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 .
Status of the Claims / Priority
This action is in response to applicant’s filing on November 21st, 2025. Claims 1-2, 4-10, and 13-22 are pending.
Response to Amendment
In response to Applicant’s amendment filed on November 21st, 2025, Examiner withdraws the previous claim objections; withdraws the previous 35 U.S.C. 112(d) rejection; and withdraws previous 35 U.S.C. 103 prior art rejections.
Response to Arguments
3. Applicant’s arguments, filed November 21st, 2025, with respect to the rejection(s) of claim(s) have been fully considered and are persuasive. Therefore, the rejection has been withdrawn. However, upon further consideration, a new ground(s) of rejection is made in view of US-20200307403 (hereinafter, “Rastoll”).
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(b):
(b) CONCLUSION.—The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph:
The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the applicant regards as his invention.
Claim 19 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor (or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the applicant), regards as the invention.
Claim 19 depends on a cancelled claim 11. Claim 19 being dependent on a cancelled claim render’s the scope indefinite.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
7. In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status.
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.
The factual inquiries 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 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.
8. Claims 1-2, 4, 7-8, 10, 11, 14, 16, 18, 19, and 20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Higgins in view of Cyril Rastoll (US 20200307403; filed 1 Apr 2019; hereinafter known as, ‘Rastoll’).
9. Regarding claim 1 Higgins discloses A control system for operating a motor vehicle component of a motor vehicle (see at least [Col. 16, lines 19-24]; “the vehicle control system 348…issues appropriate commands regarding vehicle operation”), the control system comprising:
a positioning system provided with a first plurality of positioning units of a first type and a second plurality of positioning units of a second type (Column 3, Lines 45-62, “As shown in FIG. 1, the vehicle 100 may, for example, include at least one of a ranging and imaging system 112 (e.g., LIDAR, etc.), an imaging sensor 116A, 116F (e.g., camera, IR, etc.), a radio object-detection and ranging system sensors 116B (e.g., RADAR, RF, etc.), ultrasonic sensors 116C, and/or other object-detection sensors 116D, 116E…In one embodiment, the RADAR sensors 116B may be disposed at least at a front 110, aft 120, or side 160 of the vehicle 100. Among other things, the RADAR sensors may be used to monitor and/or detect a position of other vehicles, pedestrians, and/or other objects near, or proximal to, the vehicle 100. While shown associated with one or more areas of a vehicle 100, it should be appreciated that any of the sensors and systems 116A-K, 112 illustrated in FIGS. 1 and, 2 may be disposed in, on, and/or about the vehicle 100 in any position, area, and/or zone of the vehicle 100.” RADAR (116B) is one type of positioning and object-detection and ranging sensors 116D and 116E (equivalent to applicant first and second positioning unit types)), wherein the positioning system is configured to generate positioning information relating to a user disposed in surroundings of the motor vehicle (Col. 26, Lines 41-46, “An attempt to access the vehicle can be detected 1010. For example, presence of an access device in proximity to the vehicle can be detected as a user with the device approaches the vehicle. The device can be detected, for example, through a wireless interface of the vehicle such as WIFI, Bluetooth, NFC, or other such interface.” Positioning system able to locate presence of a user in proximity to the vehicle), wherein the positioning system includes,
a plurality of positioning modules (see Fig. 2),
a separate module installation area allocated to each of the plurality of positioning modules (See Figure 2, indicated multiple positioning systems and separate areas/locations for each system; Column 4, Lines 1-2, “Each sensor 116A-K may include an operational detection range R and operational detection angle.” Each sensor has a detection angle and range R associated with it), wherein the plurality of positioning modules each include at least one of the first plurality of positioning units of the first type and at least one of the second plurality of positioning units of the second type (Col. 3, Lines 45-62, “As shown in FIG. 1, the vehicle 100 may, for example, include at least one of a ranging and imaging system 112 (e.g., LIDAR, etc.), an imaging sensor 116A, 116F (e.g., camera, IR, etc.), a radio object-detection and ranging system sensors 116B (e.g., RADAR, RF, etc.), ultrasonic sensors 116C, and/or other object-detection sensors 116D, 116E…In one embodiment, the RADAR sensors 116B may be disposed at least at a front 110, aft 120, or side 160 of the vehicle 100. Among other things, the RADAR sensors may be used to monitor and/or detect a position of other vehicles, pedestrians, and/or other objects near, or proximal to, the vehicle 100. While shown associated with one or more areas of a vehicle 100, it should be appreciated that any of the sensors and systems 116A-K, 112 illustrated in FIGS. 1 and, 2 may be disposed in, on, and/or about the vehicle 100 in any position, area, and/or zone of the vehicle 100.” The RADAR sensors (116B) are one type of positioning and object-detection and ranging sensors 116D and 116E are another type (equivalent to applicant first and second positioning unit types)), and
…wherein the first plurality of positioning units of the first type are provided with a radar sensor unit configured to generate a distance profile for a distance curve in relation to an associated radar reference point (Col. 3, Lines 53-55, “In one embodiment, the RADAR sensors 116B may be disposed at least at a front 110, aft 120, or side 160 of the vehicle 100.” Sensor 116B is a RADAR sensor; Column 4, Lines 1-2, “Each sensor 116A-K may include an operational detection range R and operational detection angle.” Sensor 116B has an operational detection range R and detection angle (equivalent to applicant distance curve); Column 7, Lines 4-6, “The orientation sensor 312 may include one or more sensors configured to determine an orientation of the vehicle 100 relative to at least one reference point.” Vehicle utilizes a reference point as part of its orientation; Figure 2 demonstrates radar detection zones w/ detection curves), wherein the second plurality of positioning units of the second type are provided with a wireless unit configured to establish a point-to-point connection with a mobile unit carried by the user (Col. 17, Lines 38-42, “The communications subsystem 350 can also include inter- and intra-vehicle communications capabilities such as hotspot and/or access point connectivity for any one or more of the vehicle occupants and/or vehicle-to-vehicle communications.” Communications subsystem 350 capable of connecting to vehicle occupants and access point connectivity; Column 23, Lines 44-46, “Additionally, multiple methods for authenticating the identity of the user of the mobile device 608A,” Device 608A (equivalent to user mobile unit); Column 18, Lines 17-22, “The device 350 can have one more antennas 504, for use in wireless communications such as multi-input multi-output (MIMO) communications, multi-user multi-input multi- output (MU-MIMO) communications Bluetooth®, LTE, 4G, 5G, Near-Field Communication (NFC), etc., and in general for any type of wireless communications.” Device 350 (equivalent to applicant mobile unit carried by the user) used to communicate wirelessly with vehicle, includes Bluetooth)…
…wherein the evaluation arrangement is further configured to verify the user in response to a…distance value (see at least Column 23, Lines 40-48, “More specifically, the system 800 can use inputs from multiple sources, e.g., mobile devices 608A-608C, access card or fob 805, remote devices such as servers 616, etc., to access the vehicle 100. Additionally, multiple methods for authenticating the identity of the user of the mobile device 608A, access card or fob 805, etc., and the requested accessor vehicle behavior intent (e.g. open left front door) can be employed,” once a device is determined to be within a certain proximity the device can be verified).
