DETAILED ACTION
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 .
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
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.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 103 which forms the basis for all obviousness rejections set forth in this Office action:
A patent for a claimed invention may not be obtained, notwithstanding that the claimed invention is not identically disclosed as set forth in section 102, if the differences between the claimed invention and the prior art are such that the claimed invention as a whole would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which the claimed invention pertains. Patentability shall not be negated by the manner in which the invention was made.
Claims 1, 2, 5, 6, and 15-17 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Park (Pub # US2016/0140823 A1), and further in view of Ford et al. (Pub # US2013/0301975 A1).
Consider claim 1, Park teaches a disaster warning system comprising a plurality of evacuation guidance signboard poles (100, Fig. 3a and 200, Fig. 2) [0050-0051] and a central server (control room) (200, Fig. 5) configured to manage the plurality of evacuation guidance signboard poles, the disaster warning system being configured to perform evacuation guidance for a disaster victim by the evacuation guidance signboard poles and the central server when a disaster (fire emergency) occurs (Fig. 6) [0101-0104], wherein each of the plurality of evacuation guidance signboard poles includes a warning device configured to announce occurrence of the disaster (speaker) (112, Fig. 5) with use of at least one of sound and light (beam output unit and LED) (113 and 114, Fig. 5), and a control unit (117, Fig. 5) configured to control the evacuation guidance signboard pole, the control unit of each of the evacuation guidance signboard poles can control the warning device included in the evacuation guidance signboard pole to which the control unit belongs [0096], and can communicate (communication uni) (119, Fig. 5) with the central server (control room) (200, Fig. 5) [0101].
Park does not teach the control unit performs its predetermined communication for accessing the central server at every predetermined timings, and performs the predetermined communication in a state where the evacuation guidance signboard poles are synchronized with one another, and, at the same time, reads its status managed by the central server, the status for each of the control units includes a warning status according to which an operation of the warning device is determined, the warning status for each of the control units makes it possible to arbitrarily set whether to stop or activate the warning device, and, when the control unit of each of the evacuation guidance signboard poles receives the status through the predetermined communication and the warning status of the received status is activation, the control unit causes the warning device to perform an announcement operation.
In the same field of endeavor, Ford et al. teaches the control unit (computer) (110, Fig. performs its predetermined communication for accessing the central server at every predetermined timings, and performs the predetermined communication in a state where the evacuation guidance signboard poles (114-120, Fig. 1) are synchronized with one another [0038 and 0039], and, at the same time, reads its status managed by the central server, the status for each of the control units includes a warning status (emergency level) according to which an operation of the warning device is determined [0042], the warning status for each of the control units makes it possible to arbitrarily set whether to stop or activate the warning device, and, when the control unit of each of the evacuation guidance signboard poles receives the status through the predetermined communication and the warning status of the received status is activation, the control unit causes the warning device to perform an announcement operation [0047] for the benefit of allowing an authorized emergency operator to manage multiple evacuation devices, select affected devices, and activate or stop their warning from central location.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to include the control unit performs its predetermined communication for accessing the central server at every predetermined timings, and performs the predetermined communication in a state where the evacuation guidance signboard poles are synchronized with one another, and, at the same time, reads its status managed by the central server, the status for each of the control units includes a warning status according to which an operation of the warning device is determined, the warning status for each of the control units makes it possible to arbitrarily set whether to stop or activate the warning device, and, when the control unit of each of the evacuation guidance signboard poles receives the status through the predetermined communication and the warning status of the received status is activation, the control unit causes the warning device to perform an announcement operation as shown in Ford et al., in Park device for the benefit of allowing an authorized emergency operator to manage multiple evacuation devices, select affected devices, and activate or stop their warning from central location.
Consider claim 2, Park teaches the disaster warning system comprising an evacuation guidance signboard pole (100, Fig, 5) capable of communicating with a central server (200, Fig. 5), the disaster warning system being configured to perform evacuation guidance for a disaster victim by the evacuation guidance signboard pole when a disaster occurs [0048-0049], wherein the evacuation guidance signboard pole includes a warning device configured to announce occurrence of the disaster with use of at least one of sound (speaker) (112, Fig. 5) and light (LED unit) (114, Fig. 5), and a control unit (117, Fig. 5) configured to control the evacuation guidance signboard pole, the control unit (117, Fig. 5) can control the warning device included in the evacuation guidance signboard pole and can communicate (119, Fig. 5) with the central server (200, Fig. 5) configured to give an operation instruction for the control unit (117, Fig. 5) [0086 and 0096], and when the control unit receives the status through the predetermined communication and the warning status is activation, the control unit causes the warning device to perform an announcement operation [0069].
