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 .
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.
Claims 1, 4, 6, 8, 10, 17, 19, 22, 34, 36, 38, 41 and 43 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Lyman (Pub# US 2015/0307273 A1), and further in view of Oliver et al. (Pub# US2015/0154847 A1).
Consider claim 1, Lyman teaches a computer-controlled lock system for a bin, the lock system including: a movement monitoring module including an accelerometer and a computer processor to monitor when the bin is being collected [0022], a lock arrangement in communication with the movement monitoring module configured to unlock the bin when the bin is being collected [0024].
Lyman does not teach lock the bin when the bin is not being collected, and a range monitoring system including a computer processor to monitor the proximity of the bin to a base station, wherein the range monitoring system includes a wireless module for receiving and measuring strength of wireless signals from a base station.
In the same field of endeavor, Oliver et al. teaches lock the bin when the bin is not being collected, and a range monitoring system including a computer processor to monitor the proximity of the bin to a base station, wherein the range monitoring system includes a wireless module for receiving and measuring strength of wireless signals (RSSI) from a base station [0033] for the benefit of providing additional access control and anti-tamper protection.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to include lock the bin when the bin is not being collected, and a range monitoring system including a computer processor to monitor the proximity of the bin to a base station, wherein the range monitoring system includes a wireless module for receiving and measuring strength of wireless signals from a base station as shown in Oliver et al., in Lyman device for the benefit of providing additional access control and anti-tamper protection.
Consider claim 4, Lyman clearly shows and discloses the computer-controlled lock system wherein the wireless module includes a BLE unit configured to operate in advertising mode [0023].
Consider claim 6, Lyman teaches similar invention.
Lyman does not teach the computer-controlled lock system wherein the range monitoring system is configured to receive a BLE data signal which includes a threshold radio signal strength data, and assess the signal strength data with the measured strength, to output a home zone data element if the measured strength is above the threshold data set in the message, and an out-of-home zone data element if the measured strength is below the threshold data in the message.
In the same field of endeavor, Oliver et al. teaches wherein the range monitoring system is configured to receive a BLE data signal which includes a threshold radio signal strength data, and assess the signal strength data with the measured strength, to output a home zone data element if the measured strength is above the threshold data set in the message, and an out-of-home zone data element if the measured strength is below the threshold data in the message [0033] for the benefit of providing alert to the user.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to include wherein the range monitoring system is configured to receive a BLE data signal which includes a threshold radio signal strength data, and assess the signal strength data with the measured strength, to output a home zone data element if the measured strength is above the threshold data set in the message, and an out-of-home zone data element if the measured strength is below the threshold data in the message as shown in Oliver et al., in Lyman device for the benefit of providing alert to the user.
Consider claim 8, Lyman clearly shows and discloses the computer-controlled lock system wherein the base station includes a volume control to vary the power of the threshold data signal [0054].
Consider claim 10, Lyman clearly shows and discloses the computer-controlled lock system wherein the lock arrangement includes a key management module and the threshold data signal includes a key (access) code for security [0024].
Consider claim 17, Lyman clearly shows and discloses the computer-controlled lock system wherein the accelerometer includes a trigger unit which includes a sensing module which activates the computer processor of the movement monitoring module to commence sampling data from the accelerometer [0022].
Consider claim 19, Lyman clearly shows and discloses the computer-controlled lock system wherein the movement monitoring module sends the threshold comparison output data to a lock control module which includes a latch state detector configured to detect whether the latch is in a locked position or in an unlocked position, the latch state detector being configured to record the latch state in an onboard memory [0058].
Consider claim 22, Lyman teaches similar invention.
Lyman does not teach the computer-controlled lock system wherein the lock control module includes a zone detector configured to detect whether the lock is in a home zone proximal a base station or whether the lock is in an out of home zone distal the base station, wherein the lock control module is configured to record whether the lock is in the home zone or in the out of home zone, in memory.
In the same field of endeavor, Oliver et al. teaches wherein the lock control module includes a zone detector configured to detect whether the lock is in a home zone proximal a base station or whether the lock is in an out of home zone distal the base station, wherein the lock control module is configured to record whether the lock is in the home zone or in the out of home zone, in memory [0053] for the benefit of providing alert notification to the user.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to include wherein the lock control module includes a zone detector configured to detect whether the lock is in a home zone proximal a base station or whether the lock is in an out of home zone distal the base station, wherein the lock control module is configured to record whether the lock is in the home zone or in the out of home zone, in memory as shown in Oliver et al., in Lyman device for the benefit of providing alert notification to the user.
