`
`UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE
`
`UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
`United States Patent and Trademark Office
`Address: COMIVHSSIONER FOR PATENTS
`PO. Box 1450
`Alexandria1 Virginia 22313-1450
`wwwusptogov
`
`
`
`
`
`14/670,307
`
`03/26/2015
`
`Hiroshi Kanamaru
`
`731156421
`
`4826
`
`Seed IP Law Group LLPflDanasonic
`701 Fifth Avenue, Suite 5400
`Seattle, WA 98104
`
`REN’ ZHUBING
`
`PAPER NUIVIBER
`
`ART UNIT
`
`2483
`
`NOTIFICATION DATE
`
`DELIVERY MODE
`
`11/17/2016
`
`ELECTRONIC
`
`Please find below and/or attached an Office communication concerning this application or proceeding.
`
`The time period for reply, if any, is set in the attached communication.
`
`Notice of the Office communication was sent electronically on above—indicated "Notification Date" to the
`following e—mail address(es):
`
`patentinfo @ seedip.c0m
`
`PTOL—90A (Rev. 04/07)
`
`

`

`
`
`Applicant(s)
`Application No.
` 14/670,307 KANAMARU ET AL.
`
`Examiner
`Art Unit
`AIA (First Inventor to File)
`Office Action Summary
`
`ZHUBING REN $2213 2483
`
`-- The MAILING DA TE of this communication appears on the cover sheet with the correspondence address --
`Period for Reply
`
`
`
`A SHORTENED STATUTORY PERIOD FOR REPLY IS SET TO EXPIRE g MONTHS FROM THE MAILING DATE OF
`THIS COMMUNICATION.
`Extensions of time may be available under the provisions of 37 CFR1. 136( a).
`after SIX () MONTHS from the mailing date of this communication.
`If NO period for reply is specified above, the maximum statutory period will apply and will expire SIX (6) MONTHS from the mailing date of this communication.
`-
`- Failure to reply within the set or extended period for reply will, by statute, cause the application to become ABANDONED (35 U.S.C. § 133).
`Any reply received by the Office later than three months after the mailing date of this communication, even if timely filed, may reduce any
`earned patent term adjustment. See 37 CFR 1 .704(b).
`
`In no event, however, may a reply be timely filed
`
`Status
`
`1)IZI Responsive to communication(s) filed on 10/25/2016.
`El A declaration(s)/affidavit(s) under 37 CFR 1.130(b) was/were filed on
`
`2b)|:l This action is non-final.
`2a)|Z| This action is FINAL.
`3)I:I An election was made by the applicant in response to a restriction requirement set forth during the interview on
`
`; the restriction requirement and election have been incorporated into this action.
`
`4)|:| Since this application is in condition for allowance except for formal matters, prosecution as to the merits is
`
`closed in accordance with the practice under Exparte Quay/e, 1935 CD. 11, 453 O.G. 213.
`
`Disposition of Claims*
`
`5)IZI Claim(s) 10 11 13-15 18 19 21-23 and 28-37is/are pending in the application.
`5a) Of the above claim(s)
`is/are withdrawn from consideration.
`
`is/are allowed.
`6)I:I Claim(s)
`
`7)|Z| Claim(s) 10 11 13-1518 19 21 -23 and28-37is/are rejected.
`
`8)|:I Claim(s)_ is/are objected to.
`* If any)claims have been determined allowable, you may be eligible to benefit from the Patent Prosecution Highway program at a
`
`
`
`()
`
`are subject to restriction and/or election requirement.
`
`participating intellectual property office for the corresponding application. For more information, please see
`
`
`
`:/'/\W¢W.LISI>I‘.0. ovI’ atentS/init events/
`hI/index.‘s orsend an inquiryto PPI-iieedback{®usgtc.00v.
`
`hit
`
`Application Papers
`
`10)I:l The specification is objected to by the Examiner.
`11)I:l The drawing(s) filed on
`is/are: a)I:I accepted or b)I:I objected to by the Examiner.
`Applicant may not request that any objection to the drawing(s) be held in abeyance. See 37 CFR 1.85(a).
`
`Replacement drawing sheet(s) including the correction is required if the drawing(s) is objected to. See 37 CFR 1.121 (d).
`
`Priority under 35 U.S.C. § 119
`
`12)IXI Acknowledgment is made of a claim for foreign priority under 35 U.S.C. § 119(a)-(d) or (f).
`Certified copies:
`
`a)IZl All
`
`b)|:l Some” c)I:l None of the:
`
`1.IXI Certified copies of the priority documents have been received.
`2.|:l Certified copies of the priority documents have been received in Application No.
`3.|:| Copies of the certified copies of the priority documents have been received in this National Stage
`
`application from the International Bureau (PCT Rule 17.2(a)).
`** See the attached detailed Office action for a list of the certified copies not received.
`
`Attachment(s)
`
`3) D Interview Summary (PTO-413)
`1) D Notice of References Cited (PTO-892)
`Paper No(s)/Mai| Date.
`.
`.
`4) I:I Other'
`2) E InformatIon DIsclosure Statement(s) (PTO/SB/08a and/or PTO/SB/08b)
`Paper No(s)/Mai| Date
`US. Patent and Trademark Office
`PTOL—326 (Rev. 11-13)
`
`Office Action Summary
`
`Part of Paper No./Mai| Date 20161108
`
`