Park does not teach the control unit performs its predetermined communication for accessing the central server at every predetermined timings, and reads a status managed by the central server, the status includes a warning status according to which an operation of the warning device is determined, the warning status makes it possible to arbitrarily set whether to stop or activate the warning device.
In the same field of endeavor, Ford et al. teaches the control unit performs its predetermined communication for accessing the central server at every predetermined timings [0042], and reads a status managed by the central server, the status includes a warning status according to which an operation of the warning device is determined, the warning status makes it possible to arbitrarily set whether to stop or activate the warning device [0042 and 0091] for the benefit of allowing an authorized emergency operator to manage multiple evacuation devices, select affected devices, and activate or stop their warning from central location.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to include the control unit performs its predetermined communication for accessing the central server at every predetermined timings, and reads a status managed by the central server, the status includes a warning status according to which an operation of the warning device is determined, the warning status makes it possible to arbitrarily set whether to stop or activate the warning device as shown in Ford et al. in Park device for the benefit of allowing an authorized emergency operator to manage multiple evacuation devices, select affected devices, and activate or stop their warning from central location.
Consider claims 5 and 6, Park teaches the disaster warning system, wherein the warning status is set to stoppage in a normal state and when the disaster has ceased [0116-0117].
Park does not teach that the control unit stops the warning device when the control unit receives the status through the predetermined communication and the warning status is stoppage.
In the same field of endeavor, Ford et al. teaches the control unit stops the warning device when the control unit receives the status through the predetermined communication (by an authorized operator) and the warning status is stoppage [0042 and 0045] for the benefit of resuming normal operation after disaster status change.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to include the control unit stops the warning device when the control unit receives the status through the predetermined communication and the warning status is stoppage as shown in Ford et al., in Park device for the benefit of resuming normal operation after disaster status change.
Consider claim 15, Park teaches similar invention.
Park does not teach the disaster warning system, wherein the central server sorts a plurality of the control units into arbitrarily-created groups and manages the control units, and the central server simultaneously changes the warning statuses for each of the groups.
In the same field of endeavor, Ford et al. teaches wherein the central server sorts a plurality of the control units into arbitrarily-created groups and manages the control units [0041], and the central server simultaneously changes the warning statuses for each of the groups [0041-0042, and 0050] for the benefit of activating al warning devices in a selected disaster area through operation and avoid individually changing each device’s status.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to include wherein the central server sorts a plurality of the control units into arbitrarily-created groups and manages the control units, and the central server simultaneously changes the warning statuses for each of the groups as shown in Ford et al., in Park device for the benefit of activating al warning devices in a selected disaster area through operation and avoid individually changing each device’s status.
Consider claims 16 and 17, Park clearly shown and disclose the disaster warning system, wherein the control unit includes a preliminary power supply unit (118, Fig. 5) configured to, when supply of power is interrupted, supply power instead [0099-0100].
Claims 3 and 4 rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Park (Pub # US 2016/0148023 A1) in view of Ford et al. (Pub # US 2013/0307975 A1) as applied to claims 1 and 2 above, and further in view of Carballido Villaverde et al. (Pub # US 2021/0142630 A1) (here after refer as Carballido).
Consider claims 3 and 4, Park and Ford et al. combined reference teaches similar invention.
Park and Ford et al. combined reference does not teach the disaster warning system, wherein the evacuation guidance signboard pole includes an indication board indicating, for the disaster victim, a safety place and a disaster that can be covered.
In the same field of endeavor, Carballido teaches wherein the evacuation guidance signboard pole includes an indication board indicating, for the disaster victim, a safety place and a disaster that can be covered [0003-0006 and 0030-0031] for the benefit of including information identifying the nearest safe exit and the relevant disaster.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to include the disaster warning system, wherein the evacuation guidance signboard pole includes an indication board indicating, for the disaster victim, a safety place and a disaster that can be covered as shown in Carbellido, in Park and Ford et al. combined device for the benefit of including information identifying the nearest safe exit and the relevant disaster.
Claims 7-10 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Park (Pub # US 2016/0148023 A1) in view of Ford et al. (Pub # US 2013/0307975 A1) as applied to claims 1 and 2 above, and further in view of Date et al. (Pub # US 2022/0101701 A1).
Consider claims 7 and 8, Park teaches the disaster warning system, wherein the warning device performs announcement with use of sound, the control unit includes a storage unit in which messages to be reproduced at a time of causing the warning device to perform the announcement operation are saved, the control unit assigns message identification information to each of the messages and manages the message [0068-0069].
Park and Ford et al. combined reference does not teach the status further includes the message identification information, the control unit receives the status through the predetermined communication so as to acquire the warning status and the message identification information, and, when the acquired warning status is set to activation, the control unit causes the warning device to perform the announcement operation so as to reproduce the message corresponding to the message identification information.
