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 1-3, 5-13, 15-18, and 20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kulkarni et al. (EP 2879105 A1).
Claim 1, Kulkarni teaches:
A data device (Kulkarni, Fig. 1: 101-105 and 107), comprising:
an interface (Kulkarni, Fig. 1: 102) to couple the data device with a communications link (Kulkarni, Fig. 1: 106) of a fire detection system (Kulkarni, Paragraph [0023], A communications link 106 connects the control panel 100 with one or more detectors, i.e. one or more components of the fire detection system, via the detector interface 102.);
an input circuit (Kulkarni, Fig. 1: 101, 107) to detect a signal transmitted via the communications link (Kulkarni, Paragraphs [0026-0027], The loop processor 107 receives the signals received by the detector interface 102, time-multiplexes the incoming detector values, and passes the data to the processor 101.), the input circuit to record a data point associated with the signal (Kulkarni, Paragraph [0029], The processor 101 stores detector values and system condition information in the storage medium 105.);
a memory (Kulkarni, Fig. 1: 105) to store the data point (Kulkarni, Paragraph [0029]); and
an output circuit (Kulkarni, Fig. 1: 101) to transmit the data point stored in the memory to an external device (Kulkarni, Fig. 1: 110, Paragraph [0030], The processor 101 is in communication with the user interface 110 and provides the time-stamped detector values in the storage medium 105 to the user interface 110. The term “external device” is interpreted as a device that is separate from the input circuit, the memory, and the output circuit.).
Kulkarni does not explicitly teach:
A cable port and a communications cable.
As per the cable port, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, at the time of filing, for the detector interface 102 to be functionally equivalent to a cable port for facilitating communications between the control panel 100 and one or more detectors of the first detection system. As per the communications cable, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, at the time of filing, for the communication link 106 to be functionally equivalent to a communications cable for transmitting values between the one or more detectors and the detector interface 102 (see Kulkarni, Paragraphs [0023] and [0025]). Such a modification would not change the principal operation of the system, as a whole, and would yield predictable results.
Claim 2, Kulkarni further teaches:
The data device of claim 1, comprising:
a time circuit to apply at least one of a date or a time to the data point stored in the memory (Kulkarni, Paragraphs [0029] and [0036], The processor 101 time-stamps the periodically sampled detector value or values and the system condition information.), the at least one of the date and time based on when the data device receives the signal via the communications cable (Kulkarni, Paragraphs [0029] and [0036], When the processor 101 samples the values and/or information, the values and/or information are time-stamped.).
Claim 3, Kulkarni further teaches:
The data device of claim 1, comprising:
the data point stored by the memory comprises raw data associated with the signal, the signal transmitted by a device coupled with the communications cable (Kulkarni, Paragraph [0025], The signals include the detector values relating to the parameters that are measured by the sensing elements, which is equivalent to raw data.), the device comprising at least one of a smoke detector, a heat detector, a fire detector, a sprinkler sensor, a hose reel sensor, a pull-down sensor, a break glass sensor, or a module that controls a fire door (Kulkarni, Paragraph [0024], An example detector is a smoke detector.).
Claim 5, Kulkarni further teaches:
The data device of claim 1, comprising:
an output port comprising at least one of a wired or wireless connection to transfer the data point to the external device (Kulkarni, Paragraph [0030], It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, at the time of filing, for the connection between the processor 101 and the user interface 110, which allows for values and information stored in storage medium 105 to be retrieved by the user interface 110, to be functionally equivalent to an output port. Such a modification would not change the principal operation of the system, as a whole, and would yield predictable results. Additionally, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, at the time of filing, for the communication between processor 101 and the user interface 110 to be wired or wireless.).
Claim 6, Kulkarni further teaches:
The data device of claim 1, comprising:
the data device to be disposed in a fire panel of the fire detection system (Kulkarni, Fig. 1, Paragraph [0022], The components 101-105 and 107 are disposed in a fire control panel 100.).
Claim 7, Kulkarni further teaches:
The data device of claim 1, comprising:
the data device to be coupled with the communications cable at any location along the communications cable (Kulkarni, Paragraph [0023], One example of “any” location is an end of a loop of a group of detectors connected via series.).
Claim 8, Kulkarni further teaches:
The data device of claim 1, comprising:
the memory to store a plurality of data points, including the data point, the plurality of data points associated with a plurality of signals, including the signal (Kulkarni, Paragraphs [0028-0029], Each of the time-stamped value and/or information is stored in the storage medium 105. As shown in Fig. 3, the plurality of values and/or information are displayed graphically via graphical display 114 (see Kulkarni, Paragraphs [0031-0032]).); and
a filter to filter the plurality of data points to facilitate detection of a faulty device coupled with the communications cable (Kulkarni, Fig. 3: “False alarm??”, Paragraph [0040], The fire detection system is able to determine false alarms, and it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, at the time of filing, for the identification of false alarms to be functionally equivalent to a filter. Additionally, the identification of false alarms could be indicative of a faulty device, e.g. smoke detectors in kitchens.).
