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
The rejection of claim 24 under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) has been withdrawn in view of the claim amendment.
Applicant's arguments filed October 10 2025 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive. More specifically the applicant argues the amended claim feature in amended claims 1, 12, and 24 of “wherein the radar reflection signal and the second message are transmitted in the UWB range at different times within the same sensing timeslot” is not disclosed in any of the cited references of the prior art (Of Record). However the examiner respectfully disagrees as the combined teachings of at least Tertinek (Of Record) in view of Zhang (Of Record) discloses the claim feature.
For example with respect to the teachings of Tertinek, the time slot 510 may be interpreted as the claimed sensing timeslot 510 in which “the radar reflection signal and the second message are transmitted at different times within the same sensing timeslot” (Tertinek, see Fig. 5 time slot 510 & Para’s [0035], [0049], [0056] i.e., Finally, in the fifth time slot 510 the UWB radar (i.e., UWB radar operation includes the “radar reflection signal”) and Wi-Fi sensing operations (i.e., “second message”) are performed at the same frequency, but at different times (sequentially)). The radar reflection signal will be transmitted during the UWB sensing in the UWB range (Tertinek, see Fig. 3 i.e., UWB TRX & Para’s [0035], [0049], & [0056]).
The main different between the claim feature and Tertinek, is that the second message transmitted in Tertinek is performed according to Wi-Fi sensing and not according to UWB in the UWB range. However as explained in the rejection of claim 1, such difference would be rendered obvious in view of Zhang (Of Record) who discloses transmitting a message wirelessly in a UWB range from a system node to an object device 302 (see Fig. 3) for performing RF sensing using either Wi-Fi or UWB in order to detect/localize the object 302, (see Fig. 3 & Para’s [0044] i.e., a wireless electronic device can be configured to communicate via Wi-Fi and/or UWB, [0089-0100] i.e., Fig. 3 is a diagram illustrating an example of a wireless device 300 that utilizes RF sensing techniques to detect an object 302, & [0156] i.e., the RF sensing data can include CSI data corresponding to reflections received in response to transmission of a signal. In one illustrative example, the RF sensing data can include Wi-Fi CSI data corresponding to reflections received in response to transmission of a Wi-Fi signal. In other examples, the RF sensing data can include CSI data obtained using UWB (i.e., transmission of the signal is performed using UWB in a UWB range)).
Therefore it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art for the transmitting of the second message wirelessly from the second system node during the sensing timeslot using Wi-Fi for performing RF sensing for localizing/detecting the object or target 306 as disclosed in Tertinek to be transmitted using UWB technology in the UWB range to a target device for performing the sensing based on the teachings of Zhang who discloses transmitting a message wirelessly in a UWB range from a system node to an object device 302 for performing RF sensing using either Wi-Fi or UWB in order to detect/localize the object 302.
Therefore the combined teachings of Tertinek in view of Zhang discloses the amended claim feature in amended claims 1, 12, and 24 of “wherein the radar reflection signal and the second message are transmitted in the UWB range at different times within the same sensing timeslot”.
In regards to the claim feature of generating the sensor fusion data based on the UWB radar reflection signal and the UWB channel state data to determine a sensing state of a predetermined region, the combined teachings of Tertinek in view of Zhang results in performing the claim feature when the Wi-Fi sensing message (i.e., second message) in Tertinek is performed according to UWB as disclosed in Zhang.
The combined teachings of Tertinek in view of Zhang results in generating the sensor fusion data based on the UWB radar reflection signal and UWB channel state data to determine a sensing state of a predetermined region, (Tertinek, see Para’s [0032-0033]. [0052-0053] i.e., the resulting radar information and sensing information may be fused (i.e., “sensor fusion data”) to improve the target detection capability, [0057] i.e., The processing unit 604 fuses the information contained in the CSI and the CIR to provide an overall system performance that is superior (e.g., a better target detection sensitivity) than if either UWB or Wi-Fi is operated on its own, & [0057-0058] & Zhang, see Para [0156] i.e., RF sensing data can include CSI data obtained using UWB).
The applicant argues on (Pg. 9 of the remarks), the teachings of Tertinek individually for not disclosing the claim features as Tertinek relates to a controller that control two different radio technologies i.e., UWB radar and Wi-Fi sensing.
In response to applicant's arguments against the references individually, one cannot show nonobviousness by attacking references individually where the rejections are based on combinations of references. See In re Keller, 642 F.2d 413, 208 USPQ 871 (CCPA 1981); In re Merck & Co., 800 F.2d 1091, 231 USPQ 375 (Fed. Cir. 1986).
As previously explained above, the combined teachings of Tertinek in view of Zhang results in performing UWB radar and UWB sensing by device 302 of Tertinek (see Fig. 1, 302). Also the two operations of UWB radar and UWB sensing can be performed at different times within a same sensing timeslot (Tertinek, see Fig. 5 i.e., time slot 510 & Para [0056] i.e., Finally, in the fifth time slot 510 the UWB radar (i.e., UWB radar operation includes the “radar reflection signal”) and Wi-Fi sensing operations (i.e., “second message”) are performed at the same frequency, but at different times (sequentially)).
In regards to the applicants argument on (Pg. 9, Para 3 of the remarks), the applicant argues that Para’s [0052-0053] of Tertinek merely disclose a practical implementation in which a UWB radar and Wi-Fi sensing unit may be operated concurrently. However the Tertinek also disclosed that the UWB radar and Wi-Fi sensing unit may be operated during different times (Tertinek, see Fig, 5, 510 & Para [0056]). Therefore such information from the UWB radar and Wi-Fi sensing may be fused (Tertinek, see Para’s [0057-0058]). In regards to the applicants argument regarding Para’s [0057-0058] of Tertinek, the applicant argues that Tertinek merely discloses fusing Wi-Fi CSI and the UWB CIR resulting in Tertinek fusing different data than that of the sensor fusion data set forth in the claims (i.e., UWB radar reflection signal and UWB channel state data). However as previously explained the applicant is arguing the teachings of Tertinek individually for not disclosing the claim feature when the rejection of claims 1, 12, and 24 is an obviousness rejection under 35 U.S.C. 103(a).
As previously explained the combined teachings of Tertinek in view of Zhang results in generating the sensor fusion data based on the UWB radar reflection signal and UWB channel state data to determine a sensing state of a predetermined region based on the sensor fusion data, (Tertinek, see Para’s [0032-0033]. [0052-0053] i.e., the resulting radar information and sensing information may be fused (i.e., “sensor fusion data”) to improve the target detection capability, [0057] i.e., The processing unit 604 fuses the information contained in the CSI and the CIR to provide an overall system performance that is superior (e.g., a better target detection sensitivity) than if either UWB or Wi-Fi is operated on its own, & [0057-0058] & Zhang, see Para [0156] i.e., RF sensing data can include CSI data obtained using UWB).
In regards to the applicants argument on Pg. 10 of the remarks, the applicant states that Tertinek merely discloses a single implementation of operating the UWB radar and Wi-Fi sensing unit concurrently for data fusion in Para’s [0052-0053] of Tertinek. However the examiner respectfully disagrees as Para [0052] states that the UWB radar unit and Wi-Fi sensing unit may be operated concurrently. However the UWB radar unit and WiFi sensing unit may also operate at different times within the same sensing timeslot for the data fusion (see Fig. 5, 510 Para [0056] & [0057-0058]), and therefore Tertinek is not limited to a single implementation of operating the UWB radar and Wi-Fi sensing unit concurrently for data fusion.
For the reasons explained the rejection of claims 1 and 12 are maintained over the combination of Tertinek in view of Zhang, and further in view of Kumari. The rejection of independent claim 24 is maintained over the combination of Tertinek in view of Zhang, and further in view of Nguyen. The dependent claims remain rejected over the prior art (Of Record) based on their dependence to the independent claims 1, 12, and 24.
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.
Claims 1, 4-5, 8, 11-12, 14-15, 18, 20, and 22-23 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Tertinek et al. US (2023/0156429) in view of Zhang et al. US (2022/0381898), and further in view of Kumari et al. US (2023/0100617).
