Detailed Action
This office action is in response to applicant’s submission filed on March 16, 2026. Claims 1-20 are pending and are rejected.
Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status
The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
Response to Amendment
This communication is in response to the amendment filed on March 16, 2026. The Examiner has acknowledged the amended claims 1-4, 8-11, and 15. Claims 1-20 are pending and are rejected.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s Arguments (Remarks) filed March 16, 2026 have been fully considered, but are not persuasive. Note that this action is made FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a).
Applicant’s arguments with respect to claim(s) 1 and 8 have been considered but are not persuasive. Applicant argues that the prior art does not teach the “a projector device configured to project at least two access control lanes on a floor, wherein each access control lane comprises an entry zone and an exit zone” limitation. Examiner respectfully disagrees. The argument is not persuasive because, under BRI, the claimed “access control lane” is not limited to projected lane boundary markings or exclusively virtual lanes. The alignment text discloses multiple access-controlled passageways associated with gates 1022 through which users user are selectively authorized or prohibited from passing, which reasonably corresponds to the claimed access control lanes. The reference further discloses a projector 1111 configured to project images directly onto the flooring of the gate area, including directional arrows and authorization/prohibition indicators associated with traversal through the passageways. Thus, the projector projects floor-based based visual information associated with the respective access control lanes, thereby presenting the lanes on the floor as claimed. Further, the reference does not limit projector 1111 to a single passageway or prohibit projection across multiple adjacent passageways. The text discloses a projector that projects bidirectional arrows, availability indicators, and warning signals onto the floor of the gate area. These projects guide users through the access-controlled passageways and visually define movement regions corresponding to the claimed access control lanes. The projected information further changes depending on whether passage is authorized or unauthorized, thereby providing floor-based access-control lane guidelines. Examiner also notes that these projections are associated with users approaching the gate (entry side) and passing beyond it (exit side), corresponding to entry and exit regions of the access control lane. Therefore, Warnitz still teaches each and every limitation as claimed.
Applicant amended the claims, therefore 112(f) has been withdrawn.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
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 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 1-4, 6-11, 13-15, and 19-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by US 2016/0292939 A1 to Warnitz et al. (hereinafter, “Warnitz”).
Regarding claim 1, Warnitz discloses: An access control system comprising:
a projector device configured to project at least two access control lanes on a floor, wherein each access control lane comprises an entry zone and an exit zone (“In the illustrated example, the display device 1030 also comprises a projector 1111 (FIG. 32) for projecting an image on a projection surface formed by the flooring of the gate 1022 or by a surface of a delimitation member 1036. This projector 1111 is desirably housed in the compartment 1064, as illustrated in FIG. 32. The hollow beam 1043 then comprises a transparent portion 1106 extending below the compartment 1064. The display device 1030 also comprises a module (not shown) for controlling the displays 1110 and the projector 1111. The controlling module is programed so as to control the display, with the displays 1110 and/or with the projector 1111, of information related to the availability of the gate 1022, to the authorization or to the prohibition of passing through the gate 1022, or to the signaling of an unauthorized maneuver, such as a fraudulent attempt. Optionally, the controlling module is programed for controlling the display, with the displays 1110 and/or with the projector 1111, of messages of an informative nature, or advertising information, such as advertising videos or information on the traffic. With reference to FIG. 46, the information related to the availability of the gate 1022 is for example shown as a pictogram 1112 illustrating a user showing an access document, when the gate 1022 is available, or a “no entry” panel 1114 when the gate 1022 is unavailable. The information related to the authorization of passing through the gate 1022 are for example shown as green arrows 1116 oriented in the direction of displacement of the user having shown his/her access document. The information related to the signaling of an unauthorized maneuver are for example shown as a blinking 1118 in an alarming color, such as orange or red, of the entirety of the display surface area of the displays 1110 and/or of the projection surface of the projector 1111” [0207-0209] [Examiner notes that this text shows a projector displaying directional signals, availability signals, warning on the floor, etc. which satisfies projecting lane-related information and guidance on the floor. The text also shows the projector output depending on permission and detection as the control module changes projections based on authorized or unauthorized behavior. The projector displays directional arrows and availability indicators on the floor, which inherently form zones or flow directions for user which projects floor information defining movement zones or lanes]);
a reader support structure for each access control lane, wherein each reader support structure comprises a reader device arrangement configured to provide user authorization data (“The document reader 32 is mounted on a support 138 secured to the stringer 91 so that the hooks 132, 136 clamp between them said support 138, the foam layer 134 being compressed between the casing 120 and the support 138... The control module 26 is programmed so as to infer, from the data read by the document reader 32 into the memory of an access document, whether the user owner of the access document is authorized to use the gate 22 or not. The control module 26 thus forms, with the document reader 32, a system for authorizing circulation” [0139-0143] [Examiner notes that the reader support structure is interpreted as the support 138 and the reader device arrangement is interpreted as the document reader 32. The reader reads data from the user's access document and the control module uses that data to determine authorization. Since the reader support structure in this specification show it is for use of the gate, it inherently means that each gate would have its own reader and support system, aligning with the claim limitation]);
