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 .
DETAILED ACTION
1. This action is responsive to applicant’s amendment dated 7/22/2026.
2. Claims 1-20 are pending in the case.
3. Claims 1 and 11 are independent claims.
Applicant’s Response
4. In Applicant’s response dated 7/22/2026, applicant has amended the following:
a) Claims 17-20
Claim Objections
Claim 19 is objected to because of the following informalities:
a) Claim 19 does not have a period at the end of the sentence to properly conclude the claim. See MPEP 608.01.
Appropriate correction is required.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 101
35 U.S.C. 101 reads as follows:
Whoever invents or discovers any new and useful process, machine, manufacture, or composition of matter, or any new and useful improvement thereof, may obtain a patent therefor, subject to the conditions and requirements of this title.
Claims 1-16 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 101 because the claimed invention is directed to a judicial exception (i.e., a law of nature, a natural phenomenon, or an abstract idea) without significantly more.
Step 1
Claims 1-10 and 17-20 are directed towards a non-transitory computer-readable storage medium including instructions (i.e., manufacture product) for notifying a user of a consolidated event.
Claims 11-16 are directed towards a method (i.e., process) for notifying a user of a consolidated event.
Therefore, Claims 1-16 recite one of the enumerated statutory categories of eligible subject matter in 35 U.S.C. $101.
Step 2A- Prong 1
If a claim limitation, under its broadest reasonable interpretation, cover concepts performed in the human mind (including an observation, evaluation, judgment, opinion), then it falls within the "mental process" grouping of abstract ideas. The independent claims recite method, machine and manufacture product for analyzing design options. Specifically, the independent claims recite
Claim 1:
processing information associated with the first datum to identify an event information associated with the first datum;
processing information associated with the second datum to identify an event information associated with the second datum;
comparing at least a portion of the event information associated with the first datum with at least a portion of the event information associated with the second datum;
determining occurrence of a consolidated event based on the comparing;
determining a notification based on the determined consolidated event;
Claim 11:
determining, by the processor, a condition for causing transmission of a notification to a user device;
processing, by the processor, information associated with the first datum and information associated with the second datum;
generating, by the processor, one or more notifications to the user device based on the processing; and
These limitations, under its broadest reasonable interpretations, cover performance of the limitations in the human mind, or by a human using a pen and paper. Therefore, these limitations are grouped within the "mental process" grouping (including an observation, evaluation, judgement, opinion) of abstract ideas. (see MPEP 2016.04(a)(2)(iii)). Accordingly, the independent claims recite an abstract idea.
Step 2A- Prong 2
The independent claims recite the combination of additional elements of 1) non-transitory computer-readable medium 2) a processor 3) receiving a first datum from a first source and a second datum from a second source, wherein the first and second sources are both connected to a network; 4) and causing transmission of the determined notification to a user device.
The independent claims merely use computer elements as tools to perform abstract ideas and generally link the use of a judicial exception to a particular technological environment. The use of the computer elements as tools to implement the abstract idea and generally to link the use of the abstract idea to a particular technological environment does not render the claim patent eligible because it requires no more than a computer performing functions that correspond to acts required to carry out the abstract idea. The 1) non-transitory computer-readable medium 2) a processor are recited at a high-level of generality such that it amounts no more than mere generic computer component limitations to apply the exception using a generic computer component or amounts to merely invoking a computer as a tool to perform the abstract idea. Specifically, the computer components may be any number of hardware architectures including processors, user devices or storage devices, and function to perform data storage and processing (see specification paras. 48-50, Figure 3).
The additional element of 3) receiving a first datum from a first source and a second datum from a second source, wherein the first and second sources are both connected to a network; is merely data gathering or well known pre-solution insignificant extra solution activity.
The additional element of 4) and causing transmission of the determined notification to a user device is merely outputting or well known post-solution insignificant extra solution activity.
Integration into a practical application requires an additional element or a combination of additional elements in the claim to apply, rely on, or use the judicial exception in a manner that imposes a meaningful limit on the judicial exception, such that the claim is more than a drafting effort designed to monopolize the exception.
As explained above, the additional elements do not impose any meaningful limits on practicing the abstract idea and the additional limitations are not indicative of materializing into a practical application. Accordingly, the claims are directed to an abstract idea.
Step 2B
The independent claims do not include additional elements that are sufficient to amount to significantly more than the judicial exception. As discussed above with respect to integration of the abstract idea into a practical application, the additional element of using computer elements such as 1) non-transitory computer-readable medium 2) a processor to perform the noted steps amounts to no more than mere instructions to apply the exception using generic computer components. Generic computer elements recited as performing generic computer functions that are well- understood, routine, or conventional activities amount to no more than implementing the abstract idea with a computerized system. Mere instructions to apply an exception using a generic computer component cannot provide an inventive concept ("significantly more").
