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 .
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 103 which forms the basis for all obviousness rejections set forth in this Office action:
A patent for a claimed invention may not be obtained, notwithstanding that the claimed invention is not identically disclosed as set forth in section 102, if the differences between the claimed invention and the prior art are such that the claimed invention as a whole would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which the claimed invention pertains. Patentability shall not be negated by the manner in which the invention was made.
Claims 1-4, 8-9, 11-12, 14, 16, 18, 21, 23 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Dijk (2004, Thesis) and Aharoni (US 2015/0168554 A1).
Regarding claims 1, 12, 18, and 21, Dijk teaches an apparatus, comprising:
a speaker configured to emit ultrasonic soundwaves [[fig. 7.3] shows ultrasound transmitters and ultrasound receiver; [sec. 1.5.2 transducer arrays] base station or mobile device in a location system can be equipped with more than one ultrasound transducer];
a microphone [[sec. 2.2 transducer model] typical piezoelectric transducers are designed to have a narrow beam width. Transmitters emit most acoustic energy from their front, in a narrow beam centered around the transducer’s normal axis. Receivers are most sensitive to sound waves impinging directly at the front, along the transducer’s normal axis]; and
circuitry to:
measure a time difference between a first time and a second time, wherein [[eq. 2.2] taking half of the round trip time of the acoustic signal]:
the first time is measured at the apparatus device based on a local apparatus clock and represents an elapsed time between transmission of a first ultrasonic signal that is emitted by the apparatus and a receipt of a second ultrasonic signal that is received by the microphone from an external device [[sec. 2.1 acoustic time of flight distance measurement] time-of-flight of acoustic signals is commonly used as a distance measurement method in acoustic position estimation systems [38] and in distance measurement systems (for example [23, 45]). A widely used method is one-way time-of-flight. Assume that at time t0 an acoustic signal is emitted by a source S, and at time t1 the signal is received at a receiver R. Then, the absolute distance d over which the acoustic signal traveled from source to receiver is related to the acoustic signal’s time-of-flight t = t1 − t0 by d = ct for speed of sound c. If the received signal is the direct sound signal, then d equals the distance between both devices. Distance d is called the line-of-sight distance (LOS distance), because the direct sound arrived over the line-of-sight path between transmitter and receiver], and
the second time is measured locally at the external device based on an external device clock and is received from the external device, the second time representing an elapsed time between receipt of the first ultrasonic signal at the external device and transmission of the second ultrasonic signal by the external device [[sec. 2. 1] a measurement of the time instants t0, t1 can often not be done directly. Typically the source and receiver are contained in separate devices, which both have a local clock that performs timing measurements. Define these clocks as clk-S and clk-R for the source and receiver, respectively. Assume that both clocks are jitter-free, but have a mutual clock offset of tRS = tRi – tSi for i = 0, 1 which is typically non-zero and unknown. The source S marks the time tS0, the transmission time of the signal expressed relative to clk-S. Some time t later, the receiver R marks the time tR1 , the time of signal reception expressed relative to clk-R. If the receiver R now wants to calculate t, it turns out that … so that R needs to know tR0, or alternatively the time tS0 and the offset tRS. Therefore, some method is needed to collect this information at the receiver. Likewise a source S that wants to calculate t will need to obtain tS1, or alternatively tR1 and tRS.]; and
calculate, without the local apparatus clock and the external device clock being synchronized with one another, a distance between the apparatus and the external device based on the difference between the first time and the second time [[sec. 2.1] second approach to solve the problem of unknown transmission time, is via the two-way time-of-flight or round-trip method. In this method, a receiver R responds to an incoming acoustic signal at time tR1 by sending out an acoustic response signal at time tR2 = tR1 + tdl, where tdl 0 is a fixed known time delay. Source S meanwhile has switched to acoustic reception mode, so it can record the time instant tS3 of the arrival of the response signal. Now the source S may calculate t by taking half of the round trip time of the acoustic signal; [eq (2.2)]].
