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 .
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 2, 3-4, 8 and 18 are objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
The cited prior art does not expressly or impliedly teach the structural limitations of claim 2 described as “a first one or more processors operatively coupled to the input unit, the display unit, the one or more IAQ sensors, and the first communication module, wherein the first one or more processor enable the sensing device to control the HVAC device that is in communication with the corresponding sensing device, to adjust the IAQ of the corresponding zone at the IAQ values set by the user.”
The cited prior art does not expressly or impliedly teach the structural limitations of claim 3 described as “a second one or more processors operatively coupled to the scanning unit, the actuation unit, and the second communication module, wherein the second one or more processors are configured to match the scanned credential of the users with a database storing credentials of registered users and correspondingly open the door upon a positive matching.”
The cited prior art does not expressly or impliedly teach the transmitting limitations of claim 8 described as “based on the credentials of the user being scanned by the electronic lock while entering or leaving the assigned zone of the sensing device; and
generate and transmit the alert signal to one or more mobile devices associated with the identified user, registered security personnel, and/or an admin, wherein the alert signal is indicative of a reminder pertaining to the removal of the sensing device from the assigned zone, and a request to return the sensing device to the assigned zone.”
The cited prior art does not expressly or impliedly teach the transmitting limitations of claim 18 described as “generating and transmitting the alert signal to one or more mobile devices associated with the identified user, registered security personnel, and/or an admin, wherein the alert signal is indicative of a reminder pertaining to the removal of the sensing device from the assigned zone, and a request to return the sensing device to the assigned zone.”
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(b):
(b) CONCLUSION.—The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph:
The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the applicant regards as his invention.
Claim 10 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor (or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the applicant), regards as the invention.
Claim 10 recites the limitations the user-defined mode and the default mode. There is insufficient antecedent basis for these limitations in the claim.
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.
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.
Claim(s) 1, 11-12, 14, and 20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Pukol et al. (PG/PUB 20210239670) in view over Almomani et al. (PG/PUB 20180068541) in view over (USPN Dixon 12112341).
20210239670
Claim 1.
Pukol et al. teaches a system to control indoor air quality (IAQ) at one or more zones of an area of interest (AOI) (0006-0007 e.g. “An air quality sensor can be configured to sense one or more air quality parameters to yield one or more sensor readings that reflect the sensed parameters. An air monitoring system can collect sensor readings from one or more sensors. The air monitoring system can process such readings to yield an assessment of air quality and, possibly, to initiate appropriate actions in response to the assessment,” see also “different zone of the indoor environment,”), the system comprising:
one or more HVAC devices configured with the one or more zones such that at least one HVAC device is assigned to and fluidically connected to a space associated with each of the zones (Pukol, 0006, 0039 e.g. “If thermal comfort is deemed inadequate (i.e., the temperature is lower than the set point) the thermostat initiates corrective action (by activating a heating functionality in the HVAC system).,” see also “ For example, replacing a filter in an air conditioner unit is an activity that is relevant to indoor air quality. Other examples of such activities include, for example, removal of building materials that contribute contaminants such as, for example, asbestos, formaldehyde, VOCs or other types of contaminants, or covering open containers, or turning off appliances, or other activities that result in the removal of a substance, or the removal of an object that emits a substance” see also Almomani et al., ABSTRACT, 0027-28 e.g. “As shown in FIG. 2, the electronic lock 20 can also be integrated to communicate with any power-consuming products (both electric and natural gas), such as household appliances 48, throughout the smart home 1 such as stove, oven, refrigerator, HVAC equipment, coffee pot, fireplace, water pump, hair iron, clothes iron, and the like.”)
