DETAILED ACTION
Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status
The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
Response to Amendment
In the amendments filed January 5th, 2026, the following has occurred: claims 24-37, 41-42, and 47 have been amended; claims 24-37 and 41-47 remain pending in this application.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 103 which forms the basis for all obviousness rejections set forth in this Office action:
A patent for a claimed invention may not be obtained, notwithstanding that the claimed invention is not identically disclosed as set forth in section 102, if the differences between the claimed invention and the prior art are such that the claimed invention as a whole would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which the claimed invention pertains. Patentability shall not be negated by the manner in which the invention was made.
The factual inquiries for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows:
1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art.
2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue.
3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art.
4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness.
Claim(s) 24, 26-27, 33, 35, and 37 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Jin et al.( US 20140108780 A1, “Jin”) in view of Ackerman et al. (US 5539705 A, “Ackerman”) and Peng et al. (US 20080304361 A1, “Peng”).
Regarding claim 24, Jin discloses an acoustic many-to-many localization, communication and management method serving a group whose members are moving or maneuvering, the method comprising: distributing plural portable hardware devices to plural group members, moving or maneuvering on land, over a terrain respectively(Fig. 1, [0028] a plurality of mobile devices communicate together via sound signals within a communication region), each device including at least one array of speakers, at least one array of microphones (Fig. 2, [0027] mobile device sound transmitters may include one or more speakers and sound receivers (210) may include one or more microphones), and at least one hardware processor (Fig. 2 (250), all co-located (Fig. 2 illustrates the sound receiver (210) sound transmitter (280) and the control unit (250) all co-located)(it is the examiner’s interpretation that as the communications are taking place between a plurality of mobile devices, they are implicitly serving a group of members who may be moving on land).
Jin may not explicitly teach wherein at least one device's at least one hardware processor P is configured to convert speech e.g. commands, captured by at least one hardware processor P's co-located at least one array of microphones, into ultrasonic signals which travel through air to a device whose at least one hardware processor P' is not co-located with at least one hardware processor P and wherein at least one hardware processor P' is configured to convert the ultrasonic signals, when received, back into sonic signals which are provided to, and played by, the at least one speaker co-located with at least one hardware processor P', thereby to allow a group member co-located with at least one hardware processor P' to hear speech uttered by a group member co-located with at least one hardware processor P; wherein at least one device y from among the plural portable hardware devices sends a localization request signal through air to at least a device x from among the plural portable hardware devices, and wherein device y knows when device y sent said localization request signal and thus when a responsive signal is received from device x, defining a round trip from device y to device x and back to device y, device y computes its own distance from device x, based on duration of the round trip and on the known velocity of sound..
Ackerman teaches wherein at least one device's at least one hardware processor P is configured to convert speech e.g. commands, captured by at least one hardware processor P's co-located at least one array of microphones, into ultrasonic signals which travel to a device whose at least one hardware processor P' is not co-located with at least one hardware processor P and wherein at least one hardware processor P' is configured to convert the ultrasonic signals, when received, back into sonic signals which are provided to, and played by, the at least one speaker co-located with at least one hardware processor P', thereby to allow a group member co-located with at least one hardware processor P' to hear speech uttered by a group member co-located with at least one hardware processor P. ([column 6, lines 26-33], ultrasonic transmitting device receives sound signals such as voice signals at a microphone)([columns 7-9] describe the ultrasonic receiving device’s operation culminating in [column 9, lines 5-16], where a reproduction of the original audio signal is played at the device speaker)(it is the examiner’s interpretation that the respective processors of Jin are capable of coordinating the communications described in Ackerman)
Therefore, it would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art of acoustic communications systems, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to modify the method of Jin to include the voice communication functionality of Ackerman with a reasonable expectation of success, with the motivation of allowing voice communications across a variety of transmission mediums [column 1, lines 10-20].
Jin, as modified in view of Ackerman may not explicitly teach wherein at least one device y from among the plural portable hardware devices sends a localization request through air signal to at least a device x from among the plural portable hardware devices, and wherein device y knows when device y sent said localization request signal and thus when a responsive signal is received from device x, defining a round trip from device y to device x and back to device y, device y computes its own distance from device x, based on duration of the round trip and on the known velocity of sound.