a camera device configured to provide detection data from the at least two access control lanes (“Referring back to FIGS. 1 to 3, the sensor 34 is positioned vertically above the gate 22. It is adapted for counting the number of users present in a detection area 140 of the sensor 34, said area 140 being comprised in the gate 22. For this purpose, the sensor 34 for example comprises a TOF (Time Of Flight) camera observing the detection area 140” [0140]; “The sensor 1034 is positioned vertically above the gate 1022. It is adapted for counting the number of users present in a detection area 1140 of the sensor 1034, said area 1140 being comprised in the gate 1022. For this purpose, the sensor 1034 for example comprises a Time Of Flight camera (TOF camera) observing the detection area 1140” [0212]); and
a controller configured to control access of users along the two access control lanes (“The access control system 10, illustrated in FIGS. 1 to 3, is intended to control the entry of users into a restricted area 12. Alternatively, the access control system 10 is intended to exclusively control the exit, or the entry and exit of users in the restricted area 12” [0079]),
wherein the control of the access of the users along each access control lane comprises that the controller is configured to: detect a user within the entry zone of the access control lane based on the detection data provided by the camera device (“Referring back to FIGS. 1 to 3, the sensor 34 is positioned vertically above the gate 22. It is adapted for counting the number of users present in a detection area 140 of the sensor 34, said area 140 being comprised in the gate 22. For this purpose, the sensor 34 for example comprises a TOF (Time Of Flight) camera observing the detection area 140” [0140]), and
control the projector device based on user authorization data relating to the detected user provided by the reader device arrangement of the reader support structure of the access control lane and/or the detection data provided by the camera device (“With reference to FIG. 46, the information related to the availability of the gate 1022 is for example shown as a pictogram 1112 illustrating a user showing an access document, when the gate 1022 is available, or a “no entry” panel 1114 when the gate 1022 is unavailable. The information related to the authorization of passing through the gate 1022 are for example shown as green arrows 1116 oriented in the direction of displacement of the user having shown his/her access document. The information related to the signaling of an unauthorized maneuver are for example shown as a blinking 1118 in an alarming color, such as orange or red, of the entirety of the display surface area of the displays 1110 and/or of the projection surface of the projector 1111” [0209]).
Claim 8 recites substantially the same limitation as claim 1, in the form of a method for implementing the corresponding system, therefore it is rejected under the same rationale.
Regarding claims 2 and 9, Warnitz discloses: wherein the controlling the projector device comprises that the controller is configured to: control the projector device to project access granted guidance on the floor at the exit zone of the access control lane, if the user authorization data indicates that the detected user is an authorized user; control the projector device to project access denied guidance on the floor at the exit zone of the access control lane, if the user authorization data indicates that the detected user is an unauthorized user; or control the projector device to project the access denied guidance on the floor at the exit zone of the access control lane, if the detected user is further detected to entry into the exit zone of the access control lane based on the detection data provided by the camera device and the user authorization data is not provided by the reader device arrangement of the reader support structure of the access control lane (“With reference to FIG. 46, the information related to the availability of the gate 1022 is for example shown as a pictogram 1112 illustrating a user showing an access document, when the gate 1022 is available, or a “no entry” panel 1114 when the gate 1022 is unavailable. The information related to the authorization of passing through the gate 1022 are for example shown as green arrows 1116 oriented in the direction of displacement of the user having shown his/her access document. The information related to the signaling of an unauthorized maneuver are for example shown as a blinking 1118 in an alarming color, such as orange or red, of the entirety of the display surface area of the displays 1110 and/or of the projection surface of the projector 1111” [0209] [Examiner notes that this text is showing that if the user is authorized, the access granted guidance is projected on the floor and if denied authorization, guidance such as alarming color blinking is projected, showing the first 2 scenarios]).
Regarding claims 3, 10, and 15, Warnitz discloses: wherein each reader support structure further comprises a restriction device for restricting access of unauthorized users into the exit zone of the respective access control lane, and wherein the control of the access along each access control lane comprises that the controller is further configured to control the restriction device based on the user authorization data relating to the detected user provided by the reader device arrangement of the reader support structure of the access control lane (“The control module 1026 is also programmed for controlling the change of state of the obstacle 1062 and of the display device 1030 according to whether it was determined that the user owner of the access document is authorized to use the gate 1022 or not. In particular, the control module 1026 is programmed for controlling the displacement of the movable members 1070 in a retracted position and the display of information related to the authorization of passing through the gate 1022 by the displays 1110, by the projector 1111 and by the screen 124 when it was determined that the user owner of the access document is authorized to use the gate 1022, and for controlling the deployment of the movable members 1070 and the display of information related to the prohibition of passing through the gate 1022 by the displays 1110 and by the projector 1111 when it was determined that the user owner of the access document is not authorized to use the gate 1022. The control module 1026 thus forms, with the device for obstruction of the gate 1028, the display device on the ground 1030 and the screen 124, an adapted signing system for informing the user whether he/she is either authorized or not to use the gate 1022” [0216]).