Higgins does not disclose an evaluation arrangement configured to generate the positioning information from a number of output signals of the first plurality of positioning units of the first type and a number of output signals of the second plurality of positioning units of the second type according to a sensor fusion strategy…
…wherein the wireless unit is configured to generate a distance value for a distance relating to the point-to-point connection, and
wherein the sensor fusion strategy is configured to compare the distance value relating to the point-to-point connection from the mobile unit carried by the user and the distance profile of the distance curve of the radar sensor unit to derive a position of the user relative the motor vehicle, and wherein the evaluation arrangement is further configured to verify the user in response to a correspondence between the distance value relating to the point-to-point connection and the distance profile of the distance curve based on sensor fusion strategy.
Rastoll, in the same field of endeavor, teaches an evaluation arrangement configured to generate the positioning information from a number of output signals of the first plurality of positioning units of the first type and a number of output signals of the second plurality of positioning units of the second type according to a sensor fusion strategy (see at least [0066]; “At step 704, a measurement of a distance between the first wireless device and the second wireless devices is obtained based on the wireless communication. As mentioned earlier, one way to measure distance using UWB signals is to detect a peak in a signal generated by combining a plurality of time-varying signals transmitted over different frequencies. The distance can be calculated by a processor of the vehicle system or a processor external to the vehicle, e.g., a processor associated with a wireless charger,” and [0068]; “At step 706, a position of the vehicle relative to the wireless charger is determined based on the measured distance and data from one or more sensors of the vehicle. In particular, the measured distance can be fused with sensor data from a camera, a LIDAR sensor, a radar sensor, and/or an ultrasonic sensor to determine the relative position of the vehicle. For example, an angle between the vehicle and the wireless charger may be determined from a camera image. The angle may be combined with the measured distance to more precisely determine the vehicle's position. Depending on what sensor data is available, the position of the vehicle relative to the wireless charger may or may not be able to be determined exactly. Nevertheless, the measured distance and the sensor data can provide at least an approximate indication of how close the vehicle is to the wireless charger” the measurement distance based on the wireless connection corresponds to the second positioning unit, and the sensor data corresponding to the radar sensor corresponds to the first positioning unit) …
…wherein the wireless unit is configured to generate a distance value for a distance relating to the point-to-point connection (see at least [0066]; “At step 704, a measurement of a distance between the first wireless device and the second wireless devices is obtained based on the wireless communication. As mentioned earlier, one way to measure distance using UWB signals is to detect a peak in a signal generated by combining a plurality of time-varying signals transmitted over different frequencies. The distance can be calculated by a processor of the vehicle system or a processor external to the vehicle, e.g., a processor associated with a wireless charger”), and
wherein the sensor fusion strategy is configured to compare the distance value relating to the point-to-point connection from the wireless unit and the distance profile of the distance curve of the radar sensor unit to derive a position of the wireless unit relative the motor vehicle (see at least [0068]; “At step 706, a position of the vehicle relative to the wireless charger is determined based on the measured distance and data from one or more sensors of the vehicle. In particular, the measured distance can be fused with sensor data from a camera, a LIDAR sensor, a radar sensor, and/or an ultrasonic sensor to determine the relative position of the vehicle,” if you have the position of the vehicle relative to the wireless unit you also have the position of the wireless unit relative to the vehicle as they are merely flipped. Additionally, while Rastoll does not disclose the wireless unit being a mobile device carried by a user, it would be obvious that the use of wireless communication to determine positioning could be used in any device capable of wireless communication, including a mobile device).
Therefore, it would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention with a reasonable expectation of success to have modified the control system of Higgins with the wireless unit distance measurement of Rastoll. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to make this modification for the benefit of providing additional information for more precisely determining the relative positioning (see at least Rastoll; [0006]).
10. Regarding Claim 2, Higgins and Rastoll renders obvious all of the limitations of claim 1. Additionally, Higgins discloses wherein the first plurality of positioning units of the first type and the second plurality of positioning units of the second type are configured to operate according to different functional principles (Col. 3, Lines 53-55, “In one embodiment, the RADAR sensors 116B may be disposed at least at a front 110, aft 120, or side 160 of the vehicle 100.” Location detection sensors 116B is a RADAR; Column 26, Lines 41-46, “An attempt to access the vehicle can be detected 1010. For example, presence of an access device in proximity to the vehicle can be detected as a user with the device approaches the vehicle. The device can be detected, for example, through a wireless interface of the vehicle such as WIFI, Bluetooth, NFC, or other such interface.” Object-detection to vehicle is based upon Wi-Fi___33 and Bluetooth).
