REISSUE OFFICE ACTION
The present application is being examined under the pre-AIA first to invent provisions.
This is a reissue office action for US Patent 9,131,257, which included original patent claims 1–56. Applicant requested amendment of the claims on 12/31/2024. Claims 57–75 are pending.
Declaration and Reason for Reissue
This Reissue has been filed pursuant to the original patent being at least partly inoperative or invalid by reason of “claiming more or less than he had the right”, specifically:
“Applicant submits U.S. Patent No. 9,131,257 is deemed wholly or partly inoperative or invalid by reason of the patentee claiming less than he had a right to claim in the patent. In particular, original claims 1-56 of the patent recite registering operation for registering a plurality of subscribers or viewing devices. New independent claim 57 and dependent claims 58-66 are provided to cover a "video monitoring system, in which a monitoring device is equipped with a memory and configured to record the video data into the memory in case of network connection disruptions." New independent claim 67 and dependent claims 68-74 are provided to cover a "video monitoring method, comprising a step of recording video data into a memory in case of network connection disruptions." New independent claim 75 is provided to cover a "monitoring device, in which a controller is configured to record video data into a memory in case of network connection disruptions." All errors being corrected in this continuation reissue application arose without deceptive intent.” (12/31/2024 declaration p. 1).
Consent of Assignee
The consent by assignee filed 12/31/2024 is not accepted. This consent was signed on 9/9/2022 and represents a copy of a consent filed in an earlier reissue, yet was accompanied by a new declaration. This new declaration indicates pursuit of a different error to be corrected and requires a new consent. See MPEP 1451(II)(A) which states:
“Generally, where a continuation reissue application is filed with a copy of the assignee consent from the parent reissue application but with a newly executed reissue oath/declaration, the copy of the assignee consent from the parent reissue application is not acceptable. A copy of the assignee consent is only acceptable if the continuation reissue application corrects an error for which consent was made. Submission of a new oath or declaration is indicative of correction of a different error. Under such circumstances, OPAP will accord the continuation reissue application a filing date, and the examiner should reject the claims under 35 U.S.C. 251 and require a new consent. See MPEP § 1410.02.”
Abstract
The amendment to the abstract filed 12/31/2024 has been approved for entry.
Specification
The amendment to the specification filed 12/31/2024 has not been approved for entry. No support has been found for the term controller for the monitoring device embodiment. See § 112 ¶ 1 rejection.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112:
The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor of carrying out his invention.
Claim 63, 73 and 75 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(a) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), first paragraph, as failing to comply with the written description requirement. The claim(s) contains subject matter which was not described in the specification in such a way as to reasonably convey to one skilled in the relevant art that the inventor or a joint inventor, or for pre-AIA the inventor(s), at the time the application was filed, had possession of the claimed invention.
Claims 63 and 73, no support has been located for the viewing device to “perform” the PTZ process. Clearly, the viewing device shows the effects of performed PTZ processes per user operations. However, the disclosure is limited to performance of PTZ processes being performed only by the camera/monitoring device or the server. Applicant’s citations to 5:47–56 cover only the PTZ operations performed by these two elements, not by the viewing device.
Claim 75, no support has been located for the “controller”.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph:
The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the applicant regards as his invention.
Claims 57–75 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor, or for pre-AIA the applicant regards as the invention.
Claims 57, 67 and 75, there is no antecedent basis for a network or a network connection.
Claims 61, 71, it is not clear to what the viewing device (or the viewer?) must be a subscriber.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 251
Claims 57–75 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 251 as lacking consent of the assignee. See MPEP 1451(II)(A) and “Consent of Assignee”, above.
Claim 75 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 251 as being based upon new matter added to the patent for which reissue is sought. The added material which is not supported by the prior patent is detailed elsewhere in this office action, see “Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112”.
Claims 57–75 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 251 as being an impermissible recapture of broadened claimed subject matter surrendered in the application for the patent upon which the present reissue is based.
See Greenliant Systems, Inc. et al v. Xicor LLC, 692 F.3d 1261, 103 USPQ2d 1951 (Fed. Cir. 2012); In re Shahram Mostafazadeh and Joseph O. Smith, 643 F.3d 1353, 98 USPQ2d 1639 (Fed. Cir. 2011); North American Container, Inc. v. Plastipak Packaging, Inc., 415 F.3d 1335, 75 USPQ2d 1545 (Fed. Cir. 2005); Pannu v. Storz Instruments Inc., 258 F.3d 1366, 59 USPQ2d 1597 (Fed. Cir. 2001); Hester Industries, Inc. v. Stein, Inc., 142 F.3d 1472, 46 USPQ2d 1641 (Fed. Cir. 1998); In re Clement, 131 F.3d 1464, 45 USPQ2d 1161 (Fed. Cir. 1997); Ball Corp. v. United States, 729 F.2d 1429, 1436, 221 USPQ 289, 295 (Fed. Cir. 1984).
