DETAILED ACTION
Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status
The present application is being examined under the pre-AIA first to invent provisions.
Continued Examination Under 37 CFR 1.114
A request for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, including the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e), was filed in this application after final rejection. Since this application is eligible for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114. Applicant's submission filed on 7/22/2026 has been entered.
Claim Status
Claims 1 is amended.
Claims 2 is canceled.
Claim 10 is newly added.
Claims 1, 3-10 are presented for examination.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments (see Remarks filed 7/22/2026) have been fully considered but applicant’s arguments are moot in view of new grounds of rejection.
Regarding applicant’s argument (Remarks page 6) about examiner does not demonstrate that the subject matter of Agrawal is in fact, supported by the alleged provisional application disclosure 60855288).
In response examiner respectfully points that, Provisional application 60/855,288, fig. 4, page 5 and 6 discloses dual mode IEEE 802.11 and Bluetooth wireless radio interface chip are referred to as Bluetooth Wireless Gateways (BWGs) routing or switching transmission between 802.11 and Bluetooth function as a bridge by interconnecting the two technologies.
Double Patenting
The nonstatutory double patenting rejection is based on a judicially created doctrine grounded in public policy (a policy reflected in the statute) so as to prevent the unjustified or improper timewise extension of the “right to exclude” granted by a patent and to prevent possible harassment by multiple assignees. A nonstatutory double patenting rejection is appropriate where the conflicting claims are not identical, but at least one examined application claim is not patentably distinct from the reference claim(s) because the examined application claim is either anticipated by, or would have been obvious over, the reference claim(s). See, e.g., In re Berg, 140 F.3d 1428, 46 USPQ2d 1226 (Fed. Cir. 1998); In re Goodman, 11 F.3d 1046, 29 USPQ2d 2010 (Fed. Cir. 1993); In re Longi, 759 F.2d 887, 225 USPQ 645 (Fed. Cir. 1985); In re Van Ornum, 686 F.2d 937, 214 USPQ 761 (CCPA 1982); In re Vogel, 422 F.2d 438, 164 USPQ 619 (CCPA 1970); In re Thorington, 418 F.2d 528, 163 USPQ 644 (CCPA 1969).
A timely filed terminal disclaimer in compliance with 37 CFR 1.321(c) or 1.321(d) may be used to overcome an actual or provisional rejection based on nonstatutory double patenting provided the reference application or patent either is shown to be commonly owned with the examined application, or claims an invention made as a result of activities undertaken within the scope of a joint research agreement. See MPEP § 717.02 for applications subject to examination under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA as explained in MPEP § 2159. See MPEP § 2146 et seq. for applications not subject to examination under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA . A terminal disclaimer must be signed in compliance with 37 CFR 1.321(b).
The USPTO Internet website contains terminal disclaimer forms which may be used. Please visit www.uspto.gov/patent/patents-forms. The filing date of the application in which the form is filed determines what form (e.g., PTO/SB/25, PTO/SB/26, PTO/AIA /25, or PTO/AIA /26) should be used. A web-based eTerminal Disclaimer may be filled out completely online using web-screens. An eTerminal Disclaimer that meets all requirements is auto-processed and approved immediately upon submission. For more information about eTerminal Disclaimers, refer to www.uspto.gov/patents/process/file/efs/guidance/eTD-info-I.jsp.
Claims 1 and 3-9 are rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting over claims 1-3 of Patent No. 10,474,418 in view of Zavracky, Kishida, Agrawal, Bengtsson. Although the claims at issue are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other because they claim same subject matter.
The following subject matter claimed in the instant application is fully disclosed in the patent No. US 10,474,418 and is covered by the patent since the patent and the application are claiming common subject matter, as follows:
Instant Application 15/802,908
U.S. Patent No. 10,474,418
Claims 1 and 3-10 maps to
Claim 1-3
Claim 1 of U.S. Patent, US 10,474,418 claims inventive steps same as of the inventive steps in claim 1 of instant application. However claim 1 of U.S. Patent, US 10,474,418 does not claim feature of, “wherein the near-eye wearable wireless transfer device has a display coupled to an arm, a processor, a memory, a wireless transceiver, an audio input, an audio output, and a speech recognition engine,
wherein the wireless transceiver employs a Bluetooth® physical layer with a Bluetooth® proxy to implement a packet switching gateway,
wherein the signal features auto sequencing and guaranteed packet delivery,
where in the Bluetooth wireless connection established between the host device and near eye, wearable wireless transfer device relies on a removal of one or more Bluetooth protocol layers.”