Peng teaches wherein at least one device y from among the plural portable hardware devices sends a localization request signal through air to at least a device x from among the plural portable hardware devices, and wherein device y knows when device y sent said localization request signal and thus when a responsive signal is received from device x, defining a round trip from device y to device x and back to device y, device y computes its own distance from device x, based on duration of the round trip and on the known velocity of sound ([0035]-[0036], acoustic ranging procedure begins with a first device emitting an acoustic signal and in response to receiving a first acoustic signal, a second device emits an acoustic signal and the differences in the time of arrival of both signals allows the devices to calculate a distance between them)([0040], illustrates equations used in order to calculate the times of arrival and therefore the distance, which includes accounting for the speed of sound)([0060] possible sources of error include propagation speed of sound in air varying with temperature and humidity, however their impacts are negligible and are mitigated by taking temperature and humidity into consideration)(it is the examiner’s interpretation that as the propagation speed of sound through air is compensated for temperature and humidity, that this means the transmission of signals implicitly takes place through the air).
Therefore, it would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art of acoustic communications systems, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to modify the method of Jin, as modified in view of Ackerman, to include the self-ranging functionality of Peng with a reasonable expectation of success, with the motivation of allowing the distance between devices to be computed [0036].
Regarding claim 26, Jin, as modified in view of Ackerman and Peng teaches the method of claim 24. Jin further teaches wherein plural devices d2 broadcast localization response signals respectively assigned only to them and not to any other device from among the plural devices. ([0028], if a device is the intended target recipient of the encoded message, it will decode the transmission and send a response)
Regarding claim 27, Jin, as modified in view of Ackerman and Peng teaches the method of claim 24. Jin further teaches wherein the hardware processor in at least one device dl from among the devices controls dl's at least one array of speakers to at least once broadcast a first signal ("localization request signal") at a time wherein at least one of the hardware processors in device dl at least once computes at least one of angle and distance between d2 and dl thereby to monitor locations of other group members who may be on the move.([0079], a first mobile device sends a communications request to another mobile device and receives a response from the second mobile device)([0034] when a sound signal is received by the first mobile device, the location of each source of the received signals is determined.)([0058], if using a mobile device with two microphones, a direction to a sound source may be determined. When using a mobile device with three microphones, a precise location of a mobile device may be determined)(it is the examiners interpretation that the use of 3 microphones in the mobile device would allow the relative position and direction to between mobile devices to be determined, and that the direction is equivalent to an angular value)
Regarding claim 33, Jin, as modified in view of Ackerman and Peng teaches the method of claim 24. Jin further teaches wherein said at least one microphone array includes at least 3 microphones, thereby to facilitate triangulation and wherein each device is configured to use triangulation to discern azimuthal orientation of at least one group member.([0034] when a sound signal is received by the first mobile device, the location of each source of the received signals is determined.)([0058], if using a mobile device with two microphones, a direction to a sound source may be determined. When using a mobile device with three microphones, a precise location of a mobile device may be determined)(it is the examiners interpretation that the use of 3 microphones in the mobile device would allow the relative position and direction to between mobile devices to be determined, and that the direction is equivalent to an angular value)
Regarding claim 35, Jin, as modified in view of Ackerman and Peng teaches the method of claim 24. Ackerman further teaches which has human-to-human communication functionality which provides group members with an ability to speak to each other in natural language.([column 6, lines 26-33], ultrasonic transmitting device receives sound signals such as voice signals at a microphone)([columns 7-9] describe the ultrasonic receiving device’s operation culminating in [column 9, lines 5-16], where a reproduction of the original audio signal is played at the device speaker)
Regarding claim 37, Jin, as modified in view of Ackerman and Peng teaches the method of claim 24. Jin further teaches which has device-to-device communication functionality which communicates data generated by an individual group member's at least one hardware processor, to at least one hardware processor in a device distributed to at least one group member other than said individual group member. ([0028], mobile device 110 generates an encoded message and broadcasts a sound signal to other mobile devices in the communication region and a target device will then decodes the message if it is determined to be the intended recipient)(it is the examiner’s interpretation that a message is a type of data)
Claim(s) 25 and 41 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Jin in view of Ackerman, Peng, and Harrel et al. (US 8644113 B2, “Harrel”).
