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 .
The application of Eckelkamp et al. for a “smart home and security system” filed November 11, 2024 has been examined.
Claims 1-20 are pending.
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.
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.
Claims 1-5 and 14-15 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Davis et al. (US# 9,947,154).
Referring to Claim 1, Davis et al. disclose a retrofit security monitor (112) (i.e. a retrofit keypad) for a security enclosure (104) (i.e. a reading device for an access control system 100) having a lock (i.e. a locking mechanism) (column 2 lines 28 to column 3 line14; see Figures 1 to 3), the retrofit security monitor (112) comprising:
a housing configured to be carried by the security enclosure (i.e. the retrofit keypad can include one or more user interface keys including, but not limited to, electrical and/or mechanical buttons, switches, actuators, etc. One example of user interface keys are keys commonly associated with a keypad, keyboard, and/or other user interface device. The retrofit keypad may utilize a wireless communications antenna to provide information to one or more components of an access control system) (column 2 lines 28 to 35; see Figures 1 and 2);
a user interface supported by the housing (i.e. the retrofit keypad 112 may include one or more interface keys 216A-N. The interface keys 216A-N may be electrical and/or mechanical buttons, switches, actuators, etc. One example of interface keys 216A-N are the physical keys commonly associated with a keypad, keyboard, and/or other user interface device) (column 10 lines 58 to 63; see Figure 2);
a first lock communication port (212A) supported by the housing, the first lock communication port being a first type of port (i.e. The one or more antennas 212A-N may be configured to enable wireless communications between the retrofit keypad 112 and a reading device 104 and/or portable device 108. As can be appreciated, the antenna(s) 212A-N may be arranged to operate using one or more wireless communication protocols and operating frequencies including, but not limited to, Bluetooth®, NFC, Zig-Bee, GSM, CDMA, WiFi, RF, and the like) (column 10 lines 47 to 54; see Figure 2);
a second lock communication port (212B) supported by the housing, the second lock communication port (212B) being a second type of port that is different from the first type of port (212A) (i.e. the antenna(s) 212A-N may be arranged to operate using one or more wireless communication protocols and operating frequencies including, but not limited to, Bluetooth®, NFC, Zig-Bee, GSM, CDMA, WiFi, RF, and the like. The antenna(s) 212A-N may be RF antenna(s), and as such, may transmit RF signals through free-space to be received by a reading device 108 having an RF transceiver. Each interface key 216A-N of the retrofit keypad 112 may utilize a specific antenna 212A-N that is unique to a particular interface key 216A-N of the retrofit keypad 112. In other words, each interface key 216A-N may have its own antenna 212A-N that is separate from any other antenna 212A-N of the keypad 112) (column 10 lines 47 to 54; column 12 lines 17 to 33; see Figure 2);
a retrofit security monitor controller (208) supported by the housing (i.e. the retrofit keypad 112 may further include a power module 220 and/or a control switch 224. The processor 208 may be an application specific integrated circuit (ASIC), microprocessor, programmable controller, or the like) (column 10 lines 28 to 32; see Figure 2);
a retrofit security monitor non-transitory storage medium (204) supported by the housing, the retrofit security monitor non-transitory storage medium (204) storing instructions executable by the retrofit security monitor controller (208) that, when executed by the retrofit security monitor controller (208) (i.e. The memory 204 of the retrofit keypad 112 may be used in connection with the execution of application programming or instructions by the processor 208, and for the temporary or long term storage of program instructions and/or data. The memory 204 may contain executable functions that are used by the processor 208 to run other components of the retrofit keypad 112) (column 10 lines 33 to 46; see Figure 2),
operate the lock of the security enclosure (104) when the lock is communicatively coupled to the first lock communication port (212A) or the second lock communication port (212B) (i.e. a user may provide a code via the retrofit keypad 112 that is received by the reading device 104 and/or the access server 128 in step 324. The code may be matched to a code stored in memory. Based at least partially on the match, the access control system 100 may perform the function of granting access to an asset of the access control system 100. This function may include unlocking a door, providing access to an area, providing access to a resource (e.g., computational, physical, storage, etc.), allowing egress or ingress, and/or providing other access functions) (column 16 lines 20 to 29; see Figures 2 and 3).