Zavracky discloses, wherein the near-eye wearable wireless transfer device has a display coupled to an arm (Par. 0160, At least one display pod 1100 is mounted to the horizontal support 1630 (i.e. arm as shown in fig. 29A, 28)), a processor (Par. 1064, fig. 20, CPU 1712), a memory (Par. 0156, fig. 28, Personal Computer Memory Card International Association (PCMCIA) interface module 1554 coupled to the head band 1512. A PCMIA card 1558 is inserted into the PCMCIA interface module 1554), a wireless transceiver (Par. 0157, the communication module 1720 includes a wireless transducer for transmitting and receiving digital audio, video and data signals), an audio input (Attached to one of the earphones is a microphone arm 1690 having a microphone 1559), an audio output (Par. 0158, The earphones 1603a, 1603b).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to modify claim 1 of U.S. Patent, US 10,474,418 by adding feature of wherein the near-eye wearable wireless transfer device has a display coupled to an arm, a processor, a memory, a wireless transceiver, an audio input, an audio output, as taught by Zavracky, drive circuits of panel displays having the desired speed, resolution and size and providing for ease, and reduced cost of fabrication, as disclosed in Zavracky, par. 0008.
Claim 1 of U.S. Patent, US 10,474,418 in view of Zavracky does not disclose, “wherein the near-eye wearable device has a speech recognition engine,
wherein the wireless transceiver employs a Bluetooth® physical layer with a Bluetooth® proxy to implement a packet switching gateway,
wherein the signal features auto sequencing and guaranteed packet delivery,
where in the Bluetooth wireless connection established between the host device and near eye, wearable wireless transfer device relies on a removal of one or more Bluetooth protocol layers.”
Kishida discloses, wherein the near-eye wearable device has a speech recognition engine (Par. 0045, the display device 2 further includes a control section 27 having a microcomputer or the like controls all devices in the display device 2. Accordingly, the display device 2 functions as one peripheral. This configuration enables voice recognition, voice synthesis, and the like by the display device 2. For example, the control section 27 recognizes a voice signal input from the microphone 25),
where in the Bluetooth wireless connection established between the host device and near eye, wearable wireless transfer device relies on a Bluetooth protocol (Par. 0048-0049, fig. 4, using Bluetooth communication between computer 1 (i.e. host device) and display device 2 (i.e. near eye wearable HMD as shown in fig. 2A)
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to modify Claim 1 of U.S. Patent, US 10,474,418 in view of Zavracky. Clear motivation exists to make this modification, which would enable the HMD of Zavracky to benefit from voice activated control of operation of displayed content such as controlling camera angle and providing hands free keyboard and mouse function (see Kishida par. 0077), cableless connection between wearable device and host device makes it less obstructive to work. For these reasons, the skilled artisan would conclude that modifying the HMD of Zavracky to utilize the speech recognition feature and Bluetooth connection as described in the Kishida to control the operation of the HMD unit using voice command to make it hands free operation that would result in an improved product..
Claim 1 of U.S. Patent, US 10,474,418 in view of Zavracky in view of Kishida does not disclose, “wherein the wireless transceiver employs a Bluetooth® physical layer with a Bluetooth® proxy to implement a packet switching gateway,
wherein the signal features auto sequencing and guaranteed packet delivery,
where in the Bluetooth wireless connection established between the host device and wireless transfer device relies on a removal of one or more Bluetooth protocol layer.”
Agrawal discloses, wherein the wireless transceiver employs a Bluetooth® physical layer with a Bluetooth® proxy to implement a packet switching gateway (Par. 0018, fig. 3, Bluetooth protocol stack. Par. 0027, fig. 3, a top radio access control protocol layer (RAC), which acts as a bridge between the two protocols, as well as a packet router. This layer receives and forwards transmission packets to and from the Bluetooth and IEEE 802.11 networks utilizing a single antenna. Fig. 3, par. 0018-0019 discloses baseband layer (i.e. baseband layer in Bluetooth protocol stack is part of the physical layer of OSI model) defines key procedures that enabled devices to communicate with each other using Bluetooth technology. Par. 0029, Devices which possess the one-chip, dual mode IEEE 802.11 and Bluetooth wireless radio interface chip are referred to as Bluetooth Wireless Gateways (BWGs), i.e. wireless communication is embellished using Bluetooth physical (i.e. baseband layer) layer with a Bluetooth bridge (i.e. proxy) to implement packet routing or packet switching gateway).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to modify Claim 1 of U.S. Patent, US 10,474,418 in view of Zavracky in view of Kishida with the teachings of the wireless transceiver employs a Bluetooth physical layer with a Bluetooth proxy to implement a packet switching gateway, as taught by Agrawal, to provide Bluetooth device access to outside world such as internet by combining Bluetooth with WLAN by packet switching between Bluetooth and WLAN networks, as disclosed in Agrawal, par. 00004.