The additional element of 3) receiving a first datum from a first source and a second datum from a second source, wherein the first and second sources are both connected to a network; is considered well- understood, routine, conventional activity in the field. (Symantec, 838 F.3d at 1321, 120 USPQ2d at 1362 (utilizing an intermediary computer to forward information); OJP Techs., Inc., V. Amazon.com, Inc., 788 F.3d 1359, 1363, 115 USPQ2d 1090, 1093 (Fed. Cir. 2015) (sending messages over a network); buySAFE, Inc. V. Google, Inc., 765 F.3d 1350, 1355, 112 USPQ2d 1093, 1096 (Fed. Cir. 2014) (computer receives and sends information over a network and performing repetitive calculations); Here, the claim limitation of receiving data over a network is similar to the receiving of data over network as stated above.
The additional element of 4) and causing transmission of the determined notification to a user device is merely displaying data output recited at a high level of generality which is a well- understood, routine, or conventional activity [MPEP 2106.05(d)(II), see OIP Techs., 788 F.3d at 1362-63, 115 USPQ2d at 1092-93] and remains insignificant extra-solution activity even upon reconsideration [MPEP 2106.05(g)]. Mere instructions to apply an exception using generic computer components, linking the use of an exception to a technological field of use, and insignificant extra-solution activity cannot provide an inventive concept.
Therefore, the additional elements in the independent claims do not amount to significantly more than a judicial exception. Furthermore, there is no indication that the additional limitations alone or in combination improves the functioning of a computer or any other technology, improves another technology or technical field, or effects a transformation or reduction of a particular article to a different state or thing. Therefore, the claims are not patent eligible
Remaining claims
Claims 2-10 and 12-16 are similarly rejected because they either further define/narrow the abstract idea and/or do not further limit the claim to a practical application or provide as inventive concept such that the claims are subject matter eligible even when considered individually or as an ordered combination
The dependent claims add additional features including those that merely serve to further narrow the abstract idea above including: 1) receiving a third datum from a third source, wherein the third source is connected to the user network; (see claim 2) 2) wherein the first source is selected from a group (see claim 4, 5, 15, 16) 3) causing transmission of at least a portion of the selected datum to the user device. (see claim 8, 10,13) 4) recalling the transmitted notification (see claim 14) are recited at a high level in the claims and in the spec and only amount to using a computer to aid in the mental process, especially as they are well known in the art (see MPEP 2106.05(f) section (2)).
Applicant's inventive concept is using the computer as a tool to consolidate events. So the improvement seems to improve the abstract idea (e.g., determining which events to consolidate) verses an improvement in a technology or technological process. The improvement cannot come from the abstract ideas. See MPEP 2106.05(a)
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.
Claims 1-13, 15 and 16 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Rabb et al. (hereinafter “Rabb”), U.S. Published Application 20160343243 A1.
Claim 1:
Rabb teaches A non-transitory computer-readable medium storing instructions which, when executed by a processor, cause performance of a method of notifying a user of a consolidated event, the method comprising: (e.g., computer system for consolidating events into a single event notice see Figure 10A; memory 1040, processor 1030, par. 25; In this way multiple events may be consolidated into a larger single event and only a single event notice may be sent.)
receiving a first datum from a first source and a second datum from a second source, wherein the first and second sources are both connected to a network; (e.g., network connected sensors or devices collect data (i.e., first and second datum) which result from a particular event par. 26; premises management systems, such as those that incorporate intelligent, multi-sensing, network-connected devices, which can integrate seamlessly with each other and/or with a central server or cloud-computing system par. 27; . At 110, a first sensor may collect a first sensor data and at 120 a second sensor may collect a second sensor data. Par. 28; At 130 the method may determine whether the collected first sensor data and the collected second sensor data result from a particular event.)
processing information associated with the first datum to identify an event information associated with the first datum; (e.g., processing captured sensor data from a first sensor to determine if a particular event occurred par. 28; Based on a match between the collected sensor data and the condition of the particular event profile, the first sensor data and the second sensor data may be determined to result from the particular event represented by the particular event profile. The method may return an indication that the particular event has occurred, or the matched event profile may serve as a basis for other functions of the subject matter of this disclosure. The determination that collected data results from a particular event may be equivalent to a determination that the collected data satisfies the conditions of a particular event profile.)
processing information associated with the second datum to identify an event information associated with the second datum; (e.g., processing captured sensor data from a second sensor to determine if a particular event occurred par. 28; Based on a match between the collected sensor data and the condition of the particular event profile, the first sensor data and the second sensor data may be determined to result from the particular event represented by the particular event profile. The method may return an indication that the particular event has occurred, or the matched event profile may serve as a basis for other functions of the subject matter of this disclosure. The determination that collected data results from a particular event may be equivalent to a determination that the collected data satisfies the conditions of a particular event profile.)
comparing at least a portion of the event information associated with the first datum with at least a portion of the event information associated with the second datum; (e.g., comparing captured sensor data to stored event profiles par. 25; To address the issues previously described, devices, systems, and techniques as disclosed herein may provide for consolidation of events across sensors by comparing captured sensor data to stored event profiles.)
