(12) United States Patent
`Richmond et al.
`
`I 1111111111111111 11111 lllll lllll lllll 111111111111111 111111111111111 11111111
`US006856237Bl
`
`(10) Patent No.:
`(45) Date of Patent:
`
`US 6,856,237 Bl
`Feb.15,2005
`
`(54) METHOD AND APPARATUS FOR RADIO
`FREQUENCY SECURITY SYSTEM WITH
`AUTOMATIC LEARNING
`
`A recent opinion by the Federal Circuit entitled, Overhead
`Door Corporation and GMI Holdings, Inc., v. Chamberlain
`Group, Inc. filed on Oct. 13, 1999.
`
`(75)
`
`Inventors: Thomas R. Richmond, Santa Ana, CA
`(US); Suzanne Richmond, San Pedro,
`CA (US); Patrick S. Kochie, Simi
`Valley, CA (US)
`
`(73) Assignee: Doorking, Inc., Inglewood, CA (US)
`
`( *) Notice:
`
`Subject to any disclaimer, the term of this
`patent is extended or adjusted under 35
`U.S.C. 154(b) by 348 days.
`
`(21) Appl. No.: 09/603,831
`
`(22) Filed:
`
`Jun. 26, 2000
`
`Int. Cl.7 ................................................ G05B 19/00
`(51)
`(52) U.S. Cl. .................... 340/5.23; 340/5.61; 340/5.71;
`340/5.2; 340/5.21; 340/5.62; 340/825.69;
`340/825.72
`(58) Field of Search ........................... 340/825.69, 5.23,
`340/5.71, 5.2, 5.21, 5.61, 5.62, 5.63; 341/176
`
`(56)
`
`References Cited
`
`U.S. PATENT DOCUMENTS
`
`4,638,433 A
`4,750,118 A
`5,517,187 A
`RE35,364 E
`5,949,349 A *
`6,049,289 A *
`RE36,703 E
`6,166,650 A
`6,167,137 A
`
`1/1987
`6/1988
`5/1996
`10/1996
`9/1999
`4/2000
`5/2000
`* 12/2000
`* 12/2000
`
`Schindler
`Heitschel et al.
`Bruwer et al.
`Heitschel et al.
`Farris et al.
`........... 340/825.34
`Waggamon et al.
`... 340/825.31
`Heitschel et al.
`Bruwer ...................... 340/5.26
`Marino et al. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 380/255
`
`OIBER PUBLICATIONS
`
`Letter dated May 17, 2001 from John F. Flannery of Fitch,
`Even, Tabin, & Flannery.
`Claims pending in re-issue application No. 08/700,610 filed
`Feb. 15, 2000.
`
`A brochure entitled, "Mega Code Transmitters MDT /MDT2/
`MDT", Copyright 1992 Moore-O-Matic.
`
`A brochure entitled, "Introducing ... AccessMaster", Copy(cid:173)
`right 1994 Linear Corporation.
`
`A brochure entitled, "AccessPro Wireless Access Control",
`Copyright 1995 Linear Corporation.
`
`* cited by examiner
`
`Primary Examiner-Michael Horabik
`Assistant Examiner-Vernal Brown
`(74) Attorney, Agent, or Firm-1. Mark Holland &
`Associates
`
`(57)
`
`ABSTRACT
`
`A security system for control access of multiple users to a
`selected area combines rotating electronic security code or
`equivalent technology with an automatic self-learning
`receiver. The first transmitter is "learned" by the receiver
`manually, but subsequent transmitters are learned without
`the need for actuating the conventional "manual learn" mode
`of the receiver. Instead, by simply sending the transmit
`signal twice within a fixed time period, users of the subse(cid:173)
`quent transmitters use "self-learning" circuitry (interposed
`between conventional transmitter and receiver technology)
`in a way that is relatively transparent to the user. Other
`aspects of conventional systems are provided, such as sepa(cid:173)
`rate control via computer or otherwise of an authorized list
`of uniquely-identified transmitters. In alternative
`embodiments, even the first transmitter/controller can be
`programmed into the receiver (such as at the time of
`manufacturing or installing the system).
`
`60 Claims, 9 Drawing Sheets
`
`ASSA ABLOY Ex. 1014 - Page 1
`ASSA ABLOY AB v. CPC Patent Technologies Pty Ltd.
`IPR2022-01045 - U.S. Patent No. 9,269,208
`
`

