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 .
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.
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on 01/07/2025 has been considered by the examiner.
Oath/Declaration
Oath/Declaration as file 12/11/2024 is noted by the Examiner.
Double Patenting
The nonstatutory double patenting rejection is based on a judicially created doctrine grounded in public policy (a policy reflected in the statute) so as to prevent the unjustified or improper timewise extension of the “right to exclude” granted by a patent and to prevent possible harassment by multiple assignees. A nonstatutory double patenting rejection is appropriate where the claims at issue are not identical, but at least one examined application claim is not patentably distinct from the reference claim(s) because the examined application claim is either anticipated by, or would have been obvious over, the reference claim(s). See, e.g., In re Berg, 140 F.3d 1428, 46 USPQ2d 1226 (Fed. Cir. 1998); In re Goodman, 11 F.3d 1046, 29 USPQ2d 2010 (Fed. Cir. 1993); In re Longi, 759 F.2d 887, 225 USPQ 645 (Fed. Cir. 1985); In re Van Ornum, 686 F.2d 937, 214 USPQ 761 (CCPA 1982); In re Vogel, 422 F.2d 438, 164 USPQ 619 (CCPA 1970); and In re Thorington, 418 F.2d 528, 163 USPQ 644 (CCPA 1969).
A timely filed terminal disclaimer in compliance with 37 CFR 1.321(c) or 1.321(d) may be used to overcome an actual or provisional rejection based on a nonstatutory double patenting ground provided the reference application or patent either is shown to be commonly owned with this application, or claims an invention made as a result of activities undertaken within the scope of a joint research agreement. A terminal disclaimer must be signed in compliance with 37 CFR 1.321(b).
The USPTO internet Web site contains terminal disclaimer forms which may be used. Please visit http://www.uspto.gov/forms/. The filing date of the application will determine what form should be used. A web-based eTerminal Disclaimer may be filled out completely online using web-screens. An eTerminal Disclaimer that meets all requirements is auto-processed and approved immediately upon submission. For more information about eTerminal Disclaimers, refer to http://www.uspto.gov/patents/process/file/efs/guidance/eTD-info-I.jsp.
Effective January 1, 1994, a registered attorney or agent of record may sign a terminal disclaimer. A terminal disclaimer signed by the assignee must fully comply with 37 CFR 3.73(b).
Claims 1-9 and 12-18 are rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claims 1, 7, 5, 6, 8, 2-4, 1, 1, 1, 2 and 3-6 of U.S. Patent No. 12,196,777 (Application No. 18/689325) respectively. Although the conflicting claims are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other because both sets of claims cover the same subject matter.
Both independent claims’ features of the instant application and the co-pending application can be compared as:
Instant Application: Claim 1
US Patent 12,196,777: Claim 1
A system for detecting ferromagnetic objects and analyzing the threat of said objects becoming projectiles as they pass through a passageway, the system comprising:
A system for detecting ferromagnetic objects and analyzing the threat of said objects becoming projectiles as they pass through a passageway, the system comprising:
a first sensor array comprising one or more magnetic field sensors configured to secure to one or more portions of the passageway, wherein the first sensor array is configured to:
a first sensor array comprising one or more magnetic field sensors configured to secure to one or more portions of the passageway, wherein the first sensor array is configured to:
generate a first signal in response to detecting a magnetic field indicating the presence of a ferromagnetic object in proximity to the first sensor array; and
generate a first signal in response to detecting a magnetic field indicating the presence of a ferromagnetic object in proximity to the first sensor array; and
output said first signal;
output said first signal;
a second sensor group configured to secure to a portion of the passageway, and wherein the second sensor group is further configured to:
a second sensor group configured to secure to a top portion of the passageway, wherein the second sensor group comprises:
generate a second signal in response to an object moving relative to the passageway and in proximity to the passageway; and
generate a second signal in response to an object moving relative to the passageway and in proximity to the passageway; and
output said second signal, wherein said second signal comprises information relating to a velocity of the object and a direction of motion of the object relative to the first sensor array; and
output said second signal, wherein said second signal comprises information relating to a velocity of the object and a direction of motion of the object relative to the first sensor array; and
a processor in communication with the first sensor array and second sensor group, the processor configured to:
a processor in communication with the first sensor array and second sensor group, the processor configured to:
receive the first signal from the first sensor array;
receive the first signal from the first sensor array;
determine a magnitude of the first signal;
determine a magnitude of the first signal;
receive the second signal from the second sensor group;
receive the second signal from the second sensor group;
determine the velocity of the object relative to the passageway and the direction of motion of the object relative to the passageway; and
determine the velocity of the object relative to the passageway and the direction of motion of the object relative to the passageway; and
generate an alert indicating a threat level of the object passing through the passageway, wherein the threat level is based, at least in part, on the magnitude of the first signal, the velocity of the object and the direction of motion of the object.
generate an alert indicating a threat level of the object passing through the passageway, wherein the threat level is based, at least in part, on the magnitude of the first signal, the velocity of the object and the direction of motion of the object…
Both sets of claims’ features of the instant application (claim 2-8) and the US Patent (claims 7, 5, 6, 8, 2, 3, 4) can be compared by using the table shown above.
