DETAILED ACTION
Summary
This Office Action is in response to reply dated July 28, 2025. Claims 1 and 3-20 are currently pending.
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 § 102
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 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 and 14-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Miniard (US 2019/0378391 A1).
Regarding claim 1, Miniard discloses a first communication device (see at least Figure 2, item 34 | [0070] note a first electronic device (34)), comprising:
a proximity sensor configured to detect whether the first communication device is in a proximity state to a human body (see at least [0069] note the proximity sensor, such as a communication module, monitors the distance/range between the first electronic device (34) and a second electronic device (33) associated with a user, such as a smart watch | [0072]);
an acceleration sensor configured to detect an acceleration of the first communication device (see at least [0061]); and
a drop detection unit (see at least Figure 1, item 14 | [0061] note the monitoring module (14) receives data from an accelerometer, wherein the accelerometer’s movement data (over time) is used to determine whether the orientation has changed beyond a threshold condition | [0078] note the monitoring module (14) may determine the first electronic device (34) has fallen based on detecting an acceleration profile that matches that of a dropped electronic device, i.e., a short drop followed by a rapid deceleration resulting from the impact with the ground, which causes the monitoring module (14) to generate a notification signal (40) that triggers a second electronic device (33) to generate an alert signal (45) so the user notices the loss of the first electronic device (34)) configured to:
detect presence or absence of a drop of the first communication device based on a detection result of the proximity sensor and a detection result of the acceleration sensor (see at least [0070] violation of a threshold condition causes a notification signal (40) to be transmitted when the first electronic device (34) in question is outside the allowed area, beyond the allowed distance, and/or beyond the allowed range of orientations),
wherein the presence of the drop is detected based on the detection result of the proximity sensor that indicates that the first communication device is not in the proximity state to the human body (see at least [0069-0070]), and the detection result of the acceleration sensor that indicates time-series information of the detected acceleration of the first communication device (see at least [0061]); and
transmit a notification based on the detected presence of the drop (see at least Figure 1, item 40 | [0070] note when the first electronic device (34) detects a violation of a threshold condition, it transmits a notification signal (40) to one or more remaining electronic devices (33, 32) | [0078]),
wherein the notification indicates that the presence of the drop is detected (see at least [0070] | [0078]).
Regarding claim 5, Miniard further discloses wherein the drop detection unit is further configured to transmit the notification to a second communication device paired with the first communication device (see at least Figure 2, items 40, 38 and 39 | [0069] note the electronic devices (32-34) are connected via a Bluetooth network (which requires pairing)).
Regarding claim 14, Miniard discloses a communication method (see at least Figure 2), comprising:
detecting, by a proximity sensor of a first communication device, whether the first communication device is in a proximity state to a human body (see at least [0069] note the proximity sensor, such as a communication module, monitors the distance/range between the first electronic device (34) and a second electronic device (33) associated with a user, such as a smart watch | [0072]);
detecting, by an acceleration sensor of the first communication device, an acceleration of the first communication device (see at least [0061]);
detecting presence or absence of a drop of the first communication device based on a detection result of the proximity sensor and a detection result of the acceleration sensor (see at least [0061] note the monitoring module (14) receives data from an accelerometer, wherein the accelerometer’s movement data (over time) is used to determine whether the orientation has changed beyond a threshold condition | [0070] violation of a threshold condition causes a notification signal (40) to be transmitted when the first electronic device (34) in question is outside the allowed area, beyond the allowed distance, and/or beyond the allowed range of orientations | [0078] note the monitoring module (14) may determine the first electronic device (34) has fallen based on detecting an acceleration profile that matches that of a dropped electronic device, i.e., a short drop followed by a rapid deceleration resulting from the impact with the ground, which causes the monitoring module (14) to generate a notification signal (40) that triggers a second electronic device (33) to generate an alert signal (45) so the user notices the loss of the first electronic device (34)),
wherein the presence of the drop is detected based on the detection result of the proximity sensor that indicates that the first communication device is not in the proximity state to the human body (see at least [0069-0070]), and the detection result of the acceleration sensor that indicates time-series information of the detected acceleration of the first communication device (see at least [0061]); and
transmitting a notification based on the detected presence of the drop (see at least Figure 1, item 40 | [0070] note when the first electronic device (34) detects a violation of a threshold condition, it transmits a notification signal (40) to one or more remaining electronic devices (33, 32) | [0078]),
wherein the notification indicates that the presence of the drop is detected (see at least [0070] | [0078]).
