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 .
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and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114.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 12/12/2025 has been entered.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 12/12/2025 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
With regards to applicant’s argument that the Sinha et al and Razak et al references do not disclose the amendment that calls for automatically provide a user of the multiple users with building management system information in response to identifying the user via geolocation, the examiner disagrees. Sinha et al discloses a building management system is able to determine the location of a user based on trilateration (Sinha et al, paras 0177-0178: trilateration is fundamental, widely used method of geolocation); where building management system responds to user prompts via the chatbot chat interface (Sinha et al, paras 0301, 0304), and as such can locate a user within the building in the case of an emergency.
Double Patenting
The nonstatutory double patenting rejection is based on a judicially created doctrine grounded in public policy (a policy reflected in the statute) so as to prevent the unjustified or improper timewise extension of the “right to exclude” granted by a patent and to prevent possible harassment by multiple assignees. A nonstatutory double patenting rejection is appropriate where the conflicting claims are not identical, but at least one examined application claim is not patentably distinct from the reference claim(s) because the examined application claim is either anticipated by, or would have been obvious over, the reference claim(s). See, e.g., In re Berg, 140 F.3d 1428, 46 USPQ2d 1226 (Fed. Cir. 1998); In re Goodman, 11 F.3d 1046, 29 USPQ2d 2010 (Fed. Cir. 1993); In re Longi, 759 F.2d 887, 225 USPQ 645 (Fed. Cir. 1985); In re Van Ornum, 686 F.2d 937, 214 USPQ 761 (CCPA 1982); In re Vogel, 422 F.2d 438, 164 USPQ 619 (CCPA 1970); In re Thorington, 418 F.2d 528, 163 USPQ 644 (CCPA 1969).
A timely filed terminal disclaimer in compliance with 37 CFR 1.321(c) or 1.321(d) may be used to overcome an actual or provisional rejection based on nonstatutory double patenting provided the reference application or patent either is shown to be commonly owned with the examined application, or claims an invention made as a result of activities undertaken within the scope of a joint research agreement. See MPEP § 717.02 for applications subject to examination under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA as explained in MPEP § 2159. See MPEP § 2146 et seq. for applications not subject to examination under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA . A terminal disclaimer must be signed in compliance with 37 CFR 1.321(b).
The filing of a terminal disclaimer by itself is not a complete reply to a nonstatutory double patenting (NSDP) rejection. A complete reply requires that the terminal disclaimer be accompanied by a reply requesting reconsideration of the prior Office action. Even where the NSDP rejection is provisional the reply must be complete. See MPEP § 804, subsection I.B.1. For a reply to a non-final Office action, see 37 CFR 1.111(a). For a reply to final Office action, see 37 CFR 1.113(c). A request for reconsideration while not provided for in 37 CFR 1.113(c) may be filed after final for consideration. See MPEP §§ 706.07(e) and 714.13.
The USPTO Internet website contains terminal disclaimer forms which may be used. Please visit www.uspto.gov/patent/patents-forms. The actual filing date of the application in which the form is filed determines what form (e.g., PTO/SB/25, PTO/SB/26, PTO/AIA /25, or PTO/AIA /26) should be used. A web-based eTerminal Disclaimer may be filled out completely online using web-screens. An eTerminal Disclaimer that meets all requirements is auto-processed and approved immediately upon submission. For more information about eTerminal Disclaimers, refer to www.uspto.gov/patents/apply/applying-online/eterminal-disclaimer.
Claim 1 of 18/497,780
A system for communicating building management system information with users, comprising: a chat-based engine comprising: a natural language processor configured to communicate with multiple users; a knowledge module connected to the natural language processor; a cognitive analytics module connected to the natural language processor, and wherein the chat-based engine is configured to automatically provide a user of the multiple users with building management system information in response to identifying the user via geolocation; and communicate the building management system information to the multiple users in response to natural language prompts from one or more of the multiple users.
Claim 17 of 18/497,780
A software guided mechanism for performing automatic repetitive tasks associated with a building management system, comprising: a framework configured to communicate with one or more users over one or more channels via a cloud platform; wherein the framework comprises: a natural language processor configured to connect to the cloud platform; a knowledge storage module connected to the natural language processor; and a cognitive analytics processor connected to the natural language processor; a web services module connected to the framework and the building management system, and wherein the framework is configured to communicate, via a chat-based engine, with a plurality of users via a chat-based engine, where the cat-based engine is configured to automatically provide a user of the plurality of users with building management system information in response to identifying the user via geolocation.
Claim 1 of 11458622
A software guided robot (bot) mechanism for performing automatic repetitive tasks, comprising: one or more channels having an input for users or building stakeholders; a cloud platform connected to the one or more channels; a bot framework connected to the cloud platform; a web services module connected to the bot framework; and one or more drivers connected to the web services module; and wherein the one or more channels, the bot framework, the web services module and the drivers are electronic devices that effect their respective functions with a level of software managed and manipulated by hardware of the electronic devices according to their respective algorithms.
