Response to Amendment
This communication is in response to the amendment filed on 1/21/2026. Claims 1-28 are pending.
Claim Objections
The objections to claims 1, 3, 10, 15, and 17 are withdrawn based on the amendments filed on 1/21/2026.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The rejections of claims 15-27 under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) are withdrawn based on the amendments filed on 1/21/2026.
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 1-28 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 101 because the claimed invention is directed to an abstract idea without significantly more.
Step 1: Is the Claim to a Process, Machine, Manufacture or Composition of Matter?
Independent Claim 1 recites a method, independent Claim 15 recites a controller device, and independent Claim 28 recites a non-transitory computer readable medium. Thus, the claims are to a method, a machine, and a manufacture, which are among the statutory categories of invention.
Step 2A: Prong One: Does the Claim Recite an Abstract Idea?
Independent claim 1 recites:
A method comprising:
associating an ultra-wide band (UWB) tag device with a UWB anchor device via a communications interface;
retrieving, from a database, a set of first data representing a plurality of locations in a physical space and a plurality of device locations in the physical space, the first data representing the plurality of device locations being tagged as associated with a device;
generating a set of first coordinates in a first coordinate system by transforming the set of first data from a second coordinate system [the examiner finds that the foregoing underlined element recites mathematical concepts, and/or a mental process because it can be performed in the human mind or by a human using pen and paper];
generating second data representing a current location of the UWB tag device in the physical space by calculating a round-trip time of a signal that is associated with a wireless protocol and an angle-of-arrival of the signal [the examiner finds that the foregoing underlined element recites mathematical concepts, and/or a mental process because it can be performed in the human mind or by a human using pen and paper];
generating a second coordinate in the first coordinate system based on the second data [the examiner finds that the foregoing underlined element recites mathematical concepts, and/or a mental process because it can be performed in the human mind or by a human using pen and paper];
generating a tiled set of coordinates by partitioning a plane associated with the physical space into a plurality of zones based on the set of first coordinates and the second coordinate [the examiner finds that the foregoing underlined element recites mathematical concepts, and/or a mental process because it can be performed in the human mind or by a human using pen and paper];
determining whether the UWB tag device is in a zone of the plurality of zones that is associated with a tagged coordinate in the tiled set of coordinates [the examiner finds that the foregoing underlined element recites mathematical concepts, and/or a mental process because it can be performed in the human mind or by a human using pen and paper]; and
in response to determining the UWB tag device is in the zone, initiating an action by the device associated with the tagged coordinate.
Step 2A: Prong Two: Does the Claim Recite Additional Elements That Integrate The Abstract Idea Into a Practical Application?
The elements that are not underlined above are the additional elements (i.e., “associating an ultra-wide band (UWB) tag device with a UWB anchor device via a communications interface”; retrieving, from a database, a set of first data representing a plurality of locations in a physical space and a plurality of device locations in the physical space, the first data representing the plurality of device locations being tagged as associated with a device”, and “in response to determining the UWB tag device is in the zone, initiating an action by the device associated with the tagged coordinate”).
The examiner submits that each of the following additional elements does no more than generally link the use of the abstract idea to a particular technological environment or field of use because they are merely an incidental or token addition to the claim that does not alter or affect how the process steps of the abstract idea are performed. The associating step merely recites a generic operation using generic components, i.e., associating of a generic UWB tag with a generic UWB anchor. The retrieving step recites mere gathering of data for use in the abstract idea, and the initiating step is merely an insignificant application of a result of the abstract idea.
Thus, taken alone, the additional elements do not integrate the abstract idea into a practical application. Looking at the limitations as an ordered combination adds nothing that is not already present when looking at the elements taken individually. For example, there is no indication that the combination of elements improves the functioning of a computer or improves any other technology.
Step 2B: Does the Claim Recite Additional Elements That Amount to Significantly More Than the Abstract Idea?
The examiner submits that the additional elements do not amount to significantly more than the abstract idea for the same reasons discussed above with respect to the conclusion that the additional elements do not integrate the abstract idea into a practical application.
Independent Claims 15 and 28 recite essentially the same steps as Claim 1, and are also not patent eligible. Independent Claim 15 additionally recites a controller device, which is generic computer hardware. Independent Claim 28 additionally recites a non-transitory computer readable medium, which is generic computer hardware.