Claim 1 of U.S. Patent, US 10,474,418 in view of Zavracky in view of Zavracky in view of Kishida in further view Agrawal does not disclose, “wherein the signal features auto sequencing and guaranteed packet delivery,
where in the Bluetooth wireless connection established between the host device and wireless transfer device relies on a removal of one or more Bluetooth protocol layer.”
Bengtsson discloses, Bluetooth connection wherein the signal features auto sequencing and guaranteed packet delivery (col. 13 lines 3-22 – RFCOMM features guaranteed QoS, a form of guaranteeing delivery of at least some of the packets. The L2CAP protocol, upon which RFCOMM is built, features auto sequencing as is known in the art, and as described in the Bluetooth Core Specification v1.0B).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to modify Claim 1 of U.S. Patent, US 10,474,418 in view of Zavracky in view of Kishida in further view of Agrawal with the teachings of Bengtsson, the rationale being to provide improved quality of delivery of the content.
Claim 1 of U.S. Patent, US 10,474,418 in view of Zavracky in of Kishida in further view Agrawal in further view of Bengtsson does not disclose, “where in the Bluetooth wireless connection established between the host device and wireless transfer device relies on a removal of one or more Bluetooth protocol layer.”
However, in an analogous art, Carreel discloses, where in the Bluetooth wireless connection established between the host device and wireless transfer device relies on a removal of one or more Bluetooth protocol layer (Par. 0052, The communication between the base 1 and some of these entities constituted by radiocommunication devices or terminals (particularly the computer 2 and the wireless telephone 3), can be carried by radio channels according to a local radiocommunication standard such as the "BLUETOOTH" standard, Par. 0059, wireless device communicate with base device over Bluetooth, Par. 0084-0088, simplified radio link can implement a reduced "BLUETOOTH" protocol (i.e. removing the layers that would be in standard Bluetooth protocol layer, such as for example other layers PHY RFCOMM SDP) comprising the following layers: "LC" layer (real time control of the radio link), "LM" layer (real time control of the radio link), "L2CAP" layer: control).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to modify Claim 1 of U.S. Patent, US 10,474,418 in view of Zavracky in view of Kishida in further view of Agrawal in further view of Bengtsson with the teachings of Carreel, the rationale being to provide great ease of updating and, if necessary a saving in memory (Carreel, see par. 0016).
Claim 1 is rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting over claims 1 of Patent No. 10579324 in view of Zavracky, Kishida, Bengtsson and Carreel. Although the claims at issue are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other because they claim same subject matter.
The following subject matter claimed in the instant application is fully disclosed in the patent No. US 10579324and is covered by the patent since the patent and the application are claiming common subject matter, as follows:
Instant Application 15/802,908
U.S. Patent No. 10579324
Claim 1 maps to
Claim 1
Claim 1 of U.S. Patent, US 10579324 claims inventive steps same as of the inventive steps in claim 1 of instant application. However claim 1 of U.S. Patent, US 10579324 does not claim feature of, “wherein the near-eye wearable wireless transfer device has a display coupled to an arm, a processor, a memory, a wireless transceiver, an audio input, an audio output, and a speech recognition engine,
wherein the signal features auto sequencing and guaranteed packet delivery,
where in the Bluetooth wireless connection established between the host device and near eye, wearable wireless transfer device relies on a removal of one or more Bluetooth protocol layers.”
Zavracky discloses, wherein the near-eye wearable wireless transfer device has a display coupled to an arm (Par. 0160, At least one display pod 1100 is mounted to the horizontal support 1630 (i.e. arm as shown in fig. 29A, 28)), a processor (Par. 1064, fig. 20, CPU 1712), a memory (Par. 0156, fig. 28, Personal Computer Memory Card International Association (PCMCIA) interface module 1554 coupled to the head band 1512. A PCMIA card 1558 is inserted into the PCMCIA interface module 1554), a wireless transceiver (Par. 0157, the communication module 1720 includes a wireless transducer for transmitting and receiving digital audio, video and data signals), an audio input (Attached to one of the earphones is a microphone arm 1690 having a microphone 1559), an audio output (Par. 0158, The earphones 1603a, 1603b).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to modify claim 1 of U.S. Patent, US 10579324 by adding feature of wherein the near-eye wearable wireless transfer device has a display coupled to an arm, a processor, a memory, a wireless transceiver, an audio input, an audio output, as taught by Zavracky, drive circuits of panel displays having the desired speed, resolution and size and providing for ease, and reduced cost of fabrication, as disclosed in Zavracky, par. 0008.