However, Pukol et al. does not expressly teach the door lock and communicatively coupled limitations described below Almomani teaches the door lock and communicatively coupled limitations limitations described below.
one or more electronic locks configured with a door of the one or more zones such that one of the electronic locks is assigned to and installed in the door associated with each of the zones (Almomani et al., 0022-23 0037-40, figure 8, 0042 e.g. “As shown in FIG. 2, the electronic lock 20 can also be integrated to communicate with any power-consuming products (both electric and natural gas), such as household appliances 48, throughout the smart home 1 such as stove, oven, refrigerator, HVAC equipment, coffee pot, fireplace, water pump, hair iron, clothes iron, and the like,” see also “The electronic lock 20 can also determine and communicate which doors are locked, unlocked or in use, and also communicate what users are present within the dwelling, as well as each room. This may be accomplished by interacting with each user as they enter and exit the smart home 1 as described above. The electronic lock 20 may scan smart devices such as cell phones or electronic identification tags to identify users. Alternatively, the electronic lock 20 can communicate with video and/or audio with the entering and exiting users and communicate their respective occupancy status.”)
one or more IAQ sensing devices provided at the one or more zones such that at least one of the sensing devices is assigned to the space associated with each of the zones; wherein the one or more sensing devices are configured to communicatively couple with the one or more electronic locks, and the one or more HVAC devices (Pujol et al. 0023-26, Figure 3-340-370 e.g. “FIG. 1 depicts an aspect of an installation of an occupant-installed air monitoring system. In the figure, occupant 110 is depicted in the act of affixing an air quality sensor 120-1 on a wall in an indoor environment. In the depiction of FIG. 1, the air monitoring system that is being installed comprises multiple air quality sensors. The figure also depicts air quality sensors 120-2, 120-3, and 120-4, which have not yet been affixed to a wall, see also 0024 “In this disclosure, the words “air quality sensor” are used to refer to a unit that comprises one or more sensing devices capable of sensing one or more air quality parameters. Such a unit may also comprise additional capabilities. For example, air quality sensor 120-1 might comprise a communication capability for communicating sensed air quality parameters to a central unit or to other air quality sensors such as air quality sensors 120-2, 120-3, or 120-4,” see also door lock communicatively coupled to multiple sensors of Almomani et al., ABSTRACT, Figures 1, Figure 2, Figure 4, Figure 8 e.g. “As shown in FIG. 2, the electronic lock 20 can also be integrated to communicate with any power-consuming products (both electric and natural gas), such as household appliances 48, throughout the smart home 1 such as stove, oven, refrigerator, HVAC equipment, coffee pot, fireplace, water pump, hair iron, clothes iron, and the like. “)
One of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention applying the teachings of Pukol, namely associating air quality sensors per zone, verifying proper installation location and improper installation location, and notifying a user of improper installation (e.g. identifying air quality sensor movement is outside target zone), to the teachings of Almomani, namely associating multiple sensors with a door lock for environment control, would achieve an expected and predictable result via combining said elements using known methods. Almomani is in the same field of endeavor and provides a benefit of localized door monitoring system for remotely monitoring environmental conditions.