The reissue application contains claim(s) that are broader than the issued patent claims. The record of the application for the patent shows that the broadening aspect (in the reissue) relates to claimed subject matter that applicant previously surrendered during the prosecution of the application. Accordingly, the narrow scope of the claims in the patent was not an error within the meaning of 35 U.S.C. 251, and the broader scope of claim subject matter surrendered in the application for the patent cannot be recaptured by the filing of the present reissue application.
MPEP 1412.02(I) describes the following three step test for determining whether impermissible recapture exists. See also the flowchart in MPEP 1412.02(VI).
(1) Determine whether, and in what respect, the reissue claims are broader in scope than the original patent claims;
(2) Determine whether the broader aspects of the reissue claims relate to subject matter surrendered in the original prosecution; and
(3) Determine whether the reissue claims were “materially narrowed” in other respects, so as to avoid the recapture rule.
Steps (1) and (2)
During the prosecution of 13/519,065 and subsequent to an art rejection, applicant added/argued1 the following claim limitation(s) in seeking allowance of the application:
Date
Prosecuted Claim(s)2
Surrender Generating Limitation (SGL)
11/14/2014
55, 81, 98, 104
SGL1a: cellular communication link
SGL1b: cellular communication means
3/3/2015
55, 81, 98, 104
SGL 2a: viewers being temporarily allowed access to the video images over the network without being a subscriber
SGL 2b: viewing devices being temporarily allowed access to the image data over the network without being a subscriber
11/14/2014
55, 98
SGL 3a: transmitting requested video images to the at least one of the respective one of the plurality of subscribers and a plurality of authorized viewers
SGL 3b: transmitting means for transmitting requested video images to the at least one of the respective one of the plurality of subscribers and a plurality of authorized viewers
8/10/2015
55, 81
SGL 4a: wherein controlling access of the subscribers includes setting up a plurality of subscribers with a custom GUI application on a viewing device
SGL 4b: wherein at least one viewing device accesses the image data corresponding to the at least one video capture device via a custom GUI application on the viewing device
8/10/2015
98
SGL 5: wherein the managing means receives control information from at least one of the respective one of the plurality of subscribers and a plurality of viewers for customized viewing by independently applying a set of user control instructions
8/10/2015
104
SGL: 6 wherein the receiving means receives control signals so that the viewing devices can independently customize viewing orientation of the image data
Reissue Claim
Missing SGL
57, 67, 75
SGL 1, 23, 3, 4, 5, 6
Step (3)
Each independent claim eliminates the surrendered subject matter in its entirety. Therefore there is no “material narrowing” present. As per MPEP 1412.02(II)(C), “[i]f surrendered subject matter has been entirely eliminated from a claim in the reissue application, then a recapture rejection under 35 U.S.C. 251 is proper and must be made for that claim.” The flowchart likewise instructs the Examiner to “Make recapture rejection” when the final flowchart inquiry results in a “No” which is the case here:
PNG
media_image1.png
156
343
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Because no single patented independent claim included all six of SGL 1–6, no reissue claim would require all six of SGL 1–6. Applicant is advised to identify on the record a patented independent claim that serves as the basis for each independent reissue claim. The presence of an appropriate subset of associated SGLs identified above can then be judged for each independent reissue claim in order to analyze potential recapture issues.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC §§ 102 and 103
The following is a quotation of the appropriate paragraphs of pre-AIA 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 –
(e) the invention was described in a patent granted on an application for patent by another filed in the United States before the invention thereof by the applicant for patent, or on an international application by another who has fulfilled the requirements of paragraphs (1), (2), and (4) of section 371(c) of this title before the invention thereof by the applicant for patent.
The following is a quotation of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 103(a) which forms the basis for all obviousness rejections set forth in this Office action:
(a) A patent may not be obtained though the invention is not identically disclosed or described as set forth in section 102, if the differences between the subject matter sought to be patented and the prior art are such that the subject matter as a whole would have been obvious at the time the invention was made to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which said subject matter pertains. Patentability shall not be negatived by the manner in which the invention was made.
Claims 57–59, 61, 67–69, 71 and 75 are rejected under pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 (e) as anticipated by US 8,675,071 (Slavin) or, in the alternative, under pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 103(a) as obvious over Slavin in view of US 2010/0333155 (Royall).
57. A video monitoring system comprising: a server; and a monitoring device configured to transmit video data to the server, wherein the server configured to provide the video data for a viewing device and record the video data, and
“the user can use a mobile application on the mobile device to watch live video (or view recently captured still images) from a security camera included in the user's monitoring system” (Slavin 2:10–12).
“FIG. 2 illustrates an example of an electronic system 200 configured to provide video monitoring and alarm verification. The electronic system 200 includes a network 205, a monitoring system control unit 210, one or more user devices 240, 250, a monitoring application server 260” (Slavin 6:6–10).