11. Regarding claim 4 Higgins and Rastoll renders obvious all of the limitations of claim 1. Additionally, Higgins discloses wherein the radar sensor unit and/or the wireless unit includes an antenna module and a preprocessing unit configured to pre-process antenna signals (Col. 6, Lines 41-45, “The communication network 352 may comprise a number of different communication media such as coaxial cable, copper cable/wire, fiber-optic cable, antennas for transmitting/receiving wireless messages, and combinations thereof.” Sensors connected to antennas for transmitting and receiving wireless signals; Col. 10, Lines 1-11, “may include one or more processors configured to process and/or interpret signals detected by the one or more sensors 306-337. In some embodiments, the processing of at least some sensor information provided by the vehicle sensors and systems 304 may be processed by at least one sensor processor 340. Raw and/or processed sensor data may be stored in a sensor data memory 344 storage medium. In some embodiments, the sensor data memory 344 may store instructions used by the sensor processor 340 for processing sensor information provided by the sensors and systems 304.” Sensor processor 340 processes sensor information).
12. Regarding Claim 7, Higgins and Rastoll renders obvious all of the limitations of claim 1. Additionally, Higgins discloses wherein each positioning module of the plurality of positioning modules includes a unified supply terminal for an electrical supply of a first positioning unit of the first plurality of positioning units of the first type and a second positioning unit of the second plurality of positioning units of the second type (Col. 6, Lines 3-5, “These associated components may be electrically and/or communicatively coupled to one another via at least one bus 360.” Bus 360 is a source of electric power for vehicle; Column 33, Line 41-44, “An electric vehicle may be powered through a collector system by electricity from off-vehicle sources, or may be self-contained with a battery or generator to convert fuel to electricity.” Vehicle may also receive electricity from off-vehicle sources and may have a generator or battery).
13. Regarding Claim 8, Higgins and Rastoll renders obvious all of the limitations of claim 1. Additionally, Rastoll, in the same field of endeavor, teaches wherein the evaluation arrangement is configured to ascertain the positioning information to the wireless unit in relation to a predetermined vehicle reference point (see at least [0079]; “the relative position determined in step 806 is a position within a 2D coordinate system referenced to the vehicle or the wireless charger. The origin of the 2D coordinate system could be the location of a wireless device or a predefined location within the vehicle or wireless charger”).
Therefore, it would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention with a reasonable expectation of success to have modified the control system of Higgins with the wireless unit distance measurement of Rastoll. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to make this modification for the benefit of providing additional information for more precisely determining the relative positioning (see at least Rastoll; [0006]).
14. Regarding Claim 10, Higgins and Rastoll renders obvious all of the limitations of claim 1. Additionally, Higgins teaches wherein the evaluation arrangement and the wireless unit are collectively configured to carry out a wireless-based identification dialog to identify and/or authenticate the mobile unit (Column 23, Lines 41-48, “More specifically, the system 800 can use inputs from multiple sources, e.g., mobile devices 608A-608C, access card or fob 805, remote devices such as servers 616, etc., to access the vehicle 100. Additionally, multiple methods for authenticating the identity of the user of the mobile device 608A, access card or fob 805, etc., and the requested access or vehicle behavior intent (e.g. open left front door) can be employed.” System 800 utilizes inputs from multiple sources to authenticate and identify a user device 608A-C; Column 25, Lines 19-24, “The security system 905 can maintain and use a plurality of security profiles 915. Each security profile 915 can be associated with a different access device or type of access device. Generally speaking, the security profiles 915 can identify a method of authentication to be applied for each different access device” Multiple methods can be used to identify users, including security profiles; Column 25, line 13-17, “part of the vehicle control system 348 described above. In other implementations, the security system 905 can comprise an additional component of the vehicle in communications with the vehicle control system 348 and other systems and components of the vehicle 100 as described above.” RADAR and wireless systems are included in use of security system 905).
16. Regarding Claim 14, Higgins and Rastoll renders obvious all of the limitations of claim 1. Additionally, Rastoll, in the same field of endeavor, teaches wherein the wireless unit is configured to wirelessly transmit a number of output signals of the radar sensor unit to the evaluation arrangement (see at least [0047]; “The wireless device 630 can be a transmitter, a receiver, or a transceiver. The wireless device 630 may send and/or receive wireless signals,” and [0071]; sensor data is continuously gathered in order to accurately determine positioning).
Therefore, it would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention with a reasonable expectation of success to have modified the control system of Higgins with the wireless unit distance measurement of Rastoll. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to make this modification for the benefit of providing additional information for more precisely determining the relative positioning (see at least Rastoll; [0006]).
17. Regarding Claim 16, Higgins and Rastoll renders obvious all of the limitations of claim 1. Additionally, Rastoll, in the same field of endeavor, teaches wherein the wireless unit is implemented as a Bluetooth wireless unit (see at least []; “The vehicle control unit 1200 may also include a wireless communication interface 1230, which can include without limitation a modem, a network card, an infrared communication device, a wireless communication device and/or a chipset (such as a Bluetooth device”) configured to generate the distance value based on a received signal level (see at least [0066]; “At step 704, a measurement of a distance between the first wireless device and the second wireless devices is obtained based on the wireless communication. As mentioned earlier, one way to measure distance using UWB signals is to detect a peak in a signal generated by combining a plurality of time-varying signals transmitted over different frequencies. The distance can be calculated by a processor of the vehicle system or a processor external to the vehicle, e.g., a processor associated with a wireless charger” the peak of the signal corresponds to Applicant’s signal level).
Therefore, it would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention with a reasonable expectation of success to have modified the control system of Higgins with the wireless unit distance measurement of Rastoll. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to make this modification for the benefit of providing additional information for more precisely determining the relative positioning (see at least Rastoll; [0006]).