Dijk does not explicitly teach and yet Aharoni teaches the second time is a measurement [[0141] interrogating wave beam … infrared … radio …acoustic waves … ultrasound; [0196] internal delays may be associated with predetermined values (e.g. stored in memory), and/or may be measured by the interrogation and/ or responder systems.], performed locally at the external device using an external device clock of an elapsed time between receipt of the first ultrasonic signal at the external device and transmission of the second ultrasonic signal by the external device [[0196] measuring the time delay between the transmission of the interrogation wave-beam and receipt of the acknowledgment signal and subtracting therefrom any internal delays associated with the interrogation system and/or responder system and optionally also subtracting the random time delay by which the responder may have delayed the acknowledgment signal.], the second time being received by the apparatus from the external device as part of a data transmission [[0196] internal delays in the responder system 200, from the detection of the interrogating wave-beam IWB to the transmission of the acknowledgement signal ACK, are also carefully controlled/measured by the responder and provided/transmitted to the interrogation system (e.g. transmitted/encoded with the acknowledgment signal ACK) to thereby enable the interrogation system 100 to determine the collective time of flight.].
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the invention with a reasonable expectation of success to replace the predetermined internal time delay as taught by Dijk, with the measured and encoded internal time delay as taught by Aharoni so that the interrogation system may determine the collective time of flight (Aharoni) [[0196]].
Regarding claim 2, Dijk teaches the apparatus of claim 1, wherein the circuitry is to calculate the first time from when the first ultrasonic signal is emitted by the speaker [[sec. 2.1 acoustic time of flight distance measurement] time-of-flight of acoustic signals … one-way time-of-flight. Assume that at time t0 an acoustic signal is emitted by a source S, and at time t1 the signal is received at a receiver R. Then, the absolute distance d over which the acoustic signal traveled from source to receiver is related to the acoustic signal’s time-of-flight t = t1 − t0 by d = ct for speed of sound c.].
Regarding claim 3, Dijk teaches the apparatus of claim 1, wherein the circuitry is to calculate the first time from when the first ultrasonic signal is received by the microphone [[sec. 2.1 acoustic time of flight distance measurement] time-of-flight of acoustic signals … one-way time-of-flight. Assume that at time t0 an acoustic signal is emitted by a source S, and at time t1 the signal is received at a receiver R. Then, the absolute distance d over which the acoustic signal traveled from source to receiver is related to the acoustic signal’s time-of-flight t = t1 − t0 by d = ct for speed of sound c.].
Regarding claim 4, Dijk teaches the apparatus of claim 1, wherein the speaker is a first speaker and the distance is a first distance, and further comprising a second speaker, and wherein the circuitry is to: measure a time difference between a third time and a fourth time where: the third time is an elapsed time between transmission of a third ultrasonic signal by the apparatus and a receipt of a fourth ultrasonic signal by the microphone, the third ultrasonic signal emitted by the second speaker and the fourth ultrasonic signal received from the external device, and the fourth time is received from the external device and is an elapsed time between receipt of the third ultrasonic signal at the external device and transmission of the fourth ultrasonic signal; and calculate a second distance between the apparatus and the external device based on the difference between the third time and the fourth time [[sec. 1.2.2] type of location information. a system may deliver different types of location information, for example 2D positions of people, or distances between devices, or the (relative) movement trajectory of a device in 3D space. Some systems have to estimate orientation as well.; [fig. 1.1] (a) standard location system for estimating the 3D position of a mobile device (MD), by measuring distances to three base stations (located near the ceiling); [sec 3.2.3 number of transducers per device] a base station or mobile device in an acoustic location system may contain more than one acoustic transducer. Although one transducer would make a device the most simple, the cheapest, and the smallest in size, a multiple number of transducers Nt > 1 may be used for the following purposes; [sec. 3.2.4] note that the communication required for purposes 2 – 4 could also be performed over the acoustic communication channel. A device may have different roles in handling nonacoustic communication: 1. None — There is no additional non-acoustic communication channel. 2. T — The device is a transmitter only. 3. R — The device is a receiver only. 4. T/R — The device may act as both transmitter and receiver. In this case, the device may communicate bidirectionally, or may switch between the transmitter/receiver roles.].
Regarding claim 8, Dijk does not explicitly teach and yet Aharoni teaches the apparatus of claim 1, wherein the data transmission comprises the second time being encoded in the second ultrasonic signal [[0141][0196]].