Dependent Claims 2-14 and 16-27 are also not patent eligible. Claims 2-4, 10-11, and 16-18, and 24-25 merely recite further data gathering and use of generic computer hardware (i.e., machine learning) to perform the abstract idea. Claims 5-8, 12, 13, 19-22, 26, and 27 merely recite further details of the mathematical concepts and/or mental process. Claims 9 and 23 and merely recite an insignificant output of a result of the abstract idea using generic hardware. Claims 14 merely recites generic hardware.
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.
Claim(s) 1-3, 8-9, 12-17, 22-23, and 25-28 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Xue (WO-2022143472-A1) in view of Houllier et al (U.S. Pub. No. 2006/0223523, hereinafter “Houllier”), and Sant et al (U.S. Pub. No. 2018/0091952, hereinafter “Sant”).
Regarding Claim 1, Xue teaches a method comprising: associating an ultra-wide band (UWB) tag device with a UWB anchor device via a communications interface (Fig. 3, electronic device 300 and household devices are activated to communicate with each other, page 16, last two full paragraphs); retrieving, from a database, a set of first data representing a plurality of locations in a physical space and a plurality of device locations in the physical space, the first data representing the plurality device locations being tagged as associated with a device (Figs. 7A-E, locations of UWB chips A1-A3, router B1, and lamp C1, pages 20-26; page 25, table 2, stored data regarding device locations equated to database); generating a set of first coordinates (pages 23-25, coordinates obtained); generating second data representing a current location of the UWB tag device in the physical space (Figs. 7A-E, mobile phone, T0); generating a second coordinate based on the second data (page 24, coordinates of T0); and initiating an action by the device associated with the tagged coordinate (last paragraph on page 5 and last full paragraph on page 7, control interface corresponding to household equipment that is closest to the mobile device is displayed on mobile device; household equipment initiates actions based on the control interface).
Xue does not specifically teach generating the set of first coordinates in a first coordinate system by transforming the set of first data from a second coordinate system; generating the second data by calculating a round-trip time of a signal that is associated with a wireless protocol and an angle-of-arrival of the signal, and generating the second coordinate in the first coordinate system. However, Xue does teach, on page 21 in the last full paragraph, determining delay times and distances based on exchange of messages between the mobile device and the household devices (equated to the claimed round-trip time of a signal). Further, Sant teaches generating the set of first coordinates in a first coordinate system by transforming the set of first data from a second coordinate system (paragraph [0070], converting polar coordinates to Cartesian coordinates); generating the second data by calculating a round-trip time of a signal that is associated with a wireless protocol and an angle-of-arrival of the signal (paragraph [0070], range, which is the same as the distance determined based on the round-trip time taught in Xue, and AoA matrices), and generating the second coordinate in the first coordinate system (paragraph [0070], converting range and AoA matrices into Cartesian coordinates). It would have been obvious to one skilled in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to include the conversions from polar to cartesian coordinates taught in Sant in the system of Xue, for the purposes of precision and accuracy in a UWB system (see Sant, paragraph [0070], and also paragraphs [0041], [0042]. [0052], [0059], UWB).
Xue does not specifically teach generating a tiled set of coordinates by partitioning a plane associated with the physical space into a plurality of zones based on the set of first coordinates and the second coordinate, determining whether the UWB tag device is in a zone of the plurality of zones that is associated with a tagged coordinate in the tiled set of coordinates, and that the action is initiated in response to determining the UWB tag device is in the zone. However, Houllier teaches, in paragraphs [0036]-[0039] and Fig. 2, defining Voronoi polygons for each of a set of base stations (equated to the claimed plurality of zones and tiled set of coordinates), assigning mobile stations to base stations based on the polygons (equated to determining whether the tag device is in a zone of the plurality of zones), and communicating between a mobile station and the base station associated with a polygon based on the zone assignment (equated to the claimed initiating of an action in response to determining that the UWB tag device is in the zone). It would have been obvious to one skilled in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to determine Voronoi polygons, such as are taught in Houllier, for the household devices of Xue, because Voronoi polygons are known in the art for wireless communications.