Regarding Claim 1, Tertinek discloses a method for managing communications among a set of system nodes (see Fig. 3 i.e., first device 302 & second device 304) configured to sense a predetermined region, (see Fig. 3 & Para’s [0050] i.e., Furthermore, a sensing transmitter is the STA that transmits a sensing signal (RF signal) to a target area (i.e., “predetermined region”), and sensing receiver is the STA that receives reflections or echoes from a target area…a sensing measurement if defined as the measurement of the target area, [0051-0052] i.e., The transmitter of STA1 transmits a sensing signal to the target area. Then, the receiver of STA2 receives reflections or echoes from the target area, which are the sensing measurements (e.g., raw CSI). Subsequently, the second station STA2 sends the sensing measurements to STA1, and the processor of STA1 processes the measurements to obtain the sensing result, & [0057] i.e., detection area)
the set of system nodes including at least a first system node (see Fig. 3 i.e., Device 2 304 (i.e., “first system node”) & Para [0049]) and a second system node (see Fig. 3 i.e., Device 1 302 (i.e., “second system node”) & Para [0049]), the method comprising: establishing, via a processor, a schedule that includes at least a localization timeslot (see Fig. 3 i.e., target 306 & Fig. 5 i.e., timeslot 504 may be a “localization timeslot” which uses UWB radar to localize a target 306) and a sensing timeslot (see Fig. 5 i.e., timeslot 510 may be a “sensing timeslot” in which Wi-Fi sensing and UWB radar is performed by the first device 302) that are non-overlapping with respect to time; (see Fig. 5 & Para [0056])
transmitting a first message wirelessly in an ultra-wideband (UWB) range from the first system node or the second system node (see Fig. 3 i.e., Device 1 302) to a target to localize the target (see Fig. 3 i.e., target 306) during the localization timeslot, (In regards to the claim language of “to localize the target”, the claim feature is simply a statement of intended use and is not considered limiting to the claim. However Tertinek still discloses the claim feature…see Fig. 3 i.e., target 306 & Fig. 5 i.e., UWB radar transmission in timeslot 504 may be interpreted as a “localization timeslot” which uses UWB radar to localize the target 306 & Para’s [0027], [0033] i.e., these types of communication units may provide suitable data for detecting the presence as well as range, velocity and angle of an external object (i.e., “localization”) [0035-0036] i.e., UWB technology may use the frequency spectrum of 3.1 to 10.6 GHz (i.e., “UWB range”)…The UWB technology enables a high data throughput for communication devices and a high precision for the localization of devices, [0038] i.e., UWB technology can be used in which the position (i.e., “localization”) of devices can be determined, [0040] i.e., in the radar mode of operation, frames are transmitted (i.e., “first message”) by at least one device and those frames are received by one or more other devices. Then the CIRs are estimated on the devices receiving the frames, and the range and/or velocity and/or AoA are calculated based on the estimated CIRs, [0049] i.e., The UWB transceiver of the first device 302 may transmit radar signals (i.e., “first message” for localization of target device), which are reflected by the external object or target 306, & [0057-0058] i.e., the processing unit 602 receives CIR data from the UWB communication unit 604. Both CSI and CIR contain information about one or mor potential targets monitored in a detection area, such as the range, velocity and angle of a target (i.e., “localization”)…Accordingly, not only the presence of a target may be detected, but also its position (i.e., “localize the target”) or movement)
transmitting a radar transmission signal in the UWB range from the second system node (see Fig. 3 i.e., Device 1 302) during the sensing timeslot; (see Fig. 5 i.e., UWB radar transmission in timeslot 510 (i.e., “sensing timeslot”) & Para’s [0035-0036] i.e., UWB technology may use the frequency spectrum of 3.1 to 10.6 GHz (i.e., “UWB range”), [0040], [0049] i.e., The UWB transceiver of the first device 302 may transmit radar signals (i.e., “second message”), which are reflected by the external object or target 306…these reflected radar signals may be used to detect the presence of the target 306, [0056], & [0057] i.e., radar signals)
receiving, via the second system node (see Fig. 3 i.e., Device 1 302), a radar reflection signal in the UWB range during the sensing timeslot, the radar reflection signal being based on the radar transmission signal; (see Fig. 5 i.e., UWB radar operation performed in timeslot 510 (i.e., “sensing timeslot”) includes receiving radar reflection signal & Para’s [0035] i.e., Subsequently, the reflected signal may be received by the radar device, [0040], [0049] i.e., The UWB transceiver of the first device 302 may transmit radar signals, which are reflected by the external object or target 306…these reflected radar signals may be used to detect the presence of the target 306, & [0056])
transmitting a second message wirelessly from the first system node or the second system node (see Fig. 3 i.e., Device 1 302) during the sensing timeslot, (see Fig. 3 & Para’s [0050] i.e., The transmitter of STA1 transmits a sensing signal (i.e., “second message”) to the target area. Then, the receiver of STA2 receives reflections or echoes from the target area, which are the sensing measurements (e.g., raw CSI). Subsequently, the second station STA2 sends the sensing measurements to STA1, and the processor of STA1 processes the measurements to obtain the sensing result, [0051] i.e., The transmitter of STA1 transmits a sensing signal (multiple PPDUs) to the target area. Then, the receiver of STA2 receives reflections or echoes from the target area, which are sensing measurements (e.g., raw CSI). Subsequently, the second station STA2 sends the sensing measurements to STA1, and the processor of STA 1 processes the measurement to obtain the sensing result & [0056] i.e., Wi-Fi sensing operation performed in timeslot 510)
determining channel state data of the second message via a subset of the set of system nodes (see Fig. 3 i.e., Device 2 304) during the sensing timeslot; (see Fig. 3 & Para’s [0050] i.e., The transmitter of STA1 transmits a sensing signal (i.e., “second message”) to the target area. Then, the receiver of STA2 receives reflections or echoes from the target area, which are the sensing measurements (e.g., raw CSI). Subsequently, the second station STA2 sends the sensing measurements (i.e., “channel state data”) to STA1, and the processor of STA1 processes the measurements to obtain the sensing result, [0051] i.e., The transmitter of STA1 transmits a sensing signal (multiple PPDUs) to the target area. Then, the receiver of STA2 receives reflections or echoes from the target area, which are sensing measurements (e.g., raw CSI) (i.e., “channel state data”). Subsequently, the second station STA2 sends the sensing measurements to STA1, and the processor of STA 1 processes the measurement to obtain the sensing result, [0056] i.e., Wi-Fi sensing operation performed in timeslot 510, & [0057]).
The channel state data including channel impulse response (CIR) data (see Para’s [0051] i.e., CIR which is obtained from the CSI measurements, & [0053] i.e., CIR obtained from an inverse Fourier transform of the CSI)
generating, via the processor (see Fig. 6 i.e., processing unit 602), sensor fusion data based on the UWB radar reflection signal and the channel state data; (see Para [0052-0053] i.e., UWB radar and Wi-Fi sensing unit may be operated concurrently, and the resulting radar information and sensing information may be fused (i.e., “sensor fusion data”) to improve the target detection capability, [0057] i.e., The processing unit 604 fuses the information contained in the CSI and the CIR to provide an overall system performance that is superior (e.g., a better target detection sensitivity) than if either UWB or Wi-Fi is operated on its own, & [0058])
and determining, via the processor (see Fig. 6 i.e., processing unit 602), a sensing state of the predetermined region based on the sensor fusion data, (see Para’s [0032-0033] i.e., presence of an external object is determined, [0049-0052] i.e., detection decision is made based on the sensing result of target area, [0053] i.e., target detected yes/no (i.e., “sensing state”) or classify a gesture such as hand movements (i.e., “sensing state”) is based on both the CSI and the CIR, [0057] i.e., The processing unit 604 fuses the information contained in the CSI and the CIR to provide an overall system performance that is superior (e.g., a better target detection sensitivity) than if either UWB or Wi-Fi is operated on its own & [0058] i.e., fusing CSI and CIR to obtain an “overall CIR” with improved target resolution and accuracy and then (i) making the decision of target present or absent (i.e., “sensing state”))
wherein the radar reflection signal is transmitted in the UWB range (see Fig. 3 i.e., UWB TRX) and the second message are transmitted at different times within the same sensing timeslot (see Fig. 5 time slot 510 & Para’s [0035], [0049], [0056] i.e., Finally, in the fifth time slot 510 the UWB radar (i.e., UWB radar operation includes the “radar reflection signal”) and Wi-Fi sensing operations (i.e., “second message”) are performed at the same frequency, but at different times (sequentially))
While Tertinek discloses transmitting the second message wirelessly from the second system node during the sensing timeslot using Wi-Fi for performing RF sensing (see Fig. 3 & Para’s [0050-0051] & [0056]), Tertinek does not disclose the second message is wirelessly transmitted in the UWB range from the second system node and the target is a target device. However the claim features would be rendered obvious in view of Zhang et al. US (2022/0381898).