Instant Application: Claim 9
US Patent 12,196,777: Claim 1
method for detecting ferromagnetic objects and analyzing the threat of said objects passing through a passageway, the method comprising:
A system for detecting ferromagnetic objects and analyzing the threat of said objects becoming projectiles as they pass through a passageway, the system comprising:
generating, by a first sensor array comprising one or more magnetic field sensors configured to secure to one or more portions of the passageway, a first signal in response to detecting a magnetic field indicating the presence of a ferromagnetic object in proximity to the first sensor array;
a first sensor array comprising one or more magnetic field sensors configured to secure to one or more portions of the passageway, wherein the first sensor array is configured to:
generate a first signal in response to detecting a magnetic field indicating the presence of a ferromagnetic object in proximity to the first sensor array; and
outputting said first signal to a processor;
output said first signal;
a second sensor group configured to secure to a top portion of the passageway, wherein the second sensor group comprises:
generating, by a second sensor group configured to secure to a portion of the passageway, a second signal in response to an object moving relative to the passageway and in proximity to the passageway;
generate a second signal in response to an object moving relative to the passageway and in proximity to the passageway; and
outputting said second signal to the processor, wherein said second signal comprises information relating to a velocity of the object and a direction of motion of the object relative to the first sensor array;
output said second signal, wherein said second signal comprises information relating to a velocity of the object and a direction of motion of the object relative to the first sensor array; and
a processor in communication with the first sensor array and second sensor group, the processor configured to:
receiving, by the processor, the first signal from the first sensor array;
receive the first signal from the first sensor array;
determining, by the processor, a magnitude of the first signal;
determine a magnitude of the first signal;
receiving, by the processor, the second signal from the second sensor group;
receive the second signal from the second sensor group;
determining, by the processor, the velocity of the object relative to the passageway and the direction of motion of the object relative to the passageway; and
determine the velocity of the object relative to the passageway and the direction of motion of the object relative to the passageway; and
generating, by the processor, an alert indicating a threat level of the object passing through the passageway, wherein the threat level is based, at least in part, on the magnitude of the first signal, the velocity of the object and the direction of motion of the object.
generate an alert indicating a threat level of the object passing through the passageway, wherein the threat level is based, at least in part, on the magnitude of the first signal, the velocity of the object and the direction of motion of the object…
Both sets of claims’ features of the instant application (claim 12-18) and the US Patent (claims 1, 1, 2, 3-6) can be compared by using the table shown above.
This is a double patenting rejection since the conflicting claims have been patented.
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(s) 1-5, 7-11 and 15-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1)/102(a)(2) as being anticipated by Kopp US 2016/0131788 (Provided by Applicant; Hereinafter Kopp).
Regarding claim 1, Kopp teaches a system for detecting ferromagnetic objects ([0003]) and analyzing the threat of said objects becoming projectiles as they pass through a passageway (Fig. 7; [0044]), the system comprising:
a first sensor array (Claim 1) comprising one or more magnetic field sensors configured to secure to one or more portions of the passageway (Claim 1), wherein the first sensor array (Claim 1) is configured to:
generate a first signal (Claim 1) in response to detecting a magnetic field indicating the presence of a ferromagnetic object in proximity to the first sensor array (Claim 1); and
output said first signal (Claim 1);
a second sensor group ([0045]; “photoelectric emitter/detector arrangement”) configured to secure to a portion of the passageway ([0045, 0049]), and wherein the second sensor group ([0045]; “photoelectric emitter/detector arrangement”) is further configured to:
generate a second signal ([0045, 0049]) in response to an object moving relative to the passageway ([0045, 0049]) and in proximity to the passageway ([0045, 0049]); and
output said second signal ([0045, 0049]), wherein said second signal comprises information relating to a velocity of the object ([0045, 0049]) and a direction of motion of the object relative to the first sensor array ([0049]); and
a processor (Fig. 8; processor; 72) in communication with the first sensor array (Claim 1) and second sensor group ([0045]; “photoelectric emitter/detector arrangement”), the processor (Fig. 8; processor; 72) configured to:
receive the first signal from the first sensor array (Fig. 8; processor; 72);
determine a magnitude of the first signal (Fig. 8; processor; 72);
receive the second signal from the second sensor group (Fig. 8; processor; 72);
determine the velocity of the object relative to the passageway (Fig. 8; processor; 72) and the direction of motion of the object relative to the passageway (Fig. 8; processor; 72); and
generate an alert (Fig. 8; processor; 72) indicating a threat level of the object passing through the passageway (Fig. 8; processor; 72), wherein the threat level is based, at least in part, on the magnitude of the first signal (Fig. 8; processor; 72), the velocity of the object and the direction of motion of the object (Fig. 8; processor; 72).