`

`Application/Control Number: 14/670,307
`
`Art Unit: 2483
`
`Page 2
`
`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
`
`Summary
`
`1.
`
`2.
`
`3.
`
`This action is in reply to Applicant’s Amendments and Remarks filed on 10/25/2016.
`
`Claims 10, 11, 13-15, 18, 19, 21-23, and 28-37 are pending.
`
`Response to Arguments
`
`Applicant filed terminal disclaimer. Therefore, the provisional nonstatutory double patenting
`
`rejections are withdrawn.
`
`4.
`
`Applicant's arguments with respect to claim limitation “the DECT master device, when receiving a
`
`request from the smartphone via the Wireless router, transmits detailed information about the abnormality
`
`detection signal different from the notification information, via the Wireless router, to the smartphone for
`
`display” recited in claims 10, 11, 18 and 19 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
`
`Applicants contend that Nakamura is silent to the claimed feature above (Applicants’ Remarks dated
`
`10/25/2016, p. 9-11). However, the Examiner respectfully disagrees. Paragraphs 0244, 0303, FIG. 9 and
`
`16-18 of Nakamura disclose the DECT master device, when receiving a request [e.g. [0303]; e.g.
`
`command for enlarge/reduce the taken image] from the smartphone via the wireless router, transmits
`
`detailed information [e.g. enlarged image of the person’s face portion] about the abnormality detection
`
`signal different from the notification information [e.g. before enlarged image], via the wireless router, to
`
`the smartphone for display [e.g. [0244]; displaying the images taken by camera 23].
`
`5.
`
`During patent examination, the pending claims must be "given their broadest reasonable
`
`interpretation consistent with the specification." Phillips v. AWH Corp., 415 F.3d 1303, at 1316 (Fed. Cir.
`
`2005). See also In re Hyatt, 211 F.3d 1367, 1372, 54 USPQ2d 1664, 1667 (Fed. Cir. 2000).
`
`Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
`
`6.
`
`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
`
`