`

`U.S. Patent
`
`Feb. 15,2005
`
`Sheet 1 of 9
`
`US 6,856,237 Bl
`
`GET CD
`(GET RF
`CODE)
`
`N
`
`N
`
`DECRYPT IT
`
`y
`
`N
`
`FIG. 1
`
`ASSA ABLOY Ex. 1014 - Page 2
`ASSA ABLOY AB v. CPC Patent Technologies Pty Ltd.
`IPR2022-01045 - U.S. Patent No. 9,269,208
`
`

`

`U.S. Patent
`
`Feb. 15,2005
`
`Sheet 2 of 9
`
`US 6,856,237 Bl
`
`N
`
`N
`
`N
`
`y
`
`y
`
`WRITE NEW
`SYNCTOMEM
`
`SET "SYNC"
`OFF FLAG
`
`FIG. 2
`
`ASSA ABLOY Ex. 1014 - Page 3
`ASSA ABLOY AB v. CPC Patent Technologies Pty Ltd.
`IPR2022-01045 - U.S. Patent No. 9,269,208
`
`

`

`U.S. Patent
`
`Feb.15,2005
`
`Sheet 3 of 9
`
`US 6,856,237 Bl
`
`N
`
`N
`
`y
`
`y
`
`SET "ADD"
`FLAG
`
`SAVEBUT.JAC
`& TRANS1~UM
`TO RAM
`
`SAVE 16 BIT
`SYNC
`TO RAM
`
`SETUP
`10 SEC TIMER
`
`FIG. 3
`
`ASSA ABLOY Ex. 1014 - Page 4
`ASSA ABLOY AB v. CPC Patent Technologies Pty Ltd.
`IPR2022-01045 - U.S. Patent No. 9,269,208
`
`

`

`U.S. Patent
`
`Feb.15,2005
`
`Sheet 4 of 9
`
`US 6,856,237 Bl
`
`N
`
`INC SAVED
`SYNC
`
`INC SAVED
`SYNC
`
`FIG. 4
`
`N
`
`y
`
`WRITE Bui
`FACiJ~Nci,
`& Su~C TO
`EEMEM
`
`CLR "ADD"
`FLAG
`
`CLR
`"SYNC"
`OFF
`FLAG
`
`WRITE
`SYNC TO
`EEMEMOF
`THAT TRANS
`
`ASSA ABLOY Ex. 1014 - Page 5
`ASSA ABLOY AB v. CPC Patent Technologies Pty Ltd.
`IPR2022-01045 - U.S. Patent No. 9,269,208
`
`

`

`U.S. Patent
`
`Feb.15,2005
`
`Sheet 5 of 9
`
`US 6,856,237 Bl
`
`FLASH LED
`
`y
`
`PROGRAM
`OTHER
`FEATURES
`
`N
`
`10 ~ FCNT
`
`SET UP 1 SEC
`
`y
`
`GET CD (GET RF CODE)
`
`N
`
`DECRYPT IT
`
`FLASH LED
`
`DEL FCNT
`
`N
`
`LONG FLASH
`
`y
`
`WRITE NEW
`SYNC
`TOEEMEM.
`
`WRITE 4BUT0
`F AC,.,J,RANS 01,
`Sn~C TO
`EEMEM
`
`FIG. 5
`
`ASSA ABLOY Ex. 1014 - Page 6
`ASSA ABLOY AB v. CPC Patent Technologies Pty Ltd.
`IPR2022-01045 - U.S. Patent No. 9,269,208
`
`

`

`U.S. Patent
`
`Feb.15,2005
`
`Sheet 6 of 9
`
`US 6,856,237 Bl
`
`y
`
`N
`
`N
`
`CLR
`SYNC
`OFF
`FLAG
`
`GET CD
`(GET RF
`CODE)
`
`DECRYPT
`IT
`
`y
`
`N
`
`N
`
`y
`
`N
`
`FIG. 6
`
`READ AND SA VE
`TIMEZONE
`
`ASSA ABLOY Ex. 1014 - Page 7
`ASSA ABLOY AB v. CPC Patent Technologies Pty Ltd.
`IPR2022-01045 - U.S. Patent No. 9,269,208
`
`