The combination of Pukol and Almomani does not teach the tracking position and motion limitations described below. Dixon teaches the tracking position and motion limitations described below
wherein each of the electronic locks is configured to: track position and motion of the sensing device that is assigned to the zone where the corresponding electronic lock is installed (Dixon, ABSTRACT, Figure 3 e.g. “Referring now to FIG. 3 , the asset 102 and associated tracking device 108 are generally illustrated in and around a site 300. The site 300 includes a site boundary 304 illustrated with cross-hatching. The site boundary 304 is the physical location of the edges of the particular site 300 that may be defined using, for example, latitude and longitude coordinates. For example, the site 300 may be policyholder's local property, residence, farm, ranch, business location and the like. In such cases, a survey may have been made of the site 300 that identifies the site boundary 304 to a high degree of accuracy. When such boundary coordinates are available to asset tracker 130, they may be used to establish a geofence for an asset 102 that is to be monitored at the site 300. While such coordinates may be used to provide a relatively accurate geofence boundary for a particular asset, programming such a geofence can be resource intensive. ,” see also alert generation “In response to determining that at least one asset location is outside a corresponding geofence region and/or in response to detecting a violation of the abovementioned asset movement rules (step 408, yes branch), at 410, the asset tracker 130 may determine the insurance policy covering the potentially stolen asset(s) based, at least in part, on corresponding one or more asset IDs. In one embodiment, the asset tracker 130 may identify the insurance policy, for example, by querying one or more databases 124 of the storage unit 122 (shown in FIG. 1 ). It is noted that in various embodiments the insurance policy may comprise, without limitations, homeowner's insurance policy, automotive insurance policy, renter's insurance policy, business insurance policy, valuable personal property insurance policy, umbrella insurance policy, or the like. At least in some embodiments, the identified policy may be associated with policyholder's preferences with respect to notifications indicative of a potential asset loss. Such preferences may include, but not limited to preferred target mobile device/computer and/or preferred notification delivery format. The notification formats may include, but not limited to, Short Message Service (SMS) messages, instant messages, email messages, application pop-up alerts, flashing indicators, audible alerts, phone calls, and the like.,” see also corresponding asset as the above air quality sensors of Pujol), see door lock of Pujol, ABSTRACT)
generate an alert signal when the sensing device assigned to any of the one or more zones is detected to be out of the corresponding zone (Dixon, ABSTRACT, Figure 4, Figure 6)
One of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention applying the teachings of Pukol, as modified, namely providing a door lock communicatively coupled with multiple air quality sensors and an HVAC system, to the teachings of Dixon, namely remotely tracking asset location, would achieve an expected and predictable result via adapting the door lock processor to integrate the pertinent function of tracking air quality sensors (e.g. assets) for verifying correct installation position as well as tracking air quality removal indicative of improper installation location and/or theft. Dixon is reasonably pertinent to a problem of tracking assets and would commend itself to tracking the air quality sensor locations of Pujol for verifying improper movement.
Claim 11.
The cited prior art teaches the system of claim 1, wherein the system is configured to detect a location of the moved sensing devices in the AOI based on a communication between the moved sensing device and the one or more electronic locks in proximity with the moved sensing device (supra claim 1, see the modified door lock configured to track air quality sensor movement in proximity to the door), wherein the system is configured to notify the detected location of the moved sensing device over the one or more mobile devices associated with the registered security personnel and/or the admin (Dixon, Col 5 lines 61-67 thru. Col 6 lines 1-10, see notifying a mobile device of asset location e.g. “According to an illustrative embodiment shown in FIG. 1 , the asset tracker application 130 may be implemented in a client-server system environment. In such a case, policyholders may interact with a user interface, such as GUI, on their mobile devices and/or computers (a client device), and the GUI on the mobile device/computer may communicate with the tracker application 130 running on one or more insurance servers 110, for example, over the network link 107. Furthermore, policyholders may receive asset loss notifications on their preferred mobile device and/or computer, as described below, Figure 4-412, 418, Figure 6)
Claim 12. The system of claim 1, wherein the AOI is a building, and the one or more zones are one or more rooms of the building (supra claim 1, Pujol, ABSTRACT, see multiple zones within a building, Figure 1)
Claim 14.
Claim 14 is rejected under the same rationale and applied combination of prior art set forth in claim 1
The cited combination of prior art teaches a method for controlling indoor air quality (IAQ) at one or more zones of an area of interest (AOI), the method comprising the steps of:
assigning one or more electronic locks to a door of the one or more zones such that one of the electronic locks is assigned to and installed in the door associated with each of the zones; supra claim 1
assigning one or more IAQ sensing devices to the one or more zones such that at least one of the sensing devices is assigned to and provided at the space associated with each of the zones; supra claim 1
wherein the one or more sensing devices are configured to communicatively couple with the one or more electronic locks, and the one or more HVAC devices; tracking, by each of the electronic locks, position and motion of the sensing device that is assigned to the zone where the corresponding electronic lock is installed; supra claim 1
generating an alert signal when the sensing device assigned to any of the one or more zones is detected to be out of the corresponding zone, supra claim 1
Claim 20. The method of claim 14, wherein the method comprises the steps of: detecting a location of the moved sensing devices in the AOI based on a communication between the moved sensing device and the one or more electronic locks in proximity to the moved sensing device; and notifying the detected location of the moved sensing device over the one or more mobile devices associated with the registered security personnel and/or the admin, supra claim 11
Claims 5-7 and 15-17 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Pukol et al. (PG/PUB 20210239670) in view over Almomani et al. (PG/PUB 20180068541) in view over (USPN Dixon 12112341) in view over Teshome et al. (PG/PUB 20190334929) in view over Sinur et al. (PG/PUB 20220154954).