Claim 8 of 18/497,780
A system of natural language conversation comprising: a framework configured to communicate with one or more users over one or more channels; wherein the framework comprises: a natural language processor configured to connect to at least one of the one or more channels; a knowledge module connected to the natural language processor; and a cognitive analytics module connected to the natural language processor; and a chat-based engine configured to automatically provide a user of the one or more users with building management system information in response to identifying the user via geolocation.
Claim 13 of 11458622
A system of natural language conversation comprising: one or more channels; and a bot framework; and wherein the bot framework comprises: a natural language processor connected to at least one of the one or more channels; a knowledge module connected to the natural language processor; a cognitive analytics module connected to the natural language processor; and a web services module connected to the bot framework.
Claims 1, 8, 17 of application number 18/497,780 (hereinafter referred to as ‘780) are rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claims 1 & 13 of U.S. Patent No. 11458622 (hereinafter referred to as ‘622), in view of Sinha et al, US Patent Pub. 20190145648 A.
Although ‘622 claims 1 & 13 anticipate the invention of ‘780 claims 1, 8, 17 but fails to disclose the chat-based engine automatically provide a user of the multiple users with building management system information in response to identifying the user via geolocation. Sinha et al discloses a building management system is able to determine the location of a user based on trilateration (Sinha et al, paras 0177-0178: trilateration is fundamental, widely used method of geolocation); where building management system responds to user prompts via the chatbot chat interface (Sinha et al, paras 0301, 0304), and as such can locate a user within the building in the case of an emergency. It would have been obvious to modify ‘622 claims 1 & 13 such that they include the ability to use chat bots to control the building management system to locate a user within the building via trilateration as taught in Sinha et al for the purpose of being able to locate a user within the building in cases of building emergencies.
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.
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 1, 3-18 & 20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Sinha et al, US Patent Pub. 20190145648 A1, in view of Razak et al, US Patent Pub. 20190355240 A1.
Re Claim 1, Sinha et al discloses a system for communicating building management system information with users (para 0271: user requests information includes information from the building management system; para 0183: user device can get access to information from building management system based on the user device having permission to access building management system information; para 0167; para 0301: building management could respond to user prompt(i.e. request of information based on status of user device location e.g. emergency alert prompt) via natural language processing chatbot (natural language processing includes cognitive analytics); wherein multiple user devices can have access to the building management system via at least one communication channel; para 0304: information from building management system is sent to the user device 4012 based on prompt from the user device 4012 (i.e. emergency prompts)), comprising: a chat-based engine comprising: a natural language processor configured to communicate with multiple users (para 0271: user requests information includes information from the building management system; para 0183: user device can get access to information from building management system based on the user device having permission to access building management system information; para 0167; para 0301: building management could respond to user prompt(i.e. request of information based on status of user device location e.g. emergency alert prompt) via natural language processing chatbot (natural language processing includes cognitive analytics); wherein multiple user devices can have access to the building management system via at least one communication channel; para 0304: information from building management system is sent to the user device 4012 based on prompt from the user device 4012 (i.e. emergency prompts)); a cognitive analytics module connected to the natural language processor (para 0271: user requests information includes information from the building management system; para 0183: user device can get access to information from building management system based on the user device having permission to access building management system information; para 0167; para 0301: building management could respond to user prompt(i.e. request of information based on status of user device location e.g. emergency alert prompt) via natural language processing chatbot (natural language processing includes cognitive analytics); wherein multiple user devices can have access to the building management system via at least one communication channel; para 0304: information from building management system is sent to the user device 4012 based on prompt from the user device 4012 (i.e. emergency prompts)), and wherein the chat-based engine is configured to automatically provide a user of the multiple users with building management system information in response to identifying the user via geolocation (paras 0177-0178: building management system is able to determine the location of a user based on trilateration, where trilateration is fundamental, widely used method of geolocation; where building management system responds to user prompts via the chatbot chat interface (paras 0301, 0304), and as such can locate a user within the building in the case of an emergency); and communicate building management system information to the multiple users in response to natural language prompts from one or more of the multiple users (para 0271: user requests information includes information from the building management system; para 0183: user device can get access to information from building management system based on the user device having permission to access building management system information; para 0167; para 0301: building management could respond to user prompt(i.e. request of information based on status of user device location e.g. emergency alert prompt) via natural language processing chatbot (natural language processing includes cognitive analytics); wherein multiple user devices can have access to the building management system via at least one communication channel; para 0304: information from building management system is sent to the user device 4012 based on prompt from the user device 4012 (i.e. emergency prompts)); but fails to explicitly disclose a knowledge module connected to the natural language processor. However, Razak et al is used as a teaching reference to emphasize the utilization of a natural language processor that discloses a system where a user device can communicate with a building management system via a natural language processor user interface (Razak et al, paras 0098, 0105: natural language processing includes cognitive analytics). It would have been obvious to modify the chatbot of Sinha et al to include natural language processing as taught in Razak et al for the purpose of making the system more intuitive. Furthermore, it would be obvious to incorporate a knowledge module since natural language processing often involves the use of knowledge modules for the purpose of improving performance on tasks like question answering.