“a security system panel or a monitoring server may be situated between the first device and the camera and may coordinate communications between the first device and the camera” (Slavin 13:14–17).
“FIG. 1 illustrates an example of sharing image data. As shown, a property 105 includes a camera 115 that captures images of the property 105 and a security system panel 120 of a security system that monitors the property 105 based on outputs of various sensors that sense physical events or conditions at the property 105” (Slavin 2:37–43).
“The monitoring application server 260 may store sensor and image/video data received from the monitoring system and perform analysis of sensor and image/video data received from the monitoring system. Based on the analysis, the monitoring application server 260 may communicate with and control aspects of the monitoring system control unit 210 or the one or more user devices 240, 250. The monitoring application server 260 also may make images/video captured by the camera 230 available to the one or more user devices 240, 250 over the network 205 (e.g., through a web portal). In this regard, the one or more user devices 240, 250 may display images/video captured by the camera 230 from a remote location. This enables a user to perceive images/video of the user's property from a remote location and verify whether or not an alarm event is occurring at the user's property” (Slavin 8:49–63).
wherein the monitoring device is equipped with a memory and configured to record the video data into the memory in case of network connection disruptions.
“The camera 115 also may begin capturing video and initiate establishment of the connection with the mobile phone 130 based on the user 110 triggering a motion sensor (e.g., a Passive Infrared Motion detector) included in the camera 115. The camera 115 further may begin capturing and locally storing video based on the security system panel 120 detecting the door opening event or trigger of its own internal motion sensor and then initiate establishment of the connection with the mobile phone 130 based on the security system panel 120 detecting the alarm condition” (Slavin 3:13–22).
Slavin’s monitoring device therefore includes a local memory into which video data is stored. This capability exists even during a case of “network connection disruptions”. Having video data stored such that it can be later retrieved inherently provides a backup “in case of” disruption. The “in case of” language hints at the purpose of the storage, but it does not limit the claimed structure of the system or actual method of use in providing a backup. The claim does not require a configuration for local storage responsive to a network disruption, for example.
However, Royall teaches a closed circuit security system (¶ 0039) and the system “relates to the selective use of non-volatile storage in conjunction with transmission of content” (¶ 0002) and in particular teaches using local camera storage as a backup during network disruptions:
“a network may be malfunctioning or a client computing device may be busy with another tasks. In these instances, it is important that the content to be transferred is not lost” (Royall ¶ 0005).
“a video camera may send video data to a server or other client. If the network becomes unavailable, the camera will store the video in a local flash memory and when the network becomes available, the camera can transmit the video from the flash memory to the server” (Royall at Abstract).
“If the network becomes unavailable, then the content is stored in local non-volatile storage system until the network becomes available” (Royall ¶ 0025).
“In one embodiment, the content is stored in the non-volatile memory only during the trigger condition” (Royall ¶ 0044).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill at the time of the invention to have modified Slavin such that local storage of content is triggered when the network becomes unavailable until it becomes available, such that this stored content can serve as a backup. One of ordinary skill would have recognized the benefit of doing so in the context of Slavin’s operation – content would not be lost in the instance of network malfunction. The stored content could be subsequently made available from the locally stored backup.
58. The video monitoring system according to claim 57, wherein the monitoring device is further configured to stop recording the video data into the memory in case of network reconnection.
“If the network becomes unavailable, then the content is stored in local non-volatile storage system until the network becomes available” (Royall ¶ 0025).
“In one embodiment, the content is stored in the non-volatile memory only during the trigger condition” (Royall ¶ 0044).
59. The video monitoring system according to claim 57, wherein the monitoring device further triggers the video data transmission and/or recording upon detecting motion within a range of view.
“The camera 115 also may begin capturing video and initiate establishment of the connection with the mobile phone 130 based on the user 110 triggering a motion sensor (e.g., a Passive Infrared Motion detector) included in the camera 115. The camera 115 further may begin capturing and locally storing video based on the security system panel 120 detecting the door opening event or trigger of its own internal motion sensor and then initiate establishment of the connection with the mobile phone 130 based on the security system panel 120 detecting the alarm condition” (Slavin 3:13–22).
“a Passive Infra Red (PIR) motion sensor may be built into the camera 230 and used to trigger the camera 230 to capture one or more images when motion is detected. The camera 230 also may include a microwave motion sensor built into the camera and used to trigger the camera 230 to capture one or more images when motion is detected. The camera 230 may have a “normally open” or “normally closed” digital input that can trigger capture of one or more images when external sensors (e.g., the sensors 220, PIR, door/window, etc.) detect motion or other events. In some implementations, the camera 230 receives a software command to capture an image when external devices detect motion. The camera 230 may receive the software command from the controller 212 or directly from one of the sensors 220” (Slavin 7:62–8:9).