Consider claim 34, the method steps herein have been performed or executed by the corresponding apparatus in claim 1. Therefore, claim 34 has been analyzed and rejected with regards to claim 1 as set forth above.
Consider claim 36, the method steps herein have been performed or executed by the corresponding apparatus in claim 10. Therefore, claim 36 has been analyzed and rejected with regards to claim 10 as set forth above.
Consider claim 38, the method steps herein have been performed or executed by the corresponding apparatus in claim 6. Therefore, claim 38 has been analyzed and rejected with regards to claim 6 as set forth above.
Consider claim 41, the method steps herein have been performed or executed by the corresponding apparatus in claim 19. Therefore, claim 41 has been analyzed and rejected with regards to claim 19 as set forth above.
Consider claim 43, the method steps herein have been performed or executed by the corresponding apparatus in claim 1. Therefore, claim 43 has been analyzed and rejected with regards to claim 1 as set forth above.
Claims 12 and 26 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Lyman (Pub# US 2015/0307273 A1) in view of Oliver et al. (Pub# US2015/0154847 A1) as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Lupovici (Pub # US 2017/0228953 A1) and Ullrich et al. (Pub # US 2013/0298616 A1).
Consider claim 12, Lyman and Oliver et al. combined reference teaches similar invention.
Lyman and Oliver et al. combined reference does not teach the computer-controlled lock system wherein the key management module includes an actuator button wherein the key management module is configured such that a long press on the actuator button will erase all key data strings from a key database except for a master key data string wherein the key management module includes a key configuration routine wherein the key management module is configured to add keys in the key configuration routine by responding to a short press of the button to cause the key data contained in any incoming message that bears a "remember me" data flag to be saved in the key database table.
In the same field of endeavor, Lupovici teaches wherein the key management module includes an actuator button wherein the key management module is configured such that a long press on the actuator button will erase all key data strings from a key database except for a master key data string [0226] for the benefit of resetting the database.
Furthermore, in the same field of endeavor, Ullrich et al. teaches wherein the key management module includes a key configuration routine wherein the key management module is configured to add keys in the key configuration routine by responding to a short press of the button to cause the key data contained in any incoming message that bears a "remember me" data flag to be saved in the key database table [0220] for the benefit of adding credential into the database.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to include the computer-controlled lock system wherein the key management module includes an actuator button wherein the key management module is configured such that a long press on the actuator button will erase all key data strings from a key database except for a master key data string wherein the key management module includes a key configuration routine wherein the key management module is configured to add keys in the key configuration routine by responding to a short press of the button to cause the key data contained in any incoming message that bears a "remember me" data flag to be saved in the key database table as shown in Lupovici and Ullrich et al., in Lyman and Oliver et al. device for the benefit of resetting and adding credential into the database.
Consider claim 26, Lyman and Oliver et al. combined reference teaches the similar invention.
Lyman and Oliver et al. combined reference does not teach the computer-controlled lock system wherein a lock housing is provided that includes shoulders to protect the latch when the bin is inverted for cleaning.
In the same field of endeavor, Lupovici teaches wherein a lock housing is provided that includes shoulders to protect the latch when the bin is inverted for cleaning [0366] for the benefit of providing weather proof protection.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to include wherein a lock housing is provided that includes shoulders to protect the latch when the bin is inverted for cleaning as shown in Lupovici, in the combined device for the benefit of providing weather proof protection.
Claim 18 is are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Lyman (Pub# US 2015/0307273 A1) in view of Oliver et al. (Pub# US2015/0154847 A1) as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Edgerton et al. (US Patent #5,835,298).
Consider claim 18, Lyman and Oliver et al. combined reference teaches similar invention.
Lyman and Oliver et al. combined reference does not teach the computer-controlled lock system wherein the movement monitoring module records a sample of data from the accelerometer and conducts numerical integration on the sample to compare it with a threshold to provide a threshold comparison output data.