`

`U.S. Patent
`
`Feb.15,2005
`
`Sheet 7 of 9
`
`US 6,856,237 Bl
`
`N
`
`y
`
`SET "SYNC'
`OFF FLAG
`
`SAVEBUT,FA
`& TRANS SO
`CAN LATER
`SEE IF MATCH
`
`SAVESYNC
`
`N
`
`SETUP
`10 SEC.
`TIMER
`
`OPERATE
`RELAY LED
`AND BEEP
`
`L--------1 BUFFER
`
`PUT THIS IN
`THE
`TRANSACTION
`
`FIG. 7
`
`ASSA ABLOY Ex. 1014 - Page 8
`ASSA ABLOY AB v. CPC Patent Technologies Pty Ltd.
`IPR2022-01045 - U.S. Patent No. 9,269,208
`
`

`

`U.S. Patent
`
`Feb.15,2005
`
`Sheet 8 of 9
`
`US 6,856,237 Bl
`
`INC SAVED
`SYNC
`
`y
`
`N
`
`INC SAVED
`SYNC
`
`CLR SYNC
`OFF
`FLAG
`
`FIG. 8
`
`ASSA ABLOY Ex. 1014 - Page 9
`ASSA ABLOY AB v. CPC Patent Technologies Pty Ltd.
`IPR2022-01045 - U.S. Patent No. 9,269,208
`
`

`

`U.S. Patent
`
`Feb. 15,2005
`
`Sheet 9 of 9
`
`US 6,856,237 Bl
`
`N
`
`PROGRAM
`SOMETHING
`ELSE
`
`y
`
`RANGE OF TRANSMITTERS
`USER ENTERS:
`BUTTON FAC CODE BEG TRANSMITTER END TRANSMITTER TIME ZO1'E
`
`THROUGH KEYPAD ON RECEIVER
`
`EACH TRANSMITTER WITH THIS BU'L F AC & TRANS, IF NOT USED YET
`IS WRITTEN Tv MEMORY
`
`FIG. 9
`
`ASSA ABLOY Ex. 1014 - Page 10
`ASSA ABLOY AB v. CPC Patent Technologies Pty Ltd.
`IPR2022-01045 - U.S. Patent No. 9,269,208
`
`