Claim 1 of U.S. Patent, US 10579324 in view of Zavracky does not disclose, “wherein the near-eye wearable device has a speech recognition engine,
wherein the signal features auto sequencing and guaranteed packet delivery,
where in the Bluetooth wireless connection established between the host device and near eye, wearable wireless transfer device relies on a removal of one or more Bluetooth protocol layers.”
Kishida discloses, wherein the near-eye wearable device has a speech recognition engine (Par. 0045, the display device 2 further includes a control section 27 having a microcomputer or the like controls all devices in the display device 2. Accordingly, the display device 2 functions as one peripheral. This configuration enables voice recognition, voice synthesis, and the like by the display device 2. For example, the control section 27 recognizes a voice signal input from the microphone 25),
where in the Bluetooth wireless connection established between the host device and near eye, wearable wireless transfer device relies on a Bluetooth protocol (Par. 0048-0049, fig. 4, using Bluetooth communication between computer 1 (i.e. host device) and display device 2 (i.e. near eye wearable HMD as shown in fig. 2A)
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to modify Claim 1 of U.S. Patent, US 10579324 in view of Zavracky. Clear motivation exists to make this modification, to benefit from voice activated dictation, control of video camera in HMD 601 and such (see Kishida par. 0070, 0072 fig. 15) and cableless connection between wearable device and host device makes it less obstructive to work. For these reasons, the skilled artisan would conclude that modifying the HMD of Zavracky to utilize the speech recognition feature and Bluetooth connection as described in the Kishida to control the operation of the HMD unit using voice command to make it hands free operation that would result in an improved product.
Claim 1 of U.S. Patent, US 10579324 in view of Zavracky in further view of Kishida does not disclose, “wherein the signal features auto sequencing and guaranteed packet delivery,
where in the Bluetooth wireless connection established between the host device and near eye, wearable wireless transfer device relies on a removal of one or more Bluetooth protocol layers.”
Bengtsson discloses, Bluetooth connection wherein the signal features auto sequencing and guaranteed packet delivery (col. 13 lines 3-22 – RFCOMM features guaranteed QoS, a form of guaranteeing delivery of at least some of the packets. The L2CAP protocol, upon which RFCOMM is built, features auto sequencing as is known in the art, and as described in the Bluetooth Core Specification v1.0B).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to modify Claim 1 of U.S. Patent, US 10579324 in view of Zavracky in view of Kishida in further view with the teachings of Bengtsson, the rationale being to provide improved quality of delivery of the content.
Claim 1 of U.S. Patent, US 10579324 in view of Zavracky in of Kishida in further view Bengtsson does not disclose, “where in the Bluetooth wireless connection established between the host device and wireless transfer device relies on a removal of one or more Bluetooth protocol layer.”
However, in an analogous art, Carreel discloses, where in the Bluetooth wireless connection established between the host device and wireless transfer device relies on a removal of one or more Bluetooth protocol layer (Par. 0052, The communication between the base 1 and some of these entities constituted by radiocommunication devices or terminals (particularly the computer 2 and the wireless telephone 3), can be carried by radio channels according to a local radiocommunication standard such as the "BLUETOOTH" standard, Par. 0059, wireless device communicate with base device over Bluetooth, Par. 0084-0088, simplified radio link can implement a reduced "BLUETOOTH" protocol (i.e. removing the layers that would be in standard Bluetooth protocol layer, such as for example other layers PHY RFCOMM SDP) comprising the following layers: "LC" layer (real time control of the radio link), "LM" layer (real time control of the radio link), "L2CAP" layer: control).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to modify Claim 1 of U.S. Patent, US 10579324 in view of Zavracky in view of Kishida in further view of Bengtsson with the teachings of Carreel, the rationale being to provide great ease of updating and, if necessary a saving in memory (Carreel, see par. 0016).
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of 35 U.S.C. 112(a):
(a) IN GENERAL.—The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor or joint inventor of carrying out the invention.
The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112:
The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor of carrying out his invention.
Claims 1, 3-10 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(a) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), first paragraph, as failing to comply with the written description requirement. The claim(s) contains subject matter which was not described in the specification in such a way as to reasonably convey to one skilled in the relevant art that the inventor or a joint inventor, or for pre-AIA the inventor(s), at the time the application was filed, had possession of the claimed invention.
Claim 1 recite “wherein the Bluetooth wireless connection established between the host device and the near eye, wearable wireless transfer device relies on a removal of one or more Bluetooth protocol layers”. This feature does not find support in the specification.