determining occurrence of a consolidated event based on the comparing; (e.g., determining occurrence of a consolidated event based on comparing an event sequence captured by sensors to an event sequence stored in the event profile par. 25; Sensors may collect data from a series of events within certain time periods such that the collected sensor data and time periods make up an event sequence. This event sequence may be compared to an event sequence stored in the event profile.)
determining a notification based on the determined consolidated event;
and causing transmission of the determined notification to a user device. (e.g., multiple events may be consolidated into a larger single event and only a single event notice may be sent par. 25; If the event sequence and the event profile match, then a single notice may be sent to a device associated with a user. In this way multiple events may be consolidated into a larger single event and only a single event notice may be sent. Par. 85; Various types of notices and other information may be provided to users via messages sent to one or more user electronic devices. )
Claim 2 depends on claim 1:
Rabb teaches wherein the method further comprises:
receiving a third datum from a third source, wherein the third source is connected to the user network; (e.g., network connected sensors or devices collect data which result from a particular event par. 26; premises management systems, such as those that incorporate intelligent, multi-sensing, network-connected devices, which can integrate seamlessly with each other and/or with a central server or cloud-computing system par. 27; . At 110, a first sensor may collect a first sensor data and at 120 a second sensor may collect a second sensor data. Par. 28; At 130 the method may determine whether the collected first sensor data and the collected second sensor data result from a particular event.)
processing information associated with the third datum to identify an event information associated with the third datum; (e.g., processing sensor data from a third sensor to determine if a particular event occurred par. 28; Based on a match between the collected sensor data and the condition of the particular event profile, the first sensor data and the second sensor data may be determined to result from the particular event represented by the particular event profile. The method may return an indication that the particular event has occurred, or the matched event profile may serve as a basis for other functions of the subject matter of this disclosure. The determination that collected data results from a particular event may be equivalent to a determination that the collected data satisfies the conditions of a particular event profile.)
and comparing at least a portion of the event information associated with the third datum with at least a portion of the event information associated with each of the first and second datum. (e.g., comparing captured sensor data to stored event profiles par. 25; To address the issues previously described, devices, systems, and techniques as disclosed herein may provide for consolidation of events across sensors by comparing captured sensor data to stored event profiles.)
Claim 3 depends on claim 1:
Rabb teaches wherein the notification identifies a contextual information associated with the determined consolidated event, and wherein a detail level of the contextual information is different based on which combination of the first, second, and third datum is received and processed. (e.g., sending notification to close a particular window because rain is expected (i.e., identified contextual information) in response to specific determinations of sequences of sensor data par. 38; the method may then check the sensor data collection order and time periods against the event sequence conditions at 440. At 450 if the collected sensor data order and time periods match the event sequence conditions, then at 460 the particular event may be determined to be the event represented by the event profile containing the event sequence. This may result in the method sending a notice to a device associated with an occupant of the premises that he or she has left the premises without locking the front door. par. 85; As previously described, such notices may be generated in response to specific determinations of the occupancy and/or physical status of a premises, or they may be sent for other reasons as disclosed herein. Par. 88; In response, notifications may be provided to occupants of the individual premises that rain is expected, that particular windows should be closed, or the like.)
Claim 4 depends on claim 1:
Rabb teaches wherein the first source is selected from a group consisting of an image capture device, a wired keypad, a wireless keypad, a wired transmitter, a wireless transmitter, a smart device, a movable barrier operator, a smart lock, a motion detector, and a proximity detector, and wherein the second source is selected from a group consisting of an image capture device, a wired keypad, a wireless keypad, a wired transmitter, a wireless transmitter, a smart device, a movable barrier operator, a smart lock, a motion detector, and a proximity detector. (e.g., networked source devices may be smart devices or wireless devices par. 82; The smart thermostats, the smart hazard detectors, the smart doorbells, the smart wall switches, the smart wall plugs, the smart entry detectors, the smart doorknobs, the keypads, and other devices of a smart home environment (e.g., as illustrated as sensors 1210 and 1220 of FIG. 12A) can be communicatively coupled to each other via the network 1200, and to the controller 1230 and/or remote system 1240 to provide security, safety, and/or comfort for the smart home environment. Par. 83; A user can interact with one or more of the network-connected smart devices (e.g., via the network 1200). For example, a user can communicate with one or more of the network-connected smart devices using a computer (e.g., a desktop computer, laptop computer, tablet, or the like) or other portable electronic device (e.g., a smartphone, a tablet, a key FOB, or the like). )
Claim 5 depends on claim 1:
Rabb teaches wherein the first source comprises a first type of device, and wherein the second source comprises a second type of device different than the first type of device. (e.g., different networked source devices may be smart devices or wireless devices par. 82; The smart thermostats, the smart hazard detectors, the smart doorbells, the smart wall switches, the smart wall plugs, the smart entry detectors, the smart doorknobs, the keypads, and other devices of a smart home environment (e.g., as illustrated as sensors 1210 and 1220 of FIG. 12A) can be communicatively coupled to each other via the network 1200, and to the controller 1230 and/or remote system 1240 to provide security, safety, and/or comfort for the smart home environment. Par. 83; A user can interact with one or more of the network-connected smart devices (e.g., via the network 1200). For example, a user can communicate with one or more of the network-connected smart devices using a computer (e.g., a desktop computer, laptop computer, tablet, or the like) or other portable electronic device (e.g., a smartphone, a tablet, a key FOB, or the like). )
Claim 6 depends on claim 1:
Rabb teaches wherein the event information associated with the first datum and the second datum each includes a contextual information, wherein comparing the event information associated with the first and second datum comprises determining a relatedness of the contextual information associated with the first datum with the contextual information associated with the second datum; (e.g., sending notification to close a particular window because rain is expected (i.e., identified contextual information) in response to specific determinations of sequences of sensor data par. 38; he method may then check the sensor data collection order and time periods against the event sequence conditions at 440. At 450 if the collected sensor data order and time periods match the event sequence conditions, then at 460 the particular event may be determined to be the event represented by the event profile containing the event sequence. This may result in the method sending a notice to a device associated with an occupant of the premises that he or she has left the premises without locking the front door. par. 85; As previously described, such notices may be generated in response to specific determinations of the occupancy and/or physical status of a premises, or they may be sent for other reasons as disclosed herein. Par. 88; In response, notifications may be provided to occupants of the individual premises that rain is expected, that particular windows should be closed, or the like.)
and wherein determining occurrence of the consolidated event based on the comparing comprises: analyzing the relatedness of the contextual information associated with the first and second datum; (e.g., analzying the relatedness of the sensor data indicating rain (i.e., contextual information) relates to multiple premises (i.e., associated with first and second datum) par. 1; certain premises management systems, such as security systems, may employ multiple sensors throughout a premises. par. 34; This combination of sensor data may meet the conditions of a particular event profile for a premises that requires that the motion sensor and the imaging sensor are trigged within 10 seconds of one another and configured to collect from the front porch. par. 85; notices may be generated in response to specific determinations of the occupancy and/or physical status of a premises par. 88; As another example, the remote system may receive data from multiple premises in a particular geographic region, indicating that it is raining in the region, and that the rain is moving east (based on the times at which the data indicating rainfall is received from different premises). In response, the remote system may provide an indication to premises further to the east that rain may be expected. In response, notifications may be provided to occupants of the individual premises that rain is expected, that particular windows should be closed, or the like.)
and determining a consolidated event type based on the contextual information where the analyzed relatedness exceeds a threshold. (e.g., determining a consolidated event type based on satisfying conditions associated with thresholds (e.g., A microphone in the room may detect a sound above a set threshold, such as 60 dB) to determine relatedness of sensor data (i.e., contextual information) par. 34; FIG. 3 shows another method 300 according to an embodiment to determine whether the collected first sensor data and collected second sensor data result from a particular event. In an example, an event profile may contain conditions that are satisfied if the locations of two sensors are determined to be the same or proximate within a location threshold or if the monitoring areas of two sensors are the same or overlap. Par.53; For example, an event profile representing the event of a home break-in may include the conditions in a sequence of receiving unauthorized user data three times within a time threshold, receiving an indication the front door is locked, and receiving a front door open indicator. Par. 58; For example, an ambient light sensor in a room may determine that the room is dark (e.g., less than 60 lux). A microphone in the room may detect a sound above a set threshold, such as 60 dB. The system processor may determine, based on the data generated by both sensors, that it should activate one or more lights in the room. )
Claim 7 depends on claim 6:
Rabb teaches wherein the determined notification is generated by comparing the consolidated event type to a lookup table or content rules. (e.g., generating notification based on comparing the stored event profile par. 25; To address the issues previously described, devices, systems, and techniques as disclosed herein may provide for consolidation of events across sensors by comparing captured sensor data to stored event profiles. For example, an event may be represented by an event profile, and the event profile may comprise an event notice. par. 38; At 430 the order in which sensor data was collected may be obtained, sensor data collection times may be obtained, and the time periods between the collection of sensor data may be determined. The method may then check the sensor data collection order and time periods against the event sequence conditions at 440. At 450 if the collected sensor data order and time periods match the event sequence conditions, then at 460 the particular event may be determined to be the event represented by the event profile containing the event sequence. This may result in the method sending a notice to a device associated with an occupant of the premises that he or she has left the premises without locking the front door. Par. 39; able 500 may also specify that if the conditions of two or more event sequences are fully satisfied, then the event sequence may be determined in accordance with the priority of EvSq A first, EvSq B second, and EvSq C third. )
Claim 8 depends on claim 1:
Rabb teaches wherein the method further comprises: selecting one of the first or second datum in view of a selection criteria; (e.g., selecting a datum in view of a time selection criteria par. 40; In general, method 500 may determine whether each event condition in table 510 is met and then determine whether such conditions are met within the specified time period conditions. Once all potential time period conditions have expired, the method may select any fully satisfied event sequences based on the priority rule. par. 44; If the method compares the collected sensor data E2 to E2A and determines E2 is not E2A, then the method may compare T1 to T1B to determine if time period is less than T1B at 560. If T1 is less than T1B, then the method may again determine whether E2 is E2A at 561. If the method determines there is still not an E2A for E2, then at 562 the method may determine whether T1A is expired. If T1A is expired, then the method may determine that the particular event sequence is EvSq B at 563 because the conditions of EvSq B are met and T1 of EvSq A may no longer be satisfied. If T1A is not expired, then the method may repeat. If at 561 E2 is determined to have a value E2A, then the method may determine whether T1A is expired at 563. If T1A is not expired then the method may determine that the particular event sequence is EvSq B at 565, otherwise the method may determine the particular event sequence to be EvSq A at 566.)