Regarding Claim 2, Xue in view of Houllier and Sant teaches everything that is claimed above with respect to Claim 1. Xue further teaches wherein prior to retrieving a set of first data, performing a calibration operation that includes capturing range and angle data based on a location of the UWB tag device relative to the UWB anchor device (page 21, last full paragraph, ranging messages sent and received; page 3, fourth full paragraph, initial heading angle of the electronic device and target angle of each home device are determined).
Regarding Claim 3, Xue in view of Houllier and Sant teaches everything that is claimed above with respect to Claim 1. Xue further teaches wherein prior to retrieving a set of first data, performing a calibration operation that includes capturing UWB range and angle data representing the plurality of locations in the physical space using a first calibration technique (page 21, last full paragraph, ranging messages sent and received; page 3, fourth full paragraph, initial heading angle of the electronic device is determined in first step, which is equated to first calibration technique), capturing rang and angle data representing the plurality of device locations using a second calibration technique (page 21, last full paragraph, ranging messages sent and received; page 3, fourth full paragraph, target angle of each home device in the plurality of home devices in subsequent step, which is equated to second calibration technique), and associating a tag with range and angle data representing each of the plurality of device locations (page 21, last full paragraph, distances are determined based on ranging messages; page 3, fourth full paragraph, target angles are associated with electronic device).
Regarding Claim 8, Xue in view of Houllier and Sant teaches everything that is claimed above with respect to Claim 1. Xue further teaches wherein the determining of whether the UWB tag device is proximate to a tagged coordinate is triggered by at least one of a user voice command and a user gesture (page 3, mobile device is pointed at home devices such as smart speaker, which is equated to user gesture).
Regarding Claim 9, Xue in view of Houllier and Sant teaches everything that is claimed above with respect to Claim 1. Xue further teaches wherein a first device and a second device are configured to perform a same action, and whether the first device or the second device initiates performance of the same action is based on the location of the UWB tag device (last paragraph on page 5 and last full paragraph on page 7, control interface corresponding to household equipment that is closest to the mobile device is displayed on mobile device; household equipment initiates actions based on the control interface; pages 10-11, second full paragraph, devices of same type may be in the same room).
Regarding Claim 12, Xue in view of Houllier and Sant teaches everything that is claimed above with respect to Claim 1. Xue further teaches wherein prior to initiating the action by the device, determining a direction a user is pointing the UWB tag device based on an AoA associated with the UWB tag device (page 28, eighth full paragraph).
Regarding Claim 13, Xue in view of Houllier and Sant teaches everything that is claimed above with respect to Claim 1. Xue further teaches wherein prior to initiating the action by the device, determining a user intent based on a projection error associated with a pointing ray representing a direction the user is pointing the device (Figs. 7D-E, pages 26-27, difference between angles and offset used to select UWB tag; difference is equated to projection error).
Regarding Claim 14, Xue in view of Houllier and Sant teaches everything that is claimed above with respect to Claim 1. Xue further teaches wherein the UWB tag device is a mobile computing device (Fig. 2, mobile phone 300; Figs. 7A-E, mobile phone) and the UWB anchor device is a stationary computing device (Figs. 3 and 7A-E, smart TV, smart speaker, router, or smart desk lamp).
Regarding Claim 15, Xue teaches a device comprising: an ultra-wideband (UWB) tag; and a UWB anchor communicatively coupled with the UWB tag via a communication interface (Fig. 3, electronic device 300 and household devices are activated to communicate with each other, page 16, last two full paragraphs), the device being configured to: retrieve, from a database, a set of first data representing a plurality of locations in a physical space and a plurality of object locations in the physical space, the first data representing the plurality of object locations being tagged as associated with an object (Figs. 7A-E, locations of UWB chips A1-A3, router B1, and lamp C1, pages 20-26; page 25, table 2, stored data regarding device locations equated to database); generate a set of first coordinates based on the set of first data (pages 23-25, coordinates obtained); generate second data representing a current location of the UWB tag device in the physical space (Figs. 7A-E, mobile phone, T0); generate a second coordinate based on the second data (page 24, coordinates of T0); and initiate a computer-controlled action by the object associated with the tagged coordinate (last paragraph on page 5 and last full paragraph on page 7, control interface corresponding to household equipment that is closest to the mobile device is displayed on mobile device; household equipment initiates actions based on the control interface).
