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 .
Claims 1-18 have been canceled.
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.
(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.
Claim(s) 19-23, 25-29, and 31 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a) as being unpatentable by Venetainer (US 2021/0358250).
[claim 19]
In regard to Claim 19, Venetianer et al discloses a method for adapting an intent model, being a machine learning, ML, model for determining intent of a person to pass through a door, the method being
performed by an intent determiner (Paragraph 0012), the method comprising:
determining that a physical environment outside a door has changed (Paragraph 0064 describes the various ways in which a person moving toward the door is moving at what speed and trajectory);
increasing, based on the determining that the physical environment outside the door has changed, a rate of training of the intent model, wherein the training is based on input features based on image data from an image capturing device covering an area near the door (Paragraphs 0063-0065 describes the determining of the subject approaching the door);
applying the intent model for inferring when a user exhibits intent to pass through the door, based on image data from the image capturing device (Paragraph 0064 and shown in Figure 2);
wherein determining that the physical environment outside the door has changed comprises classifying at least one object in the image data (Paragraph 0064 describes classifying the image data);
determining a position of each of the at least one object (Figure 2 and described in Paragraph 0064) ;
creating a current object map comprising the at least one object and its respective position; and determining that the physical environment outside the door has changed when the current object map is sufficiently different from a corresponding previous object map (Paragraphs 0063-0068 describes the creating of the object map/intent score to determine intent of subject to enter).
[claim 20]
In regard to Claim 20, Venetianer et al discloses a method according to Claim 19, further comprising triggering the door to open when the intent model infers intent to pass through the door (Paragraph 0068 describes unlocking and opening a point of entry).
[claim 21]
In regard to Claim 21, Venetianer et al discloses a method according to Claim 19, wherein increasing the rate of training of the intent model comprises: discarding a previously loaded intent model; and training a new intent model to replace the previously loaded intent model (Paragraph 0074 describes update of the intent model for access).
[claim 22]
In regard to Claim 22, Venetianer et al discloses a method according to Claim 19, wherein increasing the rate of training of the intent model comprises replacing a previously loaded intent model with a new intent model that better corresponds to the determined physical environment (Paragraphs 00079-0082 describes the training and replacing the previously loaded intent model with updates).
[claim 23]
In regard to Claim 23, Venetianer et al discloses a method according to Claim 19, wherein the training is based on a label derived from whether a person does or refrains from passing through the door (Paragraphs 0110 and 0111 describes when person does not enter or when intent model might have misjudged).
[claim 25]
In regard to Claim 25, the claim limitations have been discussed in Claim 19.
[claim 26]
In regard to Claim 26, the claim limitations have been discussed in Claim 20.
[claim 27]
In regard to Claim 27, the claim limitations have been discussed in Claim 21.
[claim 28]
In regard to Claim 28, the claim limitations have been discussed in Claim 22.
[claim 29]
In regard to Claim 29, the claim limitations have been discussed in Claim 23.
[claim 31]
In regard to Claim 31, the claim limitations have been discussed in Claim 19.
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.
Claim(s) 24 and 30 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Venetainer (US 2021/0358250) in view of Lipchin et al (US 11,157,734)
[claims 24 & 30]
In regard to Claim 24, Venetianer et al discloses a method according to Claim 19, wherein determining that the physical environment outside the door has changed (Paragraphs 0064); however, fails to disclose the determining a change in the physical environment that persists more than a threshold duration. Lipchin et al teaches a system that uses intent models for access to a door wherein the change in environment is more than a threshold duration and dependent on the object being classified (Paragraph 0049). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the invention to use the system of an environment-based door control system, as disclosed by Venetianer et al., and to further incorporate a duration threshold for physical environment changes. Incorporating such a threshold would improve the robustness and efficiency of the intent determination system by ensuring that only persistent, meaningful changes in the environment trigger adaptation of the model, thereby reducing false positives and unnecessary retraining (Paragraph 0013).
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. Shen (US 20230351775).
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JAMIE JO ATALA whose telephone number is (571)272-7384. The examiner can normally be reached 830am-500pm M-TH.
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, please contact Dave Czkeaj at 571-272-7327. 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.
/JAMIE J ATALA/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2486
Prosecution Insights