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
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.
The factual inquiries for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows:
1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art.
2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue.
3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art.
4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness.
Claims 1-4, 6, 7, and 9 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kincaid et al [US 20220349245 A1] in view of Xu et al [CN 109972915 A] in further view of Blackmore [US 20230266049 A1].
As for claim 1 , Kincaid discloses a method for detecting a sabotage magnetic field (paragraphs 0027-0031), the method comprising:
in a constant closed state of a door or a window, calibrating a closing/opening sensor comprising at least a standard magnet (122), the calibrating comprises measuring, by means of a magnetometer that is mounted in the sensor, a magnetic field induction of the standard magnet along three orthogonal axes by conducting at least two measurements and determining an arithmetic mean value of the induction along each of the axes that are recorded as reference values (paragraphs 0019 and 0022),
periodically measuring current values of the magnetic field induction along each of the three axes on a constant basis (paragraphs 0022-0023),
the periodically measuring comprising
measuring arithmetic mean values of the measured current values of the magnetic field induction (paragraph 0020),
registering a quit from the constant state (paragraphs 0021 and 0027), while if other conditions are met, registering a constant open state or a return to the constant closed state (paragraphs 0027-0031), and,
after the return to the constant closed state, one-time comparing the current values of the magnetic field induction along all the three axes to the reference values, and further comparing the arithmetic mean values of the current values of the magnetic field induction to the reference values (paragraphs 0020-0023),
if the current values of the magnetic field induction are greater than the reference values, or if the arithmetic mean value of the current values of the magnetic field induction is greater than the reference values, generating a sabotage magnetic field signal (paragraphs 0027-0031).
Kincaid does not specifically disclose a reed switch, setting a noise threshold, and determining increment modules. However, claim 1 does not show that the reed switch is used. Examiner takes official notice that it was known in the art to use a reed switch when monitoring opening and closing of door or window. As such, it would have been obvious to the skilled artisan to try using a reed switch in the invention. The skilled artisan would have had good reason to pursue the known options for monitoring and calibrating that were known in the art at the time of filing the instant application. In an analogous art, Xu discloses setting a noise threshold of a magnetometer that equals at least two-fold level of a real noise of the magnetometer (pages 7 & 8; S101-S105). In yet another analogous art, Blackmore discloses determining increment modules between current and previous values of magnetic field induction alone three axes and comparing the increment modules to a set threshold (paragraphs 0073, 0083, and 0109). Having each of the references on hand, it would have been obvious to the skilled artisan to modify Kincaid to include the teachings of Xu and Blackmore in order to yield the predictable results of a method for detecting a sabotage magnetic field wherein small changes and fluctuations to the door/window can be monitored to determine if a tamper condition has occurred.
As for claim 2, Blackmore discloses the constant measurement of the current values of the magnetic field induction along each of the three axes is performed with a periodicity of at least 300 ms, while their arithmetic mean values are determined during measurement time of between 1 and 5 sec (paragraphs 0078-0082) .
Claims 3-4 are interpreted and rejected using the same reasoning as claim 1 above. The skilled artisan would have recognized how systems incorporating a reed switch for monitoring typically work.
Claims 6 and 7 are interpreted and rejected using the same reasoning as claim 1 above.
Claim 9 is interpreted and rejected using the same reasoning as claim 6 above.
Claim 8 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kincaid et al [US 20220349245 A1] in view of Xu et al [CN 109972915 A] in further view of Blackmore [US 20230266049 A1] in further view of Laporta [GB 2599903 A].
Claim 8 is interpreted and rejected using the same reasoning as claim 1 above. Kincaid, Xu and Blackmore do not specifically disclose at least two reed switches. In an analogous art, Laporta discloses at least two reed switches, registering a state of the reed switches, and comparing current state reed switch to the state registered during the calibration process (Figs 4A-C. During a normal state only a certain number of switches is activated. If a magnetic field is brought into close proximity, additional switches will be activated and an alert signal will be generated even if the arithmetic mean values do not exceed the reference values (pages 24-26, Figures 4A-C). Having each of the references on hand, it would have been obvious to the skilled artisan to modify Kincaid to include the teachings of Xu, Blackmore, and Laporta in order to yield the predictable results of a method for detecting a sabotage magnetic field wherein small changes and fluctuations to the door/window can be monitored to determine if a tamper condition has occurred.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claim 5 is objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. Each of the cited references discloses window and/or door sensors that were known in the art at the time of filing the instant application.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ERIC M BLOUNT whose telephone number is (571)272-2973. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 9:00a - 5:30p.
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, Quan Wang can be reached at 571-272-3114. 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.
ERIC M. BLOUNT
Primary Examiner
Art Unit 2685
/Eric Blount/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2685
Prosecution Insights