Upon review of specification, the examiner is unable to find written description support for the above limitations. Therefore, there is no sufficient support for the above claimed features in applicant’s specification.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
The following is a quotation of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 103(a) which forms the basis for all obviousness rejections set forth in this Office action:
(a) A patent may not be obtained though the invention is not identically disclosed or described as set forth in section 102, if the differences between the subject matter sought to be patented and the prior art are such that the subject matter as a whole would have been obvious at the time the invention was made to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which said subject matter pertains. Patentability shall not be negatived by the manner in which the invention was made.
Claims 1, 3-9 are rejected under pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 103(a) as being unpatentable over Zavracky (US 20020030649), in view of Kishida (US 20020015008), in further view of Kang (US 20080032627), in further view of Bengtsson et al., WIPO Pub No. WO 02/15075, in further view of Carreel et al. (US 20080250404), in further view of Agrawal et al. (US 20080117850, supported by provisional application 60855288), in further view of Ishizuka, JP 2002112093 (reference is made to the English translation), in further view of iXBT Labs, “TI's OMAP Processor…”, published 05/12/2006, in further view of Tsai (US 20080218581).
As to claim 1 Zavracky discloses a method comprising:
transmitting, via a wireless transceiver of a host device, a signal to a near eye, wearable wireless transfer device (¶¶167 and 173 – the head-mounted device 1511 receives wireless signals from a host device);
wherein the near-eye wearable wireless transfer device has a display coupled to an arm (Par. 0160, At least one display pod 1100 is mounted to the horizontal support 1630 (i.e. arm as shown in fig. 29A, 28)), a processor (Par. 1064, fig. 20, CPU 1712), a memory (Par. 0156, fig. 28, Personal Computer Memory Card International Association (PCMCIA) interface module 1554 coupled to the head band 1512. A PCMIA card 1558 is inserted into the PCMCIA interface module 1554), a wireless transceiver (Par. 0157, the communication module 1720 includes a wireless transducer for transmitting and receiving digital audio, video and data signals), an audio input (Attached to one of the earphones is a microphone arm 1690 having a microphone 1559), an audio output (Par. 0158, The earphones 1603a, 1603b),
receiving, via a wireless transceiver of the near eye, wearable wireless transfer device, the signal from the host device (¶167), the signal being of at least Video Graphic Array (VGA) quality (¶¶53-55) and being received over a wireless connection (¶167),
wherein the signal comprises a first channel consisting of audio/video data and a second channel consisting of non-audio/video data (¶¶167-168 – the signal includes audio/visual information and data signals, thus includes two (logical) channels of information); and
generating a video signal, from the signal, that is suitable for handling by a display driver in the near eye, wearable wireless transfer device (¶164 – display driver 1716 generates a video signal for display on panel 1700),
wherein the near eye, wearable wireless transfer device has at least one display configured to be a near eye, wearable display (Fig. 29A-29D), and
wherein an output of the at least one display, generated from the video signal, (¶¶53-54, ¶62, and ¶112), is of at least Video Graphic Array (VGA) quality (¶¶53-55) and is received over the wireless connection (¶167),55).
Zavracky fails to disclose the signal received over a Serial Port Profile (SPP) Bluetooth wireless connection; wherein the signal features auto sequencing and guaranteed packet delivery,
wherein the near-eye wearable device has a speech recognition engine,
where in the Bluetooth wireless connection established between the host device and near eye, wearable wireless transfer device relies on a removal of one or more Bluetooth protocol layers;
wherein the signal features auto sequencing and guaranteed packet delivery.
However, in an analogous art Kishida discloses, wherein the near-eye wearable device has a speech recognition engine (Par. 0045, the display device 2 further includes a control section 27 having a microcomputer or the like controls all devices in the display device 2. Accordingly, the display device 2 functions as one peripheral. This configuration enables voice recognition, voice synthesis, and the like by the display device 2. For example, the control section 27 recognizes a voice signal input from the microphone 25),
where in the Bluetooth wireless connection established between the host device and near eye, wearable wireless transfer device relies on a Bluetooth protocol (Par. 0048-0049, fig. 4, using Bluetooth communication between computer 1 (i.e. host device) and display device 2 (i.e. near eye wearable HMD as shown in fig. 2A)
It would have been obvious to a skilled artisan at the time of the invention to modify the system of Zavracky, with the teachings of Kishida. Clear motivation exists to make this modification, which would enable the HMD of Zavracky to benefit from voice activated dictation, control of video camera in HMD 601 and such (see Kishida par. 0070, 0072 fig. 15) and cableless connection between wearable device and host device makes it less obstructive to work. For these reasons, the skilled artisan would conclude that modifying the HMD of Zavracky to utilize the speech recognition feature and Bluetooth connection as described in the Kishida to control the operation of the HMD unit using voice command to make it hands free operation that would result in an improved product.
