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 Amendment
Receipt is acknowledged of applicant’s amendment filed on 10/20/2025. Claims 1, 12 and 13 amended. Claims 1-22 are pending and an action on the merits is as follows.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
The following is a quotation of the appropriate paragraphs of 35 U.S.C. 102 that form the basis for the rejections under this section made in this Office action:
A person shall be entitled to a patent unless –
(a)(1) the claimed invention was patented, described in a printed publication, or in public use, on sale, or otherwise available to the public before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
(a)(2) the claimed invention was described in a patent issued under section 151, or in an application for patent published or deemed published under section 122(b), in which the patent or application, as the case may be, names another inventor and was effectively filed before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claim(s) 1, 2, 8-10, 12-14 and 20-21 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102a1/a2 as being anticipated by Hu US Publication No. 2019/0098445.
Re Claim 1, Hu discloses A method for determining locations of internet of things (IoT) tags (beacon devices ), comprising: receiving, during a predefined time window, packets from a plurality of gateways wherein a received packet includes at least sensing signals transmitted from the IoT tags (P18, P21, P34, P44 beacon devices can interact with one or more gateway devices (“gateways”) of event users using the gateways interacting with beacon device users is provided that a gateway measures the signal strength of the wireless signals transmit by beacon devices in the vicinity; interact with servers for data transfers and device management; interacts with beacon devices in the vicinity);
determining an affinity among the IoT tags (beacon devices )based on the sensing signals received from the plurality of gateways ; determining locations of IoT tags based on the determined affinity and the sensing signals received from the plurality of gateways (P47, P28,44, wherein a location of an IoT tag is a probability that an IoT tag is located in proximity to a gateway of the plurality of gateways P44, In some embodiments, the beacon device 406 advertises the wireless signals above a certain threshold of electric power that can be received by the gateway 404, the beacon device 406 is considered in proximity to the gateway 404 or 424; and reporting the determined locations to a user terminal (P47 and see claims 4 and 8, a gateway first determines the proximity of the beacon devices on user devices. In some embodiments, a user's proximity to a gateway is determined by the strength of the wireless signal sent from a beacon on the user device received by the gateway; P62, when propagating the location information to gateways, a database on a gateway or a host can piggyback the user-defined data message alongside the location information).
Re Claim 2, Hu discloses the method of claim 1, further comprising clustering IoT tags based on their determined locations (Fig. 4) .
Re Claim 8, Hu discloses the method of claim 1, wherein an IoT tag is a wireless battery-less IoT tag communicating with a gateway using a low-power communication protocol (P42, P93).
Re Claim 9, Hu discloses the method of claim 1, wherein the method is performed by a server, wherein each of the gateways communicate with the server over the Internet (P51).
Re Claim 10, Hu discloses the method of claim 1, wherein a packet includes sensing signals transmitted by an IoT tag, an identifier of the IoT tag transmitting the sensing signals, and an identifier of the gateway (P59).
Re Claim 12, Hu discloses a non-transitory computer readable medium having stored thereon instructions for causing a processing circuitry to execute a process for determining locations of internet of things (IoT) tags, the process comprising:
method for locations of internet of things (IoT) tags, comprising: receiving, during a predefined time window, packets from a plurality of gateways, wherein a received packet includes at least sensing signals transmitted from the IoT tags (P18, P21, P34, P44 beacon devices can interact with one or more gateway devices (“gateways”) of event users using the gateways interacting with beacon device users is provided that a gateway measures the signal strength of the wireless signals transmit by beacon devices in the vicinity; interact with servers for data transfers and device management; interacts with beacon devices in the vicinity);
determining an affinity among the IoT tags based on the sensing signals received from the plurality of gateways; determining locations of IoT tags based on the determined affinity and the sensing signals received from the plurality of gateways (P47, P28,44, wherein a location of an IoT tag is a probability that an IoT tag is located in proximity to a gateway of the plurality of gateways P44, In some embodiments, the beacon device 406 advertises the wireless signals above a certain threshold of electric power that can be received by the gateway 404, the beacon device 406 is considered in proximity to the gateway 404 or 424),
wherein a location of an IoT tag is a probability that an IoT tag is located in proximity to a gateway of the plurality of gateways; and reporting the determined locations to a user terminal (P47 and see claims 4 and 8, a gateway first determines the proximity of the beacon devices on user devices. In some embodiments, a user's proximity to a gateway is determined by the strength of the wireless signal sent from a beacon on the user device received by the gateway; P62, when propagating the location information to gateways, a database on a gateway or a host can piggyback the user-defined data message alongside the location information.
