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 .
Double Patenting
The non-statutory 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 no statutory 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.
Claims 1-19 are rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claims 1-17 of U.S. Patent No. 11,984222. Although the claims at issue are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other because for example claim 1 in the instant application and claim 1 in the patent teaches {a method comprising: providing a smart home system of network-enabled electronic devices disposed in wireless communication, the smart home system comprising an occupant computing device and a video doorbell system that includes a microphone, a speaker, and an optical camera at or adjacent to an entrance to a home, the optical camera configured to scan and read a machine-readable code; prompting a user of a visitor computing device to display “reads on generate and display” in the patent) a machine-readable code to the optical camera; the optical camera reading the machine-readable code from the visitor computing device, the machine-readable code containing information pertinent to the visitor (information reads on “health data stored on the visitor computing device and pertaining to a user of the visitor computing device, wherein the health data includes one or more of a health certificate, a vaccination status, a vaccination record, and an identification”, Claim 13 in the instant application teaches “Smart Health Card”, which can also read on a vaccination record in the patent); processing, by the smart home system, the machine-readable code to provide processed health data; and providing, by the smart home system, a notification on the occupant computing device based on the processed health data. The instant application is border than the patent, however, it would have been obvious to one with ordinary skill in the art to rewording claim 1, and combine with claim 13 to obtain the patent.
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.
Claims 1, 3-4, 17 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Reed (US 20210304537) in view of Xing (US 20220031258) in view of Sparks (US 20210327548).
Regarding claim 1, Reed teaches, a method (abstract: an automated screening system includes an access control reader with one or more computer devices for screening a pre-registered individual seeking admittance into a controlled area) comprising:
providing a smart home system of network-enabled electronic devices disposed in wireless communication (Paragraph 17, 165, 174: an access control system 100 preferably includes an access control reader 102 that is preferably utilized to authenticate individuals and control access to controlled areas including but not limited to enclosed physical locations, research laboratories, manufacturing facilities, prisons, military installations, or factory floors. In one embodiment, the access control reader 102 is desirably in communication with and is controlled by a central controller 104 (e.g., a computer network) that may include one or more servers, one or more central processing units (CPUs), software, computer applications, video monitors, and computer monitors. The access control system may incorporate wired or wireless communication networks),
the smart home system comprising an occupant computing device (Paragraph 211, 219: mobile phone) and an optical camera at or adjacent to an entrance to a home (Paragraph 165, 173, 178), prompting a user of a visitor computing device to display a machine-readable code to the optical camera (Paragraph 225-227); processing, by the smart home system, the machine-readable code to provide processed health data (Paragraph 16, 219); and providing, by the smart home system, a notification on the occupant computing device based on the processed health data (Paragraph 16, 21).
Reed does not teach and a video doorbell system that includes a microphone, a speaker.
Xing in the same art of endeavor teaches (abstract: door access control system with a temperature detection function includes an infrared body temperature monitor device configured to detect a body temperature of a monitored object; a body temperature comparison device configured to compare a detected body temperature of the monitored object with a body temperature threshold; and a warning device configured to issue a warning message in response to the detected body temperature of the monitored object being higher than the body temperature threshold), a video doorbell system that includes a microphone, a speaker (Paragraph 23: the door access control system may include a microphone to realize a voice call function, loudspeaker, Paragraph 4: smart door access control system used outdoors has a video recording function, a call function, and a data uploading function via a wireless communication module) and (Paragraph 15, 25: the door access control system 100 with the body temperature detection function further includes a body temperature comparison device 120. The body temperature comparison device 120 may be configured to compare the detected body temperature of the monitored object with a predetermined body temperature threshold. For example, a visitor may have fever. The temperature of 37.3° C. is a general standard to determine the fever. Therefore, the predetermined body temperature threshold may be set to 37.3° C. Those of skill in the art should know that the 37.3° C. is merely exemplary not restrictive. Other body temperature thresholds related to other diseases may also be used).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one with ordinary skill in the art to modify Reed with Ouellette in order to improve the system and enhance the system capabilities which increase the user’s convenience.
Reed in view of Xing does not teach the optical camera configured to scan and read a machine-readable code; the optical camera reading the machine-readable code from the visitor computing device, the machine-readable code containing information pertinent to the visitor.