System of Zavracky and Kishida fails to teach, the signal received over a Serial Port Profile (SPP) Bluetooth wireless connection; wherein the signal features auto sequencing and guaranteed packet delivery;
where in the Bluetooth wireless connection established between the host device and wireless transfer device relies on a removal of one or more Bluetooth protocol layers.
However, in an analogous art, Kang discloses, the signal received over a Serial Port Profile (SPP) Bluetooth wireless connection (Par. 0021, first Bluetooth module 2 and the second Bluetooth module 4 establish a wireless communication link for transferring real-time image data 9 between the host 1 and image module 3 using SPP. The SPP sets up a virtual serial port relying on RFCOMM (Radio Frequency Communication, a serial cable emulation protocol) to replace the original physical connection).
It would have been obvious to a skilled artisan at the time of the invention to modify the system of Zavracky and Kishida with the teachings of Kang, the rationale being to real-time image data transmitted without physical cable connection. Bluetooth SPP (Serial Port Profile) defines how to set-up virtual serial ports on two devices and connecting these with Bluetooth.
System of Zavracky, Kishida and Kang teaches, SPP sets up a virtual serial port relying on RFCOMM (Radio Frequency Communication, a serial cable emulation protocol) to replace the original physical connection. However, it does not teach RFCOMM Bluetooth connection wherein the signal features auto sequencing and guaranteed packet delivery.
Bengtsson discloses, Bluetooth connection wherein the signal features auto sequencing and guaranteed packet delivery (col. 13 lines 3-22 – RFCOMM features guaranteed QoS, a form of guaranteeing delivery of at least some of the packets. The L2CAP protocol, upon which RFCOMM is built, features auto sequencing as is known in the art, and as described in the Bluetooth Core Specification v1.0B).
It would have been obvious to a skilled artisan at the time of the invention to modify the system of Zavracky, Kishida and Kang with the teachings of Bengtsson, the rationale being to provide improved quality of delivery of the content.
The system of Zavracky, Kishida, Kang and Bengtsson fails discloses, where in the Bluetooth wireless connection established between the host device and wireless transfer device relies on a removal of one or more Bluetooth protocol layers.
However, in an analogous art, Carreel discloses, where in the Bluetooth wireless connection established between the host device and wireless transfer device relies on a removal of one or more Bluetooth protocol layer (Par. 0052, The communication between the base 1 and some of these entities constituted by radiocommunication devices or terminals (particularly the computer 2 and the wireless telephone 3), can be carried by radio channels according to a local radiocommunication standard such as the "BLUETOOTH" standard, Par. 0059, wireless device communicate with base device over Bluetooth, Par. 0084-0088, simplified radio link can implement a reduced "BLUETOOTH" protocol (i.e. removing the layers that would be in standard Bluetooth protocol layer, such as for example other layers PHY RFCOMM SDP) comprising the following layers: "LC" layer (real time control of the radio link), "LM" layer (real time control of the radio link), "L2CAP" layer: control).
It would have been obvious to a skilled artisan before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the system of Zavracky, Kishida, Kang, and Bengtsson with the teachings of Carreel, the rationale being to great ease of updating and, if necessary a saving in memory (Carreel, see par. 0016).
The system of Zavracky, Kishida, Kang, Bengtsson and Carreel fails to disclose that wherein the wireless transceiver employs a Bluetooth® physical layer with a Bluetooth® proxy to implement a packet switching gateway, the signal consists of audio and visual information received over a first radio frequency channel and non-audio and non-visual information received over a second radio frequency channel.
However, in an analogous art Agrawal discloses, wherein the wireless transceiver employs a Bluetooth® physical layer with a Bluetooth® proxy to implement a packet switching gateway (Par. 0018, fig. 3, Bluetooth protocol stack. Par. 0027, fig. 3, a top radio access control protocol layer (RAC), which acts as a bridge between the two protocols, as well as a packet router. This layer receives and forwards transmission packets to and from the Bluetooth and IEEE 802.11 networks utilizing a single antenna. Fig. 3, par. 0018-0019 discloses baseband layer (i.e. baseband layer in Bluetooth protocol stack is part of the physical layer of OSI model) defines key procedures that enabled devices to communicate with each other using Bluetooth technology. Par. 0029, Devices which possess the one-chip, dual mode IEEE 802.11 and Bluetooth wireless radio interface chip are referred to as Bluetooth Wireless Gateways (BWGs), i.e. wireless communication is embellished using Bluetooth physical (i.e. baseband layer) layer with a Bluetooth bridge (i.e. proxy) to implement packet routing or packet switching gateway. Provisional application 60/855,288, fig. 4, page 5 and 6 discloses dual mode IEEE 802.11 and Bluetooth wireless radio interface chip are referred to as Bluetooth Wireless Gateways (BWGs) routing or switching transmission between 802.11 and Bluetooth function as a bridge by interconnecting the two technologies.).