18. Regarding Claim 18, Higgins and Rastoll renders obvious all of the limitations of claim 1. Additionally, Rastoll, in the same field of endeavor, teaches the evaluation arrangement further provided with at least one evaluation unit configured to evaluate the first number output signals of the positioning units of the first type and the second number of output signals of the positioning modules of the second type, wherein the evaluation arrangement is configured to ascertain the positioning information relating to the wireless device in relation to a predetermined vehicle reference coordinate system based on the first number of output signals and the second number of output signals (see at least [0068]; “At step 706, a position of the vehicle relative to the wireless charger is determined based on the measured distance and data from one or more sensors of the vehicle. In particular, the measured distance can be fused with sensor data from a camera, a LIDAR sensor, a radar sensor, and/or an ultrasonic sensor to determine the relative position of the vehicle,” if you have the position of the vehicle relative to the wireless unit you also have the position of the wireless unit relative to the vehicle as they are merely flipped. Various data gathered by the vehicle is used to continuously determine positioning).
Therefore, it would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention with a reasonable expectation of success to have modified the control system of Higgins with the wireless unit distance measurement of Rastoll. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to make this modification for the benefit of providing additional information for more precisely determining the relative positioning (see at least Rastoll; [0006]).
19. Regarding Claim 19, Higgins and Rastoll renders obvious all of the limitations of claim 11. Additionally, Rastoll, in the same field of endeavor, teaches wherein the sensor fusion strategy is configured to ascertain a correspondence between the distance value generated by the wireless unit and the distance profile generated by the radar sensor unit to derive the positioning information (see at least [0068]; “At step 706, a position of the vehicle relative to the wireless charger is determined based on the measured distance and data from one or more sensors of the vehicle. In particular, the measured distance can be fused with sensor data from a camera, a LIDAR sensor, a radar sensor, and/or an ultrasonic sensor to determine the relative position of the vehicle,” if you have the position of the vehicle relative to the wireless unit you also have the position of the wireless unit relative to the vehicle as they are merely flipped. Additionally, while Rastoll does not disclose the wireless unit being a mobile device carried by a user, it would be obvious that the use of wireless communication to determine positioning could be used in any device capable of wireless communication, including a mobile device).
Therefore, it would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention with a reasonable expectation of success to have modified the control system of Higgins with the wireless unit distance measurement of Rastoll. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to make this modification for the benefit of providing additional information for more precisely determining the relative positioning (see at least Rastoll; [0006]).
20. Regarding Claim 20, Higgins discloses a control system for use in a vehicle (see at least fig. 3A), the control system comprising:
a number of positioning modules each disposed in a number of module installation areas, each module installation area of the number of module installation areas are spaced apart from one another (see Fig. 2, indicated multiple positioning systems and separate areas/locations for each system), and the number of positioning modules are collectively configured to generate positioning information of a user disposed within an acquisition region at least partially surrounding the vehicle based on a sensor fusion strategy (See Figure 2, indicated multiple positioning systems and separate areas/locations for each system; Col. 4, Lines 1-2, “Each sensor 116A-K may include an operational detection range R and operational detection angle.” Each sensor has a detection angle and range R associated with it); wherein each of the positioning modules include,
at least a portion of a radar sensor unit configured to generate a distance profile of a distance curve between the user and a radar reference point (Col. 3, Lines 53-55, “In one embodiment, the RADAR sensors 116B may be disposed at least at a front 110, aft 120, or side 160 of the vehicle 100.” Sensor 116B is a RADAR sensor; Column 4, Lines 1-2, “Each sensor 116A-K may include an operational detection range R and operational detection angle.” Sensor 116B has an operational detection range R and detection angle (equivalent to applicant distance curve); Col. 7, Lines 4-6, “The orientation sensor 312 may include one or more sensors configured to determine an orientation of the vehicle 100 relative to at least one reference point.” Vehicle utilizes a reference point as part of its orientation; Figure 2 demonstrates radar detection zones w/ detection curves); and
at least a portion of a wireless unit configured to establish a point-to-point connection with a mobile unit carried by the user (Column 17, Lines 38-42, “The communications subsystem 350 can also include inter- and intra-vehicle communications capabilities such as hotspot and/or access point connectivity for any one or more of the vehicle occupants and/or vehicle-to-vehicle communications.” Communications subsystem 350 capable of connecting to vehicle occupants and access point connectivity; Column 23, Lines 44-46, “Additionally, multiple methods for authenticating the identity of the user of the mobile device 608A,” Device 608A (equivalent to user mobile unit); Column 18, Lines 17-22, “The device 350 can have one more antennas 504, for use in wireless communications such as multi-input multi-output (MIMO) communications, multi-user multi-input multi- output (MU-MIMO) communications Bluetooth®, LTE, 4G, 5G, Near-Field Communication (NFC), etc., and in general for any type of wireless communications.” Device 350 (equivalent to applicant mobile unit carried by the user) used to communicate wirelessly with vehicle, includes Bluetooth)…
…wherein the evaluation arrangement is further configured to verify the user in response to a…distance value (see at least Column 23, Lines 40-48, “More specifically, the system 800 can use inputs from multiple sources, e.g., mobile devices 608A-608C, access card or fob 805, remote devices such as servers 616, etc., to access the vehicle 100. Additionally, multiple methods for authenticating the identity of the user of the mobile device 608A, access card or fob 805, etc., and the requested accessor vehicle behavior intent (e.g. open left front door) can be employed,” once a device is determined to be within a certain proximity the device can be verified).
Higgins does not disclose …generate a distance value based on a distance of the point-to-point connection;
wherein the sensor fusion strategy is configured to compare the distance value relating to the point-to-point connection from the mobile unit carried by the user and the distance profile of the distance curve of the radar sensor unit to derive a position of the user relative the motor vehicle.