`

`US 6,856,237 Bl
`
`1
`METHOD AND APPARATUS FOR RADIO
`FREQUENCY SECURITY SYSTEM WITH
`AUTOMATIC LEARNING
`
`15
`
`2
`Rotating code or code hopping security systems address
`the problem by utilizing code generators to produce different
`signals each time a transmitter emits a signal. With the
`addition of encryption and a 64-bit transmission length, such
`systems have substantially improved security. "Unique"
`identifying information is typically "burned" into each trans(cid:173)
`mitter's internal chips or circuitry, and that information can
`be used within the security system not only to control which
`transmitters are "authorized" to open a gate (by way of
`example), but even to track and log which transmitters were
`in fact used at which time(s). Examples of such improved
`technology are discussed in U.S. Pat. Nos. 5,517,187 and
`5,686,904. Commonly, that "unique" information is part of
`the signal that is transmitted to the receiver in order to
`activate the gate, door, etc.
`Typically, for these systems to be-effective, the system
`administrator has to control and track the distribution of the
`transmitters, but that commonly involves only two actions:
`an initial "check-out" (when the transmitter is given to the
`user/tenant) and subsequent "check-in" (such as when the
`20 tenant turns in his or her keys/controllers/etc. upon termi(cid:173)
`nating their lease). In the event of some intervening
`problem, however, such control and tracking of users and
`their respective transmitters can enable the manager/owner
`to "disable" the transmitter ( even though it has not been
`25 returned to the manager/owner) by removing its "identifi(cid:173)
`cation" from the list of authorized users within the receiver.
`This "authorized list" is a control level that is independent
`of the "learning" process required for each transmitter. Even
`if a transmitter is "learned" into the receiver, this further
`30 control can override and prevent activation of the gate or
`door based on that "unique" identification information in the
`transmitter.
`Newer 64-bit technology has now raised the number of
`unique code combinations into the billions, and is further
`secured when combined with the aforementioned rotating
`35 code and encryption technologies. Against such systems,
`contemporary code scanners and code grabbers are
`ineffective, and at least currently, this type of security system
`is extremely difficult ( or even virtually impossible) to
`"crack". Foreseeably, further advances in computer technol-
`40 ogy and manufacture will increase those combinations even
`further and may add additional "security" aspects to the
`technology.
`Despite their advantages, conventional rotating code or
`code hopping security systems have some shortcomings.
`45 Among other things, they can be difficult or burdensome to
`administer when there are multiple users and/or there is
`turnover among the users. This difficulty arises at least in
`part from the fact that each transmitter (with its "unique"
`identifying code or other unique information) typically must
`50 be "learned" into the receiver (see, e.g., U.S. Pat. No.
`5,686,904) before the transmitter is operational. In this
`"learn" process, a button or several buttons on the receiver
`are manually pushed, which switches the receiver from
`normal operation to "learn" mode. While the receiver is in
`55 that "learn" mode, the transmitter that is to be "learned" is
`then aimed towards the receiver and its transmit button
`pushed. The transmitter emits and the receiver receives a
`64-bit or other signal which contains various sub-signals or
`information (such as a synchronization signal, a button
`60 signal, facility code signal, etc.). Once that transmitter's
`signal is received, compared, and processed, the transmitter
`is "activated" and available for future use (in effect, the
`receiver side of the system will thereafter recognize that
`unique transmitter and its signals as "authorized"). This
`"learning" process must be repeated for each other trans(cid:173)
`mitter before those other transmitters will activate the
`receiver.
`
`This invention relates to an improved apparatus and 5
`method for secure entry systems, characterized by using a
`rotating electronic security code or equivalent technology
`with an automatic self-learning receiver. The invention is
`especially useful in multi-user applications, where many
`persons can individually operate or activate a single gate or 10
`door, for example. It can also be beneficial for smaller
`numbers of users, although single users or individual home(cid:173)
`owners might find it easier and slightly more secure to use
`conventional systems (such as those described herein) that
`require manual "learning".
`
`BACKGROUND OF THE INVENTION
`
`A wide range of "keyless" security systems exist, includ(cid:173)
`ing remote controlled gate operators and the like for
`residential, industrial, and/or business installations. Depend(cid:173)
`ing on the installation and circumstances, a large number of
`users may need to pass through a given entry on a regular
`basis. Similarly, in certain circumstances, there may be a
`substantial turnover or addition to the number or identity of
`users needing access (or having authorized access) during
`any given period of time. For example, employment
`changes, expansion, and similar factors can affect the num(cid:173)
`ber and identity of persons needing access through a par(cid:173)
`ticular company's entry gate, door, barrier arm, turnstile, or
`any other access control point.
`In many applications, such systems include multiple
`transmitters ( one is given to each authorized user), each of
`which activates a single receiver. Transmitters can take
`many forms, including (without limitation) cards, handheld
`electronic keys, RF or other frequency button activated
`devices, etc. The receiver is typically located at or near the
`controlled gate or door and, upon receiving an appropriate
`signal from any such transmitter, the receiver activates
`(typically opens or unlocks) the gate or door.
`Security of such entries is improved by providing user(cid:173)
`specific remote controls a unique, identifiable transmitter/
`controller for each user. That improved security normally
`comes at some cost, in that such user-specific controls can be
`burdensome to program, use, and administer, if they are
`available at all.
`Such systems vary widely in their complexity and con(cid:173)
`sequent degree of security. For example, transmitters com(cid:173)
`monly range from 256 code combinations (using eight DIP
`switches) to 65,536 code combinations (using 16 bit keys).
`Criminals or other persons have attacked security system
`technologies with technologies of their own. Among other
`things, these counter-efforts include code breakers such as
`code scanners (signal-generating devices that can generate a
`massive series of signals, one of which may be the "correct"
`signal that activates the security system's receiver), and code
`grabbers (which can surreptitiously record a signal as it is
`generated by an authorized user, and can subsequently
`re-emit that identical signal). Such counter-efforts can seri(cid:173)
`ously compromise the security of certain systems.
`Later generation security systems attempted to address
`those counter-technologies. One such effort was to utilize
`32-bit keys to increase the number of code combinations.
`However, this increase in bit keys only added to the number
`to combinations that a code scanner had to try before the 65
`right combination was "cracked." Against a code grabber,
`this increase provided no additional protection.
`
`ASSA ABLOY Ex. 1014 - Page 11
`ASSA ABLOY AB v. CPC Patent Technologies Pty Ltd.
`IPR2022-01045 - U.S. Patent No. 9,269,208
`
`