Regarding claim 15, Miniard discloses a non-transitory computer-readable medium having stored thereon computer-executable instructions that, when executed by a computer, cause the computer to execute operations (see at least [0098-0100] | [0161-0165]), the operations comprising:
detecting, by a proximity sensor of a first communication device, whether the first communication device is in a proximity state to a human body (see at least [0069] note the proximity sensor, such as a communication module, monitors the distance/range between the first electronic device (34) and a second electronic device (33) associated with a user, such as a smart watch | [0072]);
detecting, by an acceleration sensor of the first communication device, an acceleration of the first communication device (see at least [0061]);
detecting presence or absence of a drop of the first communication device based on a detection result of the proximity sensor and a detection result of the acceleration sensor (see at least [0061] note the monitoring module (14) receives data from an accelerometer, wherein the accelerometer’s movement data (over time) is used to determine whether the orientation has changed beyond a threshold condition | [0070] violation of a threshold condition causes a notification signal (40) to be transmitted when the first electronic device (34) in question is outside the allowed area, beyond the allowed distance, and/or beyond the allowed range of orientations | [0078] note the monitoring module (14) may determine the first electronic device (34) has fallen based on detecting an acceleration profile that matches that of a dropped electronic device, i.e., a short drop followed by a rapid deceleration resulting from the impact with the ground, which causes the monitoring module (14) to generate a notification signal (40) that triggers a second electronic device (33) to generate an alert signal (45) so the user notices the loss of the first electronic device (34)),
wherein the presence of the drop is detected based on the detection result of the proximity sensor that indicates that the first communication device is not in the proximity state to the human body (see at least [0069-0070]), and the detection result of the acceleration sensor that indicates time-series information of the detected acceleration of the first communication device (see at least [0061]); and
transmitting a notification based on the detected presence of the drop (see at least Figure 1, item 40 | [0070] note when the first electronic device (34) detects a violation of a threshold condition, it transmits a notification signal (40) to one or more remaining electronic devices (33, 32) | [0078]),
wherein the notification indicates that the presence of the drop is detected (see at least [0070] | [0078]).
Regarding claim 16, Miniard discloses a first communication device (see at least Figure 2, item 34 | [0070] note a first electronic device (34)), comprising:
a reception unit configured to receive a notification from a second communication device (see at least Figures 7 and 11, items 126 and 228a-228n | [0101] | [0122] | [0061] note the monitoring module (14) of a second communication device (33) receives data from an accelerometer, wherein the accelerometer’s movement data (over time) is used to determine whether the orientation has changed beyond a threshold condition | [0078] note the monitoring module (14) may determine the second electronic device (33) has fallen based on detecting an acceleration profile that matches that of a dropped electronic device, i.e., a short drop followed by a rapid deceleration resulting from the impact with the ground, which causes the monitoring module (14) to generate a notification signal (40) that triggers the first electronic device (34) to generate an alert signal (46) so the user notices the loss of the second electronic device (33)),
wherein the notification indicates that a drop of the second communication device has been detected (see at least [0040] | [0070] | [0078]),
the drop of the second communication device is detected based on a detection that the second communication device is not in a proximity state to a human body (see at least [0069-0070]), and time-series information of an acceleration of the second communication device (see at least [0061]),
the detection that the second communication device is not in the proximity state to the human body is based on a detection result of a proximity sensor of the second communication device (see at least [0069-0070]), and
the time-series information of the acceleration of the second communication device is based on a detection result of an acceleration sensor of the second communication device (see at least [0061]); and
a presentation unit configured to present information based on the notification, wherein the information indicates that the drop of the second communication device is detected (see at least the abstract | Figures 1 and 7, items 40 and 128 | [0040] | [0070] note when the second electronic device (33) detects a violation of a threshold condition, it transmits a notification signal (40) to one at least the first communication device (34) | [0078] | [0102]).
