CTNF 18/970,215 CTNF 87745 DETAILED ACTION The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA. 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 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. Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103 07-20-aia AIA 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. 07-21-aia AIA Claim (s) 1 and 2 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Leblond (US 2011/0013018) in view of Velipasalar et al. (US 2007/0291117) . Regarding claim 1 , Leblond teaches/suggests: A method, comprising: receiving, by a processing system including a processor associated with a network node (Leblond [0058] “a node 100 may comprise any combination of one or more processors 304” [0054] “where each node is connected through one network”), data of a first visual representation from a first source, the first source configured to produce the first visual representation (Leblond [0179] “the detection and response device may receive a stimulus resulting from the occurrence of an event. The stimulus may come from one or more capture devices … such as surveillance information”); receiving, by the processing system, an indication of a zone of coordinates (Leblond [0182] “geospace 1112 may be defined by one or more points or coordinates connected by lines or curves that form the periphery of the geospace”); storing, by the processing system, information about the zone of coordinates (Leblond [0185] “Data defining geospaces 1112 may be stored in a storage device accessible to the detection and response device”); identifying, by the processing system, a second source configured to produce a second visual representation, wherein the second visual representation includes at least a portion of the zone of coordinates (Leblond [0179] “the detection and response device may receive a stimulus resulting from the occurrence of an event. The stimulus may come from one or more capture devices … such as surveillance information”); and managing, by the processing system, events within the zone of coordinates based on the first visual representation and the second visual representation (Leblond [0179] “the detection and response device may receive a stimulus resulting from the occurrence of an event. The stimulus may come from one or more capture devices … such as surveillance information” [0185] “If an event is within a geospace 1112, the detection and response device may respond in a predefined manner”). Leblond is silent regarding an indication of a zone of coordinates comprising at least a portion of the first visual representation . Velipasalar, however, teaches/suggests an indication of a zone of coordinates comprising at least a portion of the first visual representation (Velipasalar [0070] “The region of interest can be drawn on the selected camera view by using a mouse”). Before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, it would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art to modify a geospace (the zone) of Leblond to be drawn as taught/suggested by Velipasalar to define it. Regarding claim 2 , Leblond as modified by Velipasalar teaches/suggests: The method of claim 1, wherein the managing events within the zone of coordinates comprises: issuing, by the processing system, an instruction to be performed within the zone of coordinates (Leblond [0194] “one or more instructions associated with a geospace 1112 (in which the event has occurred) may be identified according to the type of event that has occurred”) . 07-22-aia AIA Claim (s) 3-7 and 11 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Leblond (US 2011/0013018) in view of Velipasalar et al. (US 2007/0291117) as applied to claim 2 above, and further in view of Cordero (US 2011/0281547) . Regarding claim 3 , Leblond and Velipasalar are silent regarding: The method of claim 1, wherein the managing events comprises: receiving, by the processing system, a rule corresponding to the zone of coordinates; and analyzing, by the processing system, the first visual representation and the second visual representation for compliance with the rule. Cordero, however, teaches/suggests a rule (Cordero [0049] “each of which corresponds to a different emergency situation and each having a particular set of rules as to the number and/or type of emergency responders that are to be provided with dispatch instructions”). Before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, it would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art to modify the detection and response device of Leblond as modified by Velipasalar to include the sets of rules of Cordero for emergency. As such, Leblond as modified by Velipasalar and Cordero teaches/suggests: receiving, by the processing system, a rule corresponding to the zone of coordinates (Leblond [0194] “one or more instructions associated with a geospace 1112 (in which the event has occurred) may be identified according to the type of event that has occurred” Cordero [0049] “each of which corresponds to a different emergency situation and each having a particular set of rules as to the number and/or type of emergency responders that are to be provided with dispatch instructions”); and analyzing, by the processing system, the first visual representation and the second visual representation for compliance with the rule (Leblond [0179] “the detection and response device may