Response to Amendment
This action is responsive to applicant’s amendment and remarks received on 12/15/2025. Claims 1-20 have been presented for examination. Claims 1-2, 4-5, 7-9, 11-12, 14-16, and 18-20 have been amended. Claims 1-20 have been examined.
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 1-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Agerstam (Pat. No.: 9,860,677 B1) in view of Griffin (Pub. No.: 2020/0395107 A1), Chafe (Pub. No.: 2019/0386995 A1) and Mehta (Pub. No.: 2017/0251347 A1).
1) In regard to claim 1, Agerstam discloses the claimed notification system (fig. 6: 600 and col. 5, lines 46-52) comprising:
a first alert device (fig.6: S1 and col. 5, lines 46-52 discloses the IOT devices may be alarm system devices or sensors) conforming to a long range, low energy consumption point to point or mesh communication protocol (col. 16, lines 27-39 discloses the network may communicate via LORA); and
at least one additional alert device (fig. 6: S2) conforming to the long range, low energy consumption point to point or mesh communication protocol (col. 16, lines 27-39 discloses the network may communicate via LORA); and
the first alert device establishing a decentralized network of alert devices (fig. 6 and col. 11, lines 40-58).
Agerstam does not explicitly disclose the devices are configured to transmit and receive alerts, the first alert device is configured to transmit a network creation ping using the long range, low energy consumption point to point or mesh communication protocol, the network creation ping receivable by at least one additional alert device approved to join a decentralized network of alert devices, at least one additional alert device approved to join the decentralized network of alert devices receiving the network creation ping is configured to pair with the first alert device thereby establishing the decentralized network of alert devices, and the first alert device and each additional alert device in the decentralized network of alert devices is configured to transmit an alert directly to at least one other alert device in the decentralized network of alert devices using the long range, low energy consumption point to point or mesh communication protocol, and the alerts are personal and user initiated.
However, Griffin discloses it has been known for an IOT devices to have a first alert device and additional alert device in a decentralized network of alert devices to be configured to transmit an alert directly to at least one other alert device in the decentralized network of alert devices using a communication protocol (¶0106).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the claimed invention was filed to allow the system of Agerstam to transmit and receive alerts between devices, as taught by Griffin.
One skilled in the art would be motivated to modify Agerstam as described above in order to use a known method to allow devices in a network of events which are occurring with other devices within the network.
In addition, Chafe discloses it has been known for a communication system to allow a first alert device to be configured to transmit a network creation ping using a communication protocol, the network creation ping receivable by at least one additional alert device approved to join a decentralized network of alert devices, at least one additional alert device approved to join the decentralized network of alert devices receiving the network creation ping (¶0093-¶0094).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the claimed invention was filed to allow the system of Agerstam to have one of the devices to transmit a ping to allow other devices to join the network, as taught by Chafe.
One skilled in the art would be motivated to modify Agerstam as described above in order to use a known method for allowing devices to join a private network.
Furthermore, Mehta discloses it has been known for a notification system to allow a device to transmit a personal alert and the alert is user initiated (¶0275).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the claimed invention was filed to allow the system of Agerstam to transmit a personal alert and the alert is user initiated, as taught by Mehta.
One skilled in the art would be motivated to modify Agerstam as described above in order to provide a seamless transmission of multimedia messages, as taught by Mehta (¶0275).
2) In regard to claim 2 (dependent on claim 1), Agerstam, Griffin, Chafe and Mehta further disclose the notification system of claim 1, wherein upon one additional alert device in the decentralized network of alert devices receiving the user-initiated alert, the one additional alert device subsequently transmits the user-initiated alert over the decentralized network using the long range, low energy consumption point to point or mesh communication protocol (Chafe ¶0093-¶0094).
3) In regard to claim 3 (dependent on claim 1), Agerstam, Griffin, Chafe and Mehta further disclose the notification system of claim 1, wherein at least one of the first alert device and the at least one additional alert device is configured to transmit and receive data to hardware configured to forward alert information over the internet to a different alert device (Chafe ¶0093-¶0094).
4) In regard to claim 4 (dependent on claim 1), Agerstam, Griffin, Chafe and Mehta further disclose the notification system of claim 1.
Agerstam, Griffin and Chafe does not explicitly disclose the first alert device comprises a selectable button pressable to initiate the user-initiated alert.
However, official notice is taken by the examiner that both the concept and advantage is known for a system to initiate a ping being transmitted based on a button being pressed.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the claimed invention was filed to allow the system of Agerstam to include a button to be pressed to initiate the ping.
One skilled in the art would be motivated to modify Agerstam as described above in order to use a known technique for initiating a ping for joining a network.
5) In regard to claim 5 (dependent on claim 3), Agerstam, Griffin, Chafe and Mehta further disclose the notification system of claim 3, wherein one user-initiated alert sent by the first alert device progressively propagates to all devices in the decentralized network (Chafe ¶0093-¶0094).
6) In regard to claim 6 (dependent on claim 1), Agerstam, Griffin, Chafe and Mehta further disclose the notification system of claim 1, wherein the first alert device is provided on a wearable apparatus (Griffin ¶0113).
7) In regard to claim 7 (dependent on claim 1), Agerstam, Griffin, Chafe and Mehta further disclose the notification system of claim 1, wherein the user-initiated alert comprises an enterprise related alert (Griffin ¶0119) personal with respect to the user of the first device (Mehta ¶0275).
8) In regard to claim 8, claim 8 is rejected and analyzed with respect to claim 1 and the references applied.
9) In regard to claim 9 (dependent on claim 8), claim 9 is rejected and analyzed with respect to claim 2 and the references applied.
10) In regard to claim 10 (dependent on claim 8), claim 10 is rejected and analyzed with respect to claim 3 and the references applied.
11) In regard to claim 11 (dependent on claim 8), claim 11 is rejected and analyzed with respect to claim 4 and the references applied.
12) In regard to claim 12 (dependent on claim 10), claim 12 is rejected and analyzed with respect to claim 5 and the references applied.
13) In regard to claim 13 (dependent on claim 8), claim 13 is rejected and analyzed with respect to claim 6 and the references applied.
14) In regard to claim 14 (dependent on claim 8), claim 14 is rejected and analyzed with respect to claim 7 and the references applied.
15) In regard to claim 15, claim 15 is rejected and analyzed with respect to claim 1 and the references applied.
16) In regard to claim 16 (dependent on claim 15), claim 16 is rejected and analyzed with respect to claim 2 and the references applied.
17) In regard to claim 17 (dependent on claim 15), claim 17 is rejected and analyzed with respect to claim 3 and the references applied.
18) In regard to claim 18 (dependent on claim 15), claim 18 is rejected and analyzed with respect to claim 4 and the references applied.
19) In regard to claim 19 (dependent on claim 15), claim 19 is rejected and analyzed with respect to claim 5 and the references applied.
20) In regard to claim 20 (dependent on claim 15), claim 20 is rejected and analyzed with respect to claim 7 and the references applied.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments with respect to the amended claims, based solely on the amendments to the claims, have been considered but are moot because the arguments do not apply to the combination of the references including new prior art being used in the current new grounds of rejection for the newly added limitations to the claims. Furthermore, the well-known in the art statements in the above Office action is taken to be admitted prior art due to applicant failure to traverse the examiner’s official notice.
Conclusion
Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a). Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a).
A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of the advisory action. In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the mailing date of this final action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to CURTIS J KING whose telephone number is (571)270-5160. The examiner can normally be reached Mon-Fri 6:00 - 2:00 EST.
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, Quan-Zhen Wang can be reached at 571-272-3114. 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.
/CURTIS J KING/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2685