Zhang transmitting a message wirelessly in a UWB range from a system node to an object device 302 (see Fig. 3) for performing RF sensing using either Wi-Fi or UWB in order to detect/localize the object 302, (see Fig. 3 & Para’s [0044] i.e., a wireless electronic device can be configured to communicate via Wi-Fi and/or UWB, [0089-0100] i.e., Fig. 3 is a diagram illustrating an example of a wireless device 300 that utilizes RF sensing techniques to detect an object 302, & [0156] i.e., the RF sensing data can include CSI data corresponding to reflections received in response to transmission of a signal. In one illustrative example, the RF sensing data can include Wi-Fi CSI data corresponding to reflections received in response to transmission of a Wi-Fi signal. In other examples, the RF sensing data can include CSI data obtained using UWB (i.e., transmission of the signal is performed using UWB in a UWB range)).
Zhang further discloses the object 302 is a target device (see Fig. 3 i.e., object 302 & Para [0106] i.e., the object 302 can include a device (i.e., “target device”)).
(Zhang suggests the wireless device 300 can perform the RF sensing operation using UWB technology instead of Wi-Fi for obtaining the CSI data in order to properly detect/localize the object 302, (see Fig. 3 & Para’s [0089-0100] & [0156])).
Therefore it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date for the transmitting of the second message wirelessly from the second system node during the sensing timeslot using Wi-Fi for performing RF sensing for localizing/detecting the object or target 306 as disclosed in Tertinek to be transmitted using UWB technology in the UWB range to a target device for performing the sensing based on the teachings of Zhang who discloses transmitting a message wirelessly in a UWB range from a system node to an object device 302 for performing RF sensing using either Wi-Fi or UWB in order to detect/localize the object which may be a target device, which results in generating the sensor fusion data based on the UWB radar reflection signal and the UWB channel state data and the radar reflection signal and the second message being transmitted in the UWB range at different times within the same sensing timeslot, because the motivation lies in Zhang that the wireless device can perform the RF sensing operation using UWB technology instead of Wi-Fi for obtaining the CSI data in order to properly detect/localize the target device.
While the combination of Tertinek in view of Zhang discloses the target may be a target device (Tertinek, see Fig. 3 i.e., target 306 & Para [0049] & Zhang, see Fig. 3, 302 & Para [0106]), the combination of Tertinek in view of Zhang do not disclose the claim feature of a transceiver of the target device. However the claim feature would be rendered obvious in view of Kumari et al. US (2023/0100617).
Kumari discloses a system node (see Fig. 7 i.e., UE-1 702) transmits a radar signal to a transceiver of a target device (see Fig. 7 i.e., UE-2 704 may be a target device), (see Para [0101] i.e., At 712, the UE-1 702 may transmit a ranging signal, such as a radar signal…that may be reflected off UE-2 704 as reflected ranging signals…The radar signal may be reflected by surrounding objects (e.g., UE-2 704) (i.e., “target device”), and the resulting radar echoes may be received by the radar transceiver & Fig. 10 i.e., UE includes transceiver 1010 & Para’s [0120] & [0124]).
(Kumari suggests the UE-1 702 which receives the radar reflection signal from the target UE-2 704 estimates the channel for determining the distance, velocity, and the angle of the target UE-2 704 with respect to the UE-1 702 for determining optimal transmission parameters for transmission to the target UE such as optimal transmit power and beamforming parameters (see Para’s [0101-0104])).
Therefore it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date for the transmitting of the first message wirelessly from the system node to the target device to localize the target device as disclosed in Tertinek in view of Zhang to be transmitted to a transceiver of the target device based on the teachings of Kumari who discloses a system node transmits a radar signal to a transceiver of a target device in which a radar reflection signal is received by the system node from the target device, because the motivation lies in Kumari that the UE-1 which receives the radar reflection signal from the target UE-2 estimates the channel for determining the distance, velocity, and the angle of the target UE-2 with respect to the UE-1 for determining optimal transmission parameters for transmission to the target UE such as optimal transmit power and beamforming parameters.
Regarding Claim 4, Tertinek discloses the method of claim 1, wherein the second system node is operable to switch between a radar mode (see Fig. 3 i.e., UWB TRX & Para’s [0027] i.e., a UWB communication unit operating in a radar mode, [0033], & [0049]) and a communication mode (see Para’s [0015] i.e., communication mode & [0033]) such that the second system node transmits (see Fig. 3 i.e., Device 1 302) the radar transmission signal while operating in the radar mode and transmits the second message while operating in the communication mode, (see Para’s [0015], [0027], [0032-0033] i.e., Furthermore, congested or occupied channels may be avoided by switching the detection mode from radar-based detection to RF communication-based detection and back, [0049-0050] & [0056] i.e., UWB radar and Wi-Fi sensing operations (i.e., “communication mode”) may be performed sequentially suggests the device can switch between radar mode and a communication mode).
Regarding Claim 5, Tertinek discloses the method of claim 1, further comprising: transmitting a high-frequency (HF) radar transmission signal during the sensing timeslot (see Para’s [0028], [0034-0035], [0040], & [0049] i.e., The UWB transceiver may transmit radar signals & [0056]); and receiving a HF radar reflection signal during the sensing timeslot, (see Para’s [0028], [0034-0035], [0040] i.e., in the radar mode of operation, frames are transmitted by at least one device and those frames are received by the same device & [0049] i.e., The UWB transceiver may transmit radar signals, which are reflected by the external object & [0056])
the HF radar reflection signal being based on the HF radar transmission signal, (see Para’s [0028], [0034-0035], [0040] i.e., in the radar mode of operation, frames are transmitted by at least one device and those frames are received by the same device, [0049] i.e., The UWB transceiver may transmit radar signals, which are reflected by the external object, & [0056])
wherein the sensor fusion data is also generated based on the HF radar reflection signal, (see Para [0052-0053] i.e., UWB radar and Wi-Fi sensing unit may be operated concurrently, and the resulting radar information and sensing information may be fused (i.e., “sensor fusion data”) to improve the target detection capability, [0057] i.e., The processing unit 604 fuses the information contained in the CSI and the CIR to provide an overall system performance that is superior (e.g., a better target detection sensitivity) than if either UWB or Wi-Fi is operated on its own, & [0058])
Regarding Claim 8, Tertinek discloses the method of claim 8, further comprising: generating, via a machine learning system, output data upon receiving the sensor fusion data as input (see Para [0053] i.e., radar information and sensing information may be fused in different ways…Another way would be a data-driven approach, based on a convolution neural network (CNN) as used for deep learning. In that case, the range-Doppler map may be computed from both the CSI and the CIR, then both maps may be concatenated and fed into a pre-trained CNN for classification (e.g., target detected yes/no or classify a gesture such as a hand movements. In another implementation, features may be extracted from the CSI and the CIR and processed with a standard machine learning classifier) & [0058] i.e., the CNN would receive both CSI and CIR as inputs), wherein the sensing state is determined, via the processor, based on the output data, (see Para [0053] i.e., radar information and sensing information may be fused in different ways…Another way would be a data-driven approach, based on a convolution neural network (CNN) as used for deep learning. In that case, the range-Doppler map may be computed from both the CSI and the CIR, then both maps may be concatenated and fed into a pre-trained CNN for classification (e.g., target detected yes/no or classify a gesture such as a hand movements (i.e., “sensing state”). In another implementation, features may be extracted from the CSI and the CIR and processed with a standard machine learning classifier) & [0057-0058])
Regarding Claim 11, Tertinek discloses the method of claim 1, wherein: the predetermined region is adjacent to a vehicle (see Para’s [0035] i.e., For instance, a radar device may transmit a signal which is reflected by a human being moving in a particular manner. Subsequently, the reflected signal may be received by the radar device, thereby resulting in a detection of the moving human being. In this way, a kicking movement toward a trunk may be detected, for example…For example, a vehicle may operate a radar sensor behind the rear bumper and automatically open the trunk when detecting that a user performs a kicking motion towards the sensor and when a legitimate key fob is within the vehicles proximity. The latter may require that the key fob has a predefined distance to the vehicle and that the key fob has successfully performed an authorization process within the vehicle, [0038] i.e., To enable access to the vehicle, the users smart device must have a predefined range relative to the other smart device, [0040], & [0050]), and the step of determining the sensing state further comprises determining a living being within a vicinity of an exterior of the vehicle, (see Para’s [0035] i.e., Subsequently, the reflected signal may be received by the radar device, thereby resulting in a detection of the moving human being…For example, a vehicle may operate a radar sensor behind the rear bumper and automatically open the trunk when detecting that a user performs a kicking motion towards the sensor and when a legitimate key fob is within the vehicles proximity, [0038] i.e., To enable access to the vehicle, the users smart device must have a predefined range relative to the other smart device, [0040], [0050], & [0053] i.e., target detected).