`

`Application/Control Number: 14/670,307
`
`Art Unit: 2483
`
`Page 3
`
`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.
`
`7.
`
`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 of this title, 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.
`
`8.
`
`Claim 10, 11, 15, 18, 19, 28, 30, 32, 34 and 36 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being
`
`unpatentable over Nakamura et al (US 20060209176 A1 in view of Hundal (US 20050197061 A1)
`
`Regarding claim 10, Nakamura discloses a monitoring camera [e.g. FIG. 2; 1]
`
`including an
`
`imager [e.g. 23] and a DECT (Digital Enhanced Cordless Telecommunications) compliant communicator
`
`[e.g. FIG. 1-3; e.g. LAN system]; and a DECT master device [e.g. 25] that, in operation [e.g. [0091]],
`
`performs wireless communication with the monitoring camera according to a DECT communications
`
`protocol [e.g. FIG. 3; e.g. wireless communication], wherein the monitoring camera [e.g. FIG. 3;
`
`[0239]; cameras], when detecting an abnormal state [e.g. FIG. 16 and 17; e.g. abnormality] of the
`
`monitoring camera, transmits an abnormality detection signal [e.g. FIG. 17] to the DECT master device,
`
`and the DECT master device, when receiving the abnormality detection signal, generates notification
`
`information [e.g. [0119]; e.g. abnormality notice] based on the abnormality detection signal, and
`
`transmits the notification information, via a wireless router [e.g. FIG. 2; e.g. 13], to a smartphone [e.g. 12;
`
`[0091]; cellular phone] to display a warning screen [e.g. FIG. 2 and 15; [0230-233 and 244]] based on
`
`the notification information on the smartphone, wherein the smartphone is connectable to a mobile phone
`
`network [e.g. 13]
`
`to communicate with other mobile telephones [e.g. [210]; e.g. cellular phones], and
`
`the DECT master device, when receiving a request [e.g. [0303]; e.g. command for enlarge/reduce the
`
`taken image] from the smartphone via the wireless router, transmits detailed information [e.g. enlarged
`
`image of the person’s face portion] about the abnormality detection signal different from the notification
`
`

`

`Application/Control Number: 14/670,307
`
`Art Unit: 2483
`
`Page 4
`
`information [e.g. before enlarged image], via the wireless router, to the smartphone for display [e.g.
`
`[0244]; displaying the images taken by camera 23].
`
`Although Nakamura discloses a Digital Enhanced communicator DECT master device
`
`communicates with cellular phone, it is noted that Nakamura differs to the present invention in that
`
`Nakamura fails to disclose a cordless handset.
`
`However, Hundal (US 20050197061 A1) teaches the well-known concept of a Digital Enhanced
`
`communicator DECT master device [e.g. FIGURE 4; 410] performs wireless communication [e.g. [0007];
`
`wireless communication] with one or more DECT cordless handsets [e.g. 411] according to the DECT
`
`communications protocol [e.g. FIG. 5; [0023]; protocol], and is connected to a fixed telephone network
`
`[e.g. FIGURE 4; [0022 and 0038]; e.g. cordless/wireless radio link] to communicate with other fixed
`
`telephones [e.g. multiple 411].
`
`It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of
`
`the invention to modify the monitoring system disclosed by Nakamura to exploit the well-known concept
`
`of cordless set telephone network technique taught by Hundal as above, in order to provide exchanging
`
`data and audio between landline telephones and various electronic devices [See Hundal; [0002]].
`
`Regarding claim 11, this claim is an apparatus that performs the same limitations cited in claim 10,
`
`the rejection of which are incorporated herein. Furthermore, Nakamura discloses a monitoring camera
`
`[e.g. FIG. 2-4; 23] comprising: a sensor [e.g. FIG. 16; e.g. 50a] detecting an abnormal state [e.g. FIG. 16
`
`and 17; e.g. abnormality].
`
`Regarding claim 15, Nakamura further discloses the sensor detects an abnormal state of the
`
`sensor when detecting that a remaining battery level of the sensor is below a defined threshold [e.g. FIG.
`
`3 and 4; [0104]].
`
`Regarding claim 18, this claim is the method of the apparatus version as applied to claim 10
`
`above, wherein the method performs the same limitations cited in claim 10, the rejection of which are
`
`incorporated herein.
`
`