Claim 5. The cited art teaches the system of claim 1 but does not expressly teach the default and user limitations described below. Teshome teaches the default limitations and Sinur teaches the user limitations described below
wherein when the sensing device assigned to any of the one or more zones is detected to be out of the assigned zone (supra claim 1, see Dixon for tracking asset location), the system is configured to operate the HVAC device of the assigned zone, from where the assigned sensing device is moved out, in a user-defined mode to maintain the IAQ of the corresponding zone at the IAQ values previously set by the user (as interpreted, the system HVAC/IAQ concurrently operates with a plurality of sensors regardless of presence or absence due to movement. The application of default settings described below enforces continued operation of the system in light of potential communication failure/loss/abnormal, see 0048 e.g. “ If so, the process continues to step 170 to set the sensors connected to the physical bus with adaptive default settings, such as sensor settings enforced in the event of network failure,” see also token transfer loss as a basis for entering a default mode, 0028, i.e., as applied, air quality sensor token transfer with door lock system of Pujol, as modified, see also Dixon for implementing corrective actions responsive to loss or theft, Figure 6)
One of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention applying the teachings of Teshome et al., namely invoking default modes responsive to at least communication loss, to the teachings of Pujol, as modified, namely tracking air quality sensors as well as monitoring air quality thresholds in light of identifying asset movement, would achieve an expected and predictable result via combining said elements using known methods to ensure default settings are implemented responsive to failures. One of ordinary skill in the art modifying a responsive action, as per Pujol in light of Dixon, to comprise default modes of Teshome, would achieve an expected and predictable result of implementing protection actions responsive to potentially compromised assets.
The combination does not expressly teach user default IAQ settings, but Sinur teaches AQ values previously set by the user (ABSTRACT, 0058 e.g. “Specifically, there preprogramed range(s) or value(s) may be determined by the system designer based on one or more of the following: regulatory bodies, government agencies, private groups or standard setting bodies, such as the ASHRAE Standard Committee (e.g., ANSI/ASHRAE 62.2-2016, ISSN 1041-2336, which is fully incorporated herein by reference). An example of the range(s) that may be preprogram into the system 10 are shown in the below table, where the system 10 will send the alert or take start to take corrective action when the air quality reaches the “Fair” reference level. It should be understood that the if the air quality reaches the “Poor” reference level or the “Bad” reference level, the system 10 may take additional actions or more aggressive action in order to try and return the air quality within the structure 100 to at least a “Good” reference level within a reasonable amount of time. It should further be understood that these range(s) are only exemplary and should not be construed as limiting.”)
One of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention applying the teachings of Sinu, namely user defining air quality thresholds for control, to the teachings Pujol, as modified, namely employing default settings responsive to identifying communication/token loss between an air quality sensor and system due to relocation, would achieve an expected and predictable result via adapting the system of Pujol, as modified, to maintain default air quality settings responsive to detecting relocation of an air quality sensor indicative of identifying a “token transfer loss” between the sensor and door lock,
Claim 6. The cited prior art teaches the system of claim 5 but does not expressly teach the default setting in response to the predefined time limitation described below. Dixon teaches the predefined time limitations while wherein when the sensing device assigned to any of the one or more zones is detected to be out of the assigned zone for a predefined time (supra claim 1, see Dixon, e.g. “for example, if the policyholder did not authorize law enforcement notification (step 418, no branch) and/or if the one or more law enforcement agencies have not sent a retrieval alert within a predetermined period of time after the detected loss/theft of the asset 102, at 428, the asset tracker 130 may calculate a probability of asset recovery based, at least in part, on whether the asset tracker 130 remains in wireless communication with the tracking device 108 associated with the insured asset 102, based on estimated location of the insured asset 102 and based on historical asset recovery information, which may be stored in one or more databases 124 of the storage unit 122 (shown in FIG. 1 ).”
