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 .
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.
Drawings
3. The drawings are objected to under 37 CFR 1.83(a). The drawings must show every feature of the invention specified in the claims. The following features are absent from the drawings:
Claim 1, “A method for calibrating at least one system for carrying out one or both of a signal time-of-flight measurement and a signal time-of-flight difference measurement.” [The Examiner recommends a flowchart depicting the method set forth by claim 1 and respective dependent claims] and “a first object,”
Claim 2, “at least one second object […] the distance or time-of-flight measurements are made between the first object and the at least one second object”
Claim 3, “carrying out a plurality of signal time-of-flight difference measurements, in each case between a shared first object and a second object of a plurality of second objects […] one first distance measurement […] at least one plurality of signal time-of-flight difference measurements between signal times-of-flight, in each case between the shared first object and the second object from the plurality of second objects also including the reference object.”
Claim 4, “A use of at least one phase measurement on at least one signal between a first object and at least one second object.”
Claim 5, “carrying out a plurality of signal time-of-flight difference measurements between, in each case, the shared first object and a second object from [[a]] the plurality of second objects, and to determine at least one distance or position of the first object on the basis thereof.”
Claim 7, “calibration ascertains an offset, particularly one that is dependent on frequency or temperature, said offset being used as a correction in the at least one signal time-of-flight measurement or signal time-of-flight-based distance measurement.”
Claim 8, “wherein the phase measurement or phase-based distance measurement is not apparatus-specific/system-specific, or is or will be calibrated merely model range-specifically or series-specifically”
Claim 9, “multiple phase measurements or phase-based distance measurements at difference frequencies, or multiple measurements of changes in the phase shifts with the frequency at different frequency spacings, are performed before the calibration and used for the calibration, for reducing or excluding ambiguities,”
Claim 10, “wherein a frequency or temperature dependent difference, between distance determined in a phase-based manner and signal time-of-flight-based distance measurement is ascertained as a frequency dependent or temperature-dependent, respectively, correction term”
Claim 11, “a shared radio signal and wherein the signal time-of-flight is the signal time-of-flight for a path between the second object and the first object, or is the signal round-trip time-of-flight between the second object and the first object and back.”
Claim 12, “time spacing between the transmission of the at least one signal for the signal time-of-flight measurement and the at least one signal for the phase measurement is less than 500 ms or wherein the signal timeof-flight measurement and at least one phase measurement are performed on same signal or on signals with similar frequency.”
Claim 13, “method according to claim 1, is performed individually in each case for a plurality of apparatuses or pairs of same-model apparatuses or apparatuses from a model range or series, wherein only a uniform calibration that is identical for all is used for the phase measurement or phase-based distance measurement for all apparatuses or pairs of the plurality, respectively”
Claim 14 “a transmission and receiving arrangement as well as a unit for phase measurement, an oscillator, a time measurer, configured for carrying out a signal time-of-flight measurement, having a control for carrying out the method.”
Claim 15, “system comprising at least two objects, having in each case a transmission or receiving arrangement or both, a PLL or oscillator or both, and, a time measurer, and configured together for carrying out a signal time-of-flight measurement between the two objects and a phase-based distance measurement between the two objects, having at least one control for carrying out the method.”
Claim 17, “The method according to claim 3, wherein the system is configured for carrying out a plurality of time-of-flight difference measurements between, in each case, the shared first object and a second object from a plurality of second objects, and to determine a distance or position of the first object on the basis thereof.”
Claim 18, “the calibration of the correction term is frequency-dependent or temperature-dependent, or frequency and temperature dependent.”
Therefore, the above features as recited by claims 1-5, 7-15, and 17-18 must be shown or the features canceled from the claims. No new matter should be entered.
Corrected drawing sheets in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(d) are required in reply to the Office action to avoid abandonment of the application. Any amended replacement drawing sheet should include all of the figures appearing on the immediate prior version of the sheet, even if only one figure is being amended. The figure or figure number of an amended drawing should not be labeled as “amended.” If a drawing figure is to be canceled, the appropriate figure must be removed from the replacement sheet, and where necessary, the remaining figures must be renumbered and appropriate changes made to the brief description of the several views of the drawings for consistency. Additional replacement sheets may be necessary to show the renumbering of the remaining figures. Each drawing sheet submitted after the filing date of an application must be labeled in the top margin as either “Replacement Sheet” or “New Sheet” pursuant to 37 CFR 1.121(d). If the changes are not accepted by the examiner, the applicant will be notified and informed of any required corrective action in the next Office action. The objection to the drawings will not be held in abeyance.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 101
35 U.S.C. 101 reads as follows:
Whoever invents or discovers any new and useful process, machine, manufacture, or composition of matter, or any new and useful improvement thereof, may obtain a patent therefor, subject to the conditions and requirements of this title.