Regarding claim 17, Miniard discloses wherein the reception unit is further configured to receive a drop position notification signal from the second communication device for which the drop has been detected, the first communication device further comprises a specification unit configured to specify a direction of the second communication device or a position of the second communication device based on the received drop position notification signal, and the presentation unit presents is further configured to the specified direction of the second communication device or the specified position of the second communication device (see at least [0074] | [0078] | [0102]).
Regarding claim 18, Miniard discloses a communication method (see at least Figures 1-2), comprising:
receiving, by a first communication device, a notification from a second communication device (see at least Figures 1-2 | [0101] | [0122] | [0061] note the monitoring module (14) of a second communication device (33) receives data from an accelerometer, wherein the accelerometer’s movement data (over time) is used to determine whether the orientation has changed beyond a threshold condition | [0078] note the monitoring module (14) may determine the second electronic device (33) has fallen based on detecting an acceleration profile that matches that of a dropped electronic device, i.e., a short drop followed by a rapid deceleration resulting from the impact with the ground, which causes the monitoring module (14) to generate a notification signal (40) that triggers the first electronic device (34) to generate an alert signal (46) so the user notices the loss of the second electronic device (33)),
wherein the notification indicates that a drop of the second communication device has been detected (see at least [0040] | [0070] | [0078]),
the drop of the second communication device is detected based on a detection that the second communication device is not in a proximity state to a human body (see at least [0069-0070]) and time-series information of an acceleration of the second communication device (see at least [0061]),
the detection that the second communication device is not in the proximity state to the human body is based on a detection result of a proximity sensor of the second communication device (see at least [0069-0070]), and
the time-series information of the acceleration of the second communication device is based on a detection result of an acceleration sensor of the second communication device (see at least [0061]); and
presenting, by the first communication device, information based on the notification, wherein the information indicates that the drop of the second communication device is detected (see at least the abstract | Figures 1 and 7, items 40 and 128 | [0040] | [0070] note when the second electronic device (33) detects a violation of a threshold condition, it transmits a notification signal (40) to one at least the first communication device (34) | [0078] | [0102]).
Regarding claim 19, Miniard discloses a non-transitory computer-readable medium having stored thereon computer-executable instructions that, when executed by a computer, cause the computer to execute operations (see at least [0098-0100] | [0161-0165]), the operations comprising:
receiving, by a first communication device, a notification from a second communication device (see at least Figures 1-2 | [0101] | [0122] | [0061] note the monitoring module (14) of a second communication device (33) receives data from an accelerometer, wherein the accelerometer’s movement data (over time) is used to determine whether the orientation has changed beyond a threshold condition | [0078] note the monitoring module (14) may determine the second electronic device (33) has fallen based on detecting an acceleration profile that matches that of a dropped electronic device, i.e., a short drop followed by a rapid deceleration resulting from the impact with the ground, which causes the monitoring module (14) to generate a notification signal (40) that triggers the first electronic device (34) to generate an alert signal (46) so the user notices the loss of the second electronic device (33)),
wherein the notification indicates that a drop of the second communication device has been detected (see at least [0040] | [0070] | [0078]),
the drop of the second communication device is detected based on a detection that the second communication device is not in a proximity state to a human body (see at least [0069-0070]), and time-series information of an acceleration of the second communication device (see at least [0061]),
the detection that the second communication device is not in the proximity state to the human body is based on a detection result of a proximity sensor of the second communication device (see at least [0069-0070]), and
the time-series information of the acceleration of the second communication device is based on a detection result of an acceleration sensor of the second communication device (see at least [0061]); and
presenting, by the first communication device, information based on the notification, wherein the information indicates that the drop of the second communication device is detected (see at least the abstract | Figures 1 and 7, items 40 and 128 | [0040] | [0070] note when the second electronic device (33) detects a violation of a threshold condition, it transmits a notification signal (40) to at least the first communication device (34) | [0078] | [0102]).