Re Claim 3, the combined teachings of Sinha et al and Razak et al disclose the system of claim 1, wherein the chat-based engine is configured to automatically provide a user with building management system information based on a scheduled notification time (Sinha et al, paras 0303, 0330-0331: calendar).
Re Claim 4, the combined teachings of Sinha et al and Razak et al disclose the system of claim 1, wherein the chat-based engine is configured to receive a natural language response from one or more of the multiple users and provide a reply to the natural language response (Sinha et al, para 0271: user requests information includes information from the building management system; para 0183: user device can get access to information from building management system based on the user device having permission to access building management system information; para 0167; para 0301: building management could respond to user prompt(i.e. request of information based on status of user device location e.g. emergency alert prompt) via natural language processing chatbot (natural language processing includes cognitive analytics); wherein multiple user devices can have access to the building management system via at least one communication channel; para 0304: information from building management system is sent to the user device 4012 based on prompt from the user device 4012 (i.e. emergency prompts)).
Re Claim 5, the combined teachings of Sinha et al and Razak et al disclose the system of claim 4, wherein the reply includes trends in data (Sinha et al para 0489: trending data i.e. trending posts).
Re Claim 6, the combined teachings of Sinha et al and Razak et al disclose the system of claim 1, wherein the chat-based engine is configured to communicate with the multiple users over one or more channels (Sinha et al, para 0271: user requests information includes information from the building management system; para 0183: user device can get access to information from building management system based on the user device having permission to access building management system information; para 0167; para 0301: building management could respond to user prompt(i.e. request of information based on status of user device location e.g. emergency alert prompt) via natural language processing chatbot (natural language processing includes cognitive analytics); wherein multiple user devices can have access to the building management system via at least one communication channel; para 0304: information from building management system is sent to the user device 4012 based on prompt from the user device 4012 (i.e. emergency prompts)).
Re Claim 7, the combined teachings of Sinha et al and Razak et al disclose the system of claim 1, wherein the chat-based engine is configured to communicate with a building management system via a web services module, wherein the building management system is associated with the building management system information (Sinha et al, paras 0154-0155: web-based web applications for the building management system).
Claim 8 has been analyzed and rejected according to claim 1.
Claims 9-10 have been analyzed and rejected according to claim 7.
Re Claim 11, the combined teachings of Sinha et al and Razak et al disclose the system of claim 9, wherein the web services module is connected to one or more drivers (Sinha et al, paras 0298, 0307: control of the building management systems is interpreted as a driver).
Re Claim 12, the combined teachings of Sinha et al and Razak et al disclose the system of claim 11, wherein the one or more drivers are connected to a building management system (Sinha et al, paras 0298, 0307: control of the building management systems via network is interpreted as a driver).
Re Claim 13, the combined teachings of Sinha et al and Razak et al disclose the system of claim 11, wherein: the one or more drivers are connected to a network having a protocol (Sinha et al, paras 0298, 0307: control of the building management systems via network is interpreted as a driver; wherein the control involves control of a thermostat among a plurality of other building components, where temperature control is selected from the Markush language); and the network is connected to one or more devices selected from a group comprising room temperature controls, lighting controls, curtain controls, door controls, and vent controls (Sinha et al, paras 0298, 0307: control of the building management systems via network is interpreted as a driver; wherein the control involves control of a thermostat among a plurality of other building components, where temperature control is selected from the Markush language).
Claim 14 has been analyzed and rejected according to claim 1.
Re Claim 15, the combined teachings of Sinha et al and Razak et al disclose the system of claim 9, wherein the framework is configured to communicate with the one or more users over the one or more channels via a cloud platform (Sinha et al, paras 0107, 0303: cloud).
Claim 16 has been analyzed and rejected according to claims 4 & 6.
Claim 17 has been analyzed and rejected according to claims 1, 6-7, 15.
Re Claim 18, the combined teachings of Sinha et al and Razak et al disclose the mechanism of claim 17, wherein the framework and the web services module are electronic devices that effect their respective functions with a level of software managed and manipulated by hardware of the electronic devices according to their respective algorithms (Sinha et al, paras 0298, 0307: control of the building management systems via network is interpreted as a driver).
Re Claim 20, the combined teachings of Sinha et al and Razak et al disclose the mechanism of claim 17, wherein: the web services module is connected to one or more drivers (Sinha et al, paras 0298, 0307: control of the building management systems via network (para 0297: BACnet) is interpreted as a driver; paras 0154-0155: web-based web applications for the building management system); the one or more drivers are connected to a network; and the network uses a BACnet protocol (Sinha et al, paras 0298, 0307: control of the building management systems via network (para 0297: BACnet) is interpreted as a driver; paras 0154-0155: web-based web applications for the building management system).
Contact
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to GEORGE C MONIKANG whose telephone number is (571)270-1190. The examiner can normally be reached Mon. - Fri., 9AM-5PM, ALT. Fridays off.
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, Carolyn R Edwards can be reached at 571-270-7136. 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.
/GEORGE C MONIKANG/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2692 2/6/2026