Claims 4 and 5 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 101 because the claimed invention is directed to non-statutory subject matter. The claim(s) does/do not fall within at least one of the four categories of patent eligible subject matter because the claims are drawn to the “use of at least one phase measurement on at least one second object for calibrating.” MPEP 2173.05(q) states, “Use claims that do not purport to claim a process, machine, manufacture, or composition of matter fail to comply with 35 U.S.C. 101.” The Examiner recommend the Applicant amend the claims to recite one of the four categories of patent eligible subject matter
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(b):
(b) CONCLUSION.—The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph:
The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the applicant regards as his invention.
Claims 1-18 rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor (or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the applicant), regards as the invention.
Regarding claim 1, it is not clear of what encompasses and is meant by the term “in cooperation with a first object.” A review of the specification sets forth the term ”cooperation.” As claimed the term is excessively broad in nature and the meets and bounds of the claimed limitation cannot be ascertained by one skilled in the art. It is unclear how the claimed first object is particularly involved in the method. Review of the specification reveals on page 3 “In particular, the distance- time-of-flight measurements time-of-flight difference measurements are carried out between the first object and the at least one second object.” The specification suggests that the method is performed on either the first or second object wherein the distance measurement disclosed by claim 1 is the distance between these two objects. Without further clarification the term in “cooperation” suggests that the method is either performed by the “first object” or on a separate apparatus in which the “first object” is a target for measurement. The second object is initially introduced in dependent claim 2 only being a generic object different from the “first object” and does not help clarify the explicit function of the “first object.” It suggested applicant amend the claims to be consistent with the disclosed “cooperation” and clearly disclose what the term means as it is not clear how the Applicant intends to limit the term based on review of the specification. For examination purposes the term “cooperation with a first object” in claim 1 will be interpreted to mean that the “first object” is the object to be positioned.
Regarding claim 1 and similarly claims 2, 3, and 10, it is not clear of what encompasses and is meant by the limitation “wherein the system for carrying out further signal time-of-flight measurements or distance measurements or position-finding is calibrated by means of the at least one first phase measurement on the basis of at least one signal time-of-flight measurement, or signal time- of-flight difference measurement” (emphasis added). A review of the specification sets forth the term ”on the basis of.” As claimed the term is excessively broad in nature and the meets and bounds of the claimed limitation cannot be ascertained by one skilled in the art. The claim discloses that “signal time-of-flight measurements or distance measurements or position-finding” are calibrated using phase measurements; however, it is unclear how and what is meant by the calibration using phase measurement being performed on the basis of “one signal time-of-flight measurement, or signal time- of-flight difference measurement” as the previously mentioned, listed alternatives are the object being calibrated. The claim sets forth a circularly dependent clause wherein “signal time-of-flight measurements or distance measurements or position-finding” are calibrated on the basis of “signal time-of-flight measurements or distance measurements or position-finding,” rendering the claim indefinite. Review of the specification reveals on page 2 “system for carrying out further signal time-of-flight measurements, r distance measurements, position-finding, is calibrated using the at least one first phase measurement (PBR) on the basis of at least one signal time-of-flight measurement, particularly pulse signal time-of-flight measurement (ToF), signal time-of-flight difference measurement;” however, the Examiner can find no further clarification on the term ”on the basis of.” It suggested applicant amend the claims to be consistent with the disclosed “on the basis of” and clearly disclose what the term means as it is not clear how the Applicant intends to limit the term based on review of the specification. For examination purposes above limitation as recited by claim 1 will be interpreted to mean that “signal time-of-flight measurements or distance measurements or position-finding” are calibrated using phase measurements that are correlated to a “signal time-of-flight measurement, or signal time- of-flight difference measurement.”