and causing transmission of at least a portion of the selected datum to the user device. ( transmitting a notice to the user based on the selected datum associated with the event profile par. 49; For example, an event profile may contain a condition that a door lock/unlock sensor indicate the door is unlocked after 11:00 pm each night. If this condition is met, then a notice may be sent to a device associated with a user indicating the door is unlocked.)
Claim 9 depends on claim 1:
Rabb teaches wherein the first datum is received prior to the second datum, and wherein the method further comprises: determining the event information associated with the first datum in response to receiving the first datum; determining a waiting period associated with a duration of time between receiving the first datum and an anticipated receipt of the second datum in view of the determined event information; and waiting for the waiting period to expire without causing transmission of the determined notification to the user device. (e.g., generating notification based on comparing the stored event profile with collected datum includes expiring time periods par. 25; To address the issues previously described, devices, systems, and techniques as disclosed herein may provide for consolidation of events across sensors by comparing captured sensor data to stored event profiles. For example, an event may be represented by an event profile, and the event profile may comprise an event notice. par. 38; At 430 the order in which sensor data was collected may be obtained, sensor data collection times may be obtained, and the time periods between the collection of sensor data may be determined. The method may then check the sensor data collection order and time periods against the event sequence conditions at 440. At 450 if the collected sensor data order and time periods match the event sequence conditions, then at 460 the particular event may be determined to be the event represented by the event profile containing the event sequence. This may result in the method sending a notice to a device associated with an occupant of the premises that he or she has left the premises without locking the front door. Par. 40; In general, method 500 may determine whether each event condition in table 510 is met and then determine whether such conditions are met within the specified time period conditions. Once all potential time period conditions have expired, the method may select any fully satisfied event sequences based on the priority rule. )
Claim 10 depends on claim 9:
Rabb teaches further comprising: determining a notification based on the event information associated with the first datum; and causing transmission of the notification based on the event information associated with the first datum after expiration of the waiting period without receipt of the second datum. (e.g., generating notification based on comparing the stored event profile with collected datum includes expiring time periods par. 25; To address the issues previously described, devices, systems, and techniques as disclosed herein may provide for consolidation of events across sensors by comparing captured sensor data to stored event profiles. For example, an event may be represented by an event profile, and the event profile may comprise an event notice. par. 38; At 430 the order in which sensor data was collected may be obtained, sensor data collection times may be obtained, and the time periods between the collection of sensor data may be determined. The method may then check the sensor data collection order and time periods against the event sequence conditions at 440. At 450 if the collected sensor data order and time periods match the event sequence conditions, then at 460 the particular event may be determined to be the event represented by the event profile containing the event sequence. This may result in the method sending a notice to a device associated with an occupant of the premises that he or she has left the premises without locking the front door. Par. 40; In general, method 500 may determine whether each event condition in table 510 is met and then determine whether such conditions are met within the specified time period conditions. Once all potential time period conditions have expired, the method may select any fully satisfied event sequences based on the priority rule. )
Independent Claim 11:
Rabb teaches A computer-implemented method comprising: receiving, at a processor, a first datum from a first source; (e.g., network connected sensors or devices collect data (i.e., first and second datum) which result from a particular event par. 26; premises management systems, such as those that incorporate intelligent, multi-sensing, network-connected devices, which can integrate seamlessly with each other and/or with a central server or cloud-computing system par. 27; . At 110, a first sensor may collect a first sensor data and at 120 a second sensor may collect a second sensor data. Par. 28; At 130 the method may determine whether the collected first sensor data and the collected second sensor data result from a particular event.)