receive a stimulus resulting from the occurrence of an event. The stimulus may come from one or more capture devices … such as surveillance information” Cordero [0049] “each of which corresponds to a different emergency situation and each having a particular set of rules as to the number and/or type of emergency responders that are to be provided with dispatch instructions”). Regarding claim 4 , Leblond as modified by Velipasalar and Cordero teaches/suggests: The method of claim 3, wherein the receiving the data of a first visual representation comprises: receiving, by the processing system, information defining the rule for the zone of coordinates (Leblond [0182] “geospace 1112 may be defined by one or more points or coordinates connected by lines or curves that form the periphery of the geospace” Cordero [0049] “each of which corresponds to a different emergency situation and each having a particular set of rules as to the number and/or type of emergency responders that are to be provided with dispatch instructions”). The same rationale to combine as set forth in the rejection of claim 3 is incorporated herein. Regarding claim 5 , Leblond as modified by Velipasalar and Cordero teaches/suggests: The method of claim 4, wherein the managing events comprises: assigning, by the processing system, a first zone within the zone of coordinates to a first team member (Cordero [0032] “particular emergency units or emergency responders have certain geographical assignments and will be provided with dispatch instructions when an incident occurs within their assigned region”); The same rationale to combine as set forth in the rejection of claim 3 is incorporated herein. Cordero are silent regarding: communicating, by the processing system, information about assignment of the first zone to the first team member. However, official notice is taken that the concept and advantages of such communicating are well known and expected in the art. It would have been obvious for the geographical assignments of Leblond as modified by Velipasalar and Cordero to be communicated to the emergency responders to let them know of such assignments. Regarding claim 6 , Leblond as modified by Velipasalar and Cordero teaches/suggests: The method of claim 5, wherein the assigning the first zone within the first zone of coordinates comprises: presenting, by the processing system, the first visual representation on a display device to a team manager (Leblond [0180] “a geospace is a physical area that may be defined by a user, administrator, and/or personnel using or configuring the detection and response device” Velipasalar [0070] “The region of interest can be drawn on the selected camera view by using a mouse”); receiving, by the processing system, a first zone definition indication from the team manager (Leblond [0180] “a geospace is a physical area that may be defined by a user, administrator, and/or personnel using or configuring the detection and response device” Cordero [0032] “particular emergency units or emergency responders have certain geographical assignments and will be provided with dispatch instructions when an incident occurs within their assigned region”); The same rationales to combine as set forth in the rejection of claims 1 and 3 are incorporated herein. Cordero are silent regarding: communicating, by the processing system, the first zone definition indication to the first team member. However, official notice is taken that the concept and advantages of such communicating are well known and expected in the art. It would have been obvious for the geographical assignments of Leblond as modified by Velipasalar and Cordero to be communicated to the emergency responders to let them know of such assignments. Regarding claim 7 , Leblond as modified by Velipasalar and Cordero teaches/suggests: The method of claim 6, wherein the receiving the first zone definition indication from the team manager comprises: receiving, by the processing system, an indication of a set of coordinates defining the first zone definition indication, wherein the indication of the set of coordinates is received from a touch screen device of the team manager (Leblond [0180] “a geospace is a physical area that may be defined by a user, administrator, and/or personnel using or configuring the detection and response device” [0160] “a video monitor 824 may also collect user input, such as through a touch screen” Velipasalar [0070] “The region of interest can be drawn on the selected camera view by using a mouse”); and storing, by the processing system, in a zone database, data corresponding to a zone identifier for the set of coordinates, identification information for the first team member, and the information defining the rule (Leblond [0185] “Data defining geospaces 1112 may be stored in a storage device accessible to the detection and response device” Cordero [0032] “particular emergency units or emergency responders have certain geographical assignments and will be provided with dispatch instructions when an incident occurs within their assigned region” [0049] “each of which corresponds to a different emergency situation and each having a particular set of rules as to the number and/or type of emergency responders that are to be provided with dispatch instructions”). The same rationales to combine as set forth in the rejection of claims 1 and 3 are incorporated