It would have been obvious to a skilled artisan at the time of the invention to modify the system of System of The system of Zavracky, Kishida, Kang, Bengtsson and Carreel with the teachings of the wireless transceiver employs a Bluetooth physical layer with a Bluetooth proxy to implement a packet switching gateway, as taught by Agrawal, to provide Bluetooth device access to outside world such as internet by combining Bluetooth with WLAN by packet switching between Bluetooth and WLAN networks, as disclosed in Agrawal, par. 00004.
The system of Zavracky, Kishida, Kang, Bengtsson, Carreel and Agrawal fails to disclose, the signal consists of audio and visual information received over a first radio frequency channel and non-audio and non-visual information received over a second radio frequency channel.
Ishizuka discloses transmitting a wireless Bluetooth signal to a video reception device (Fig. 1: 27), wherein the signal consists of visual information received over a first radio frequency channel and non-audio and non-visual information received over a second radio frequency channel (¶¶42-44 – video data (see also ¶40, which describes that recording the video includes capturing audio, which would suggest to the skilled artisan that audio and video are delivered to the output device) and control information (non-A/V information) are sent via separate Bluetooth transmission channels. A POSA would understand this as a disclosure that the two types of information are delivered using first and second RF channels).
It would have been obvious to a skilled artisan before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the system of Zavracky, Kishida, Kang, Bengtsson, Carreel and Agrawal with the teachings of Ishizuka, the rationale being to ensure proper reception of the video data by dedicating a Bluetooth channel to its delivery. As described above, Ishizuka suggests, but does not explicitly disclose, that audio is sent along with the video to the receiving device. However, because the Zavracky device already receives audio for output along with video (see Zavracky ¶167), the combination of these references would suggest sending A/V information via Ishizuka’s first Bluetooth channel and control information via a second channel.
The system of Zavracky, Kishida, Kang, Bengtsson, Carreel, Agrawal and Ishizuka fails to disclose that the generating is performed by an ARM DSP processor of the near eye, wearable wireless transceiver device.
However, in an analogous art, iXBT discloses a portable media device that generates videos by an ARM DSP processor of the near eye, wearable wireless transceiver device (pg. 1-2: the OMAP 2420 is an ARM DSP processor for generating video in a portable media device).
It would have been obvious to a skilled artisan at the time of the invention to modify the system of Zavracky, Kishida, Kang, Bengtsson, Carreel, Agrawal and Ishizuka with the teachings of iXBT. Clear motivation exists to make this modification, which would enable the HMD of Zavracky to benefit from improved functionality offered by the OMAP 2420. Such motivation includes improved speed and video quality, “enhanced power and performance management through TI's SmartReflex solutions that incorporate a range of intelligent and adaptive hardware and software technologies that dynamically control voltage, frequency and power based on device activity, modes of operation and process and temperature variation.” (see iXBT pg.1-2). For these reasons, the skilled artisan would conclude that modifying the HMD of Zavracky to utilize the OMAP processor described in the iXBT article would result in an improved product.
The system of Zavracky, Kishida, Kang, Bengtsson, Carreel, Agrawal, Ishizuka, and iXBT fails to disclose that the ARM DSP processor is configured to open a communication port to the host system to receive the signal, wherein the ARM DSP processor is configured to modify the signal into an audio stream and a video stream.
However, in an analogous art, Tsai discloses, the ARM DSP processor is configured to open a communication port to the host system to receive the signal, wherein the ARM DSP processor is configured to modify the signal into an audio stream and a video stream (Par. 0029, par. 0039, fig. 4 and 7 The audio/video integrated unit 504 is electronically connected to the first memory unit 500 and the second memory 502 for separating at least one audio signal and least one a video signal of a plurality of voice packets via the communication software, fig. 4 and fig. 7 shows receive audio/video communication packet, The audio/video integrated unit 504 includes audio/video processor 5042 that drives audio/video encoder/decoder to separate the audio packet and video packet to be output via audio output and video display unit. Par. 0032, The audio/video processor 5042 is a microprocessor designed by ARM Corporation. Par. 039, the network audio/video communication device receiving at least one audio/video communication packet via the Internet (S200), i.e. as shown in fig. 4, network audio/video communication device diagram where audio/video processor (i.e. ARM processor) is connected to network interface unit 506 to receive audio/video connect to transmitter device or host system (see par. 0041). The limitation “modify the signal into an audio stream and video stream” has been interpreted as, stripping video signal into respective audio and video streams, as disclosed in applicant’s specification par. 0031).
