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
The following is a final office action in response to applicant’s amendment filed on 03/06/2026 for response of the office action mailed on 12/09/2025. Independent Claim 6 is amended. Claims 14-16 and 25 are canceled. Claims 6-8 are pending in the application.
Applicant’s cancelation of Claim 15 and amendment to the specification (Title) have overcome each and every objection set forth in the office action mailed 12/09/2025.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments with respect to independent Claim 6 (filed 03/06/2026) have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
Main Argument
Applicant argues, on page 9, KANG (and YIM) fail to disclose the predetermined condition is satisfied when the terminal position information of the terminal indicates a greatest decreasing distance to the wireless connection device per unit time, among the plurality of terminals (hereinafter "rate-of-approach feature").
Response to Main Argument: Examiner Respectfully disagrees.
The Patent and Trademark Office (“PTO”) determines the scope of claims in patent applications not solely on the basis of the claim language, but upon giving claims their broadest reasonable construction “in light of the specification as it would be interpreted by one of ordinary skill in the art.” In re Am. Acad. of Sci. Tech. Ctr., 367 F.3d 1359, 1364[, 70 USPQ2d 1827, 1830] (Fed. Cir. 2004). Indeed, the rules of the PTO require that application claims must “conform to the invention as set forth in the remainder of the specification and the terms and phrases used in the claims must find clear support or antecedent basis in the description so that the meaning of the terms in the claims may be ascertainable by reference to the description.”
KANG teaches at ¶0035, the monitoring of at least one of physical states outside the electronic apparatus, at least one of a sensor and an antenna of the electronic apparatus may be used. . . .and at ¶0038, whether a monitored physical state satisfies a selected condition may include determining whether a state in which a value indicating the monitored physical state is greater than or equal to or exceeds a threshold is maintained for more than a selected time, i.e. what constitutes satisfaction of “a predetermined condition”. YIM is relied upon to teach satisfaction of “a predetermined condition” based on selecting a terminal located closest to the terminal (¶0445). Under the BRI standard, examiner interprets the preferential selection of a terminal closest to the terminal to correspond to “a greatest decreasing distance.” For further illustration, with respect to Applicant’s “rate of approach” argument, YIM teaches time of arrival (ToA) in connection with distance information between the terminals, which examiner interprets to correspond to a “rate of approach”.
Accordingly, with respect to the BRI, examiner maintains the rejection of independent Claim 6, as amended and claims 7-8 by virtue of their dependency on Claim 6.
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.
The factual inquiries for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows:
1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art.
2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue.
3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art.
4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or non-obviousness.
Claims 6-8 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over KANG et al. (US 20140342670 A1), hereinafter KANG in view of YIM et al. (US 20170289329 A1), hereinafter, YIM.
Regarding Claim 6, KANG teaches a wireless connection device comprising circuitry configured to (KANG, FIG. 1, ¶0106-0107 first device that may include a short-range communication unit):
acquire a wireless signal to recognize a presence of a terminal (KANG, ¶0132, the second device 200 may broadcast advertisement information including identifier information and capability information in the form of an advertising packet (e.g., to the outside environment) by simultaneously using the BLE communication method); FIG. 3, ¶0145 second device includes a smartphone 200-4/ “terminal” and may transmit the advertisement information to the first device 100 through a touch code), wherein the wireless signal includes terminal state information ((KANG, ¶0130 state information indicating a current state of the second device 200 may include information about an active or inactive state (“terminal state information”); see also ¶0147 data packet of advertisement information broadcasted);
determine that the terminal state information corresponds to a working state of the terminal indicating that a user is using the terminal (KANG, FIG. 3, ¶0145 second device includes a smartphone 200-4/ “terminal” and may transmit the advertisement information to the first device 100 through a touch code, “indication user is using terminal”);
establish a wireless connection with the terminal using a predetermined protocol (KANG, establish a wireless connection; see also ¶0116 [t]he second device 200 may advertise identifier information of the second device 200 and capability information about a communication method (i.e. a “predetermined protocol”) supported by the second device 200 through a plurality of communication methods; communication methods may include a BLE method),