Sparks teaches the above {(Paragraph 138, 174, 212, 213: i.e.; the system 100 can interface with hospitals and healthcare providers to have the up-to-date immunization record and clean bill of health household QR code scanned as the subscriber 602 enters a hospital. Similarly, a hotel or apartment complex may require their guests or tenants (subscribers 602) to have QR codes on their mobile phones 108 scanned at the entrance to the complex to ensure that the subscriber 602 is up to date on their immunizations and/or COVID-19 health status required tests)}.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one with ordinary skill in the art before the filing date of the claimed invention to modify Reed with Sparks in order to improve the system and allow easy and quick way to obtain the health record which will improve the system and allow fast and quick results.
Sparks teaches the above {(Paragraph 138, 174, 212, 213: i.e.; the system 100 can interface with hospitals and healthcare providers to have the up-to-date immunization record and clean bill of health household QR code scanned as the subscriber 602 enters a hospital. Similarly, a hotel or apartment complex may require their guests or tenants (subscribers 602) to have QR codes on their mobile phones 108 scanned at the entrance to the complex to ensure that the subscriber 602 is up to date on their immunizations and/or COVID-19 health status required tests)}.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one with ordinary skill in the art before the filing date of the claimed invention to modify Reed with Sparks in order to improve the system and allow easy and quick way to obtain the health record which will improve the system and allow fast and quick results.
Regarding claim 3, Reed in view of Xing in view of Sparks teaches, acquiring additional health data from a remote database via the Internet (Sparks: Paragraph 28, 33, 37, 74); comparing, by the smart home system, the additional health data with one or more stored criteria; and notifying, by the smart home system, the user of the occupant computing device based on comparison results of the additional health data with the one or more stored criteria (Reed: if said skin temperature reading for said pre-registered individual is within an acceptable skin temperature range established for said automated system), (Reed: Paragraph 24: Once identity and acceptable skin temperature are confirmed, along with all the above-described parameters, the physical barrier (e.g., turnstile, gate, door, elevator, etc.) will release allowing the visitor to proceed to a walkthrough metal detector) and abstract: if the skin temperature reading for the individual is within an acceptable pre-established skin temperature range “reads on stored criteria” and Paragraph 85), also (Sparks: Paragraph 139, 183, 219).
Regarding claim 4, Reed in view of Xing in view of Sparks teaches, enabling the optical camera to scan and read the machine-readable code (Reed: Fig. 1, el. 120).
Regarding claim 17, see claim 1 rejection.
Claims 2, 12, 16 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Reed (US 20210304537) in view of Xing (US 20220031258) in view of Sparks (US 20210327548) in view of Lee (US 20170239524).
Regarding claim 2, Reed in view of Xing in view of Sparks teaches, health data is received, wherein the health data comprises contemporaneous data acquired in real time (see claim 1 rejection).
Reed in view of Xing in view of Sparks does not teach wherein the health data acquired in real time from a wearable device or embedded microchip in communication with the visitor computing device.
Lee in the same art of endeavor teaches health data acquired in real time from a wearable device or embedded microchip in communication with the visitor computing device (Paragraph 91).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one with ordinary skill in the art before the filing date of the claimed invention to modify Reed with Sparks with Lee in order to improve the system and obtain the heath data in easy and quick way.
Regarding claim 12, see claims 1and 2 rejections.
Regarding claim 16, Reed in view of Xing in view of Sparks in view of Lee teaches, wherein the smart home network also includes a card reader configured for wireless communication and the method further comprises: prompting the visitor to present a smart card to the card reader; receiving, by the system, information about the visitor via the card reader (Reed: Paragraph 168: card reader 106 may be configured to detect the presence of various types of hand-held cards that are used for gaining access to secured locations including but not limited to identification cards).
Claims 5-8, 10-11, 18-19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Reed (US 20210304537) in view of Xing (US 20220031258) in view of Sparks (US 20210327548) in view of Scalisi (US 20150288167).
Regarding claim 5, Reed in view of Xing in view of Sparks teaches, capturing, using the optical camera, an image of the visitor (Paragraph 46: the door access control system to detect and record the body temperature of the visitor in addition to obtain and recognize the human face image).
Reed in view of Xing in view of Sparks does not teach identifying the visitor, by applying facial recognition to the image of the visitor, to provide a visitor identity; and acquiring, by the system via the Internet, additional data about the visitor using the visitor identity.
