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
This action is responsive to the amendments and remarks received 17 November 2025. Claims 1 - 12 are currently pending.
Drawings
The objection to the drawings, due to failing to comply with 37 CFR 1.84(p)(5), is hereby withdrawn in view of the amendments and remarks received 17 November 2025.
Claim Objections
Claim 1 is objected to because of the following informalities: Lines 7 - 9 of claim 1 recite, in part, “the receiver; wherein roll component and pitch component of the rotational matrix are computed using an accelerometer in the receiver, yaw component of the rotational matrix is computed using an magnetometer” which appears to contain grammatical errors and/or minor informalities. The Examiner suggests amending the claim to --the receiver,[[;]] wherein a roll component and a pitch component of the rotational matrix are computed using an accelerometer in the receiver, and a yaw component of the rotational matrix is computed using [[an]] a magnetometer-- in order to improve the clarity and precision of the claim. Appropriate correction is required.
Claim 7 is objected to because of the following informalities: Lines 7 - 10 of claim 7 recite, in part, “the receiver; wherein roll component and pitch component of the rotational matrix are computed using an accelerometer in the receiver, yaw component of the rotational matrix is computed using an magnetometer” which appears to contain grammatical errors and/or minor informalities. The Examiner suggests amending the claim to --the receiver,[[;]] wherein a roll component and a pitch component of the rotational matrix are computed using an accelerometer in the receiver, and a yaw component of the rotational matrix is computed using [[an]] a magnetometer-- in order to improve the clarity and precision of the claim. Appropriate correction is required.
The objections to claims 4 and 10, due to minor informalities, are hereby withdrawn in view of the amendments and remarks received 17 November 2025.
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.
The rejections to claims 1 - 12 under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, are hereby withdrawn in view of the amendments and remarks received 17 November 2025.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to claim(s) 1 - 12 have been considered but are moot because the new ground of rejection does not rely on any reference applied in the prior rejection of record for any teaching or matter specifically challenged in the argument.
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 text of those sections of Title 35, U.S. Code not included in this action can be found in a prior Office action.
Claims 1, 4, 6, 7, 10 and 12 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Li et al. U.S. Publication No. 2018/0348338 A1 in view of Barrows et al. U.S. Publication No. 2016/0357189 A1 in view of Phat Huynh and Myungsik Yoo, “VLC-Based Positioning System for an Indoor Environment Using an Image Sensor and an Accelerometer Sensor”, Sensors, Vol. 16, Issue 6, pages 1 - 16, 2016, herein referred to as “Huynh et al.”, in view of Zhao et al. U.S. Publication No. 2010/0017124 A1.
- With regards to claims 1 and 7, Li et al. disclose an apparatus provided within a receiver for determining a location of the receiver in an enclosed space, (Li et al., Abstract, Figs. 1, 4 & 5, Pg. 1 ¶ 0003 - 0005, Pg. 2 ¶ 0019, Pg. 3 ¶ 0021 - 0022 and 0025, Pg. 5 ¶ 0039, Pg. 6 ¶ 0055 - 0056, Pg. 7 ¶ 0058) and a method for determining a location of a receiver in an enclosed space, wherein the method is implemented by an apparatus provided within the receiver, (Li et al., Abstract, Figs. 1, 4 & 5, Pg. 1 ¶ 0003 - 0005, Pg. 2 ¶ 0019, Pg. 3 ¶ 0021 - 0022 and 0025, Pg. 5 ¶ 0039, Pg. 6 ¶ 0055 - 0056, Pg. 7 ¶ 0058 - 0061) the apparatus comprising: at least one camera (Li et al., Fig. 5, Pg. 1 ¶ 0005, Pg. 3 ¶ 