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 .
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statements (IDS) submitted on 09/09/2024 and 04/24/2026 are in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statements are being considered by the examiner.
Claim Objections
Claims 12 and 20 are objected to because of the following informalities:
Claim 12 recites “generate a segmented first image by segment the first image” in line 2. The examiner suggests amending to “generate a segmented first image by segmenting the first image.” Appropriate correction is required.
Claim 20 depends on the method of claim 14. Claim 14 is directed to a system. The examiner suggests amending claim 20 to depend on claim 15. Appropriate correction is required.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 101
35 U.S.C. 101 reads as follows:
Whoever invents or discovers any new and useful process, machine, manufacture, or composition of matter, or any new and useful improvement thereof, may obtain a patent therefor, subject to the conditions and requirements of this title.
Claims 1 and 15 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 101 because the claimed invention is directed to an abstract idea without significantly more. The claim(s) recite(s) determining first and second spatial relationships from an image and determining a state of an infant care station. These limitations fall into enumerated grouping of abstract idea, namely mental processes because they are concepts performed in the human mind since they correspond to one or more of an observation, evaluation, judgment and opinion. This judicial exception is not integrated into a practical application because the additional limitations in the claims, e.g., recitations of mage sensors, processor, memory and infant care station structures, correspond to mere nominal recitations of generic computer components, and to a mere attempt to generally link the use of the abstract idea to infant care environment. For these reasons, the claim(s) also does/do not include additional elements that are sufficient to amount to significantly more than the judicial exception. As such, claims 1 and 15 are patent ineligible.
Claims 2-5, 7, 8, 12, 13, 14, 16, and 20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 101 because the claimed invention is directed to an abstract idea without significantly more. These claims describe either the data being observed/evaluated or the environment that the claimed method/system takes place. As such, these claims do not integrate the judicial exception to a practical application and do not include additional elements that are sufficient to amount to significantly more than the judicial exception. As such, claims 2-5, 7, 8, 12-14, and 16, 20 are patent ineligible.
Claims 6, 9-11 and 17-19 are patent eligible because they recite additional limitations that recite using technologies, such as Lidar, machine learning model and point clouds, that render mentally performing the limitations of the claims virtually impossible.
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.
Claim(s) 1-5, 7, 8, 10, 12-16, and 20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over us patent application publication no. 2020/0311972 to Love in view of us patent application publication no. 2025/0127672 to Thacker.
For claim 1, Love as applied teaches a system for determining a state of an infant care station, comprising:
an image sensor through which a first image is captured (see, e.g., pars. 20-23 and FIGS. 1-, which teach capturing an image of the door including the door lock using a camera);
a computer processor (see, e.g., pars. 22-25 and 31 and FIGS. 1 and 2, which teach using a processing system to process the image); and
a memory device comprising instructions executable by the computer processor (see, e.g., pars. 32 and 35-38 and FIG. 2, which teach using a memory as a part of the processing system) to:
determine, based on the first image:
a first spatial relationship between a first predetermined point of a first feature that is captured in the first image, and a second predetermined point of a second feature that is captured in the first image (see, e.g., pars. 26-27, 39-43, and 45-48 and FIGS. 3, 4, 6A-B, 7A-B, and 8A-B, which teach determining whether the thumbturn is in the vertical/horizontal position with respect to the door lock; the examiner interprets one of the horizontal and vertical positions as the first spatial relationship and the other position as the second spatial relationship); and
a second spatial relationship between the first predetermined point of the first feature and a third predetermined point of a third feature that is captured in the first image (see, e.g., pars. 26, 27 and 39-43, which teach determining whether the thumbturn is in the vertical/horizontal position with respect to the door lock and the deadbolt; the examiner interprets one of the position as the first spatial relationship and the other position as the second spatial relationship); and
determine the state of the infant care station based on the first spatial relationship and the second spatial relationship (see, e.g., pars. 26, 27, 39, 45-48, 50-51, 54-56, and 63-65 and FIG. 5, which teach determining the current door state based on the position of the thumbturn and the deadbolt), wherein the state of the infant care station indicates whether a plurality of walls of the infant care station are latched (see, e.g., pars. 21, 26, 27, 39, and 45-48, which teach that when the thumbturn and deadbolt are engaged, the door is latched to the wall).