Scalisi in the same art of endeavor teaches identifying the visitor, by applying facial recognition to the image of the visitor, to provide a visitor identity; and acquiring, by the system via the Internet, additional data about the visitor using the visitor identity (Paragraph 169: FIG. 20, the doorbell system 200 may also be configured to identify a visitor, such as a criminal or suspicious person, by taking a picture of the visitor (at step 2000). The doorbell system 200 may then determine, based on the picture, that the visitor is included in a database of suspicious visitors, such as a database of criminals, that previously visited other doorbells 202 (at step 2002). The doorbell system 200, and/or a remote computer, may use facial recognition software to match the facial data of the criminal with facial data from a law enforcement database. As well, the doorbell system 200 may detect the indication of the presence of the criminal by detecting body language of the criminal, such as detecting evasive or suspicious moves, detecting a fingerprint of the criminal, detecting a retina of the criminal, and the like).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one with ordinary skill in the art before the filing date of the claimed invention to modify Reed in view of Xing in view of Sparks with Scalisi in order to improve the system and enhance the security and safety of the occupant.
Regarding claim 6, Reed in view of Xing in view of Sparks in view of Scalisi teaches, wherein acquiring the additional data includes checking a criminal database (Scalisi: Paragraph 169).
Regarding claim 7, Reed in view of Xing in view of Sparks in view of Scalisi teaches, wherein acquiring the additional data includes checking a sex offender registry (Scalisi: Paragraph 169).
Regarding claim 8, Reed in view of Xing in view of Sparks in view of Scalisi teaches, wherein acquiring the criminal history includes accessing a government database (Scalisi: Paragraph 169; law enforcement database).
Regarding claim 10, Reed in view of Xing in view of Sparks teaches, wherein the machine-readable code contains a visitor identity (Paragraph 22: recognize the identity of the visitor through the under-screen fingerprint recognition function).
Reed in view of Xing in view of Sparks does not teach acquiring, by the system via the Internet, additional data about the visitor.
Scalisi in the same art of endeavor teaches identifying the visitor, by applying facial recognition to the image of the visitor, to provide a visitor identity; and acquiring, by the system via the Internet, additional data about the visitor using the visitor identity (Paragraph 169: FIG. 20, the doorbell system 200 may also be configured to identify a visitor, such as a criminal or suspicious person, by taking a picture of the visitor (at step 2000). The doorbell system 200 may then determine, based on the picture, that the visitor is included in a database of suspicious visitors, such as a database of criminals, that previously visited other doorbells 202 (at step 2002). The doorbell system 200, and/or a remote computer, may use facial recognition software to match the facial data of the criminal with facial data from a law enforcement database. As well, the doorbell system 200 may detect the indication of the presence of the criminal by detecting body language of the criminal, such as detecting evasive or suspicious moves, detecting a fingerprint of the criminal, detecting a retina of the criminal, and the like).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one with ordinary skill in the art before the filing date of the claimed invention to modify Reed in view of Xing in view of Sparks with Scalisi in order to improve the system and enhance the security and safety of the occupant.
Regarding claim 11, Reed in view of Xing in view of Sparks in view of Scalisi teaches, wherein acquiring the additional data about the visitor includes one or more of (i) checking a criminal database, (ii) checking a sex offender registry, (iii) accessing a government database, and (iv) searching social media websites for information about the visitor (Scalisi: Paragraph 169).
Regarding claim 18, wherein the machine-readable code contains health data and personal data of the user of the visitor computing device (see claims 3 and 5 rejection)
Regarding claim 19, acquiring, by the system via the Internet, additional data about the user of the visitor computing device; and displaying on the computing device a message relating to the additional data (see claims 3-5 and
Claims 9 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Reed (US 20210304537) in view of Xing (US 20220031258) in view of Sparks (US 20210327548) in view of Scalisi (US 20150288167) in view of Carbonell (US 10652627).
Regarding claim 9, Reed in view of Xing in view of Sparks in view of Scalisi teaches, identify the user.
Reed in view of Xing in view of Sparks in view of Scalisi does not teach wherein acquiring the additional data includes the system searching social media websites for information about the visitor.