Regarding claim 20, Miniard discloses a communication system (see at least Figures 1-2) comprising:
a first communication device (see at least Figure 2, item 34); and
a second communication device configured to communicate with the first communication device (see at least Figure 2, item 33),
wherein the first communication device comprises:
a proximity sensor configured to detect whether the first communication device is in a proximity state to a human body (see at least [0069-0070]);
an acceleration sensor configured to detect an acceleration of the first communication device (see at least [0061]); and
a drop detection unit (see at least Figure 1, item 14 | [0061] note the monitoring module (14) receives data from an accelerometer, wherein the accelerometer’s movement data (over time) is used to determine whether the orientation has changed beyond a threshold condition | [0078] note the monitoring module (14) may determine the first electronic device (34) has fallen based on detecting an acceleration profile that matches that of a dropped electronic device, i.e., a short drop followed by a rapid deceleration resulting from the impact with the ground, which causes the monitoring module (14) to generate a notification signal (40) that triggers a second electronic device (33) to generate an alert signal (45) so the user notices the loss of the first electronic device (34)) configured to:
detect presence or absence of a drop of the first communication device based on a detection result of the proximity sensor (see at least [0069-0070]) and a detection result of the acceleration sensor (see at least [0061]),
wherein the presence of the drop is detected based on the detection result of the proximity sensor that indicates that the first communication device is not in the proximity state to the human body (see at least [0069-0070]), and the detection result of the acceleration sensor that indicates time-series information of the detected acceleration of the first communication device (see at least [0061]); and
transmit a notification to the second communication device based on the detected presence of the drop (see at least Figure 1, items 34, 40 and 33 | [0078]), wherein
the notification indicates that the presence of the drop is detected (see at least [0040] | [0070] | [0078]), and
the second communication device comprises:
a reception unit configured to receive the notification from the first communication device (see at least Figures 7 and 11, items 126 and 228a-228n | [0101] | [0122]); and
a presentation unit configured to present, information based on the notification (see at least the abstract | Figures 1 and 7, items 40 and 128 | [0040] | [0070] note when the first electronic device (34) detects a violation of a threshold condition, it transmits a notification signal (40) to at least the second communication device (33) | [0078] | [0102]).
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 3 and 4 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Miniard (US 2019/0378391 A1) in view of Sipolins (US 2019/0343465 A1).
Regarding claim 3, Miniard, as addressed above, discloses wherein the drop detection unit detects the presence or the absence of the drop based on an analysis result (see at least [0069-0070]).
However, Miniard does not specifically disclose analyze the detection result of the proximity sensor and the detection result of the acceleration sensor based on a deep neural network (DNN); and obtain an analysis result based on the analysis.
It is known to detect that an electronic device has fallen or been dropped in different ways. For example, Sipolins teaches an electronic device that detects a drop based on analyzing a detection result of a second sensor and a detection result of an acceleration sensor based on a deep neural network (DNN); obtain an analysis result based on the analysis; and detect the presence or the absence of the drop based on the analysis result (see at least Figure 1, item 114 | [0022] note accelerometer data and microphone data is analyzed by a machine learning model in order to detect a drop or fall | [0054] note the machine learning model, which can be a deep neural network, can detect rapid deceleration of a virtual reality device and/or a computing device based on motion data (from the accelerometer) and the auxiliary data (from microphones, cameras, etc.)).
Thus, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to incorporate the features of Sipolins into Miniard. This provides the ability to analyze multiple streams of data from different sensors together to recognize patterns, such as an electronic device falling or being dropped.
Regarding claim 4, Miniard in view of Sipolins, as addressed above, teach wherein the drop detection unit is an audio analysis engine that includes the DNN (see at least [0022] of Sipolins, note microphone data is analyzed | [0054] of Sipolins).
Claims 6-9, 11 and 12 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Miniard (US 2019/0378391 A1) in view of Sydir (US 2016/0192112 A1).
Regarding claim 6, Miniard, as addressed above, discloses wherein the drop detection unit is further configured to transmit the notification to the second communication device (see at least Figure 2, items 34, 40 and 33 | [0070]).
However, Miniard does not specifically disclose a communication unit configured to receive audio data transmitted from a second communication device; and an output unit configured to output a sound based on the received audio data.
It is known for a user to utilize various types of electronic devices together. For example, Sydir teaches a system with a communication unit configured to receive audio data transmitted from a second communication device (see at least [0124] note user would stream music from the smartphone (120) to ear/headphones (140) | [0029] note content sent to ear/headphones would correspond to music, news, etc.); and an output unit configured to output a sound based on the received audio data (see at least Figure 1, items 120, 140 and 130 | [0119-0124] note ear/headphones have transducers to produce sound | [0076-0078] note the ensemble manager (125) of the smartphone (120) tracks the presence/absence of the user’s wearable devices (130, 140, 150, 160) on the body of the user and can generate an alert to an earphone (140) if one is missing | [0046-0050] | [0092] | [0096] | [0098] | [0056]).
