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 .
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to claim(s) 1-19 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.
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
Claim(s) 1-11, 14-17, 19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Baker (2024/0212407) in view of Zavesky (2019/0158492).
Regarding claim 1, Baker discloses a system to keep track of location of a person in or at a facility (abstract) comprising a server (management system 308 and administrative center 307) configured to communicate with at least one mobile device associated with the person (badge 1000) and at least one short-range radio transceiver located in the facility (para 41, use of low power Bluetooth or WIFI), the mobile device being configured to transmit its geolocation to the server (para 40, communication data used to find position and para 41 using wifi/bluetooth), configured to communicate with the short-range radio transceiver(40-42), and configured to perform biometric identification (para 190), wherein the server is configured to locate the person in the facility (Figures 4-6) based on the geolocation, the biometric information, and location of the short-range radio transceiver in communication with the mobile device (para 72-86, para 165-177). Baker discloses that the location is based on geolocation and short-range communications (para 246 – note that Bluetooth and cellular/gps are used to locate the patient) but doesn’t disclose the use of biometric information to locate a device.
However, Zavesky teaches the use of biometric information to locate a user (para 34 – detecting location based on biometric detection and the use of short-range radio receivers as well). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to include biometric location techniques in order to allow authorized devices to be monitored for locations.
Regarding claim 2, Baker discloses at least one database server configured to record information acquired from the mobile device and the short-range transceiver (server 1102 and data store 1104).
Regarding claims 3-4, Baker discloses wherein the mobile device is a laptop computer (105) or a smart phone (para 96 – badge can be a cellular data communications device) and that the biometric information is performed with facial, voice, or fingerprint recognition (para 190, fingerprint, vocal, or facial topography).
Regarding claims 5-6, Baker discloses the geolocation is acquired from GPS (para 165, 184 – use of GPS) and that the server transmits instructions to the mobile device to generate an audio signal indication location in the facility para 72-74, alerting badges based on proximity also para 82, alerting with buzz/flash).
Regarding claims 7-8, Baker discloses the use of temperature or humidity information to indicate fire based on the observed temperature or humidity (para 85-86, use of sensors to indicate fire) and the server configured to send communication to the mobile device while in range of the short-range transceiver (para 77-82, use of alerts/communications to the relevant mobile devices within range of a situation).
Regarding claim 9, Baker discloses a system to keep track of location of a person in or at a facility (abstract) comprising a server (management system 308 and administrative center 307) configured to communicate with at least one mobile device associated with the person (badge 1000) and at least one short-range radio transceiver located in the facility (para 41, use of low power Bluetooth or WIFI), the mobile device being configured to transmit its geolocation to the server (para 37-43 geolocation/location finding), configured to communicate with the short-range radio transceiver(40-42), and configured to perform biometric identification (para 190), wherein the server is configured to locate the person in the facility (Figures 4-6) based on the geolocation, the biometric information, and location of the short-range radio transceiver in communication with the mobile device (para 72-86, para 165-177). Baker discloses receiving a signal indicating geolocation of the device (para 37, 40-42), receiving a signal by the server indicating that the mobile device has communicated with the short-range transceiver (para 41-42). Baker discloses receiving temporally spaced second messages indicated that the mobile device has communicated with short-range transceivers (para 41- signals are sent in temporally spaced intervals), receiving confirmation of biometric identification from mobile devices (para 190- use of biometrics to confirm identify), based on the first and second signals, determine the location of the mobile device,(para 34 – triangulation based on received data and par72-7) and causing recording of the determined locations of the mobile device in a database (use of database store 1104 for storage of heuristics and monitoring of data, para 164, 167) Baker discloses that the location is based on geolocation and short-range communications (para 246 – note that Bluetooth and cellular/gps are used to locate the patient) but doesn’t disclose the use of biometric information to locate a device.
However, Zavesky teaches the use of biometric information to locate a user (para 34 – detecting location based on biometric detection and the use of short-range radio receivers as well). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to include biometric location techniques in order to allow authorized devices to be monitored for locations.
Regarding claims 10 and 14, Baker discloses wherein the server receives the first and second signals from the mobile device or the short-range transceiver (para 34-35, 37-41). Baker discloses that the first message is an initial entry point of a location and the second signal and be a person’s exit point from the location (para 45, 47, 51-52)
Regarding claim 11, the first and second signals include respective date and time information (para 67 and para 143, tracking of date and time of alert).
Regarding claims 15-16, Baker discloses the location is a room within a building (patient room para 62) or that the building is a multi-floor building (para 74 and Figure 5, para 76-77).
Regarding claims 17 and 19, Baker discloses the system determines location of the mobile device only within the facility (beacons only track within the facility, para 76-78), wherein the system comprises additional short-range transceivers within the facility and the mobile device is configured to communicate with the additional transceivers (para 40, Figure 5, use of multiple beacons that are short-range/Bluetooth to detect location, etc., para 124-126).
.
Claim(s) 12-13, 18 are is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Baker and Zaveksy as applied to claim 9 above and further in view of Elias (2018/0014150)..
Regarding claims 12-13, the combination of Baker and Zavesky discloses the transmission of second messages according to a temporal schedule (para 41) and the use of biometric information received by a server (para 190) but does not disclose the use of randomly spaced communications.
However, Elias teaches in an analogous art, a mobile device which includes biometric identification (abstract) in which the biometric information can be temporally spaced randomly (para 33, 48, 52, 67 – not on a predetermined schedule, only based on location and or suspicious activities, which are not planned temporally). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to include random spaced checks in order to provide accurate location data and prevent unauthorized access.
Regarding claim 18, the combination of Baker and Zavesky discloses the first and second signals are sent periodically (on a time based schedule, para 41) but fails to disclose the biometric identification happening randomly. However, Elias teaches in an analogous art, a mobile device which includes biometric identification (abstract) in which the biometric information can be generated randomly (para 33, 48, 52, 67 – not on a predetermined schedule, only based on location and or suspicious activities, which are not planned or scheduled). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to include random spaced checks in order to provide accurate location data and prevent unauthorized access.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Zebley (2019/0188508) discloses biometric verification to access a location.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to WILLIAM GEORGE TROST IV whose telephone number is (571)272-7872. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Thursday 7a-4p, Fridays 7a-2p.
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, Charles Appiah can be reached at 571-272-7904. 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.
WILLIAM GEORGE TROST IV
Primary Patent Examiner
Art Unit 2641
/WILLIAM G TROST IV/Primary Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2641
Prosecution Insights