Regarding claims 4 and 11, Warnitz discloses: wherein the controlling the restriction device comprises that the controller is configured to: control the restriction device to allow access for the detected user into the exit zone of the access control lane, if the user authorization data indicates that the detected user is an authorized user; control the restriction device to restrict access of the detected user into the exit zone of the access control lane, if the user authorization data indicates that the detected user is an unauthorized user; or control the restriction device to restrict access of the detected user into the exit zone of the access control lane, if the user authorization data is not provided by the reader device arrangement of the reader support structure of the access control lane (“The control module 1026 is also programmed for controlling the change of state of the obstacle 1062 and of the display device 1030 according to whether it was determined that the user owner of the access document is authorized to use the gate 1022 or not. In particular, the control module 1026 is programmed for controlling the displacement of the movable members 1070 in a retracted position and the display of information related to the authorization of passing through the gate 1022 by the displays 1110, by the projector 1111 and by the screen 124 when it was determined that the user owner of the access document is authorized to use the gate 1022, and for controlling the deployment of the movable members 1070 and the display of information related to the prohibition of passing through the gate 1022 by the displays 1110 and by the projector 1111 when it was determined that the user owner of the access document is not authorized to use the gate 1022. The control module 1026 thus forms, with the device for obstruction of the gate 1028, the display device on the ground 1030 and the screen 124, an adapted signing system for informing the user whether he/she is either authorized or not to use the gate 1022” [0216] [Examiner notes that the restriction device is controlled to allow access if the user is authorized or restrict access if the user is not, satisfying 2 of these scenarios]).
Regarding claims 6, 13, 19, and 20, Warnitz discloses: wherein the camera device is a 2D camera, a time-of-flight camera, or a stereo camera (“For this purpose, the sensor 34 for example comprises a TOF (Time Of Flight) camera observing the detection area 140” [0140]).
Regarding claims 7 and 14, Warnitz discloses: wherein the reader device arrangement of each reader support structure comprises: a quick response code reader device, a radio frequency identification reader device, a near-field communication reader device, and/or an identification card reader device (“The document reader 32 is adapted for communicating with a contactless access document. For this purpose, it comprises, with reference to FIGS. 24 and 25, an antenna 122 and an electronic card 126. It further comprises a casing 120, a screen 124, a self-clamping lock 127, a ferrite layer 128 and optionally a loudspeaker (not shown)... The electronic card 126 is electrically connected to the antenna 122. It is adapted for reading and optionally writing data into the memory of a contactless media, for example of the type CSC (Contactless Smart Card) or of the type NFC (Near Field Communication), via the antenna 122. The electronic card 126 is also adapted for communicating with the control module 26” [0131-0135]).
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 5, 12, 16, 17, and 18 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over US 2016/0292939 A1 to Warnitz et al. (hereinafter, “Warnitz”) in view of WO 2019/226544 A1 to Neill et al. (hereinafter, “Neill”).
Regarding claims 5, 12, 16, 17, and 18, a combination of Warnitz-Neill disclose the system of claim 1.
Warnitz does not disclose: a facial recognition camera device configured to provide facial recognition data for a facial recognition-based identification of the detected user.
However, Neill discloses: a facial recognition camera device configured to provide facial recognition data for a facial recognition-based identification of the detected user (“In an aspect, the access control system 100 can use the camera 110 to detect (or capture) images regarding a subject (e.g., as the subject approaches a door or other access point), the processor 125 executes the facial recognizer 135 that receives the images, the processor 125 executes the skeletal tracker 155 that receives the images, the database 140 maintaining facial information and skeletal information, and the alarm device 115. The processor 125 executes the facial recognizer 135 to identify the subject based on the received images. In an example, the facial recognizer 135 can identify facial features based on the received images (e.g., expression, eye movements). The processor 125 executes the skeletal tracker 155 to identify movements of the subject based on the images (e.g., movements of the head or limbs)” [0027-0028]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Warnitz with the added structure of Neill to supplement the camera system to not only detect individuals, but when detection occurs, recognize the individuals using their facial features.
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 extension fee 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 date of this final action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should
be directed to SARON MATTHEWOS WORKU whose telephone number is (703)756-1761. The
examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday, 9:30am - 6:30pm.
Examiner interviews are available via telephone, in-person, and video conferencing using a
USPTO supplied web-based collaboration tool. To schedule an interview, applicant is encouraged to use
the USPTO Automated Interview Request (AIR) at http://www.uspto.gov/interviewpractice.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Linglan Edwards can be reached on 571-270-5440. 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.
/SARON MATTHEWOS WORKU/Examiner, Art Unit 2408
/LINGLAN EDWARDS/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2408
Prosecution Insights