Regarding Claim 12, Tertinek discloses a method for managing communications among a set of system nodes (see Fig. 3 i.e., first device 302 & second device 304 ) configured to sense a predetermined region (see Fig. 3 & Para’s [0050] i.e., Furthermore, a sensing transmitter is the STA that transmits a sensing signal (RF signal) to a target area (i.e., “predetermined region”), and sensing receiver is the STA that receives reflections or echoes from a target area…a sensing measurement if defined as the measurement of the target area, [0051-0052] i.e., The transmitter of STA1 transmits a sensing signal to the target area. Then, the receiver of STA2 receives reflections or echoes from the target area, which are the sensing measurements (e.g., raw CSI). Subsequently, the second station STA2 sends the sensing measurements to STA1, and the processor of STA1 processes the measurements to obtain the sensing result, & [0057] i.e., detection area), the method comprising: establishing, via a processor (see Para’s [0018], [0060-0063], & [0066]), a schedule that includes at least a first localization timeslot (see Fig. 5 i.e., timeslot 504 may be a “first localization timeslot” which uses UWB radar to localize a target device & Para [0056]), a second localization timeslot (see Fig. 5 i.e., timeslot 506 may be a “second localization timeslot” which uses UWB radar to localize a target device & Para [0056]),
and a sensing timeslot that are distinct and non-overlapping (see Fig. 5) with respect to time, the sensing timeslot being between the first localization timeslot and the second localization timeslot; (see Fig. 5 i.e., timeslot 510 may be a “sensing timeslot” in which Wi-Fi sensing/UWB radar is performed by the first device 302 & Para’s [0050-0051] & [0056])
transmitting a first set of messages wirelessly in an ultra-wideband (UWB range) from a first system node or a second system (see Fig. 3 i.e., Device 1 302) node to a target to localize the target during the first localization timeslot; (In regards to the claim language of “to localize the target”, the claim feature is simply a statement of intended use and is not considered limiting to the claim. However Tertinek still discloses the claim feature…see Fig. 3, target 306 see Fig. 5 i.e., UWB radar transmission in timeslot 504 may be a “first localization timeslot” which uses UWB radar to localize a target device & Para’s [0027], [0033] i.e., these types of communication units may provide suitable data for detecting the presence as well as range, velocity and angle of an external object (i.e., “localization”) [0035-0036] i.e., UWB technology may use the frequency spectrum of 3.1 to 10.6 GHz (i.e., “UWB range”)…The UWB technology enables a high data throughput for communication devices and a high precision for the localization of devices, [0038] i.e., UWB technology can be used in which the position (i.e., “localization”) of devices can be determined, [0040] i.e., in the radar mode of operation, frames are transmitted (i.e., “first message”) by at least one device and those frames are received by one or more other devices. Then the CIRs are estimated on the devices receiving the frames, and the range and/or velocity and/or AoA are calculated based on the estimated CIRs, [0049] i.e., The UWB transceiver of the first device 302 may transmit radar signals (i.e., “first message” for localization of target device), which are reflected by the external object or target 306, & [0057-0058] i.e., the processing unit 602 receives CIR data from the UWB communication unit 604. Both CSI and CIR contain information about one or mor potential targets monitored in a detection area, such as the range, velocity and angle of a target (i.e., “localization”)…Accordingly, not only the presence of a target may be detected, but also its position (i.e., “localize the target”) or movement)
transmitting a second set of messages wirelessly in the UWB range from a first system node (see Para [0059] i.e., multiple devices may include a “first system node” for performing UWB transmission) to the target and localizing the target during the second localization timeslot; (see Fig. 5 i.e., UWB radar transmission in timeslot 510 may be a “second localization timeslot” which uses UWB radar to localize a target device & Para’s [0027], [0033] i.e., these types of communication units may provide suitable data for detecting the presence as well as range, velocity and angle of an external object (i.e., “localization”), [0035] i.e., Radar-based detection systems are able to detect external objects by transmitting radar signals which are reflected by said objects, [0036] i.e., UWB technology may use the frequency spectrum of 3.1 to 10.6 GHz (i.e., “UWB range”)…The UWB technology enables a high data throughput for communication devices and a high precision for the localization of devices, [0038] i.e., UWB technology can be used in which the position (i.e., “localization”) of devices can be determined, [0040] i.e., In the radar mode of operation, frames (i.e., “second set of messages”) are transmitted by at least one device and those frames are received by the same device and/or by one or more other devices, [0049] i.e., The UWB transceiver of the first device 302 may transmit radar signals (i.e., “second set of messages” for localization of target device), which are reflected by the external object or target 306…these reflected radar signals may be used to detect the presence of the target 306 & [0057-0058] i.e., the processing unit 602 receives CIR data from the UWB communication unit 604. Both CSI and CIR contain information about one or mor potential targets monitored in a detection area, such as the range, velocity and angle of a target (i.e., “localization”))
transmitting a radar transmission signal in the UWB range from the second system node (see Fig. 3 i.e., Device 1 302) during the sensing timeslot; (see Fig. 5 i.e., UWB radar transmission in timeslot 506 (i.e., “sensing timeslot”) & Para’s [0035-0036], [0040], [0049] i.e., The UWB transceiver of the first device 302 may transmit radar signals (i.e., “second message”), which are reflected by the external object or target 306…these reflected radar signals may be used to detect the presence of the target 306, [0056], & [0057] i.e., radar signals)
receiving, via the second system node (see Fig. 3 i.e., Device 1 302), a radar reflection signal in the UWB range during the sensing timeslot, the radar reflection signal being based on the radar transmission signal, (see Fig. 5 i.e., UWB radar operation performed in timeslot 506 (i.e., “sensing timeslot”) includes receiving radar reflection signal & Para’s [0035] i.e., Subsequently, the reflected signal may be received by the radar device, [0040], [0049] i.e., The UWB transceiver of the first device 302 may transmit radar signals, which are reflected by the external object or target 306…these reflected radar signals may be used to detect the presence of the target 306, & [0056])
transmitting another message wirelessly from the first system node or the second system (see Fig. 3 i.e., Device 1 302) node during the sensing timeslot; (see Fig. 3 & Para’s [0050] i.e., The transmitter of STA1 transmits a sensing signal (i.e., “another message”) to the target area. Then, the receiver of STA2 receives reflections or echoes from the target area, which are the sensing measurements (e.g., raw CSI). Subsequently, the second station STA2 sends the sensing measurements to STA1, and the processor of STA1 processes the measurements to obtain the sensing result, [0051] i.e., The transmitter of STA1 transmits a sensing signal (multiple PPDUs) to the target area. Then, the receiver of STA2 receives reflections or echoes from the target area, which are sensing measurements (e.g., raw CSI). Subsequently, the second station STA2 sends the sensing measurements to STA1, and the processor of STA 1 processes the measurement to obtain the sensing result & [0056] i.e., Wi-Fi sensing operation performed in timeslot 506)
determining channel state data of the another message via a subset of the set of system nodes during the sensing timeslot, (see Fig. 3 & Para’s [0050] i.e., The transmitter of STA1 transmits a sensing signal (i.e., “another message”) to the target area. Then, the receiver of STA2 receives reflections or echoes from the target area, which are the sensing measurements (e.g., raw CSI). Subsequently, the second station STA2 sends the sensing measurements (i.e., “channel state data”) to STA1, and the processor of STA1 processes the measurements to obtain the sensing result, [0051] i.e., The transmitter of STA1 transmits a sensing signal (multiple PPDUs) to the target area. Then, the receiver of STA2 receives reflections or echoes from the target area, which are sensing measurements (e.g., raw CSI) (i.e., “channel state data”). Subsequently, the second station STA2 sends the sensing measurements to STA1, and the processor of STA 1 processes the measurement to obtain the sensing result, [0056] i.e., Wi-Fi sensing operation performed in timeslot 506, & [0057]).
