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
Rejection of claims under 35 U.S.C. § 102:
Applicant argues Lobo fails to disclose any of the claimed events. The Examiner agrees that Lobo does not expressly disclose the claimed events; however, the Examiner does not find that the events serve to distinguish the claims themselves from Lobo. Claim 1 is drawn to a process and the listed events are not positively recited as a step, but couched in a manner in which the method is intended to be deployed. Claim 1 recites "determining a variation pattern of the airborne particulate matter indicative of perturbation in the airborne particulate matter during an active stimulus associated with an event." The claim requires the act of determining a variation of the airborne particulate matter, not that the event be performed, nor determining which event has occurred, and the active stimulus does not have to be the event but only requires some "associat[ion]" such as a similar stimulus as that produced by one of the events.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
The following is a quotation of the appropriate paragraphs of 35 U.S.C. 102 that form the basis for the rejections under this section made in this Office action:
A person shall be entitled to a patent unless –
(a)(1) the claimed invention was patented, described in a printed publication, or in public use, on sale, or otherwise available to the public before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claim(s) 1, 3-8, and 11-14 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Lobo (US 2021/0142654).
Lobo, under normal operation, monitors for smoke, and also during testing, monitors for smoke and anomalies (Table 30):
1. A method of evaluating an operational aspect of a life safety detection device, the method comprising:
transmitting light from at least one light source into a detection chamber positioned within an interior of a housing of the life safety detection device (para. [0047]: "the detection chamber readings may be obtained by a photo electric transmitter and receiver placed inside each detector.");
receiving, over a predefined time period (para. []0051), scattered light within the detection chamber (para. [0047]: "the detection chamber readings may be obtained by a photo electric transmitter and receiver placed inside each detector."), wherein the scattered light is indicative of a presence of airborne particulate matter (para. [0047]: "When airborne particles enter inside a detection chamber of the detector, the light transmitted by the photo electric transmitter is scattered by the airborne particles");
determining, by at least one processor (control panel 102; para. [0062]: “The monitoring unit monitors the detection chamber readings received from the detectors.”) communicably coupled to the life safety detection device, a variation pattern of the airborne particulate matter during the predefined time period based on the received scattered light during the predefined time period (Para. [0047]: "Whenever, there is smoke or fire, the number of airborne particles increases and more light is scattered and received in lesser amount at the photo electric receiver.");
analyzing, by the at least one processor, the variation pattern of the airborne particulate matter over the predefined time period with respect to another variation pattern during the predefined time duration (Para. [0047]: "Whenever, there is smoke or fire, the number of airborne particles increases and more light is scattered and received in lesser amount at the photo electric receiver."; Para. [0060]: "it is shown in Table 2 that there is smoke build up at 13:45 ") ; and
evaluating, by the at least one processor, the operational aspect associated with the life safety detection device based on the analyzing step (para. [0060]: " Table 3 illustrates different detectors D1-D6. Detector D1 describes the value (from ADC) of detector D1 which is below 50 units indicating an alarm needs to be triggered for the value of less than 50 units. The value of less than 50 indicates increase the airborne particles such as smoke to alarming level. In this case due to more number of smoke particles, the light received by the photo receiver is less and accordingly lesser reading for ADC is obtained. A neighboring detector D3 indicates the impact of smoke being developed and reading are in range of 65-70. Detector D3 appears to have constant reading and does not correspond to the readings of neighboring detectors indicating a possibility of anomaly in the detector D3. The readings of D4-D6 appear to be in normal range of 75-80. Accordingly, in this embodiment, different readings from ADC may be used to identify any anomaly associated with the detectors.");
wherein the determining comprises determining a variation pattern of the airborne particulate matter (Para. [0047]: "Whenever, there is smoke or fire, the number of airborne particles increases and more light is scattered and received in lesser amount at the photo electric receiver.") indicative of perturbation in the airborne particulate matter during an active stimulus associated with an event (para. [0059]: "Further, it is shown in Table 2 that there is smoke build up at 13:45 with 44 units which increases to 53 units at 14:00 indicating a time to alert a fire and alarm system.) within a predefined threshold distance from the life safety detection device (nearby or closer such as at the life safety detection device), and wherein the event perturbs air quality (smoke; para. [0060]: "Detector D1 describes the value (from ADC) of detector D1 which is below 50 units indicating an alarm needs to be triggered for the value of less than 50 units. The value of less than 50 indicates increase the airborne particles such as smoke to alarming level." See remainder of para. [0060]) within the predefined threshold distance (vicinity of the detector: "location information" para. [0040]; or inside chamber);
wherein the event comprises one of:
activating a sub-alarm threshold aerosol within the predefined threshold distance,
change in state of one of a door or a window within the predefined threshold distance, and
activating a ventilation system within the predefined threshold distance
(This list of various events are interpreted to be conditions in which the claimed method is intended to be practiced. These events are not taken to be positively reciting steps of the claimed method (e.g. the claim does not recite "comprising a step of: activating a sub-alarm threshold aerosol). For instance, if there is fire event in another room and a door is opened allowing smoke to enter, Lobo's method would detect the smoke due to an event of "change in state of one of a door or a window within the predefined threshold distance."
As an analogy, a claim directed to detecting motion/events in view of camera comprising: imaging a scene, observing changes in intensity in pixels of an image caused by a motion/event, and determining a motion/event has occurred, wherein the motion/event comprises one of: a mouse scampering, a burglar walking, a rose bush swaying in the wind. The Examiner submits that it would be a reasonable that the claim is anticipated by a reference teaching a camera that takes images and detect motion in the image. Please also see remarks regarding the rejection of claim 3 in the Office action of March 11, 2026).