0026, , Pg. 5 ¶ 0039, Pg. 8 ¶ 0064) configured to capture an image of at least two transmitters that are provided within the enclosed space; (Li et al., Abstract, Figs. 1 & 4, Pg. 1 ¶ 0003 - 0005, Pg. 2 ¶ 0019, Pg. 3 ¶ 0021 - 0022, Pg. 4 ¶ 0030, Pg. 5 ¶ 0039 - 0042) and a processor (Li et al., Abstract, Figs. 1 & 5, Pg. 1 ¶ 0003 and 0005, Pg. 2 ¶ 0007, Pg. 3 ¶ 0025 - 0028, Pg. 5 ¶ 0039, Pg. 7 ¶ 0058 - 0061) configured to: generate measurements obtained from a pre-calibrated inertial measurement unit (IMU) provided within the receiver; (Li et al., Fig. 5, Pg. 5 ¶ 0041, Pg. 7 ¶ 0058, Pg. 8 ¶ 0065) wherein roll component, pitch component and yaw component are computed, (Li et al., Pg. 1 ¶ 0004 and 0006, Pg. 6 ¶ 0055, Pg. 8 ¶ 0065) an accelerometer in the receiver and an magnetometer in the receiver; (Li et al., Fig. 5, Pg. 6 ¶ 0055, Pg. 8 ¶ 0065) identify, from the captured image, a unique arrangement associated with the at least two transmitters, (Li et al., Fig. 4, Pg. 1 ¶ 0003 - 0004, Pg. 2 ¶ 0019 - Pg. 3 ¶ 0022, Pg. 4 ¶ 0034 - 0035, Pg. 5 ¶ 0038 - 0041 and 0044, Pg. 6 ¶ 0047 and 0054 - 0056) wherein the unique arrangement is used to determine locations of each of the at least two transmitters in the enclosed space; (Li et al., Abstract, Pg. 1 ¶ 0004, Pg. 2 ¶ 0019, Pg. 3 ¶ 0021, Pg. 5 ¶ 0045, Pg. 6 ¶ 0054 - 0056) convert from a receiver's coordinate system to a global coordinate system; (Li et al., Pg. 5 ¶ 0041 - 0045, Pg. 6 ¶ 0055 - 0056) and estimate the location of the receiver using the locations of each of the at least two transmitters in the enclosed space. (Li et al., Abstract, Fig. 4, Pg. 1 ¶ 0003 - 0005, Pg. 3 ¶ 0021 - 0022, Pg. 6 ¶ 0054 - 0056) Li et al. fail to disclose explicitly generating a rotational matrix based on measurements obtained from a pre-calibrated inertial measurement unit (IMU); wherein the roll component and the pitch component of the rotational matrix are computed using the accelerometer, and the yaw component of the rotational matrix is computed using the magnetometer; for each of the at least two transmitters, computing an angle of arrival (AOA) as a line of sight (LOS) unit vector from the receiver to a location of the transmitter on an image plane of the at least one camera based on the location of the transmitter on the image plane and based on a focal length of the at least one camera; and estimating the location of the receiver using a maximum-likelihood estimate scheme and the LOS unit vectors associated with each of the at least two transmitters. Pertaining to analogous art, Barrows et al. disclose at least one camera configured to capture an image of at least two transmitters that are provided within the enclosed space; (Barrows et al., Abstract, Figs. 2, 7, 8A, 9A & 9B, Pg. 1 ¶ 0006 - 0009, Pg. 3 ¶ 0040, Pg. 6 ¶ 0085, Pg. 11 ¶ 0130 - 0132) determining locations of each of the at least two transmitters in the enclosed space; (Barrows et al., Abstract, Fig. 2, Pg. 3 ¶ 0039 - 0041, Pg. 6 ¶ 0080, Pg. 11 ¶ 00130 - 0133, Pg. 13 ¶ 0144 - 0145) for each of the at least two transmitters, computing an angle of arrival (AOA) as a line of sight (LOS) unit vector from the receiver to a location of the transmitter on an image plane of the at least one camera based on the location of the transmitter on the image plane and based on a focal length of the at least one camera; (Barrows et al., Abstract, Figs. 7, 9A & 9B, Pg. 12 ¶ 0137 - Pg. 13 ¶ 0145 [“camera calibration parameters may incorporate, for example, the known pose and position of each camera with respect to the receiver 221 and its body coordinate system 905, the geometry of the pixel array within each camera's image sensor, the focal length and position of the optics above each image sensor, and any relevant distortion parameters” and “a unit vector 931 may be generated from camera calibration parameters using a pinhole lens model”]) converting the LOS unit