The channel state data including channel impulse response (CIR) data (see Para’s [0051] i.e., CIR which is obtained from the CSI measurements, & [0053] i.e., CIR obtained from an inverse Fourier transform of the CSI)
generating, via the processor (see Fig. 6 i.e., processing unit 602), sensor fusion data based on the UWB radar reflection signal and the channel state data; (see Para [0052-0053] i.e., UWB radar and Wi-Fi sensing unit may be operated concurrently, and the resulting radar information and sensing information may be fused (i.e., “sensor fusion data”) to improve the target detection capability, [0057] i.e., The processing unit 604 fuses the information contained in the CSI and the CIR to provide an overall system performance that is superior (e.g., a better target detection sensitivity) than if either UWB or Wi-Fi is operated on its own, & [0058])
and determining, via the processor (see Fig. 6 i.e., processing unit 602), a sensing state of the predetermined region using the sensor fusion data, (see Para’s [0032-0033] i.e., presence of an external object is determined, [0049-0052] i.e., detection decision is made based on the sensing result of target area, [0053] i.e., target detected yes/no (i.e., “sensing state”) or classify a gesture such as hand movements (i.e., “sensing state”) is based on both the CSI and the CIR, [0057] i.e., The processing unit 604 fuses the information contained in the CSI and the CIR to provide an overall system performance that is superior (e.g., a better target detection sensitivity) than if either UWB or Wi-Fi is operated on its own & [0058] i.e., fusing CSI and CIR to obtain an “overall CIR” with improved target resolution and accuracy and then (i) making the decision of target present or absent (i.e., “sensing state”))
wherein the radar reflection signal is transmitted in the UWB range (see Fig. 3 i.e., UWB TRX) and the second message are transmitted at different times within the same sensing timeslot (see Fig. 5 time slot 510 & Para’s [0035], [0049], [0056] i.e., Finally, in the fifth time slot 510 the UWB radar (i.e., UWB radar operation includes the “radar reflection signal”) and Wi-Fi sensing operations (i.e., “second message”) are performed at the same frequency, but at different times (sequentially))
While Tertinek discloses transmitting the another message wirelessly from the second system node during the sensing timeslot using Wi-Fi for performing RF sensing (see Fig. 3 & Para’s [0050-0051] & [0056]), Tertinek does not disclose the another message is wirelessly transmitted in the UWB range from the second system node and the target is a target device. However the claim features would be rendered obvious in view of Zhang et al. US (2022/0381898).
Zhang transmitting a message wirelessly in a UWB range from a system node to an object device 302 (see Fig. 3) for performing RF sensing using either Wi-Fi or UWB in order to detect/localize the object 302, (see Fig. 3 & Para’s [0044] i.e., a wireless electronic device can be configured to communicate via Wi-Fi and/or UWB, [0089-0100] i.e., Fig. 3 is a diagram illustrating an example of a wireless device 300 that utilizes RF sensing techniques to detect an object 302, & [0156] i.e., the RF sensing data can include CSI data corresponding to reflections received in response to transmission of a signal. In one illustrative example, the RF sensing data can include Wi-Fi CSI data corresponding to reflections received in response to transmission of a Wi-Fi signal. In other examples, the RF sensing data can include CSI data obtained using UWB (i.e., transmission of the signal is performed using UWB in a UWB range)).
Zhang further discloses the object 302 is a target device (see Fig. 3 i.e., object 302 & Para [0106] i.e., the object 302 can include a device (i.e., “target device”)).
(Zhang suggests the wireless device 300 can perform the RF sensing operation using UWB technology instead of Wi-Fi for obtaining the CSI data in order to properly detect/localize the object 302, (see Fig. 3 & Para’s [0089-0100] & [0156])).
Therefore it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date for the transmitting of the another message wirelessly from the second system node during the sensing timeslot using Wi-Fi for performing RF sensing for localizing/detecting the object or target 306 as disclosed in Tertinek to be transmitted using UWB technology in the UWB range to a target device for performing the sensing based on the teachings of Zhang who discloses transmitting a message wirelessly in a UWB range from a system node to an object device 302 for performing RF sensing using either Wi-Fi or UWB in order to detect/localize the object which may be a target device, which results in generating the sensor fusion data based on the UWB radar reflection signal and the UWB channel state data and the radar reflection signal and the second message being transmitted in the UWB range at different times within the same sensing timeslot, because the motivation lies in Zhang that the wireless device can perform the RF sensing operation using UWB technology instead of Wi-Fi for obtaining the CSI data in order to properly detect/localize the target device.
While the combination of Tertinek in view of Zhang discloses the target may be a target device (Tertinek, see Fig. 3 i.e., target 306 & Para [0049] & Zhang, see Fig. 3, 302 & Para [0106]), the combination of Tertinek in view of Zhang do not disclose the claim feature of a transceiver of the target device. However the claim feature would be rendered obvious in view of Kumari et al. US (2023/0100617).
Kumari discloses a system node (see Fig. 7 i.e., UE-1 702) transmits a radar signal to a transceiver of a target device (see Fig. 7 i.e., UE-2 704 may be a target device), (see Para [0101] i.e., At 712, the UE-1 702 may transmit a ranging signal, such as a radar signal…that may be reflected off UE-2 704 as reflected ranging signals…The radar signal may be reflected by surrounding objects (e.g., UE-2 704) (i.e., “target device”), and the resulting radar echoes may be received by the radar transceiver & Fig. 10 i.e., UE includes transceiver 1010 & Para’s [0120] & [0124]).
(Kumari suggests the UE-1 702 which receives the radar reflection signal from the target UE-2 704 estimates the channel for determining the distance, velocity, and the angle of the target UE-2 704 with respect to the UE-1 702 for determining optimal transmission parameters for transmission to the target UE such as optimal transmit power and beamforming parameters (see Para’s [0101-0104])).
Therefore it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date for the transmitting of the first set of messages and the second set of messages wirelessly from the system nodes to the target device to localize the target device as disclosed in Tertinek in view of Zhang to be transmitted to a transceiver of the target device based on the teachings of Kumari who discloses a system node transmits a radar signal to a transceiver of a target device in which a radar reflection signal is received by the system node from the target device, because the motivation lies in Kumari that the UE-1 which receives the radar reflection signal from the target UE-2 estimates the channel for determining the distance, velocity, and the angle of the target UE-2 with respect to the UE-1 for determining optimal transmission parameters for transmission to the target UE such as optimal transmit power and beamforming parameters.
Regarding Claim 14, the claim is directed towards a method which performs the same claim steps as the method in claim 11. Therefore claim 14 is rejected as obvious over the combination of Tertinek in view of Zhang, and further in view of Kumari as in claim 11.
Regarding Claim 15, the claim is directed towards a method which performs the same claim steps as the method in claim 8. Therefore claim 15 is rejected as obvious over the combination of Tertinek in view of Zhang, and further in view of Kumari as in claim 8.
Regarding Claim 18, the claim is directed towards a method which performs the same claim steps as the method in claim 5. Therefore claim 18 is rejected as obvious over the combination of Tertinek in view of Zhang, and further in view of Kumari as in claim 5.
Regarding Claim 20, the claim is directed towards a method which performs the same claim steps as the method in claim 4. Therefore claim 20 is rejected as obvious over the combination of Tertinek in view of Zhang, and further in view of Kumari as in claim 4.
Regarding Claim 23, the combination of Tertinek in view of Zhang, and further in view of Kumari discloses the method of claim 1, wherein the set of system nodes support vehicle access control or a keyless application of a vehicle, (Tertinek, see Para’s [0035] i.e., I some examples, such a radar-based detection system may be used to assist a smart access system. In particular, in UWB-based smart access systems a radar sensor can assist a UWB ranging device to make an access procedure more convenient for a user. For example, a vehicle may operate a radar sensor behind the rear bumper and automatically open the trunk when detecting that a user performs a kicking motion towards the sensor (i.e., “vehicle access control”) and when a legitimate key fob is within the vehicles proximity (i.e., “keyless application”) & [0038])
Claim 22 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Tertinek et al. US (2023/0156429) in view of Zhang et al. US (2022/0381898), and further in view of Kumari et al. US (2023/0100617) as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Tucci et al. USP (10,926,738).
Regarding Claim 22, the combination of Tertinek in view of Zhang, and further in view of Kumari discloses the method of claim 1, including localizing the target device during the localization timeslot (Tertinek, see Para’s [0033-0036], [0038], [0040], [0049], & [0056-0058]) and wherein the target device is configured to communicate in the UWB range with the set of system nodes, (Tertinek, see Fig. 3 & Para’s [0035-0036], [0038], [0049], [0052], [0056-0057], & [0059] i.e., the concurrent UWB radar and Wi-Fi sensing need not be limited to one device but may involve multiple devices (i.e., set of system nodes that may perform UWB communication with the target device)), but does not disclose the claim features of receiving a reply message from the transceiver of the target device during the localization. However the claim feature would be rendered obvious in view of Tucci et al. USP (10,926,738).