Love, however, does not explicitly teach that its video/image based monitoring method is used in an infant care setting. Thacker in the analogous art teaches using a video monitoring system in an infant care setting for monitoring the equipment condition, such as the door latch status (see, e.g., pars. 29, 53 and 84 of Thacker).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Love’s method to be used in an infant care setting as taught by Thacker because doing so would provide a monitoring coverage on the equipment/device conditions, and hence, more comprehensive infant care (see pars. 29 and 53 of Thacker).
For claim 2, Love in view of Thacker teaches that the first spatial relationship comprises a first angle, the second spatial relationship comprises a second angle (see, e.g., pars. 47, 50-51 and 63-65 and FIGS. 4, 6A-B, 7A-B, and 8A-B of Love, which teach determining locations and angles of the detected edges, which includes edges of the lock mechanism, and wherein determining the horizontal/vertical position of thumbturn include determining its angle with respect to the respective axis).
For claim 3, Love in view of Thacker teaches that the first spatial relationship comprises a first angle, the second spatial relationship comprises a distance (see, e.g., pars. 24, 41-43, 50-51, and 63-65 and FIGS. 4, 6A-B, 7A-B, and 8A-B of Love, which teach determining locations and angles of the detected edges of the door lock and the thumbturn).
For claim 4, Love in view of Thacker teaches that the first spatial relationship comprises a first distance, and wherein the second spatial relationship comprises a second distance (see, e.g., pars. 24, 41-43, 50-51, and 63-65 and FIGS. 4, 6A-B, 7A-B, and 8A-B of Love, which teach detecting edges of the door lock and the thumbturn using Canny edge detection, wherein the edges detected under Canny edge detection have respective magnitudes and angles).
For claim 5, Love in view of Thacker teaches that each of the first distance and the second distance is represented by a number of pixels between corresponding features of the first image (see, e.g., pars. 24, 41-43, 50-51, and 63-65 and FIGS. 4, 6A-B, 7A-B, and 8A-B of Love, which teach detecting edges of the door lock and the thumbturn using Canny edge detection, wherein the magnitude of the edges detected under Canny edge detection are measured in pixels).
For claim 7, Love as applied teaches that the first feature comprises a movable feature (see, e.g., FIGS. 6A-B, 7A-B, and 8A-B of Love, which show the thumbturn, e.g., 612, which is moveable with respect to the door lock, e.g., 614), and wherein the first feature is disposed on one of the plurality of walls (see, e.g., FIGS. 6A-B, 7A-B, and 8A-B of Love, which show that the thumbturn, e.g., 612, is disposed on the wall including the door lock, e.g., 614), and wherein the second feature comprises a fixed feature (see, e.g., FIGS. 6A-B, 7A-B, and 8A-B of Love, which show the door lock, e.g., 614, which is fixed to the door).
Love, however, does not explicitly teach that the wall that includes the door being monitored is not a wall of an infant care station. Thacker in the analogous art teaches monitoring a door and its latch on an infant care station wall (see, e.g., pars. 29, 53 and 84 of Thacker).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Love’s method to be used in an infant care door because doing so would allow providing a coverage in the equipment/device conditions, and hence, more comprehensive care in the infant care setting (see pars. 29 and 53 of Thacker).
For claim 8, Love in view of Thacker teaches that the third feature is selected from a group consisting of a movable feature, and a fixed feature (see, e.g., pars. 39, 45-48 and 60 and FIGS. 7A-B and 8A-B of Love, which teach using the deadbolt as one of the features being monitored).