wherein the wireless connection device further comprises a terminal position sensor configured to acquire terminal position information of a plurality of terminals (KANG, ¶0182-0184, FIG. 6, device scan of a plurality of terminals; FIG. 27, ¶0380; FIG. 28, ¶0381, first device comprises a sensing unit 120. . .¶0389 which may include a position sensor 126),
wherein the circuitry is further configured to determine that the terminal position information satisfies a predetermined condition (KANG ¶0390, [t]he sensing unit 120 may detect occurrence of a predetermined event of triggering a device scan), and
wherein the wireless connection is established with the terminal, in response to determining that the terminal state information corresponds to the working state and to determining that the terminal position information satisfies the predetermined condition (KANG, ¶0130, connection between first device and second device is established when the mobile device is in an active state /“working state” and ¶0051, position of mobile device is within a predetermined range/in set proximity/range; see also ¶0388, the communication unit 110 may request a communication connection or negotiation request for determined a communication method from the second device 200 based on the information broadcasted by the second device 200),
wherein the terminal position information includes at least one information selected from a group consisting of a position of the terminal, a change in position of the terminal relative to the wireless connection device, and a distance from the terminal to the wireless connection device (KANG, ¶0217, e.g. when the second device 200 including a magnetic substance is a 70 W 5'' loud speaker, the magnetic magnitude (B) measured by the magnetic sensor may increase if the distance between the first device 100 and the loud speaker is within 10 cm), and wherein the circuitry is further configured to select the terminal among the plurality of terminals, as having the terminal position information that satisfies the predetermined condition (KANG ¶0011, [i]n the detecting of the second device may include switching a plurality of communication units/”plurality of terminals” in an inactive state to an active state based on the occurrence of the predetermined event / “predetermined condition”, and receiving from the second device the identifier information and the capability information through the plurality of communication units/ “plurality of terminals” that are switched to the active state).
KANG does not explicitly teach the predetermined condition is satisfied when the terminal position information of the terminal indicates a greatest decreasing distance to the wireless connection device per unit time, among the plurality of terminals.
However, in the analogous art, YIM explicitly discloses the predetermined condition is satisfied when the terminal position information of the terminal indicates a greatest decreasing distance to the wireless connection device per unit time, among the plurality of terminals (YIM, ¶0445, as a result of checking the period of time during step S2602 (“per unit time”), [and] . . . at S2604, as a result of measuring a distance between other terminals currently connected thereto, the controller 180 may preferentially select a terminal located closest to the terminal, interpreted to correspond to a “greatest decreasing distance”).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of the ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention to combine KANG’s short-range wireless communication method for communicating data between devices with YIM’s mobile terminal and method to detect the operation states of a plurality of other devices. The motivation would be to enhance network stability, and enhance security, device efficiency, user convenience, and the like. [YIM, ¶0287, ¶0310].
Regarding Claim 7, KANG and YIM teach Claim 6.
KANG further teaches the wireless connection device is a wireless speaker to establish a short-range wireless communication as the wireless connection, with a mobile phone as the terminal (KANG, ¶0107-0108, first device 100 / “wireless connection device” first device may contain a short range communication unit and my include a sound output unit, interpreted to correspond to a “wireless speaker”; FIG. 3, ¶0145 second device includes a smartphone 200-4/ “terminal”; first device and second device communicate via BLE (a short range wireless connection).
Regarding Claim 8, KANG and YIM teach Claim 6.
KANG further teaches the working state indicates that a screen of the terminal is being displayed (KANG ¶0390, [t]he sensing unit 120 may detect occurrence of a predetermined event of triggering a device scan. For example, the sensing unit 120 may detect an event of unlocking a lock screen, i.e., screen of smart phone is awake / in active state / i.e. “being displayed”).
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 TRACY L WILLIAMS whose telephone number is (571)270-7694. The examiner can normally be reached Mon - Fri 8:30-5:30.
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, Ayman Abaza can be reached at 571-270-0422. 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.
/TRACY L WILLIAMS/Examiner, Art Unit 2465 /CHRISTOPHER T WYLLIE/Examiner, Art Unit 2465
Prosecution Insights