Xue does not specifically teach generate the set of first coordinates in a first coordinate system by transforming the set of first data from a second coordinate system; generate the second data by calculating a round-trip time of a signal that is associated with a wireless protocol and an angle-of-arrival of the signal, and generate the second coordinate in the first coordinate system. However, Xue does teach, on page 21 in the last full paragraph, determining delay times and distances based on exchange of messages between the mobile device and the household devices (equated to the claimed round-trip time of a signal). Further, Sant teaches generating the set of first coordinates in a first coordinate system by transforming the set of first data from a second coordinate system (paragraph [0070], converting polar coordinates to Cartesian coordinates); generating the second data by calculating a round-trip time of a signal that is associated with a wireless protocol and an angle-of-arrival of the signal (paragraph [0070], range, which the same as the distance that is determined based on the round-trip time taught in Xue, and AoA matrices), and generating the second coordinate in the first coordinate system (paragraph [0070], converting range and AoA matrices into Cartesian coordinates). It would have been obvious to one skilled in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to include the conversions from polar to cartesian coordinates taught in Sant in the system of Xue, for the purposes of precision and accuracy in a UWB system (see Sant, paragraph [0070], and also paragraphs [0041], [0042]. [0052], [0059], UWB).
Xue does not specifically teach generate a tiled set of coordinates by partitioning a plane associated with the physical space into a plurality of zones based on the set of first coordinates and the second coordinate, determine whether the UWB tag device is in a zone of the plurality of zones that is associated with a tagged coordinate in the tiled set of coordinates, and that the action is initiated in response to determining the UWB tag device is in the zone. However, Houllier teaches, in paragraphs [0036]-[0039] and Fig. 2, defining Voronoi polygons for each of a set of base stations (equated to the claimed plurality of zones and tiled set of coordinates), assigning mobile stations to base stations based on the polygons (equated to determining whether the tag device is in a zone of the plurality of zones), and communicating between a mobile station and the base station associated with a polygon based on the zone assignment (equated to the claimed initiating of an action in response to determining that the UWB tag device is in the zone). It would have been obvious to one skilled in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to determine Voronoi polygons, such as are taught in Houllier, for the household devices of Xue, because Voronoi polygons are known in the art for wireless communications.
Regarding Claim 16, Xue in view of Houllier and Sant teaches everything that is claimed above with respect to Claim 15. Xue further teaches wherein prior to retrieving a set of first data, performing a calibration operation that includes capturing range and angle data based on a location of the UWB tag relative to the UWB anchor device (page 21, last full paragraph, ranging messages sent and received; page 3, fourth full paragraph, initial heading angle of the electronic device and target angle of each home device are determined).
Regarding Claim 17, Xue in view of Houllier and Sant teaches everything that is claimed above with respect to Claim 15. Xue further teaches wherein prior to retrieving a set of first data, performing a calibration operation that includes capturing UWB range and angle data representing the plurality of locations in the physical space using a first calibration technique (page 21, last full paragraph, ranging messages sent and received; page 3, fourth full paragraph, initial heading angle of the electronic device is determined in first step, which is equated to first calibration technique), capturing range and angle data representing the plurality of device locations using a second calibration technique (page 21, last full paragraph, ranging messages sent and received; page 3, fourth full paragraph, target angle of each home device in the plurality of home devices in subsequent step, which is equated to second calibration technique), and associating a tag with range and angle data representing each of the plurality of device locations (page 21, last full paragraph, distances are determined based on ranging messages; page 3, fourth full paragraph, target angles are associated with electronic device).
Regarding Claim 22, Xue in view of Houllier and Sant teaches everything that is claimed above with respect to Claim 15. Xue further teaches wherein the determining of whether the UWB tag device is proximate to a tagged coordinate is triggered by at least one of a user voice command and a user gesture (page 3, mobile device is pointed at home devices such as smart speaker, which is equated to user gesture).
Regarding Claim 23, Xue in view of Houllier and Sant teaches everything that is claimed above with respect to Claim 15. Xue further teaches wherein a first device and a second device are configured to perform a same action, and whether the first device or the second device initiates performance of the same action is based on the location of the UWB tag (last paragraph on page 5 and last full paragraph on page 7, control interface corresponding to household equipment that is closest to the mobile device is displayed on mobile device; household equipment initiates actions based on the control interface; pages 10-11, second full paragraph, devices of same type may be in the same room).
