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 .
DETAILED ACTION
This action is responsive to claims filed on March 19, 2025. Claims 1-18 have been canceled. Claims 19-37 are pending and presented for examination.
Authorization for Internet Communication
To expedite prosecution, filing a written authorization for internet communication is recommended. Doing so permits the USPTO to communicate using email to schedule interviews and/or discuss other aspects of the application. Without a written authorization in place, the USPTO cannot respond to email communications. The preferred method of providing authorization is by filing form PTO/SB/439, available at: https://www.uspto.gov/patent/forms/forms. See MPEP § 502.03.
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 conflicting claims 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); 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 nonstatutory double patenting provided the reference application or patent either is shown to be commonly owned with the examined application, or claims an invention made as a result of activities undertaken within the scope of a joint research agreement. See MPEP § 717.02 for applications subject to examination under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA as explained in MPEP § 2159. See MPEP § 2146 et seq. for applications not subject to examination under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA . A terminal disclaimer must be signed in compliance with 37 CFR 1.321(b).
The filing of a terminal disclaimer by itself is not a complete reply to a nonstatutory double patenting (NSDP) rejection. A complete reply requires that the terminal disclaimer be accompanied by a reply requesting reconsideration of the prior Office action. Even where the NSDP rejection is provisional the reply must be complete. See MPEP § 804, subsection I.B.1. For a reply to a non-final Office action, see 37 CFR 1.111(a). For a reply to final Office action, see 37 CFR 1.113(c). A request for reconsideration while not provided for in 37 CFR 1.113(c) may be filed after final for consideration. See MPEP §§ 706.07(e) and 714.13.
The USPTO Internet website contains terminal disclaimer forms which may be used. Please visit www.uspto.gov/patent/patents-forms. The actual filing date of the application in which the form is filed determines what form (e.g., PTO/SB/25, PTO/SB/26, PTO/AIA /25, or PTO/AIA /26) 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 www.uspto.gov/patents/apply/applying-online/eterminal-disclaimer.
Claims 19-37 are rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over Claims 1-16 of U.S. Patent No. 12,224,879. Although the claims at issue are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other because the instant application claims are anticipated by the claims recited in the U.S. Patent.
Said claims in both applications are directed to providing a secure meeting space that automatically adapts to the classification level of one or more participants. Both applications focus on the concept of insuring security in conference/meeting rooms by continuously monitoring meeting rooms to detect any changes that could impact security. In response, applying the proper security measures.
Taking claims 19, 29 and 35 in the instant application, as an exemplary to show the similarity in features being claimed in both applications, to compare to claims 1, 9 and 14 in the U.S. Patent (see comparison table below). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of the ordinary skill in the art, having the same claim elements of the parent application, to construct a system as claimed in the instant application capable of performing identical functions as the parent application. The rest of the instant application claims recite similar features as those cited in the U.S. Patent.
An exemplary table to show similarity among the conflicting claims.
Instant Application
U.S. Patent No. 12,224,879
19. A system for adaptively controlling components associated with one or more areas of one or more facilities, the system comprising:
a system controller, including a memory device and a processor;
one or more sensors, associated with the one or more areas and communicatively coupled to the system controller;
a first subset of the components, operably coupled to the system controller;
a meeting interface, configured within an interior region of a first area and operably coupled to the system controller, wherein the meeting interface comprises a second subset of the components;
the system controller memory device further including instructions, which when executed by the processor, causes the system controller to:
receive meeting parameters associated with the first area,
receive security information associated with a second area,
continuously monitor status information associated with the one or more areas using the one or more sensors, and
automatically control a response, from any of the components, based on the meeting parameters, security information, and monitoring.
Examiner’s note: while the claim language slightly differs in both claims but both claims cover similar features of insuring security in a meeting room by continuously monitoring the meeting room to detect any changes that could impact security & applying proper security measures.