Regarding claim 25, Jin, as modified in view of Ackerman and Peng teaches the method of claim 24. Jin, as modified in view of Ackerman and Peng may not explicitly teach wherein the at least one hardware processor in one device d2 from among the devices controls d2's at least one array of speakers is configured to do the following each time d2's at least one array of microphones receives a localization request signal: to broadcast2a second signal ("localization response signal"), at a time t b which is separated by a value deltaT, known to the at least one hardware processor in device dl, from a time at which d2's at least one array of microphones receives the localization request signal and wherein the same value deltaT is used by d2 each time d2's at least one array microphone receives a localization request signal.
Harrel teaches wherein the at least one hardware processor in one device d2 from among the devices controls d2's at least one array of speakers is configured to do the following each time d2's at least one array of microphones receives a localization request signal: to broadcast2a second signal ("localization response signal"), at a time t b which is separated by a value deltaT, known to the at least one hardware processor in device dl, from a time at which d2's at least one array of microphones receives the localization request signal and wherein the same value deltaT is used by d2 each time d2's at least one array microphone receives a localization request signal. ([column 8, lines 63-67]-[column 9, lines 1-6], each signal source emits its respective signal during its own timeslot in order to improve the efficiency and reliability of signal correlation)
Therefore, it would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art of acoustic communications systems, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to modify the method of Jin, as modified in view of Ackerman and Peng, to include the known transmission delays of Harrel with a reasonable expectation of success, with the motivation of correlating the ultrasonic signals sent between devices [column 8, lines 63-67]-[column 9, lines 1-6].
Regarding claim 41, Jin, as modified in view of Ackerman, Peng, and Harrel teaches the method of claim 25. Harrel further teaches wherein the value deltaT (AT) used by any given one of the plural devices d2 is different from the value deltaT (AT) used by any other of the plural devices d2, thereby to reduce interference between plural localization response signals being received by device dl. ([column 8, lines 63-67]-[column 9, lines 1-6], each signal source emits its respective signal during its own timeslot in order to improve the efficiency and reliability of signal correlation)
Claim(s) 28 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Jin in view of Ackerman, Peng, and Hosny (US 7135968 B2, “Hosny”).
Regarding claim 28, Jin, as modified in view of Ackerman and Peng teaches the method of claim 24. Jin, as modified in view of Ackerman and Peng, may not explicitly teach wherein dl's at least one hardware processor is operative to control dl's at least one array of speaker to send an alert to d2, to be played by d2's at least one array speaker, if the distance between d2 and dl answers a criterion indicating that d2 is almost outside of dl's range.
Hosny teaches wherein dl's at least one hardware processor is operative to control dl's at least one array of speaker to send an alert to d2, to be played by d2's at least one array speaker, if the distance between d2 and dl answers a criterion indicating that d2 is almost outside of dl's range. ([column 4, lines 20-26], teaches ultrasonic transmitter and receiver are configured to trigger an alarm when the distance between the transmitter and receiver are greater than a specified distance)(it is the examiner’s interpretation that the specified distance may be set to a value before the devices are out of each other’s range)([column 3, lines 33-36] the alarm may be audio/visual and can indicate to other travelers that the luggage left behind does not belong to any of the present travelers)(it is the examiner’s interpretation that the receiver indicating the alarm state would be readily applicable to hardware device d2 being almost out of the range of hardware device d1)
Therefore, it would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art of acoustic communications systems, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to modify the method of Jin, as modified in view of Ackerman and Peng, to include the distance threshold alarm of Hosny with a reasonable expectation of success, with the motivation of notifying a group member that they are almost out of range from the group.
Claim(s) 29-31, 34, and 36 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Jin in view of Ackerman, Peng, and Chung (US 20200088835 A1, “Chung”).