61. The video monitoring system according to claim 57, wherein the server further temporarily authorizes the viewing device to access to the server and to receive the video data over a network without being a subscriber.
“In some examples, the one or more user devices 240, 250 may provide the one or more third party devices 270, 280 with permission or credentials to access the monitoring system directly or the monitoring application server 260 for a limited time. In these examples, the user device may provide the third party device with a link that the third party device can use to log into an event portal on the monitoring application server 260 that provides access to sensor status, live video, and saved clips relevant to the event. The material included in the event portal may be controlled by the user (e.g., using the user device) and access may be granted for a limited period of time” (Slavin 12:40–51).
“The one or more third party devices 270, 280 may be configured to display a surveillance monitoring user interface 272,282 that is generated by the one or more third party devices 270, 280, the one or more user devices 240, 250, or the monitoring application server 260” (Slavin 11:41–46).
67. A video monitoring method comprising: transmitting, by a monitoring device, video data to a server; providing, by the server, the video data for a viewing device and record the video data,
“the user can use a mobile application on the mobile device to watch live video (or view recently captured still images) from a security camera included in the user's monitoring system” (Slavin 2:10–12).
“FIG. 2 illustrates an example of an electronic system 200 configured to provide video monitoring and alarm verification. The electronic system 200 includes a network 205, a monitoring system control unit 210, one or more user devices 240, 250, a monitoring application server 260” (Slavin 6:6–10).
“a security system panel or a monitoring server may be situated between the first device and the camera and may coordinate communications between the first device and the camera” (Slavin 13:14–17).
“FIG. 1 illustrates an example of sharing image data. As shown, a property 105 includes a camera 115 that captures images of the property 105 and a security system panel 120 of a security system that monitors the property 105 based on outputs of various sensors that sense physical events or conditions at the property 105” (Slavin 2:37–43).
“The monitoring application server 260 may store sensor and image/video data received from the monitoring system and perform analysis of sensor and image/video data received from the monitoring system. Based on the analysis, the monitoring application server 260 may communicate with and control aspects of the monitoring system control unit 210 or the one or more user devices 240, 250. The monitoring application server 260 also may make images/video captured by the camera 230 available to the one or more user devices 240, 250 over the network 205 (e.g., through a web portal). In this regard, the one or more user devices 240, 250 may display images/video captured by the camera 230 from a remote location. This enables a user to perceive images/video of the user's property from a remote location and verify whether or not an alarm event is occurring at the user's property” (Slavin 8:49–63).
wherein the monitoring device equipped with a memory; and recording the video data into the memory in case of network connection disruptions.
“The camera 115 also may begin capturing video and initiate establishment of the connection with the mobile phone 130 based on the user 110 triggering a motion sensor (e.g., a Passive Infrared Motion detector) included in the camera 115. The camera 115 further may begin capturing and locally storing video based on the security system panel 120 detecting the door opening event or trigger of its own internal motion sensor and then initiate establishment of the connection with the mobile phone 130 based on the security system panel 120 detecting the alarm condition” (Slavin 3:13–22).
Slavin’s monitoring device therefore includes a local memory into which video data is stored. This capability exists even during a case of “network connection disruptions”. Having video data stored such that it can be later retrieved inherently provides a backup “in case of” disruption. The “in case of” language hints at the purpose of the storage, but it does not limit the claimed structure of the system or actual method of use in providing a backup. The claim does not require a configuration for local storage responsive to a network disruption, for example.
However, Royall teaches a closed circuit security system (¶ 0039) and the system “relates to the selective use of non-volatile storage in conjunction with transmission of content” (¶ 0002) and in particular teaches using local camera storage as a backup during network disruptions:
“a network may be malfunctioning or a client computing device may be busy with another tasks. In these instances, it is important that the content to be transferred is not lost” (Royall ¶ 0005).
“a video camera may send video data to a server or other client. If the network becomes unavailable, the camera will store the video in a local flash memory and when the network becomes available, the camera can transmit the video from the flash memory to the server” (Royall at Abstract).
“If the network becomes unavailable, then the content is stored in local non-volatile storage system until the network becomes available” (Royall ¶ 0025).
“In one embodiment, the content is stored in the non-volatile memory only during the trigger condition” (Royall ¶ 0044).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill at the time of the invention to have modified Slavin such that local storage of content is triggered when the network becomes unavailable until it becomes available, such that this stored content can serve as a backup. One of ordinary skill would have recognized the benefit of doing so in the context of Slavin’s operation – content would not be lost in the instance of network malfunction. The stored content could be subsequently made available from the locally stored backup.
68. The video monitoring method according to claim 67, further comprising stopping, by the monitoring device, recording the video data into the memory in case of network reconnection.
“If the network becomes unavailable, then the content is stored in local non-volatile storage system until the network becomes available” (Royall ¶ 0025).
