DETAILED ACTION
Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status
The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
Claim Objections
Claims 18 and 20 are objected to because of the following informalities:
As of claim 18, limitation “a control system configured to activate at least one of the light or the camera based on a signal received from at least one of the sensor or the camera, is not clear. How a camera is being activated by receiving a signal from itself? Based on the specification (paragraph [0039]) it is the examiner’s understanding that the camera is being activated based on a signal received from the sensor.
Claim 20 recited the similar subject matter and should be corrected accordingly.
Appropriate correction is required.
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 Marcinkowski et al. (US Pub 2019/0238355) in view of Schau (US Pub 2009/0313790).
As of claims 1 and 12, A door system comprising: a door jamb (door frame 102; see fig. 1); a door panel (via intelligent door 101; see fig. 2); a power transfer mechanism extending from the door jamb to the edge of the door panel (via disclosing that the intelligent frame 102 is hardwired into a building's electrical system. Such a configuration not only improves the intelligent door system's aesthetics but also prevents disconnection of a power source by accident, and a connector 106 providing power to intelligent door 101 and frame 102 from an exterior source, hence disclosing a power transfer mechanism; see fig. 1; also see paragraphs [0030] and [0060]);
a plurality of electronic components (via multiple components on the door; see fig. 2), wherein the power transfer mechanism is configured to facilitate electrically coupling one or more of the plurality of electronic components to an external power source (via disclosing that the intelligent frame 102 is hardwired into a building's electrical system. Such a configuration not only improves the intelligent door system's aesthetics but also prevents disconnection of a power source by accident, and a connector 106 providing power to intelligent door 101 and frame 102 from an exterior source, hence disclosing a power transfer mechanism; see fig. 1; also see paragraphs [0030] and [0060]), and wherein the plurality of electronic components include:
a camera (via camera 113; see fig. 2);
a light (via light; see paragraph [0076]);
a sensor configured to facilitate detecting at least one of sound or activity proximate the door panel (via cameras 113/114, microphone 115, proximity sensors, doorbell, motion detector; see fig. 2; also see paragraphs [0037], [0043]-[0044], [0048] and [0052] and ; and
a backup battery configured to power at least one of the plurality of electronic components in an event of power loss from the external power source (via one or more barriers providing backup power source; see paragraph [0056]); and
a control system configured to: acquire data from one or more of the plurality of electronic components; and at least one of (i) transmit the data to a server (via sending data to a server; see paragraph [0057]) or (ii) control one or more of the plurality of electronic components based on the data (via performing one or more functions, such as unlocking, instructing the camera to record for a certain time period upon detection of an event or condition for a certain time period; see paragraph [0094]).
With regard to the limitation of a hinge coupling an edge of the door panel to the door jamb Marcinkowski discloses that the processor 105 is coupled to various mechanical controls 506 including hinges (see paragraph [0076]) and based on fig. 1 it can be seen that the door will be coupled to the frame via hinges. In order to further support the Examiner’s assertion, Schau discloses a door with electric transfer hinge to transfer power to components including locks and cameras (see paragraph [0002]).
From the teaching of Schau it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was filed to include a power transfer hinge coupled to an edge of the door as taught by Schau to facilitate pivotally coupled the door to a door jamb and facilitating electrically coupling the lock and the camera to an external power source.
As of claims 7, 13, 16 and 19, combination of Marcinkowski and Schau discloses all the limitations of the claimed invention as mentioned in claim 1 above, with regards to the limitation of door panel including a box embedded therein and the camera disposed within the box, the camera 113 embedded in the door (see fig. 2) is interpreted as a camera disposed within a box in the door. The Examiner further takes official notice that it is well known in the art to dispose a camera within a box in a door (see Wang (US 2006/0156361) figs. 1-2; also see paragraphs [0022]-[0023]).
As of claims 17 and 20, combination of Marcinkowski and Schau discloses all the limitations of the claimed invention as mentioned in claim 1 above, Marcinkowski further discloses that the user can control the intelligent door system using a user device (see paragraphs [0036] and [0082]. Even though Marcinkowski does not explicitly disclose that the user uses the user device to active the light. The Examiner further takes official notice that it is well known in the art of access control that a controller configured to control a door and coupled with a camera or lighting system is able to receive a command from a user device to active the lighting system in order to allow a user to remotely control locking/unlocking and lighting system (see Bresson (US Pub 2019/0325681, fig. 2; also see paragraph [0021]).
