DETAILED ACTION
Non-Final Rejection
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 .
Benefit of an Earlier Filing
Acknowledgment is made of applicant’s claim for foreign priority under 35 U.S.C. 119 (a)-(d). The certified copy has been filed in Foreign Application No. (GB) 210374.3 filed on 1st February, 2021.
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on 01/24/2024, 07/25/2023 are in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statements are being considered by the examiner.
Election/Restriction
Applicant’s election without traverse of Group 2, Claim(s) 23-24, 27, and 29, drawn to a system arranged to image at least one passive object within a surrounding structure having a plurality of surfaces with an array of ultrasonic transmitters in the reply filed on 9/25/2025 is acknowledged.
Specification
The lengthy specification (more than 20 pages) has not been checked to the extent necessary to determine the presence of all possible minor errors. Applicant's cooperation is requested in correcting any errors of which applicant may become aware in the specification.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status.
The following is a quotation of the appropriate paragraphs of 35 U.S.C. 102 that form the basis for the rejections under this section made in this Office action:
A person shall be entitled to a patent unless –
(a)(1) the claimed invention was patented, described in a printed publication, or in public use, on sale or otherwise available to the public before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
(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.
Claim(s) 23-24 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102“(a)(1)” or “(a)(2)” or both as being anticipated by Cheatham (US 2015/0331102 A1).
Referring to Claim(s) 1-22, (Canceled).
Referring to Claim 23, Cheatham teaches a system (positioning system 110) arranged to image at least one passive object within a surrounding structure having a plurality of surfaces, the system comprising:
an array of ultrasonic transmitters (first plurality of transducers 112) arranged to transmit ([0085]: “the positioning system 110 may include an array of transducers [...] configured to transmit and/or receive ultrasound”) an ultrasonic signal (ultrasound 120) into the surrounding structure ([0083]-[0084]: “The ultrasound 120 may be transmitted directly or indirectly toward persons 151, 152, and 153 in a group 150 within a bounded region 100 which is bounded by a floor 141, a left wall 142, a back wall 143, a right wall 144, a ceiling 145 and a front wall (not shown), see fig. 1 and 2); and
an array of ultrasonic receivers (second plurality of transducers 113) arranged to receive reflections from the passive object ([0085]; [0094]);
wherein the system is arranged to steer the ultrasonic signal ([0084]: The positioning system 110 may transmit the ultrasound 120 as directional ultrasonic pulses”) using stored data relating to a position of at least one of said surfaces ([0050]: “the direction of a reflected beam (and hence directional characteristics of its delivered positional information) can be determined by knowledge of the orientation of the reflecting surface”, wherein the orientation of the reflecting surface is data “relating to” its position, e.g. a wall surface has a different orientation than a ceiling surface; [0084] and fig. 1 and 2: “The positioning system 110 may transmit the ultrasound 120 as directional ultrasonic pulses [...] The ultrasound 120 may be transmitted directly toward the persons 151, 152, and 153. The ultrasound 120 may be transmitted indirectly toward the persons 151, 152, and 153”; [0098] and fig. 4; wherein, it is implicit that information, i.e. stored data, about the position of a wall is necessary for emitting a directional pulse towards said wall) such that the ultrasonic signal includes at least one reflection off a surrounding structure surface ([0087] and fig. 2A: “ultrasound 225 is transmitted toward a surface bounding the region 200”).
Referring to Claim 24, Cheatham teaches the system of claim 23, having a single array comprising separate transmitters and receivers therein ([0085]: “the positioning system includes a first plurality of transducers 112 (or a single transducer) for transmitting ultrasound and a second plurality of transducers 113 (or a single transducer) for receiving ultrasound”; [0114]: “[…] include one or more ultrasonic transmitters and/or ultrasonic receivers and the transmitters and receivers may be physically joined (as illustrated in FIG. 7C) or they may be separated and even possible positioned in disparate locations within the region”).