“In one embodiment, the content is stored in the non-volatile memory only during the trigger condition” (Royall ¶ 0044).
69. The video monitoring method according to claim 67, further comprising triggering, by the monitoring device, the video data transmission and/or recording upon detecting motion within a range of view.
“The camera 115 also may begin capturing video and initiate establishment of the connection with the mobile phone 130 based on the user 110 triggering a motion sensor (e.g., a Passive Infrared Motion detector) included in the camera 115. The camera 115 further may begin capturing and locally storing video based on the security system panel 120 detecting the door opening event or trigger of its own internal motion sensor and then initiate establishment of the connection with the mobile phone 130 based on the security system panel 120 detecting the alarm condition” (Slavin 3:13–22).
“a Passive Infra Red (PIR) motion sensor may be built into the camera 230 and used to trigger the camera 230 to capture one or more images when motion is detected. The camera 230 also may include a microwave motion sensor built into the camera and used to trigger the camera 230 to capture one or more images when motion is detected. The camera 230 may have a “normally open” or “normally closed” digital input that can trigger capture of one or more images when external sensors (e.g., the sensors 220, PIR, door/window, etc.) detect motion or other events. In some implementations, the camera 230 receives a software command to capture an image when external devices detect motion. The camera 230 may receive the software command from the controller 212 or directly from one of the sensors 220” (Slavin 7:62–8:9).
71. The video monitoring method according to claim 67, further comprising temporarily authorizing, by the server, the viewing device to access to the server and to receive the video data over a network without being a subscriber.
“In some examples, the one or more user devices 240, 250 may provide the one or more third party devices 270, 280 with permission or credentials to access the monitoring system directly or the monitoring application server 260 for a limited time. In these examples, the user device may provide the third party device with a link that the third party device can use to log into an event portal on the monitoring application server 260 that provides access to sensor status, live video, and saved clips relevant to the event. The material included in the event portal may be controlled by the user (e.g., using the user device) and access may be granted for a limited period of time” (Slavin 12:40–51).
“The one or more third party devices 270, 280 may be configured to display a surveillance monitoring user interface 272,282 that is generated by the one or more third party devices 270, 280, the one or more user devices 240, 250, or the monitoring application server 260” (Slavin 11:41–46).
75. A monitoring device comprising: a memory; a transmitter configured to transmit video data to a server configured to provide the video data for a viewing device and record the video data; and
“the user can use a mobile application on the mobile device to watch live video (or view recently captured still images) from a security camera included in the user's monitoring system” (Slavin 2:10–12).
“FIG. 2 illustrates an example of an electronic system 200 configured to provide video monitoring and alarm verification. The electronic system 200 includes a network 205, a monitoring system control unit 210, one or more user devices 240, 250, a monitoring application server 260” (Slavin 6:6–10).
“a security system panel or a monitoring server may be situated between the first device and the camera and may coordinate communications between the first device and the camera” (Slavin 13:14–17).
“FIG. 1 illustrates an example of sharing image data. As shown, a property 105 includes a camera 115 that captures images of the property 105 and a security system panel 120 of a security system that monitors the property 105 based on outputs of various sensors that sense physical events or conditions at the property 105” (Slavin 2:37–43).
“The monitoring application server 260 may store sensor and image/video data received from the monitoring system and perform analysis of sensor and image/video data received from the monitoring system. Based on the analysis, the monitoring application server 260 may communicate with and control aspects of the monitoring system control unit 210 or the one or more user devices 240, 250. The monitoring application server 260 also may make images/video captured by the camera 230 available to the one or more user devices 240, 250 over the network 205 (e.g., through a web portal). In this regard, the one or more user devices 240, 250 may display images/video captured by the camera 230 from a remote location. This enables a user to perceive images/video of the user's property from a remote location and verify whether or not an alarm event is occurring at the user's property” (Slavin 8:49–63).
a controller configured to record the video data into the memory in case of network connection disruptions.
As best understood, this claim appears to require a “controller” configured to record the video data into the memory. However, given that this claim has been rejected under § 112 for new matter, the prior art need not provide teachings beyond the extent of applicant’s disclosure. Applicant at most teaches that the monitoring device is capable of recording video into the memory; although no controller is disclosed. Slavin likewise is capable of storing video at the monitoring device (as described below). Further, Slavin also teaches the use of a controller associated with the monitoring device and its functions (see e.g. 6:48–62).
“The camera 115 also may begin capturing video and initiate establishment of the connection with the mobile phone 130 based on the user 110 triggering a motion sensor (e.g., a Passive Infrared Motion detector) included in the camera 115. The camera 115 further may begin capturing and locally storing video based on the security system panel 120 detecting the door opening event or trigger of its own internal motion sensor and then initiate establishment of the connection with the mobile phone 130 based on the security system panel 120 detecting the alarm condition” (Slavin 3:13–22).
