DETAILED ACTION
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 02/13/2026 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive. With respect to the rejection under 35 U.S.C. 102 based on Tertinek and the rejection of dependent claims under 35 U.S.C 103, the applicant states that the prior art does not disclose or suggest at least, “ascertaining at least one ascertained path delay using a predetermined selection method” and “generating a signal characteristic of the time-variant channel impulse response for the at least one ascertained path delay, wherein the signal characteristic is a phase characteristic of a complex channel impulse response” as recited by independent claim 1. The Examiner respectfully disagrees and maintains the art rejection.
Tertinek discloses, “The method comprises: receiving, by a moving object detector, a plurality of frames transmitted over a channel; determining, by the detector, one or more channel impulse
responses (CIRs) associated with the channel based on the received plurality of frames” on paragraph [0048]. It is well known to one of ordinary skill in the art that CIRs are time domain representations
of a communication channels response to an impulse. Paragraph [0013] of the instant application specification clarifies that the claimed path delay refers to the “time between the transmission of an impulse radio signal and the reception of the associated echo signal.” In order to properly represent a communication channel the “time between the transmission of an impulse radio signal and the reception of the associated echo signal” path delay is necessarily ascertained. As ascertaining path delay is integral preliminary step to determining CIRs, The Examiner maintains the art rejection.
The Applicant further purports that Tertinek fails to disclose, “generating a signal characteristic of the time-variant channel impulse response for the at least one ascertained path delay, wherein the signal characteristic is a phase characteristic of a complex channel impulse response.” The Examiner respectfully disagrees. Tertinek discloses on paragraph [0046], “ At 516, a characteristic of the phase signal is output. The characteristic may be an amplitude of the phase signal indicative of velocity of the moving object or a frequency of peaks in a plurality of phase signals indicative of a breathing rate or heart rate of a person” and “The phase extractor 130 may determine a CIR phase as phase values as a function of time by converting one or more of the complex numbers of the CIR to a respective phase value associated with a polar coordinate system” in paragraph [0018]. The Examiner maintains that Tertinek discloses the above limitation.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
The following is a quotation of the appropriate paragraphs of 35 U.S.C. 102 that form the basis for the rejections under this section made in this Office action:
A person shall be entitled to a patent unless –
(a)(1) the claimed invention was patented, described in a printed publication, or in public use, on sale, or otherwise available to the public before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
(a)(2) the claimed invention was described in a patent issued under section 151, or in an application for patent published or deemed published under section 122(b), in which the patent or application, as the case may be, names another inventor and was effectively filed before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claims 1, 8, 9, and 10 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) as being anticipated by Tertinek(US20210359774A1).
Regarding claim 1, Tertinek discloses
A method for recognizing a predetermined movement pattern (“The target signal may be a predefined signal indicative of a type of motion such as a kick of a leg,” [0044]), comprising at an ultra-wideband sensor device (“the pulses may have a bandwidth of 500 MHz and transmitted with a carrier frequency in a range of 3.1 GHz to 10.6 GHz associated with ultrawide band (UWB) radar systems” [0014]) transmitting impulse radio signals over a predetermined time period (FIG.5, Step 502), detecting echo signals of the impulse radio signals by at least one sensor unit of the ultra-wideband sensor device (FIG.5, Step 504) and generating a time- variant channel impulse response (“In an embodiment, the CIR phase and the phase signal define phase values that vary as a function of time” [0048]) that describes the echo signals received by the at least one sensor unit as a function of a time at which the respective impulse radio signal of the predetermined time period was transmitted (“ determining, by the detector, one or more channel impulse responses (CIRs) associated with the channel based on the received plurality of frames” [0048]) and a path delay (“a result of reflection in a path between the transmitter 102 and receive antenna 120 on static objects 118 and/or moving objects 106 in the channel 108 “ [0041]), ascertaining at least one ascertained path delay using a predefined selection method (“tap 1 associated with each of the CIR phase 246-250 may be selected as shown by phase value 224-228” [0028]), generating a signal characteristic of the time-variant channel impulse response for the at least one ascertained path delay (“At 516, a characteristic of the phase signal is output” [0046] & “The method comprises: receiving, by a moving object detector, a plurality of frames transmitted over a channel; determining, by the detector, one or more channel impulse
responses (CIRs) associated with the channel based on the received plurality of frames” [0048]) wherein the signal characteristic is a phase characteristic of a complex channel impulse response (“The phase extractor 130 may determine a CIR phase as phase values as a function of time by converting one or more of the complex numbers of the CIR to a respective phase value associated with a polar coordinate system” [0018]), determining a similarity of the signal characteristic to a reference characteristic (“ At 510, the phase signal is compared to a target signal” [0044]), and if the similarity meets a predetermined similarity criterion, signaling that a predetermined movement pattern associated with the reference characteristic has been detected (“If the comparison indicates that the degree of correlation exceeds a threshold amount, then at 512, the moving object associated with the target signal is detected” [0045]).
