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 .
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
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, 9-11, 14, and 16-18 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a1) as being taught by Marpu et al (PGPUB 2024/0140759).
With respect to claim 1, Marpu teaches a sensor enclosure assembly for a safety net system for an elevator system, the sensor enclosure assembly comprising:
a single enclosure (fig. 2a, 103) disposable in one of an elevator shaft (fig. 2a, 117), an elevator pit (fig. 2a, 270), an entrance area (fig. 6a, 600) for the elevator pit and an elevator pit entrance area of the elevator system;
multiple sensors (paragraph 0067; 220s) mounted orthogonally with respect to one another in the (fig. 3G) single enclosure, each of the multiple sensors being configured to perform sensing and to generate data corresponding to sensing results; and
circuitry disposed (paragraph 0017) in the single enclosure to support performance of the sensing by each of the multiple sensors.
With respect to claim 2, Marpu teaches wherein each of the multiple sensors is a LiDAR sensor (paragraph 0067).
With respect to claim 3, Marpu teaches wherein each of the multiple sensors is a millimeter wave RADAR sensor (paragraph 0008).
With respect to claim 4, Marpu teaches wherein each of the multiple sensors is an RGBD camera (paragraph 0008).
With respect to claim 5, Marpu teaches wherein each of the multiple sensors is one of a LiDAR sensor, a RADAR sensor or a camera (paragraph 0008).
With respect to claim 6, Marpu teaches wherein the single enclosure comprises a field-of-view (FOV) alignment feature for adjusting an FOV for each of the multiple sensors (paragraph 0067).
With respect to claim 7, Marpu teaches wherein the multiple sensors comprise two or more sensors mounted orthogonally with respect to one another (fig. 3G).
With respect to claim 9, Marpu teaches a safety net system for an elevator system comprising an elevator shaft, an elevator pit and an elevator pit entrance area, the safety net system comprising:
a single enclosure (fig. 2a, 103) disposable in one of the elevator shaft (fig. 2a, 117), the elevator pit (fig. 2a, 270) and the elevator pit entrance area (fig. 6a, 600);
multiple sensors (paragraph 0067; 220s) mounted orthogonally with respect to one another in the single enclosure, each of the multiple sensors being configured to perform sensing and to generate data corresponding to sensing results;
circuitry disposed (paragraph 0017) in the single enclosure to support performance of the sensing by each of the multiple sensors; and
a processor (paragraph 0017) coupled to each of the multiple sensors and configured to analyze whether the data indicates a person entering or occupying the one of the elevator shaft, the elevator pit and the elevator pit entrance area and to take an action based on analysis results.
With respect to claim 10, Marpu teaches wherein each of the multiple sensors is one of a LiDAR sensor, a RADAR sensor or a camera (paragraph 0008).
With respect to claim 11, Marpu teaches wherein the single enclosure comprises a field-of-view (FOV) alignment feature for adjusting an FOV for each of the multiple sensors (paragraph 0067).
With respect to claim 14, Marpu teaches wherein: each of the multiple sensors is configured to generate the data as point cloud data (230) from one or more sensing operations, and
the processor (paragraph 0017) is configured to analyze the point cloud data (paragraph 0005) from the one or more sensing operations, various learned backgrounds, external switch information, car information, timing information and car location and movement information (paragraph 0082) and to determine whether the point cloud data from the one or more sensing operations is indicative of the person entering (paragraph 0017) or occupying the one of the elevator shaft, the elevator pit and the elevator pit entrance area.
With respect to claim 16, Marpu teaches a safety net system for an elevator system comprising an elevator car which is movable in an elevator shaft, the safety net system comprising:
a single enclosure (fig. 4a, 115 car controller) disposed at a top of the elevator car (fig. 2a, 103);
multiple sensors (paragraph 0067; 220s) mounted orthogonally with respect to (fig. 3G) one another in the single enclosure, each of the multiple sensors being configured to perform sensing and to generate data corresponding to sensing results;
circuitry disposed (paragraph 0017) in the single enclosure to support performance of the sensing by each of the multiple sensors; and
a processor (paragraph 0064) coupled to each of the multiple sensors and configured to analyze whether the data indicates a person being present at the top of the elevator car or extending a portion of their body or tools outside of a projection of the elevator car and to take an action based on analysis results.
With respect to claim 17, Marpu teaches wherein each of the multiple sensors is one of a LiDAR sensor, a RADAR sensor or a camera (paragraph 0008).
With respect to claim 18, Marpu teaches wherein the single enclosure comprises a field-of-view (FOV) alignment feature for adjusting an FOV for each of the multiple sensors (paragraph 0067).
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) 8, 12, 13, 15, 19 and 20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Marpu et al (PGPUB 2024/0140759).
With respect to claim 8, Marpu does not teach wherein the circuitry comprises a power supply, a printed circuit board (PCB), multiple connections and cabling shared among each of the multiple sensors. It would have been an obvious matter of design choice to have sensor circuit be on PCB with power, since applicant has not disclosed that use of PCB solves any stated problem or is for any particular purpose.
With respect to claim 12, Marpu does not teach wherein: the single enclosure is provided as two single enclosures disposed at opposite corners of the one of the elevator shaft, the elevator pit and the elevator pit entrance area, and, for each of the two single enclosures, the multiple sensors comprise two or more sensors mounted orthogonally with respect to one another.
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was made to have two enclosure on opposite corners, since it has been held that rearranging parts of an invention involves only routine skill in the art. In re Japikse, 86 USPQ 70.
With respect to claim 13, Marpu does not teach wherein the circuitry comprises a power supply, a printed circuit board (PCB), multiple connections and cabling shared among each of the multiple sensors. It would have been an obvious matter of design choice to have sensor circuit be on PCB with power, since applicant has not disclosed that use of PCB solves any stated problem or is for any particular purpose.
With respect to claim 15, Marpu does not explicitly teach wherein the elevator shaft is a non-rectangular elevator shaft, the elevator pit is a non-rectangular elevator pit and the elevator pit entrance area is a non-rectangular elevator pit entrance area. It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was made to shape of shaft to be non-rectangle since it was known in the art that, providing cut out space as safety feature.
With respect to claim 19, Marpu does not teach wherein the single enclosure is provided as two single enclosures at opposite corners at the top of the elevator car.
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was made to have two enclosure on opposite corners, since it has been held that rearranging parts of an invention involves only routine skill in the art. In re Japikse, 86 USPQ 70.
With respect to claim 20, Marpu teaches each of the multiple sensors is configured to generate the data as point cloud data (230) from one or more sensing operations, and
the processor is (paragraph 0017) configured to analyze the point cloud data (paragraph 0005) from the one or more sensing operations, various learned backgrounds, external switch information, car information, timing information and car location and movement information (paragraph 0082) and to determine whether the point cloud data from the one or more sensing operations is indicative (paragraph 0017) of the person being present at the top of the elevator car or extending the portion of their body or tools outside of a projection of the elevator car.
Marpu does not teach wherein: the circuitry comprises a power supply, a printed circuit board (PCB), multiple connections and cabling shared among each of the multiple sensors.
It would have been an obvious matter of design choice to have sensor circuit be on PCB with power, since applicant has not disclosed that use of PCB solves any stated problem or is for any particular purpose.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ERICK DAVID GLASS whose telephone number is (571)272-8395. The examiner can normally be reached Mon-Fri_8-5pm.
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, Eduardo Colon-Santana can be reached at 571-272-2060. 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.
/ERICK D GLASS/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2837
Prosecution Insights