Slavin’s monitoring device therefore includes a local memory into which video data is stored. This capability exists even during a case of “network connection disruptions”. Having video data stored such that it can be later retrieved inherently provides a backup “in case of” disruption. The “in case of” language hints at the purpose of the storage, but it does not limit the claimed structure of the system or actual method of use in providing a backup. The claim does not require a configuration for local storage responsive to a network disruption, for example.
However, Royall teaches a closed circuit security system (¶ 0039) and the system “relates to the selective use of non-volatile storage in conjunction with transmission of content” (¶ 0002) and in particular teaches using local camera storage as a backup during network disruptions:
“a network may be malfunctioning or a client computing device may be busy with another tasks. In these instances, it is important that the content to be transferred is not lost” (Royall ¶ 0005).
“a video camera may send video data to a server or other client. If the network becomes unavailable, the camera will store the video in a local flash memory and when the network becomes available, the camera can transmit the video from the flash memory to the server” (Royall at Abstract).
“If the network becomes unavailable, then the content is stored in local non-volatile storage system until the network becomes available” (Royall ¶ 0025).
“In one embodiment, the content is stored in the non-volatile memory only during the trigger condition” (Royall ¶ 0044).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill at the time of the invention to have modified Slavin such that local storage of content is triggered when the network becomes unavailable until it becomes available, such that this stored content can serve as a backup. One of ordinary skill would have recognized the benefit of doing so in the context of Slavin’s operation – content would not be lost in the instance of network malfunction. The stored content could be subsequently made available from the locally stored backup.
Claims 60, 66 and 70 are rejected under pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 103(a) as being unpatentable over Slavin (or Slavin and Royall) in view of US 2010/0195810 (Mota).
60. The video monitoring system according to claim 57, wherein the monitoring device further triggers the video data transmission and/or recording upon detecting sound.
Slavin teaches video capture to be triggered on detected motion events, but not on detected sound events. Mota teaches a security system with a video camera which is triggered by sensors upon detected motion and/or sound events:
“a security system having a camera, a sensor generating a signal in response to a triggering event, and a management module. The triggering event is one of…sound detection, motion detection…The management module is adapted to send data to be received by a remote communication device upon generation by the sensor of the signal generated in response to the triggering event” (Mota ¶ 0014).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill at the time of the invention to have included a sound detection sensor with that of Slavin (or Slavin and Royall) in order to trigger video in response to sounds. Doing so would allow the users of Slavin to investigate the monitored area in the event of a suspicious sound.
66. The video monitoring system according to claim 60, wherein the monitoring device comprises a motion sensor and is configured to be capable of detecting sound.
See claim 60.
70. The video monitoring method according to claim 67, further comprising triggering, by the monitoring device, the video data transmission and/or recording upon detecting sound.
Slavin teaches video capture to be triggered on detected motion events, but not on detected sound events. Mota teaches a security system with a video camera which is triggered by sensors upon detected motion and/or sound events:
“a security system having a camera, a sensor generating a signal in response to a triggering event, and a management module. The triggering event is one of…sound detection, motion detection…The management module is adapted to send data to be received by a remote communication device upon generation by the sensor of the signal generated in response to the triggering event” (Mota ¶ 0014).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill at the time of the invention to have included a sound detection sensor with that of Slavin (or Slavin and Royall) in order to trigger video in response to sounds. Doing so would allow the users of Slavin to investigate the monitored area in the event of a suspicious sound.
Claims 62–64 and 72–74 are rejected under pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 103(a) as being unpatentable over Slavin (or Slavin and Royall) in view of Official Notice.
62. The video monitoring system according to claim 57, wherein the monitoring device is further configured to perform a pan/tilt/zoom process depending on a user's operation.
Slavin does not appear to teach that the monitoring device is equipped with image processing operations such as pan/tilt/zoom (PTZ). Official Notice is taken and applicant admits that such image processing operations were well known in the video art:
“the processing power of the cloud server is further increased to accommodate extra user control instructions, more notably operations such as pan/tilt/zoom (PTZ), horizontal/vertical flip and rotation. Additionally, the optional image processing unit integrated to the device may be enabled to perform the flip, rotation and PTZ operations locally at the camera. These types of processing are known to those skilled in the art, such as U.S. Pat. No. 7,324,706. Other examples include U.S. Pat. Nos. 7,474,799; 7,576,767 and 8,055,070” (US Patent 9,131,257 at).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill to have provided such image processing capabilities with the system components of Slavin (or Slavin and Royall) in order to offer more revealing and customized video content for viewing. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill at the time of the invention that such processing could have been provided at various locations throughout the system with predictable results, including at the monitoring device itself. One of ordinary skill would have recognized the predictable tradeoffs in choosing to locate this processing at the monitoring device vs. at other acceptable locations (such as at the server).