Tucci discloses of receiving a reply message from the transceiver of the target device (see Fig. 1 i.e., target device 40) during localization of the target device (see Fig. 3 i.e., response 104 (i.e., “reply message”) to poll message 102 from initiator I & Col. 6 lines 10-41 i.e., Particularly, both the localization of the target portable device and the localization of slave system nodes 20 having unknown installation locations involve determining distances from one device to another. A distance from a given system node 20, 30 to the target portable device 40 can be computed by measuring a time of flight (ToF) for a message communicated between the devices…including two way ranging (TWR) for calculating ToF & Col. 6 lines 51-67 i.e., The responder R then replies by sending a response message 104 & Col. 7 lines 1-10 & 45-60).
(Tucci suggests the response 104 received from the target device is used for determining a distance between a system node 120 and the target device by measuring a time of flight (ToF) for a message communicated between the devices for successfully localizing the target device, (see Col. 6 lines 10-41)).
Therefore it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date for the localizing the target device during the localization timeslot as disclosed in Tertinek in view of Zhang, and further in view of Kumari to include receiving a reply message from the transceiver of the target device during localization of the target device as disclosed in Tucci, because the motivation lies in Tucci that the response 104 received from the target device is used for determining a distance between a system node 120 and the target device by measuring a time of flight (ToF) for a message communicated between the devices for successfully localizing the target device.
Claims 24-25 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Tertinek et al. US (2023/0156429) in view of Zhang et al. US (2022/0381898), and further in view of Nguyen et al. US (2022/0214418).
Regarding Claim 24, Tertinek discloses a method for managing communications among a set of system nodes (see Fig. 3 i.e., first device 302 & second device 304) configured to sense a predetermined region, (see Fig. 3 & Para’s [0050] i.e., Furthermore, a sensing transmitter is the STA that transmits a sensing signal (RF signal) to a target area (i.e., “predetermined region”), and sensing receiver is the STA that receives reflections or echoes from a target area…a sensing measurement if defined as the measurement of the target area, [0051-0052] i.e., The transmitter of STA1 transmits a sensing signal to the target area. Then, the receiver of STA2 receives reflections or echoes from the target area, which are the sensing measurements (e.g., raw CSI). Subsequently, the second station STA2 sends the sensing measurements to STA1, and the processor of STA1 processes the measurements to obtain the sensing result, & [0057] i.e., detection area)
the set of system nodes including at least a first system node (see Fig. 3 i.e., Device 2 304 (i.e., “first system node”) & Para [0049]) and a second system node (see Fig. 3 i.e., Device 1 302 (i.e., “second system node”) & Para [0049]), the method comprising: establishing, via a processor, a schedule that includes at least a localization timeslot (see Fig. 3 i.e., target 306 & Fig. 5 i.e., timeslot 504 may be a “localization timeslot” which uses UWB radar to localize a target 306) and a sensing timeslot (see Fig. 5 i.e., timeslot 510 may be a “sensing timeslot” in which Wi-Fi sensing/UWB radar is performed by the first device 302) that are non-overlapping with respect to time; (see Fig. 5 & Para [0056])
transmitting a first message wirelessly in an ultra-wideband (UWB) range from the first system node or the second system node (see Fig. 3 i.e., Device 1 302) to a target (see Fig. 3 i.e., target 306) during the localization timeslot, (see Fig. 3 i.e., target 306 & Fig. 5 i.e., UWB radar transmission in timeslot 504 may be interpreted as a “localization timeslot” which uses UWB radar to localize the target 306 & Para’s [0027], [0033] i.e., these types of communication units may provide suitable data for detecting the presence as well as range, velocity and angle of an external object (i.e., “localization”) [0035-0036] i.e., UWB technology may use the frequency spectrum of 3.1 to 10.6 GHz (i.e., “UWB range”)…The UWB technology enables a high data throughput for communication devices and a high precision for the localization of devices, [0038] i.e., UWB technology can be used in which the position (i.e., “localization”) of devices can be determined, [0040] i.e., in the radar mode of operation, frames are transmitted (i.e., “first message”) by at least one device and those frames are received by one or more other devices. Then the CIRs are estimated on the devices receiving the frames, and the range and/or velocity and/or AoA are calculated based on the estimated CIRs, [0049] i.e., The UWB transceiver of the first device 302 may transmit radar signals (i.e., “first message” for localization of target device), which are reflected by the external object or target 306, & [0057-0058] i.e., the processing unit 602 receives CIR data from the UWB communication unit 604. Both CSI and CIR contain information about one or mor potential targets monitored in a detection area, such as the range, velocity and angle of a target (i.e., “localization”)…Accordingly, not only the presence of a target may be detected, but also its position (i.e., “localize the target”) or movement)
transmitting a radar transmission signal in the UWB range from the second system node (see Fig. 3 i.e., Device 1 302) during the sensing timeslot; (see Fig. 5 i.e., UWB radar transmission in timeslot 506 (i.e., “sensing timeslot”) & Para’s [0035-0036] i.e., UWB technology may use the frequency spectrum of 3.1 to 10.6 GHz (i.e., “UWB range”), [0040], [0049] i.e., The UWB transceiver of the first device 302 may transmit radar signals (i.e., “second message”), which are reflected by the external object or target 306…these reflected radar signals may be used to detect the presence of the target 306, [0056], & [0057] i.e., radar signals)
receiving, via the second system node (see Fig. 3 i.e., Device 1 302), a radar reflection signal in the UWB range during the sensing timeslot, the radar reflection signal being based on the radar transmission signal; (see Fig. 5 i.e., UWB radar operation performed in timeslot 510 (i.e., “sensing timeslot”) includes receiving radar reflection signal & Para’s [0035] i.e., Subsequently, the reflected signal may be received by the radar device, [0040], [0049] i.e., The UWB transceiver of the first device 302 may transmit radar signals, which are reflected by the external object or target 306…these reflected radar signals may be used to detect the presence of the target 306, & [0056])
transmitting a second message wirelessly from the first system node or the second system node (see Fig. 3 i.e., Device 1 302) during the sensing timeslot, (see Fig. 3 & Para’s [0050] i.e., The transmitter of STA1 transmits a sensing signal (i.e., “second message”) to the target area. Then, the receiver of STA2 receives reflections or echoes from the target area, which are the sensing measurements (e.g., raw CSI). Subsequently, the second station STA2 sends the sensing measurements to STA1, and the processor of STA1 processes the measurements to obtain the sensing result, [0051] i.e., The transmitter of STA1 transmits a sensing signal (multiple PPDUs) to the target area. Then, the receiver of STA2 receives reflections or echoes from the target area, which are sensing measurements (e.g., raw CSI). Subsequently, the second station STA2 sends the sensing measurements to STA1, and the processor of STA 1 processes the measurement to obtain the sensing result & [0056] i.e., Wi-Fi sensing operation performed in timeslot 510)
determining channel state data of the second message via a subset of the set of system nodes (see Fig. 3 i.e., Device 2 304) during the sensing timeslot; (see Fig. 3 & Para’s [0050] i.e., The transmitter of STA1 transmits a sensing signal (i.e., “second message”) to the target area. Then, the receiver of STA2 receives reflections or echoes from the target area, which are the sensing measurements (e.g., raw CSI). Subsequently, the second station STA2 sends the sensing measurements (i.e., “channel state data”) to STA1, and the processor of STA1 processes the measurements to obtain the sensing result, [0051] i.e., The transmitter of STA1 transmits a sensing signal (multiple PPDUs) to the target area. Then, the receiver of STA2 receives reflections or echoes from the target area, which are sensing measurements (e.g., raw CSI) (i.e., “channel state data”). Subsequently, the second station STA2 sends the sensing measurements to STA1, and the processor of STA 1 processes the measurement to obtain the sensing result, [0056] i.e., Wi-Fi sensing operation performed in timeslot 510, & [0057]).