the system is configured to operate the HVAC device of the assigned zone in a default mode to maintain the IAQ of the corresponding zone at predefined IAQ values (supra claim 5)
One of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention applying the teachings of Pujol, as modified, namely implementing default modes responsive to identifying air quality asset movement, to the teachings of Dixon, namely implementing actions responsive to predefined times in which the asset is located outside a zone, would achieve an expected and predictable result via combining said elements using known methods.
Claim 7.
The system of claim 5, wherein when the sensing device is detected to be returned within the assigned zone (Dixon, see recovery status of claim 1, see also Pujol, Figure 3 e.g. see determining proper sensor re-arrangement, i.e., if sensor is returned to proper zone), the system is configured to operate the HVAC device in the user-defined mode, supra claim 1 for identifying proper location and maintaining IAQ settings (Pujol, see implementing HVAC user defined mode responsive to proper air quality sensor installation, 0006, Figure 3-370)
Claim 15.
claim 15 is rejected under the same rationale and prior art set forth in claim 5
The method of claim 14, wherein when the sensing device assigned to any of the one or more zones is detected to be out of the assigned zone, the method comprises the steps of operating the HVAC device of the assigned zone, from where the assigned sensing device is moved out, in a user-defined mode to maintain the IAQ of the corresponding zone at the IAQ values previously set by the user, supra claim 5
Claim 16.
claim 16 is rejected under the same rationale and prior art set forth in claim 6
The method of 15, wherein when the sensing device assigned to any of the one or more zones is detected to be out of the assigned zone for a predefined time, the method comprises the steps of operating the HVAC device of the assigned zone in a default mode to maintain the IAQ of the corresponding zone at predefined IAQ values, supra claim 6
Claim 17.
claim 17 is rejected under the same rationale and prior art set forth in claim 7
The method of claim 16, wherein when the sensing device is detected to be returned within the assigned zone, the method comprises the steps of operating the HVAC device in the user-defined mode, supra claim 7.
Claims 9 and 19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Pukol et al. (PG/PUB 20210239670) in view over Almomani et al. (PG/PUB 20180068541) in view over (USPN Dixon 12112341) in view over Romero (PG/PUB 20200410792)
Claim 9. The system of claim 1 but does not expressly teach the lock actuation limitations described below. Romero teaches the lock actuation limitations described below
wherein when the sensing device assigned to any of the one or more zones is detected to be moved out of the assigned zone by the user, the server, upon confirmation from the registered security personnel and/or the admin (Dixon, see responsive/corrective actions and associated security personnel, Figure 6, Figure4), is configured to: actuate the one or more electronic locks to allow the identified user to enter only the assigned zone of the moved sensing device and further lock the remaining electronic locks among the one or more locks to block the identified user from entering the remaining unassigned zones among the one or more zones (Romero, 0064 e.g. “FIG. 1 shows an exemplary embodiment of a system 100 in accordance with the present disclosure. A controller 104 may comprise memory 106, processor 108, and transmitter 110. Sensor 102 may be operable to scan a target and determine, with or independent of the controller 104, a presence of contraband on a target. In response, sensor 102 may send an indication of contraband, which may identify the type of contraband, to the controller 104. The memory 106 may store a program for processing input from sensor 102 to determine a suitable course of action in response to an indication of contraband provided by the sensor 102. In some instances, the course of action may be preprogrammed and stored in the memory, and in some instances the course of action may be determined using a variety of factors and one or more algorithms stored in the memory. A course of action may include generating an alert such as a remote alert to be sent via a telecommunications medium to authorities such as law enforcement or security personnel, a building administrator, etc. Additionally or alternatively, a local alert may be