In the same field of endeavor, Date et al. teaches the status further includes the message identification information (audio-file library) [0015], the control unit receives the status through the predetermined communication so as to acquire the warning status and the message identification information, and, when the acquired warning status is set to activation, the control unit (12, Fig. 2) causes the warning device to perform the announcement operation so as to reproduce the message corresponding to the message identification information [0030 and 0033] for the benefit of identifying and retrieve the particular audio file corresponding to the received alarm instruction.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to include the status further includes the message identification information, the control unit receives the status through the predetermined communication so as to acquire the warning status and the message identification information, and, when the acquired warning status is set to activation, the control unit causes the warning device to perform the announcement operation so as to reproduce the message corresponding to the message identification information as shown in Date et al., in Park and Ford et al. combined device for the benefit of identifying and retrieve the particular audio file corresponding to the received alarm instruction.
Consider claims 9 and 10, Park and Ford et al. combined reference teaches similar invention.
Park and Ford et al. combined reference does not teach the disaster warning system, wherein the message can be subjected to at least one of addition, change, and deletion through communication with the central server.
In the same field of endeavor, Date et al. teaches wherein the message can be subjected to at least one of addition (adding the received audio file) [0009], change (configuring the device with new message) [0033], and deletion (transferring audio file) through communication with the central server [0038] for the benefit of providing an update to the system.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to include the disaster warning system, wherein the message can be subjected to at least one of addition, change, and deletion through communication with the central server as shown in Date et al., in Park and Ford et al. combined device for the benefit of providing an update to the system.
Claims 11 and 12 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Park (Pub # US 2016/0148023 A1) in view of Ford et al. (Pub # US 2013/0307975 A1) as applied to claim 1 and 2 above, and further in view of Dumet et al. (Pub # US 2009/0201936 A1).
Consider claims and 11 and 12, Park and Ford et al. combined reference teaches similar invention.
Park and Ford et al. combined reference does not teach the disaster warning system, wherein the control unit includes a clock configured to measure the predetermined timings for the predetermined communication, and the clock is synchronized to keep accurate time through at least one of communication with an NTP server via the Internet and access to the central server.
In the same field of endeavor, Dumet et al. teaches wherein the control unit includes a clock configured to measure the predetermined timings for the predetermined communication, and the clock is synchronized to keep accurate time through at least one of communication with an NTP server via the Internet and access to the central server [0025, 0049, and 0067] for the benefit of accurately measure the polling interval.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to include wherein the control unit includes a clock configured to measure the predetermined timings for the predetermined communication, and the clock is synchronized to keep accurate time through at least one of communication with an NTP server via the Internet and access to the central server as shown in Demet et al., in Park and Ford et al. combined device for the benefit of accurately measure the polling interval.
Claims 13 and 14 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Park (Pub # US 2016/0148023 A1) in view of Ford et al. (Pub # US 2013/0307975 A1) and Dumet et al. (Pub # US 2009/0201936 A1) as applied to claim 11 and 12 above, and further in view of Ho et al. (Pub # US 2021/0018970 A1).
Consider claims and 13 and 14, the combined reference teaches similar invention.
The combined references do not teach the disaster warning system, wherein the clock includes a battery configured to, when supply of power is interrupted owing to disconnection of a power supply, supply power instead.
In the same field of endeavor, Ho et al. teaches wherein the clock includes a battery configured to, when supply of power is interrupted owing to disconnection of a power supply, supply power instead [0017-0018] for the benefit maintain clock operation when primary power is unavailable.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to include wherein the clock includes a battery configured to, when supply of power is interrupted owing to disconnection of a power supply, supply power instead as shown in Ho et al., in the combined device for the benefit maintain clock operation when primary power is unavailable.
Claim 18 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Park (Pub # US 2016/0148023 A1) in view of Ford et al. (Pub # US 2013/0307975 A1) as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Yang et al. (Pub # US 2019/0104044 A1).
Consider claim 18, Park and Ford et al. combined reference teaches similar invention.
Park and Ford et al. combined reference does not teach the disaster warning system, wherein the central server determines a failure state of the control unit according to whether or not the control unit has notified the central server of an operation situation of the control unit at each of specific timings.
In the same field of endeavor, Yang et al. teaches wherein the central server determines a failure state of the control unit according to whether or not the control unit has notified the central server of an operation situation of the control unit at each of specific timings [0017-0020] for the benefit of determining a control unit status and facilitating maintenance when needed.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to include wherein the central server determines a failure state of the control unit according to whether or not the control unit has notified the central server of an operation situation of the control unit at each of specific timings as shown in Yang et al., in Park and Ford et al. combined device for the benefit of determining a control unit status and facilitating maintenance when needed.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JACK K WANG whose telephone number is (571)272-1938. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 9AM - 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.
/JACK K WANG/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2686
Prosecution Insights