`

`US 6,856,237 Bl
`
`3
`Consequently, and as indicated above, despite the benefits
`of this rotating code or code hopping technology, it can be
`cumbersome to administer in a large user situation. For
`example, if such a system is used in an apartment or business
`complex, each tenant's transmitter must be "manually"
`learned or programmed before the tenant can use it. Such
`transmitters are used, for example, to open a common gate
`that permits entry into an apartment complex parking or
`common areas. Under this scenario, either each tenant must
`be taught how to program or "learn" his transmitter into the
`receiver, or the management/owner of the complex must do
`so for each tenant/transmitter. If there is a power failure, the
`"learning" can be lost from the receiver (unless flash
`memory, emergency backup power sources, permanent
`memory, or similar technology is provided), which requires
`that all transmitters to be relearned. Even if permanent
`memory is used, however, other failure of the receiver or
`access control system can require that all the transmitters be
`relearned into the replacement equipment. During any such
`period of inoperability (not only during the power outage
`itself, but during any period of time required to "relearn" the
`transmitters), access to the complex can either be precluded
`( even for tenants that are authorized to enter) or uncontrolled
`(such as if the gate is left open to prevent a massive number
`of frustrated tenants from not being able to enter the
`complex).
`Other problems can occur in such multi-user systems,
`such as when one tenant or user tries to enter through the
`gate while another transmitter is being "learned". Also, if the
`apartment manager or owner programs in or "learns" all the
`transmitters himself, he could be programming hundreds or
`even thousands of transmitters, a very daunting task.
`
`OBJECTS AND ADVANTAGES OF THE
`INVENTION
`
`It is, therefore, an object of the present invention to
`provide an improved security system that provides the
`heightened security of technology such as rotating code or
`code hopping, without the administrative burdens currently
`associated with that technology. The invention is especially
`useful for installations involving a large user population,
`although single or small user populations can benefit from
`the invention as well.
`Another object of the invention is the provision of a
`system of the aforementioned character that has the ability
`to automatically or remotely "learn" some or most
`transmitters, such as at least being able to "automatically"
`learn all transmitters after the first transmitter is "manually"
`learned.
`A further object of the invention is the provision of a
`security system method and apparatus of the aforementioned
`character, that automatically learns in new transmitters with(cid:173)
`out the users necessarily realizing that their transmitters are
`being "learned".
`Some of the objects of the invention incorporate aspects
`of existing technology, such as requiring multiple signal
`transmissions from any given transmitter before the trans(cid:173)
`mitter is "learned" (this is known within "manually" learned
`systems). Similarly, although alternative embodiments of 60
`the invention could be modified using existing "manual
`learning" technology to learn via a single transmission ( or
`by more than two transmissions), the preferred embodiment
`of the invention requires two signals from any given
`transmitter, thereby taking advantage of the rotating code or 65
`code hopping technology. Under anticipated usage, this
`double press would be relatively transparent to a user, so that
`
`4
`the user would not necessarily even realize that he or she
`was in the "learn" mode.
`Yet another object of the invention is providing a security
`method and system having the ability to manually prepro-
`5 gram ( or "teach" or learn into) a receiver the codes or similar
`information to identify and function with one or more
`transmitters, so that all transmitters that correspond to such
`preprogrammed information (including even the first trans(cid:173)
`mitter used) will be automatically "learned" into the receiver
`10 upon pressing the transmitter button, thereby avoiding the
`need to manually learn even the first such transmitter.
`A still further object of the present invention is the
`providing a security system improvement that is compatible
`with, and has the ability to operate within, a multitude of
`prior art access control systems (including, by way of
`15 example and not by way of limitation, Weigand controllers,
`computers, and telephone systems).
`An additional object of the present invention is the
`provision of a security system of the aforementioned
`character, in which the automatic learning of transmitters
`20 can occur at any suitable location within the system, or via
`cooperation of various portions of the system. By way of
`example, preferred control logic or circuitry of the receiver
`can be positioned within the actual access control system
`(such as Weigand or other controllers, an associated tele-
`25 phone or telephone system, an associated computer, etc.) or
`at any other suitable location capable of interacting with the
`corresponding transmitters and the rest of the security sys(cid:173)
`tem.
`Other objects and advantages of the invention will be
`30 apparent from the foregoing, as well as from the following
`specification and the drawings.
`BRIEF DESCRIPTION OF THE DRAWINGS
`FIG. 1 is a flowchart illustrating a preferred embodiment
`of the receiver algorithm during its "normal" (non-
`35 "learning" or housekeeping) mode.
`FIG. 2 is a flowchart illustrating a preferred embodiment
`of the receiver algorithm when information for at least one
`transmitter is already in memory and a new signal for the
`same transmitter is being processed.
`FIG. 3 is a flowchart illustrating a preferred embodiment
`of the receiver algorithm when a new transmitter is pressed
`a first time.
`FIG. 4 is a flowchart illustrating a preferred embodiment
`45 of the receiver algorithm when a new transmitter is pressed
`a second time and within a span of a predetermined period
`(such as 10 seconds).
`FIG. 5 is a flowchart illustrating a preferred embodiment
`of the receiver algorithm when a new transmitter is manually
`50 "learned" in.
`FIG. 6 is a flowchart illustrating one of the many alter(cid:173)
`native embodiments of the receiver algorithm during "nor(cid:173)
`mal" housekeeping mode.
`FIG. 7 is a flowchart illustrating one of the many alter-
`55 native embodiments of the receiver algorithm when a new
`transmitter is pressed a first time.
`FIG. 8 is a flowchart illustrating one of the many alter(cid:173)
`native embodiments of the receiver algorithm when a new
`transmitter is pressed a second time (within a predetermined
`period).
`FIG. 9 is a block diagram depicting a preferred method of
`entering information into a receiver within the invention.
`
`40
`
`DESCRIPTION OF THE PREFERRED
`EMBODIMENT
`A preferred embodiment of the invention is illustrated in
`the Figures, which include flowcharts of interactions
`
`ASSA ABLOY Ex. 1014 - Page 12
`ASSA ABLOY AB v. CPC Patent Technologies Pty Ltd.
`IPR2022-01045 - U.S. Patent No. 9,269,208
`
`