Regarding claim 29, Jin, as modified in view of Ackerman and Peng teaches the method of claim 24. Jin, as modified in view of Ackerman and Peng, may not explicitly teach wherein the system has location marking functionality including providing oral prompts aiding group members to navigate to a location that has been marked.
Chung teaches wherein the system has location marking functionality including providing oral prompts aiding group members to navigate to a location that has been marked. ([0032]-[0034] group devices may determine a member of the group is missing and prompt other group devices to navigate to look for a missing group member)
Therefore, it would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art of acoustic communications systems, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to modify the method of Jin, as modified in view of Ackerman and Peng, to include the missing group member prompt of Chung with a reasonable expectation of success, with the motivation of improving the efficiency of rescue efforts [0032].
Regarding claim 30, Jin, as modified in view of Ackerman and Peng teaches the method of claim 24. Jin, as modified in view of Ackerman and Peng, may not explicitly teach wherein the system has homing functionality including providing oral prompts aiding all group members to navigate toward a single group member.
Chung teaches wherein the system has homing functionality including providing oral prompts aiding all group members to navigate toward a single group member. (Implicit, [0034] group devices may send a prompt instructing group members to meet at a particular location)(it is the examiner’s interpretation that the instruction prompts telling members to meet at a particular location includes that location being a position of a single group member).
Therefore, it would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art of acoustic communications systems, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to modify the method of Jin, as modified in view of Ackerman and Peng, to include the missing group member prompt of Chung with a reasonable expectation of success, with the motivation of coordinating the efforts of all members of an outdoor activity group [0034].
Regarding claim 31, Jin, as modified in view of Ackerman and Peng teaches the method of claim 24. Jin, as modified in view of Ackerman and Peng, may not explicitly teach wherein a group has a known total number of members and wherein the system has roll call or group member counting functionality which provides alerts to at least one group member when a depleted number of group members, less than the known total number of members, is recorded.
Chung teaches wherein a group has a known total number of members and wherein the system has roll call or group member counting functionality which provides alerts to at least one group member when a depleted number of group members, less than the known total number of members, is recorded.([0032]-[0034] utilizing a relay transmission system, group devices may determine a member of the group is missing and prompt other group devices to navigate to look for a missing group member)(it is the examiner’s interpretation that the period relay transmissions are equivalent to a roll call function)
Therefore, it would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art of acoustic communications systems, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to modify the method of Jin, as modified in view of Ackerman and Peng, to include the roll call function of Chung with a reasonable expectation of success, with the motivation of improving the efficiency of rescue efforts [0032].
Regarding claim 34, Jin, as modified in view of Ackerman and Peng teaches the method of claim 33. Jin, as modified in view of Ackerman and Peng, may not explicitly wherein the system provides at least one alert to at least one group member when at least one group member is azimuthally off course.
Chung teaches wherein the system provides at least one alert to at least one group member when at least one group member is azimuthally off course.([0032]-[0034] utilizing a relay transmission system, group devices may determine a member of the group is missing and prompt other group devices to navigate to look for a missing group member)(it is the examiner’s interpretation that a group member being missing includes the situation in which a group member is azimuthally off course).
Therefore, it would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art of acoustic communications systems, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to modify the method of Jin, as modified in view of Ackerman and Peng, to include the off course notification of Chung with a reasonable expectation of success, with the motivation of improving the efficiency of rescue efforts [0032].
Regarding claim 36, Jin, as modified in view of Ackerman and Peng, teaches the method of claim 24. Jin, as modified in view of Ackerman and Peng, may not explicitly teach, which has device-to-human communication functionality which presents a command provided by an individual group member's at least one hardware processor, to group members other than said individual group member.
Chung teaches which has device-to-human communication functionality which presents a command provided by an individual group member's hardware processor, to group members other than said individual group member.([0025] operating unit of an interconnected device can send a help message or action instruction to other interconnected devices in the group)
Therefore, it would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art of acoustic communications systems, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to modify the method of Jin, as modified in view of Ackerman and Peng, to include the action instruction function of Chung with a reasonable expectation of success, with the motivation of providing an emergency call or instructing the itinerary of the team [0032].