vectors from a receiver's coordinate system to a global coordinate system; (Barrows et al., Abstract, Figs. 7, 9A & 9B, Pg. 1 ¶ 0003 - 0006, Pg. 3 ¶ 0039 - 0041, Pg. 11 ¶ 0130, Pg. 12 ¶ 0136 - 0140, Pg. 13 ¶ 0144 - 0147) and estimating the location of the receiver using a maximum-likelihood estimate scheme, the locations of each of the at least two transmitters in the enclosed space, and the LOS unit vectors associated with each of the at least two transmitters. (Barrows et al., Abstract, Figs. 2, 7, 9A & 9B, Pg. 1 ¶ 0003 - 0006, Pg. 3 ¶ 0039 - 0041, Pg. 11 ¶ 0130 - 0133, Pg. 12 ¶ 0136 - 0142, Pg. 13 ¶ 0144 - 0154, 0158 and 0160) Barrows et al. fail to disclose explicitly generating a rotational matrix based on measurements obtained from a pre-calibrated inertial measurement unit (IMU); wherein roll component and pitch component of the rotational matrix are computed using an accelerometer, and yaw component of the rotational matrix is computed using an magnetometer; and converting the LOS vectors using the rotational matrix. Pertaining to analogous art, Huynh et al. disclose a method for determining a location of a receiver in an enclosed space, (Huynh et al., Pg. 1 Abstract, Pg. 2 § 2.1 - Pg. 3 Second-Full Paragraph, Pg. 5 First-Full Paragraph - § 2.2.1 ¶ 1) comprising: at least one camera configured to capture an image of at least two transmitters that are provided within the enclosed space; (Huynh et al., Abstract, Pg. 2 ¶ 2.1 - Pg. 5 § 2.2.1 ¶ 1) generating a rotational matrix based on measurements obtained from a pre-calibrated inertial measurement unit (IMU) provided within the receiver; (Huynh et al., Abstract, Pg. 5 § 2.2 - Pg. 7 Second-Full Paragraph) wherein roll component and pitch component of the rotational matrix are computed using an accelerometer, (Huynh et al., Pg. 5 § 2.2 - Pg. 7 Second-Full Paragraph, Pg. 5 Fig. 3 [“from the AS, the information about the tilt shifts on the x-, y- and z-axes will be extracted in order to form the rotation matrix”]) and yaw component of the rotational matrix is computed; (Huynh et al., Pg. 5 § 2.2 - Pg. 7 Second-Full Paragraph [“from the AS, the information about the tilt shifts on the x-, y- and z-axes will be extracted in order to form the rotation matrix”]) determining locations of each of the at least two transmitters in the enclosed space; (Huynh et al., Pg. 3 Fig. 1, Pg. 3 Second-Full Paragraph - Pg. 5 Second-Full Paragraph) for each of the at least two transmitters, computing an angle of arrival (AOA) as a line of sight (LOS) vector from the receiver to a location of the transmitter on an image plane of the at least one camera based on the location of the transmitter on the image plane and based on a focal length of the at least one camera; (Huynh et al., Pg. 3 Fig. 1, Pg. 3 Second-Full Paragraph - Pg. 5 Second-Full Paragraph, Pg. 4 Fig. 2) converting the LOS vectors from a receiver's coordinate system to a global coordinate system using the rotational matrix; (Huynh et al., Pg. 3 Second-Full Paragraph - Pg. 5 Second-Full Paragraph, Pg. 5 § 2.2.1 - Pg. 7 Second-Full Paragraph) and estimating the location of the receiver using a maximum-likelihood estimate scheme, the locations of each of the at least two transmitters in the enclosed space, and the LOS vectors associated with each of the at least two transmitters. (Huynh et al., Pg. 3 Fig. 1, Pg. 3 Second-Full Paragraph - Pg. 5 Second-Full Paragraph) Huynh et al. fail to disclose explicitly wherein the yaw component is computed using an magnetometer. Pertaining to analogous art, Zhao et al. disclose an apparatus provided within a receiver for determining a location of the receiver, (Zhao et al., Abstract, Figs. 1 - 3 & 6, Pg. 1 ¶ 0003 and 0008 - 0011, Pg. 2 ¶ 0020, Pg. 3 ¶ 0041 - Pg. 4 ¶ 0047, Pg. 4 ¶ 0051 - 0052, Pg. 5 ¶ 5 ¶ 0066) and a method for determining a location of a receiver, wherein the method is implemented by an apparatus