`

`US 6,856,237 Bl
`
`5
`between a first transmitter, a second transmitter and a
`receiver. The preferred method and apparatus can utilize any
`suitable code hopping encoder and decoder, such as the
`model HCS301 available from Microchip Technology Incor(cid:173)
`porated ("Microchip"). Examples of suitable hopping code 5
`technology are provided in Microchip's HCS301 product
`catalog and U.S. Pat. No. 5,686,904, the latter of which is
`hereby incorporated by reference herein regarding, among
`other things, its teachings of encryption and decryption
`algorithms and synchronization or hop code technology.
`In a preferred embodiment, a single receiver may be used
`with hundreds to several thousand transmitters, with the
`number of transmitters limited only by the receiver memory.
`As indicated above, the invention is especially useful in
`applications involving a large number of users (such as in a
`large apartment complex, a business, or a factory). Persons
`of ordinary skill in the art will understand, however, that
`many of the benefits of the invention can be experienced in
`applications involving a smaller number of users.
`Only the first transmitter and the second transmitter are
`illustrated in the Figures. Persons of ordinary skill in the art
`will understand, however, that the preferred method and
`apparatus can include third and subsequent transmitters that
`are learned and that operate similarly to the second trans(cid:173)
`mitter.
`In a preferred embodiment, the receiver is factory pro(cid:173)
`grammed with a 12-bit reference discrimination code. This
`reference discrimination information is unique and contains
`12 bits of information that enables the receiver to identify
`and discriminate authorized from unauthorized transmitters. 30
`Authorized transmitters are similarly factory programmed
`with the same discrimination code.
`As indicated above, preferred transmitters can take any
`suitable form, including (without limitation) cards, handheld 35
`electronic keys, RF or other frequency button activated
`devices, etc. In the preferred embodiment, the receiver first
`manually learns the characteristics of the first transmitter
`(similarly to the manual learning required with prior art
`systems).
`The first transmitter is similar to the second transmitter,
`except the second transmitter has a different transmitter
`identification signal. By virtue of coordinated programming
`between the receiver (typically programmed by the install(cid:173)
`ing company) and the transmitters (typically programmed or
`"burned" in by a manufacturer), the receiver can recognize
`each transmitters as belonging to an "authorized" group of
`transmitters. Accordingly, the "first" transmitter can be any
`of the authorized group of transmitters provided for a
`particular installation.
`Furthermore, because each transmitter is typically pro(cid:173)
`grammed or burned with a distinct transmitter identification
`signal, each individual transmitter can be singled out for
`different security clearances or similar control processes.
`For example, tenants might be charged an additional fee 55
`each month for access to their complex's pool hall and gym,
`and their individual transmitter's code can be authorized to
`allow them entry through gates or doors for those areas of
`the complex. If they choose to not continue to pay, that code
`control can be changed by the landlord or manager to
`remove that user from the "authorized list" for that gate or
`door, without requiring any changes to the user's transmitter.
`With regard to the preferred embodiment generally, and
`referring to the figures, all transmitters pass through the
`logic of FIG. 1. Depending on whether the signal is emitted 65
`for the first time, the second time, the third time or third time
`with some problem with aspects of the signal, four different
`
`6
`paths, represented by different portions of the figures, will be
`encountered. Those various paths are discussed in greater
