UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE
`
`
`
`UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
`United States Patent and Trademark Office
`Address: COMMISSIONER FOR PATENTS
`PO. Box 1450
`Alexandria, Virginia 2231371450
`www.uspto.gov
`
`15/894,665
`
`02/12/2018
`
`Yutaka SUWA
`
`731156675
`
`1393
`
`Seed IP Law Group LLP/Panason1e
`701 Fifth Avenue, Suite 5400
`Seattle, WA 98104
`
`HILAIRE' CLIFFORD
`
`ART UNIT
`
`2488
`
`PAPER NUMBER
`
`NOTIFICATION DATE
`
`DELIVERY MODE
`
`05/24/2019
`
`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):
`US PTOeACtion @ SeedIP .Com
`
`pairlinkdktg @ seedip .eom
`
`PTOL-90A (Rev. 04/07)
`
`

`

`0/7709 A0170” Summary
`
`Application No.
`15/894,665
`Examiner
`CLIFFORD HILAIRE
`
`Applicant(s)
`SUWA, Yutaka
`Art Unit
`AIA (FITF) Status
`2488
`Yes
`
`- The MAILING DA TE of this communication appears on the cover sheet wit/7 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 CFR 1.136(a). In no event, however, may a reply be timely filed after SIX (6) MONTHS from the mailing
`date of this communication.
`|f 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).
`
`Status
`
`1). Responsive to communication(s) filed on 2/12/2018.
`[:1 A declaration(s)/affidavit(s) under 37 CFR 1.130(b) was/were filed on
`
`2a)D This action is FINAL.
`
`2b)
`
`This action is non-final.
`
`3)[:] 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 Expat/7e Quay/e, 1935 CD. 11, 453 O.G. 213.
`
`Disposition of Claims*
`
`5)
`
`Claim(s) fl is/are pending in the application.
`
`5a) Of the above claim(s)
`
`is/are withdrawn from consideration.
`
`E] Claim(s)
`
`is/are allowed.
`
`Claim(s) fl is/are rejected.
`
`[:1 Claim(s) _ is/are objected to.
`
`) ) ) )
`
`6 7
`
`8
`
`
`
`are subject to restriction and/or election requirement
`[j Claim(s)
`9
`* If any claims have been determined aflowabie. you may be eligible to benefit from the Patent Prosecution Highway program at a
`
`participating intellectual property office for the corresponding application. For more information, please see
`
`http://www.uspto.gov/patents/init events/pph/index.jsp or send an inquiry to PPeredback@uspto.gov.
`
`Application Papers
`10)[:] The specification is objected to by the Examiner.
`
`11). The drawing(s) filed on 2/12/2018 is/are: a). accepted or b)E] 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). Acknowledgment is made of a claim for foreign priority under 35 U.S.C. § 119(a)-(d) or (f).
`Certified copies:
`
`a). All
`
`b)D Some**
`
`C)D None of the:
`
`1.. Certified copies of the priority documents have been received.
`
`2.[:] 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)
`
`1)
`
`Notice of References Cited (PTO-892)
`
`Information Disclosure Statement(s) (PTO/SB/08a and/or PTO/SB/08b)
`2)
`Paper No(s)/Mail DateW.
`U.S. Patent and Trademark Office
`
`3) C] Interview Summary (PTO-413)
`Paper No(s)/Mail Date
`4) CI Other-
`
`PTOL-326 (Rev. 11-13)
`
`Office Action Summary
`
`Part of Paper No./Mai| Date 20190521
`
`

`

`Application/ Control Number: 15/894,665
`Art Unit: 2488
`
`Page 2
`
`DETAILED ACTION
`
`Notice ofPre-AIA or AIA Status
`
`1.
`
`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 U5C§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 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.
`
`The factual inquiries set forth in Gin/mm e. fo/m Deere Ca, 383 US. 1, 148 USPQ 459 (1966), that are
`
`applied 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.
`
`This application currently names joint inventors. In considering patentability of the claims the
`
`examiner presumes that the subject matter of the various claims was commonly owned as of the
`
`effective filing date of the claimed invention(s) absent any evidence to the contrary. Applicant is
`
`advised of the obligation under 37 CFR 1.56 to point out the inventor and effective filing dates of
`
`