Regarding Claim 26, Xue in view of Houllier and Sant teaches everything that is claimed above with respect to Claim 15. Xue further teaches wherein prior to initiating the action by the device, determining a direction a user is pointing the UWB tag device based on an AoA associated with the UWB tag device (page 28, eighth full paragraph).
Regarding Claim 27, Xue in view of Houllier and Sant teaches everything that is claimed above with respect to Claim 15. Xue further teaches wherein prior to initiating the action by the device, determining a user intent based on a projection error associated with a pointing ray representing a direction the user is pointing the device (Figs. 7D-E, pages 26-27, difference between angles and offset used to select UWB tag; difference is equated to projection error).
Regarding Claim 28, Xue teaches a non-transitory computer readable medium (Fig. 3, Figs. 7A-E) containing instructions that when executed cause a processor of a computer system to perform steps comprising: associating an ultra-wide band (UWB) tag device with a UWB anchor device via a communications interface (Fig. 3, electronic device 300 and household devices are activated to communicate with each other, page 16, last two full paragraphs); retrieving, from a database, a set of first data representing a plurality of locations in a physical space and a plurality of device locations in the physical space, the first data representing the plurality device locations being tagged as associated with a device (Figs. 7A-E, locations of UWB chips A1-A3, router B1, and lamp C1, pages 20-26; page 25, table 2, stored data regarding device locations equated to database); generating a set of first coordinates (pages 23-25, coordinates obtained); generating second data representing a current location of the UWB tag device in the physical space (Figs. 7A-E, mobile phone, T0); generating a second coordinate based on the second data (page 24, coordinates of T0); and initiating an action by the device associated with the tagged coordinate (last paragraph on page 5 and last full paragraph on page 7, control interface corresponding to household equipment that is closest to the mobile device is displayed on mobile device; household equipment initiates actions based on the control interface).
Xue does not specifically teach generating the set of first coordinates in a first coordinate system by transforming the set of first data from a second coordinate system; generating the second data by calculating a round-trip time of a signal that is associated with a wireless protocol and an angle-of-arrival of the signal, and generating the second coordinate in the first coordinate system. However, Xue does teach, on page 21 in the last full paragraph, determining delay times and distances based on exchange of messages between the mobile device and the household devices (equated to the claimed round-trip time of a signal). Further, Sant teaches generating the set of first coordinates in a first coordinate system by transforming the set of first data from a second coordinate system (paragraph [0070], converting polar coordinates to Cartesian coordinates); generating the second data by calculating a round-trip time of a signal that is associated with a wireless protocol and an angle-of-arrival of the signal (paragraph [0070], range, which the same as the distance determined based on the round-trip time taught in Xue, and AoA matrices), and generating the second coordinate in the first coordinate system (paragraph [0070], converting range and AoA matrices into Cartesian coordinates). It would have been obvious to one skilled in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to include the conversions from polar to cartesian coordinates taught in Sant in the system of Xue, for the purposes of precision and accuracy in a UWB system (see Sant, paragraph [0070], and also paragraphs [0041], [0042]. [0052], [0059], UWB).
Xue does not specifically teach generating a tiled set of coordinates by partitioning a plane associated with the physical space into a plurality of zones based on the set of first coordinates and the second coordinate, determining whether the UWB tag device is in a zone of the plurality of zones that is associated with a tagged coordinate in the tiled set of coordinates, and that the action is initiated in response to determining the UWB tag device is in the zone. However, Houllier teaches, in paragraphs [0036]-[0039] and Fig. 2, defining Voronoi polygons for each of a set of base stations (equated to the claimed plurality of zones and tiled set of coordinates), assigning mobile stations to base stations based on the polygons (equated to determining whether the tag device is in a zone of the plurality of zones), and communicating between a mobile station and the base station associated with a polygon based on the zone assignment (equated to the claimed initiating of an action in response to determining that the UWB tag device is in the zone). It would have been obvious to one skilled in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to determine Voronoi polygons, such as are taught in Houllier, for the household devices of Xue, because Voronoi polygons are known in the art for wireless communications.
Claim(s) 4 and 18 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Xue in view of Houllier and Sant, further in view of Flueratoru, Lohan, Nurmi, and Nicolescu, “HTC Vive as Ground-Truth System for Anchor-Based Indoor Localization”, 12th ICUMT, 2020 (hereinafter “HTC”).