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the invention with a reasonable expectation of success to replace the predetermined internal time delay as taught by Dijk, with the measured and encoded internal time delay as taught by Aharoni so that the interrogation system may determine the collective time of flight (Aharoni) [[0196]].
Regarding claim 9, Dijk does not explicitly teach and yet Aharoni teaches the apparatus of claim 1 and the method of claim 12, wherein the data transmission comprises the second time being encoded in the second ultrasonic signal [[0141][0196]].
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the invention with a reasonable expectation of success to replace the predetermined internal time delay as taught by Dijk, with the measured and encoded internal time delay as taught by Aharoni so that the interrogation system may determine the collective time of flight (Aharoni) [[0196]].
Regarding claim 11, Dijk teaches the apparatus of claim 1, wherein the apparatus is a laptop computer or mobile computing device [[ch. 1 introduction] location technologies have appeared into the world of everyday in the form of car navigation systems, consumer GPS devices, and location-based services for mobile phones].
Regarding claim 14, Dijk teaches the method of claim 12, wherein the first ultrasonic signal is transmitted from a speaker to the apparatus [[fig. 7.3] shows ultrasound transmitters and ultrasound receiver; [sec. 1.5.2 transducer arrays] base station or mobile device in a location system can be equipped with more than one ultrasound transducer], and wherein the calculating the first time comprises calculating the time between transmission of the first ultrasonic signal from the speaker and receipt of the second ultrasonic signal at a microphone of the apparatus [[sec. 2.1 acoustic time of flight distance measurement] time-of-flight of acoustic signals is commonly used as a distance measurement method in acoustic position estimation systems [38] and in distance measurement systems (for example [23, 45]). A widely used method is one-way time-of-flight. Assume that at time t0 an acoustic signal is emitted by a source S, and at time t1 the signal is received at a receiver R. Then, the absolute distance d over which the acoustic signal traveled from source to receiver is related to the acoustic signal’s time-of-flight t = t1 − t0 by d = ct for speed of sound c. If the received signal is the direct sound signal, then d equals the distance between both devices. Distance d is called the line-of-sight distance (LOS distance), because the direct sound arrived over the line-of-sight path between transmitter and receiver].
Regarding claim 16, Dijk does not explicitly teach and yet Aharoni teaches the method of claim 12, wherein the data transmission comprises being encoded in the second ultrasonic signal [[0141][0196]].
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the invention with a reasonable expectation of success to replace the predetermined internal time delay as taught by Dijk, with the measured and encoded internal time delay as taught by Aharoni so that the interrogation system may determine the collective time of flight (Aharoni) [[0196]].
Regarding claim 23, Dijk teaches the method of claim 22, wherein the apparatus is a laptop or mobile device [[ch. 1 introduction] location-based services for mobile phones].
Claims 5-7 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Dijk (2004, Thesis) as applied to claim 4, and further in view of Qiu (US 2013/0102324 A1).
Regarding claim 5, Dijk does not explicitly teach and yet Qiu teaches the apparatus of claim 4, wherein the circuitry is to calculate: a third distance between the apparatus and the external device based on the difference between the first time and the third time [[0034] 2D measurements … 3D positions may be resolved … additional pair wise data exchange may be used in order to resolve the remaining ambiguity]; a fourth distance between the apparatus and the external device based on the difference between the second time and the third time; a fifth distance between the apparatus and the external device based on the difference between the first time and the fourth time; and a sixth distance between the apparatus and the external device based on the difference between the second time and the fourth time [[0069] second set of receivers and transmitters may include two receivers and one transmitter or one receiver and two transmitters to collect location information of a third device.].
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the invention with a reasonable expectation of success to combine the ranging as taught by Dijk, with the multiple ranging as taught by Qiu so that the relative location and orientation of devices may be determined (Qiu) [[0016][0018][fig. 6][0092-0093][0094][0095]].
Regarding claim 6, Dijk does not explicitly teach and yet Qiu teaches the apparatus of claim 4, wherein the circuitry is to calculate a rotation angle of the external device relative to the apparatus [[0016] and [fig. 6]; [0018] and FIG. 8 illustrates an angle measurement usable to determine a location of the second device relative to the first device.]].
