(571) 272-2600 (for customer service assistance)
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to LISA HASHEM whose telephone number is 571-272-7542. The examiner can normally be reached on Monday and Thursday, 10 a.m. to 7 p.m. EST.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Carolyn Edwards can be reached on 571-270-7136.
Information regarding the status of an application may be obtained from Patent Center. Status information for published applications may be obtained from Patent Center. Status information for unpublished applications is available through Patent Center for authorized users only. Should you have questions about access to Patent Center, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free).
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) Form at https://www.uspto.gov/patents/uspto-automated- interview-request-air-form.
/LISA HASHEM/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2692
Prosecution Insights