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 .
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to claim(s) 1-6, 9-18, 21-26 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.
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.
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.
Claim(s) 1, 6, 15, 18 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Porter (US 2005/0048945 A1) in view of Penix et al. (US 2015/0223271 A1, “Penix”).
As to claims 1, 15, Porter discloses an emergency telephone, comprising:
a speaker (mobile phone inherently includes a speaker, para. 0010, for two-way conversation, para. 0030);
a microphone (transmitting unit 12 include a microphone 22, para. 0010, 0025);
an activation mechanism configured to be placed in at least a first state and a second state (on/off switch 24 of the transmitting unit, para. 0010, 0025);
a memory storing a plurality of programmed telephone numbers (two different emergency telephone numbers stored within the mobile phone 16’s activation system 60, para. 0027): and
means for selecting one of the plurality of programmed telephone numbers (audio switch 56 provides a selector, which may be embodied as a mechanical or electrical switch, for selection of one of the two emergency telephone numbers, para. 0027, 0031), the means for selecting including a plurality of buttons,
wherein each button of the plurality of buttons is associated with one of the plurality of programmed telephone numbers, and each button can be individually actuated to select the associated telephone number, and
wherein when the activation mechanism is in the first state the emergency telephone is inactive (on/off switch 24 in an off state prior to activation, para. 0032), and when the activation mechanism is in the second state the emergency telephone is activated and automatically places a call to the selected programmed telephone number associated with the actuated button (when the on/off switch 24 is placed in an on position, the previously selected emergency number is automatically dialed, para. 0032-0033).
Porter differs from claims 1, 15 in that it does not disclose the above underlined limitations. Porter teaches a selector switch 56 to select a desired emergency telephone number (para. 0027, 0031), rather than a plurality of buttons.
Penix teaches the well known use of a button or series of buttons as an alternative to a switch (para. 0054) such that it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Porter with the above teaching of Penix.
As to claims 6, 18, Porter in view of Penix teaches: wherein the activation mechanism is at least one of an electrical sensor, a mechanical sensor, a magnetic sensor, an electrical switch, an optical switch, a magnetic switch, an accelerometer, a tilt switch, a gyroscope, a hall effect sensor, a button, a motion sensor, a tilt sensor, a capacitive sensor, a proximity sensor, a push plate, and a pull cord (activation mechanism may be an on/off switch 24, para. 0032, 0037).
Claim(s) 2-5, 9-10, 16-17, 21-22 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Porter in view of Penix, as applied to claims 1, 15 above, and further in view of Butler (US 2014/0066000 A1).
Porter in view of Penix teaches: a handset, the handset including the speaker and the microphone (Porter: mobile phone, para. 0024), but differs from claims 2 and 16 in that it does not teach: wherein when the handset is in a resting position the activation mechanism is positioned in the first state and the emergency telephone is inactive, and when the handset is removed from its resting position the activation mechanism changes from the first state to the second state causing the emergency telephone to be activated.
Butler teaches: wherein when the handset is in a resting position the activation mechanism is positioned in the first state and the emergency telephone is inactive (attack detection mode enabled and the mobile device’s emergency response can be considered inactive in that it has not detected an attack on the mobile device user, para. 0046), and when the handset is removed from its resting position the activation mechanism changes from the first state to the second state causing the emergency telephone to be activated (when it is determined that the mobile device has been dropped, the mobile device enters an attack detection response mode, para. 0048, 0059; Fig. 5A, step 510).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Porter in view of Penix with the above teaching of Butler in order to automatically place an emergency call when the mobile phone user has been attacked, e.g. when the mobile phone has been dropped.
As to claims 3, Porter in view of Penix and Butler teaches: comprising a sensor configured to detect that the handset has been dropped (Butler: mobile device’s accelerometer detects whether the mobile device has dropped, para. 0048; Fig. 5A, step 510).
As to claims 4, 17, Porter in view of Penix and Butler teaches: wherein the emergency telephone increases a gain of the microphone when the sensor detects that the handset has been dropped (Butler: mobile device’s accelerometer detects whether the mobile device has dropped, para. 0048; Fig. 5A, step 510, and speaker and microphone volume settings are activated at maximum volume, para. 0068; Fig. 5B, step 554).