Claim 9, Kulkarni further teaches:
The data device of claim 1, comprising:
no power supply port to provide power to the external device (Kulkarni, Fig. 1, It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, at the time of filing, because of an absence of a power supply shown in Fig. 1 and in the disclosure of Kulkarni for no power supply port to be provided to the external device via the control panel 100.).
Claim 10, Kulkarni teaches:
A method of monitoring a fire detection system (Kulkarni, Fig. 1), comprising:
detecting, by a data device (Kulkarni, Fig. 1: 101-105 and 107), a signal transmitted via a communications link (Kulkarni, Fig. 1: 106) of the fire detection system (Kulkarni, Paragraphs [0026-0027], The loop processor 107 receives the signals received by the detector interface 102, time-multiplexes the incoming detector values, and passes the data to the processor 101.), the data device communicably and electrically coupled with the communications link (Kulkarni, Paragraph [0023], A communications link 106 connects the control panel 100 with one or more detectors, i.e. one or more components of the fire detection system, via the detector interface 102.);
recording, by the data device, a data point associated with the signal (Kulkarni, Paragraph [0029], The processor 101 stores detector values and system condition information in the storage medium 105.);
storing, by the data device, the data point (Kulkarni, Paragraph [0029], The processor 101 stores detector values and system condition information in the storage medium 105.); and
outputting, by the data device, the data point to an external device (Kulkarni, Fig. 1: 110, Paragraph [0030], The processor 101 is in communication with the user interface 110 and provides the time-stamped detector values in the storage medium 105 to the user interface 110. The term “external device” is interpreted as a device that is separate from the input circuit, the memory, and the output circuit.).
Kulkarni does not explicitly teach:
A communications cable.
As per the communications cable, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, at the time of filing, for the communication link 106 to be functionally equivalent to a communications cable for transmitting values between the one or more detectors and the detector interface 102 (see Kulkarni, Paragraphs [0023] and [0025]). Such a modification would not change the principal operation of the system, as a whole, and would yield predictable results.
Claim 11, Kulkarni further teaches:
The method of claim 10, comprising:
applying, by the data device, a time stamp to the data point based on when the data device detects the signal via the communications cable (Kulkarni, Paragraphs [0029] and [0036], When the processor 101 samples the values and/or information, the values and/or information are time-stamped.).
Claim 12, Kulkarni further teaches:
The method of claim 10, comprising:
recording, by the data device, a plurality of data points, including the data point, the plurality of data points associated with a plurality of signals, including the signal (Kulkarni, Paragraphs [0028-0029], Each of the time-stamped value and/or information is stored in the storage medium 105. As shown in Fig. 3, the plurality of values and/or information are displayed graphically via graphical display 114 (see Kulkarni, Paragraphs [0031-0032]).); and
filtering the plurality of data points to facilitate detection of a faulty device coupled with the communications cable (Kulkarni, Fig. 3: “False alarm??”, Paragraph [0040], The fire detection system is able to determine false alarms, and it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, at the time of filing, for the identification of false alarms to be functionally equivalent to a filter. Additionally, the identification of false alarms could be indicative of a faulty device, e.g. smoke detectors in kitchens.).
Claim 13, Kulkarni further teaches:
The method of claim 10, comprising:
communicably coupling the data device with the external device via at least one of a wired or wireless connection to transmit the data point to the external device (Kulkarni, Paragraph [0030], It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, at the time of filing, for the communication between processor 101 and the user interface 110 to be wired or wireless. Such a modification would not change the principal operation of the system, as a whole, and would yield predictable results.).
Claim 15, Kulkarni further teaches:
The method of claim 10, comprising:
coupling the data device to a portion of the communications cable, the portion of the communications cable disposed in a fire panel (Kulkarni, Fig. 1, Paragraph [0022], The components 101-105 and 107 are disposed in a fire control panel 100.).