1. A system, comprising:
a local meeting space configured at a location to house one or more local occupants;
one or more remote meeting spaces configured at one or more remote locations, with respect to the location of the local meeting space, to house one or more remote occupants;
a first meeting interface configured at the local meeting space and a second meeting interface configured at the one or more remote meeting spaces;
a communication channel configured over a communication network coupled between the local meeting space, the one or more remote meeting spaces, and each of the meeting interfaces;
a system controller including a controller memory device and a processor, operably coupled to the communication channel, the meeting interfaces, the local meeting space, and the one or more remote meeting spaces, wherein the controller memory device embodies instructions stored thereon, which when executed by the processor, causes the controller to perform the steps of:
receiving meeting space usage criteria associated with the local and remote meeting spaces,
determining security parameters associated with the local and remote meeting spaces,
detecting changes to the determined security parameters associated with the local meeting space, and
disabling the communication channel between the local meeting space and one or more of the remote meeting spaces based on the detected security parameter changes associated with the local meeting space.
29. A method implemented with a system controller, having memory and a processor, for adaptively controlling components associated with one or more areas, the method comprising the steps of:
receiving, at the system controller, meeting parameters associated with a first area,
receiving, at the system controller, security information associated with a second area,
continuously monitoring, by the system controller, status information associated with the one or more areas using one or more sensors, and
automatically controlling, with the system controller, a response by any of the components based on the meeting parameters, security information, and monitoring.
Examiner’s note: while the claim language slightly differs in both claims but both claims cover similar features of insuring security in a meeting room by continuously monitoring the meeting room to detect any changes that could impact security & applying proper security measures.
9. A method implemented with a controller having a processor, the method comprising:
receiving, at the controller processor, meeting usage parameters associated with a local meeting space configured at a first location and one or more remote meeting spaces configured at a second location;
determining, by the controller processor, security parameters associated with the local and remote meeting spaces based on the received usage parameters;
detecting to the determined security parameters associated with the local and remote meeting spaces respectively, and
the controller processor automatically disabling a communication channel between the local meeting space and one or more of the remote meeting spaces based on the detected security parameter changes associated with the local meeting space.
35. A non-transitory computer readable medium having stored thereon a computer program having machine-readable instructions for adaptively controlling components associated with one or more areas, which when executed by a processor causes the computer to perform the steps comprising:
receiving, at the computer, meeting parameters associated with a first area,
receiving, at the computer, security information associated with a second area,
continuously monitoring, by the computer, status information associated with the one or more areas using one or more sensors, and
automatically controlling, with the computer, a response by any of the components based on the meeting parameters, security information, and monitoring.
Examiner’s note: while the claim language slightly differs in both claims but both claims cover similar features of insuring security in a meeting room by continuously monitoring the meeting room to detect any changes that could impact security & applying proper security measures.
14. A non-transitory computer readable medium having stored thereon a computer program having machine-readable instructions for performing, when running on a computer, steps comprising:
receiving, at the controller processor, meeting usage parameters associated with a local meeting space configured at a first location and one or more remote meeting spaces configured at a second location;
determining, by the controller processor, security parameters associated with the local and remote meeting spaces based on the received usage parameters;
the controller processor detecting changes to the determined security parameters associated with the local and remote meeting spaces respectively, and
the controller processor automatically disabling a communication channel between the local meeting space and one or more of the remote meeting spaces based on the detected security parameter changes associated with the local meeting space.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status.
The following is a quotation of the appropriate paragraphs of 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 –
(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.
Claims 19-37 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) as being anticipated by Carlos et al “Carlos”, US PGPub. No. 20170339216.