Re Claim 13, Hu discloses a system for determining locations of internet of things (IoT) tags, comprising: a processing circuitry; a memory connected to the processing circuitry and configured to contain a plurality of instructions that when executed by the processing circuitry configure the system to: receive, during a predefined time window, packets from a plurality of gateways, wherein a received packets include at least sensing signals transmitted from the IoT tags (P18, P21, P34, P44 beacon devices can interact with one or more gateway devices (“gateways”) of event users using the gateways interacting with beacon device users is provided that a gateway measures the signal strength of the wireless signals transmit by beacon devices in the vicinity; interact with servers for data transfers and device management; interacts with beacon devices in the vicinity;
determine an affinity among the IoT tags based on the sensing signals received from the plurality of gateways; determine locations of IoT tags based on the determined affinity and the sensing signals received from the plurality of gateways (P47, P28,44, wherein a location of an IoT tag is a probability that an IoT tag is located in proximity to a gateway of the plurality of gateways P44, In some embodiments, the beacon device 406 advertises the wireless signals above a certain threshold of electric power that can be received by the gateway 404, the beacon device 406 is considered in proximity to the gateway 404 or 424),
wherein a location of an IoT tag is a probability that an IoT tag is located in proximity to a gateway of the plurality of gateways; and report the determined locations to a user terminal (P47 and see claims 4 and 8, a gateway first determines the proximity of the beacon devices on user devices. In some embodiments, a user's proximity to a gateway is determined by the strength of the wireless signal sent from a beacon on the user device received by the gateway; P62, when propagating the location information to gateways, a database on a gateway or a host can piggyback the user-defined data message alongside the location information.
Re Claim 14, Hu discloses the system of claim 13, wherein the system is further configured to: cluster IoT tags based on their determined locations(Fig. 4).
Re Claim 20, Hu discloses the system of claim 13, wherein an IoT tag is a wireless battery-less IoT tag communicating with a gateway using a low-power communication protocol (P42, P93).
Re Claim 21, Hu discloses the system of claim 13, wherein a packet includes sensing signals transmitted by an IoT tag, an identifier of the IoT tag transmitting the sensing signals, and an identifier of the gateway (P59).
Claim(s) 11 and 22 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Hu US Publication No. 2019/0098445 in view of Sandre et al. US Publication No. 2021/015, 8428 cited in the previous action.
Re Claim 11, Hu discloses the method of claim 1.
Hu fails to disclose wherein a sensing signal includes any one of: a frequency word, a received signal strength indicator (RSSI), a digitally controlled oscillator(DCO) signal.
Sandre discloses wherein a sensing signal includes any one of: a frequency word, a received signal strength indicator (RSSI), a digitally controlled oscillator(DCO) signal (P35).
Given the teachings of Sandre 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 teachings of Hu with wherein a sensing signal includes any one of: a frequency word, a received signal strength indicator (RSSI), a digitally controlled oscillator(DCO) signal.
As suggested by Sandra Doing so would provide an alternative economically means of detecting/sensing movement of an IOT tag (P42, P48, P71-72)
Re Claim 22, Hu discloses the system of claim 13.
Hu fails to disclose wherein a sensing signal includes any one of: a frequency word, a received signal strength indicator (RSSI), a digitally controlled oscillator(DCO) signal.
Sandre discloses wherein a sensing signal includes any one of: a frequency word, a received signal strength indicator (RSSI), a digitally controlled oscillator(DCO) signal (P35).
Given the teachings of Sandre 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 teachings of Hu with wherein a sensing signal includes any one of: a frequency word, a received signal strength indicator (RSSI), a digitally controlled oscillator(DCO) signal.
As suggested by Sandra Doing so would provide an alternative economically means of detecting/sensing movement of an IOT tag (P42, P48, P71-72)
Claim(s) 3-5, 15-17 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Hu US Publication No. 2019/0098445 in view of Freeman et al. US Publication No. 2022/0207473 cited in previous action.
Re Claims 3-5, Hu discloses the method of claim 1.
Hu fails to disclose wherein receiving, during a predefined time window, packets from a plurality of gateways, further comprises: for each of the IoT tags, creating a vector of an average value of sensing signals transmitted by each of the IoT tags as received by each of the gateways; and forming a sensing signal matrix based on the created vectors.
Freeman discloses wherein receiving, during a predefined time window, packets from a plurality of gateways, further comprises: for each of the IoT tags, creating a vector of an average value of sensing signals transmitted by each of the IoT tags as received by each of the gateways; and forming a sensing signal matrix based on the created vectors (P97, P72, P31; Fig. 7c).
Freeman further discloses wherein determining the affinity among the IoT tags based on the sensing signals further comprises: for each pair of IoT tags, computing a distance metric between the pair of IoT tags, wherein the distance metric is computed using the respective average values of sensing signals included in the sensing signal matrix; and forming an affinity matrix based on the distance metric (P97; Fig. 7c).
Freeman further discloses computing the distance metric using any one of: a Euclidean distance function, and a cosine similarity (P97, P101).
Given the teachings of Freeman 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 teachings of Hu with wherein receiving, during a predefined time window, packets from a plurality of gateways, further comprises: for each of the IoT tags, creating a vector of an average value of sensing signals transmitted by each of the IoT tags as received by each of the gateways; and forming a sensing signal matrix based on the created vectors.
Doing so would improve location sensing technologies because they include
new functionality and components that improve the accuracy of location sensing
systems, among other things (P20)
Re-claims 15-17, Hu discloses the system of claim 13.
Hu fails to disclose wherein the system is further configured to: for each of the IoT tags, create a vector of an average value of sensing signals transmitted by each of the IoT tags as received by each of the gateways; and form a sensing signal matrix based on the created vectors.