Regarding claim 2, Kopp further teaches the system of claim 1, wherein the second sensor group ([0045]; “photoelectric emitter/detector arrangement”) comprises a plurality of sensors that are AC-coupled ([0045]; “photoelectric emitter/detector arrangement”).
Regarding claim 3, Kopp further teaches the system of claim 1, wherein the second sensor group ([0045]; “photoelectric emitter/detector arrangement”) comprises a plurality of sensors for detecting motion of objects ([0045]) and wherein the plurality of sensors of the second sensor group are configured to not use magnetic field fluctuations ([0045]).
Regarding claim 4, Kopp further teaches the system of claim 1, wherein the second signal further comprises information relating to a distance between the object and the passageway and wherein the processor is configured to determine said distance (Fig. 8; processor; 72; the photoelectric arrangement is suitable for providing information relating to a distance between the object and the passageway and wherein the processor (72) could be configured to determine said distance, a position and the velocity of an object in a coordinate system).
Regarding claim 5, Kopp further teaches the system of claim 1, wherein the alert is based, at least in part, on the door portion of the passageway being in the open state (Fig. 8; processor; 72).
Regarding claim 7, Kopp further teaches the system of claim 1, wherein the system comprises a plurality of light emitting diodes (LEDs) configured to secure to the passageway and emit light of one or more colors ([0040, 0049]), wherein each of the one or more colors indicates a unique status of the alert ([0040, 0049]), wherein the statuses of alert comprise (1) no threat, (2) potential threat, (3) actual threat ([0040, 0049]).
Regarding claim 8, Kopp further teaches the system of claim 1, wherein the system comprises a display in communication with the processor and wherein the processor is configured to output the generated alert to the display (Fig. 8; [0094]).
Regarding claim 9, Kopp teaches a method for detecting ferromagnetic objects ([0003]) and analyzing the threat of said objects passing through a passageway (Fig. 7; [0044]), the method comprising:
generating, by a first sensor array (Claim 1) comprising one or more magnetic field sensors configured to secure to one or more portions of the passageway (Claim 1), a first signal in response to detecting a magnetic field indicating the presence of a ferromagnetic object in proximity to the first sensor array (Claim 1);
outputting said first signal (Claim 1) to a processor (Fig. 8; processor; 72);
generating, by a second sensor group ([0045]; “photoelectric emitter/detector arrangement”) configured to secure to a portion of the passageway ([0045, 0049]), a second signal in response to an object moving relative to the passageway and in proximity to the passageway ([0045, 0049]);
outputting said second signal ([0045, 0049]) to the processor, wherein said second signal comprises information relating to a velocity of the object ([0045, 0049]) and a direction of motion of the object relative to the first sensor array (Claim 1);
receiving, by the processor, the first signal from the first sensor array (Fig. 8; processor; 72);
determining, by the processor, a magnitude of the first signal (Fig. 8; processor; 72);
receiving, by the processor, the second signal from the second sensor group (Fig. 8; processor; 72);
determining, by the processor (Fig. 8; processor; 72), the velocity of the object relative to the passageway and the direction of motion of the object relative to the passageway (Fig. 8; processor; 72); and
generating , by the processor (Fig. 8; processor; 72), an alert indicating a threat level of the object passing through the passageway, wherein the threat level is based (Fig. 8; processor; 72), at least in part, on the magnitude of the first signal, the velocity of the object and the direction of motion of the object (Fig. 8; processor; 72).
Regarding claim 10, Kopp further teaches the method of claim 9, further comprising generating the alert if the magnitude of the first signal exceeds a first threshold and the velocity of the object exceeds a second threshold (Fig. 8; [0094]).
Regarding claim 11, Kopp further teaches the method of claim 10, further comprising adjusting, dynamically and in real time, the first threshold based on the velocity of the object and the direction of motion of the object (Fig. 8; [0094]).