The channel state data including channel impulse response (CIR) data (see Para’s [0051] i.e., CIR which is obtained from the CSI measurements, & [0053] i.e., CIR obtained from an inverse Fourier transform of the CSI)
generating, via the processor (see Fig. 6 i.e., processing unit 602), sensor fusion data based on the UWB radar reflection signal and the channel state data; (see Para [0052-0053] i.e., UWB radar and Wi-Fi sensing unit may be operated concurrently, and the resulting radar information and sensing information may be fused (i.e., “sensor fusion data”) to improve the target detection capability, [0057] i.e., The processing unit 604 fuses the information contained in the CSI and the CIR to provide an overall system performance that is superior (e.g., a better target detection sensitivity) than if either UWB or Wi-Fi is operated on its own, & [0058])
and determining, via the processor (see Fig. 6 i.e., processing unit 602), a sensing state of the predetermined region based on the sensor fusion data, (see Para’s [0032-0033] i.e., presence of an external object is determined, [0049-0052] i.e., detection decision is made based on the sensing result of target area, [0053] i.e., target detected yes/no (i.e., “sensing state”) or classify a gesture such as hand movements (i.e., “sensing state”) is based on both the CSI and the CIR, [0057] i.e., The processing unit 604 fuses the information contained in the CSI and the CIR to provide an overall system performance that is superior (e.g., a better target detection sensitivity) than if either UWB or Wi-Fi is operated on its own & [0058] i.e., fusing CSI and CIR to obtain an “overall CIR” with improved target resolution and accuracy and then (i) making the decision of target present or absent (i.e., “sensing state”))
wherein the radar reflection signal is transmitted in the UWB range (see Fig. 3 i.e., UWB TRX) and the second message are transmitted at different times within the same sensing timeslot (see Fig. 5 time slot 510 & Para’s [0035], [0049], [0056] i.e., Finally, in the fifth time slot 510 the UWB radar (i.e., UWB radar operation includes the “radar reflection signal”) and Wi-Fi sensing operations (i.e., “second message”) are performed at the same frequency, but at different times (sequentially))
While Tertinek discloses transmitting the second message wirelessly from the second system node during the sensing timeslot using Wi-Fi for performing RF sensing (see Fig. 3 & Para’s [0050-0051] & [0056]), Tertinek does not disclose the second message is wirelessly transmitted in the UWB range from the second system node and the target is a target device. However the claim features would be rendered obvious in view of Zhang et al. US (2022/0381898).
Zhang transmitting a message wirelessly in a UWB range from a system node to an object device 302 (see Fig. 3) for performing RF sensing using either Wi-Fi or UWB in order to detect/localize the object 302, (see Fig. 3 & Para’s [0044] i.e., a wireless electronic device can be configured to communicate via Wi-Fi and/or UWB, [0089-0100] i.e., Fig. 3 is a diagram illustrating an example of a wireless device 300 that utilizes RF sensing techniques to detect an object 302, & [0156] i.e., the RF sensing data can include CSI data corresponding to reflections received in response to transmission of a signal. In one illustrative example, the RF sensing data can include Wi-Fi CSI data corresponding to reflections received in response to transmission of a Wi-Fi signal. In other examples, the RF sensing data can include CSI data obtained using UWB (i.e., transmission of the signal is performed using UWB in a UWB range)).
Zhang further discloses the object 302 is a target device (see Fig. 3 i.e., object 302 & Para [0106] i.e., the object 302 can include a device (i.e., “target device”)).
(Zhang suggests the wireless device 300 can perform the RF sensing operation using UWB technology instead of Wi-Fi for obtaining the CSI data in order to properly detect/localize the object 302, (see Fig. 3 & Para’s [0089-0100] & [0156])).
Therefore it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date for the transmitting of the second message wirelessly from the second system node during the sensing timeslot using Wi-Fi for performing RF sensing for localizing/detecting the object or target 306 as disclosed in Tertinek to be transmitted using UWB technology in the UWB range to a target device for performing the sensing based on the teachings of Zhang who discloses transmitting a message wirelessly in a UWB range from a system node to an object device 302 for performing RF sensing using either Wi-Fi or UWB in order to detect/localize the object which may be a target device, which results in generating the sensor fusion data based on the UWB radar reflection signal and the UWB channel state data and the radar reflection signal and the second message being transmitted in the UWB range at different times within the same sensing timeslot, because the motivation lies in Zhang that the wireless device can perform the RF sensing operation using UWB technology instead of Wi-Fi for obtaining the CSI data in order to properly detect/localize the target device.
While the combination of Tertinek in view of Zhang discloses the target may be a target device (Tertinek, see Fig. 3 i.e., target 306 & Para [0049] & Zhang, see Fig. 3, 302 & Para [0106]), the combination of Tertinek in view of Zhang do not disclose the claim feature of the target device including at least a transceiver to communicate in the UWB range with at least the second system node. However the claim feature would be rendered obvious in view of Nguyen et al. US (2022/0214418).
Nguyen discloses a target device (see Fig. 4a i.e., target device 410) including at least a transceiver to communicate in the UWB range with at least a system node (see Fig. 4a i.e., electronic device 402), (see Para’s [0004], [0034] i.e., The device and target(s) are both equipped with transceivers. Similarly, the transceiver target devices can be a UWB transceiver, [0046], [0061-0062], & [0094-0096] i.e., the electronic device 402, the target device 410a and 410 b can include a transceiver such as, the measuring transceiver 270 of Fig. 2, a UWB transceiver, or the like)
(Nguyen suggests the target device communicates with the electronic device using the UWB transceivers for accurately identifying the location of the target device based on signal measurements performed between the target device and electronic device, (see Fig. 4a & Para’s [0034-0035], [0038], [0062], & [0094-0096])).
Therefore it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date for the target device which communicates with the second system node using UWB communications for localizing the target device as disclosed in Tertinek in view of Zhang to include the UWB transceiver of the target device for communicating with the system node as disclosed in the teachings of Nguyen who discloses the target device includes at least a UWB transceiver to communicate in the UWB range with at least a system node, because the motivation lies in Nguyen that the target device communicates with the electronic device using the UWB transceivers for accurately identifying the location of the target device based on signal measurements performed between the target device and electronic device.
Regarding Claim 25, Tertinek discloses the method of claim 24, wherein the second system node is operable to switch between a radar mode (see Fig. 3 i.e., UWB TRX & Para’s [0027] i.e., a UWB communication unit operating in a radar mode, [0033], & [0049]) and a communication mode (see Para’s [0015] i.e., communication mode & [0033]) such that the second system node transmits (see Fig. 3 i.e., Device 1 302) the radar transmission signal while operating in the radar mode and transmits the second message while operating in the communication mode, (see Para’s [0015], [0027], [0032-0033] i.e., Furthermore, congested or occupied channels may be avoided by switching the detection mode from radar-based detection to RF communication-based detection and back, [0049-0050] & [0056] i.e., UWB radar and Wi-Fi sensing operations (i.e., “communication mode”) may be performed sequentially suggests the device can switch between radar mode and a communication mode).
Claims 9 and 19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Tertinek et al. US (2023/0156429) in view of Zhang et al. US (2022/0381898), and further in view of Kumari et al. US (2023/0100617) as applied to claims 1 and 12 above, and further in view of Zhang et al. US (2023/0341535).
Regarding Claims 9 and 19, the combination of Tertinek in view of Zhang, and further in view of Kumari discloses the method of claims 1 and 12 including the target based detection can be used for indoor applications including in-car sensing applications (see Para [0028]), but does not disclose wherein: the predetermined region is an interior of a vehicle, and the step of determining the sensing state further comprises determining a living being within the interior of the vehicle. However the claim features would be rendered obvious in view of Zhang et al. US (2023/0341535).
Zhang discloses a node which performs sensing in a predetermined region which is an interior of a vehicle, (see Fig. 2 i.e., vehicle 200 & Para’s [0021-0022], [0025-0026] i.e., Fig. 2 illustrates how RF sensing may be used in a vehicular environment to detect an object or movement inside the vehicle 200)
and the step of determining the sensing state further comprises determining a living being within the interior of the vehicle (see Fig. 2 & Para’s [0021-0022], [0025-0026] i.e., these reflections may be identified in the captured CSI and used to determine a location of the first object 240 and/or larger motion of the object 240 (e.g., a person moving their head/arm movement or shifting in their seat) (i.e., “sensing state”), & [0051] i.e., type of object detected may be a child)
(Zhang suggests the RF sensing is performed by the RF sensing system 105 within the transceiver for identifying an object within a vehicle for successfully determining the presence of a child or adult within the vehicle (see Para’s [0073], [0075], & [0077])).
