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 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) 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Amir (US 20230245541) in view of Harel (US 20210201640).
Regarding claim 1, An apparatus comprising: one or more processors coupled with memory (“The functions or algorithms described herein are implemented in hardware, software or a combination of software and hardware in one or more embodiments. The software comprises computer executable instructions stored on computer readable carrier media such as memory or other type of storage devices. Further, described functions may correspond to modules, which may be software, hardware, firmware, or any combination thereof. Multiple functions are performed in one or more modules as desired, and the embodiments described are merely examples. The software is executed on a digital signal processor, ASIC, microprocessor, microcontroller or other type of processing device or combination thereof” Amir: paragraph 51)
and configured to: detect, an entity within an area; determine that the entity corresponds to one or more criteria; (“If, at step S406, the CPU 202 determines that the first predetermined condition in respect of the object is met, the CPU 202 determines that an intruder is present in an area of interest, and the process 400 proceeds to step S408” Amir: paragraph 104)
identify a first sound corresponding to the one or more criteria and a state of the area; play, by a speaker device, the first sound to deter the entity from perpetrating an event within the area; (“Additionally or alternatively, at step S408 the CPU 202 controls the speaker 218 to emit audio as an audible deterrent to the intruder. The audio emitted by the speaker 218 may be a non-speech sound e.g. a warning siren. Additionally or alternatively the audio emitted by the speaker 218 may be an audible speech message e.g. “this is private property, please leave the area immediately!”.” Amir: paragraph 112)
identify a second sound corresponding to the one or more criteria, the state of the area, and the first sound; and play, by the speaker device, the second sound to deter the entity from perpetrating the event. (“Taking the example where at step S408 the CPU 202 controls the speaker 218 to emit an audible speech message, at step S412 the CPU 202 may control the speaker to increase the volume of the emitted audible speech message and/or to output a different audible speech message. Alternatively or additionally, at step S412, the CPU 202 may control the speaker 218 to emit a non-speech sound e.g. a warning siren. Alternatively or additionally, at step S412 the CPU 202 may control the lighting device 216 to emit light as a visual deterrent to the intruder in a manner as described above with respect to the deterrent output at step S408.” Amir: paragraph 137 & Figure 4)
The claimed detecting being done by an image capture device is not specifically disclosed by Amir. Harel discloses a security system that teaches using a camera to detect intruders (“FIG. 2 describes an apparatus comprising an AI based cameras protected perimeter, alerting either the user or a monitoring center or both; the AI system performs object and face recognition, validating strangers' timely and orderly departure from the perimeter, or else, summoning intervention by a human operator residing in a monitoring station, either local or remote” Harel: paragraph 22). Modifying Amir to include a camera for detecting intruders based on captured images would increase the overall capabilities of the system by providing the device with additional means to determine if someone is an intruder or not. Therefore it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to modify Amir according to Harel.
Regarding claim 2, The apparatus of claim 1, wherein the one or more processors are configured to: detect the entity within the area by detecting at least one of physical characteristics of the entity or behavioral characteristics of the entity. (“Failure to comply in either first level of scrutiny, e.g. evident wrong trajectory, or second level, e.g. ignoring loudspeaker's instruction, or third one, e.g. continuing irregular behavior and not passing the machine learning processing, cause an alert to the central monitoring or other human guard entity 1307” Harel: paragraph 122)
Regarding claim 3, The apparatus of claim 1, wherein the one or more processors are configured to: detect the entity within the area based on images captured of the entity; determine, using image recognition techniques, features of the entity from the images; and determine that the entity corresponds to the one or more criteria responsive to determining that the features of the entity meet a threshold for features of the one or more criteria. (“FIG. 2 describes an apparatus comprising an AI based cameras protected perimeter, alerting either the user or a monitoring center or both; the AI system performs object and face recognition, validating strangers' timely and orderly departure from the perimeter, or else, summoning intervention by a human operator residing in a monitoring station, either local or remote” Harel: paragraph 22)
Regarding claim 4, The apparatus of claim 1, wherein the state comprises one or more of a time of day, a resident within the area, or a holiday. (“One of such a vetting process is trying to perform Face Recognition, and if successful, it performs search of a previously train data, looking for a match to one of the Home Owners, or previously captured family members, hired help, or any other previously authorized person whose face are part of a “white listed” people.” Harel: paragraph 41; matching the home owner’s face would be considered a “resident within the area”)
Regarding claim 5, The apparatus of claim 1, wherein identifying the first sound corresponding to the one or more criteria and a state of the area includes providing the state and the one or more criteria as inputs to a machine learning model to generate the first sound. (“The present invention, in embodiments thereof, provides a system and methods which may implement a combination of computer vision tools, machine learning techniques, canned messages announcements over a loudspeaker, speech recognition based dialoging, and interactive procedures, all together comprising an AI system which facilitates an automatic assessment of people who enter or leave a monitored perimeter” Harel: paragraph 15)
