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 .
Election/Restrictions
Applicant’s election of group I, claims 1-5 without traverse in the reply filed on 7/14/2026 is acknowledged.
Claim 6-11 withdrawn from further consideration pursuant to 37 CFR 1.142(b) as being drawn to a nonelected invention, there being no allowable generic or linking claim. Election was made without traverse in the reply filed on 7/14/2026.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 101
35 U.S.C. 101 reads as follows:
Whoever invents or discovers any new and useful process, machine, manufacture, or composition of matter, or any new and useful improvement thereof, may obtain a patent therefore, subject to the conditions and requirements of this title.
Claim 1-5 rejected under 35 U.S.C. 101 because the claimed invention is directed to an abstract idea without significantly more. The claim(s) recite(s) concepts performed in the human mind (including an observation, evaluation, judgment, opinion) combined with mathematical concepts (mathematical formulas or equations) with the assistance of generic computer elements. This judicial exception is not integrated into a practical application because the generically recited computer elements do not add a meaningful limitation to the abstract idea because they amount to simply implementing the abstract idea on a computer. The claim(s) does/do not include additional elements that are sufficient to amount to significantly more than the judicial exception because additional elements, door lock end and control end as claimed, when considered separately and in combination, they do not add significantly more (also known as an “inventive concept”) to the exception, given that these only store, retrieve and process information in memory which are all well-understood, routine, conventional computer functions as recognized by the court decisions listed in MPEP § 2106.05(d).
Re claim 1. A door lock security assessment method, the method comprising:
sending a security evaluation instruction to a door lock end to trigger the door lock end to perform a local security environment assessment and obtain a first safety index corresponding to the door lock end; (data processing and mathematical formulas or equations)
obtaining historical behavior data for the door lock end within a specified time period; (data gathering)
performing a security evaluation analysis on the historical behavior data to obtain a second safety index; (concepts performed in the human mind (including an observation, evaluation, judgment, opinion))
receiving a third security index sent by a control end and the first security index sent by the door lock end, wherein the third security index is obtained by the control end performing the local security environment assessment; (data gathering and mathematical formulas or equations)
determining a security assessment result of a door lock based on the first security index, the second security index and the third security index; and (mathematical formulas or equations)
sending the security assessment result of the door lock to the control end. (data outputting)
Re claim 2, is directed to concepts performed in the human mind (including an observation, evaluation, judgment, opinion) combined with mathematical concepts (mathematical formulas or equations)
Re claim 3, is directed to concepts performed in the human mind (including an observation, evaluation, judgment, opinion) combined with mathematical concepts (mathematical formulas or equations)
Re claim 4, is directed to concepts performed in the human mind (including an observation, evaluation, judgment, opinion) combined with mathematical concepts (mathematical formulas or equations)
Re claim 5, is directed to concepts performed in the human mind (including an observation, evaluation, judgment, opinion) combined with mathematical concepts (mathematical formulas or equations)
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to CARLOS E GARCIA whose telephone number is (571)270-1354. The examiner can normally be reached M-Th 9-6pm F 9-5pm.
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, Brian Zimmerman can be reached at (571) 272-3059. 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.
CARLOS E. GARCIA
Primary Examiner
Art Unit 2686
/Carlos Garcia/
Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2686 8/26/2026
Prosecution Insights