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 .
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.
Claim 14 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 101 because claim 21 is directed to non-statutory subject matter. Claims 14 is directed to a computer program product which is understood as computer/software program per se. Computer software does not fall within at least one of the four categories of patent eligible subject matter recited in 35 U.S.C § 101 (process, machine, manufacture or composition of matter). See Gottschalk v. Benson, 409 U.S. at 72, 175 USPQ at 676-77.
Claim 15 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 101 because the claimed invention is directed to non-statutory subject matter. Claims 15 is directed to a computer readable storage medium, which is non-statutory unless claimed as a non-transitory storage medium. The specification doesn’t specify the computer readable storage medium as a non-transitory computer readable medium. Thus one of ordinary skill in the art can interpret the claims as transitory forms of computer readable media. (See In re Nuijten, 500 F.3d 1346,1356-57 (Fed. Cir. 2007) and Interim Examination Instructions for Evaluating Subject Matter Eligibility Under 35 USC 101, Aug. 24, 2009; p.2.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(b):
(b) CONCLUSION.—The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph:
The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the applicant regards as his invention.
Claims 1-15 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor (or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the applicant), regards as the invention.
The metes and bounds of the claimed invention are not clear and hence the claims are indefinite. The language of the claim was given a broadest reasonable interpretation. The boundaries of the protected subject matter are not clearly delineated and the scope is unclear. Because claims delineate the patentee’s right to exclude, the patent statute requires that the scope of the claims be sufficiently definite to inform the public of the bounds of the protected invention, i.e., what subject matter is covered by the exclusive rights of the patent. (See MPEP 2173.02).
Claim 1 recites “consistent latency” which is not defined by the claims and the Applicant’s specification does not provide a standard for ascertaining the requisite degree of such term “consistent latency”, and one of ordinary skill in the art would not be reasonably apprised of the scope of the invention and thereby such term “consistent latency” renders the claim indefinite for that reason.
Claim 11 recites “criticality ranking” which is not defined by the claims and the Applicant’s specification does not provide a standard for ascertaining the requisite degree of such term “criticality ranking”, and one of ordinary skill in the art would not be reasonably apprised of the scope of the invention and thereby such term “criticality ranking” renders the claim indefinite for that reason.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 103 which forms the basis for all obviousness rejections set forth in this Office action:
A patent for a claimed invention may not be obtained, notwithstanding that the claimed invention is not identically disclosed as set forth in section 102, if the differences between the claimed invention and the prior art are such that the claimed invention as a whole would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which the claimed invention pertains. Patentability shall not be negated by the manner in which the invention was made.
The factual inquiries for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows:
1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art.
2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue.
3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art.
4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness.
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.
Claim(s) 1-15 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over US 20220172622 A1 herein Bhakishev in view of US 8996598 B2 herein Krogh in view of US 9602377 B2 herein Agarwal.
Claim 1, Bhakishev discloses a radio frequency system for performing radio frequency based sensing and reacting to an event detected by the radio frequency based sensing (Title, system using RF and sensors for monitoring, thus sensing) [[with a consistent latency or at least with a latency within a latency range around the consistent latency]], wherein the radio frequency system comprises multiple nodes grouped in multiple groups (Fig. 1: sensors 171, 181 and 191 placed in group 195; sensors 120…132 placed in group 196), each of the groups configured for performing radio frequency based sensing in a respective sensing area of multiple sensing areas of the radio frequency system (0003, Fig. 6, with nodes (sensors) spread out in various rooms and a centrally located hub in accordance with one embodiment), wherein the radio frequency system is configured for:
determining a time of flight and RSSI [[latency]] of two or more of the groups for performing radio frequency based sensing and reacting to the event detected by the radio frequency based sensing (0062, time of flight and RSSI measurements for the sensors, thus the groups).
Bhakishev may not explicitly determining a latency of the groups; with a consistent latency or at least with a latency within a latency range around the consistent latency; determining the consistent latency based on the determined latencies, and adapting at least one of the two or more of the groups such that they perform radio frequency based sensing and react to the event detected by the radio frequency based sensing with the consistent latency or at least with a latency within a latency range around the consistent latency.
Krogh discloses determining a latency of the groups (Col 2: 45-55, construct a model of latency effects on the different parameter data and use the model of latency effects to compensate for latency-based differences, thus measuring/estimation of per group sensing and reaction latency). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Bhakishev to include measurement/estimation of sensing and reaction latency and constructing a model of latency effects as taught by Krogh so as to compensate for unwanted affects to outputs of filters (Col 2: 40-44).
Bhakishev may not explicitly disclose with a consistent latency or at least with a latency within a latency range around the consistent latency; determining the consistent latency based on the determined latencies, adapting at least one of the two or more of the groups such that they perform radio frequency based sensing and react to the event detected by the radio frequency based sensing with the consistent latency or at least with a latency within a latency range around the consistent latency.