Therefore it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date for the sensing operations performed by the system nodes which can be used for in-car sensing as disclosed in Tertinek in view of Zhang, and further in view of Kumari to be performed in an interior of a vehicle, and the step of determining the sensing state further comprises determining a living being within the interior of the vehicle according to the sensing performed by the system nodes within the vehicle as disclosed in Zhang, because the motivation lies in Zhang that the RF sensing is performed by the RF sensing system 105 within the transceiver for identifying an object within a vehicle for successfully determining the presence of a child or adult within the vehicle.
Claims 6-7 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Tertinek et al. US (2023/0156429) in view of Zhang et al. US (2022/0381898), and further in view of Kumari et al. US (2023/0100617) as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Somayazulu et al. US (2022/0240168).
Regarding Claim 6, the combination of Tertinek in view of Zhang, and further in view of Kumari discloses the method of claims 1 and 12 including sensing performed during the sensing time slot (see Para’s [0050] & [0056]) and suggests the target based detection can be used for indoor applications including in-car sensing applications (see Para [0028]), however Tertinek in view of Zhang, and further in view of Kumari does not disclose the claim features of further comprising: capturing image data during the sensing timeslot, wherein the sensor fusion data is also generated based on the image data. However the claim feature would be rendered obvious in view of Somayazulu et al. US (2022/0240168).
Somayazulu discloses capturing image data during sensing, (see Fig. 1 i.e., & Para’s [0037], [0041], [0046] i.e., the data processing platform 102 may be used in a sensor fusion mechanism with other sensors, where audio data, image data…and/or other types of sensor data provided by the sensor array 121 are used to augment, corroborate, or otherwise assist in vehicle recognition, object type detection, object identification & [0049])
wherein the sensor fusion data is also generated based on the image data (see Fig. 1 i.e., & Para’s [0037], [0046] i.e., the data processing platform 102 may be used in a sensor fusion mechanism with other sensors, where audio data, image data…and/or other types of sensor data provided by the sensor array 121 are used to augment, corroborate, or otherwise assist in vehicle recognition, object type detection, object identification & [0049])
(Somayazulu suggests the image data provided by the sensory array 121 are used for object type detection (see Para [0046])).
Therefore it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date for the sensing performed during the sensing time slot which can be used for in-car sensing as disclosed in Tertinek in view of Zhang, and further in view of Kumari to perform sensing which captures image data during sensing as disclosed in Somayazulu who discloses a sensory array within a vehicle performs capturing of image data during sensing, wherein sensor fusion data is also generated based on the image data, because the motivation lies in Somayazulu that the image data provided by the sensory array 121 are used for object type detection for successful detection of an object.
Regarding Claim 7, Tertinek discloses the method of claim 1 including sensing performed during the sensing time slot (see Para’s [0050] & [0056]) and suggests the target based detection can be used for indoor applications including in-car sensing applications (see Para [0028]) however Tertinek in view of Zhang, and further in view of Kumari does not disclose the claim features of further comprising: capturing audio data during the sensing timeslot, wherein the sensor fusion data is also generated based on the audio data. However the claim feature would be rendered obvious in view of Somayazulu et al. US (2022/0240168).
Somayazulu discloses capturing audio data during sensing, (see Fig. 1 i.e., & Para’s [0037], [0041], [0046-0047] i.e., the data processing platform 102 may be used in a sensor fusion mechanism with other sensors, where audio data, image data…and/or other types of sensor data provided by the sensor array 121 are used to augment, corroborate, or otherwise assist in vehicle recognition, object type detection, object identification & [0049])
wherein the sensor fusion data is also generated based on the audio data (see Fig. 1 i.e., & Para’s [0037], [0046] i.e., the data processing platform 102 may be used in a sensor fusion mechanism with other sensors, where audio data, image data…and/or other types of sensor data provided by the sensor array 121 are used to augment, corroborate, or otherwise assist in vehicle recognition, object type detection, object identification & [0049])
(Somayazulu suggests the image data provided by the sensory array 121 are used for object type detection (see Para [0046])).
Therefore it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date for the sensing performed during the sensing time slot which can be used for in-car sensing as disclosed in Tertinek in view of Zhang, and further in view of Kumari to perform sensing which captures audio data during sensing as disclosed in Somayazulu who discloses a sensory array within a vehicle performs capturing of audio data during sensing, wherein sensor fusion data is also generated based on the audio data, because the motivation lies in Somayazulu that the audio data provided by the sensory array 121 are used for object type detection for successful detection of an object.
Claims 16-17 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Tertinek et al. US (2023/0156429) in view of Zhang et al. US (2022/0381898), and further in view of Kumari et al. US (2023/0100617) as applied to claim 12 above, and further in view of Somayazulu et al. US (2022/0240168).
Regarding Claim 16, Tertinek discloses the method of claim 12 including sensing performed during the sensing time slot (see Para’s [0050] & [0056]) and suggests the target based detection can be used for indoor applications including in-car sensing applications (see Para [0028]), but the references combined does not disclose the claim features of further comprising: capturing image data during the sensing timeslot, wherein the sensor fusion data is also generated based on the image data. However the claim feature would be rendered obvious in view of Somayazulu et al. US (2022/0240168).
Somayazulu discloses capturing image data during sensing, (see Fig. 1 i.e., & Para’s [0037], [0041], [0046] i.e., the data processing platform 102 may be used in a sensor fusion mechanism with other sensors, where audio data, image data…and/or other types of sensor data provided by the sensor array 121 are used to augment, corroborate, or otherwise assist in vehicle recognition, object type detection, object identification & [0049])
wherein the sensor fusion data is also generated based on the image data (see Fig. 1 i.e., & Para’s [0037], [0046] i.e., the data processing platform 102 may be used in a sensor fusion mechanism with other sensors, where audio data, image data…and/or other types of sensor data provided by the sensor array 121 are used to augment, corroborate, or otherwise assist in vehicle recognition, object type detection, object identification & [0049])
(Somayazulu suggests the image data provided by the sensory array 121 are used for object type detection (see Para [0046])).
Therefore it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date for the sensing performed during the sensing time slot which can be used for in-car sensing as disclosed in Tertinek in view of Zhang, and further in view of Kumari to perform sensing which captures image data during sensing as disclosed in Somayazulu who discloses a sensory array within a vehicle performs capturing of image data during sensing, wherein sensor fusion data is also generated based on the image data, because the motivation lies in Somayazulu that the image data provided by the sensory array 121 are used for object type detection for successful detection of an object.
Regarding Claim 17, Tertinek discloses the method of claim 12 including sensing performed during the sensing time slot (see Para’s [0050] & [0056]) and suggests the target based detection can be used for indoor applications including in-car sensing applications (see Para [0028]) but the references combined does not disclose the claim features of further comprising: capturing audio data during the sensing timeslot, wherein the sensor fusion data is also generated based on the audio data. However the claim feature would be rendered obvious in view of Somayazulu et al. US (2022/0240168).
Somayazulu discloses capturing audio data during sensing, (see Fig. 1 i.e., & Para’s [0037], [0041], [0046-0047] i.e., the data processing platform 102 may be used in a sensor fusion mechanism with other sensors, where audio data, image data…and/or other types of sensor data provided by the sensor array 121 are used to augment, corroborate, or otherwise assist in vehicle recognition, object type detection, object identification & [0049])
wherein the sensor fusion data is also generated based on the audio data (see Fig. 1 i.e., & Para’s [0037], [0046] i.e., the data processing platform 102 may be used in a sensor fusion mechanism with other sensors, where audio data, image data…and/or other types of sensor data provided by the sensor array 121 are used to augment, corroborate, or otherwise assist in vehicle recognition, object type detection, object identification & [0049])
(Somayazulu suggests the image data provided by the sensory array 121 are used for object type detection (see Para [0046])).
Therefore it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date for the sensing performed during the sensing time slot which can be used for in-car sensing as disclosed in Tertinek in view of Zhang, and further in view of Kumari to perform sensing which captures audio data during sensing as disclosed in Somayazulu who discloses a sensory array within a vehicle performs capturing of audio data during sensing, wherein sensor fusion data is also generated based on the audio data, because the motivation lies in Somayazulu that the audio data provided by the sensory array 121 are used for object type detection for successful detection of an object.
Conclusion
THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. 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 ADNAN A BAIG whose telephone number is (571)270-7511. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 9:00am-5:00pm.
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, Huy Vu can be reached at 571-272-3155. 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.
/ADNAN BAIG/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2461