Regarding claim 2 and similarly claims 3, 4, 5, 6, 15, and 17 it is not clear of what encompasses and is meant by the limitation “wherein the system contains at least one second object and the distance or time-of-flight measurements are made between the first object and the at least one second object.” A review of the specification sets forth the term ”at least one second object.” As claimed the term is excessively broad in nature and the meets and bounds of the claimed limitation cannot be ascertained by one skilled in the art. As it is unclear if the method itself is performed by the “first object” or on a separate apparatus in which the “first object” is a target for measurement, the above 112(b) rejection states that the nature and function of the claimed “first object” is indefinite. Review of the specification reveals on page 3, “In particular, the distance- time-of-flight measurements time-of-flight difference measurements are carried out between the first object and the at least one second object,” suggesting that the method is performed on either the first or second device. The Examiner further notes that if the method is performed on either the first or second device, there is no clarification as to which device explicitly preforms the method. If the method is performed by an apparatus different from the first and second object, it is unclear how the apparatus would estimate the distance between the first and second object. It suggested applicant amend the claims to be consistent with the disclosed “second object” and clearly disclose what the term means as it is not clear how the Applicant intends to limit the term based on review of the specification. For examination purposes the term “second object” in claim 2 will be interpreted to mean that the “second object” is the object preforming the positioning method.
Regarding claim 4 and similarly claim 5 , it is not clear of what encompasses and is meant by the limitation, “A use of at least one phase measurement on at least one signal between a first object and at least one second object, for calibrating at least one apparatus or system.” The claim recites a process without setting forth any steps involved in the process, which is defined by MPEP 2173.05(q) as a “Use claim.” The recitation of a “use” without any active, positive steps delimiting how this use is actually practiced renders the claim indefinite. It is suggested that the applicant amend the claim to recite positive steps delimiting how this use is actually practiced as it is not clear how the Applicant intends to limit the claim.
Regarding claim 7, it is not clear of what encompasses and is meant by the phrase “the calibration ascertains an offset.” A review of the specification sets forth the term ”ascertains an offset.” As claimed the term is excessively broad in nature and the meets and bounds of the claimed limitation cannot be ascertained by one skilled in the art. The definition of “ascertain” implies that the process of calibration itself discovers or learns of an offset. It is unclear to the Examiner how a processes, "calibration," may perform an act of learning or discovery. Review of the specification reveals on page 9, “the calibration is performed such that a difference, particularly a frequency- temperature-dependent difference, between distance determined in a phase-based manner and signal time-of-flight-based distance measurement is ascertained as a correction term.” When the applicant acts as his or her own lexicographer to specifically define a term of a claim contrary to its ordinary meaning, the written description must clearly redefine the claim term and set forth the uncommon definition so as to put one reasonably skilled in the art on notice that the applicant intended to so redefine that claim term. While the specification provides support for the process of "calibration" performing the act of ascertainment, the Examiner does not find a clear special definition for the term "ascertain" in the specification that supports a process performing learning or discovery. The term is indefinite because the specification does not clearly redefine the term. It is suggested that the applicant amend the claims to clearly disclose what the term means as it is not clear how the Applicant intends to limit the term based on review of the specification. For examination purposes the term “ascertains an offset” in claim 7 will be interpreted to mean "determines an offset."
Regarding claim 8, it is not clear of what encompasses and is meant by the term “is or will be calibrated.” As claimed the term is excessively broad in nature and the meets and bounds of the claimed limitation cannot be ascertained by one skilled in the art. The term establishes, in the alternative, that the method either is actively performed or performed generically in the future. This produces ambiguity regarding when or if the calibration method is performed. As it is unclear when or if the calibration method is performed, the scope of the limitation is improperly blurred, rendering the claim indefinite. It is suggested that the applicant amend the claims to be consistent with the disclosed calibration and clearly disclose what the above term means as it is not clear how the Applicant intends to limit the term based on review of the specification. For examination purposes the term “is or will be calibrated” in claim 8 will be interpreted to as “is calibrated”
Regarding claim 8, it is not clear of what encompasses and is meant by the limitation, “The phase measurement or phase-based distance measurement is not apparatus-specific/system-specific, or is or will be calibrated model range-specifically or series-specifically.” The claim consists of a series of alternative limitations that are excessively broad in nature and the meets and bounds of the claimed limitations cannot be ascertained by one skilled in the art. The alternative limitations of claim 8 are not set forth in a clear and explicit manner and it is grammatically unclear how these alternative limitations are intended to modify one another. As it is unclear to one of skill in the art as to how the alternative limitations effect the meets and bounds of the claim as a whole, the claim is rendered indefinite. It is suggested that the applicant amend the claim to clarify how each alternative limitation is intended to effect each other claim as it is not clear how the Applicant intends to limit the claim. For examination purposes claim 8 will be interpreted to set forth the alternative limitation that the measurements of claim 8 are either specific to apparatus or system or not specific to apparatus or system.