Regarding claim 15, Kopp further teaches the method of claim 9, further comprising, by one or more light emitting diodes (LEDs) ([0040, 0049]) configured to secure to the passageway and emit light of one or more colors: emitting a first color indicating a first status of the alert corresponding to no threat being present ([0040, 0049]); emitting a second color indicating a second status of the alert corresponding to a potential threat being present ([0040, 0049]); and emitting a third color indicating a third status of the alert corresponding to an actual threat being present ([0040, 0049]).
Regarding claim 16, Kopp further teaches the method of claim 9, further comprising outputting the generated alert to a display (Fig. 8; [0094]).
Regarding claim 17, Kopp further teaches the method of claim 9, further comprising, not using magnetic field fluctuations, by the second sensor group, to detect the motion of objects ([0045]).
Regarding claim 18, Kopp further teaches the method of claim 9, further comprising determining, by the processor, a distance between the object and the passageway, based in part on information in the second signal relating to said distance (Fig. 8; processor; 72).
Regarding claim 19, Kopp further teaches the method of claim 9, further comprising determining, by the processor, the position of an object in a coordinate system, based in part on information in the second signal relating to said distance (Fig. 8; processor; 72).
Regarding claim 20, Kopp further teaches the method of claim 9, further comprising determining, by the processor, the velocity of an object, based in part on information in the second signal relating to said distance (Fig. 8; processor; 72).
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 6 and 12-14 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.
The following is an examiner’s statement of reasons for allowance:
Regarding claim 6, the prior art does not teach or suggest, in combination with the rest of the limitations of claim 1,
“…wherein the first sensor array comprises: a first sensor grouping configured to secure to a first frame portion of the passageway, wherein the first sensor grouping comprises: a first magnetic field sensor configured to secure to a top portion of the first frame portion; a second magnetic field sensor configured to secure to a middle portion of the first frame portion; and a third magnetic field sensor configured to secure to a bottom portion of the first frame portion; and a second sensor grouping configured to secure to a second frame portion of the passageway, wherein the second sensor grouping comprises: a fourth magnetic field sensor configured to secure to a top portion of the second frame portion; a fifth magnetic field sensor configured to secure to a middle portion of the second frame portion; and a sixth magnetic field sensor configured to secure to a bottom portion of the second frame portion.”
Regarding claim 12, the prior art does not teach or suggest, in combination with the rest of the limitations of claim 9,
“…detecting, by a first pair of sensors of the second sensor group configured to secure to a top portion of the passageway and face toward a portion of the passageway, a motion of a door portion of the passageway or a motion of an object passing through the passageway; detecting, by a second pair of sensors of the second sensor group configured to secure to a top portion of the passageway and to face in a downward direction, a motion of objects approaching the passageway; and detecting, by a third pair of sensors of the second sensor group configured to secure to a top portion of the passageway and to face away from the passageway, a motion of objects.”
Claim 13 is also allowed as they further limit allowed claim 9.
Regarding claim 14, the prior art does not teach or suggest, in combination with the rest of the limitations of claim 9,
“…wherein the first sensor array comprises: a first sensor grouping configured to secure to a first frame portion of the passageway, wherein the first sensor grouping comprises: a first magnetic field sensor configured to secure to a top portion of the first frame portion; a second magnetic field sensor configured to secure to a middle portion of the first frame portion; and a third magnetic field sensor configured to secure to a bottom portion of the first frame portion; and a second sensor grouping configured to secure to a second frame portion of the passageway, wherein the second sensor grouping comprises: a fourth magnetic field sensor configured to secure to a top portion of the second frame portion; a fifth magnetic field sensor configured to secure to a middle portion of the second frame portion; and a sixth magnetic field sensor configured to secure to a bottom portion of the second frame portion.”
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Foletto et al. US 2016/0356628 - A magnetic field sensor that provides target speed and direction detection that is independent of sensor-to-target orientation includes at least three differential channels, each responsive to a pair of magnetic field sensing elements to generate a respective magnetic field channel signal.
Cadugan et al. US 2015/0050013 - The linear position of an object is estimated using multiple magnetic field sensors and a magnet. The multiple magnetic field sensors are held in fixed relation to one another and in moving relation with respect to the magnet.
Thompson et al. US 2015/0103625 - Systems, methods, and computer programs for monitoring production of fluids from a subterranean formation includes receiving, from a first sensor array at a first time, a first set of electromagnetic signals generated by an electro seismic or seismoelectric conversion of seismic signals caused, at least in part, by the production of fluid from the subterranean formation.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to RAUL J RIOS RUSSO whose telephone number is (571)270-3459. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday: 10am-6pm, EST.
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, Huy Phan can be reached at 571-272-7924. 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.
/RAUL J RIOS RUSSO/Examiner, Art Unit 2858
Prosecution Insights