4. The method of claim 1, wherein the another variation pattern is associated with another life safety detection device within a predefined threshold distance from the life safety detection device (“neighboring detector D3”; para. [0058]: “It is depicted in the tables that a detector D1, D2, D4, D5, and D6 are showing detection chamber readings which are varying at different time periods sampled by a control panel. However, detector D3 is showing constant reading of 7 units for all the time samples indicating an anomaly associated with detector D3").
5. The method of claim 1, wherein the another variation pattern is a predefined pattern associated with a ground truth airborne particulate matter detection device. (The act performed in claim 1 is the same, regardless of how the data is associated with the ground truth airborne particulate matter detection device. Furthermore, the claim does not require the predefined pattern be from the ground truth airborne particulate matter detection device and only requires an undefined association. In this case, the detectors of Lobo provide indications of particles in air like that of a ground truth airborne particulate matter detection device)
6. The method of claim 1, wherein:
the analyzing comprises determining whether a deviation between the variation pattern of the airborne particulate matter and the another variation pattern is within a predefined threshold, and
the evaluating comprises evaluating that the life safety detection device is malfunctioning in response to a determining that the deviation is above a predefined threshold (para. [0059]: "Further, it is shown in Table 2 that there is smoke build up at 13:45 with 44 units which increases to 53 units at 14:00 indicating a time to alert a fire and alarm system. The neighboring detector D3 still shows a constant reading of 7 units. Such a reading indicates that the detector D3 is not working properly and needs to be notified to the concerned user.").
7. The method of claim 6 further comprising:
transmitting, by the at least one processor, an alert indicating malfunctioning of the life safety detection device based on the evaluating step (para. [0059]: "Such a reading indicates that the detector D3 is not working properly and needs to be notified to the concerned user.").
8. A system of evaluating an operational aspect of a life safety detection device, the system comprising:
a life safety detection device (Fig. 1, 100) comprising:
a housing defining a detection chamber for receiving ambient materials (para. [0003]: "detectors such as smoke, fire, hazardous gases detectors etc. are covered with a cover/cap to avoid fine air particles such as construction dust, painting fumes etc. entering into a detection chamber of the detectors");
at least one light source configured to emit light into the detection chamber (para. [0047]: "the detection chamber readings may be obtained by a photo electric transmitter and receiver placed inside each detector."); and
at least one light sensing device configured to receive, over a predefined time period, scattered light reflected from the ambient materials in the detection chamber, wherein the scattered light is indicative of a presence of airborne particulate matter (para. [0047]: "the detection chamber readings may be obtained by a photo electric transmitter and receiver placed inside each detector."); and
a processor (control panel 102) communicably coupled to the life safety detection device, wherein the processor is configured to:
determine a variation pattern of the airborne particulate matter during the predefined time period based on the received scattered light at the life safety detection device during the predefined time period (control panel 102; see citation given above for claim 1);
analyze the variation pattern of the airborne particulate matter over the predefined time period with respect to another variation pattern during the predefined time duration (see citation given above for claim 1); and
evaluate the operational aspect associated with the life safety detection device based on the analysis (see citation given above for claim 1);
wherein the determining comprises determining a variation pattern of the airborne particulate matter indicative of perturbation in the airborne particulate matter during an active stimulus associated with an event within a predefined threshold distance from the life safety detection device within the predefined threshold distance (see citation given above for claim 1);
wherein the event comprises one of:
activating a sub-alarm threshold aerosol within the predefined threshold distance,
change in state of one of a door or a window within the predefined threshold distance, and
activating a ventilation system within the predefined threshold distance
(This list of various events are interpreted to be a manner/condition in which the claimed system is intended to be used. Claim 8 is directed to the structure of a system and the events are not found to impart any particular structure to the system and thus do not serve to structurally distinguish from Lobo. Lobo shows all the structural elements as recited claim 8 and being identical in structure as claimed, it would be reasonable to conclude the system of Lobo would operate should it be used in any of the listed events. See MPEP 2114(II)).
11. The system of claim 8, wherein the another variation pattern is associated with another life safety detection device within a predefined threshold distance from the life safety detection device (Same applies as claim 10 above).
12. The system of claim 8, wherein the another variation pattern is a predefined pattern associated with a ground truth airborne particulate matter detection device (Same applies as claim 10 above since the ground truth airborne particulate matter detection device is not an element of the claim system and is an object intended to be used in conjunction with the claimed system).
13. The system of claim 8, wherein:
to analyze the variation pattern, the processor is configured to determine whether a deviation between the variation pattern of the airborne particulate matter and the another variation pattern is within a predefined threshold, and
to evaluate the operational aspect, the processor is configured to evaluate that the life safety detection device is malfunctioning in response to a determining that the deviation is above a predefined threshold (para. [0051]: " During the blockade, the detection chamber reading may also vary around the constant reading within a predetermined limit." In addition, the processor only compares the patterns. The processor does not identify what the active stimulus is).
14. The system of claim 13, wherein the processor is further configured to:
transmit an alert indicating malfunctioning of the life safety detection device based on the evaluating step (para. [0059]: "Such a reading indicates that the detector D3 is not working properly and needs to be notified to the concerned user.").
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Hwa Andrew S Lee whose telephone number is (571)272-2419. The examiner can normally be reached Mon-Fri 9am-5:30pm.
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, Michelle Iacoletti can be reached at (571) 270-5789. 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.
/Hwa Andrew Lee/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2877
Prosecution Insights