In the same field of endeavor, Edgerton et al. teaches wherein the movement monitoring module records a sample of data from the accelerometer and conducts numerical integration on the sample to compare it with a threshold to provide a threshold comparison output data (Column 7 lines 25-35) for the benefit of improving event detection by integrated motion measure vs instant acceleration spike.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to include wherein the movement monitoring module records a sample of data from the accelerometer and conducts numerical integration on the sample to compare it with a threshold to provide a threshold comparison output data ss shown in Edgerton et al., in Lyman and Oliver et al. combined device for the benefit of improving event detection by integrated motion measure vs instant acceleration spike.
Claim 24 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Lyman (Pub# US 2015/0307273 A1) in view of Oliver et al. (Pub# US2015/0154847 A1) as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Simmons (Pub # US 2015/0048927 A1).
Consider claim 24, Lyman and Oliver et al. combined reference teaches similar invention.
Lyman and Oliver et al. combined reference does not teach the computer-controlled lock system wherein the lock control module is configured to receive the output data from the range monitor to lock the lock arrangement when the output data indicates that the bin is in the out of home zone.
In the same field of endeavor, Simmons teaches wherein the lock control module is configured to receive the output data from the range monitor to lock the lock arrangement when the output data indicates that the bin is in the out of home zone [0068] for the benefit of proving security when away from the system.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to include wherein the lock control module is configured to receive the output data from the range monitor to lock the lock arrangement when the output data indicates that the bin is in the out of home zone as shown in Simmons, in Lyman and Oliver et al. combined device for the benefit of proving security when away from the system.
Claims 27, 30, and 31 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Lyman (Pub# US 2015/0307273 A1) in view of Oliver et al. (Pub# US2015/0154847 A1) as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Banik (Pub # US 2014/0027454 A1).
Consider claim 27, Lyman and Oliver et al. combined reference teaches similar invention.
Lyman and Oliver et al. combined reference does not teach the computer-controlled lock system wherein the lock system includes a catch which is movable for manual release, such that it can move between a locked position and an unlocked position, wherein the catch is configured to be unlocked from the outside or the inside of the bin, wherein an outside actuator is a key, which in use cooperates with a lock and includes a detent so as to be retainable in the lock when the key is turned to the unlock position.
In the same field of endeavor, Banik teaches wherein the lock system includes a catch which is movable for manual release, such that it can move between a locked position and an unlocked position, wherein the catch is configured to be unlocked from the outside or the inside of the bin, wherein an outside actuator is a key, which in use cooperates with a lock and includes a detent so as to be retainable in the lock when the key is turned to the unlock position [0012] for the benefit of shown the structure of the latch mechanisms .
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to include wherein the lock system includes a catch which is movable for manual release, such that it can move between a locked position and an unlocked position, wherein the catch is configured to be unlocked from the outside or the inside of the bin, wherein an outside actuator is a key, which in use cooperates with a lock and includes a detent so as to be retainable in the lock when the key is turned to the unlock position as shown in Banik, in Lyman and Oliver et al. combined device for the benefit of shown the structure of the latch mechanisms.
Consider claim 30, Lyman and Oliver et al. combined reference teaches similar invention.
Lyman and Oliver et al. combined reference does not teach wherein the lock includes a cam which operates on a follower to push against a biasing force in the form of springs wherein the follower is manually operable by an actuator handle in order to release from the inside.
In the same field of endeavor, Banik teaches wherein the lock includes a cam which operates on a follower to push against a biasing force in the form of springs wherein the follower is manually operable by an actuator handle in order to release from the inside [0014] for the benefit of securing the lid.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to include wherein the lock includes a cam which operates on a follower to push against a biasing force in the form of springs wherein the follower is manually operable by an actuator handle in order to release from the inside as shown in Banik, in Lyman and Oliver et al. device for the benefit of securing the lid.
Consider claim 31, Lyman and Oliver et al. combined reference teaches similar invention.
Lyman and Oliver et al. combined reference does not teach the computer-controlled lock system wherein there is provided a catch safety release wherein the handle slides the catch away from the latch to release.
In the same field of endeavor, Banik teaches wherein there is provided a catch safety release wherein the handle slides the catch away from the latch to release [0050] for the benefit of providing manual latch release.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to include wherein there is provided a catch safety release wherein the handle slides the catch away from the latch to release as shown inBanik, in Lyman and Oliver et al. device for the benefit of providing manual latch release.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JACK K WANG whose telephone number is (571)272-1938. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 9AM - 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, Brian Zimmerman can be reached at 571-272-3059. 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.
/JACK K WANG/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2686