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, 7 and 13 have been considered but are moot because the claims are currently amended thus it necessitates a new ground of rejection as shown in the followings.
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)(2) the claimed invention was described in a patent issued under section 151, or in an application for patent published or deemed published under section 122(b), in which the patent or application, as the case may be, names another inventor and was effectively filed before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claim(s) 1-18 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) as being anticipated by Feldkamp et al. (Pub. No. US 2005/0174229).
Regarding claim 1. (Currently amended) Feldkamp teaches a method for sharing information with emergency service agencies (Feldkamp, the Abstract), the method comprising:
storing a device sharing indicator for each device in a plurality of devices associated with a user location, wherein the device sharing information indicates whether the device is available for sharing a video stream with an emergency service agency, wherein the camera sharing authorization is received from a user system over a first Application Programming Interface (API) (Feldkamp, Fig. 1, pp [33]: information collection devices 111, 112 and 113 are cameras or audio stations which are used for collecting and sharing information at a monitored site 110);
receiving a plurality of video streams from a plurality of cameras located at a plurality of user locations (Feldkamp, Fig. 1, pp [33]: information collection devices 111, 112 and 113 are cameras or audio stations which are used for collecting and sharing information at a monitored site 110);
in response to receiving a communication indicating an emergency event at the user location (Feldkamp, Fig. 1, pp [31]-[32]: response to the emergency event):
determining one or more devices associated with the user location within a proximity of an emergency event location corresponding to the emergency event (Feldkamp, Fig. 1, pp [34]-[36]: cameras and audio stations are determined to be in proximity of the monitored site);
determining if a device in the one or more cameras is available for sharing (Feldkamp, pp [47]: the central monitoring station manager 134 monitors the video and/or audio feeds being shared with the public safety call center 140 and/or the emergency response vehicle 150 and may periodically opt to suspend those video and/or audio feeds which appear to be shared as a result of an administrative error or if the manager of the central monitoring station 130 believes there are compelling reasons to suspend the video and/or audio feeds), wherein
if a device of the plurality devices is available for sharing, adding the device to a set of shareable devices (Feldkamp, pp [47]-[48]: audio stations and camera devices are in the list of sharing devices), or
if a device of the one or more devices is not available for sharing, not adding the device to the set of shareable devices (Feldkamp, pp [47]-[48]: the central monitoring station manager 134 may suspends those video and/or audio feeds from a particular audio stations or cameras devices if the video and/or audio feeds are interfering with privacy rights of a person at the monitored site); and
sharing information including a video stream from each device in the set of shareable devices with an emergency service agency server (Feldkamp, pp [47]: the central monitoring station manager 134 monitors the video and/or audio feeds being shared with the public safety call center 140 and/or the emergency response vehicle 150 and may periodically opt to suspend those video and/or audio feeds which appear to be shared as a result of an administrative error or if the manager of the central monitoring station 130 believes there are compelling reasons to suspend the video and/or audio feeds).
Regarding claim 7. (Currently amended) Feldkamp teaches a data center communicatively coupled to a plurality of devices and a plurality of user systems, wherein each device is associated with a user system of the plurality of user systems and each user system is associated with a user location (Feldkamp, the Abstract), the data center comprising:
a plurality of storage devices configured to receive information from the plurality of devices and store the information and a device sharing indicator for each device of the plurality of devices associated with a user location, wherein the device sharing information indicates whether the device is available for sharing a video stream with an emergency service agency, wherein the camera sharing authorization is received from a user system over a first Application Programming Interface (API) (Feldkamp, Fig. 1, pp [33]: information collection devices 111, 112 and 113 are cameras or audio stations which are used for collecting and sharing information at a monitored site 110); and
one or more servers (Feldkamp, Fig. 1, pp [42], [57]) executing a set of instructions to:
in response to receiving a communication indicating an emergency event (Feldkamp, Fig. 1, pp [31]-[32]: response to the emergency event);
determine one or more devices corresponding to a user location within a proximity of an emergency event location associated with the emergency event (Feldkamp, Fig. 1, pp [34]-[36]: cameras and audio stations are determined to be in proximity of the monitored site);
determine if each device in the one or more devices is available for sharing (Feldkamp, pp [47]: the central monitoring station manager 134 monitors the video and/or audio feeds being shared with the public safety call center 140 and/or the emergency response vehicle 150 and may periodically opt to suspend those video and/or audio feeds which appear to be shared as a result of an administrative error or if the manager of the central monitoring station 130 believes there are compelling reasons to suspend the video and/or audio feeds), wherein
if a device of the one or more devices is available for sharing, the one or more servers execute a set of instructions to add the device to a set of shareable devices (Feldkamp, pp [47]-[48]: audio stations and camera devices are in the list of sharing devices), or
if a device of the one or more devices is not available for sharing, the one or more servers execute a set of instructions to not add the device to the set of shareable devices (Feldkamp, pp [47]-[48]: the central monitoring station manager 134 may suspends those video and/or audio feeds from a particular audio stations or cameras devices if the video and/or audio feeds are interfering with privacy rights of a person at the monitored site); and
share information from the set of shareable devices with an emergency service agency server (Feldkamp, pp [47]: the central monitoring station manager 134 monitors the video and/or audio feeds being shared with the public safety call center 140 and/or the emergency response vehicle 150 and may periodically opt to suspend those video and/or audio feeds which appear to be shared as a result of an administrative error or if the manager of the central monitoring station 130 believes there are compelling reasons to suspend the video and/or audio feeds).