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the invention with a reasonable expectation of success to combine the ranging as taught by Dijk, with the multiple ranging as taught by Qiu so that the relative location and orientation of devices may be determined (Qiu) [[0016][0018][fig. 6][0092-0093][0094][0095]].
Regarding claim 7, Dijk does not explicitly teach and yet Qiu teaches the apparatus of claim 6, wherein the microphone is one of a plurality of microphones of the apparatus, and wherein the circuitry is to calculate the rotation angle based in part on a geometry of the plurality of microphones [[0094] distance between the two mics AB is fixed by the geometry of the phone.; [0095] theta angle is derived using the distance measurements above…law of cosines…], and the first and the second speakers [[0092-0093] while these equations cannot be solved for any individual mic-speaker distance, the difference of two mic-speaker distances for microphones hosted on the same device … fig. 5 illustrates an example triangle].
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the invention with a reasonable expectation of success to combine the ranging as taught by Dijk, with the multiple ranging as taught by Qiu so that the relative location and orientation of devices may be determined (Qiu) [[0016][0018][fig. 6][0092-0093][0094][0095]].
Claims 10, 13, 15 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Dijk (2004, Thesis) as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Peng (US 2008/0304361 A1).
Regarding claim 10, Dijk does not explicitly teach and yet Peng teaches the apparatus of claim 1, wherein the data transmission comprises a first timestamp and a second timestamp from the external device, the first timestamp corresponding to receipt of the first ultrasonic signal at the external device and the second timestamp corresponding to transmission of the second ultrasonic signal, and the circuitry is to compute the second time from the first timestamp and second timestamp [[0016] TOA measurement is often performed with both sides taking a timestamp of their respective local clock at the moment the signal is emitted or received; [0018] devices further exchange the elapsed time information with each other. The differential of these two elapsed times is related to the sum of the time of flight of the two acoustic signals and hence the two-way distance between the two devices].
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the invention with a reasonable expectation of success to combine the round trip distance ranging as taught by Dijk, with the exchange of timestamps as taught by Peng so that distance may be calculated locally on all devices (Peng) [[0016].
Regarding claim 13, Dijk does not explicitly teach and yet Peng teaches the method of claim 12, wherein the second ultrasonic signal is received at a microphone equipped to the apparatus, and calculating the first time comprises calculating the time between receipt of the first ultrasonic signal at the microphone and receipt of the second ultrasonic signal [[fig. 2] shows that device A measures emission time of speaker A with its own microphone A, and also receives emission from device B caused by speaker B with the same microphone A].
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the invention with a reasonable expectation of success to combine the round trip distance ranging as taught by Dijk, with self recording as taught by Peng so that the precise emission time of the speaker is known (Peng) [[0018].
Regarding claim 15, Dijk does not explicitly teach and yet Peng teaches the method of claim 12, wherein the data transmission comprises wireless transmission [[0018] devices further exchange the elapsed time information with each other. The differential of these two elapsed times is related to the sum of the time of flight of the two acoustic signals and hence the two-way distance between the two devices.; [0054] times may be implemented in any manner. Examples include, but are not limited to, timestamps from a local or global clock, index sample points/numbers at a predetermined sampling frequency of an A/D converter, and so forth.; [0070] multimedia services that are embedded in WINDOWS® MOBILE® can be used to control the microphones and speakers. WINSOCK can be used for communications over Wi-Fi wireless communication channels.].
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the invention with a reasonable expectation of success to combine the round trip distance ranging as taught by Dijk, with the exchange of timestamp information over wireless communication as taught by Peng so data may be shared over alternative communication channels (Peng) [[0070].
Claims 17 and 19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Dijk (2004, Thesis) as applied to claims 12 and 18 above, and further in view of Halavee (US 2017/0302778 A1).