As of claims 2 and 18, Marcinkowski that the control system is configured to activate at least one of the light or the camera based on the data, wherein the data includes a signal from the sensor indicating that at least one of sound or activity was detected proximate the door panel (via activating the cameras after receiving signal from motion detectors; see paragraph [0052]).
As of claims 3 and 14, Marcinkowski discloses that the backup battery is disposed within the door panel (via batteries being included in the door or frame; see paragraphs [0056] and [0074]).
As of claim 4, Marcinkowski discloses that the backup battery is disposed within the door jamb (via batteries being included in the door or frame; see paragraphs [0056] and [0074]).
As of claim 5, Marcinkowski discloses the backup battery only provides power to a subset of the plurality of electronic components during the event of power loss from the external power source (Marcinkowski discloses that the barriers provide backup power to intelligent door, even though it does not explicitly state providing power to a subset of the plurality of electronic components but that it would have been an obvious design choice that the installer can use to have certain components that are absolutely require for the function of the intelligent door system in case of power failure; see paragraph [0056]).
As of claim 6, Marcinkowski discloses that the intelligent door system comprising a light (see paragraphs [0072], however it does not disclose that the light is positioned along at least a portion of the door jamb. The Examiner takes official notice that it is well known in the art that the door system comprises a light positioned along at least a portion of door jamb in order to illuminate the entryway of a house or other building with light that is primarily directed to the door jambs and other parts of the door (see Guarion (US 2008/0013303), abstract; also see paragraph [0003]).
As of claim 8, Marcinkowski discloses that the plurality of electronic components include an electronic locking mechanism coupled to the door panel (via smart lock 107; see fig. 2; also see paragraph [0034]).
As of claim 9, Schau discloses that the power transfer mechanism includes a flexible conduit (see paragraph [0005]).
As of claims 10 and 15, Schau discloses that the power transfer mechanism includes an electric transfer hinge (via a door with electric transfer hinge to transfer power to components including locks and cameras (see paragraph [0002]).
As of claim 11, Marcinkowski discloses that the control system is configured to transmit the data to the server and control one or more of the plurality of electronic components based on the data (via sending data to a server; see paragraph [0057]) and performing one or more functions, such as unlocking, instructing the camera to record for a certain time period upon detection of an event or condition for a certain time period; see paragraph [0094]).
Double Patenting
The nonstatutory double patenting rejection is based on a judicially created doctrine grounded in public policy (a policy reflected in the statute) so as to prevent the unjustified or improper timewise extension of the “right to exclude” granted by a patent and to prevent possible harassment by multiple assignees. A nonstatutory double patenting rejection is appropriate where the conflicting claims are not identical, but at least one examined application claim is not patentably distinct from the reference claim(s) because the examined application claim is either anticipated by, or would have been obvious over, the reference claim(s). See, e.g., In re Berg, 140 F.3d 1428, 46 USPQ2d 1226 (Fed. Cir. 1998); In re Goodman, 11 F.3d 1046, 29 USPQ2d 2010 (Fed. Cir. 1993); In re Longi, 759 F.2d 887, 225 USPQ 645 (Fed. Cir. 1985); In re Van Ornum, 686 F.2d 937, 214 USPQ 761 (CCPA 1982); In re Vogel, 422 F.2d 438, 164 USPQ 619 (CCPA 1970); In re Thorington, 418 F.2d 528, 163 USPQ 644 (CCPA 1969).
A timely filed terminal disclaimer in compliance with 37 CFR 1.321(c) or 1.321(d) may be used to overcome an actual or provisional rejection based on nonstatutory double patenting provided the reference application or patent either is shown to be commonly owned with the examined application, or claims an invention made as a result of activities undertaken within the scope of a joint research agreement. See MPEP § 717.02 for applications subject to examination under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA as explained in MPEP § 2159. See MPEP § 2146 et seq. for applications not subject to examination under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA . A terminal disclaimer must be signed in compliance with 37 CFR 1.321(b).