Rastoll, in the same field of endeavor, teaches …generate a distance value based on a distance of the point-to-point connection (see at least [0066]; “At step 704, a measurement of a distance between the first wireless device and the second wireless devices is obtained based on the wireless communication. As mentioned earlier, one way to measure distance using UWB signals is to detect a peak in a signal generated by combining a plurality of time-varying signals transmitted over different frequencies. The distance can be calculated by a processor of the vehicle system or a processor external to the vehicle, e.g., a processor associated with a wireless charger”);
wherein the sensor fusion strategy is configured to compare the distance value relating to the point-to-point connection from the mobile unit carried by the user and the distance profile of the distance curve of the radar sensor unit to derive a position of the user relative the motor vehicle (see at least [0068]; “At step 706, a position of the vehicle relative to the wireless charger is determined based on the measured distance and data from one or more sensors of the vehicle. In particular, the measured distance can be fused with sensor data from a camera, a LIDAR sensor, a radar sensor, and/or an ultrasonic sensor to determine the relative position of the vehicle,” if you have the position of the vehicle relative to the wireless unit you also have the position of the wireless unit relative to the vehicle as they are merely flipped. Additionally, while Rastoll does not disclose the wireless unit being a mobile device carried by a user, it would be obvious that the use of wireless communication to determine positioning could be used in any device capable of wireless communication, including a mobile device).
Therefore, it would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention with a reasonable expectation of success to have modified the control system of Higgins with the wireless unit distance measurement of Rastoll. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to make this modification for the benefit of providing additional information for more precisely determining the relative positioning (see at least Rastoll; [0006]).
21. Claims 5 & 17 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Higgins and Rastoll as applied to Claim 1 above, and further in view of Zimmerman et al. (WO 2019/136486 A1; filed 8 Jan 2019, published 11 Jul 2019; hereinafter known as, ‘Zimmerman’).
22. Regarding Claim 5, Higgins and Rastoll renders obvious all of the limitations of claim 11. Additionally, Higgins teaches wherein each positioning module of the plurality of positioning modules include, a circuit board (Col. 19, Lines 10-11, “MAC circuitry 522 provides for controlling access to the wireless medium.” Location system has circuitry 522 as part of the wireless system).
Higgins in view of Rastoll does not teach a circuit board, at least a part of a first positioning unit of the first plurality of positioning units of the first type arranged on the circuit board and at least a part of a second positioning unit of the second plurality of positioning units of the second type arranged on the circuit board.
Zimmerman, in the same field of endeavor, teaches a circuit board, at least a part of a first positioning unit of the first plurality of positioning units of the first type arranged on the circuit board and at least a part of a second positioning unit of the second plurality of positioning units of the second type arranged on the circuit board (Page 11, Lines 9-13, “The small cell networking device may include a location module mounted on the at least one printed circuit board, the location module being arranged to provide data suitable to determine a location of the small cell networking device.” Circuit board has a location module (i.e. – a part of a first positioning unit); Page 13, Lines 18-30, “a first wireless transceiver module mounted on the at least one printed circuit board, the first wireless transceiver module being arranged to transmit and receive data according to a first data communication standard; a second wireless transceiver module mounted on the at least one printed circuit board, the second wireless transceiver module being arranged to transmit and receive data according to a second data communication standard,” Circuit board has a first and second wireless transceiver (a part of a second positioning unit);
Therefore, it would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention with a reasonable expectation of success to further modify the system of Higgins, as modified by Rastoll, to include a circuit board that includes part of the positioning module and part of the wireless module as taught by Zimmerman with a reasonable expectation of success in order to ensure the electronic design took up less space, ran on less power, and as a result, increased vehicular endurance.
23. Regarding Claim 17, Higgins in view of Rastoll and Zimmerman renders obvious all of the limitations of claim 5. Additionally, Higgins teaches wherein the at least a part of the first positioning unit is a radar chip and/or a first antenna model (Col. 6, lines 54-59; “the navigation sensor 308 may include one or more sensors having receivers and antennas”), and the at least part of the second positioning unit is a wireless chip and/or a second antenna module (Col. 6, lines 41-45; “the communication network 352 may comprise a number of different communication media such as a coaxial cable, antennas for transmitting/receiving wireless messages, and combinations thereof”).
24. Claims 6 and 15 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Higgins and Rastoll, as applied to Claim 1, and in further view of Gabler et al. (US 6,417,783 B1; filed 5 Aug 1999, published 9 Jul 2002; hereinafter known as, ‘Gabler’).
25. Regarding Claim 6, Higgins and Rastoll renders obvious all of the limitations of claim 1. Higgins does not teach wherein each positioning module of the plurality of positioning modules includes, a module housing provided with the at least one of the first plurality of positioning units of the first type, and at least one of the second plurality of positioning units of the second type, and/or a module carrier provided with at least one of the first plurality of the positioning unit of the first type, and at least one of the second plurality of the positioning unit of the second type.
Gabler, in the same field of endeavor, teaches wherein each positioning module of the plurality of positioning modules includes, a module housing provided with the at least one of the first plurality of positioning units of the first type, and at least one of the second plurality of positioning units of the second type, and/or a module carrier provided with at least one of the first plurality of the positioning unit of the first type, and at least one of the second plurality of the positioning unit of the second type (Column 1, Lines 61-67, “According to an especially advantageous proposal of the invention, a detector unit comprises a plurality of sensors, whereby sensors with post-pulse oscillation and sensors without post-pulse oscillation are combined. Advantageously, three sensors with post-pulse oscillation are combined with one sensor without post-pulse oscillation.” Each detector unit (equivalent to applicant ‘modules each include’) capable of carry two types of sensors in a single detector; Column 2, Lines 1-4, “According to another advantageous proposal of the invention, the detector unit additionally or alternatively comprises radar sensors or, respectively, additionally or alternatively comprises microwave sensors.” Detector can carry a first and a second type of positioning detector).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the system of Higgins, as modified by Rastoll, to include two separate types of sensors in a single module housing as taught by Gabler with a reasonable expectation of success in order to reduce power consumption via transmission, save space, and include multiple sensor types (Gabler, Column 1, Lines 33-67).