Regarding claim 8 and similarly claim 13 , it is not clear of what encompasses and is meant by the limitation “calibrated model range-specifically or series-specifically.” A review of the specification sets forth the term “model range-specifically or series-specifically.” As claimed the term is excessively broad in nature and the meets and bounds of the claimed limitation cannot be ascertained by one skilled in the art. It is unclear what “model” specifically refers to as it may refer to a type of system representation or a type of device. It is further unclear how the term “range” and “series” are intended to modify the term “model.” By way of example, the term “range” may refer to either a breath of model serial numbers or respective distances in between individual devices, as is commonly used in the art; and the term “series” may refer to an explicit order of model serial numbers or, in conjunction with the term “model,” to mean a time-series specific model. Review of the specification reveals on page 1 “in relation to the phase-based distance measurement an apparatus or a pair of apparatuses of a series or model range can be calibrated exemplarily and this calibration can be used for the phase measurements of all apparatuses of the series;” however, the examiner can find no further clarification on the terms “model,” “range-specifically” or “series-specifically.” It is suggested that the applicant amend the claims to be consistent with the disclosed “model range-specifically or series-specifically” and clearly disclose what the term means as it is not clear how the Applicant intends to limit the term based on review of the specification. For examination purposes the term “model range-specifically or series-specifically” in claim 8 will be interpreted to mean that calibration is performed with respect to the specific device types and orientations.
Claims 2, 3, and 5-18 are also rejected based on their dependency of the defected parent claim.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
The following is a quotation of the appropriate paragraphs of 35 U.S.C. 102 that form the basis for the rejections under this section made in this Office action:
A person shall be entitled to a patent unless –
(a)(1) the claimed invention was patented, described in a printed publication, or in public use, on sale, or otherwise available to the public before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
(a)(2) the claimed invention was described in a patent issued under section 151, or in an application for patent published or deemed published under section 122(b), in which the patent or application, as the case may be, names another inventor and was effectively filed before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claims 1-13 and 16-18 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Pon(US20150195117A).
Regarding claim 1, Pon discloses
A method for calibrating (“FIG. 12 shows the one-way travel time (T.sub.onewayAB) computed as the difference between transmit time (t.sub.T1) and reception time (t.sub.windowB) adjusted by the signal phase (T.sub..PHI.B)” [061]) at least one system for carrying out one or both of a signal time-of-flight measurement and a signal time-of-flight difference measurement (“ Round-trip time (RTT) may be computed” [0060]), wherein the system is configured, in cooperation with a first object (“estimate a position of the mobile device” [0005]), to carry out a distance measurement on the basis of a phase measurement wherein at least one first distance measurement to the first object is carried out by means of the phase measurement (“The phase delay T.sub..PHI.for the single-cycle signal is measured” [0071]), and at least one signal time-of-flight measurement or a second distance measurement is carried out on the basis of at least one signal time-of-flight measurement to or via the first object (“ Each time delay reflects a path delay, which again corresponds to a distance. With three distances from the RTT signals, MS 200 may approximate its position via trilateration.” [0049]), wherein the system for carrying out further signal time-of-flight measurements or distance measurements or position-finding is calibrated by means of the at least one first phase measurement on the basis of at least one signal time-of-flight measurement, or signal time- of-flight difference measurement (“the phase offset found in the received OFDM signal to determine where the (non-CP) OFDM symbol actually begins (t.sub.R) and adjust the received OFDM signal time “ [0057])
Regarding claim 2, Pon discloses
The method according to claim 1, wherein the system contains at least one second object (FIG.2, Part.100-1) and the distance or time-of-flight measurements are made between the first object and the at least one second object (FIG.2, Part. RTT1), or the performance of additional signal time-of-flight measurements or distance measurements or position-finding is calibrated by means of the at least one first phase measurement on the basis of at least one signal time-of-flight measurement or signal time- of-flight difference measurement (“the phase offset found in the received OFDM signal to determine where the (non-CP) OFDM symbol actually begins (t.sub.R) and adjust the received OFDM signal time “ [0057]).