`

`Application/ Control Number: 15/894,665
`Art Unit: 2488
`
`Page 3
`
`each claim that was not commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the later invention in
`
`order for the examiner to consider the applicability of 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(C) for any potential 35
`
`U.S.C. 102(a)(2) prior art against the later invention.
`
`2.
`
`Claims 1—6 are rejected under AIA 35 U.S.C. 103(a) as being unpatentable over by Kindborg
`
`Mattias et al. [US 20080722949 A7] in view of Burbidge Richard Charles et al. [US 20700376034
`
`A7].
`
`Regarding claim 1, Mattias teaches:
`
`1. A surveillance camera system (z 6. FIG.
`
`7 film/mm ag6fi6ml smwlllmw 667mm WEE/77 Mil? a
`
`plural/91 ofmmwm 100a-100fi fil0052) comprising:
`
`a surveillance camera that performs imaging and generates image data (z 6. aplural/91 of
`
`w 100a-100fi fil0052); and
`
`a controller that receives and displays image data from the surveillance camera and
`
`controls the surveillance camera (z 6. 1/96 appmm‘m 104 66% also [76 utllz'wdfor mafia/Mg t/96
`
`para/726167“ mlmyfor eat/7 667mm 100a-100f- fil0054),
`
`wherein the surveillance camera and the controller perform wireless communication
`
`by any one of a plurality of communication methods having different bandwidths (z 6. 1566/?
`
`667mm ls 60%666/64’ [0 a dam 60mmmlmtz'0m mill/one 102, AWE/7 m" a TCP/IP—[mwd Lam/Arm Nfill/0%
`
`(LAM or a TCP/IP—[mwd er6l6m Lam/Arm Nfill/0% ( WLAM- fil0052, fig. 7),
`
`However, Mattias does not teach explicitly:
`
`the controller
`
`performs registration processing of the surveillance camera using a first
`
`communication method, and in the registration processing, exchange of first information for
`
`connection by the first communication method and second information for connection by a
`
`second communication method is performed with the surveillance camera.
`
`

`

`Application/ Control Number: 15/894,665
`Art Unit: 2488
`
`In the same field of endeavor, Burbidge teaches:
`
`the controller (1.6. 666633" 6’66166— 1417516660
`
`Page 4
`
`performs registration processing of the surveillance camera (1.6. 11367" 666166 (Ufa-fig 72)
`
`using a first communication method, and in the registration processing, exchange (1.6.
`
`Mg 141761666) of first information for connection by the first communication method (1.6.
`
`6 weffdgeflom 66 666633" 666166 dfiOflfll‘éd 11/1117 1/76flm‘ 6616/06é 6611- 6175166617 and second information
`
`for connection by a second communication method (1.6. 1/96 M6Hflg61d6611f163" 6p16661191 0f§66066’
`
`6616/06é 6611sp60616’16g 1/96 56761661417666le is performed with the surveillance camera (1.6. A
`
`76611706p6yf067666’ 17} 6366 6661276661 1! 2B 2 1651114763" 66661616<g 6 Tequefl‘ 10 666633" 6 5666166 666661161716 1/7606g/7
`
`6flm‘ 6616/06é £611d§§0£1fl16d M117 1196 UE, 666’Mg 6 mefidgeflwfl 66 666633" 666166 dfiOflfll‘éd M117 1196
`
`flm‘ 6616/06é 6611, 161967616 1196 M6Hflg61d6611f163" 6 p16661191 0f§66066’ 6616/06é 6611sp60616’16g 1196 3676166-
`
`141731666).
`
`It would have been obvious to one with ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the
`
`claimed invention, to modify the teachings of Mattias with the teachings of Burbidge to determine
`
`an optimal CS network cell to which UE 10 may be transferred during the CS fallback procedure
`
`(B661716’g6- flOOU’).
`
`Regarding claim 2, Mattias and Burbidge teach all the limitation of claim 1.
`
`However, Mattias does not teach explicitly:
`
`wherein the first communication method is a digital enhanced cordless telecommunications
`
`(DECT) method, and the second communication method is a wireless local area network (LAN)
`
`method.
`
`In the same field of endeavor, Burbidge teaches:
`
`

`

`Application/ Control Number: 15/894,665
`Art Unit: 2488
`
`Page 5
`
`wherein the first communication method is a digital enhanced cordless telecommunications
`
`(DECT) method (z 6. nglmlEfi/amwd Cord/6m" T6l66077zmmlml‘z'0m (DECD- fil0004), and the second
`
`communication method is a wireless local area network (LAN) method (7.6. m (6g. IEEE
`
`802. 7 7)1l0004)
`
`It would have been obvious to one with ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the
`
`claimed invention, to modify the teachings of Mattias with the teachings of Burbidge to determine
`
`an optimal CS network cell to which UE 10 may be transferred during the CS fallback procedure
`
`(Bur/aldg6- fil0073).
`
`Regarding claim 3, Mattias teaches:
`
`3. A surveillance camera system (z 6. FIG.
`
`7 film/mm ag6fi6ml smwlllmw L‘dfiiflfl 9376M Mil? a
`
`plum/791 ofmmwm 100a-100fi fil0052) comprising:
`
`a surveillance camera that performs imaging and generates image data (z 6. aplum/791 of
`
`w 100a-100fi fil0052); and
`
`a controller that receives and displays image data from the surveillance camera and
`
`controls the surveillance camera (z 6. 7/96 appmm‘m 104 66% also l76 utllz'wdfor mafia/Mg 7/96
`
`para/726767“ mlmyfor eat/7 L‘dfiiflfl 100a-100f- fil0054),
`
`wherein the surveillance camera and the controller perform wireless communication
`
`by any one of a plurality of communication methods having different bandwidths (z 6. 1566/9
`
`L‘dfiiflfl ls 606666764’ [0 a dam 60mmmlmtz'0m mill/0% 102, sm/y m" a TCP/IP—[mwd Lam/Arm Nfill/0%
`
`(LAM or a TCP/IP—[mwd Wr6l6m Lam/Arm Nay/070% ( WLAM- fil0052,fl<g. 7), and
`
`However, Mattias does not teach explicitly:
`
`the surveillance camera measures environmental values indicating an environment of a
`
`bandwidth of each communication method, determines a communication method to be used for
`
`