63. The video monitoring system according to claim 57, further comprising the viewing device, wherein the viewing device is further configured to perform a pan/tilt/zoom process for an image depending on a user's operation.
As best understood, this claim appears to require that the viewing device is configured to perform such PTZ manipulations, not merely render their results. However, given that this claim has been rejected under § 112 for new matter, the prior art need not provide teachings beyond the extent of applicant’s disclosure. Applicant at most teaches that the results of PTZ manipulations are shown on the viewing device. The same is true of Slavin (or Slavin and Royall) in view of Official Notice; PTZ results would have been seen by the viewing device when PTZ manipulations are performed by the monitoring device (claim 62) or by the server (claim 64).
64. The video monitoring system according to claim 57, wherein the server is further configured to perform a pan/tilt/zoom process for an image depending on a user's operation.
“The monitoring application server 260 may store sensor and image/video data received from the monitoring system and perform analysis of sensor and image/video data received from the monitoring system. Based on the analysis, the monitoring application server 260 may communicate with and control aspects of the monitoring system control unit 210 or the one or more user devices 240, 250. The monitoring application server 260 also may make images/video captured by the camera 230 available to the one or more user devices 240, 250 over the network 205 (e.g., through a web portal). In this regard, the one or more user devices 240, 250 may display images/video captured by the camera 230 from a remote location. This enables a user to perceive images/video of the user's property from a remote location and verify whether or not an alarm event is occurring at the user's property” (Slavin 8:49–63).
Slavin teaches recording and storing of the video at the server where the server can analyze the video. Slavin also teaches that different users may review the video and review its content. Slavin does not appear to teach that the server processes the stored video and performs image processing operations such as offering pan/tilt/zoom (PTZ) features. Official Notice is taken and applicant admits that such image processing operations were well known in the video art:
“the processing power of the cloud server is further increased to accommodate extra user control instructions, more notably operations such as pan/tilt/zoom (PTZ), horizontal/vertical flip and rotation. Additionally, the optional image processing unit integrated to the device may be enabled to perform the flip, rotation and PTZ operations locally at the camera. These types of processing are known to those skilled in the art, such as U.S. Pat. No. 7,324,706. Other examples include U.S. Pat. Nos. 7,474,799; 7,576,767 and 8,055,070” (US Patent 9,131,257 at).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill to have provided such image processing capabilities with the system components of Slavin (or Slavin and Royall) in order to offer more revealing and customized video content for viewing/reviewing. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill at the time of the invention that such processing could have been provided at various locations throughout the system with predictable results, including at the server. One of ordinary skill would have recognized the predictable tradeoffs in choosing to locate this processing at the server vs. at other acceptable locations (such as at the video capture device itself).
72. The video monitoring method according to claim 67, further comprising performing, by the monitoring device, a pan/tilt/zoom process depending on a user's operation.
Slavin does not appear to teach that the monitoring device is equipped with image processing operations such as pan/tilt/zoom (PTZ). Official Notice is taken and applicant admits that such image processing operations were well known in the video art:
“the processing power of the cloud server is further increased to accommodate extra user control instructions, more notably operations such as pan/tilt/zoom (PTZ), horizontal/vertical flip and rotation. Additionally, the optional image processing unit integrated to the device may be enabled to perform the flip, rotation and PTZ operations locally at the camera. These types of processing are known to those skilled in the art, such as U.S. Pat. No. 7,324,706. Other examples include U.S. Pat. Nos. 7,474,799; 7,576,767 and 8,055,070” (US Patent 9,131,257 at).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill to have provided such image processing capabilities with the system components of Slavin (or Slavin and Royall) in order to offer more revealing and customized video content for viewing. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill at the time of the invention that such processing could have been provided at various locations throughout the system with predictable results, including at the monitoring device itself. One of ordinary skill would have recognized the predictable tradeoffs in choosing to locate this processing at the monitoring device vs. at other acceptable locations (such as at the server).
73. The video monitoring method according to claim 67, further comprising performing, by the viewing device, a pan/tilt/zoom process for an image depending on a user's operation.
As best understood, this claim appears to require that the viewing device is configured to perform such PTZ manipulations, not merely render their results. However, given that this claim has been rejected under § 112 for new matter, the prior art need not provide teachings beyond the extent of applicant’s disclosure. Applicant at most teaches that the results of PTZ manipulations are shown on the viewing device. The same is true of Slavin (or Slavin and Royall) in view of Official Notice; PTZ results would have been seen by the viewing device when PTZ manipulations are performed by the monitoring device (claim 72) or by the server (claim 74).
74. The video monitoring method according to claim 67, further comprising performing, by the server, a pan/tilt/zoom process for an image depending on a user's operation.