determining, by the processor, a condition for causing transmission of a notification to a user device; (e.g., determining if captured data satisfy an event sequence condition for causing a notice to be sent to user par. 28; Based on a match between the collected sensor data and the condition of the particular event profile, the first sensor data and the second sensor data may be determined to result from the particular event represented by the particular event profile. The method may return an indication that the particular event has occurred, or the matched event profile may serve as a basis for other functions of the subject matter of this disclosure. The determination that collected data results from a particular event may be equivalent to a determination that the collected data satisfies the conditions of a particular event profile. par. 38; the method may then check the sensor data collection order and time periods against the event sequence conditions at 440. At 450 if the collected sensor data order and time periods match the event sequence conditions, then at 460 the particular event may be determined to be the event represented by the event profile containing the event sequence. This may result in the method sending a notice to a device associated with an occupant of the premises that he or she has left the premises without locking the front door.)
receiving, at the processor, a second datum from the first source or a second source, the second datum received prior to satisfying the condition; (e.g., network connected sensors or devices collect data (i.e., first and second datum) which result from a particular event par. 26; premises management systems, such as those that incorporate intelligent, multi-sensing, network-connected devices, which can integrate seamlessly with each other and/or with a central server or cloud-computing system par. 27; . At 110, a first sensor may collect a first sensor data and at 120 a second sensor may collect a second sensor data. Par. 28; At 130 the method may determine whether the collected first sensor data and the collected second sensor data result from a particular event.)
processing, by the processor, information associated with the first datum and information associated with the second datum; (e.g., processing sensor data to determine if a particular event occurred par. 28; Based on a match between the collected sensor data and the condition of the particular event profile, the first sensor data and the second sensor data may be determined to result from the particular event represented by the particular event profile. The method may return an indication that the particular event has occurred, or the matched event profile may serve as a basis for other functions of the subject matter of this disclosure. The determination that collected data results from a particular event may be equivalent to a determination that the collected data satisfies the conditions of a particular event profile.)
generating, by the processor, one or more notifications to the user device based on the processing; and causing transmission of the one or more notifications to the user device. (e.g., multiple events may be consolidated into a larger single event and only a single event notice may be sent par. 25; If the event sequence and the event profile match, then a single notice may be sent to a device associated with a user. In this way multiple events may be consolidated into a larger single event and only a single event notice may be sent. Par. 85; Various types of notices and other information may be provided to users via messages sent to one or more user electronic devices. )
Claim 12 depends on claim 11:
Rabb teaches wherein determining the condition comprises determining a duration of time to wait prior to determining the one or more notifications, and wherein the second datum is received prior to expiration of the duration of time. (e.g., determining time periods (i.e., duration of time prior to notification) to make up an event sequence par. 25; Sensors may collect data from a series of events within certain time periods such that the collected sensor data and time periods make up an event sequence. This event sequence may be compared to an event sequence stored in the event profile. par. 40; In general, method 500 may determine whether each event condition in table 510 is met and then determine whether such conditions are met within the specified time period conditions. Once all potential time period conditions have expired, the method may select any fully satisfied event sequences based on the priority rule. par. 44; If the method compares the collected sensor data E2 to E2A and determines E2 is not E2A, then the method may compare T1 to T1B to determine if time period is less than T1B at 560. If T1 is less than T1B, then the method may again determine whether E2 is E2A at 561. If the method determines there is still not an E2A for E2, then at 562 the method may determine whether T1A is expired. If T1A is expired, then the method may determine that the particular event sequence is EvSq B at 563 because the conditions of EvSq B are met and T1 of EvSq A may no longer be satisfied. If T1A is not expired, then the method may repeat. If at 561 E2 is determined to have a value E2A, then the method may determine whether T1A is expired at 563. If T1A is not expired then the method may determine that the particular event sequence is EvSq B at 565, otherwise the method may determine the particular event sequence to be EvSq A at 566.)
Claim 13 depends on claim 11:
Rabb teaches further comprising: receiving, at the processor, a third datum from the first source, the second source, or a third source, wherein the third datum is received after the condition; (e.g., determining time periods (i.e., duration of time after the condition but prior to notification) to make up an event sequence par. 25; Sensors may collect data from a series of events within certain time periods such that the collected sensor data and time periods make up an event sequence. This event sequence may be compared to an event sequence stored in the event profile. par. 40; In general, method 500 may determine whether each event condition in table 510 is met and then determine whether such conditions are met within the specified time period conditions. Once all potential time period conditions have expired, the method may select any fully satisfied event sequences based on the priority rule. par. 44; If the method compares the collected sensor data E2 to E2A and determines E2 is not E2A, then the method may compare T1 to T1B to determine if time period is less than T1B at 560. If T1 is less than T1B, then the method may again determine whether E2 is E2A at 561. If the method determines there is still not an E2A for E2, then at 562 the method may determine whether T1A is expired. If T1A is expired, then the method may determine that the particular event sequence is EvSq B at 563 because the conditions of EvSq B are met and T1 of EvSq A may no longer be satisfied. If T1A is not expired, then the method may repeat. If at 561 E2 is determined to have a value E2A, then the method may determine whether T1A is expired at 563. If T1A is not expired then the method may determine that the particular event sequence is EvSq B at 565, otherwise the method may determine the particular event sequence to be EvSq A at 566.)