Thus, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to incorporate the features of Sydir into Miniard. This provides the ability for Miniard’s user to listen to music (while determining whether or not their earphones are nearby).
Regarding claim 7, Miniard in view of Sydir, as addressed above, teach wherein the communication unit is further configured to receive the audio data transmitted from the second communication device based on Bluetooth (registered trademark) communication (see at least [0069] of Miniard | [0032] of Sydir).
Regarding claim 8, Miniard in view of Sydir further teach a drop position notification signal transmission unit configured to transmit a drop position notification signal to the second communication device, wherein the drop position notification signal is for estimation of a position of the first communication device (see at least [0055] of Miniard | [0077] of Miniard | [0069] of Miniard, note proximity could be monitored via NFC and the drop position notification signal could be transmitted via Bluetooth, BLE or LTE).
Regarding claim 9, Miniard in view of Sydir, as addressed above, teach wherein the drop position notification signal transmission unit is further conjured to transmit the drop position notification signal to the second communication device based on Bluetooth low energy (BLE) communication (see at least [0055] of Miniard | [0077] of Miniard | [0069] of Miniard, note proximity could be monitored via NFC and the drop position notification signal could be transmitted via Bluetooth, BLE or LTE).
Regarding claim 11, Miniard in view of Sydir, as addressed above, teach wherein the drop position notification signal transmission unit is further configured to transmit the drop position notification signal to the second communication device in a long-distance communication mode (see at least [0069] of Miniard, note proximity could be monitored via NFC and the drop position notification signal could be transmitted via LTE).
Regarding claim 12, Miniard in view of Sydir, as addressed above, teach wherein the drop position notification signal transmission unit is further configured to transmit the drop position notification signal to the second communication device in a low power communication mode (see at least [0069] of Miniard, note proximity could be monitored via NFC and the drop position notification signal could be transmitted via Bluetooth Low Energy (BLE)).
Claim 10 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Miniard (US 2019/0378391 A1) in view of Sydir (US 2016/0192112 A1) as applied to claim 9 above, and in further view of Desai (US 2010/0302102 A1).
Regarding claim 10, Miniard in view of Sydir, as addressed above, teach wherein a direction that indicates the position of the first communication device is estimated based on BLE indicated by the drop position notification signal (see at least [0069] of Miniard, note BLE | [0074] of Miniard, note directional tracking).
However, Miniard in view of Sydir do not specifically teach estimated based on a BLE Angle of Arrival (AoA) or based on BLE Angle of Departure (AoD).
It is known to locate electronic devices in different ways. For example, Desai teaches a directional tracking system wherein a direction that indicates a position of a device is estimated based on BLE Angle of Arrival (AoA) indicated by a position notification signal, or the position of the device is estimated based on a BLE Angle of Departure (AoD) indicated by the position notification signal (see at least [0017]).
Thus, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to incorporate the features of Desai into Miniard in view of Sydir. This provides the ability for Miniard in view of Sydir’s user directionally locate the electronic device when it is communicating via BLE.
Claim 13 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Miniard (US 2019/0378391 A1) in view of Sydir (US 2016/0192112 A1) as applied to claim 12 above, and in further view of Miranda-Knapp (US 2005/0046580 A1).
Regarding claim 13, Miniard in view of Sydir, as addressed above, teach wherein the drop position notification signal transmission unit is further configured to transmit the drop position notification signal to the second communication device in the low power communication mode (see at least [0069-0070] of Miniard, note BLE).
However, Miniard in view of Sydir do not specifically teach based on an elapsed time that is longer than a specific time, the elapsed time is from a timing at which the presence of the drop is detected by the drop detection unit.
It is known to transmit signals in different ways. For example, Miranda-Knapp teaches a system wherein a drop position notification signal transmission unit transmits a drop position notification signal to a second communication device in a communication mode based on an elapsed time that is longer than a specific time, and the elapsed time is from a timing at which the presence of the drop is detected by a drop detection unit (see at least [0020]).