herein. Regarding claim 11 , Leblond as modified by Velipasalar and Cordero teaches/suggests: The method of claim 4, wherein the managing events comprises: communicating, by the processing system, with a team manager at a dispatch center location (Cordero [0029] “The viewing station 150a and the CAD/RMS 170 may be located in an operations room and/or control room of a public safety agency, such as a police station, a fire station, a security office in a public or private facility, and/or some other emergency agency. The viewing station 150a may be operable as an automated dispatch protocol activation point”); or communicating, by the processing system, with a mobile device of the team manager at a mobile location, the mobile device including an application program for managing events [This is yet to be considered because of the “or” recitation.]. The same rationale to combine as set forth in the rejection of claim 3 is incorporated herein . 07-21-aia AIA Claim (s) 12-15 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Leblond (US 2011/0013018) in view of Cordero (US 2011/0281547) . Regarding claim 12 , Leblond teaches/suggests: A device, comprising: a processing system including a processor (Leblond Fig. 3: processor 304); and a memory that stores executable instructions that, when executed by the processing system, facilitate performance of operations (Leblond Fig. 3: memory 308), the operations comprising: receiving a first video feed from a first camera, the first video feed showing a view of an environment including the first camera (Leblond [0179] “the detection and response device may receive a stimulus resulting from the occurrence of an event. The stimulus may come from one or more capture devices … such as surveillance information”); receiving a zone of coordinates corresponding to a first field of view of the first camera (Leblond [0182] “geospace 1112 may be defined by one or more points or coordinates connected by lines or curves that form the periphery of the geospace”); identifying a second camera having a second field of view corresponding at least in part to the first field of view of the first camera, wherein the identifying the second camera is based on the zone of coordinates (Leblond [0179] “the detection and response device may receive a stimulus resulting from the occurrence of an event. The stimulus may come from one or more capture devices … such as surveillance information” [0185] “If an event is within a geospace 1112, the detection and response device may respond in a predefined manner”); Leblond does not teach/suggest: providing information to first responder personnel located in or near an area including the environment including the first camera, wherein the providing the information enables managing the first responder personnel from a remote location. Cordero, however, teaches/suggests: providing information to first responder personnel located in or near an area including the environment including the first camera, wherein the providing the information enables managing the first responder personnel from a remote location (Cordero [0032] “particular emergency units or emergency responders have certain geographical assignments and will be provided with dispatch instructions when an incident occurs within their assigned region” [0053] “FIGS. 7 and 8 are diagrams that illustrate coordinate information from a pan-tilt-zoom (PTZ) camera for computing incident location information in an automated dispatch protocol”). Before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, it would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art to modify the detection and response device of Leblond to include the dispatch instructions of Cordero for emergency. Regarding claim 13 , Leblond as modified by Cordero teaches/suggests: The device of claim 12, wherein the providing the information to the first responder personnel comprises: providing instructions to the first responder personnel to direct actions of the first responder personnel (Cordero [0032] “particular emergency units or emergency responders have certain geographical assignments and will be provided with dispatch instructions when an incident occurs within their assigned region”). The same rationale to combine as set forth in the rejection of claim 12 is incorporated herein. Regarding claim 14 , Leblond as modified by Cordero teaches/suggests: The device of claim 12, wherein the providing the information to the first responder personnel comprises: receiving information defining a boundary for a zone of responsibility associated with the first responder personnel (Leblond [0182] “geospace 1112 may be defined by one or more points or coordinates connected by lines or curves that form the periphery of the geospace” Cordero [0032] “particular emergency units or emergency responders have certain geographical assignments and will be provided with dispatch instructions when an incident occurs within their assigned region”); communicating the information defining the boundary (Leblond [0185] “Data defining geospaces 1112 may be stored in a storage device accessible to the detection and response device” [The communicating is an inherent feature of the storing.]); storing, in a zone database, identification information for the first responder personnel, the information defining the boundary, and rules for defining an assignment for the first