Regarding claims 17 and 19, Dijk does not explicitly teach and yet Halavee teaches the method of claim 12 and the computer readable medium of claim 18, wherein the distance is a first distance, and comprising: transmitting, from the apparatus, a third ultrasonic signal, the third ultrasonic signal transmitted from a location on the apparatus that is different than a location of transmission of the first ultrasonic signal [fig. 10 show Emitter I and Emitter II which are located at different locations with length ‘a’ in between]; receiving, at the apparatus, a fourth ultrasonic signal; calculating, by the apparatus, a third time from transmission of the third ultrasonic signal to receipt of the fourth ultrasonic signal [fig. 10 shows lengths ‘b’ and ‘c’ from emitters]; receiving, at the apparatus, a fourth time from the remote device that corresponds to a time between receipt of the third ultrasonic signal and transmission of the fourth ultrasonic signal [fig. 10 shows length ‘e’ from emitter]; calculating, at the apparatus, a second distance from the apparatus to the remote device from the third time and the fourth time [[0016] FIG. 10 is an example of relationships between directions and distances between transmitters and receivers;]; and calculating, at the apparatus, an orientation of the remove device relative to the apparatus from at least the difference between the first distance and second distance, and geometry of the locations of transmission of the first and third ultrasonic signals [fig. 10 shows angles alpha, beta, gamma; [0043] method, described in this invention to locate the other devices' speakers in space is based upon measuring and analyzing the differences in sound signals time of arrival (TDOA) as received by the device's microphones].
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the invention with a reasonable expectation of success to replace the trilateration as taught by Dijk, with the geometric algorithm using law of sines/cosines as taught by Halavee so that aligned microphones may be used to detect time difference of arrival and infer orientations between devices (Halavee) [0057; 0149].
PNG
media_image1.png
794
585
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Claim 20 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Dijk (2004, Thesis) and Halavee (US 2017/0302778 A1) as applied to claim 19 above, and further in view of Qiu (US 2013/0102324 A1).
Regarding claim 20, Dijk does not explicitly teach and yet Qiu teaches the CRM of claim 19, wherein the instructions are to further cause the apparatus to: receive a fifth signal from the remote device; transmit a sixth signal [[0034]]; calculate a fifth time from receipt of the fifth signal to transmission of the sixth signal; and transmit the fifth time [[[0069] second set of receivers and transmitters may include two receivers and one transmitter or one receiver and two transmitters to collect location information of a third device.].
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the invention with a reasonable expectation of success to combine the ranging as taught by Dijk, with the multiple ranging as taught by Qiu so that the relative location and orientation of devices may be determined (Qiu) [[0016][0018][fig. 6][0092-0093][0094][0095]].
Claim 24 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Dijk (2004, Thesis) as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Gibbons (US 7,936,794 B2).
Regarding claim 24, Dijk does not explicitly teach and yet Gibbons teaches the apparatus of claim 1, wherein the transmission of the second ultrasonic signal by the external device occurs prior to the receipt of the first ultrasonic signal at the external device, such that the elapsed time is a negative value [[prior art claim 11] clock adjustment system comprising: a device that receives a first packet; a clock management module that extracts an RTP (Real-Time Transport Protocol) timestamp from the first packet and establishes an initial baseline based on the first packet, and upon receiving a next packet, determines a delta from the baseline, and iteratively performs the receiving of the next packet and determining steps to determine the delta from the baseline, wherein if the delta is a negative amount indicating a clock at the receiver is slower than a clock at a sender of the packets, immediately updating the baseline by the negative amount].
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the invention with a reasonable expectation of success to combine the ranging as taught by Dijk, with the negative elapsed time as taught by Gibbons so clocks which are slower than the reference time can be handled (Gibbons) [[prior art claim 11]].
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments, see pgs. 1, filed 7, with respect to the rejection(s) of claim(s) 1 under 35 U.S.C. 102 have been fully considered and are persuasive. Therefore, the rejection has been withdrawn. However, upon further consideration, a new ground(s) of rejection is made in view of Aharoni (US 2015/0168554 A1).
Applicant’s arguments, see pg. 1, filed 7/22/2026, with respect to claim 1 have been fully considered and are persuasive. The rejection under 112(b) of 6/18/2026 has been withdrawn.
Conclusion
Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a). Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a).
A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of the advisory action. In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the mailing date of this final action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JONATHAN D ARMSTRONG whose telephone number is (571)270-7339. The examiner can normally be reached M - F 9am-5pm.
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, Isam Alsomiri can be reached on 571-272-6970. 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.
/JONATHAN D ARMSTRONG/Examiner, Art Unit 3645
Prosecution Insights