Regarding claim 13. (Currently amended) Feldkamp teaches a system for sharing information with emergency service agencies (Feldkamp, the Abstract), the system comprising:
a plurality of devices, each device located at a user location and configured to transmit information corresponding to the user location (Feldkamp, Fig. 1, pp [35]-[36]);
a data center (Feldkamp, Fig. 1, pp [36]-[37], Fig. 2, pp [58]), comprising:
a plurality of servers (Feldkamp, Fig. 1, pp [42], [57]) configured to:
communicate with the plurality of devices to receive information associated with the user location and store the information and a device sharing indicator for each device of the plurality of devices associated with the user location, wherein the device sharing information indicates whether the device is available for sharing a video stream with an emergency service agency, wherein the camera sharing authorization is received from a user system over a first Application Programming Interface (API) (Feldkamp, Fig. 1, pp [33]: information collection devices 111, 112 and 113 are cameras or audio stations which are used for collecting and sharing information at a monitored site 110), wherein the plurality of servers comprise one or more servers executing a set of instructions to:
in response to receiving a communication indicating an emergency event at the user location (Feldkamp, Fig. 1, pp [31]-[32]: response to the emergency event);
determine one or more devices corresponding to the user location within a proximity of an emergency event location corresponding to the emergency event (Feldkamp, Fig. 1, pp [34]-[36]: cameras and audio stations are determined to be in proximity of the monitored site);
determine if each device in the one or more devices is available for sharing (Feldkamp, pp [47]: the central monitoring station manager 134 monitors the video and/or audio feeds being shared with the public safety call center 140 and/or the emergency response vehicle 150 and may periodically opt to suspend those video and/or audio feeds which appear to be shared as a result of an administrative error or if the manager of the central monitoring station 130 believes there are compelling reasons to suspend the video and/or audio feeds), wherein
if a device of the one or more devices is available for sharing, the one or more servers execute a set of instructions to add the device to a set of shareable devices (Feldkamp, pp [47]-[48]: audio stations and camera devices are in the list of sharing devices), or
if a device of the one or more devices is not available for sharing, the one or more servers execute a set of instructions to not add the device to the set of shareable devices (Feldkamp, pp [47]-[48]: the central monitoring station manager 134 may suspends those video and/or audio feeds from a particular audio stations or cameras devices if the video and/or audio feeds are interfering with privacy rights of a person at the monitored site); and
share information from the set of shareable devices with an emergency service agency server (Feldkamp, pp [47]: the central monitoring station manager 134 monitors the video and/or audio feeds being shared with the public safety call center 140 and/or the emergency response vehicle 150 and may periodically opt to suspend those video and/or audio feeds which appear to be shared as a result of an administrative error or if the manager of the central monitoring station 130 believes there are compelling reasons to suspend the video and/or audio feeds).
Regarding claim 2. (Currently amended) Feldkamp teaches the method of claim 1, wherein the user system communicates with the data center through the first API and the emergency service agency server communicates with the data center through a second API separate from the first API (Feldkamp, pp [37], [39]).
Regarding claim 3. (Original) Feldkamp teaches the method of claim 1, further comprising receiving, from the user system, a device sharing authorization for a device associated with the user location over the first API, wherein determining if each device in the one or more device is available for sharing comprises determining if each device has a corresponding device sharing authorization (Feldkamp, pp [47]-[48], [80], [85]).
Regarding claim 4. (Original) Feldkamp teaches the method of claim 1, wherein determining one or more devices corresponding to a user location within a proximity of an emergency event location comprises determining one or more of the user location, a device location and an address is within a distance of the emergency event location (Feldkamp, pp [34]-[37]).
Regarding claim 5. (Original) Feldkamp teaches the method of claim 4, wherein determining one or more devices corresponding to a user location are within a proximity of an emergency event location comprises determining one or more of the user location of one or more cameras and the emergency event location are both within a same building, on a same floor in the same building, on a same street and on a same route (Feldkamp, pp [34]-[37]).