generated on a local alert device 116, such as a speaker, lights, panels, displays, or other visual or audible indicators within the facility. These may include, for example, strobes and/or a siren or commands or other alert indicators,” see also 0084 e.g. “In the event that contraband is detected (rendering the target 208 a threat), the controllers or a central controller may proceed to determine a course of action. In the case of a simple system which utilizes sensors capable of detecting only a single type of contraband, for example, a weapon, and which does not include any additional sensors, cameras, or other occupant tracking within the facility, there may be only a single preprogrammed course of action, such as a lockdown. The lockdown may result in the controllers ensuring barriers 210 a and 210 b are both closed and locked using a control signal transmitted to barrier actuators associated with the respective barriers. Closing and locking both barriers 210 a, 210 b may prevent the threat from accessing the facility and may also prevent the threat from running away as they will become isolated within the room 202 until, for example, law enforcement personnel arrive to handle the threat.)
One of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention applying the teachings of Romero, namely selectively isolating doors to prevent asset movement, to the teachings of Pujol, as modified, namely implementing corrective actions responsive to identifying air quality sensor movement, would achieve an expected and predictable result of isolating the air quality sensor via selectively locking barrier access between multiple barriers. Romero is reasonably pertinent to a problem of access control in light of abnormal activities and would commend itself to limiting asset relocation.
Claim 19.
Claim 19 is rejected under the same rationale and prior art set forth in claim 9
The method of claim 14, wherein when the sensing device assigned to any of the one or more zones is detected to be moved out of the assigned zone by the user, the method comprises the steps of: actuating the one or more electronic locks, upon confirmation from the registered security personnel and/or the admin, to allow the identified user to enter only the assigned zone of the moved sensing device and further locking the remaining electronic locks among the one or more locks to block the identified user from entering the remaining unassigned zones among the one or more zones, supra claim 9
Claim 10 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Pukol et al. (PG/PUB 20210239670) in view over Almomani et al. (PG/PUB 20180068541) in view over (USPN Dixon 12112341) in view over Wagner et al. (PG/PUB 20230243542)
Claim 10. The system of claim 1 but does not expressly teach the VAV limitations described below Wagner teaches the VAV limitations described below
wherein each of the HVAC devices comprises a variable air volume (VAV) in fluidic connection with an air handling unit associated with the AOI, wherein a controller associated with the VAV is in communication with the server (Wagner, ABSTRACT, 0028, 0032 e.g. “n some embodiments, airside system 130 includes multiple variable air volume (VAV) units 116. For example, airside system 130 is shown to include a separate VAV unit 116 on each floor or zone of building 10. VAV units 116 may include dampers or other flow control elements that can be operated to control an amount of the supply airflow provided to individual zones of building 10.,” see also server based control, Figure 4-466, 214)
One of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention applying the teachings of Wagner, namely server based control of VAVs for regulating air quality, to the teachings of Pujol, namely monitoring air quality, would achieve an expected and predictable result of implementing distributed control for regulating building air quality. Wagner is in the same field of endeavor and reasonably pertinent to a problem of air quality regulation.
Pujol, as modified, teaches:
the electronic lock that is assigned to the zone associated with the VAV (supra claim 1 for associated door lock per zone in light of the VAV zone of Wagner), wherein the one or more HVAC devices are configured to: maintain the IAQ of the one or more zones at the IAQ values set by the user in the user-defined mode (Wagner 0090 e.g. see critical user thresholds); and maintain the IAQ of the one or more zones at the predefined IAQ values in the default mode (Wagner, 0080 e.g. see default administrator setpoint)
.
