DETAILED ACTION
Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status
The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 08/04/2026 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive. Although art by CN 107076842 A uses term radar it does not exclude laser radars(LIDAR) . One of ordinary skills in the art would recognize that LIDAR is obvious combination of the general term radar with small obvious modifications which are well understood in the art.
Color coating or placing different reflectors different wavelength filters is commonly practiced in order to associate different reflectors with different colors and that decreases the interference and identification of the reflector and it is described in D01.
Official Notice
Subject matter of dependent claims 2-8, 10-14, 16-20 is well know and either is present in prior art bellow or obvious over available prior art bellow as evidenced in European Office action filed with this Application. The motivation of obviousness is in order to perform triangulation and positioning using distinguishable light transmissions and therefore avoiding interference and mixing the tranmisions+reception pairs.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 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, 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.
Claim(s) 1, 9, 15 and claims bellow are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over D1 US 2019/162854 in view of D2 CN 107076842 A Further in view of D01 CN 107064906 A.
Regarding claims 1, 9 15 D1 teaches
An indoor positioning system (D1, par.75) using reflected light, comprising:
a reflection unit including at least one reflective surface (D1, par.25; "ToF circuit
110 is configured to emit a first modulated light signal and to receive a reflection of the first modulated light signal from the first device"); and
a user terminal for determining a location of a user based on location information of the at least one reflective surface and distance information from the user to the at least one reflective surface (D1, par.55),
wherein the reflective surface is configured to reflect an incident optical signal as reflected light of a specific frequency (D1 describes "reflection" of the modulated light signal in general; when light is generally reflected, then it is self evident that a "specific frequency" is reflected as well), and
the user terminal (D1, ref .100, "apparatus") includes:
an optical transmission unit to transmit the optical signal (D1, ref .110. e.g. fig.1 );
an optical reception unit (D1, ref .112, e.g. fig.1) to receive the reflected light of
the specific frequency reflected from the reflective surface;
a distance calculation unit (D1, ref .120, e.g. fig.1) to calculate a distance from
the user terminal to the reflective surface based on a time difference between a time at which the optical transmission unit transmitted the optical signal and a time at which the optical reception unit received the respective reflected light;[0001](time of flight)
a storage unit to store the location information of the reflective surface (D1, this is self evident for the ToF calculation); and
a location determination unit to determine the location of the user based on the location information of the reflective surface and the distance information from the user terminal to each reflective surface (D1, par.55-58).
But does not teach while D2 teaches
a plurality of reflective surfaces (Ra,Rb,Rc)(fig. 4) installed at predetermined locations in a building(page 26), wherein each reflective surface is configured to reflect an incident optical signal as reflected light (Lra, Lrb, Lrc) of a specific frequency, each specific frequency being different for each reflective surface (Ra,Rb,Rc)(claim 3 and page 8)
a storage unit to store the location information of the at least one reflective surface surfaces, the location information corresponding to the predetermined locations of the reflective surfaces(page 26); and a location determination unit to determine the location of the user based on the location information reflective surfaces(page 28)
corner-reflector structure in which an angle of incidence and an angle of reflection of the optical signal are equal to each other and which returns the reflected light in an incident direction back to the user terminal(fig. 3 explicitly shows corner reflector reflecting the waves back to the user terminal)
It would be obvious to one of ordinary skills in the art at the time of filing to modify teachings by D1 with teaching by D2 in order to determine the position of the user in the indoor environment.
D01 teaches
As reflective surface for light to take
“wherein each reflective surface includes a filter configured to reflect the respective specific wavelength or is a mirror coated in a color corresponding to the respective specific wavelength, and wherein each reflective surface has a structure in which an angle of incidence and an angle of reflection of the optical signal are equal to each other;”(page 9 mirror angle of incidence is = to angle of reflection.)
It will be obvious to one of ordinary skills in the art to modify teachings taught by D1 with teachings by D1 in order to provide reflector od different wavelength and therefore identify the light reflected from that reflective surface by decreasing interference.
Claim 5 D1[0024]
Claim 6 see D01
Regarding claim 18 D1 teaches modulating signal but does not explicitly say he optical signal includes an identification code to identify the user, and the user terminal senses only reflected light of an optical signal including the identification code
Although D1 does not explicitly teach limitation above it is well known in the art to use coded modulations in order to avoid interference and also signal separation. (see as evidence US 20020071126 A1 [0009]+ claim 7)
Claim(s) 2-8, 10-14, 16-20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over D1 in view of Official Notice.
If not explicitly taught in D1 Official Notice (evidenced by European search report) teaches the subject matter of dependent claims
It would be obvious to one of ordinary skills in the art at the time of filing to modify teachings by D1 with teaching by Official Notice in order to perform the triangulation using distinguishable light transmissions and therefore avoiding interference and mixing the tranmisions+reception pairs.
Conclusion
Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a). Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a).
A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of the advisory action. In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the mailing date of this final action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to HOVHANNES BAGHDASARYAN whose telephone number is (571)272-7845. The examiner can normally be reached Mon-Fri 7am - 5 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, Yuqing Xiao can be reached at (571) 270-3603. 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.
/HOVHANNES BAGHDASARYAN/Examiner, Art Unit 3645
Prosecution Insights