Referring to Claim 2, Davis et al. disclose the retrofit security monitor of claim 1, wherein the first type of port is a first type of wired port, and wherein the second type of port is a second type of wired port different from the first type of wired port (i.e. it should be appreciated that the various links connecting the elements can be wired or wireless links, or any combination thereof, or any other known or later developed element(s) that is capable of supplying and/or communicating data to and from the connected elements. These wired or wireless links can also be secure links and may be capable of communicating encrypted information) (column 20 lines 34 to 45; see Figure 1).
Referring to Claim 3, Davis et al. disclose the retrofit security monitor of claim 1, further comprising a third lock communication port (212N) supported by the housing, the third lock communication port being a third type of port that is different from the first (212A) and second types of ports (212B) (i.e. the antenna(s) 212A-N may be arranged to operate using one or more wireless communication protocols and operating frequencies including, but not limited to, Bluetooth®, NFC, Zig-Bee, GSM, CDMA, WiFi, RF, and the like. The antenna(s) 212A-N may be RF antenna(s), and as such, may transmit RF signals through free-space to be received by a reading device 108 having an RF transceiver) (column 10 lines 47 to 57; see Figures 1 and 2).
Referring to Claim 4, Davis et al. disclose the retrofit security monitor of claim 3, wherein the instructions include instructions to operate the lock of the security enclosure (104) when the lock is communicatively coupled to the third lock communication port (212N) (i.e. a user may provide a code via the retrofit keypad 112 that is received by the reading device 104 and/or the access server 128 in step 324. The code may be matched to a code stored in memory. Based at least partially on the match, the access control system 100 may perform the function of granting access to an asset of the access control system 100. This function may include unlocking a door, providing access to an area, providing access to a resource (e.g., computational, physical, storage, etc.), allowing egress or ingress, and/or providing other access functions) (column 16 lines 20 to 29; see Figures 2 and 3).
Referring to Claim 5, Davis et al. disclose the retrofit security monitor of claim 1, wherein the instructions include instructions to operate the lock of the security enclosure responsive to user input received by the user interface (216A) (i.e. it is anticipated that each interface key 216A-N may correspond to a specific output associated with that interface key 216A-N. The output associated with an interface key 216A-N may be stored in the memory 204 of the retrofit keypad 112 and/or in a memory associated with each interface key 216A-N. Typical outputs can include one or more of numbers, letters, signals, instructions, and the like. A user may provide a code via the retrofit keypad 112 that is received by the reading device 104 and/or the access server 128 in step 324. The code may be matched to a code stored in memory. Based at least partially on the match, the access control system 100 may perform the function of granting access to an asset of the access control system 100. This function may include unlocking a door, providing access to an area, providing access to a resource (e.g., computational, physical, storage, etc.), allowing egress or ingress, and/or providing other access functions) (column 10 lines 58 to column 11 line 67; column 16 lines 20 to 29; see Figures 2 and 3).
Referring to Claim 14, Davis et al. disclose the retrofit security monitor of claim 1,
further comprising a power source (220) supported by the housing (i.e. the retrofit keypad may include a power module 220. The power module 220 may be configured to provide power to the parts of the retrofit keypad 112 in order to operate. The power module 220 may store power in a capacitor of the power module) (column 10 lines 28 to 30; column 12 lines 40 to 54; see Figure 2).
Referring to Claim 15, Davis et al. disclose the retrofit security monitor of claim 1, wherein the housing includes an interior, and wherein the first (212A) and second lock communication ports (212B) are disposed in the interior of the housing (i.e. The retrofit keypad 112 may include a memory 204, a processor 208, at least one antenna 212A-N, and at least one key 216A-N) (column 10 lines 24 to 57; see Figure 2).
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.
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.
Claims 6 and 16 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Davis et al. (US# 9,947,154) as applied to Claims 1 and 15 and in view of Nikovski et al. (WO 2022/215317).
Referring to Claim 6, Davis et al. disclose the retrofit security monitor of claim 1, however, Davis et al. did not explicitly disclose further comprising a motion sensor supported by the housing, the motion sensor configured to sense motion of the retrofit security monitor.
In the same field of endeavor of a control module for an access control system, Nikovski et al. teach that a motion sensor (212) supported by the housing (202), the motion sensor (212) configured to sense motion of the retrofit security monitor (200) (i.e. the sensor 212 is arranged to sense motion in proximity to the touchable interface 204. In one example embodiment, the sensor 212 may detect position of inputs, such as fingertips or hand gestures of the user 106 in front of the touchable interface 204) (page 15 paragraph 0036; see Figure 2A) in order to detect position of fingertip of the user at the control interface.