Claim(s) 32 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Jin in view of Ackerman, Peng, and Baxter et al. (US 20110069585 A1, “Baxter”).
Regarding claim 32, Jin, as modified in view of Ackerman and Peng, teaches the method of claim 24. Jin, as modified in view of Ackerman, may not explicitly teach wherein the system has threat detection and localization functionality which provides alerts to at least one group member when a learned acoustic signature of a threat is sensed by at least one group member's at least one array of microphones.
Baxter teaches wherein the system has threat detection and localization functionality which provides alerts to at least one group member when a learned acoustic signature of a threat is sensed by at least one group member's at least one array of microphones. ([0034] based on when a gunshot occurs, the sound reaches the sensors at different times, and based on the differences in the arrival times, the location of a gunshot is provided to device 120)([0036], acoustic sensor (102) contains a microphone (404) for receiving acoustic information)
Therefore, it would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art of acoustic communications systems, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to modify the method of Jin, as modified in view of Ackerman and Peng, to include the threat detection of Baxter with a reasonable expectation of success, with the motivation of identifying the origin of a gunshot [0003].
Claim(s) 42 and 47 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Jin in view of Peng.
Regarding claim 42, Jin discloses an acoustic many-to-many localization, communication and management method serving a group whose members are moving or maneuvering(Fig. 1, [0028] a plurality of mobile devices communicate together via sound signals within a communication region), the method comprising: providing plural portable hardware devices for distribution to plural group members respectively, each device including at least one array of speakers, at least one array of microphones, and at least one hardware processor, all co-located(Fig. 2, [0027] mobile device sound transmitters may include one or more speakers and sound receivers (210) may include one or more microphones)(Fig. 2 (250) (Fig. 2 illustrates the sound receiver (210) sound transmitter (280) and the control unit (250) all co-located), wherein the at least one hardware processor in at least one device dl from among the devices controls dl's speaker to at least once broadcast a first signal ("localization request signal") at a time and wherein the at least one hardware processor in device dl at least once computes at least one of angle and distance between d2 and dl thereby to monitor locations of other group members who may be on the move. ([0079], a first mobile device sends a communications request to another mobile device and receives a response from the second mobile device)([0034] when a sound signal is received by the first mobile device, the location of each source of the received signals is determined.)([0058], if using a mobile device with two microphones, a direction to a sound source may be determined. When using a mobile device with three microphones, a precise location of a mobile device may be determined)(it is the examiners interpretation that the use of 3 microphones in the mobile device would allow the relative position and direction to between mobile devices to be determined, and that the direction is equivalent to an angular value)
Jin may not explicitly teach wherein at least one device y from among the plural portable hardware devices sends a localization request signal to at least a device x from among the plural portable hardware devices, and wherein device y knows when device y sent said localization request signal and thus when a responsive signal is received from device x, defining a round trip from device y to device x and back to device y, device y computes its own distance from device x, based a on duration of the round trip and on the known velocity of sound.
Peng teaches wherein at least one device y from among the plural portable hardware devices sends a localization request signal to at least a device x from among the plural portable hardware devices, and wherein device y knows when device y sent said localization request signal and thus when a responsive signal is received from device x, defining a round trip from device y to device x and back to device y, device y computes its own distance from device x, based on a duration of the round trip and on the known velocity of sound. ([0035]-[0036], acoustic ranging procedure begins with a first device emitting an acoustic signal and in response to receiving a first acoustic signal, a second device emits an acoustic signal and the differences in the time of arrival of both signals allows the devices to calculate a distance between them)([0040], illustrates equations used in order to calculate the times of arrival and therefore the distance, which includes accounting for the speed of sound).
Therefore, it would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art of acoustic communications systems, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to modify the method of Jin, to include the self-ranging functionality of Peng with a reasonable expectation of success, with the motivation of allowing the distance between devices to be computed [0036].
Regarding claim 47, the claim is a CRM claim corresponding to claim 42 and is therefore rejected for the same reasons.