The USPTO Internet website contains terminal disclaimer forms which may be used. Please visit www.uspto.gov/patent/patents-forms. The filing date of the application in which the form is filed determines what form (e.g., PTO/SB/25, PTO/SB/26, PTO/AIA /25, or PTO/AIA /26) should be used. A web-based eTerminal Disclaimer may be filled out completely online using web-screens. An eTerminal Disclaimer that meets all requirements is auto-processed and approved immediately upon submission. For more information about eTerminal Disclaimers, refer to www.uspto.gov/patents/process/file/efs/guidance/eTD-info-I.jsp.
Claim 1 is rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claim 1 of U.S. Patent No. 11,922748. Although the claims at issue are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other because
Present Application (18/780134) Claim 1:
A door system comprising: a door jamb; a door panel; a hinge coupling an edge of the door panel to the door jamb; a power transfer mechanism extending from the door jamb to the edge of the door panel; a plurality of electronic components, wherein the power transfer mechanism is configured to facilitate electrically coupling one or more of the plurality of electronic components to an external power source, and wherein the plurality of electronic components include: a camera; a light; a sensor configured to facilitate detecting at least one of sound or activity proximate the door panel; and a backup battery configured to power at least one of the plurality of electronic components in an event of power loss from the external power source; and a control system configured to: acquire data from one or more of the plurality of electronic components; and at least one of (i) transmit the data to a server or (ii) control one or more of the plurality of electronic components based on the data.
Conflicting Patent (11,922,748) Claim 1:
A door system comprising: a doorjamb; a door panel including a box disposed therealong and embedded therein; a hinge pivotally coupling an edge of the door panel to the doorjamb; a flexible conduit extending from the door jamb to the edge of the door panel; a plurality of electronic components, wherein the flexible conduit is configured to facilitate electrically coupling one or more of the plurality of electronic components to an external power source, and wherein the plurality of electronic components include: an electronic locking mechanism coupled to the door panel; a camera disposed within the box of the door panel; a light integrated into the doorjamb; a sensor configured to facilitate detecting at least one of sound or activity proximate the door panel; and a backup battery disposed within at least one of the door jamb or the door panel, the backup battery configured to power at least one of the plurality of electronic components in an event of power loss from the external power source; and a control system configured to: acquire data from one or more of the plurality of electronic components; and at least one of (i) transmit the data to a server or (ii) control one or more of the plurality of electronic components based on the data.
Comments
The patent claims include all of the limitations of the instant application claims, respectively. The patent claims also include additional limitations. Hence, the instant application claims are generic to the species of invention covered by the respective patent claims. As such, the instant application claims are anticipated by the patent claims and are therefore not patentably distinct therefrom. (See Eli Lilly and Co. v. Barr Laboratories Inc., 58 USPQ2D 1869, "a later genus claim limitation is anticipated by, and therefore not patentably distinct from, an earlier species claim", In re Goodman, 29 USPQ2d 2010, "Thus, the generic invention is 'anticipated' by the species of the patented invention" and the instant “application claims are generic to species of invention covered by the patent claim, and since without terminal disclaimer, extant species claims preclude issuance of generic application claims”
Present Application 18/780134
Conflicting Patent (11,922,748)
2
2
3, 14
1
4
1
5
3
6-10, 15-16
1
11
12
12
10
13, 20
4
16
9
17
14
18
2
19
10
Claims 1-20 are rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claims 1-20 of U.S. Patent No. 11,373,471 in the same manner as rejected above.
Claims 1-20 are rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claims 1-20 of U.S. Patent No. 12,073,674 in the same manner as rejected above.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to NABIL H SYED whose telephone number is (571)270-3028. The examiner can normally be reached 8:00-5:00 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, Brian Zimmerman can be reached at 571-272-3059. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300.
Information regarding the status of published or unpublished applications may be obtained from Patent Center. Unpublished application information in Patent Center is available to registered users. To file and manage patent submissions in Patent Center, visit: https://patentcenter.uspto.gov. Visit https://www.uspto.gov/patents/apply/patent-center for more information about Patent Center and https://www.uspto.gov/patents/docx for information about filing in DOCX format. For additional questions, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
/NABIL H SYED/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2686