At the time of the effective filing date of the current application, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art to recognize the need for adding a sensor to sense motion in proximity to the touchable interface of the multi-input call panel taught by Nikovski et al. in the keypad to provide access information of the access control system of Davis et al. because adding the sensor to sense motion in proximity to the touchable interface of the multi-input call panel would provide additional function to the keypad of the access control system.
Referring to Claim 16, Davis et al. disclose the retrofit security monitor of claim 15, Nikovski et al. disclose wherein the housing includes an access opening in communication with the interior of the housing, the access opening configured to permit an electrical cable of the security enclosure to extend into the interior of the housing and be coupled to the first or second lock communication port (i.e. the touchable interface 204 with above wired arrangement, the sensor 212 may be installed at a suitable location close to the touchable interface 204. For instance, the sensor 212 may be attached on the same wall where the touchable interface 206 is installed) (page 15 paragraph 0035).
Claims 7-11 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Davis et al. (US# 9,947,154) as applied to Claim 1 and in view of Henry (Pub. No. US2023/0281405)).
Referring to Claim 7, Davis et al. disclose the retrofit security monitor of claim 1, however, Davis et al. did not explicitly disclose further comprising a lock state sensor
configured to detect whether the lock of the security enclosure is in a locked or unlocked state.
In the same field of endeavor of a control module for an access control system, Henry teaches that further comprising a lock state sensor (1008) configured to detect whether the lock of the security enclosure is in a locked or unlocked state (i.e. the cabinet 1000 comprises a door 1006 mounted on the housing 1002, whereby the door is openable and closable by a user, and a door sensor 1008 configured to output a door open signal in the event of the door 1006 transitioning from closed to open and a door close signal in the event of the door 1006 transitioning from open to closed) (page 3 paragraph 0035; see Figure 2(h)) in order to detect the status of the door event.
At the time of the effective filing date of the current application, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art to recognize the need for adding a door sensor to output a door open signal or close signal in the event of the door taught by Henry in the keypad to provide access information of the access control system of Davis et al. because adding a door sensor to output a door open signal or close signal in the event of the door would provide a useful feature of the status of the door for the user in the access control system.
Referring to Claim 8, Davis et al. in view of Henry disclose the retrofit security monitor of claim 7, Henry discloses wherein the lock state sensor comprises a potentiometer (i.e. the door sensor 1008 may take many forms, and may be a magnetic/hall effect sensor; alternatively, it may be embodied in an electronic (controllable) door lock (not shown) connected to a cabinet controller 1012) (page 3 paragraph 0035; see Figure 2(h)).
Referring to Claims 9-11, Davis et al. disclose the retrofit security monitor of claim 1, Henry discloses further comprising an environment condition probe configured to detect an environmental condition of an interior of the security enclosure (i.e. where it is desirable to detect conditions or take measurements relating to objects or attributes of the objects, e.g., temperature and pressure sensing, or in the monitoring of the presence or absence of objects or persons) (page 2 paragraph 0027).
Claim 12 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Davis et al. (US# 9,947,154) as applied to Claim 1 and in view of Almomani et al. (US# 9,406,181).
Referring to Claim 12, Davis et al. disclose the retrofit security monitor of claim 1, however, Davis et al. did not explicitly disclose wherein the instructions include instructions to determine a lock type for the lock of the security enclosure and to operate the lock of the security enclosure using a lock communication protocol selected from a library of lock communication protocols based on the determined lock type.
In the same field of endeavor of an access control system, Almomani et al. teach that wherein the instructions include instructions to determine a lock type for the lock of the security enclosure and to operate the lock of the security enclosure using a lock communication protocol selected from a library of lock communication protocols based on the determined lock type (i.e. If at step S106 no communication is detected, then at step S108 it is determined that no wireless protocol profile has been found and processing unit 17 will then re-execute step S106 and sequentially advance to the next profile, e.g., wireless protocol profile #2, and retrieve the next profile, e.g., wireless protocol profile #2, from memory unit 18. Processing unit 17 then executes the selected profile, e.g., wireless protocol profile #2, to configure electronics circuitry 9 for attempted communication with another communication device in the system in which the electronic lock is being installed. This process continues until the appropriate wireless protocol profile that facilitates wireless communication with another communication device in the system is established, thus becoming the default wireless protocol profile) (column 4 lines 41 to column 5 lines 37; see Figures 4 and 5).