Regarding claim 6, The apparatus of claim 1, wherein the one or more processors are configured to: determine, responsive to playing the first sound, one or more second criteria of the entity; and identify the second sound corresponding to the one or more criteria, the state of the area, and the one or more second criteria. (“Taking the example where at step S408 the CPU 202 controls the speaker 218 to emit an audible speech message, at step S412 the CPU 202 may control the speaker to increase the volume of the emitted audible speech message and/or to output a different audible speech message. Alternatively or additionally, at step S412, the CPU 202 may control the speaker 218 to emit a non-speech sound e.g. a warning siren. Alternatively or additionally, at step S412 the CPU 202 may control the lighting device 216 to emit light as a visual deterrent to the intruder in a manner as described above with respect to the deterrent output at step S408.” Amir: paragraph 137 & Figure 4)
Regarding claim 7, The apparatus of claim 1, wherein the one or more processors are configured to: identify a third sound corresponding to the one or more criteria, the state of the area, the first sound, and the second sound; and play, by a second speaker device located separately from the speaker device, the third sound to deter the entity from perpetrating the event. (“Whilst not shown in FIG. 4, after a predetermined time period has elapsed after output of the deterrent at step S412, the CPU 202 may process further measured wave reflection data accrued by the active reflected wave detector 206 to determine that an object has moved from the deterrent zone towards the device 102 into an alarm zone (which in this illustrative example is the inner most zone located closest to the device 102). In response to this determination the CPU 202 controls the speaker 218 to emit audio in the form of an alarm siren.” Amir: paragraph 148)
Regarding claim 8, The apparatus of claim 1, wherein the first sound and the second sound are played in at least partial concurrence. (Amir: figure 4; as shown by the figure, if both 1st and 2nd predetermined conditions are met close enough together, the output device will output both deterrents concurrently)
Regarding claim 9, the claim is interpreted and rejected as claim 1 stated above.
Regarding claim 11, the claim is interpreted and rejected as claim 1 stated above.
Regarding claim 12, the claim is interpreted and rejected as claim 2 stated above.
Regarding claim 13, the claim is interpreted and rejected as claim 3 stated above.
Regarding claim 14, The method of claim 11, comprising: detecting, by the image capture device, the one or more criteria of the entity; and generating, by the one or more processors, a profile corresponding to the one or more criteria of the entity. (“FIG. 2 describes an apparatus comprising an AI based cameras protected perimeter, alerting either the user or a monitoring center or both; the AI system performs object and face recognition, validating strangers' timely and orderly departure from the perimeter, or else, summoning intervention by a human operator residing in a monitoring station, either local or remote” Harel: paragraph 22)
Regarding claim 15, the claim is interpreted and rejected as claim 4 stated above.
Regarding claim 16, the claim is interpreted and rejected as claim 5 stated above.
Regarding claim 17, the claim is interpreted and rejected as claim 6 stated above.
Regarding claim 18, the claim is interpreted and rejected as claim 7 stated above.
Regarding claim 19, The method of claim 11, comprising: capturing, by the image capture device, images of the entity in the area; and transmitting, by the one or more processors, the images of the entity to a client device associated with the area. (“The CPU 202 may additionally transmit an alert message to one or more of the remote monitoring station 110, the server 112 and the remote personal computing device 114 (either directly or via the control hub 106).” Amir: paragraph 148)
Regarding claim 20, the claim is interpreted and rejected as claim 8 stated above.
Claim(s) 10 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Amir in view of Harel and further in view of Vazirani (US 20210020007).
Regarding claim 10, The apparatus of claim 9, wherein the schedule of states includes holidays is not specifically disclosed by Amir and Harel. Vazirani discloses a security system that teaches using specific time periods, including holidays, to judge for intruders (“For example, the monitoring entity 417 may be capable of a learning process wherein if an unregistered device has been detected before (e.g., during nights, weekends, holiday seasons, etc.) and no sensors were tripped previously, the monitoring entity 417 may assign the unregistered device a non-threat score of 0.” Vazirani: paragraph 65). Modifying Amir and Harel to include holidays as a part of the detection algorithm would increase the overall utility of the system by providing the user with additional means to avoid false alarms. Therefore it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to modify Amir and Harel according to Vazirani.
Conclusion
Related Art:
US 20250225850 A1 – using different audio to deter intruders
US 20250218265 A1 – using different audio to deter intruders
US 20240296725 A1 – using different audio to deter intruders
US 20230281997 A1 – using different audio to deter intruders
US 11308333 B1 – using different audio to deter intruders
US 20210358278 A1 – using different audio to deter intruders
US 20210020007 A1 – using different audio to deter intruders
US 20030117280 A1 – using camera images to detect intruders
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to TRAVIS R HUNNINGS whose telephone number is (571)272-3118. The examiner can normally be reached M: 6-7:30a, 9:30a-4:45p, 8:30-10p; T: 6-7:30a, 12-4p, 7:30p-12a; W: 6-7:30a, 9:30a-4:45p; H: 6-7:30a, 8:15a-4:45p; F: 12:00-4:45p.
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, Davetta Goins can be reached at 571-272-2957. 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.
/TRAVIS R HUNNINGS/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2689