For claim 10, Love in view of Thacker teaches that the instructions comprise an infant care station interface for obtaining the first spatial relationship and the second spatial relationship (see, e.g., pars. 33-34 of Love, which teach using an interface to communicate with the external device such as the camera system), and wherein determining the state of the infant care station comprises using a machine learning model that is trained to classify the state of the infant care station based on training data comprising a plurality of spatial relationships corresponding to the first spatial relationship and the second spatial relationship (see, e.g., par. 24 of Love, which teach using a machine learning to identify the security state of the door; the examiner finds the above teaching to suggest the involved training).
Love, however, does not explicitly teach that the interface is one used in an infant care setting. Thacker in the analogous art teaches using a video monitoring system in an infant care setting for monitoring the equipment condition, such as the door latch status (see, e.g., pars. 29, 53 and 84 of Thacker).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Love’s interface to be used in an infant care setting because doing so would allow providing a coverage in the equipment/device conditions, and hence, more comprehensive care in the infant care setting (see pars. 29 and 53 of Thacker).
For claim 12, Love in view of Thacker teaches that the instructions are executable by the computer processor to generate a segmented first image by segment the first image, and wherein the segmented first image comprises a plurality of representations corresponding to the first feature, the second feature, and the third feature, and wherein the first spatial relationship and the second spatial relationship are based on the segmented first image (see, e.g., pars. 24, 43 and 52 of Love, which teach using image segmentation to generate processed versions of the capture images and to determine the security state of a door and one or more components thereof; the examiner interprets the above teaching to suggest using the image segmentation in determining the thumbturn’s position).
For claim 13, while Love does not explicitly teach, Thacker in the analogous art teaches that the image sensor is disposed at a location selected from a group consisting of within the walls of the infant care station (see, e.g., pars. 40-42 and FIGS. 2 and 4A-B of Thacker) and , at a head of the infant care station, outside the walls of the infant care station, and at a level that is even with a cover of the infant care station.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Love’s camera to be disposed in an infant care setting as taught by Thacker because doing so would optimize the data acquisition (see par. 41 of Thacker).
For claim 14, while Love does not explicitly teach, Thacker in the analogous art teaches that the infant care station is selected from a group consisting of an infant incubator and an infant warmer (see, e.g., pars. 35-36 and FIG. 1 of Thacker, which teach the warming therapy devices).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Love’s method to be used in an infant warmer as taught by Thacker because doing so would provide a monitoring coverage on the equipment/device conditions, and hence, more comprehensive infant care (see pars. 29 and 53 of Thacker).
For claim 15, Love as applied teaches a method for monitoring patient safety in an infant care station, the method comprising:
determining, based on a first image of the infant care station that is captured by an image sensor, a first spatial relationship between a first predetermined point of a first feature that is captured in the first image, and a second predetermined point of a second feature that is captured in the first image (see, e.g., pars. 26-27, 39-43, and 45- 48 and FIGS. 3, 4, 6A-B, 7A-B, and 8A-B, which teach determining, from an image captured by a camera system, whether the thumbturn is in the vertical/horizontal position with respect to the door lock; the examiner interprets one of the horizontal and vertical positions as the first spatial relationship and the other position as the second spatial relationship);
determining a second spatial relationship between the first predetermined point of the first feature and a third predetermined point of a third feature that is captured in the first image (see, e.g., pars. 26, 27 and 39-43, which teach determining whether the thumbturn is in the vertical/horizontal position with respect to the door lock and the deadbolt; the examiner interprets one of the position as the first spatial relationship and the other position as the second spatial relationship); and
determining the state of the infant care station based on the first spatial relationship and the second spatial relationship (see, e.g., pars. 26, 27, 39, 45-48, 50-51, 54-56, and 63-65 and FIG. 5, which teach determining the current door state based on the position of the thumbturn and the deadbolt), wherein the state of the infant care station indicates whether a plurality of walls of the infant care station are latched (see, e.g., pars. 21, 26, 27, 39, and 45-48, which teach that when the thumbturn and deadbolt are engaged, the door is latched to the wall).