`

`Application/Control Number: 14/670,307
`
`Art Unit: 2483
`
`Page 5
`
`Regarding claim 19, this claim is the method of the apparatus version as applied to claim 11
`
`above, wherein the method performs the same limitations cited in claim 11, the rejection of which are
`
`incorporated herein.
`
`Regarding claim 28, Nakamura further disclose the sensor is an infrared sensor [e.g. [0282]; an
`
`infrared sensor].
`
`Regarding claim 30, Nakamura further discloses the notification information includes one or
`
`more of an ID of the monitoring camera [e.g. FIG. 9; [0239]; e.g. registered camera selection] and a
`
`location of the monitoring camera, and the detailed information includes a reason for the abnormality
`
`detection signal [e.g. [0241]; e.g. a face of the suspected person]].
`
`Regarding claim 32, this claim is the method of the apparatus version as applied to claim 30
`
`above, wherein the method performs the same limitations cited in claim 30, the rejection of which are
`
`incorporated herein
`
`Regarding claim 34, this claim is the method of the apparatus version as applied to claim 30
`
`above, wherein the method performs the same limitations cited in claim 30, the rejection of which are
`
`incorporated herein.
`
`Regarding claim 36, this claim is the method of the apparatus version as applied to claim 32
`
`above, wherein the method performs the same limitations cited in claim 32, the rejection of which are
`
`incorporated herein.
`
`9.
`
`Claim 13 and 21 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Nakamura et al
`
`(US 20060209176 A1) in view of Hundal (US 20050197061 A1) and Sugimura et al (US 20090244363
`
`A1).
`
`Regarding claim 13, Nakamura and Hundal disclose all the limitations in claim 10, but
`
`Nakamura fails to disclose a temperature sensor.
`
`However, Sugimura teaches the monitoring camera includes a temperature sensor [e.g. FIG. 10;
`
`e.g. 38], and detects an abnormal state of the monitoring camera when the temperature sensor detects a
`
`temperature below a defined threshold [e.g. FIG. 11; [0066]].
`
`

`

`Application/Control Number: 14/670,307
`
`Art Unit: 2483
`
`Page 6
`
`It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of
`
`the invention to modify the monitoring system disclosed by Nakamura to exploit the well-known concept
`
`of cordless set telephone network technique taught by Hundal and monitoring camera temperature
`
`technique taught by Sugimura as above, in order to provide exchanging data and audio between landline
`
`telephones and various electronic devices [See Hundal; [0002]] and reduced transmission of the noise of
`
`in the camera [See Sugimura].
`
`Regarding claim 21, this claim is the method of the apparatus version as applied to claim 11 and
`
`13 above, wherein the method performs the same limitations cited in claim 11 and 13, the rejection of
`
`which are incorporated herein.
`
`10.
`
`Claim 14, 22, 23, 31, 33, 35 and 37 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable
`
`over Nakamura et al (US 20060209176 A1) in view of Hundal (US 20050197061 A1) and Lee et al (US
`
`20110090822 A1).
`
`Regarding claim 14, Nakamura further discloses the DECT master device detects an abnormal
`
`state of the monitoring camera [e.g. FIG. 16 and 17; e.g. abnormality], generates the notification
`
`information by converting ID information of the monitoring camera, and transmits the generated
`
`notification information to the smartphone [e.g. FIG. 14 and 15], but Nakamura fails to disclose detecting
`
`a communication link.
`
`However, Lee teaches the DECT master device detects an abnormal state of the monitoring
`
`camera when detecting that a communication link with the monitoring camera is disconnected [e.g. FIG. 1
`
`and 2; [0037]; e.g. detecting a communication link disconnection].
`
`It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of
`
`the invention to modify the monitoring system disclosed by Nakamura to exploit the well-known concept
`
`of cordless set telephone network technique taught by Hundal and detecting communication link
`
`connection technique taught by Lee as above, in order to provide exchanging data and audio between
`
`landline telephones and recording (i.e., taping, storing, preserving, or filing) a media conference when a
`
`termination event is detected [See Lee].
`
`