26. Regarding Claim 15, Higgins discloses A positioning module for a control system (Column 2, Lines 37-46, “cameras (e.g., independent, stereo, combined image, etc.), infrared (IR) sensors, radio frequency (RF) sensors, ultrasonic sensors (e.g., transducers, transceivers, etc.), RADAR sensors (e.g., object-detection sensors and/or systems), LIDAR (Light Imaging, Detection, And Ranging) systems, odometry sensors and/or devices (e.g., encoders, etc.), orientation sensors (e.g., accelerometers, gyroscopes, magnetometer, etc.), navigation sensors and systems (e.g. GPS, etc.), and other ranging, imaging, and/or object-detecting sensors.” Several types of sensors (equivalent to applicant positioning units) including RADAR and other ranging and object-detecting devices; Figure 3C – Location Module 333 is connected to sensors 304 and is part of the Navigation subsystem 302; Figure 3A – Sensors 304 includes all vehicle mounted sensors);
at least part of a second positioning unit arranged on the circuit board (see at least Fig. 5; MAC circuitry 522) …
…wherein the positioning module further includes a module carrier and the at least a part of the first positioning unit and the at least a part of the second positioning unit arranged on the positioning module (Column 3, Lines 45-62, “As shown in FIG. 1, the vehicle 100 may, for example, include at least one of a ranging and imaging system 112 (e.g., LIDAR, etc.), an imaging sensor 116A, 116F (e.g., camera, IR, etc.), a radio object-detection and ranging system sensors 116B (e.g., RADAR, RF, etc.), ultrasonic sensors 116C, and/or other object-detection sensors 116D, 116E…In one embodiment, the RADAR sensors 116B may be disposed at least at a front 110, aft 120, or side 160 of the vehicle 100. Among other things, the RADAR sensors may be used to monitor and/or detect a position of other vehicles, pedestrians, and/or other objects near, or proximal to, the vehicle 100. While shown associated with one or more areas of a vehicle 100, it should be appreciated that any of the sensors and systems 116A-K, 112 illustrated in FIGS. 1 and, 2 may be disposed in, on, and/or about the vehicle 100 in any position, area, and/or zone of the vehicle 100.” RADAR (116B) is one type of positioning and object-detection and ranging sensors 116D and 116E (equivalent to applicant first and second positioning unit types); Figure 2 shows Sensors 116A-K all housed with similar types of sensors housed on vehicle); and/or
wherein the positioning module further includes a unified supply terminal configured for an electrical supply of the first positioning unit and of the second positioning unit (Column 6, Lines 3-5, “These associated components may be electrically and/or communicatively coupled to one another via at least one bus 360.” Bus 360 is a source of electric power for vehicle; Column 33, Line 41-44, “An electric vehicle may be powered through a collector system by electricity from off-vehicle sources, or may be self-contained with a battery or generator to convert fuel to electricity.” Vehicle may also receive electricity from off-vehicle sources and may have a generator or battery);
wherein the first positioning unit is provided with a radar sensor unit configured to generate a distance profile for a distance curve in relation to an associated radar reference point (Col. 3, Lines 53-55, “In one embodiment, the RADAR sensors 116B may be disposed at least at a front 110, aft 120, or side 160 of the vehicle 100.” Sensor 116B is a RADAR sensor; Column 4, Lines 1-2, “Each sensor 116A-K may include an operational detection range R and operational detection angle.” Sensor 116B has an operational detection range R and detection angle (equivalent to applicant distance curve); Column 7, Lines 4-6, “The orientation sensor 312 may include one or more sensors configured to determine an orientation of the vehicle 100 relative to at least one reference point.” Vehicle utilizes a reference point as part of its orientation; Figure 2 demonstrates radar detection zones w/ detection curves), wherein the second positioning unit is provided with a wireless unit configured to establish a point-to-point connection with a mobile unit carried by a user (Col. 17, Lines 38-42, “The communications subsystem 350 can also include inter- and intra-vehicle communications capabilities such as hotspot and/or access point connectivity for any one or more of the vehicle occupants and/or vehicle-to-vehicle communications.” Communications subsystem 350 capable of connecting to vehicle occupants and access point connectivity; Column 23, Lines 44-46, “Additionally, multiple methods for authenticating the identity of the user of the mobile device 608A,” Device 608A (equivalent to user mobile unit); Column 18, Lines 17-22, “The device 350 can have one more antennas 504, for use in wireless communications such as multi-input multi-output (MIMO) communications, multi-user multi-input multi- output (MU-MIMO) communications Bluetooth®, LTE, 4G, 5G, Near-Field Communication (NFC), etc., and in general for any type of wireless communications.” Device 350 (equivalent to applicant mobile unit carried by the user) used to communicate wirelessly with vehicle, includes Bluetooth)…
…wherein the evaluation arrangement is further configured to verify the user in response to a…distance value (see at least Column 23, Lines 40-48, “More specifically, the system 800 can use inputs from multiple sources, e.g., mobile devices 608A-608C, access card or fob 805, remote devices such as servers 616, etc., to access the vehicle 100. Additionally, multiple methods for authenticating the identity of the user of the mobile device 608A, access card or fob 805, etc., and the requested accessor vehicle behavior intent (e.g. open left front door) can be employed,” once a device is determined to be within a certain proximity the device can be verified).