`

`Application/ Control Number: 15/894,665
`Art Unit: 2488
`
`Page 6
`
`communication with the controller based on each of the environmental values, and transmits image
`
`data to the controller according to the determined communication method.
`
`In the same field of endeavor, Burbidge teaches:
`
`the surveillance camera measures environmental values indicating an environment of a
`
`bandwidth of each communication method (i'e. As site/7, n’nrz'ng t/ae Canllline/épreeess, UE 10 inn}
`
`nnn’ertn/ée n inensnreinent step to n’eteet nnn’ ln’entfli t/ae eells neeessllile t0 UE 70- fll0070), determines a
`
`communication method to be used for communication with the controller based on each of the
`
`environmental values (le. W/aenpeyforinlng Canllline/é, UE 10 inn} lie in t/ae [nest/finsi'ti'on to determine iii/aids
`
`eell 0r eells nre ennn’ln’nte eells tofnllline/é t0--UE 10 enn n’eteet iii/aids eells nre in elose Qroxz'ini'ty 0r lynne Qnrti'enlnrly
`
`strong reeei'nen’ slgnnl strengt/a 0r nnnli'gu (0r otlyer site/7 preferenti'nlpnrnineters), nnn’ lyenee tint/7 iii/aids eells UE 70
`
`ninnln’ like} lynne n sneeessfnl tonneetlonfillowlng t/ae Canllline/é proeess- fll0070), and transmits image data to
`
`the controller according to the determined communication method (le. After the lnst inensnreinentgnp,
`
`sinjln'ent inensnreinents inn} lynne [ieen penfiwnen’ l7} UE 10 nnn’ one or inore ennn’ln’nte netn/or/é eells t/antproni'n’e CS
`
`n’ninnln serni'ees inn} lanne [ieen n’eteeten’. UE 10 inn} t/aen trnnsinlt inensnreinent resnlts t0 nn neeess n’eni'ee oft/9e PS
`
`netn/or/é (eg, nn E-UTRAN eNB) lee inensnreinent resnlts trnnsinltten’ t0 the PS netn/or/é inn} t/aen lie nsen’ l7}
`
`t/ae P5 network to determine nn opti'innl CS netn/or/é tell to iii/aids UE 10 inn} lie trnnsferren’ n’nrz'ng t/ae Canllline/é
`
`proeen’nre- flOOU’)
`
`It would have been obvious to one with ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the
`
`claimed invention, to modify the teachings of Mattias with the teachings of Burbidge to determine
`
`an optimal CS network cell to which UE 10 may be transferred during the CS fallback procedure
`
`(Bnrliln’ge- fil0073)
`
`Regarding claim 4, Mattias and Burbidge teach all the limitation of claim 3 and Mattias further
`
`teaches:
`
`

`

`Application/ Control Number: 15/894,665
`Art Unit: 2488
`
`Page 7
`
`wherein the controller causes the image data (26. I” aflm‘ mp 1000, image dam is arqm'redfmm
`
`#96 [501701291 aframems 100a-100f. I” a semm’ mp 1002, #96 image dam is Wafered- 1W7)" 7-0732) to be
`
`displayed with a resolution according to a communication method determined by the surveillance
`
`camera (26. I” a Z/az'm’ step 1004, #96 image dam is displayed 1WD?)
`
`Regarding claim 5, Mattias and Burbidge teach all the limitation of claim 3.
`
`However, Mattias does not teach explicitly:
`
`wherein the communication method includes a digital enhanced cordless
`
`telecommunications (DECT) method and a wireless local area network (LAN) method.
`
`In the same field of endeavor, Burbidge teaches:
`
`wherein the communication method includes a digital enhanced cordless
`
`telecommunications (DECT) method and a wireless local area network (LAN) method (2.6. ngz'ml
`
`
`Efl/mmed Cordless" Telecommunicatiom (DECT), .. MAN (6g. IEEE 802.77)1l0004)
`
`It would have been obvious to one with ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the
`
`claimed invention, to modify the teachings of Mattias with the teachings of Burbidge to determine
`
`an optimal CS network cell to which UE 10 may be transferred during the CS fallback procedure
`
`(Burlaz'dge- flOOU’)
`
`Regarding claim 6, method claim 6 corresponds to apparatus claim 1, and therefore is also rejected
`
`for the same reasons of obviousness as listed above.
`
`Conclusion
`
`Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner
`
`should be directed to CLIFFORD HILAIRE whose telephone number is (571)272—8397. The
`
`examiner can normally be reached on 5:30—1400.
`
`