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 .
DETAILED ACTION
Restriction/Election Response
1. Applicant’s response filed on 11/25/2025 includes restriction election without traverse of claims 1-19 and 28-29. The response has been acknowledged.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
2. 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 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 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.
Claims 1-5, 12, 19 and 28 rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Zaphrir et al. (US 2018/0174686) (hereinafter, Zaphrir).
Regarding claims 1 and 28, Zaphrir discloses apparatus for wireless communication/method at a first network node (= system 200 may include plurality of device 100 and one or more server 201, see [0041]; Fig. 3A may be performed in main controller, see [0047]), comprising:
memory; and at least one processor coupled to the memory and, based at least in part on information stored in the memory, the at least one processor (= server computer 201 includes may controller 205, and memory 220, see [0041]) is configured to:
transmit a set of data collection schedules to a first set of network nodes and a first set of user equipment (UEs) to obtain a first set of attributes associated with a user equipment (UE) and a second set of attributes associated with an object associated with an area of interest, wherein the first set of UEs comprises the UE (= classifying personal information for a person may be received, see [0047]; via any other computing device that is associated with device 100, see [0049]; and measurement of at least one health indicator of the person may be collected via at least one sensor 135 during a predetermined learning period or time, see [0050]; classifying personal information may include geographical location, see [0047]);
receive the first set of attributes and the second set of attributes from the first set of network nodes and the first set of UEs based on the set of data collection schedules (= during the learning period continuous or repeated measurement of one or more health indicators may be collected and recorded in a remote server, see [0051]); and
transmit an association of the UE with the object based on the first set of attributes and the second set of attributes (= measurement of at least one health indicator of the person may be monitored continuously or regularly via the at least one sensor, see [0056]).
Regarding claim 2, as mentioned in claim 1, Zphrir discloses the apparatus wherein the first network node comprises at least one of a sensing server or a transmission reception point (TRP) (see, [0051]).
Regarding claim 3, as mentioned in claim 1, Zphrir discloses the apparatus wherein the at least one processor is further configured to: calculate at least one of a beam direction, a position, a speed, or a micro-Doppler measurement of the UE based on the first set of attributes (see, [0051 and 0058]).
Regarding claim 4, as mentioned in claim 1, Zphrir discloses the apparatus wherein the at least one processor is further configured to: calculate at least one of a beam direction, a position, a speed, a micro-Doppler measurement, or a shape profile of the object based on the first set of attributes (see, [0051 and 0058]).
Regarding claim 5, as mentioned in claim 1, Zphrir discloses the apparatus wherein the at least one processor is further configured to associate the UE with the object based on at least one of: a first beam direction associated with the UE and a second beam direction associated with the object; a first position associated with the UE and a second position associated with the object; a first speed associated with the UE and a second speed associated with the object; a first micro-Doppler measurement associated with the UE and a second micro-Doppler measurement associated with the object; or a first device type associated with the UE and a shape profile associated with the object (see, [0051 and 0058]).
Regarding claim 6, as mentioned in claim 1, Zphrir discloses the apparatus wherein the at least one processor is further configured to: schedule the set of data collection schedules to obtain the first set of attributes and the second set of attributes within a maximum threshold time period (see, [0067]).
Regarding claim 12, as mentioned in claim 1, Zphrir discloses the apparatus wherein the at least one processor is further configured to: transmit a set of object identifiers associated with a set of objects to the UE; and receive a selection of a subset of the set of objects from the UE, wherein transmitting the association of the UE with the object is further based on the selection of the subset of the set of objects (see, [0010 and 0067]).
Regarding claim 19, as mentioned in claim 1, Zphrir discloses the apparatus further comprising a transceiver coupled to the at least one processor, wherein the at least one processor is further configured : transmit the set of data collection schedules via the transceiver ; receive the first set of attributes and the second set of attributes from the first set of network nodes and the first set of UEs via the transceiver ;and transmit the association of the lE with the object via the transceiver (see, [0010 and 0067]).
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
3. In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 103 which forms the basis for all obviousness rejections set forth in this Office action:
A patent for a claimed invention may not be obtained, notwithstanding that the claimed invention is not identically disclosed as set forth in section 102, if the differences between the claimed invention and the prior art are such that the claimed invention as a whole would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which the claimed invention pertains. Patentability shall not be negated by the manner in which the invention was made.
The factual inquiries for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows:
1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art.
2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue.
3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art.
4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness.
This application currently names joint inventors. In considering patentability of the claims the examiner presumes that the subject matter of the various claims was commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the claimed invention(s) absent any evidence to the contrary. Applicant is advised of the obligation under 37 CFR 1.56 to point out the inventor and effective filing dates of each claim that was not commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the later invention in order for the examiner to consider the applicability of 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(C) for any potential 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) prior art against the later invention.
Claim 7 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103(a) as being unpatentable over Zaphrir in view of Bastide et al., (US 2019/0164634), (hereinafter, Bastide).
Regarding claim 7, as mentioned in claim 1, Zaphrir explicitly fails to disclose the apparatus wherein at least one of the first set of attributes comprises a first time stamp and at least one of the second set of attributes comprises a second time stamp, wherein the at least one processor is further configured to: associate the UE with the object based on the first time stamp and the second time stamp.
However, Bastide, which is an analogous art equivalently disclose the apparatus wherein at least one of the first set of attributes comprises a first time stamp and at least one of the second set of attributes comprises a second time stamp, wherein the at least one processor is further configured to: associate the UE with the object based on the first time stamp and the second time stamp (see, [0021]).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have combined the teaching of Bastide with Zaphrir for the benefit of achieving a communication system that provides data notification for real-time health data.
Allowable Subject Matter
4. Claims 8-11, 13-18 and 29 are objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
CONCLUSION
5. The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
a. Booth et al., (US 10,687,193) teaches an assist device and system.
b. Tran (US 2007/0085690) teaches patient monitoring apparatus.
c. Sze et al., (US 2012/0203078) teaches wireless patient monitoring system.
6. Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to KWASI KARIKARI whose telephone number is (571)272-8566. The examiner can normally be reached M-Sat: 6am-10pm.
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, Charles Appiah can be reached on 571-272-7904. 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.
/Kwasi Karikari/
Primary Examiner: Art Unit 2641.