Claim 13 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Pukol et al. (PG/PUB 20210239670) in view over Almomani et al. (PG/PUB 20180068541) in view over (USPN Dixon 12112341) in view over Huat (USPN 8959036)
claim 13. The cited prior art teaches the system of claim 1 but does not teach the shipment limitations. Huat teaches the shipment limitations
wherein the AOI is a shipment, and the one or more zones are one or more containers associated with the shipment (ABSTRACT, Figure 1)
One of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention applying the teachings of Huat, namely monitoring shipping containers, to the teachings of Pujol, as modified, namely monitoring zone air quality, would achieve an expected and predictable result via combining said elements using known methods (Huat, see “Examples of an operational parameter can include, but is not limited to, temperature, humidity, air pressure, lighting, and air quality (e.g., the mixture or presence of certain gases).)
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
see Toulouse (PG/PUB 20240134738) relevancy for default modes unable in light of losing sensor communication described in claim 1, see 0082 e.g. “In step 314, all components within the zone associated with the component having a communication failure are instructed to enter a default mode in which components are treated as having experienced conventional hardware failures (e.g., a short-circuited sensor, a jammed damper, etc.) and the system responds accordingly. As an example of a default mode, a controller may determine that a voltage feedback of a damper is experiencing a communication failure. Even if the damper is operating properly, the controller cannot validate the communication. In a safe mode, the damper may lose active control and spring to an open position. In the default mode, the damper may be allowed to continue to operate despite the communication failure. The method may end following step 314.”)”
20220272490 e.g., see managing distributed sensors, ABSTEACT,” there is described a system, method, and medium for managing a group of radio frequency (RF) sensors. The system comprising a first sensor, a second sensor and an upstream device. A sensor management system comprises a first sensor, a second sensor, and an upstream device. The first sensor is positioned at a first location and transmits a wireless signal. The second sensor is positioned at a second location and detects the wireless signal. The first and second locations of the first and second sensors correspond to an expected wireless signal of the first sensor. The upstream device performs an action in response to determining that a difference between the detected wireless signal and the expected wireless signal exceeds a predetermined threshold.”
20170221289 see door access control based on credentials, ABSTRACT “A security system comprises a positioning unit that determines locations of user devices relative to a threshold of the access point, a surveillance camera that monitors the threshold, and an access control system that controls the access point based on the locations of the user devices and orientations of individuals carrying the user devices relative to the access point. The surveillance camera is used to prevent tailgating. The cameras image data is also analyzed to determine the orientation of the individuals relative to the access point, such as a door. If the individuals are oriented such that they may be merely walking past the door, then access is not granted.”)
20170154517, see air quality monitoring in combination with door locks, An air quality alert system provides a signal which indicates whether or not a door or window should be (fully or partially) opened or closed. The system takes account of the air quality in a first area (e.g. outdoors) as well as the proximity of the user to a door or window so that information is only provided when the user is situated at the door or window. This avoids overloading the user with unwanted information, Figure 1
See general prior art below for asset monitoring and air quality control:
20250232624 20210065489 10861265 20180068541 20160374133 20160343181 20130090744 20070216764 20090251282 20250193206 20210341319 20230228122 20180068541 20170154517 20240257588 20180121571 11976832 10704797 20210341319 20180120793 20210239670 9575477 20250052734 20100315235 20220272490 20190074990 20050159848 20240247588 20180068541 20070176771 20170221289 20190334929 20190090440 20240134738 20240134738 20250097999 20250271829 20090030712 20070282495 20110001356 20080040223 20090040029 10279698 10875419 9026347 9457680 9400990 9727898 20160129960 20060282189 20230074247 20230074247 20050256788 20250053166 10902711 20180122030 20250110022 20190334929
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to DARRIN D DUNN whose telephone number is (571)270-1645. The examiner can normally be reached M-Sat (10-8) PST.
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, Robert Fennema can be reached at 571-272-2748. 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.
/DARRIN D DUNN/Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2117
Prosecution Insights