Regarding Claim 4, Xue in view of Houllier and Sant teaches everything that is claimed above with respect to Claim 2. Xue does not specifically teach wherein the capturing range and angle data includes transmitting a first signal from the UWB anchor device to the UWB tag device, determining a delay time associated with a second signal received, in response to the first signal, by the UWB anchor device from the UWB tag device, determining a distance based on the delay time, and determining an angle-of-arrival (AoA) based on the second signal. However, Xue does teach, on page 21 in the last full paragraph, determining delay times and distance based on exchange of messages between the mobile device and the household devices. Further, HTC teaches on page 214, in the second paragraph of the Introduction section, wherein the capturing UWB range and angle data includes transmitting a first signal from the UWB anchor device to the UWB tag device (signals sent by the anchors to the tag), determining a delay time associated with a second signal received, in response to the first signal, by the UWB anchor device from the UWB tag device (TOF, TDOA, signals sent by anchors to tag, or the other way around), determining a distance based on the delay time, and determining an angle-of-arrival (AoA) based on the second signal (location computed using distances, AOA, and TDOA). It would have been obvious to one skilled in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to include the anchor-based location determination of HTC in the system of Xue, because anchor-based location determination can provide relatively accurate location determination (see HTC, Introduction section).
Regarding Claim 18, Xue in view of Houllier and Sant teaches everything that is claimed above with respect to Claim 16. Xue does not specifically teach wherein the capturing range and angle data includes transmitting a first signal from the UWB anchor device to the UWB tag, determining a delay time associated with a second signal received, in response to the first signal, by the UWB anchor device from the UWB tag, determining a distance based on the delay time, and determining an angle-of-arrival (AoA) based on the second signal. However, Xue does teach, on page 21 in the last full paragraph, determining delay times and distance based on exchange of messages between the mobile device and the household devices. Further, HTC teaches on page 214, in the second paragraph of the Introduction section, wherein the capturing UWB range and angle data includes transmitting a first signal from the UWB anchor device to the UWB tag device (signals sent by the anchors to the tag), determining a delay time associated with a second signal received, in response to the first signal, by the UWB anchor device from the UWB tag device (TOF, TDOA, signals sent by anchors to tag, or the other way around), determining a distance based on the delay time, and determining an angle-of-arrival (AoA) based on the second signal (location computed using distances, AOA, and TDOA). It would have been obvious to one skilled in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to include the anchor-based location determination of HTC in the system of Xue, because anchor-based location determination can provide relatively accurate location determination (see HTC, Introduction section).
Claim(s) 5 and 19 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Xue in view of Houllier, Sant, and Wodrich et al (U.S. Pub. No. 2020/0250352, hereinafter “Wodrich”).
Regarding Claim 5, Xue in view of Houllier and Sant teaches everything that is claimed above with respect to Claim 1. Xue does not specifically teach wherein the generating of the set of first coordinates based on the set of first data includes formatting range and angle data into a two-dimensional (2D) coordinate system. However, Wodrich teaches in paragraph [0072] that the virtual model can be presented as two-dimensional or 3-dimensional. It would have been obvious to one skilled in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to include the 2D presentation of Wodrich in the system of Xue, in order to represent the environment that includes the wireless nodes (see Wodrich, paragraph [0072]).
Regarding Claim 19, Xue in view of Houllier and Sant teaches everything that is claimed above with respect to Claim 15. Xue does not specifically teach wherein the generating of the set of first coordinates based on the set of first data includes formatting range and angle data into a two-dimensional (2D) coordinate system. However, Wodrich teaches in paragraph [0072] that the virtual model can be presented as two-dimensional or 3-dimensional. It would have been obvious to one skilled in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to include the 2D presentation of Wodrich in the system of Xue, in order to represent the environment that includes the wireless nodes (see Wodrich, paragraph [0072]).
Claim(s) 6 and 20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Xue in view of Houllier, Sant, and Bevan (CN-102762999-A).