Regarding claim 3, Pon discloses
The method according to claim 1 for calibrating at least one system for carrying out a plurality of signal time-of-flight difference measurements (FIG.2, Part.RTT1-RTT3), in each case between a shared first object (FIG.2, Part 200) and a second object of a plurality of second objects (FIG.2, Parts.100-1, 100-2 & 100-3), wherein the system is configured for carrying out the at least one first distance measurement between the first object and at least one reference object of the plurality of second objects (“With three distances from the RTT signals, MS 200 may approximate its position via trilateration” [0049]), on the basis of the phase measurement, wherein the at least one first distance measurement to the first object is carried out by means of the phase measurement (“The phase delay T.sub..PHI.for the single-cycle signal is measured” [0071]), and at least one plurality of signal time-of-flight difference measurements between signal times-of-flight, in each case between the shared first object and the second object from the plurality of second objects, also including the reference object (“Each time delay reflects a path delay, which again corresponds to a distance” [0049]), wherein the system for carrying out further signal time-of-flight difference measurements between signal times-of-flight or distance measurements or position-findings is calibrated by means of the at least one phase measurement, based on further signal time-of-flight difference measurements between signal times-of-flight, in each case between the shared first object and the second object from the plurality of second objects (“the phase offset found in the received OFDM signal to determine where the (non-CP) OFDM symbol actually begins (t.sub.R) and adjust the received OFDM signal time “ [0057]).
Regarding claim 4, Pon discloses
A use of at least one phase measurement on at least one signal between a first object and at least one second object (“The phase delay T.sub..PHI.for the single-cycle signal is measured” [0071]), for calibrating at least one apparatus or system for signal time-of-flight measurement or signal time-of-flight difference measurements signal time-of-flight-based- or signal time-of-flight-difference-based distance measurement or position-finding of the first object or of at least one second object (“the phase offset found in the received OFDM signal to determine where the (non-CP) OFDM symbol actually begins (t.sub.R) and adjust the received OFDM signal time “ [0057]).
Regarding claim 5, Pon discloses
The use according to claim 4, wherein the at least one apparatus is part of a system for signal time-of-flight difference measurement-based distance measurement (“FIG. 2 illustrates trilateration using RTT measurements.” [0049]) or position-finding of the first object (FIG.2, Part.200) and comprises a plurality of second objects (FIG.2, Parts.100-1, 100-2 & 100-3), wherein the system is configured, for carrying out a plurality of signal time-of-flight difference measurements between, in each case, the shared first object and a second object from the plurality of second objects, and to determine at least one distance or position of the first object on the basis thereof (“Each time delay reflects a path delay, which again corresponds to a distance. With three distances from the RTT signals, MS 200 may approximate its position via trilateration.” [0049])
Regarding claim 6, Pon discloses
The method according to claim 1,wherein the calibration is a calibration of one or both of the signal time-of- flight measurement and signal time-of-flight-based distance measurement between the first object and the second object (“the one-way travel time (T.sub.onewayAB) computed as the difference between transmit time (t.sub.T1) and reception time (t.sub.windowB) adjusted by the signal phase (T.sub..PHI.B).” [0061]).
Regarding claim 7, Pon discloses
The method according to claim 1,wherein the calibration is used for carrying out a plurality of signal time-of-flight measurement(s) or signal time-of-flight-based distance measurement(s), distance measurements or position-findings, of the system (“the one-way travel time (T.sub.onewayAB) computed as the difference between transmit time (t.sub.T1) and reception time (t.sub.windowB) adjusted by the signal phase (T.sub..PHI.B).” [0061]), such that the calibration ascertains an offset that is dependent on frequency or temperature (“a first OFDM signal in a window B having a window B start time (t.sub.windowB); and determine a window B phase difference (T.sub..PHI.B) from a first difference between a receive time (t.sub.R1) of the first OFDM signal and the window B start time (t.sub.windowB).” [0015] & “orthogonal frequency division multiplexing (OFDM)” [0015]), said offset being used as a correction in the at least one signal time-of-flight measurement or signal time-of-flight-based distance measurement (“the one-way travel time (T.sub.onewayAB) computed as the difference between transmit time (t.sub.T1) and reception time (t.sub.windowB) adjusted by the signal phase (T.sub..PHI.B).” [0061]).