As to claim 5, Porter in view of Penix and Butler teaches: wherein the sensor is at least one of an electrical sensor, a mechanical sensor, a magnetic sensor, an electrical switch, an optical switch, a magnetic switch, an accelerometer, a tilt switch, a gyroscope, and a hall effect sensor (Butler: accelerometer, para. 0048).
As to claims 9, 21, Porter in view of Penix and Butler teaches: wherein the memory stores a message and the emergency telephone plays the message after automatically placing the call to the at least one programmed telephone number (Butler: an audible message is played to one or more telephones that have answered, para. 0067; Fig. 5B, step 552).
As to claims 10, 22, Porter in view of Penix and Butler teaches: wherein the message is customizable and can be recorded by a user with the microphone (Butler: the audible message may be customized by the user before or in addition to the conventional emergency message, para. 0081).
Claim(s) 11, 23 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Porter in view of Penix and Butler, as applied to claims 9, 15 above, and further in view of Baum et al. (US 2007/0206729 A1, “Baum”).
Porter in view of Penix and Butler differs from claims 11, 23 in that it does not disclose: wherein the emergency telephone plays the voice message after a programmed amount of time has elapsed.
Baum teaches transmitting an emergency message to an automatically dialed number after a predetermined time after the number has been dialed (Abstract, para. 0039). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Porter in view of Penix and Butler with the above teaching of Baum in order to simplify the circuitry required because there is no need for any detection circuitry to detect when a telephone call is answered (para. 0039).
Claim(s) 12, 24 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Porter in view of Penix, as applied to claims 1, 15 above, and further in view of Mufti et al. (US 2003/0143986 A1, “Mufti”).
Porter in view of Penix discloses a processor in communication with the memory (inherently provided in the mobile phone, para. 0024), but differs from claims 12, 24 in that it does not teach:
monitoring the microphone for sound;
determining if sound has been captured by the microphone during a predetermined time period; and
ending a current call if sound has not been detected during the predetermined time period.
Mufti teaches monitoring audio level during a call and automatically terminating the call in the event that audio signals input at the microphone fall below a predetermined threshold for a predetermined period of time (Fig. 4, para. 0022, 0066, 0112). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Porter in view of Penix with the above teaching of Mufti in order to avoid the negative effects of a channel that is kept open inadvertently (para. 0016-0020).
Claims 13, 25 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Porter in view of Penix and Mufti, as applied to claims 12, 24 above, and further in view of Haines (US 2022/0014189 A1).
Porter in view of Penix and Mufti teaches: wherein the processor determines if captured sound is greater than a threshold decibel level and disregards the captured sound if the decibel level of the captured sound is not greater than the threshold decibel level (determines significant audio input as being audio signals above a predetermined threshold voltage level, para. 0027, or volume level, para. 0072, 0056), but differs from claims 13, 25 in that it does not teach the above underlined limitation.
Haines teaches determining significant sound level as being above a predetermined decibel level for a certain amount of time (para. 0032). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Porter in view of Penix and Mufti in order to use decibels as a well known alternative for measuring audio level.
Claim(s) 14, 26 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Porter in view of Penix, as applied to claims 1, 25 above, and further in view of Lyman et al. (US 2022/0061746 A1, “Lyman”).
Porter in view of Penix discloses a processor in communication with the memory (inherently provided in the mobile phone, para. 0024), but differs from claims 14, 26 in that it does not disclose:
determining an elapsed call time, the elapsed call time being how much time has elapsed since the call has been placed;
determining whether the call has been answered;
determining whether the elapsed call time exceeds a threshold;
disconnecting the call if the call has not been answered and the elapsed call time exceeds a threshold; and
automatically placing a call to a second programmed telephone number after disconnecting.
Lyman teaches automatically calling a next contact if a telephone call is not answered within a predetermined window of time (para. 0367-0368). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Porter in view of Penix with the above teaching of Lyman in order to ensure an urgent message is conveyed to at least a relevant contact in a list of contacts (para. 0350).
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Stella L Woo whose telephone number is (571)272-7512. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday, 8 a.m. to 5 p.m.
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, Ahmad Matar can be reached at 571-272-7488. 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.
STELLA L. WOO
Primary Examiner
Art Unit 2693
/Stella L. Woo/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2693