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 § 112
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(b):
(b) CONCLUSION.—The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention.
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 1-20 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 applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the applicant), regards as the invention.
Claims 1, 2, 7, 8, 13 and 14 recites “if the signal indicates…if the signal indicates…”. It is not clear the whether the limitations after if are required by claims or not.
Claims 3-6, 9-12 and 15-20 are also affected.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
The following is a quotation of the appropriate paragraphs of 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)(1) the claimed invention was patented, described in a printed publication, or in public use, on sale, or otherwise available to the public before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claims 1-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being described by Gagvani et al (US 2009/0022362).
For claim 1, a method for cross-verification of an event at a site, the method comprising:
receiving a signal from a sensor at a site (e.g. paragraph 18: The video analytics capability of processor P can be used to confirm the presence or existence of anomalous or otherwise undesirable circumstances such as an intruder or a broken or open door or window at monitored premise MP…if alarm sensor S is a window opening sensor, such that alarm signal AS indicates that the associated window has been opened);
determining a set of possible events based on the signal (e.g. paragraph 18: The video analytics capability of processor P can be used to confirm the presence or existence of anomalous or otherwise undesirable circumstances such as an intruder or a broken or open door or window at monitored premise MP…);
identifying a camera associated with the sensor (e.g. paragraph 18: For example, if alarm sensor S is a window opening sensor, such that alarm signal AS indicates that the associated window has been opened, video data VD may be received from a camera C that includes the associated window in its field of view.); and
analyzing a video stream from the camera to determine whether an event of the set of possible events is occurring (e.g. paragraph 18: For example, video analytics techniques may be applied to video data VD to determine if the window has in fact been opened, and/or whether a person has entered (or exited) the open window.), wherein
if the video stream indicates an event of the set of possible events is occurring: identifying the event of the set of possible events; and executing a first set of instructions associated with a main process (e.g. paragraph 18: At step 140, the results of the analysis of the video data VD are used, along with other suitable parameters, to determine whether the alarm is verified. If the alarm is verified, then at step 150, an alert is generated for transmission to a recipient R. If the alarm is not verified, the processing of the alarm signal AS stops); and
if the video stream indicates no event of the set of possible events is occurring: executing a second set of instructions associated with an alternate process (e.g. paragraph 18: At step 140, the results of the analysis of the video data VD are used, along with other suitable parameters, to determine whether the alarm is verified. If the alarm is verified, then at step 150, an alert is generated for transmission to a recipient R. If the alarm is not verified, the processing of the alarm signal AS stops).
Claim 7 is rejected for the same reasons as discussed in claim 1 above, wherein paragraph 23 discloses software running on a general purpose processor.
For claim 13, Gagvani et al teach a method for cross-verification of an event at a site based on a video stream received by a bridge at the site, the bridge comprising a memory storing instructions and a processor configured to execute the instructions (e.g. paragraph 23 discloses software running on a general purpose processor.), the method comprising:
receiving, from a camera at the site, a video stream (e.g. figure 3, Camera C);
determining an event based on an analysis of the video stream (e.g. paragraph 25: For example, each camera C can analyze its own video data VD and determine that an alarm condition exists);
identifying a sensor associated with the event captured in the video stream (e.g. paragraph 18: The video analytics capability of processor P can be used to confirm the presence or existence of anomalous or otherwise undesirable circumstances such as an intruder or a broken or open door or window at monitored premise MP…if alarm sensor S is a window opening sensor, such that alarm signal AS indicates that the associated window has been opened); and
determining whether a signal from the sensor indicates the event is occurring (e.g. paragraph 18: The video analytics capability of processor P can be used to confirm the presence or existence of anomalous or otherwise undesirable circumstances such as an intruder or a broken or open door or window at monitored premise MP…if alarm sensor S is a window opening sensor, such that alarm signal AS indicates that the associated window has been opened), wherein
if the signal indicates the event is occurring, executing a first set of instructions associated with a main process (e.g. paragraph 18: At step 140, the results of the analysis of the video data VD are used, along with other suitable parameters, to determine whether the alarm is verified. If the alarm is verified, then at step 150, an alert is generated for transmission to a recipient R. If the alarm is not verified, the processing of the alarm signal AS stops); and
if the signal indicates the event is not occurring, executing a second set of instructions associated with an alternate process (e.g. paragraph 18: At step 140, the results of the analysis of the video data VD are used, along with other suitable parameters, to determine whether the alarm is verified. If the alarm is verified, then at step 150, an alert is generated for transmission to a recipient R. If the alarm is not verified, the processing of the alarm signal AS stops).
For claims 2, 8 and 14, Gagvani et al teach wherein analyzing a video stream from the camera to determine whether the event is occurring comprises determining if a condition is present, wherein:if the video stream indicates the condition is present, executing the first set of instructions; or if the video stream indicates the condition is not present, executing the second set of instructions (e.g. figure 2, step 140: Alarm verified?, yes, step 150 generate alert, no stop).
For claim 3, 9 and 15, Gagvani et al teach identify the camera associated with the sensor in response to receiving the signal (e.g. paragraph 18: For example, if alarm sensor S is a window opening sensor, such that alarm signal AS indicates that the associated window has been opened, video data VD may be received from a camera C that includes the associated window in its field of view.).
For claims 4, 10 and 16, Gagvani et al teach identifying a camera associated with the sensor is performed in response to determining the event based on the signal (e.g. paragraph 18: For example, if alarm sensor S is a window opening sensor, such that alarm signal AS indicates that the associated window has been opened, video data VD may be received from a camera C that includes the associated window in its field of view.).
For claims 5, 11 and 17, Gagvani et al teach analyzing a video stream from the camera to determine whether the event is occurring comprises retrieving at least a portion of the video stream from the memory in the bridge (e.g. paragraph 45: the camera C equipped with video analytics can merely transmit a video segment temporally associated with the receipt of alarm signal AS to the central server M. The video analytics can also be present instead at the central server M.).
For claims 6, 12 and 18, Gagvani et al teach the sensor comprises one of an electromechanical sensor, an audio sensor, a temperature sensor, a chemical sensor or a pressure sensor (e.g. paragraph 17: pressure sensor).
For claim 19, Gagvani et al teach determining whether a signal from the sensor indicates the event is occurring comprises determining whether there is a signal (e.g. paragraph 17: signal from sensors S may also be of any desired type, including motion, window/door opening, glass breakage, infrared, sound, pressure, tension, magnetic, temperature, humidity, fire or smoke, or other input devices such as security keypad, card swipe, or biometric input (iris, face, finger or palm print, etc.).
For claim 20, Gagvani et al teach a lack of signal indicates the event is not occurring. (e.g. paragraph 17: no signal should come from sensor when nothing happens).
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. Kovach (US 2005/134450).
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to DAQUAN ZHAO whose telephone number is (571)270-1119. The examiner can normally be reached M-Thur: 7:00 am-5:00 pm.
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, Thai Tran can be reached on 571-272-7382. 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.
Email: daquan.zhao1@uspto.gov.
Phone: (571)270-1119
/DAQUAN ZHAO/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2484
Prosecution Insights