Carbonell in the same art of endeavor teaches wherein acquiring the additional data includes the system searching social media websites for information about the visitor (Col. 12, lines 10-35: visitor rings a homeowner's doorbell. The homeowner has registered with the cognitive vetting program 110a, 110b and has installed a connected camera system outside the homeowner's home. The connected camera system captures images of the visitor and the cognitive vetting program 110a, 110b compares the captured images to a trained machine learning model to identify the visitor using facial recognition techniques. The cognitive vetting program 110a, 110b utilizes facial recognition techniques to match the captured images of the visitor to previously captured images of visitors which are stored within the cognitive vetting program 110a, 110b. The cognitive vetting program 110a, 110b locates a visitor profile for the visitor which contains past interaction history between the visitor and the homeowner's neighbors. The past interaction history includes images of the visitor, the visitor's name, date of birth, occupation, and linked social media accounts
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one with ordinary skill in the art before the filing date of the claimed invention to modify Reed in view of Xing in view of Sparks with Carbonell in order to improve the system and enhance the security and safety of the occupant by collecting different types of information about the visitor.
Claim 13 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Reed (US 20210304537) in view of Xing (US 20220031258) in view of Sparks (US 20210327548) in view of Lee (US 20170239524) in view of White (US 20210391041).
Regarding claim 13, Reed in view of Xing in view of Sparks in view of Scalisi in view of Lee teaches, the claimed method (see claim 12 rejection).
Reed in view of Xing in view of Sparks in view of Scalisi in view of Lee does not teach wherein the machine-readable code is part of a Smart Health Card.
White in the same art of endeavor teaches (abstract: health safety method executed by a processor includes receiving, by the processor, from a medical facility, a certificate of vaccination for a particular disease for an individual, the vaccination conferring immunity to the individual for the disease; receiving by the processor an access request from a venue for the individual; and responding to the venue access request by providing a health safety certification including the certificate of vaccination for the individual and an effective date range of the certificate of vaccination), white also teaches machine-readable code is part of a Smart Health Card (Paragraph 36, 59, 129: card reader for vaccination card to gain access to venue).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one with ordinary skill in the art before the filing date of the claimed invention to modify Reed in view of Xing in view of Sparks with White in order to improve the system and enhance users’ safety and health.
Claims 14-15 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Reed (US 20210304537) in view of Xing (US 20220031258) in view of Sparks (US 20210327548) in view of Lee (US 20170239524) in view of Trell (US 8, 041016).
Regarding claim 14, Reed in view of Xing in view of Sparks in view of Scalisi in view of Lee teaches, establishing wireless communication (see claim 12 rejection).
Reed in view of Xing in view of Sparks in view of Scalisi in view of Lee does not teach wherein establishing wireless communication includes receiving, by the visitor computing device, a broadcast signal from the smart home network.
Trell in the same art of endeavor teaches establishing wireless communication includes receiving, by the visitor computing device, a broadcast signal from the smart home network (Trell: Col. 2, lines 15-40; the mobile telephone is placed into a "cradle" having a microphone and a loudspeaker connected to a service providing machine, or other contrivance for short range communication with a mobile phone, e.g. IR, Bluetooth, and which so is passed on by the mobile (hereinafter commonly referred to as "cradle"), thereby establishing a two-way signal or data transfer link between the service provider and the service providing machine).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one with ordinary skill in the art before the filing date of the claimed invention to modify Reed in view of Xing in view of Sparks in view of Scalisi with Lee in order to improve the system and enhance the user’s convenience by providing quick connection.
Regarding claim 15, Reed in view of Xing in view of Sparks in view of Scalisi teaches, establishing wireless communication (see claim 12 rejection).
Reed in view of Xing in view of Sparks in view of Scalisi does not teach wherein establishing wireless communication is performed using near-field communication.
Trell in the same art of endeavor teaches establishing wireless communication is performed using near-field communication (Trell: Col. 2, lines 15-40; the mobile telephone is placed into a "cradle" having a microphone and a loudspeaker connected to a service providing machine, or other contrivance for short range communication with a mobile phone, e.g. IR, Bluetooth, and which so is passed on by the mobile (hereinafter commonly referred to as "cradle"), thereby establishing a two-way signal or data transfer link between the service provider and the service providing machine).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one with ordinary skill in the art before the filing date of the claimed invention to modify Reed in view of Xing in view of Sparks in view of Scalisi with Lee in order to improve the system and enhance the user’s convenience by providing quick connection.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to MARIA EL-ZOOBI whose telephone number is (571)270-3434. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 7-4.
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 Edward 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.
/MARIA EL-ZOOBI/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2692
Prosecution Insights