Regarding claim 8, Pon discloses
The method according to claim 1,wherein the phase measurement or phase-based distance measurement is not apparatus-specific/system-specific, or is or will be calibrated model range-specifically or series-specifically (“ As used herein, a mobile device, sometimes referred to as a mobile station (MS) or user equipment (UE), such as a cellular phone, mobile phone or other wireless communication device, personal communication system (PCS) device, personal navigation device (PND), Personal Information Manager (PIM), Personal Digital Assistant (PDA), laptop or other suitable mobile device which is capable of receiving wireless communication and/or navigation signal” [0042]).
Regarding claim 9, Pon discloses
The method according to claim 1,wherein multiple phase measurements or phase-based distance measurements at difference frequencies (“a first OFDM signal in a window B having a window B start time (t.sub.windowB); and determine a window B phase difference (T.sub..PHI.B) from a first difference between a receive time (t.sub.R1) of the first OFDM signal and the window B start time (t.sub.windowB).” [0015] & “orthogonal frequency division multiplexing (OFDM)” [0015]), or multiple measurements of changes in the phase shifts with the frequency at different frequency spacings, are performed before the calibration and used for the calibration (FIG.22A, Steps. 618 & 620), for reducing or excluding ambiguities (“The phase offset found in the received OFDM signal to determine where the (non-CP) OFDM symbol actually begins (t.sub.R)” [0057]).
Regarding claim 10, Pon discloses
The method according to claim 1,wherein a frequency- or temperature- dependent difference, between distance determined in a phase-based manner and signal time-of-flight-based distance measurement is ascertained as a frequency- dependent or temperature-dependent, respectively (“a first OFDM signal in a window B having a window B start time (t.sub.windowB); and determine a window B phase difference (T.sub..PHI.B) from a first difference between a receive time (t.sub.R1) of the first OFDM signal and the window B start time (t.sub.windowB).” [0015] & “orthogonal frequency division multiplexing (OFDM)” [0015]), correction term (“The phase offset found in the received OFDM signal to determine where the (non-CP) OFDM symbol actually begins (t.sub.R)” [0057]), by means of which one additional signal time-of-flight measurement or additional distance measurements are corrected on the basis of at least one additional signal time-of-flight measurement of the system (“the one-way travel time (T.sub.onewayAB) computed as the difference between transmit time (t.sub.T1) and reception time (t.sub.windowB) adjusted by the signal phase (T.sub..PHI.B).” [0061]).
Regarding claim 11, Pon discloses
The method according to claim 1,wherein the at least one signal of the signal time-of-flight measurement or the signal on which the phase measurement is performed is a radio signal; which contains a shared radio signal (“Position determination techniques described herein may be implemented in conjunction with various wireless communication networks such as a wireless wide area network (WWAN), a wireless local area network (WLAN), a wireless personal area network (WPAN), and so on.” [0040]), and wherein the signal time-of-flight is the signal time-of-flight for a path between the second object and the first object, or is the signal round-trip time-of-flight between the second object and the first object and back (FIG.2, Part.RTT1).
Regarding claim 12, Pon discloses
The method according to claim 1,wherein time spacing between the transmission of the at least one signal for the signal time-of-flight measurement and the at least one signal for the phase measurement is less than 500 ms (“An OFDM frame length (or an OFDM symbol with a cyclic prefix) is 4.0 ms. A cyclic prefix is 0.8 ms.” [0043])or wherein the signal time- of-flight measurement and at least one phase measurement are performed on same signal or on signals with similar frequency (FIG.22B, Steps.608, 610 & 612).
Regarding claim 13, Pon discloses
The method according to claim 1,is performed individually in each case for a plurality of apparatuses (FIG.25A, Steps. 094 & 914A)or pairs of same-model apparatuses or apparatuses from a model range or series (FIG.2, Parts. 100-1, 100-2 & 100-3), wherein only a uniform calibration that is identical for all is used for the phase measurement or phase-based distance measurement for all apparatuses or pairs of the plurality, respectively (“device and the difference between the transmit time (t.sub.T1) and the reception time (t.sub.windowB) may be considered based on a common clock (e.g., GPS time or CDMA time. “ [0083]).
Regarding claim 16, Pon discloses
The method according to claim 1, wherein the at least one fist distance measurement to the first object is carried out by means of phase measurement by means of one or both of a phase shift and a change of a phase shift with the frequency (“means for determining a window B phase difference (T.sub..PHI.B) from a first difference of a receive time (t.sub.R1) of the OFDM signal and the window B start time (t.sub.windowB) of the window B” [0017]).
