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 .
Election/Restrictions
Applicant’s election without traverse of Group 1: claims 1-5 in the reply filed on 06/18/2026 is acknowledged. Claims 6-20 are withdrawn from further consideration.
Drawings
The drawings filed on 11/15/2024 are acknowledged and are acceptable.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(b):
(b) CONCLUSION.—The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph:
The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the applicant regards as his invention.
Claims 3-4 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor, or for pre-AIA the applicant regards as the invention.
Claim 3 recites “a second predetermined interior pressure change threshold” and “the first predetermined interior pressure change threshold”, which renders the scope of the claim indefinite. Although the claim states that the second threshold is different from the first threshold, the claim does not define any functional distinction between the thresholds or explain what each threshold represents. Are they upper and lower thresholds? Are they associated with different events? Are they different magnitudes of pressure change? Consequently, it is unclear how the first and second thresholds are meaningfully distinguished other than by being different values, and the metes and bounds of the claimed subject matter cannot be determined with reasonable certainty.
Claim 4 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) as being indefinite by virtue of its dependency on claim 3.
Appropriate correction or clarification is requested.
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.
Claim 1 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) and (a)(2) as being anticipated by Whiffen (U.K. Publication No. GB2447050A; provided by Applicant with the 11/15/2024 IDS).
As per claim 1, Whiffen discloses a system (e.g., page 2, lines 16-22: discloses a security device for a cargo container comprising a processing means, a ventilator, and an air pressure measuring means) comprising:
a controller (e.g., page 6, lines 16-28: a processing means/microprocessor (164) including signal processor 167 that controls the system and performs the pressure analysis);
a first pressure sensor configured to detect a first air pressure within a premises at a first time (see e.g., page 2, last two lines: “Preferably, said means for measuring variation in air pressure is operable to measure a first air pressure within said cargo container when said ventilator is switched ON”) and a second air pressure within the premises at a second time, the first pressure sensor in communication with the controller, the first time being different than the second time (see e.g., page 3, lines 1-2: “measure a second air pressure within said cargo container when said ventilator is switched OFF”);
wherein the controller is configured to receive the first air pressure and the second air pressure within the premises from the first pressure sensor (e.g., page 6, lines 26-28: the signal processor calculates the difference in air pressure between the pressure measured with the ventilator ON and the pressure measured with the ventilator OFF), determine a change in pressure within the premises using at least the first air pressure and the second air pressure, compare the change in pressure within the premises to a first predetermined interior pressure change threshold (see e.g., page 3, lines 8-13: “Preferably, said processing means is operable to compare said determined difference with a predetermined value. The predetermined value may be any one of: a. a fixed predetermined value; b. a value based on an initial determined difference in air pressure; and c. a range of value having an upper limit and a lower limit”), and, when the change in pressure within the premises matches the first predetermined interior pressure change threshold, determine a first output associated with the first predetermined interior pressure change threshold (see e.g., page 3, lines 19-22: “Preferably, said processing means is further operable to trigger an alarm signal when said determined difference in air pressure is not equal to said predetermined value or when said determined difference in air pressure is not within the range of predetermined value”).
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 of this title, 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.
The factual inquiries for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows:
1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art.
2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue.
3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art.
4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness.
Claim 2 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Whiffen in view of Gantt (U.S. Publication No. 2009/0295578).
As per claim 2, claim 1 is incorporated and Whiffen discloses detecting the presence of an additional opening (hole) in a cargo container and the change in air pressure, and to send a signal to trigger an intruder alarm (see e.g., page 6, lines 7-11).
Whiffen does not explicitly disclose: wherein the first predetermined interior pressure change threshold corresponds to opening of a door or window, and wherein the first output determined by the controller as associated with the first predetermined interior pressure change threshold is an entry alert to a remote device.
