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 .
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 filing of a terminal disclaimer by itself is not a complete reply to a nonstatutory double patenting (NSDP) rejection. A complete reply requires that the terminal disclaimer be accompanied by a reply requesting reconsideration of the prior Office action. Even where the NSDP rejection is provisional the reply must be complete. See MPEP § 804, subsection I.B.1. For a reply to a non-final Office action, see 37 CFR 1.111(a). For a reply to final Office action, see 37 CFR 1.113(c). A request for reconsideration while not provided for in 37 CFR 1.113(c) may be filed after final for consideration. See MPEP §§ 706.07(e) and 714.13.
The USPTO Internet website contains terminal disclaimer forms which may be used. Please visit www.uspto.gov/patent/patents-forms. The actual 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/apply/applying-online/eterminal-disclaimer.
Claims 1 and 20 are rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claim 1 of U.S. Patent No. 12,095,586 B2. Although the claims at issue are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other because both the claims of the present invention and the claims of the U.S. Patent are drawn to a method of using a doorbell system. The respective claims, and their corresponding differences, are presented in the table below:
U.S. Patent 12,095,586 B2
Application #18/809,886 (Present Invention)
1. A method of operating a doorbell system comprising a doorbell, wherein the doorbell comprises a motion detector, a camera, a microphone, and an alert system having a component selected from the group consisting of a light, a speaker, and combinations thereof, the method comprising:
determining, by the doorbell system, whether an emergency event has been initiated;
creating a score based on a severity and a certainty of the emergency event;
initiating, by the doorbell system, at least a first communication session with at least a first remote computing device communicatively coupled to the doorbell system, wherein the first communication session comprises an indication that the emergency event that has been initiated;
determining a type of alarm based on the score;
activating an alert system in response to determining that the emergency event has been initiated, wherein the alert system provides the type of alarm based on the score;
receiving, by a deactivation unit of the doorbell system, a deactivation command; and
deactivating, in connection with a code transmission of a code to the deactivation unit and a receipt of the code from the deactivation unit, the alert system, so as to prevent modification of the first communication session.
1. A method of using a doorbell system comprising:
determining, by a security system, whether an emergency event has been initiated;
creating a score based on a severity and a certainty of the emergency event;
initiating, by the security system, at least a first communication session with a remote computing device, wherein the first communication session comprises an indication that the emergency event has been initiated;
determining a type of alarm based on the score; and
activating an alert system in response to determining that the emergency event has been initiated, wherein the alert system provides the type of alarm based on the score.
20. The method of Claim 1, further comprising: receiving, by a deactivation unit of the doorbell system, a deactivation command; and deactivating, in connection with a code transmission of a code to the deactivation unit and a receipt of the code from the deactivation unit, the alert system, so as to prevent modification of the first communication session.
As per claim 1 of the present invention, claim 1 of the U.S. Patent differs from claim 1 of the present invention by further claiming a doorbell, wherein the doorbell comprises a motion detector, a camera, a microphone, and an alert system having a component selected from the group consisting of a light, a speaker, and combinations thereof and the steps of receiving, by a deactivation unit of the doorbell system, a deactivation command; and deactivating, in connection with a code transmission of a code to the deactivation unit and a receipt of the code from the deactivation unit, the alert system, so as to prevent modification of the first communication session. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, at the time of filing, to modify claim 1 of the U.S. Patent by removing the additional features, as a matter of engineering choice and/or preferences, to conclude at claim 1 of the present invention. Such a modification would not render the invention inoperable for its intended purpose, and would yield predictable results. See MPEP 2144.04.
Claim 20 of the present invention is further rejected in view of claim 1 of the U.S. Patent for the same reasons as claim 1 above.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 2-19 are objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims. Claims 1 and 20 have been rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting, however, would be allowable if the nonstatutory double patenting rejection is overcome.
The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter:
The closest related prior at to the Applicant’s invention is Fadell et al. (U.S. 2014/0266669 A1). Fadell discloses a method of operating a doorbell system comprising a doorbell (Fadell, Paragraph [0030]), having a motion detector (Fadell, Paragraph [0190]), a camera (Fadel, Paragraph [0190]), an alert system having at least one of a light and speaker (Fadell, Paragraph [0190)), determining when an emergency event has been initiated (Fadell, Paragraphs [0072-0074]), and initiating a communication session with a remote computing device when the emergency event has been initiated (Fadell, Paragraph [0074]) and activating an alert system when the emergency event has been initiated (Fadell, Paragraph [0074]). Fadell, however, does not teach the steps of creating a score based on a severity and a certainty of the emergency event, determining a type of alarm based on the score, and activating the alert system in response to determining that the emergency event has been initiated, wherein the alert system provides the type of alarm based on the score. As per claim 20, Fadell does not disclose a deactivation unit, and the step of deactivating, in connection with a code transmission of a code to the deactivation unit and a receipt of the code from the deactivation unit, the alert system, so as to prevent modification of the first communication session. Saylor et al. (U.S. 6,661,340) discloses a system that allows a user to select to have an alarm deactivated (Saylor, Col. 14, Lines 15-31). Saylor, however, does not additionally teach the steps of in connection with a code transmission of a code to the deactivation unit and a receipt of the code from the deactivation unit, the alert system, so as to prevent modification of the first communication session, as is required by claim 20. Furthermore, it would not have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to modify the teachings of Fadell in view of Saylor to conclude at the invention of claim 20, without using improper hindsight reasoning.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JAMES J YANG whose telephone number is (571)270-5170. The examiner can normally be reached 9:30am-6:00p 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.
/JAMES J YANG/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2686