Agarwal discloses with a consistent latency or at least with a latency within a latency range around the consistent latency (Col 6: 59-67, calculating an estimated latency, thus consistent latency); determining the consistent latency based on the determined latencies (Col 6: 59-67, aggregating latencies and calculating an estimated latency, thus consistent latency), adapting at least one of the two or more of the groups (Col 8: 8-15, adjustment of performance of operations of execution of the applications executing on the first computing device) such that they perform radio frequency based sensing and react to the event detected by the radio frequency based sensing with the consistent latency or at least with a latency within a latency range around the consistent latency (intended result – the clause in a is not given weight when it simply expresses the intended result of a process step positively recited, MPEP 2111.04). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Bhakishev to include calculate an estimated latency as taught by Agarwal so as to allow devices to intelligently adjust execution of applications based on the current latency estimation (Col 8: 44-46).
Claim 2, Bhakishev discloses radio frequency system according to claim 1. Bhakishev may not explicitly disclose wherein the radio frequency system is configured for optimizing the latency of one or more groups with a latency equal to or above the consistent latency in order to minimize the latency range, the consistent latency, or both.
Agarwal discloses wherein the radio frequency system is configured for optimizing the latency of one or more groups with a latency equal to or above the consistent latency (Col 6: 59-67, aggregating latencies and calculating an estimated latency, thus consistent latency) in order to minimize the latency range, the consistent latency, or both (intended use/result - the clause in a is not given weight when it simply expresses the intended result of a process step positively recited, MPEP 2111.04). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Bhakishev to include calculate an estimated latency as taught by Agarwal so as to allow devices to intelligently adjust execution of applications based on the current latency estimation (Col 8: 44-46).
Claim 3, Bakhshev discloses The radio frequency system according to claim 2. Bhakishev may not explicitly disclose wherein the radio frequency system is configured for optimizing the latency of the one or more groups with latency equal to or above the consistent latency based on one or more of: [[-]] increasing a messaging rate, [[-]] increasing transmit power, [[-]] removing one or more nodes of the one or more groups with latency equal to or above the consistent latency, [[-]] adding one or more nodes to the one or more groups with latency equal to or above the consistent latency, [[-]] reducing a radio frequency based sensing activity of one or more groups adjacent to the one or more groups with latency equal to or above the consistent latency, and [[-]] rebalancing wireless communication traffic in order to reduce wireless interference caused by the wireless communication traffic.
Agarwal discloses wherein the radio frequency system is configured for optimizing the latency of the one or more groups with latency equal to or above the consistent latency based on one or more of: [[-]] increasing a messaging rate, [[-]] increasing transmit power, [[-]] removing one or more nodes of the one or more groups with latency equal to or above the consistent latency, [[-]] adding one or more nodes to the one or more groups with latency equal to or above the consistent latency, [[-]] reducing a radio frequency based sensing activity of one or more groups adjacent to the one or more groups with latency equal to or above the consistent latency, and [[-]] rebalancing wireless communication traffic in order to reduce wireless interference caused by the wireless communication traffic (Col 7: 10-18, low signal strength, for example, may correspond to an increased latency). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Bhakishev to include calculate an estimated latency as taught by Agarwal so as to allow devices to intelligently adjust execution of applications based on the current latency estimation (Col 8: 44-46).
Claim 4, Bakhshev discloses The radio frequency system according to claim 1. Bhakishev in view of Krogh in view of Agarwal discloses groups and collection of latencies (see claim 1). Bakishev may not explicitly disclose wherein the radio frequency system is configured for: determining a minimal latency of a group with a highest latency of the determined latencies of the two or more of the groups for performing radio frequency based sensing and reacting to the event detected by the radio frequency based sensing, and determining the consistent latency, the latency range, or both based on the minimal latency.
Agarwal discloses determining a minimal latency of a group (Col 10: 23-31) with a highest latency of the determined latencies of the two or more of the groups for performing radio frequency based sensing and reacting to the event detected by the radio frequency based sensing (Col 6: 59-67, aggregating latencies and calculating an estimated latency, thus consistent latency), and determining the consistent latency, the latency range, or both based on the minimal latency (Col 6: 59-67, aggregating latencies and calculating an estimated latency, thus consistent latency, since the latencies are aggregated thus there must be high latency and minimum latency values). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Bhakishev to include calculate an estimated latency as taught by Agarwal so as to allow devices to intelligently adjust execution of applications based on the current latency estimation (Col 8: 44-46).
Claim 5, Bhakishev discloses The radio frequency system according to claim 1, wherein the radio frequency system is configured for determining the consistent latency, the latency range, or both based on a current context (0003, various applications of sensors).