Love, however, does not explicitly teach that its video/image based monitoring method is used in an infant care setting. Thacker in the analogous art teaches using a video monitoring system in an infant care setting for monitoring the equipment condition, such as the door latch status (see, e.g., pars. 29, 53 and 84 of Thacker).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Love’s method to be used in an infant care setting as taught by Thacker because doing so would allow providing a coverage in the equipment/device conditions, and hence, more comprehensive care in the infant care setting (see pars. 29 and 53 of Thacker).
For claim 16, Love in view of Thacker teaches that the first spatial relationship comprises a first distance, and wherein the second spatial relationship comprises a second distance. (see, e.g., pars. 24, 41-43, 50-51, and 63-65 and FIGS. 4, 6A-B, 7A-B, and 8A-B of Love, which teach detecting edges of the door lock and the thumbturn using Canny edge detection, wherein the edges detected under Canny edge detection have respective magnitudes and angles).
For claim 20, Love in view of Thacker teaches:
generating a segmented first image by segmenting the first image, wherein the segmented first image comprises a plurality of representations corresponding to the first feature, the second feature, and the third feature; and determining the first spatial relationship and the second spatial relationship based on a plurality of features identified in the segmented first image (see, e.g., pars. 24, 43 and 52 of Love, which teach using image segmentation to generate processed versions of the capture images and to determine the security state of a door and one or more components thereof; the examiner interprets the above teaching to suggest using the image segmentation in determining the thumbturn’s position).
Claim(s) 6 and 17 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Love in view of Thacker and further in view of us patent application publication no. 2020/0242471 to Busch.
For claim 6, while Love in view of Thacker does not explicitly teach, Busch in the analogous art teaches using a laser and a laser sensor, wherein the first distance and the second distance are determined using the laser, the laser sensor, and a light detection and ranging process (see, e.g., pars. 164 and 251 of Busch, which teach using Lidar to determine whether a door is open).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Love in view of Thacker to use Lidar because doing so would yield predictable results of detecting and ranging a surface that is not easily discernable from an image, such as a glass window or door (see MPEP 2143(I)(D)).
For claim 17, Love in view of Thacker teaches:
determining a plurality of positions of the first predetermined point, the second predetermined point, and the third predetermined point (see, e.g., pars. 24, 41-43, 50-51, and 63-65 and FIGS. 4, 6A-B, 7A-B, and 8A-B of Love, which teach determining locations and angles of the detected edges of the door lock, the thumbturn and the deadbolt).; and
determining the first spatial relationship and the second spatial relationship based on the plurality of positions (see, e.g., pars. 26-27, 39-43, and 45-48 and FIGS. 3, 4, 6A-B, 7A-B, and 8A-B, which teach determining whether the thumbturn is in the vertical/horizontal position with respect to the door lock and the deadbolt).
Love in view of Thacker does not explicitly teach using a Lidar. Busch in the analogous art teaches using a Lidar for determining the current door state (see, e.g., pars. 164 and 251 of Busch, which teach using Lidar to determine whether a door is open).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Love in view of Thacker to use Lidar because doing so would yield predictable results of detecting and ranging a surface that is not easily discernable from an image, such as a glass window or door (see MPEP 2143(I)(D)).
Claim(s) 11 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Love in view of Thacker and further in view of us patent application publication no. 2024/0108524 to Khair et al. (hereinafter Khair).