`detail below, but a general overview is set forth here.
`If the receiver is being manually programmed for the first
`time, the logic proceeds from FIG. 1 then FIG. 5, via the
`connection PROG 100. If the transmitter emits a second
`signal for validation, the logic proceeds from FIG. 1 through
`FIG. 2, via the connection C. If the transmitter emits a third
`or a subsequent time and there is no problem with the signal
`10 and its processing, the logic proceeds from FIG. 1 to FIG. 2.
`If there is a problem during the third or a subsequent signal
`emission, however, the logic proceeds from FIG. 1, to FIG.
`2, to FIG. 3, to FIG. 1 again, and then to FIG. 4. If a second
`transmitter emits a signal for the first time, the logic pro-
`15 ceeds from FIG. 1, to FIG. 3, to FIG. 1 again, and then FIG.
`4. If the second transmitter emits a signal for the second time
`for validation, it is processed through FIG. 1 then FIG. 2. If
`the second transmitter is emitted for the third or a subsequent
`time and there is no problem with any aspects of the signal,
`20 processing proceeds from FIG. 1 to FIG. 2. If there is
`problem with any third or subsequent transmission, process(cid:173)
`ing proceeds from FIG. 1, to FIG. 2, to FIG. 3, to FIG. 1
`again, and then to FIG. 4.
`In a preferred embodiment of the invention, only the first
`25 transmitter has to be manually "learned" in. Once "learned"
`in, all subsequent transmitters are "automatically learned."
`That is, subsequent transmitters are initialized without first
`pressing the learn button on the receiver. Turning now to the
`logic or circuitry illustrated in FIG. 1, when no transmitter
`signal is detected, the receiver "keeps house" by continu(cid:173)
`ously updating a ten (10) second timer if the "ADD" flag 20
`is set. Persons of ordinary skill in the art will understand that
`the ten-second interval can be programmed to any suitable
`length without departing from the scope of the invention.
`They will similarly understand that the logic or circuitry
`illustrated in the Figures can be embodied in a wide variety
`and combination of chips, integrated circuits, and the like,
`depending on the particular installation and components
`utilized.
`In this "housekeeping" mode, the receiverlooks for the
`programming switch to be pressed 30. To "learn" the first
`transmitter, the receiver preferably is manually placed in
`"learn" mode (such as by pushing a button on the receiver)
`45 and the first transmitter is activated to send its signal
`(typically accomplished by the user pushing a button on the
`transmitter, indicated by block GC 38 in FIG. 5). The first
`signal is thereby emitted from the first transmitter and
`processed by the receiver. In FIG. 1, when the "learn" button
`on the receiver is pushed, the "SW Push?" block 30 is
`triggered and the logic or algorithm 10 is moved to the
`condition illustrated in FIG. 5 (via the common element
`indicated as PROG 100), to begin a logic sequence.
`In the preferred embodiment, the first transmitter may be
`provided with multiple buttons that can be programmed in
`various ways, including requiring a user to press a left
`button, a right button, or both in order to communicate with
`the receiver. Persons of ordinary skill in the art will under(cid:173)
`stand that, as indicated above, any suitable transmitter
`60 device can be utilized within the scope of the invention.
`As indicated above, the preferred transmitter signal
`includes 64 bits of information, although persons of ordinary
`skill in the art will understand that a wide variety of signals
`can be utilized effectively with the invention. The preferred
`64-bit signal preferably contains encrypted and non(cid:173)
`encrypted portions of the signal, including a button signal, a
`facility code signal, the aforementioned unique "burned-in"
`
`40
`
`50
`
`ASSA ABLOY Ex. 1014 - Page 13
`ASSA ABLOY AB v. CPC Patent Technologies Pty Ltd.
`IPR2022-01045 - U.S. Patent No. 9,269,208
`
`