“The monitoring application server 260 may store sensor and image/video data received from the monitoring system and perform analysis of sensor and image/video data received from the monitoring system. Based on the analysis, the monitoring application server 260 may communicate with and control aspects of the monitoring system control unit 210 or the one or more user devices 240, 250. The monitoring application server 260 also may make images/video captured by the camera 230 available to the one or more user devices 240, 250 over the network 205 (e.g., through a web portal). In this regard, the one or more user devices 240, 250 may display images/video captured by the camera 230 from a remote location. This enables a user to perceive images/video of the user's property from a remote location and verify whether or not an alarm event is occurring at the user's property” (Slavin 8:49–63).
Slavin teaches recording and storing of the video at the server where the server can analyze the video. Slavin also teaches that different users may review the video and review its content. Slavin does not appear to teach that the server processes the stored video and performs image processing operations such as offering pan/tilt/zoom (PTZ) features. Official Notice is taken and applicant admits that such image processing operations were well known in the video art:
“the processing power of the cloud server is further increased to accommodate extra user control instructions, more notably operations such as pan/tilt/zoom (PTZ), horizontal/vertical flip and rotation. Additionally, the optional image processing unit integrated to the device may be enabled to perform the flip, rotation and PTZ operations locally at the camera. These types of processing are known to those skilled in the art, such as U.S. Pat. No. 7,324,706. Other examples include U.S. Pat. Nos. 7,474,799; 7,576,767 and 8,055,070” (US Patent 9,131,257 at).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill to have provided such image processing capabilities with the system components of Slavin (or Slavin and Royall) in order to offer more revealing and customized video content for viewing/reviewing. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill at the time of the invention that such processing could have been provided at various locations throughout the system with predictable results, including at the server. One of ordinary skill would have recognized the predictable tradeoffs in choosing to locate this processing at the server vs. at other acceptable locations (such as at the video capture device itself).
Claim 65 is rejected under pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 103(a) as being unpatentable over Slavin (or Slavin and Royall) in view of US 2005/0078174 (Casey).
65. The video monitoring system according to claim 57, wherein the monitoring device comprises a global positioning system (GPS) for acquiring location information.
Slavin does not appear to teach that the monitoring device includes a GPS function. Casey however teaches a video recording system device used for security cameras where the security cameras include location sensors recording device is equipped with GPS:
“Imaging device 110 further includes a location sensor 220. Location sensor 220 can be, but is not limited to, a GPS sensor capable of fixing the location of imaging device 110 as a set of absolute coordinates. Using the GPS location sensor as an example, location sensor 220 determines the location of imaging device 110 by analysis of satellite position determining signals as is known in the art” (Casey ¶ 0036).
“Each security camera 820 can include a location sensor as previously described in relation to imaging device 110. When the video image is sent from a respective security camera 820 to security monitoring facility 850, the GPS coordinates will be included with the image. This data can be placed on a map to show the exact location of the camera as well as the direction the camera is pointing. If there is a problem at one of buildings 830, the GPS data and the image information can be dispatched to a local security officer, police, or emergency personnel” (Casey ¶ 0060).
It would have been obvious at the time the invention was made to have included GPS functions/equipment at the monitoring devices of Slavin (or Slavin and Royall) so that the images can include locations of the cameras. One of ordinary skill would have recognized that this would have provided the viewers of video with location information so as to determine the location of the cameras as well as the direction it is facing. Doings so would have enhanced the data available to the viewer so that the assessment of the potential threat could be improved.
Notification of Proceedings and Material Information
Applicant is reminded of the continuing obligation under 37 CFR 1.178(b), to timely apprise the Office of any prior or concurrent proceeding in which this patent is or was involved. These proceedings would include any trial before the Patent Trial and Appeal Board, interferences, reissues, reexaminations, supplemental examinations, and litigation.
Applicant is further reminded of the continuing obligation under 37 CFR 1.56, to timely apprise the Office of any information which is material to patentability of the claims under consideration in this reissue application.
These obligations rest with each individual associated with the filing and prosecution of this application for reissue. See also MPEP §§ 1404, 1442.01 and 1442.04.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JEFFREY D CARLSON whose telephone number is (571) 272-6716. The examiner can normally be reached Mon-Fri 7:30 am to 5:00 pm, off 1st Fri.
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, Michael Fuelling can be reached on (571) 270-1367. 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.
/JEFFREY D CARLSON/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3992
Conferees:
/C. Michelle Tarae/Reexamination Specialist, Art Unit 3992 /M.F/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3992
1 In Hester, supra, the Federal Circuit held that the surrender that forms the basis for impermissible recapture "can occur through arguments alone". 142 F.3d at 1482, 46 USPQ2d at 1649.
2 Prosecuted claims issued as patented claims as follows:
prosecuted claim 55 issued as patented claim 1
prosecuted claim 81 issued as patented claim 28
prosecuted claim 98 issued as patented claim 47
prosecuted claim 104 issued as patented claim 52
3 dependent claims 61 and 71 include language corresponding to SGL 2.
Prosecution Insights