Claim(s) 43-46 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Jin in view of Peng and Rowe (US 20050219950 A1, “Rowe”).
Regarding claim 43, Jin, as modified in view of Peng teaches a method according to claim 42. Jin, as modified in view of Peng, may not explicitly teach and wherein at least one device possesses independent location knowledge and wherein at least one group members relative location monitored by the method is transformed into an absolute location using said independent location knowledge .
Rowe teaches wherein at least one device possesses independent location knowledge and wherein at least one group members relative location monitored by the method is transformed into an absolute location using said independent location knowledge.([0016], one of the communicators may be configured to include a GPS receiving means to calculate its own position, and utilize the GPS data as well as range and bearing data reported by one of the other communicators to get absolute positions of other communicators in the network)
Therefore, it would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art of acoustic communications systems, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to modify the method of Jin, as modified in view of Peng to include the absolute position transformation of Rowe with a reasonable expectation of success, with the motivation of determining an absolute coordinate position of other communicators in the network [0016].
Regarding claim 44, Jin, as modified in view of Peng and Rowe teaches a method according to claim 43. Rowe further teaches wherein said independent location knowledge comprises GPS data.([0016], one of the communicators may be configured to include a GPS receiving means to calculate its own position, and utilize the GPS data as well as range and bearing data reported by one of the other communicators to get absolute positions of other communicators in the network)
Regarding claim 45, Jin, as modified in view of Peng and Rowe teaches a method according to claim 43. Rowe further teaches wherein localization of all group members is provided even while on the move, using only one reference device.([0016], one of the communicators may be configured to include a GPS receiving means to calculate its own position, and utilize the GPS data as well as range and bearing data reported by one of the other communicators to get absolute positions of other communicators in the network)([0008], A particular embodiment includes multiple "communicators" configured to be associated with (e.g., worn by or carried by) one or more divers or other personnel in an environment)(it is the examiner’s interpretation that the use of the communicators in a diving environment implicitly means its capable of use while on the move)
Regarding claim 46, Jin, as modified in view of Peng teaches a method according to claim 42. Jin, as modified in view of Peng, may not explicitly teach and wherein all relative locations are transformed into absolute locations, thereby to facilitate localization of all group members even while on the move, using but a single reference device.
Rowe teaches wherein all relative locations are transformed into absolute locations, thereby to facilitate localization of all group members even while on the move, using but a single reference device.([0016], one of the communicators may be configured to include a GPS receiving means to calculate its own position, and utilize the GPS data as well as range and bearing data reported by one of the other communicators to get absolute positions of other communicators in the network)([0008], A particular embodiment includes multiple "communicators" configured to be associated with (e.g., worn by or carried by) one or more divers or other personnel in an environment)(it is the examiner’s interpretation that the use of the communicators in a diving environment implicitly means its capable of use while on the move)
Therefore, it would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art of acoustic communications systems, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to modify the method of Jin, as modified in view of Peng, to include the absolute position transformation of Rowe with a reasonable expectation of success, with the motivation of determining an absolute coordinate position of other communicators in the network [0016].
Response to Arguments
The request for reconsideration has been considered but does NOT place the application in condition for allowance because: On pg. 1-4 of Applicant’s Remarks, Applicant argues that Jin as modified in view of Ackerman and Peng fails to teach the limitations of claim 24 for the following reasons:
Ackerman teaches the medium across which communication takes place may be liquid, solid, or air, instead of just air
Ackerman teaches the communication takes place across multiple media
With respect to (1) the examiner agrees that Ackerman teaches that the communication may take place across liquids, solids, or air, however it is the examiners interpretation that Ackerman’s ability to communicate over different media does not preclude Ackerman from reading upon the limitations. For example, Ackerman at [column 6, lines 5-12] teaches that the invention of Ackerman is particularly well-suited for focused directional communications through air for distances of approximately 100-150 feet. It is the examiner’s interpretation that the cited portion of Ackerman teaches that the communication medium being air is the preferred method of communication.