`

`US 6,856,237 Bl
`
`7
`transmitter identification signal (these three portions prefer(cid:173)
`ably constitute a first subset of the entire signal) and a 32-bit
`hop code signal. In the preferred embodiment, the first
`subset of the signal uses 4 bits for the button information or
`signal, 12 bits for the facility code information or signal, and 5
`16 bits for the transmitter ID information or signal.
`Preferably, the 32-bit hop code is encrypted and the others
`portions of the signal are not. The preferred 32-bit hop code
`is decrypted into the same 4-bit button information or signal
`as in the first subset, 12-bit discrimination signal and a 16-bit 10
`synchronization signal. As illustrated in FIG. 5, upon detect(cid:173)
`ing this 64-bit signal, the receiver verifies that all 64-bits of
`the signal are good 42. The receiver then decrypts 44 the
`encryption component of the 64-bit signal and verifies that
`the transmitted 12-bit discrimination signal portion matches 15
`the receiver's 12-bit reference discrimination code at block
`46. If it does match, the receiver confirms 130 whether other
`characteristics of the first transmitter are already in its
`memory before writing 132 those characteristics in its
`electronically erasable ("EE") memory. This writing or 20
`storing 132 of information constitutes a "learn-in" process of
`the receiver. Persons of ordinary skill in the art will under(cid:173)
`stand that other memory will work, including RAM.
`However, if memory is required without power supply, then
`EE memory is used.
`As indicated above, in the preferred embodiment, if the
`discrimination signal matches the reference discrimination
`code at block 46, then the receiver searches its EE memory
`at step 130 for the same information as the emitted infor(cid:173)
`mation. When "learning" the first transmitter, the first time 30
`that first transmitter's button is pushed, no similar informa(cid:173)
`tion will be found in the receiver's EE memory bank (unless
`it has been previously programmed, as discussed in connec(cid:173)
`tion with alternative embodiments discussed below). In a
`preferred embodiment, the receiver then stores 132 in its EE 35
`memory the 4-bit button signal, the 12-bit facility code
`signal, the 16-bit first transmitter identification signal, and
`the 16-bit sync signal. Persons of ordinary skill in the art will
`understand that, in alternative embodiments, less than all of
`this information can be stored in the receiver's EE memory 40
`for later verification, use, and processing. The amount of
`information stored in the EE memory corresponds to a
`selection by the owner/manager of a balance between (1) a
`higher or lower level of security (more information stored
`corresponds to higher security) and (2) a varying degree of 45
`flexibility in terms of checking one or more signals before a
`subsequent transmitter is recognized and processed. In alter(cid:173)
`native embodiments, the first transmitter can be manually
`"learned" in at the factory. In such embodiments, when a
`user pushes the first transmitter button for the first time, he 50
`does not have to manually push the receiver's "learn"
`button.
`Once the first transmitter is "learned" in