responder personnel in the zone of responsibility associated with the first responder personnel (Leblond [0185] “Data defining geospaces 1112 may be stored in a storage device accessible to the detection and response device” Cordero [0032] “particular emergency units or emergency responders have certain geographical assignments and will be provided with dispatch instructions when an incident occurs within their assigned region”); The same rationale to combine as set forth in the rejection of claim 12 is incorporated herein. Cordero are silent regarding: communicating the information defining the boundary, and rules for defining an assignment for the first responder personnel to the first responder personnel. However, official notice is taken that the concept and advantages of such communicating are well known and expected in the art. It would have been obvious for the geographical assignments of Leblond as modified by Cordero to be communicated to the emergency responders to let them know of such assignments. Regarding claim 15 , Leblond as modified by Cordero teaches/suggests: The device of claim 12, wherein the operations further comprise: storing, in a camera database, information identifying the first camera, a network address of the first camera, a geographical location of the first camera, and information about the first field of view of the first camera (Leblond [0018] “data identifying at least one of the capture devices. The storage devices may be configured to store such data” [0207] “the routing system 1304 may store a network addresses (or other identifying information) of the one or more cameras 812” [0215] “One or more camera ranges 1404, viewable areas 1408, or both may be defined for the cameras 812. These definitions may be stored”) . Allowable Subject Matter 12-151-08 AIA 07-43 12-51-08 Claim s 8-10 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. 12-151-07 AIA 07-97 12-51-07 Claim s 16-20 are allowed. 13-03-01 AIA The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter: Boiarshinov (US 2024/0264715) discloses map navigation using augmented reality (Fig. 3). However, the limitations “correlating, by the processing system, the first visual representation with the first zone definition indication,” “developing, by the processing system, an augmented reality virtual display based on the first visual representation and the first zone definition indication,” and “communicating, by the processing system, information about the augmented reality virtual display to the first team member for viewing by the first team member on a device of the first team member” in claims 8-10, taken as a whole, render the claims patentably distinct over the prior art. In addition, the limitations “communicating, by the zone management server, with a user device of a user, selected portions of the zone monitoring information and zone management information,” “determining, responsive to the information defining the zone of interest to the user and the area measurement information for the predetermined zone, information defining a three-dimensional map for the zone of interest to the user,” “comparing the past video information for the zone of interest with current video information for the zone of interest to determine compliance with a rule of the one or more rules,” and “providing, to the user device, an indication of the compliance with the rule of the one or more rules, wherein the providing is based on the comparing” in claims 16-20, taken as a whole, render the claims patentably distinct over the prior art . Conclusion 07-96 AIA The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure : US 9167379 – automatic emergency response US 2011/0181716 – video surveillance enhancement US 2025/0182231 – rules for school security Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ANH-TUAN V NGUYEN whose telephone number is 571-270-7513. The examiner can normally be reached on M-F 9AM-5PM 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, JASON CHAN can be reached on 571- 272-3022. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300. 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). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative or access to the automated information system, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000. /ANH-TUAN V NGUYEN/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2619 Application/Control Number: 18/970,215 Page 2 Art Unit: 2619 Application/Control Number: 18/970,215 Page 3 Art Unit: 2619 Application/Control Number: 18/970,215 Page 4 Art Unit: 2619 Application/Control Number: 18/970,215 Page 5 Art Unit: 2619 Application/Control Number: 18/970,215 Page 6 Art Unit: 2619 Application/Control Number: 18/970,215 Page 7 Art Unit: 2619 Application/Control Number: 18/970,215 Page 8 Art Unit: 2619 Application/Control Number: 18/970,215 Page 9 Art Unit: 2619 Application/Control Number: 18/970,215 Page 10 Art Unit: 2619 Application/Control Number: 18/970,215 Page 11 Art Unit: 2619 Application/Control Number: 18/970,215 Page 12 Art Unit: 2619 Application/Control Number: 18/970,215 Page 13 Art Unit: 2619 Application/Control Number: 18/970,215 Page 14 Art Unit: 2619 Application/Control Number: 18/970,215 Page 15 Art Unit: 2619 Application/Control Number: 18/970,215 Page 16 Art Unit: 2619 Application/Control Number: 18/970,215 Page 17 Art Unit: 2619
Prosecution Insights