DETAILED ACTION
The instant application having Application No. filed on 7/15/2024 is presented for examination by the examiner.
Examiner Notes
Examiner cites particular columns and line numbers in the references as applied to the claims below for the convenience of the applicant. Although the specified citations are representative of the teachings in the art and are applied to the specific limitations within the individual claim, other passages and figures may apply as well. It is respectfully requested that, in preparing responses, the applicant fully consider the references in entirety as potentially teaching all or part of the claimed invention, as well as the context of the passage as taught by the prior art or disclosed by the examiner.
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.
(a)(2) the claimed invention was described in a patent issued under section 151, or in an application for patent published or deemed published under section 122(b), in which the patent or application, as the case may be, names another inventor and was effectively filed before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claims 1-11 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Sonnenmoser et. al. (WO 2019081332 A1) (hereinafter referred to as Sonnenmoser).
Regarding claim 1
Sonnenmoser teaches a functional safety management system (safety system 36) for a plurality of equipment under control, the plurality of equipment under control being transport systems and one of the following: an elevator, an escalator, a travelator, an automatic door (see page 8 lines 5-8, a building-based passenger transport system 10 includes a safety system, elevator, escalator, moving walkways), the system comprising:
a data storage entity (see page 3 lines 27-30, “FLASH memory) configured to store desired functional safety information related to a desired functional safety status (see page 4 lines 1-7) of the equipment under control (see Fig. 1, elevator system 10), wherein the data storage entity is connected to an external information source for obtaining or receiving the desired functional safety information from the external information source (see Fig. 1, control system 22; and page 8 line 32 to page 9 line 5);
a functional safety management entity (Fig. 1, safety units 40, 40’, 40”) connected to the data storage entity for obtaining or receiving therefrom the desired functional safety information (see page 4 lines 1-14), and to the plurality of equipment under control (see Fig. 1, elevator shaft 12, elevator hub 14, counterweight 16) to obtain or receive current functional safety status information related to a current functional safety status of the equipment under control from each one of the plurality of equipment under control (see page 8 lines 26-30),
wherein the functional safety management entity is arranged physically external with respect to the equipment under control (see Fig 1, Fig 2, safety system 36 and safety units 40, 40’, 40” are external to the elevator system 10), wherein the functional safety management system is configured to perform a functional safety related operation based on information included in the current functional safety status information and the desired functional safety information (see page 8 lines 26-30).
Regarding claim 2
Sonnenmoser teaches the functional safety management system of claim 1, wherein the functional safety related operation is performed by the functional safety management entity (see page 9 lines 15-27).
Regarding claim 3
Sonnenmoser teaches the functional safety management system of claim 1, wherein the functional safety related operation is a corrective action to change or at least to indicate a need for changing the current functional safety status towards the desired functional safety status (see page 11 lines 25-30).
Regarding claim 4
Sonnenmoser teaches the functional safety management system of claim 1, wherein the external information source includes recommended functional safety information related to the equipment under control and/or to one or several components of the equipment under control (see page 11 line 32 to page 12 line 2).
Regarding claim 5
Sonnenmoser teaches the functional safety management system of claim 1, wherein the functional safety related operation is a decision, a comparison, and/or a data collection operation (see flow chart of Fig. 4 and page 11 lines 25-29, updated software 50 is available for update).
Regarding claim 6
Sonnenmoser teaches the functional safety management system of claim 5, wherein the comparison includes at least one selected from the group consisting of: comparison of current configuration of the equipment under control to a desired configuration of the equipment under control, comparison of an elapsed operation time of a component to a maximum allowable mission time of said component, comparison of hardware or software version of a component to the desired hardware or software version of said component (see page 6 lines 31-34, “the updating unit regularly requesting updated software from the provider”).
Regarding claim 7
Sonnenmoser teaches the functional safety management system of claim 1, wherein the functional safety management entity is arranged physically at the equipment under control, such as a functionality to be performed by a control unit of the equipment under control (see Fig. 1).
Regarding claim 8
Sonnenmoser teaches the functional safety management system of claim 1, wherein the desired functional safety status includes at least one selected from the group consisting of: latest safety management rules, maximum allowable mission time set for specific component usage, estimated preliminary life time of a component, desired hardware or software version number, new set of control parameters of the equipment under control, information of verified compatible configurations of the equipment under control (see page 2 lines 15-30).