Thus, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to incorporate the features of Miranda-Knapp into Miniard in view of Sydir. This provides the ability for Miniard in view of Sydir’s system to give a user a chance to pick up their device, thus reducing false alarms.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed July 28, 2025 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
“Applicant submits that Miniard does not expressly or inherently describe at least, for example, the features of ‘detect presence or absence of a drop of the first communication device based on a detection result of the proximity sensor and a detection result of the acceleration sensor, wherein the presence of the drop is detected based on the detection result of the proximity sensor that indicates that the first communication device is not in the proximity state to the human body,’ as recited in amended independent claim 1.”
In response, paragraph [0069] of Miniard states the electronic devices 32-34 may be configured to interchangeably detect when one or more of the electronic devices 32-34 is in violation of a threshold condition, such as being positioned outside an allowed area, beyond an allowed distance from one or more of the other devices 32-34, or having an orientation that outside an allowed range of orientations. The allowed areas, distances, and/or ranges of orientations may be relative to a fixed position (i.e., absolute), or relative to another of the devices 32-34 so that the devices 32-34 are virtually tethered.
In paragraph [0061] Miniard states the monitoring module 14 may receive data from an accelerometer, gyroscope, or other type of motion sensor of electronic device 12, and may use this data to supplement or replace data received from the other position detection systems. This movement data may also be used to determine whether the orientation of the asset associated with the electronic device has changed beyond a threshold condition.
Paragraph [0072] states a sufficient change in position and/or orientation of any of the electronic devices 32-34 relative to each other may indicate that the device in question has been moved without the knowledge of the user of the device. Such a change in position and/or orientation may indicate an increased risk that the electronic device 32-34 is being stolen or inadvertently left behind by the user. For example, the smart watch may be positioned on the user's wrist as the user sits in the chair, in which case the electronic device 32 would have a limited range of motion relative to the user. Any positioning of the smart phone beyond a threshold distance from the smart watch, especially if the laptop remains in the user's lap, might indicate that an unauthorized person has taken possession of the smart phone and is walking away. In another example, the smart phone may have fallen off the arm of the chair and to the floor without the user noticing.
In view of the paragraphs above, a sufficient change in position from a proximity state to a human body and an orientation sensed from time-series information from an accelerometer, see paragraph [0072], are used to determine that a smart phone has fallen to the ground away from a smart watch worn on the user’s wrist. Miniard clearly discloses “detect presence or absence of a drop of the first communication device based on a detection result of the proximity sensor and a detection result of the acceleration sensor, wherein the presence of the drop is detected based on the detection result of the proximity sensor that indicates that the first communication device is not in the proximity state to the human body”. Applicant’s arguments are not persuasive.
Applicant argues “Miniard does not describe detecting whether the electronic device is not in a proximity state to a human body.”
In response, paragraph [0097] of Applicant’s Publication US 20240046773 A1 states the proximity sensor 98 is an electromagnetic induction type, a magnetic type, an electrostatic type, or the like, detects whether or not the earphone 32 is in a state of being in close contact with the human body, that is, in a state of being worn on the ear, and outputs the detection result to the control unit 91. Paragraph [0167] states the sensor used for the drop event detection may be a sensor other than the proximity sensor 98 and the acceleration sensor 99. For example, an impact detection sensor may be provided so that a drop event is detected in a case where an impact is detected. Furthermore, for example, an image sensor or a brightness/darkness sensor that images the inside of the ear may be provided, and when a black image is captured, it may be regarded as being worn on the ear, and when a bright image is captured, it may be recognized that the user is away from the ear and a drop event may be detected.
In view of the paragraphs above, the type of proximity sensor used is open ended (i.e., via the phrasing or the like, or the sensor used for the drop event detection may be a sensor other than the proximity sensor, and furthermore, for example). In addition, proximity state is not defined as a state of being worn on the ear, it is open ended. Although the claims are interpreted in light of the specification, limitations from the specification are not read into the claims. Miniard clearly determines proximity to the user’s wrist. Applicant’s arguments are not persuasive.
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 BRIAN WILSON whose telephone number is 571-270-5884. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 9:00-5:00pm.
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, CURTIS KUNTZ can be reached at 571-272-7499. 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.
/BRIAN WILSON/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2687