Regarding Claim 6, Xue in view of Houllier and Sant teaches everything that is claimed above with respect to Claim 1. Xue does not specifically teach wherein at least one range associated with the first data is non-linear corrected using a trained polynomial regression model. However, Bevan teaches in paragraph [0065] using polynomial regression to correct position data in a wireless network. It would have been obvious to one skilled in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to use the polynomial regression taught in Bevan in the system of Xue, in order to accurately determine position data (see Bevan, paragraph [0065]).
Regarding Claim 20, Xue in view of Houllier and Sant teaches everything that is claimed above with respect to Claim 15. Xue does not specifically teach wherein at least one range associated with the first data is non-linear corrected using a trained polynomial regression model. However, Bevan teaches in paragraph [0065] using polynomial regression to correct position data in a wireless network. It would have been obvious to one skilled in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to use the polynomial regression taught in Bevan in the system of Xue, in order to accurately determine position data (see Bevan, paragraph [0065]).
Claim(s) 7 and 21 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Xue in view of Houllier, Sant, and Stein et al (U.S. Pub. No. 2021/0019385, hereinafter “Stein”).
Regarding Claim 7, Xue in view of Houllier and Sant teaches everything that is claimed above with respect to Claim 1. Xue does not specifically teach wherein the generating of the tiled set of coordinates includes Voronoi-tessellate the plane associated with the physical space. However, Houllier teaches, in paragraphs [0036]-[0039] and Fig. 2, defining Voronoi polygons for each of a set of base stations. It would have been obvious to one skilled in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to use Voronoi polygons, such as are taught in Houllier, in the system of Xue, because Voronoi polygons are known in the art for wireless communications. Xue in view of Houllier does not specifically teach applying a Euclidean distance metric to Voronoi-tessellate the plane. However, Stein teaches, in paragraph [0035], that a Euclidian distance metric is a suitable distance metric that can be used to compute a Voronoi cell. It would have been obvious to one skilled in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to use Euclidian distance, as is taught in Stein, to compute the Voronoi polygons, such as are taught in Houllier, in the system of Xue, because a Euclidian distance metric is a suitable distance metric that can be used to compute a Voronoi cell (see Stein, paragraph [0035]).
Regarding Claim 21, Xue in view of Houllier and Sant teaches everything that is claimed above with respect to Claim 15. Xue does not specifically teach wherein the generating of the tiled set of coordinates includes Voronoi-tessellate the plane associated with the physical space. However, Houllier teaches, in paragraphs [0036]-[0039] and Fig. 2, defining Voronoi polygons for each of a set of base stations. It would have been obvious to one skilled in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to use Voronoi polygons, such as are taught in Houllier, in the system of Xue, because Voronoi polygons are known in the art for wireless communications. Xue in view of Houllier does not specifically teach applying a Euclidean distance metric to Voronoi-tessellate the plane. However, Stein teaches, in paragraph [0035], that a Euclidian distance metric is a suitable distance metric that can be used to compute a Voronoi cell. It would have been obvious to one skilled in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to use Euclidian distance, as is taught in Stein, to compute the Voronoi polygons, such as are taught in Houllier, in the system of Xue, because a Euclidian distance metric is a suitable distance metric that can be used to compute a Voronoi cell (see Stein, paragraph [0035]).
Claim(s) 10 and 24 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Xue in view of Houllier, Sant, and Xu et al (U.S. Pub. No. 2023/0291826, hereinafter “Xu”).
Regarding Claim 10, Xue in view of Houllier and Sant teaches everything that is claimed above with respect to Claim 1. Xue does not specifically teach wherein the initiating of the action by the device includes determining the action to initiate using a model. However, Xue does teach at the top of page 14 that a neural-network processing unit (NPU) may be used. Further, Xu teaches in paragraph [0788] that an NPU includes a neural network that performs continuous self-learning, which is equated to the claimed model. It would have been obvious to one skilled in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to include the neural network of Xu on the NPU of Xue, because a neural network on an NPU quickly processes input information (see Xu, paragraph [0788]).
Regarding Claim 24, Xue in view of Houllier and Sant teaches everything that is claimed above with respect to Claim 15. Xue does not specifically teach wherein the initiating of the action by the device includes determining the action to initiate using a model. However, Xue does teach at the top of page 14 that a neural-network processing unit (NPU) may be used. Further, Xu teaches in paragraph [0788] that an NPU includes a neural network that performs continuous self-learning, which is equated to the claimed model. It would have been obvious to one skilled in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to include the neural network of Xu on the NPU of Xue, because a neural network on an NPU quickly processes input information (see Xu, paragraph [0788]).