For claim 11, while Love as applied does not explicitly teach, Khair in the analogous art teaches comprising a stereoscopic lens (see, e.g., pars. 96 and 128-130 of Khair, which teach using stereo infrared images), wherein the image sensor is configured to capture a second image from a different angle than a capture angle of the first image (see, e.g., pars. 96 and 128-130 of Khair, which teach using stereo infrared images, which are captured at different angles from each other), and wherein the first spatial relationship and the second spatial relationship are determined based on a point cloud representing the infant care station (see, e.g., pars. 166-172 and FIG. 26 of Khair, which teach determining the spatial relationships between the features in the station using the infrared images), and wherein the instructions are executable by the computer processor to generate the point cloud based on the first image and the second image (see, e.g., pars. 64, 127-130 and FIGS. 22A-D of Khair, which teach generating point cloud based on the video data).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Love in view of Thacker to generate and use point cloud as taught by Khair because doing so would yield predictable results of obtaining 3D data for more accurate determination of the state of a station being monitored (see MPEP 2143(I)(D)).
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 9, 18 and 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.
In regard to claims 9 and 18, when considered as a whole, prior art of record fails to disclose or render obvious, alone or in combination:
“the state of the infant care station is determined using a state space model, and wherein the state space model uses a plurality of inputs indicating a plurality of positions of the first feature, the second feature, and the third feature.”
In regard to claim 19, when considered as a whole, prior art of record fails to disclose or render obvious, alone or in combination:
“obtaining the first spatial relationship and the second spatial relationship, using an infant care station interface; and
determining the state of the infant care station comprises using a machine learning model that is trained to classify the state of the infant care station based on training data comprising a plurality of spatial relationships corresponding to the first spatial relationship and the second spatial relationship, wherein the plurality of spatial relationships are associated with a plurality of infant care stations that are manufactured by a plurality of different manufacturers.”
Additional Citations
The following table lists several references that are relevant to the subject matter claimed and disclosed in this Application. The references are not relied on by the Examiner, but are provided to assist the Applicant in responding to this Office action.
Citation
Relevance
Becker et al. (us pat. pub. 2023/0181402)
Describes infant care stations, and more specifically providing open access point indicators for an enclosure of an infant care station. In one embodiment, an infant care station can include a lighting system, at least one access point, and a processor that can detect that the at least one access point is open. The processor can also provide, using the lighting system, a first color light in response to the detecting that the at least one access point is open, and provide the first color light with a modified brightness or provide a second color light with the lighting system after a predetermined period of time elapses with the at least one access point being open.
Trundle (us pat. pub. 2021/0158054)
Describes virtual sensor technology, in which a camera is controlled to capture at least one configuration image of an area monitored by a monitoring system and input is received that defines one or more characteristics of the at least one configuration image that enable sensing of an event in the area. Based on the received input, configuration data used in sensing the event is generated and stored. After storage of the configuration data, the camera is controlled to capture one or more images of the area, the one or more images are analyzed based on the configuration data, and occurrence of the event is detected based on the analysis of the one or more images. Based on detecting occurrence of the event, a transmitting device is controlled to send, to a controller of the monitoring system, a signal that indicates the detection of the occurrence of the event.
Bjurstrom (us pat. pub. 2020/0320311)
Describes systems and methods for monitoring an operation of a door of a public transportation vehicle are disclosed. In an embodiment, the system includes an optical sensor unit and a control unit. The optical sensor is arranged at a distance from the door and configured to record a movement of the door during an opening and/or a closing. The control unit is configured to (1) determine a position of a reference point of the door based on the recorded movement of the door, (2) determine a parameter of the movement of the door during the movement based on the determined position of the reference point, (3) determine a deviation of the parameter of the movement from a predetermined/allowed range of values of the parameter, and (4) determine an error in the operation of the door based on the determined deviation.
Table 1
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. See Table 1 and form 892.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to WOO RHIM whose telephone number is (571)272-6560. The examiner can normally be reached Mon - Fri 9:30 am - 6:00 pm et.
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, Henok Shiferaw can be reached at 571-272-4637. 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.
/WOO C RHIM/Examiner, Art Unit 2676
Prosecution Insights