However, in the same field of endeavor, Gantt teaches: wherein the first predetermined interior pressure change threshold corresponds to opening of a door or window, and wherein the first output determined by the controller as associated with the first predetermined interior pressure change threshold is an entry alert to a remote device (see e.g., para. [0032]-[0033] & [0044]: “sensor is capable of detecting major change in air pressure, such as a window breaking or door opening, automatically protecting all entry points into enclosed confines 2 but not restricting movement of occupants or animals inside the enclosed confines 2”; “the control means 30 may be adapted to receive either a digital or analog intrusion signal and to generate the annunciation signal which can then be used to perform various tasks…the control means 30 may be programmed to call a mobile phone 8 of the user of the system”).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the event recognition of Whiffen to recognize pressure signatures associated with door or window opening as taught by Gantt and send a notification to a remote device.
Claim 5 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Whiffen in view of Rodolico et al. (U.S. Publication No. 2018/0047265; hereinafter as, “Rodolico”).
As per claim 5, claim 1 is incorporated and Whiffen does not explicitly disclose: the system further comprising: a security sensor in communication with the controller, wherein the controller is further configured to receive security data at the premises from the security sensor and, when both the change in pressure within the premises matches the first predetermined interior pressure change threshold and the security data matches a first predetermined premises security threshold, determine a first output associated with each of the first predetermined interior pressure change threshold and the first predetermined premises security threshold.
However, in the same field of endeavor, Rodolico teaches: a security sensor in communication with the controller (see e.g., Fig. 3; para. [0026]-[0028]: security sensors 306 and 307), wherein the controller is further configured to receive security data at the premises from the security sensor and, when both the change in pressure within the premises matches the first predetermined interior pressure change threshold and the security data matches a first predetermined premises security threshold, determine a first output associated with each of the first predetermined interior pressure change threshold and the first predetermined premises security threshold (see e.g., para. [0067] & [0074]: “For example, as a person knocks, an accelerometer may transmit data indicating the door is accelerating along one or more axes based on the knock, but a magnetometer may not record a significant change in magnetic field based on the knock. Similarly, a pressure sensor may not record a significant change in pressure based on the knock. If someone is breaking in, both the accelerometer and the magnetometer (and the pressure sensor) may be recording changes that cause an alarm to be raised. If someone is knocking on the door of the monitored premises, it may be desirable to not trigger an alarm and it may be desirable to take a different action based on the knocking event”).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the pressure detection system of Whiffen with an additional security sensor as taught by Rodolico in order to integrate pressure sensor data with signals from a security sensor mounted on a door or window to initiate an alarm.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 3 and 4 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, and by overcoming the rejection(s) under 35 U.S.C. § 112(b) set forth in this Office action.
Regarding claims 3 and 4, the following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter over the prior art: The prior arts of record do not expressly teach or render obvious, wherein the controller is further configured to compare the change in pressure within the premises to a second predetermined interior pressure change threshold, and, when the change in pressure within the premises matches the second predetermined interior pressure change threshold, determine a second output associated with the second predetermined interior pressure change threshold, wherein the second predetermined interior pressure change threshold is different than the first predetermined interior pressure change threshold; wherein the second predetermined interior pressure change threshold corresponds to a presence of a person at the premises, and wherein the second output determined by the controller as associated with the second predetermined interior pressure change threshold is an intruder alert to a remote device. The combination of these features enables to differentiate between detecting an entry into the premises and the presence of an intruder.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. Refer to PTO-892, Notice of References Cited for a listing of analogous art.
Patel et al. (U.S. Publication No. 2013/0289930) discloses a motion detecting device configured to detect whether one or more movement events have occurred; the motion detecting device including one or more pressure sensors configured to provide two or more pressure measurements.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ADNAN AZIZ whose telephone number is (571) 270-7536, (Fax: 571-270-8536). The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday (9am - 6pm Eastern Time).
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, QUAN-ZHEN WANG can be reached at 571-272-3114. 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.
/ADNAN AZIZ/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2685 adnan.aziz@uspto.gov
Prosecution Insights