Regarding claim 17, Pon discloses
The method according to claim 3, wherein the system is configured for carrying out a plurality of time-of-flight difference measurements between, in each case, the shared first object and a second object from a plurality of second objects (FIG.2, Parts. 100-1, 100-2, 100-3, 200 & RTT2), and to determine a distance or position of the first object on the basis thereof (“With knowledge of the original transmit level and the received level, a difference shows the path attenuation, which corresponds to a distance” [0048]).
Regarding claim 18, Pon discloses
The method according to claim 1, wherein the calibration of the correction term is frequency-dependent or temperature-dependent, or frequency and temperature dependent (“a first OFDM signal in a window B having a window B start time (t.sub.windowB); and determine a window B phase difference (T.sub..PHI.B) from a first difference between a receive time (t.sub.R1) of the first OFDM signal and the window B start time (t.sub.windowB).” [0015] & “orthogonal frequency division multiplexing (OFDM)” [0015]).
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
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.
Claims 14 and 15 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Pon(US20150195117A) in view of Broussard(US20190107811A1).
Regarding claim 14, Pon discloses
An apparatus having a transmission and receiving arrangement (“a first transceiver to a second transceiver” [0008]) as well as a unit for phase measurement (“a processor coupled to the first transceiver and configured to determine a window A phase difference “ [0010]), […] a time measurer, configured for carrying out a signal time-of-flight measurement (“device and the difference between the transmit time (t.sub.T1) and the reception time (t.sub.windowB) may be considered based on a common clock (e.g., GPS time or CDMA time. “ [0083]), having a control for carrying out the method according to claim 1 by means of the apparatus (“the non-transitory computer-readable storage medium including program code stored thereon, comprising program code” [0011])
Pon discloses means to produce and transmit signals, but does not does not explicitly disclose nor limit an oscillator. Broussard discloses one or more oscillators [0007].
Broussard teaches in the same field of endeavor of methods and apparatus for measuring the time-of-flight of a signal from a transmitter to a receiver. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Pon with the teachings of Broussard to incorporate the features of an oscillator so as to gain the advantage of improving signal reception [0008, Broussard]. Also, since it has been held that if a technique has been used to improve one device, and a person of ordinary skill in the art would recognize that it would improve similar devices in the same way, using the technique is obvious unless its actual application is beyond his or her skill (MPEP 2143).
Regarding claim 15, Pon discloses
A system comprising at least two objects, having in each case a transmission or receiving arrangement or both (“a first transceiver to a second transceiver” [0008]), […] and, a time measurer, and configured together for carrying out a signal time-of-flight measurement between the two objects (“device and the difference between the transmit time (t.sub.T1) and the reception time (t.sub.windowB) may be considered based on a common clock (e.g., GPS time or CDMA time. “ [0083]), and a phase-based distance measurement between the two objects (“a processor coupled to the first transceiver and configured to determine a window A phase difference “ [0010]), having at least one control for carrying out the method according to claim 1 by means of the at least two objects (“the non-transitory computer-readable storage medium including program code stored thereon, comprising program code” [0011])
Pon discloses means to produce and transmit signals, but does not does not explicitly disclose nor limit an oscillator or a phase locked loop. Broussard discloses one or more oscillators [0007] and a phase locked loop (FIG.1, Parts.2 & 18).
Broussard teaches in the same field of endeavor of methods and apparatus for measuring the time-of-flight of a signal from a transmitter to a receiver. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Pon with the teachings of Broussard to incorporate the features of an oscillator and a phase locked loop so as to gain the advantage of improving signal reception [0008, Broussard]. Also, since it has been held that if a technique has been used to improve one device, and a person of ordinary skill in the art would recognize that it would improve similar devices in the same way, using the technique is obvious unless its actual application is beyond his or her skill (MPEP 2143).
Documents Considered but not Relied Upon
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to the applicant’s Disclosure.
Hinderling(US20060119833A1) is considered analogous art to the instant application as it discloses in [0019] “the method according to the invention, the total signal information is evaluated for distance determination, and not just the phases as in the phase difference method or the transit times as in the time-of-flight method”
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to CLAYTON PAUL RIDDER whose telephone number is (571)272-2771. The examiner can normally be reached Monday thru Friday ET.
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, Jack Keith can be reached on (571) 272-6878. 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.
/C.P.R./Examiner, Art Unit 3646
/JACK W KEITH/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3646