Regarding claim 6. (Original) Feldkamp teaches the method of claim 1, wherein sharing information from the set of shareable cameras with an emergency service agency server comprises:
determining an emergency event start time (Feldkamp, pp [34]-[35], [38]-[40]);
determining a device sharing end time (Feldkamp, pp [34]-[35], [38]-[40]); and
determining a present time, wherein if the present time is less than the device sharing end time, sharing the information with the emergency service agency server (Feldkamp, pp [34]-[35], [38]-[40]); and
if the present time is equal to or greater than the device sharing end time, stop sharing the information with the emergency service agency server (Feldkamp, pp [34]-[35], [38]-[40]).
Regarding claim 8. (Currently amended) Feldkamp teaches the data center of claim 7, wherein the user system communicates with the data center through the first API and the emergency service agency server communicates with the data center through a second API separate from the first API (Feldkamp, pp [37], [39]).
Regarding claim 9. (Original) Feldkamp teaches the data center of claim 7, wherein the one or more servers executes a set of instructions to receive a device sharing authorization for a device associated with the user location over the first API, wherein, to determine if each device in the one or more devices is available for sharing, the one or more servers execute a set of instructions to determine if each device has a corresponding device sharing authorization (Feldkamp, pp [47]-[48], [80], [85]).
Regarding claim 10. (Original) Feldkamp teaches the data center of claim 7, wherein to determine one or more devices corresponding to a user location are within a proximity of an emergency event location, the one or more servers execute a set of instructions to determine whether one or more of the user location, a device location or an address of the one or more devices are within a distance of the emergency event location (Feldkamp, Fig. 1, pp [34]-[37]).
Regarding claim 11. (Original) Feldkamp teaches the data center of claim 10, wherein to determine one or more devices corresponding to a user location are within a proximity of an emergency event location, the one or more servers execute a set of instructions to determine one or more of whether the user location and the emergency event location are both within a same building, on a same floor in the same building, on a same street and on a same route (Feldkamp, Fig. 1, pp [34]-[37]).
Regarding claim 12. (Original) Feldkamp teaches the data center of claim 7, wherein to share information from the set of shareable devices with an emergency service agency server, the one or more servers execute a set of instructions to:
determine an emergency event start time (Feldkamp, pp [34]-[35], [38]-[40]);
determine a device sharing end time (Feldkamp, pp [34]-[35], [38]-[40]); and
determine a present time, wherein if the present time is less than the device sharing end time, share the information with the emergency service agency server (Feldkamp, pp [34]-[35], [38]-[40]); and
if the present time is equal to or greater than the device sharing end time, stop sharing the information with the emergency service agency server (Feldkamp, pp [34]-[35], [38]-[40]).
Regarding claim 14. (Currently amended) Feldkamp teaches the system of claim 13, wherein the user system communicates with the data center through the first API and the emergency service agency server communicates with the data center through a second API separate from the first API (Feldkamp, pp [37], [39]).
Regarding claim 15. (Original) Feldkamp teaches the system of claim 13, wherein the one or more servers executes a set of instructions to receive a device sharing authorization for a device associated with the user location over the first API, wherein, to determine if each device in the one or more devices is available for sharing, the one or more servers execute a set of instructions to determine if each devices has a corresponding device sharing authorization (Feldkamp, pp [47]-[48], [80], [85]).
Regarding claim 16. (Original) Feldkamp teaches the system of claim 13, wherein to determine one or more devices corresponding to a user location within a proximity of an emergency event location corresponding to the emergency event, the one or more servers execute a set of instructions to determine whether one or more of the user location, a device location, a device address of one or more cameras are within a distance of the emergency event location (Feldkamp, Fig. 1, pp [34]-[37]).
Regarding claim 17. (Original) Feldkamp teaches the system of claim 16, wherein to determine one or more cameras corresponding to a user location within a proximity of an emergency event location corresponding to the emergency event, the one or more servers execute a set of instructions to determine one or more of if the user location of one or more cameras and the emergency event location are both within a same building, on a same floor in the same building, on a same street and on a same route (Feldkamp, Fig. 1, pp [34]-[37]).
Regarding claim 18. (Original) Feldkamp teaches the system of claim 13, wherein to share information from the set of shareable devices with an emergency service agency server, the one or more servers execute a set of instructions to:
determine an emergency event start time (Feldkamp, pp [34]-[35], [38]-[40]);
determine a device sharing end time (Feldkamp, pp [34]-[35], [38]-[40]); and
determine a present time, wherein if the present time is less than the device sharing end time, share the information with the emergency service agency server (Feldkamp, pp [34]-[35], [38]-[40]); and
if the present time is equal to or greater than the device sharing end time, stop sharing the information with the emergency service agency server (Feldkamp, pp [34]-[35], [38]-[40]).
Conclusion
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.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to HUY C HO whose telephone number is (571)270-1108. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 8AM-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, KATHY WANG-HURST can be reached at (571)270-5371. 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.
/HUY C HO/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2644
Prosecution Insights