Higgins does not disclose a module housing and at least a part of the first positioning unit and at least a part of the second positioning unit arranged in the module housing…
…an evaluation arrangement configured to generate positioning information from a number of output signals of the first positioning unit and a number of output signals of the second positioning unit according to a sensor fusion strategy…
…wherein the wireless unit is configured to generate a distance value for a distance relating to the point-to-point connection, and
wherein the sensor fusion strategy is configured to compare the distance value relating to the point-to-point connection from the mobile unit carried by the user and the distance profile of the distance curve of the radar sensor unit to derive a position of the user relative the motor vehicle.
Gabler, in the same field of endeavor, teaches a module housing and at least a part of the first positioning unit and the at least a part of the second positioning unit arranged in the module housing, (Column 1, Lines 61-67, “According to an especially advantageous proposal of the invention, a detector unit comprises a plurality of sensors, whereby sensors with post-pulse oscillation and sensors without post-pulse oscillation are combined. Advantageously, three sensors with post-pulse oscillation are combined with one sensor without post-pulse oscillation.” Each detector unit (equivalent to applicant ‘modules each include’) capable of carry two types of sensors in a single detector; Column 2, Lines 1-4, “According to another advantageous proposal of the invention, the detector unit additionally or alternatively comprises radar sensors or, respectively, additionally or alternatively comprises microwave sensors.” Detector can carry a first and a second type of positioning detector).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the system of Higgins to include two separate types of sensors in a single module housing as taught by Gabler with a reasonable expectation of success in order to reduce power consumption via transmission, save space, and include multiple sensor types (Gabler, Column 1, Lines 33-67).
Higgins in view of Gabler does not disclose …an evaluation arrangement configured to generate positioning information from a number of output signals of the first positioning unit and a number of output signals of the second positioning unit according to a sensor fusion strategy…
…wherein the wireless unit is configured to generate a distance value for a distance relating to the point-to-point connection, and
wherein the sensor fusion strategy is configured to compare the distance value relating to the point-to-point connection from the mobile unit carried by the user and the distance profile of the distance curve of the radar sensor unit to derive a position of the user relative the motor vehicle.
Rastoll, in the same field of endeavor, teaches an evaluation arrangement configured to generate positioning information from a number of output signals of the first positioning unit and a number of output signals of the second positioning unit according to a sensor fusion strategy (see at least [0066]; “At step 704, a measurement of a distance between the first wireless device and the second wireless devices is obtained based on the wireless communication. As mentioned earlier, one way to measure distance using UWB signals is to detect a peak in a signal generated by combining a plurality of time-varying signals transmitted over different frequencies. The distance can be calculated by a processor of the vehicle system or a processor external to the vehicle, e.g., a processor associated with a wireless charger,” and [0068]; “At step 706, a position of the vehicle relative to the wireless charger is determined based on the measured distance and data from one or more sensors of the vehicle. In particular, the measured distance can be fused with sensor data from a camera, a LIDAR sensor, a radar sensor, and/or an ultrasonic sensor to determine the relative position of the vehicle. For example, an angle between the vehicle and the wireless charger may be determined from a camera image. The angle may be combined with the measured distance to more precisely determine the vehicle's position. Depending on what sensor data is available, the position of the vehicle relative to the wireless charger may or may not be able to be determined exactly. Nevertheless, the measured distance and the sensor data can provide at least an approximate indication of how close the vehicle is to the wireless charger” the measurement distance based on the wireless connection corresponds to the second positioning unit, and the sensor data corresponding to the radar sensor corresponds to the first positioning unit)…
…wherein the wireless unit is configured to generate a distance value for a distance relating to the point-to-point connection (see at least [0066]; “At step 704, a measurement of a distance between the first wireless device and the second wireless devices is obtained based on the wireless communication. As mentioned earlier, one way to measure distance using UWB signals is to detect a peak in a signal generated by combining a plurality of time-varying signals transmitted over different frequencies. The distance can be calculated by a processor of the vehicle system or a processor external to the vehicle, e.g., a processor associated with a wireless charger”), and
wherein the sensor fusion strategy is configured to compare the distance value relating to the point-to-point connection from the mobile unit carried by the user and the distance profile of the distance curve of the radar sensor unit to derive a position of the user relative the motor vehicle (see at least [0068]; “At step 706, a position of the vehicle relative to the wireless charger is determined based on the measured distance and data from one or more sensors of the vehicle. In particular, the measured distance can be fused with sensor data from a camera, a LIDAR sensor, a radar sensor, and/or an ultrasonic sensor to determine the relative position of the vehicle,” if you have the position of the vehicle relative to the wireless unit you also have the position of the wireless unit relative to the vehicle as they are merely flipped. Additionally, while Rastoll does not disclose the wireless unit being a mobile device carried by a user, it would be obvious that the use of wireless communication to determine positioning could be used in any device capable of wireless communication, including a mobile device).
Therefore, it would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention with a reasonable expectation of success to have modified the control system of Higgins with the wireless unit distance measurement of Rastoll. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to make this modification for the benefit of providing additional information for more precisely determining the relative positioning (see at least Rastoll; [0006]).
27. Claim 9 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Higgins and Rastoll, as applied to Claim 1, and in further view of Park et al. (US 2019/0204840 A1; filed 9 Jul 2018, published 4 Jul 2019; hereinafter known as, ‘Park’).
28. Regarding Claim 9, Higgins and Rastoll renders obvious all of the limitations of claim 11. Higgins does not teach wherein the evaluation arrangement and the radar sensor unit are collectively configured to detect an existing and/or imminent collision based on the distance profile generated by the radar sensor unit.