provided within the receiver, (Zhao et al., Abstract, Figs. 1 - 3 & 6, Pg. 1 ¶ 0003 and 0008 - 0011, Pg. 2 ¶ 0020, Pg. 3 ¶ 0041 - Pg. 4 ¶ 0047, Pg. 4 ¶ 0051 - 0052, Pg. 5 ¶ 5 ¶ 0066) the apparatus comprising: at least one camera configured to capture an image; (Zhao et al., Abstract, Figs. 2, 3 & 6, Pg. 1 ¶ 0011, Pg. 2 ¶ 0022 and 0025, Pg. 3 ¶ 0041 - 0043, Pg. 4 ¶ 0047 - 0051, Pg. 5 ¶ 0064 - 0066) and a processor (Zhao et al., Figs. 2 & 3, Pg. 1 ¶ 0011, Pg. 2 ¶ 0020, 0022 and 0024 - 0025, Pg. 3 ¶ 0040 - Pg. 4 ¶ 0047, Pg. 4 ¶ 0050 - 0052) configured to: generate measurements obtained from a pre-calibrated inertial measurement unit (IMU) provided within the receiver; (Zhao et al., Abstract, Figs. 1 - 3 & 6, Pg. 1 ¶ 0004 and 0011, Pg. 2 ¶ 0021 - 0024, Pg. 2 ¶ 0026 - Pg. 3 ¶ 0034, Pg. 3 ¶ 0038, Pg. 3 ¶ 0044 - Pg. 4 ¶ 0046, Pg. 4 ¶ 0052 - 0056, Pg. 5 ¶ 0066) wherein roll component and pitch component are computed using an accelerometer in the receiver, (Zhao et al., Abstract, Figs. 1 - 3 & 6, Pg. 2 ¶ 0021 - 0024, 0026 and 0028, Pg. 3 ¶ 0031 - 0038, Pg. 4 ¶ 0046 and 0053 - 0054) and yaw component is computed using an magnetometer in the receiver. (Zhao et al., Abstract, Figs. 1 - 3 & 6, Pg. 2 ¶ 0021 - 0024 and 0026 - 0027, Pg. 3 ¶ 0029 - 0031 and 0034 - 0038, Pg. 4 ¶ 0046 and 0053 - 0054) Li et al. and Barrows et al. are combinable because they are both directed towards image processing systems that determine the position of an apparatus based on known positions of transmitters. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the teachings of Li et al. with the teachings of Barrows et al. This modification would have been prompted in order to substitute the position estimation technique of Li et al. for the location estimation process of Barrows et al. The location estimation process of Barrows et al. could be substituted in place of the position estimation technique of Li et al. utilizing well-known techniques in the art and would likely yield predictable results, in that, in the combination, the location of the receiver of the base device of Li et al. would be estimated using a maximum-likelihood estimate scheme, the locations of each of the transmitters, and the LOS unit vectors associated with each of the transmitters. This combination could be completed according to well-known techniques in the art and would likely yield predictable results, in that the location of the receiver of the base device of Li et al. would be estimated using a maximum-likelihood estimate scheme, the locations of each of the transmitters, and the LOS unit vectors associated with each of the transmitters. In addition, Li et al. in view of Barrows et al. and Huynh et al. are combinable because they are all directed towards image processing systems that determine the position of an apparatus based on known positions of transmitters. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the combined teachings of Li et al. in view of Barrows et al. with the teachings of Huynh et al. This modification would have been prompted in order to enhance the combined base device of Li et al. in view of Barrows et al. with the well-known and applicable technique Huynh et al. applied to a comparable device. Converting the LOS vectors using a rotational matrix generated based on measurements obtained from an inertial measurement unit (IMU), as taught by Huynh et al., would enhance the combined base device by simplifying and increasing the accuracy of the overall location estimation process, as suggested by Huynh et al., see at least page 3 first-full paragraph and page 4 section 2.2.1 paragraph 1 of Huynh et al. Furthermore, this modification would have been prompted by the teachings and suggestions of Li et al. that a corrected image may be obtained by using a tilting angle measured by a gyroscopic sensor to transform the image of the at least two transmitters into a birds-eye-view