Regarding claim 8, Tertinek discloses
The method as claimed in claim 1, wherein the predetermined comparison method determines the similarity of the signal characteristic to the reference characteristic by computing Euclidean distances between points on the two signal characteristics (“The comparison may involve calculating a normalized absolute error between the phase signal and the target signal” [0029]).
Regarding claim 9, Tertinek discloses
An ultra-wideband sensor device for recognizing a predetermined movement pattern (“The target signal may be a predefined signal indicative of a type of motion such as a kick of a leg,” [0044]), wherein the ultra-wideband sensor device (“the pulses may have a bandwidth of 500 MHz and transmitted with a carrier frequency in a range of 3.1 GHz to 10.6 GHz associated with ultrawide band (UWB) radar systems” [0014] is configured to transmit impulse radio signals over a predetermined time period (FIG.5, Step 502), detect echo signals of the impulse radio signals by way of at least one sensor unit of the ultra-wideband sensor device (FIG.5, Step 504) and to generate a time-variant channel impulse response (“In an embodiment, the CIR phase and the phase signal define phase values that vary as a function of time” [0048]) that describes the echo signals received by the at least one sensor unit as a function of a time at which the respective impulse radio signal of the predetermined time period was transmitted (“ determining, by the detector, one or more channel impulse responses
(CIRs) associated with the channel based on the received plurality of frames” [0048]) and a path delay (“a result of reflection in a path between the transmitter 102 and receive antenna 120 on static objects 118 and/or moving objects 106 in the channel 108 “ [0041]), ascertain at least one ascertained path delay using a predetermined selection method (“tap 1 associated with each of the CIR phase 246-250 may be selected as shown by phase value 224-228” [0028] & “The method comprises: receiving, by a moving object detector, a plurality of frames transmitted over a channel; determining, by the detector, one or more channel impulse responses (CIRs) associated with the channel based on the received plurality of frames” [0048]), generate a signal characteristic of the time-variant channel impulse response for the at least one ascertained path delay (“At 516, a characteristic of the phase signal is output” [0046]), wherein the signal characteristic is a phase characteristic of a complex channel impulse response (“The phase extractor 130 may determine a CIR phase as phase values as a function of time by converting one or more of the complex numbers of the CIR to a respective phase value associated with a polar coordinate system” [0018]) determine a similarity of the signal characteristic to a reference characteristic using a predetermined comparison method (“ At 510, the phase signal is compared to a target signal” [0044]), and signal that a predetermined movement pattern associated with the reference characteristic has been detected if the similarity meets a predetermined similarity criterion (“If the comparison indicates that the degree of correlation exceeds a threshold amount, then at 512, the moving object associated with the target signal is detected” [0045]).
Regarding claim 10, Tertinek discloses
A vehicle comprising an ultra-wideband sensor device for recognizing a predetermined movement pattern as claimed in claim 9 (FIG.1, Part.144).
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 103 which forms the basis for all obviousness rejections set forth in this Office action:
A patent for a claimed invention may not be obtained, notwithstanding that the claimed invention is not identically disclosed as set forth in section 102, if the differences between the claimed invention and the prior art are such that the claimed invention as a whole would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which the claimed invention pertains. Patentability shall not be negated by the manner in which the invention was made.
The factual inquiries for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows:
1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art.
2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue.
3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art.
4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness.
Claims 2-4, 7, 11-12, and 14-16 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Tertinek(US20210359774A1) in view of Dahl(US20120243374A1).