Claim 6, Bhakishev discloses The radio frequency system according to claim 5, wherein the current context includes one or more of:[[-]] a sensing application of one or more groups, [[-]] a latency requirement of one or more groups, [[-]] an expected event in one or more of the multiple sensing areas, [[-]] a size of one or more of the sensing areas, [[-]] a shape of one or more of the sensing areas, [[-]] a radio power consumption requirement, [[-]] a radio transmit power requirement, [[-]] a radio beam shape requirement, [[-]] a radio receive beamforming requirement, [[-]] a current location of the radio frequency system, [[-]] a current location of at least one of the nodes, [[-]] a current location of a tangible entity in the multiple sensing areas, [[-]] characteristics of a tangible entity in one of the sensing areas, [[-]] a current date, [[-]] a current operation mode of one or more of the groups, [[-]] environmental effects in one or more of the multiple sensing areas, [[-]] currently available bandwidth in one or more of the multiple sensing areas, [[-]] current capabilities of one or more of the nodes, [[-]] current group properties of one or more of the groups, [[-]] a number of users in the multiple sensing areas of the radio frequency system experiencing the consistent latency, and [[-]] a false event detection rate requirement (0003).
Claim 7, Bhakishev discloses The radio frequency system according to claim 1. wherein the radio frequency system is configured for performing radio frequency based sensing and reacting to the event detected by the radio frequency based sensing (0074-0075, detection event and signaling that follows) such that the latency range, the consistent latency, or both stay below a respective threshold value over time (intended use/result - the clause in a is not given weight when it simply expresses the intended result of a process step positively recited, MPEP 2111.04).
Claim 8, Bhakishev discloses The radio frequency system according to claim 1. wherein the two or more groups have different group properties including one or more of: a different number of nodes, different capabilities of one or more nodes, different current free processing power, and different current load (Fig. 1: 195, 196).
Claim 9, Claim 9 depends on claim 1 and further limits an alternative of claim 1. Since Bhakishev in view of Krogh in view of Agarwal disclose consistent latency, all the limitations of claim 9 have been met.
Claim 10, Bhakishev discloses The radio frequency system according to claim 1. Bhakishev discloses groups of sensors and radio frequency sensing. Bhakishev discloses wherein the radio frequency system is configured for adapting at least one of the two or more of the groups such that they perform radio frequency based sensing and react to the event detected by the radio frequency based sensing with the consistent latency or at least with a latency within the latency range around the consistent latency time (intended use/result - the clause in a is not given weight when it simply expresses the intended result of a process step positively recited, MPEP 2111.04) based on adjusting a radio frequency based sensing activity of at least one of the groups, adjusting a reaction activity of at least one of the groups, or both (0075, detecting presence based on RF sensing).
Claim 11, Bhakishev discloses The radio frequency system according to claim 1 wherein the radio frequency system is configured for [[-]] providing a latency criticality ranking of one or more events which are to be detected by the two or more groups by performing radio frequency based sensing (0090, prioritizing high occupancy areas, based on RSSI).
Bakhshev may not explicitly disclose and [[-]] determining the consistent latency, the latency range, or both based on the latency criticality ranking.
Agarwal discloses determining the consistent latency, the latency range, or both based on the latency criticality ranking (Col 6: 59-67, aggregating latencies and calculating an estimated latency, thus consistent latency, since the latencies are aggregated thus there must be high latency and minimum latency values). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Bhakishev to include calculate an estimated latency as taught by Agarwal so as to allow devices to intelligently adjust execution of applications based on the current latency estimation (Col 8: 44-46).
Claim 12, as analyzed with respect to the limitations as discussed in claim 1. Bhakishev discloses A method for performing radio frequency based sensing and reacting to an event detected by the radio frequency based sensing with a consistent latency or at least with a latency within a latency range around the consistent latency in a radio frequency system comprising multiple nodes grouped in multiple groups, each of the groups configured for performing radio frequency based sensing in a respective sensing area of multiple sensing areas of the radio frequency system (Title, systems and methods).
Claim 13, as analyzed with respect to the limitations as discussed in claim 2.
Claim 14, as analyzed with respect to the limitations as discussed in claim 1. Bhakishev discloses A computer program product for performing radio frequency based sensing and reacting to an event detected by the radio frequency based sensing with a consistent latency or at least with a latency within a latency range around the consistent latency, wherein the computer program product comprises program code means for causing a processor to carry out the method according to claim 12, when the computer program product is run on the processor (0114, processor running a computer program)
Claim 15, analyzed with respect to the limitations as discussed in claim 1. Bhakishev discloses A computer readable medium (18) having stored the computer program product of claim 14 (0114).
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. US 20150338510 A1 – A sensor such as a presence sensor for use in a lighting system or other system that adapts to information from a plurality of active presence sensors. If transmissions from the active sensors are uncoordinated, the overall detection performance may be adversely impacted (e.g. due to potential cross-interference), which may make sensing over the detection coverage area defined by a single presence sensor (or the like) become unreliable. The disclosure presents protocols for coordinating transmissions in active sensing systems. The invention may be applied to various active modalities (e.g. ultrasound, RF), for example that find applications in indoor and outdoor lighting controls.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Mehmood B. Khan whose telephone number is (571)272-9277. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 9:30 am-6:30 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, Nishant Divecha can be reached at (571) 270-3125. 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.
/Mehmood B. Khan/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2419