Regarding claim 11
Sonnenmoser teaches a method for managing functional safety status of a plurality of equipment under control, the plurality of equipment under control being transport systems and one of the following: an elevator, an escalator, a travelator, an automatic door (see page 8 lines 5-8, a building-based passenger transport system 10 includes a safety system, elevator, escalator, moving walkways), the method comprising:
obtaining or receiving, by a functional safety management entity (see Fig. 1, safety units 40, 40’, 40”), desired functional safety information related to a desired functional safety status of the equipment under control from a data storage (see page 4 lines 1-7),
wherein the data storage entity is connected to an external information source for obtaining or receiving the desired functional safety information from the external information source (see Fig. 1, control system 22; and page 8 line 32 to page 9 line 5), and
wherein the functional safety management entity is arranged physically external with respect to the equipment under control (see Fig 1, Fig 2, safety system 36 and safety units 40, 40’, 40” are external to the elevator system 10), obtaining or receiving, by the functional safety management entity, current functional safety status information related to a current functional safety status of the equipment under control from each one of the plurality of equipment under control (see page 8 lines 26-30), and
performing a functional safety related operation based on information included in the current functional safety status information and the desired functional safety information (see page 11 lines 25-30).
Regarding claim 12
Sonnenmoser teaches the method of claim 11, comprising comparing the current functional safety status to the desired functional safety status (see page 6 lines 31-34, “the updating unit regularly requesting updated software from the provider”).
Regarding claim 13
Sonnenmoser teaches the method of claim 11, wherein the functional safety related operation is a corrective action to change or at least to indicate a need for changing the current functional safety status towards the desired functional safety status (see flow chart of Fig. 4 and page 11 lines 25-29, updated software 50 is available for update).
Regarding claim 14
Sonnenmoser teaches a computer program product comprising instructions which, when the program is executed by a computer system, cause the computer system to carry out the method of claim 11 (see page 1125-29, “updated software 50”).
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.
2. The text of those sections of Title 35, U.S. Code not included in this action can be found in a prior Office action.
3. Claims 9-10 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Sonnenmoser in view of Kauppinen et al. (US 11,733,995 B2) (hereinafter Kauppinen).
Regarding claim 9
Sonnenmoser teaches the functional safety management system of claim 1 but is silent on wherein the current functional safety status information includes at least stored information indicated in an electrical nameplate mounted to a selected component of the equipment under control.
However, in the same field of endeavor of people conveyor system, Kauppinen teaches the current functional safety status information includes at least stored information indicated in an electrical nameplate mounted to a selected component of the equipment under control (see col. 7 lines 57-65, “the application software is elevator component-specific, comprising an installation key, such as an encryption key, associated with an elevator component-specific counterpart such that said application software may be installed successfully only in the elevator component associated with the respective installation key. In one embodiment each elevator component comprises a secure chip comprising a component-specific encryption key.”).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filling date of the claimed invention, to including the teaching of storing the identification keys specific to each component under control of Kauppinen with the system of Sonnenmoser for the purpose of updating require software update specifically to individual component under control (see col. 7 line 66).
Regarding claim 10
Sonnenmoser teaches the functional safety management system of claim 1 but is silence on wherein the current functional safety status information includes, optionally in addition to the stored information indicated in the electrical nameplate, at least one selected from the group consisting of: manufacturing time, factory name or ID, component serial number, manufacturing batch, component hardware or software version number, control parameters of the equipment under control currently in use, number of starts of the equipment under control, component information of the equipment under control.
However, in the same field of endeavor of people conveyor system, Kauppinen teaches additionally, the current functional safety status information stored information indicated at least one selected from the group consisting of: manufacturing time, factory name or ID, component serial number, manufacturing batch, component hardware or software version number, control parameters of the equipment under control currently in use, number of starts of the equipment under control, component information of the equipment under control. (see col. 8 lines 1-18, “The updating means is configured to generate a software status list of the elevator components based on their responses to the enquiry such that status or version of each application software associated with respective elevator components listed”).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filling date of the claimed invention, to including the teaching of storing the software version specific to each component under control of Kauppinen with the system of Sonnenmoser for the purpose of updating require software update specifically to individual component under control (see col. 7 line 66).
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to THOMAS PHAM whose telephone number is (571) 572‐3689. The examiner can normally be reached Monday ‐ Thursday 7 AM ‐ 4 PM.
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.
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.
/THOMAS K PHAM/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2876
Prosecution Insights