comparing, by the processor, information associated with the third datum with the information associated with the first datum, the second datum, or both; and (e.g., comparing captured sensor data to stored event profiles par. 25; To address the issues previously described, devices, systems, and techniques as disclosed herein may provide for consolidation of events across sensors by comparing captured sensor data to stored event profiles.)
determining, by the processor, an updated notification based on the comparing of the third datum with the information associated with the first datum, the second datum, or both; causing transmission of the updated notification to the user device. (e.g., multiple events may be consolidated into a larger single event and only a single event notice may be sent par. 25; If the event sequence and the event profile match, then a single notice may be sent to a device associated with a user. In this way multiple events may be consolidated into a larger single event and only a single event notice may be sent. Par. 85; Various types of notices and other information may be provided to users via messages sent to one or more user electronic devices. )
Claim 15 depends on claim 11:
Rabb teaches wherein the first source is selected from a group consisting of an image capture device, a wired keypad, a wireless keypad, a wired transmitter, a wireless transmitter, a smart device, a movable barrier operator, a smart lock, a motion detector, and a proximity detector, and wherein the second source is selected from a group consisting of an image capture device, a wired keypad, a wireless keypad, a wired transmitter, a wireless transmitter, a smart device, a movable barrier operator, a smart lock, a motion detector, and a proximity detector. (e.g., networked source devices may be smart devices or wireless devices par. 82; The smart thermostats, the smart hazard detectors, the smart doorbells, the smart wall switches, the smart wall plugs, the smart entry detectors, the smart doorknobs, the keypads, and other devices of a smart home environment (e.g., as illustrated as sensors 1210 and 1220 of FIG. 12A) can be communicatively coupled to each other via the network 1200, and to the controller 1230 and/or remote system 1240 to provide security, safety, and/or comfort for the smart home environment. Par. 83; A user can interact with one or more of the network-connected smart devices (e.g., via the network 1200). For example, a user can communicate with one or more of the network-connected smart devices using a computer (e.g., a desktop computer, laptop computer, tablet, or the like) or other portable electronic device (e.g., a smartphone, a tablet, a key FOB, or the like). )
Claim 16 depends on claim 15:
Rabb teaches wherein the first source comprises a first type of device, and wherein the second source comprises a second type of device different than the first type of device. (e.g., different networked source devices may be smart devices or wireless devices par. 82; The smart thermostats, the smart hazard detectors, the smart doorbells, the smart wall switches, the smart wall plugs, the smart entry detectors, the smart doorknobs, the keypads, and other devices of a smart home environment (e.g., as illustrated as sensors 1210 and 1220 of FIG. 12A) can be communicatively coupled to each other via the network 1200, and to the controller 1230 and/or remote system 1240 to provide security, safety, and/or comfort for the smart home environment. Par. 83; A user can interact with one or more of the network-connected smart devices (e.g., via the network 1200). For example, a user can communicate with one or more of the network-connected smart devices using a computer (e.g., a desktop computer, laptop computer, tablet, or the like) or other portable electronic device (e.g., a smartphone, a tablet, a key FOB, or the like). )
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.
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 14 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Rabb as cited above, in view of Chen et al. (hereinafter “Chen”), U.S. Published Application No. 20230412540 A1.
Claim 14 depends on claim 13:
Rabb fails to expressly teach further comprising recalling the transmitted one or more notifications from the user device in view of the updated notification.
However, Chen teaches further comprising recalling the transmitted one or more notifications from the user device in view of the updated notification. (e.g., recalling transmitted messages to update the messages par. 4; The update request specifies a recall of the sent message, and wherein the updated content replaces the content of the received message with a notification that the received message was recalled. Par. 21; The secure data path enables the sending and receiving message servers to communicate with one another, e.g., for transmitting a recall request and changed or deleted content of a recalled message. Par. 21; Since the content of a sent message may be updated or deleted in a recipient inbox, the present disclosure enables robust and reliable message recall over traditional methods of recalling messages. )
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the notifications as taught by Rabb to include recalling the transmitted message in view of updates as taught by Chen to provide the benefit of rectifying confusion among recipients when necessary (see Chen; par. 1)
Claims 17, 18 and 20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Rabb as cited above, in view of Rajkovic et al. (hereinafter “Rajkovic”), U.S. Patent No. 12073706 B1.
Claim 17:
Rabb teaches further comprising: receiving a user request to view a feed history displaying the feed history on a user device, the feed history including the consolidated event, wherein the consolidated event comprises a plurality of separately captured events and a consolidated event tag descriptively identifying the consolidated event; (e.g., displaying aggregated historical data identifying trends, predict physical statuses of a premises par. 88; . In some configurations users may be provided with the option of receiving such aggregated data, and/or with the option of providing anonymous data to a remote system for use in such aggregation. In some configurations, aggregated data also may be provided as “historical” data as previously disclosed. Such data may be used by a remote system and/or by individual smart home environments to identify trends, predict physical statuses of a premises, and the like.)