Regarding claim 2, Tertinek discloses all of the limitations of claim 1. Tertinek does not explicitly disclose nor limit wherein the method includes at least two sensor units used to determine the similarity criterion. Dahl teaches in the same field of remote movement pattern recognition. Dahl discloses the method comprising, at the ultra-wideband sensor device: detecting the predetermined movement pattern only if the respective signal characteristics of at least two sensor units meet the predetermined similarity criterion (“comparison of echoes or impulse responses, by instead considering several echoic responses together and by comparing information relating to received signals across multiple channels.” [0049])
Dahl teaches in the same field of remote movement pattern recognition. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Tertinek with the teachings of Dahl to incorporate the features of at least two sensor units used to determine the similarity criterion so as to gain the advantage of improving pattern recognition accuracy [0080, Dahl]. Also, since it has been held that if a technique has been used to improve one device, and a person of ordinary skill in the art would recognize that it would improve similar devices in the same way, using the technique is obvious unless its actual application is beyond his or her skill (MPEP 2143).
Regarding claim 3, Tertinek as modified by Dahl discloses all of the limitations of claim 2. Tertinek does not explicitly disclose nor limit wherein the method includes ascertaining a movement locality. Dahl teaches in the same field of remote movement pattern recognition. Dahl discloses the method comprising, at the ultra-wideband sensor device; ascertaining a movement locality of the predetermined movement from the at least one ascertained path delay using a predetermined locating method (“The matching criterion can be related to pixel values or to distances” [0201]).
Dahl teaches in the same field of remote movement pattern recognition. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Tertinek with the teachings of Dahl to incorporate the features of ascertaining a movement locality so as to gain the advantage of improving performance gains [0093, Dahl]. Also, since it has been held that if a technique has been used to improve one device, and a person of ordinary skill in the art would recognize that it would improve similar devices in the same way, using the technique is obvious unless its actual application is beyond his or her skill (MPEP 2143).
Regarding claim 4, Tertinek as modified by Dahl discloses all of the limitations of claim 3. Tertinek discloses the method further comprising, at the ultra-wideband sensor device transmitting a predetermined control signal if the movement locality of the predetermined movement pattern is situated in a predetermined local detection area (“If the object detector 132 determines a match between the phase signal and target signal, then the trunk is opened [0030]).
Regarding claim 7, Tertinek as modified by Dahl discloses all of the limitations of claim 4. Tertinek discloses the method further comprising The method as claimed in claim 4, wherein the predetermined control signal at least one of unlocks (“the door may be unlocked “ [0056]) and opens a trunk of a vehicle (“If the object detector 132 determines a match between the phase signal and target signal, then the trunk is opened [0030]).
Regarding claim 11, Tertinek discloses all of the limitations of claim 1. Tertinek does not explicitly disclose nor limit wherein the method includes ascertaining a movement locality. Dahl teaches in the same field of remote movement pattern recognition. Dahl discloses the method comprising: at the ultra-wideband sensor device: ascertaining a movement locality of the predetermined movement from the at least one ascertained path delay using a predetermined locating method (“The matching criterion can be related to pixel values or to distances” [0201]).
Dahl teaches in the same field of remote movement pattern recognition. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Tertinek with the teachings of Dahl to incorporate the features of ascertaining a movement locality so as to gain the advantage of improving performance gains [0093, Dahl]. Also, since it has been held that if a technique has been used to improve one device, and a person of ordinary skill in the art would recognize that it would improve similar devices in the same way, using the technique is obvious unless its actual application is beyond his or her skill (MPEP 2143).
Regarding claim 12, Tertinek as modified by Dahl discloses all of the limitations of claim 11. Tertinek discloses the method further comprising, at the ultra-wideband sensor device: transmitting a predetermined control signal if the movement locality of the predetermined movement pattern is situated in a predetermined local detection area (“If the object detector 132 determines a match between the phase signal and target signal, then the trunk is opened [0030]).
Regarding claim 14, Tertinek as modified by Dahl discloses all of the limitations of claim 11. Tertinek discloses the method wherein the signal characteristic is a phase characteristic of a complex channel impulse response (“ a characteristic of the phase signal is output” [0046]).
Regarding claim 15, Tertinek as modified by Dahl discloses all of the limitations of claim 12. Tertinek discloses the method wherein, the predetermined control signal at least one of unlocks (“the door may be unlocked “ [0056]) and opens a trunk of a vehicle (“If the object detector 132 determines a match between the phase signal and target signal, then the trunk is opened [0030]).