With respect to (2), the examiners disagrees that Ackerman teaches the communication takes place across multiple media during operation, however Ackerman still explicitly teaches the communication takes place through the air. For example, Ackerman at [column 6, lines 5-12] teaches that the invention of Ackerman is particularly well-suited for focused directional communications through air for distances of approximately 100-150 feet, and that there are alternative use cases in which depending on the application of the invention, the carrier media may be a solid or liquid. Therefore the rejection of claim 24 under 35 U.S.C. 103 is maintained.
On pg. 4 of Applicant’s Remarks, Applicant argues that given the alleged allowability of claim 24, claims 26-27 and 29-37 are therefore in condition for allowance. As noted in the response to arguments above for claim 24, the claim is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 and therefore so are the rejections of claims 26-27 and 29-37.
On pg. 5 of Applicant’s Remarks, Applicant argues that Jin in view of Peng fails to teach the limitations of claim 42 for the following reasons:
Peng doe not supply sufficient motivation to combine with Jin to teach the limitations regarding the localization signal request
The examiner fails to denote which prior art the motivation statement with relation to Peng’s teachings corresponds to
There is insufficient motivation to combine Jin and Peng as Jin already teaches distance determination between devices
With respect to (1) the examiner respectfully disagrees that Peng does not provide sufficient motivation to combine with Jin. While Jin may teach distance determination between devices takes place, Jin does not explicitly teach that the determination takes place as a result of a coordinated localization request process. Peng at [0036] teaches the exchange of signals (interpreted to be equivalent to a localization request signal) between two devices in which the time of arrival is calculated at both devices and a distance between the two devices is calculated. As the teaching of Jin doesn’t explicitly state the distance determination process includes the localization request process, one of ordinary skill in the art would be motivated to combine the teachings of Jin to include the ranging process of Peng with the motivation to determine distances between devices using time differences of arrivals to generate accurate distance values. Further Peng at [0089] teaches that the localization process for acoustic ranging supplies further benefits such as generating a schedule to which devices emit their respective signals to prevent possible collisions, and allowing a specific devices signal to be identifiably based on its respective emission slot.
With respect to (2) the examiner respectfully disagrees that the motivation statement doesn’t indicate which prior art the motivation statement corresponds to, as the motivation statement is supplied directly after introducing the limitations in which Peng teaches.
With respect to (3), the examiner agrees that Jin teaches determination of distances between devices, however Jin does not explicitly teach the required limitations regarding the localization request signal. Therefore one of ordinary skill in the art would have sufficient motivation to include the acoustic ranging process of Peng. For example, [0036] teaches the exchange of signals (interpreted to be equivalent to a localization request signal) between two devices in which the time of arrival is calculated at both devices and a distance between the two devices is calculated. As the teaching of Jin doesn’t explicitly state the distance determination process includes the localization request process, one of ordinary skill in the art would be motivated to combine the teachings of Jin to include the ranging process of Peng with the motivation to determine distances between devices using time differences of arrivals to generate accurate distance values. Further Peng at [0089] teaches that the localization process for acoustic ranging supplies further benefits such as generating a schedule to which devices emit their respective signals to prevent possible collisions, and allowing a specific devices signal to be identifiably based on its respective emission slot. Therefore the rejection of claims 42 and 47 under 35 U.S.C. 103 are maintained.
On pg. 4 of Applicant’s Remarks, Applicant argues that given the alleged allowability of claim 42, claims 43-46 are therefore in condition for allowance. As noted in the response to arguments above for claim 42, the claim is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 and therefore so are the rejections of claims 43-46.
Conclusion
Prior art made of record though not relied upon in the present basis of rejection are noted in the attached PTO 892 and include:
Chu et al. (U.S. Patent No. 9674661) which discloses device-to-device relative localization using audio signals
Harding et al. (U.S. Patent Application No. 20180332432) which discloses sharing navigation data among co-located computing devices
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to CHRISTOPHER RICHARD WALKER whose telephone number is (571)272-6136. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday 7:30 am - 5:00 pm.
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, Yuqing Xiao can be reached on 571-270-3603. 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.
/CHRISTOPHER RICHARD WALKER/Examiner, Art Unit 3645
/YUQING XIAO/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3645