Claim 16, Kulkarni teaches:
A fire detection system (Kulkarni, Fig. 1), comprising:
a fire panel (Kulkarni, Fig. 1: 100);
a device disposed remote from the fire panel (Kulkarni, Paragraph [0023], The one or more detectors communicate with the control panel 100 via communication link 106. The one or more detectors are installed in many different locations (see Kulkarni, Paragraph [0004]).);
a communications link (Kulkarni, Fig. 1: 106) coupling the fire panel with the device, the device to transmit a signal via the communications link (Kulkarni, Paragraph [0023], A communications link 106 connects the control panel 100 with one or more detectors, i.e. one or more components of the fire detection system, via the detector interface 102.); and
a data device (Kulkarni, Fig. 1: 101-105 and 107) to couple with the communications link (Kulkarni, Fig. 1: 102, 106), the data device comprising:
an input circuit (Kulkarni, Fig. 1: 101, 107) to detect the signal transmitted via the communications link (Kulkarni, Paragraphs [0026-0027], The loop processor 107 receives the signals received by the detector interface 102, time-multiplexes the incoming detector values, and passes the data to the processor 101.), the input circuit to record a data point associated with the signal (Kulkarni, Paragraph [0029], The processor 101 stores detector values and system condition information in the storage medium 105.);
a memory (Kulkarni, Fig. 1: 105) to store the data point (Kulkarni, Paragraph [0029]); and
an output circuit (Kulkarni, Fig. 1: 101) to transmit the data point stored in the memory to an external device (Kulkarni, Fig. 1: 110, Paragraph [0030], The processor 101 is in communication with the user interface 110 and provides the time-stamped detector values in the storage medium 105 to the user interface 110. The term “external device” is interpreted as a device that is separate from the input circuit, the memory, and the output circuit.).
Kulkarni does not explicitly teach:
A communications cable.
As per the communications cable, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, at the time of filing, for the communication link 106 to be functionally equivalent to a communications cable for transmitting values between the one or more detectors and the detector interface 102 (see Kulkarni, Paragraphs [0023] and [0025]). Such a modification would not change the principal operation of the system, as a whole, and would yield predictable results.
Claim 17, Kulkarni further teaches:
The fire detection system of claim 16, comprising:
a plurality of devices including the device, the plurality of devices coupled with the communications cable (Kulkarni, Paragraph [0023], The one or more detectors are connected to control panel 100 via the communication link 106.); and
the memory of the data device to store a plurality of data points generated by the plurality of devices (Kulkarni, Paragraphs [0028-0029]).
Claim 18, Kulkarni further teaches:
The fire detection system of claim 16, comprising:
the data device comprising a time circuit to apply at least one of a date or a time to the data point stored in the memory (Kulkarni, Paragraphs [0029] and [0036], The processor 101 time-stamps the periodically sampled detector value or values and the system condition information.), the at least one of the date or the time based on when the signal is transmitted via the communications cable (Kulkarni, Paragraphs [0029] and [0036], When the processor 101 samples the values and/or information, the values and/or information are time-stamped.).
Claim 20, Kulkarni further teaches:
The fire detection system of claim 16, comprising:
the data device disposed in the fire panel (Kulkarni, Fig. 1, Paragraph [0022], The components 101-105 and 107 are disposed in a fire control panel 100.).
Claims 4, 14, and 19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kulkarni et al. (EP 2879105 A1) in view of Dicke et al. (U.S. 2016/0214051 A1).
Claim 4, Kulkarni teaches:
The data device of claim 1.
Kulkarni does not specifically teach:
Comprising:
the data device is to receive operating power from the communications cable.
Dicke teaches:
A device is to receive operating power from the communications cable (Dicke, Paragraph [0080], The control system 13 can receive power via a USB-cable, which is equivalent to a communications cable.).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, at the time of filing, to modify the one or more detectors in Kulkarni by integrating the teaching of a USB-cable, as taught by Dicke.
The motivation would be to provide power to the one or more detectors in order to operate according to their intended function (see Dicke, Paragraph [0080]).
Claim 14, Kulkarni teaches:
The method of claim 10.
Kulkarni does not specifically teach:
Comprising:
receiving, by the data device, operating power from the communications cable.
Dicke teaches:
A device is to receive operating power from the communications cable (Dicke, Paragraph [0080], The control system 13 can receive power via a USB-cable, which is equivalent to a communications cable.).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, at the time of filing, to modify the one or more detectors in Kulkarni by integrating the teaching of a USB-cable, as taught by Dicke.
The motivation would be to provide power to the one or more detectors in order to operate according to their intended function (see Dicke, Paragraph [0080]).
Claim 19, Kulkarni teaches:
The fire detection system of claim 16.
Kulkarni does not specifically teach:
Comprising:
the communications cable to receive power from a fire panel power source; and
the data device to receive the power from the communications cable, the data device to operate based on the power from the communications cable.
Dicke teaches:
A cable to receive power from a power source (Dicke, Paragraph [0080]).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, at the time of filing, to modify the control panel in Kulkarni by integrating the teaching of power sources, as taught by Dicke.
The motivation would be to provide power to the control panel in order to operate according to their intended function (see Dicke, Paragraph [0080]).
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JAMES J YANG whose telephone number is (571)270-5170. The examiner can normally be reached 9:30am-6:00p M-F.
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.
/JAMES J YANG/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2686
Prosecution Insights