Regarding claim 16, Tertinek as modified by Dahl discloses all of the limitations of claim 11. Tertinek discloses the method wherein the predetermined comparison method determines the similarity of the signal characteristic to the reference characteristic by computing Euclidean distances between points on the two signal characteristics (“The comparison may involve calculating a normalized absolute error between the phase signal and the target signal” [0029]).
Claims 5 and 13 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Tertinek(US20210359774A1) as modified by Dahl(US20120243374A1) as applied to claims 4 and 12 above, and further in view of Bauman(US20140253287A1)
Regarding claim 5, Tertinek as modified by Dahl discloses all of the limitations of claim 4. Tertinek as modified by Dahl fails to set forth an ultra-wideband key. Bauman teaches in the same field of endeavor of remote movement pattern recognition. Bauman discloses the method comprising, at the ultra-wideband sensor device: using a predetermined active locating method to detect a key position of an ultra-wideband key “a method for locating a key fob relative to a vehicle using ultra-wide band” [0047]), and specifying the predetermined local detection area based on the key position using a predetermined specification method (“ the controller 24 may locate and track the fob 26 in and out of zones “ [0021]).
Bauman teaches in the same field of endeavor of remote movement pattern recognition. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Tertinek as modified by Dahl with the teachings of Bauman to incorporate the features of an ultra-wideband key so as to gain the advantage of improving remote gesture recognition. Also, since it has been held that if a technique has been used to improve one device, and a person of ordinary skill in the art would recognize that it would improve similar devices in the same way, using the technique is obvious unless its actual application is beyond his or her skill (MPEP 2143).
Regarding claim 13, Tertinek as modified by Dahl discloses all of the limitations of claim 12. Tertinek as modified by Dahl fails to set forth an ultra-wideband key. Bauman teaches in the same field of endeavor of remote movement pattern recognition. Bauman discloses the method comprising, at the ultra-wideband sensor device: using a predetermined active locating method to detect a key position of an ultra-wideband key (“a method for locating a key fob relative to a vehicle using ultra-wide band” [0047]), and specifying the predetermined local detection area based on the key position using a predetermined specification method (“ the controller 24 may locate and track the fob 26 in and out of zones “ [0021])
Bauman teaches in the same field of endeavor of remote movement pattern recognition. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Tertinek as modified by Dahl with the teachings of Bauman to incorporate the features of an ultra-wideband key so as to gain the advantage of improving remote gesture recognition. Also, since it has been held that if a technique has been used to improve one device, and a person of ordinary skill in the art would recognize that it would improve similar devices in the same way, using the technique is obvious unless its actual application is beyond his or her skill (MPEP 2143).
For applicant’s benefit portions of the cited reference(s) have been cited to aid in the review of the rejection(s). While every attempt has been made to be thorough and consistent within the rejection it is noted that the PRIOR ART MUST BE CONSIDERED IN ITS ENTIRETY, INCLUDING DISCLOSURES THAT TEACH AWAY FROM THE CLAIMS. See MPEP 2141.02 VI.
Documents Considered but not Relied Upon
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to the applicant’s Disclosure.
CHEN(US20170212210A1) is considered analogous art to the instant application as it discloses in [0041] “Comparing the second channel state information with the first channel state information”
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 CLAYTON PAUL RIDDER whose telephone number is (571)272-2771. The examiner can normally be reached Monday thru Friday ET.
Examiner interviews are available via telephone, in-person, and video conferencing using a USPTO supplied web-based collaboration tool. To schedule an interview, applicant is encouraged to use the USPTO Automated Interview Request (AIR) at http://www.uspto.gov/interviewpractice.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Jack Keith can be reached on (571) 272-6878. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300.
Information regarding the status of published or unpublished applications may be obtained from Patent Center. Unpublished application information in Patent Center is available to registered users. To file and manage patent submissions in Patent Center, visit: https://patentcenter.uspto.gov. Visit https://www.uspto.gov/patents/apply/patent-center for more information about Patent Center and https://www.uspto.gov/patents/docx for information about filing in DOCX format. For additional questions, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
/C.P.R./Examiner, Art Unit 3646
/JACK W KEITH/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3646
Prosecution Insights