At the time of the effective filing date of the current application, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art to recognize the need for having the electronic lock selects the profile/protocol from the memory unit according to the type of the lock that communicate is established with the external device taught by Almomani et al. in the keypad to provide access information of the access control system of Davis et al. because having the electronic lock selects the profile/protocol from the memory unit according to the type of the lock would provide the electronic lock to automatically set the communication protocol to the type of the lock operate in the access control system.
Claim 13 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Davis et al. (US# 9,947,154) as applied to Claim 1 and in view of Tannenbaum et al. (US# 10,373,481).
Referring to Claim 13, Davis et al. disclose the retrofit security monitor of claim 1, however, Davis et al. did not explicitly disclose wherein the instructions include instructions for selecting a lock communication protocol from a library of lock communication protocols based on user input received by the user interface and to operate the lock of the security enclosure using the selected lock communication protocol.
In the same field of endeavor of an access control system, Almomani et al. teach that wherein the instructions include instructions for selecting a lock communication protocol from a library of lock communication protocols based on user input received by the user interface and to operate the lock of the security enclosure using the selected lock communication protocol) (i.e. a first user input selecting one of the plurality of security protocol/operation options in response to the notification; and in response to receiving the first user input, executing the selected one of the plurality of security protocol/operation options at the premises based on the first user input, ) (column 18 lines 16 to 23; see Figures 3 and 6).
At the time of the effective filing date of the current application, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art to recognize the need for executing the selected one of the plurality of security protocol/operation options at the premises based on the first user input taught by Tannenbaum et al. in the keypad to provide access information of the access control system of Davis et al. because executing the selected one of the plurality of security protocol/operation options at the premises based on the first user input would provide an alternative way to set the communication protocol to the type of the lock operate in the access control system.
Claims 17-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Davis et al. (US# 9,947,154) as applied to Claim 1 and in view of Petersen (Pub. No. 2008/0134732).
Referring to Claim 17, Davis et al. disclose the retrofit security monitor of claim 1, however, Davis et al. did not explicitly disclose further comprising a mount configured to be attached to the security enclosure to mount the housing to the security enclosure.
In the same field of endeavor of an access control system, Petersen teaches that a mount (6) (i.e. a rear plate 6) configured to be attached to the security enclosure (12) (i.e. a separate control box 12) to mount the housing (1) to the security enclosure (12) (i.e. The box housing 1 is configured with an upper shielding 5 forming a roof on the box when the latter is mounted correctly on an essentially vertical wall or the like. In the same position the box housing 1 further forms two lateral shieldings 3 and 4 that shield the closed box to the right and to the left, respectively, and it has a rear plate 6 forming at least a part of the rear side of the box which faces towards the vertical wall. (page 2 paragraph 0017; see Figure 2).
At the time of the effective filing date of the current application, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art to recognize the need for having the rear plate of the box housing to mount to the electronic control box for installation taught by Petersen in the keypad to provide access information of the access control system of Davis et al. because having the rear plate of the box housing to mount to the electronic control box for installation would secure the keypad installation in place at the reading device of the access control system.
Referring to Claims 18-20, Davis et al. in view of Petersen disclose the retrofit security monitor of claim 17, Petersen discloses wherein the mount include a housing connector configured to releasably connect to the housing to mount the housing to the security enclosure (i.e. the rear plate of the box housing is configured with two mounting apertures 7 and 8 for receiving a mounting bolt or the like attachment means. According to the invention is an option to further provide a separate aperture 9 for passage of electric wires for power supply and signal to the electric units that are, in accordance with the invention, configured in the box) (page 2 paragraphs 0018-0020; see Figures 1 and 2).
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. Refer to the enclosed PTO-892 for details.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to NAM V NGUYEN whose telephone number is 571-272-3061. Fax number is (571) 273-3061. The examiner can normally be reached on 8:00AM-5:00PM Monday to Friday.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Quan-Zhen Wang can be reached on 571-272-3114. The fax phone numbers for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned are 571-273-8300 for regular communications.
Information regarding the status of an application may be obtained from the Patent Application Information Retrieval (PAIR) system. Status information for published applications may be obtained from either Private PAIR or Public PAIR. Status information for unpublished applications is available through Private PAIR only. For more information about the PAIR system, see http://pair-direct.uspto.gov. Should you have questions on access to the Private PAIR system, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free).
/NAM V NGUYEN/
Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2685