Referring to Claim(s) 25-26, (Canceled).
Referring to Claim 28, teaches (Canceled).
Referring to Claim 30, teaches (Canceled).
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
This application currently names joint inventors. In considering patentability of the claims the examiner presumes that the subject matter of the various claims was commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the claimed invention(s) absent any evidence to the contrary. Applicant is advised of the obligation under 37 CFR 1.56 to point out the inventor and effective filing dates of each claim that was not commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the later invention in order for the examiner to consider the applicability of 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(C) for any potential 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) prior art against the later invention.
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 set forth in Graham v. John Deere Co., 383 U.S. 1, 148 USPQ 459 (1966), that are applied for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows:
Determining the scope and contents of the prior art.
Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue.
Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art.
Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness.
Claim(s) 27 and 29 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Tashev (US 2017/0300124 A1).
Referring to Claim 27, Cheatham teaches The system of claim 23, but doesn’t explicitly teach wherein the receiver array comprises Micro-Electro-Mechanical System microphones.
Tashev teaches the receiver array comprises Micro-Electro-Mechanical System microphones ([0024]: “the transmitter may be a piezoelectric transducer placed at the center of an 8-element array of receivers such as microelectromechanical systems (“MEMS”) microphones”).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the system disclosed in Cheatham with receiver array taught in Tashev with a reasonable expectation of success because it would have easily measured the directional response or beam patterns of the microphones and simplifying calibration by essentially isolating angular distance attenuation.
Referring to Claim 29, Cheatham teaches the system of claim 23, wherein the transmitter array has a spacing between the transmitters equivalent to a half-wavelength of a sound wave in the ultrasonic frequency range ([0111]-[0113]; Fig. 7A-7C: “spacing between the arcs representing the ultrasound 720 and 740 is representative of the wavelength and/or frequency of the ultrasound”); however, Cheatham doesn’t explicitly each the receiver array is a microphone array having a peak response in the audible frequency range
Tashev each the receiver array is a microphone array having a peak response in the audible frequency range ([0004]: “The UGR system may transmit an ultrasonic chirp and collect samples at sample intervals via a microphone array”; [0025]-[0026]: “In some embodiments, the UGR system may employ an ultrasonic signal that has the following characteristics: (a) its auto-correlation has one sharp peak for easier detection of echoes using the cross-correlation method”; [0033]: “The UGR system extracts the depth d* by finding the peaks in the cross-correlation”; [0048]: “wherein the microphone collects samples from ultrasonic chirps; thereby, showing the array is responsive to ultrasonic frequencies”);
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the system disclosed in Cheatham with transmitter array taught in Tashev with a reasonable expectation of success because it would have enabled simultaneous detection of user voice (audible) and gestures (ultrasonic); thereby, improving audible and ultrasonic detection reliability,
Examiner’s Note
Examiner has pointed out particular references contained in the prior art of record in the body of this action for the convenience of the Applicant. However, any citation to specific, pages, columns, lines, or figures in the prior art references and any interpretation of the references should not be considered to be limiting in any way. A reference is relevant for all it contains and may be relied upon for all that it would have reasonably suggested to one having ordinary skill in the art. In re Heck, 699 F.2d 1331, 1332-33, 216 USPQ 1038, 1039 (Fed. Cir. 1983) (quoting In re Lemelson, 397 F.2d 1006, 1009, 158 USPQ 275, 277 (CCPA 1968)). Applicant, in preparing the response, should consider fully the entire reference as potentially teaching all or part of the claimed invention, as well as the context of the passage as taught by the prior art or disclosed by the Examiner.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to AMIE M N'DURE whose telephone number is (571)272-6031. The examiner can normally be reached 8AM-5:30PM.
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, Isam Alsomire can be reached at 571-272-6970. 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.
/AMIE M NDURE/ Examiner, Art Unit 3645
/DANIEL L MURPHY/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3645