Freeman discloses wherein the system is further configured to: for each of the IoT tags, create a vector of an average value of sensing signals transmitted by each of the IoT tags as received by each of the gateways; and form a sensing signal matrix based on the created vectors (P97, P72, P31; Fog. 7c).
Freeman discloses wherein the system is further configured to: for each pair of IoT tags, compute a distance metric between the pair of IoT tags, wherein the distance metric is computed using the respective average values of sensing signals included in the sensing signal matrix; and form an affinity matrix based on the distance metric (P97; Fig. 7c).
Freeman also discloses computing the distance metric using any one of: a Euclidean distance function, and a cosine similarity (P97, P101).
Given the teachings of Freeman 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 teachings of Hu with wherein the system is further configured to: for each of the IoT tags, create a vector of an average value of sensing signals transmitted by each of the IoT tags as received by each of the gateways; and form a sensing signal matrix based on the created vectors.
Doing so would improve location sensing technologies because they include
new functionality and components that improve the accuracy of location sensing
systems, among other things (P20)
Claim(s) 6-7, 18-19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Hu US Publication No. 2019/0098445 in view of Freeman et la. US Publication No. 2022/0207473 cited in previous action as applied to claim 5 above and further in view of Gibbs et al US Publication No. 2015/0097653 cited in previous action.
Re Claim 6-7, Hu and Freeman discloses the method of claim 5.
Hu and Freeman fails to disclose wherein determining locations of IoT tags further comprises: applying a probabilistic graphical model to estimate a location matrix of a current time window, wherein the probabilistic graphical model is applied on the affinity matrix determined for a pervious time window, the sensing signal matrix of the current time window, and a location matrix of a pervious time window, wherein the location matrix includes probabilities of each IoT tag located in a proximity to each of the gateways.
Gibb discloses wherein determining locations of IoT tags further comprises: applying a probabilistic graphical model to estimate a location matrix of a current time window, wherein the probabilistic graphical model is applied on the affinity matrix determined for a pervious time window, the sensing signal matrix of the current time window, and a location matrix of a pervious time window, wherein the location matrix includes probabilities of each IoT tag located in a proximity to each of the gateways (Abstract, P3, 20 and 80).
Gibbs discloses wherein probabilistic graphical model is a dynamic Bayesian network (DBN) (P49).
Given the teachings of Gibb 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 teachings of Hu and Freeman with wherein determining locations of IoT tags further comprises: applying a probabilistic graphical model to estimate a location matrix of a current time window, wherein the probabilistic graphical model is applied on the affinity matrix determined for a pervious time window, the sensing signal matrix of the current time window, and a location matrix of a pervious time window, wherein the location matrix includes probabilities of each IoT tag located in a proximity to each of the gateways.
Doing so would refine proximity estimation for the transponder of interest (P20).
Re Claims 18 and 19, Hu and Freeman discloses the system of claim 17.
Hu and Freeman fails to disclose wherein the system is further configured to: apply a probabilistic graphical model to estimate a location matrix of a current time window, wherein the probabilistic graphical model is applied on the affinity matrix determined for a pervious time window, the sensing signal matrix of the current time window, and a location matrix of a pervious time window, wherein the location matrix includes probabilities of each IoT tag located in a proximity to each of the gateways.
However, Gibbs discloses wherein the system is further configured to: apply a probabilistic graphical model to estimate a location matrix of a current time window, wherein the probabilistic graphical model is applied on the affinity matrix determined for a pervious time window, the sensing signal matrix of the current time window, and a location matrix of a pervious time window, wherein the location matrix includes probabilities of each IoT tag located in a proximity to each of the gateways(Abstract, P3, 20 and 80).
Gibbs further discloses wherein the probabilistic graphical model is a dynamic Bayesian network (DBN) (P49).
Given the teachings of Gibb 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 teachings of Hu and Freeman with wherein determining locations of IoT tags further comprises: applying a probabilistic graphical model to estimate a location matrix of a current time window, wherein the probabilistic graphical model is applied on the affinity matrix determined for a pervious time window, the sensing signal matrix of the current time window, and a location matrix of a pervious time window, wherein the location matrix includes probabilities of each IoT tag located in a proximity to each of the gateways.
Doing so would refine proximity estimation for the transponder of interest (P20).
. Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to claim(s) 1, 12 and 13 have been considered but are moot because the new ground of rejection does not rely on any reference applied in the prior rejection of record for any teaching or matter specifically challenged in the argument.
Applicant amended the claims with new limitations which necessitated new search and consideration. Therefore this action is made final.
Conclusion
The following reference is cited but not relied upon:
Paul discloses wherein the entity is associated with an Internet of Things (IoT) device that provides the first geo-location message and the first geo-location message is received via a gateway sensor that is configured to communicate with a plurality of IoT devices having different protocols and converting the different protocols to a standard protocol
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 SONJI N JOHNSON whose telephone number is (571)270-5266. The examiner can normally be reached 9am-9pm.
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, Steven Paik can be reached at 5712722404. 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.
SONJI N. JOHNSON
Examiner
Art Unit 2876
/SONJI N JOHNSON/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2876