As per claims 19, 29 and 35, Carlos teaches a method, a non-transitory computer readable medium and a system for adaptively controlling components associated with one or more areas of one or more facilities (Fig. 1, Paragraph(s) [0128], [0134]) , the system comprising:
a system controller, including a memory device and a processor (Fig. 9, Paragraph(s) [0127-0130]);
one or more sensors, associated with the one or more areas and communicatively coupled to the system controller (Paragraph(s) [0015], [0052-0053], [0055]; as soon as participant 556 approaches the room or enters the room, sensor 504 and/or sensors 506a and 506b can ascertain that a new participant has entered the room.);
a first subset of the components, operably coupled to the system controller (Fig. 5, Paragraph(s) [0016], [0052]);
a meeting interface, configured within an interior region of a first area and operably coupled to the system controller, wherein the meeting interface comprises a second subset of the components (Paragraph(s) [0038], [0053], [0078]);
the system controller memory device further including instructions, which when executed by the processor, causes the system controller to:
receive meeting parameters associated with the first area (Paragraph(s) [0014], [0101]; a service provider can receive a wide variety of information associated with the state of a meeting, the state of meeting participants, and the like from different locations. The service provider 104 can apply a set of rules to the information to make a decision with respect to the current state of the meeting. Carlos further discloses in Paragraph [0065] conference rooms, sites, and devices may have their own associated security levels. Thus, a conference room with a high security level would not be an appropriate meeting location for individuals with only a low security clearance. In this instance, the system can ascertain that one or more individuals do not qualify to participate in a meeting held in a particular high security level conference room),
receive security information associated with a second area (Paragraph(s) [0075]; based on state changes within the conference room, the system can make intelligent decisions with respect to exposing assets during the content sharing session),
continuously monitor status information associated with the one or more areas using the one or more sensors (Paragraph(s) [0053], [0078]; the devices can be used for detecting participants in the meeting room, detecting participants entering and leaving the meeting room, counting participants, identifying participants, authenticating meeting participants, and the like. The devices can also have other uses such as, more generally, detecting various states associated with a meeting or meeting room, such as time of day (e.g., certain times of day may be designated for confidential meetings). To this end, the devices can include, by way of example and not limitation, RFID readers, cell phone proximity devices, clocks, Bluetooth devices, image sensors, motion sensors, biometric sensors such as room retinal readers and fingerprint scanners, sonic sensors, microphones, asset event sensors that can sense or detect asset state (e.g., changing asset states, asset interaction by a meeting participant), room event sensors (e.g., door opened or closed, window shades opened or closed, switchable glass on or off, video input/output), and the like), and
automatically control a response, from any of the components, based on the meeting parameters, security information, and monitoring (Paragraph(s) [0051], [0053], [0066], [0122]; the security level of an asset can be modified based on who provides an annotation on the asset. For example, an individual may be designated as a high-security individual such that any annotations they make on a particular asset automatically change the asset's security level to a high level. Carlos further discloses in Paragraph [0079] when a person enters a meeting room, the system can identify that a new person has entered the room and can make an intelligent decision on whether to continue to display the particular asset. For example, if the system identifies that the person who just entered the meeting room is not cleared for a particular asset or, alternatively, is unable to ascertain whether the person is cleared, the system may obfuscate the asset until a resolution can be reached as to whether the person is cleared for the asset).
As per claims 20 and 30, Carlos teaches wherein the one or more sensors are configured to determine a presence of an unauthorized electronic device (Paragraph(s) [0016], [0058]).
As per claims 21 and 31, Carlos teaches wherein the one or more sensors are configured to determine a presence of wireless communication signals (Paragraph(s) [0058]).
As per claims 22 and 32, Carlos teaches wherein the one or more sensors are configured to determine a presence of firearms or explosives (Paragraph(s) [0053]).
As per claims 23, 33 and 36, Carlos teaches wherein the system controller memory device embodies instructions, which when executed by the processor, causes the controller to determine, using the one or more sensors, that an unauthorized device is present within the first area, and wherein the automatic control of a response further comprises the system controller disabling one or more components of the second subset of components (Paragraph(s) [0056]).
As per claims 24, 34 and 37, Carlos teaches wherein the system controller memory device embodies instructions, which when executed by the processor, causes the controller to determine, using the one or more sensors, that an unauthorized device is present within the first area, and wherein the automatic control of a response further comprises the system controller powering one or more components of the first subset of components (Paragraph(s) [0053], [0056], [0066], [0072]).
As per claim 25, Carlos teaches wherein the second subset of components comprises any of one or more display devices, microphone devices, camera devices, speakerphone devices, and video teleconferencing devices (Paragraph(s) [0072], [0131]).
As per claim 26, Carlos teaches wherein the first subset of components comprises any of one or more external status displays, external in relation to the first area and one or more windows with privacy glass configured between two adjoining areas (Paragraph(s) [0053], [0074]).
As per claim 27, Carlos teaches wherein the first area and second area are configured as adjoining areas within a facility (Paragraph(s) [0050]).
As per claim 28, Carlos teaches wherein the first area and second area are configured within separate distinct facilities (Paragraph(s) [0058]).
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. Please refer to form PTO-892 (Notice of Reference Cited) for a list of relevant prior art.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to MOHAMED A WASEL whose telephone number is (571) 272-2669. The examiner can normally be reached Mon-Fri (8:00 am – 4:30 pm).
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Glenton Burgess can be reached on (571)272-3949. 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.
/MOHAMED A. WASEL/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2454
Prosecution Insights