Claim(s) 11 and 25 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Xue in view of Houllier and Sant, in further view of Mahfouz (U.S. Pub. No. 2017/0367766) and Xu.
Regarding Claim 11, Xue in view of Houllier and Sant teaches everything that is claimed above with respect to Claim 1. Xue does not specifically teach wherein the UWB tag device includes a component configured to measure six (6) degrees of freedom (6DoF) data. However, Mahfouz teaches in paragraph [0199] that 6DoF data may be used to track movement with high accuracy. It would have been obvious to one skilled in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to include the 6D0F data of Mahfouz in the system of Xue, because 6DoF data accurately captures orientation and movements (see Mahfouz, paragraph [0199]).
Xue and Mahfouz do not specifically teach the initiating of the action by the device includes determining the action to initiate using a model having the second coordinate and the 6DoF data as input. However, Xue does teach at the top of page 14 that a neural-network processing unit (NPU) may be used. Further, Xu teaches in paragraph [0788] that an NPU includes a neural network that performs continuous self-learning, which is equated to the claimed model. It would have been obvious to one skilled in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to include the neural network of Xu on the NPU of Xue, and to have the neural network process 6DOF data that is taught in Mahfouz and second coordinate data that is taught in Xue, because a neural network on an NPU quickly processes input information (see Xu, paragraph [0788]).
Regarding Claim 25, Xue in view of Houllier and Sant teaches everything that is claimed above with respect to Claim 15. Xue does not specifically teach wherein the UWB tag device includes a component configured to measure six (6) degrees of freedom (6DoF) data. However, Mahfouz teaches in paragraph [0199] that 6DoF data may be used to track movement with high accuracy. It would have been obvious to one skilled in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to include the 6D0F data of Mahfouz in the system of Xue, because 6DoF data accurately captures orientation and movements (see Mahfouz, paragraph [0199]).
Xue and Mahfouz do not specifically teach the initiating of the action by the device includes determining the action to initiate using a model having the second coordinate and the 6DoF data as input. However, Xue does teach at the top of page 14 that a neural-network processing unit (NPU) may be used. Further, Xu teaches in paragraph [0788] that an NPU includes a neural network that performs continuous self-learning, which is equated to the claimed model. It would have been obvious to one skilled in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to include the neural network of Xu on the NPU of Xue, and to have the neural network process 6DOF data that is taught in Mahfouz and second coordinate data that is taught in Xue, because a neural network on an NPU quickly processes input information (see Xu, paragraph [0788]).
Prior Art of Record
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to Applicant’s disclosure.
Veselinovic et al (U.S. Pat. No. 11558693) teaches that cartesian coordinates may be readily converted into spherical coordinates, and vice versa, as needed, in column 8, lines 45-47, and column 19, lines 20-22)
Huang et al (U.S. Pub. No. 2020/0279170) teaches converting spherical coordinates to cartesian coordinates in paragraphs [0104] and [0141].
Zhang et al (U.S. Pub. No. 2020/0191913) teaches converting polar coordinates to cartesian coordinates in paragraph [0125].
Oswald (U.S. Pub. No. 2008/0204322) teaches readily converting polar coordinates into two or three dimensional Cartesian coordinates in a UWB system in paragraphs [0045] and [0193].
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 1/21/2026 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive. Regarding the 101 rejections, the Examiner does not deem the claim amendments to overcome the rejections. Updated rejections of the amended claims are provided above.
Applicant’s arguments with respect the prior art rejections have been considered but are moot because the new ground of rejection does not rely on any reference applied in the prior rejection of record for any teaching or matter specifically challenged in the argument. It is noted that converting range/angle, or polar, coordinates to cartesian coordinates, which is what is disclosed in Applicant’s Specification as filed (see at least paragraphs [0043] and [0057]) is common in the art (see the references cited in the Prior Art of Record section, above).
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 CYNTHIA L DAVIS whose telephone number is (571)272-1599. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday, 7am to 3pm.
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, Shelby A Turner can be reached at 571-272-6334. 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.
/CYNTHIA L DAVIS/Examiner, Art Unit 2857
/SHELBY A TURNER/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2857