It would have been obvious to a skilled artisan at the time of the invention to modify the system of Zavracky, Kishida, Kang, Bengtsson, Carreel, Agrawal, Ishizuka, and iXBT with the teachings of Tsai. Clear motivation exists to make this modification, which would enable the HMD of Zavracky to benefit from improved functionality offered of Tsai’s ARM processor to receive and decode audio/video signal in to video and audio to be outputted for user experience. Such motivation includes for supporting MPEG-4, H.264 or higher specifications. (see Tsai par. 0030). For these reasons, the skilled artisan would conclude that modifying the HMD of Zavracky to utilize the ARM processor described in the Tsai to separate audio and video signals for outputting by video display and audio output would result in an improved product.
As to claim 3 Zavracky discloses sending the signal and other data over a high speed connection (¶167). Zavracky fails to explicitly disclose that the signal and other data are multiplexed. Official notice is taken that this was widely practiced in the art at the time of the invention, and to include this functionality into the system of Zavracky would have been obvious to the skilled artisan in order to send audio and video contemporaneously in a manner the synchronizes their reception.
As to claim 4 Bengtsson discloses reading an application program from a memory (Fig. 3 and its description).
As to claim 5 Zavracky discloses generating a monaural or stereo audio output (¶156).
As to claim 6 Kishida discloses receiving at least one voice command by an audio input of the near eye, wearable wireless transfer device (Par. 0077, words such as "up", "down", "right", and "left" are recognized, and the image capturing direction of the video camera 602 is adjusted according to a voice recognition result).
As to claim 7 Kishida discloses that at least one voice command is used to control, via the speech recognition engine, at least one function of the near eye, wearable wireless transfer device (Par. 0077, words such as "up", "down", "right", and "left" are recognized, and the image capturing direction of the video camera 602 is adjusted according to a voice recognition result, i.e. controlling camera 602 angle which is part of the HMD 601 as shown in fig. 15, camera 602 provides function of taking video of line of sight of user).
As to claim 8 iXBT discloses that an ARM bus of the ARM DSP processor is configured to send the video signal directly to the display driver of the near eye, wearable wireless transfer device (see circuit diagram – the OMAP 2420 SoC includes internal display drivers. The bus that inherently connects the ARM and display driver is therefore an ARM bus of the processor).
As to claim 9 the system of Zavracky and iXBT discloses that the signal is decompressed (Abstract; ¶77) by the ARM DSP processor to create the video signal (iXBT).
Claim 10 is rejected under pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 103(a) as being unpatentable over Zavracky, US 20020030649, in view of Kishida (US 20020015008), in further view of Kang US 20080032627, in further view of Bengtsson et al., WIPO Pub No. WO 02/15075, in further view of Carreel et al. (US 20080250404), in further view of Agrawal et al. (US 20080117850, supported by provisional application 60855288), in further view of Ishizuka, JP 2002112093 (reference is made to the English translation), in further view of iXBT Labs, “TI's OMAP Processor…”, published 05/12/2006, in further view of Tsai (US 20080218581), in further view of Fengels (US 20060209013).
As to claim 10, The method of claim 1,
The system of Zavracky, Kishida, Kang, Bengtsson, Carreel, Agrawal, Ishizuka, iXBT and Tsai fails to disclose, wherein the communication port of the near eye, wearable wireless transfer device is configured to receive the signal over a universal serial bus (USB) interface.
However, in an analogous art, Fengels discloses, wherein the communication port of the near eye, wearable wireless transfer device is configured to receive the signal over a universal serial bus (USB) interface (Par. 0180, fig. 9A and 9B, wearable apparatus and a receiver apparatus sends the image and audio data to a high bandwidth RF transmitter 161 without further data processing. The transmitter constitutes part of a broadband wireless link, such as wireless USB).
It would have been obvious to a skilled artisan at the time of the invention to modify the system of Zavracky, Kishida, Kang, Bengtsson, Carreel, Agrawal, Ishizuka, iXBT and Tsai with teaching of Fengels. Clear motivation exists to make this modification, which would enable the HMD of Zavracky to benefit from additional wireless connectivity such as wireless USB that provides ultra-low latency and stable connection with less prone to interference. For these reasons, the skilled artisan would conclude that modifying the HMD of Zavracky to utilize the wireless USB described in the Fengels to provide connectivity that is ultra-low latency and stable.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to AKSHAY DOSHI whose telephone number is (571)272-2736. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 9:30 AM to 6:00 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, JOHN W MILLER can be reached at (571)272-7353. 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.
/A.D./Examiner, Art Unit 2422
/JOHN W MILLER/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2422
Prosecution Insights