Park, in the same field of endeavor, teaches wherein the evaluation arrangement and the radar sensor unit are collectively configured to detect an existing and/or imminent collision based on the distance profile generated by the radar sensor unit (Paragraph [0212] Lines 1-4, “The sensing unit 120 may acquire sensing signals with respect to vehicle-related information, such as a posture, a collision, an orientation, a position (GPS information),” Sensing unit 120 acquires signals related to position and includes collision information; Paragraph [0276] Lines 1-3, “In an example, the sensing unit 820 may be implemented as a combination of at least two among the camera 310, radar 320,” Sensing unit can be a combination of sensors, including RADAR; Paragraph [0249] Lines 3-7, “The controller may provide or process proper information or functions to the user by processing input or output signals, data, information, etc. through the aforementioned components or running an application program stored in the memory.” Controller processes input and output signals).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to further modify the system of Higgins, as modified by Golov, to include as part of the detection system the ability to detect a collision as taught by Park with a reasonable expectation of success in order to ensure the radar, lidar, camera, and wireless detection sensors also provided early warning to possible collisions from outside objects to increase driver and passenger safety.
29. Claim 13 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Higgins and Rastoll as applied to Claim 1 above, and further in view of Kenneth Jensen (US 2019/0101649 A1; filed 22 Dec 2017, published 4 Apr 2019; hereinafter known as, ‘Jensen’).
30. Regarding Claim 13, Higgins and Rastoll renders obvious all of the limitations of claim 11. Higgins does not teach wherein the sensor fusion strategy is further configured to check the first number of output signals of the positioning unit of the first type and the second number of output signals of the second positioning unit of the second type against one another for plausibility.
Jensen, in the same field of endeavor, teaches wherein the sensor fusion strategy is further configured to check the first number of output signals of the positioning unit of the first type and the second number of output signals of the second positioning unit of the second type against one another for plausibility (Paragraph [0059] Lines 9-16, “The comparison of the two point cloud data sets may identify points representing the tree 506 in scene 502 that do not have corresponding points in the point cloud representing the scene 510, since the tree 506 is not present in the scene 506. These points may be considered non-- matching points. In other words, corresponding or "matching" points may be two points in two respective point cloud data sets that have equivalent coordinates after the two-point cloud data sets are aligned, for example, via a registration process. In some aspects, some degree of error may be provided for in determining whether two points are corresponding.” System compares two-point cloud data sets in a scene (i.e. – surrounding a vehicle) and checks for ‘matching’ points (which are location coordinates) to see if they’re corresponding (equivalent to applicant ‘check…for plausibility’)).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to further modify the system of Higgins, as modified by Rastoll, to include the sensor data matching of Jensen. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to make this modification for the benefit of more accurate means of estimating position (see at least Jensen; [0022-0023]).
31. Claim 21 and 22 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Higgins and Rastoll as applied to Claim 1 above, and further in view of Carlos Vallespi-Gonzalez (US-20190079526 A1; filed 27 October 2017; hereinafter known as, ‘Vallespi”).
32. Regarding Claim 21, Higgins and Rastoll renders obvious all of the limitations of claim 1. Higgins does not teach wherein the evaluation arrangement is further configured to ascertain outline information associated with the user based on the distance profile.
Vallespi, in the same field of endeavor, teaches wherein the evaluation arrangement is further configured to ascertain outline information associated with the user based on the distance profile (see at least [0082]; “the vehicle computing system 108) can receive outputs from one or more sensors (e.g., sensor output from one or more cameras, sonar devices, thermal imaging devices, RADAR devices, and/or LIDAR devices) to detect objects including the object 410 (e.g., a pedestrian) and the sidewalk 416 that the object 410 is travelling on…the vehicle computing system can determine the shape of the object 410 based in part on the sensor output and the use of a machine learned model that uses previously classified objects to determine that the detected object 410 is a pedestrian (e.g., the physical dimensions and other characteristics of the object 410 correspond to a pedestrian class). Further, through use of the sensor output and the machine learned model, the vehicle computing system can determine that the object 418 (e.g., an umbrella) is an implement that is being carried by the object 410. Based in part on the detected physical dimensions of the object 410, the vehicle computing system can generate the bounding shape 412, which can define the outer edges of the object 410,” the bounding shape corresponds to outline information which is determined with the use of radar).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to further modify the system of Higgins, as modified by Rastoll, to include the pedestrian classification by use of a radar of Vallespi. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to make this modification for the benefit of allowing a vehicle to detect objects in its surroundings safely (see at least Vallespi [0003]).
33. Regarding Claim 22, Higgins in view of Rastoll and Rycken renders obvious all of the limitations of claim 21. Additionally, Rycken, in the same field of endeavor, teaches wherein the evaluation arrangement is further configured to assign a user class to the user based on the outline information (see at least [0082]; “the vehicle computing system 108) can receive outputs from one or more sensors (e.g., sensor output from one or more cameras, sonar devices, thermal imaging devices, RADAR devices, and/or LIDAR devices) to detect objects including the object 410 (e.g., a pedestrian) and the sidewalk 416 that the object 410 is travelling on…the vehicle computing system can determine the shape of the object 410 based in part on the sensor output and the use of a machine learned model that uses previously classified objects to determine that the detected object 410 is a pedestrian (e.g., the physical dimensions and other characteristics of the object 410 correspond to a pedestrian class). Further, through use of the sensor output and the machine learned model, the vehicle computing system can determine that the object 418 (e.g., an umbrella) is an implement that is being carried by the object 410. Based in part on the detected physical dimensions of the object 410, the vehicle computing system can generate the bounding shape 412, which can define the outer edges of the object 410,” the object is able to be classified based on the bounding shape detected).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to further modify the system of Higgins, as modified by Rastoll, to include the pedestrian classification by use of a radar of Vallespi. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to make this modification for the benefit of allowing a vehicle to detect objects in its surroundings safely (see at least Vallespi [0003]).
Conclusion
34. 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 ASHLEIGH NICOLE TURNBAUGH whose telephone number is (703)756-1982. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday 9:00 am - 5:00 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, Helal Algahaim can be reached at (571) 270-5227. 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.
/ASHLEIGH NICOLE TURNBAUGH/Examiner, Art Unit 3666
/HELAL A ALGAHAIM/SPE , Art Unit 3645