`

`Application/Control Number: 14/670,307
`
`Art Unit: 2483
`
`Page 7
`
`Regarding claim 22, this claim is the method of the apparatus version as applied to claim 14
`
`above, wherein the method performs the same limitations cited in claim 14, the rejection of which are
`
`incorporated herein.
`
`Regarding claim 23, this claim is the method of the apparatus version as applied to claim 11 and
`
`14 above, wherein the method performs the same limitations cited in claim 11 and 14, the rejection of
`
`which are incorporated herein.
`
`Regarding claim 31, Nakamura further discloses the DECT master device detects an abnormal
`
`state of the monitoring camera [e.g. FIG. 16 and 17; e.g. abnormality], but Nakamura fails to disclose
`
`detecting a communication link disconnection.
`
`However, Lee teaches the reason for the abnormality detection includes one or more of a
`
`temperature of or near the monitoring camera and disconnection of a communication link between the
`
`monitoring camera and the DECT master device [e.g. FIG. 1 and 2; [0037]; e.g. detecting a
`
`communication link disconnection].
`
`It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of
`
`the invention to modify the monitoring system disclosed by Nakamura to exploit the well-known concept
`
`of cordless set telephone network technique taught by Hundal and detecting communication link
`
`connection technique taught by Lee as above, in order to provide exchanging data and audio between
`
`landline telephones and recording (i.e., taping, storing, preserving, or filing) a media conference when a
`
`termination event is detected [See Lee].
`
`Regarding claim 33, this claim is the method of the apparatus version as applied to claim 31
`
`above, wherein the method performs the same limitations cited in claim 31, the rejection of which are
`
`incorporated herein
`
`Regarding claim 35, this claim is the method of the apparatus version as applied to claim 31
`
`above, wherein the method performs the same limitations cited in claim 31, the rejection of which are
`
`incorporated herein.
`
`

`

`Application/Control Number: 14/670,307
`
`Art Unit: 2483
`
`Page 8
`
`Regarding claim 37, this claim is the method of the apparatus version as applied to claim 33
`
`above, wherein the method performs the same limitations cited in claim 33, the rejection of which are
`
`incorporated herein.
`
`11.
`
`Claim 29 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Nakamura et al (US
`
`20060209176 A1) in view of Hundal (US 20050197061 A1) and Slavin et al (US 8675071 B1).
`
`Regarding claim 29, Nakamura and Hundal disclose all the limitations in claim 11, but
`
`Nakamura fails to explicitly disclose the details of the sensor.
`
`However, Slavin et al (US 8675071 B1) teaches the well-known concept of wherein the sensor is
`
`selected from a group [column 7 lines 23-39; e.g. sensors] consisting of a human sensor [e.g. blood
`
`sugar sensor], a smoke sensor [e.g. smoke detector], an opening/closing sensor [e.g. door opening
`
`detector], a temperature sensor [e.g. temperature sensor].
`
`It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of
`
`the invention to modify the monitoring system disclosed by Nakamura to exploit the well-known concept
`
`of cordless set telephone network technique taught by Hundal and motion detection sensor technique
`
`taught by Slavin as above, in order to provide exchanging data and audio between landline telephones
`
`and the monitoring station with access to the video and/or image data may allow faster and more
`
`accurate alarm verification [See Slavin; column 22 lines 1-16].
`
`Conclusion
`
`12.
`
`THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth
`
`in 37 CFR1.136(a).
`
`A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from
`
`the mailing date of this action.
`
`In the event a first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS of the mailing date
`
`of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH
`
`shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action
`
`is mailed, and any extension fee pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of
`
`the advisory action.
`
`In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX
`
`MONTHS from the mailing date of this final action.
`
`

`

`Application/Control Number: 14/670,307
`
`Art Unit: 2483
`
`Page 9
`
`Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should
`
`be directed to ZHUBING REN whose telephone number is (571 )272—2788. The examiner can normally
`
`be reached on Monday to Friday 8:00am to 5 pm.
`
`If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor,
`
`Joseph Ustaris can be reached on 571-272—7383. 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.
`
`/ZHUBING REN/
`
`Examiner, Art Unit 2483
`
`