Rabb fails to expressly teach
receiving a user request to individually access the plurality of separately captured events included in the consolidated event;
and expanding the consolidated event to display the separately captured events and consolidated event tags descriptively identifying each of the separately captured events.
However, Rajkovic teaches receiving a user request to individually access the plurality of separately captured events included in the consolidated event; (e.g., expanding a list of events for a time period (i.e., separately captured events included in the consolidated event) col. 25 line 28; Continuing with the example of FIG. 9, the chronology control group 906 is configured to display a list of events observed and actions taken related to an alarm. In some examples, the user can select the expansion control 910 to toggle the chronology control group 906 between an expanded and contracted state. When the expansion control 910 is in an expanded state, the customer interface devotes more space within the screen 900 to the list of events observed and actions taken. When the expansion control 910 is in a contracted state, the customer interface devotes less space within the screen 900 to the list. As illustrated in FIG. 9, the expansion control 910 is in a contracted state. As shown in FIG. 9, the user can select the recordings control 912 to access sensor data (e.g., audio-visual recordings) that triggered the alarm.)
and expanding the consolidated event to display the separately captured events and consolidated event tags descriptively identifying each of the separately captured events. (e.g., displaying separate recording events with description col. 25 line 11; The chronology control group 906 includes an expansion control 910 and a recordings control 912. col. 25 line 39; As shown in FIG. 9, the user can select the recordings control 912 to access sensor data (e.g., audio-visual recordings) that triggered the alarm.)
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the aggregated to data used to generate notifications as taught by Rabb to be used to display notifications on a consolidated alarm screen including separate recordings of events as taught by Rajkovic to provide the benefit of improving the organization of events in effort to make searching for events easier for a user.
Claim 18 depends on claim 17:
Rabb teaches wherein displaying the consolidated event on the user device comprises selecting data from the first and sources to display on the user device, and wherein the selected data comprises one of the plurality of separately captured events having a highest relevance score. (e.g., aggregated data sensors to identify trends (i.e., separately captured events having a highest relevance score) par. 88; . The systems 1250 and 1260 may provide data directly from one or more sensors as previously described, or the data may be aggregated and/or analyzed by local controllers such as the controller 1230, which then communicates with the remote system 1240. The remote system may aggregate and analyze the data from multiple locations, and may provide aggregate results to each location. For example, the remote system 1240 may examine larger regions for common sensor data or trends in sensor data, and provide information on the identified commonality or environmental data trends to each local system 1250 and 1260.)
Claim 20 depends on claim 17:
Rabb teaches wherein at least one of the first or second sources comprises an image capture device. (e.g., sensors may include an image capture component par. 32; For example, the first sensor may be an active infrared sensor that includes an active infrared emission component and optionally an image capture component, which may emit an infrared radiation pattern on a front door.)
Claim 19 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Rabb/Rajkovic as cited above, in view of Foss et al. (hereinafter “Foss”), U.S. Published Application No. 20240406304 A1.
Claim 19 depends on claim 17:
Rabb/Rajkovic fails to expressly teach wherein the plurality of separately captured events are arranged in a stack of cards.
However, Foss teaches wherein the plurality of separately captured events are arranged in a stack of cards. (e.g., displaying captured events in a widget and displaying the widgets as a stack of cards par. 437; In some embodiments, the widget 7000 is one widget in a “stack” of widgets (e.g., in response to detecting a user input, the computer system 100 can display widgets other than the widget 7000, at the same location at which the widget 7000 is shown in FIG. 7A). For example, in FIG. 7A, the widget 7000 is currently displaying content for a stocks application. While displaying the widget 7000 that includes content for the stocks application, the computer system 100 detects a user input 7002 (e.g., an upward swipe input).)
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the aggregated to data used to generate notifications as taught by Rabb/ Rajkovic to be displayed within stacked widgets as taught by Foss to provide the benefit of improving the organization of events in effort to make searching for events from particular sources much easier for a user.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Gratton et al. U.S. Published Application No. 20190310997 A1
See abstract; The present invention extends to methods, systems, and computer program products for consolidating information from different signals into an event.
De Castro Alves et al. U.S. Published Application No. 20150381712 A1
Par. 85; In some implementations, server 712 may include one or more applications to analyze and consolidate data feeds and/or event updates received from users of client computing devices 702, 704, 706, and 708. As an example, data feeds and/or event updates may include, but are not limited to, Twitter® feeds, Facebook® updates or real-time updates received from one or more third party information sources and continuous data streams, which may include real-time events related to sensor data applications, financial tickers, network performance measuring tools (e.g., network monitoring and traffic management applications), clickstream analysis tools, automobile traffic monitoring, and the like.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to HENRY ORR whose telephone number is (571)270-1308. The examiner can normally be reached 9AM-5PM EST M-F.
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, Adam Queler can be reached at (571)272-4140. 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.
/HENRY ORR/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2172
Prosecution Insights