and that the orientation, e.g., pitch, roll and/or yaw, of the computing device may also be determined, see at least figure 5, page 5 paragraph 0041, page 6 paragraphs 0055 - 0056 and page 8 paragraph 0065 of Li et al. Moreover, modification would have been prompted by the teachings and suggestions of Barrows et al. that the receiver’s frame of reference may be transformed using well-known linear algebra and vector rotation so as to be aligned with the platforms frame of reference, see at least page 12 paragraph 0136 of Barrows et al. This combination could be completed according to well-known techniques in the art and would likely yield predictable results, in that the LOS vectors would be converted using a rotational matrix generated based on measurements obtained from an inertial measurement unit (IMU) in order to simplify and increase the accuracy of the overall location estimation process of the combined base device. Additionally, Li et al. in view of Barrows et al. in view of Huynh et al. and Zhao et al. are combinable because they are all directed towards image processing systems that determine the position of an apparatus in an environment using captured image data. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the combined teachings of Li et al. in view of Barrows et al. in view of Huynh et al. with the teachings of Zhao et al. This modification would have been prompted in order to substitute the technique of computing a yaw component using an accelerometer of Huynh et al. for the process of computing a yaw component using a magnetometer of Zhao et al. The process of computing a yaw component using a magnetometer of Zhao et al. could be substituted in place of the technique of computing a yaw component using an accelerometer of Huynh et al. using well-known techniques in the art and would likely yield predictable results, in that, in the combination, the yaw component of the rotational matrix would be computed using the process of Zhao et al. wherein a magnetometer is utilized in the computation of the yaw component. Furthermore, this modification would have been prompted in order to enhance the combined base device of Li et al. in view of Barrows et al. in view of Huynh et al. with the well-known and applicable technique Zhao et al. applied to a similar device. enhance the combined base device of Li et al. in view of Barrows et al. in view of Huynh et al. with the well-known and applicable technique Zhao et al. applied to a similar device. Using a magnetometer to compute a yaw component, and an accelerometer to compute roll and pitch components, as taught by Zhao et al., would enhance the combined base device by improving its ability to accurately and reliably obtain position data that includes six degrees of freedom in indoor environments and/or without relying on GPS as taught and suggested by Zhao et al., see at least page 1 paragraphs 0003 and 0008, page 2 paragraphs 0021 - 0024 and 0026 - 0027 and page 3 paragraphs 0029 - 0038 of Zhao et al. This combination could be completed according to well-known techniques in the art and would likely yield predictable results, in that the yaw component of the rotational matrix would be computed using the process of Zhao et al. wherein a magnetometer is utilized to compute the yaw component. Therefore, it would have been obvious to combine Li et al. with Barrows et al., Huynh et al. and Zhao et al. to obtain the invention as specified in claims 1 and 7.
- With regards to claims 4 and 10, Li et al. in view of Barrows et al. in view of Huynh et al. in view of Zhao et al. disclose the apparatus and method according to claims 1 and 7, respectively, wherein in identifying the unique arrangement associated with the at least two transmitters, the processor is further configured to: determine, from a database communicatively linked to the apparatus, (Li et al., Abstract, Figs. 1, 4 & 5, Pg. 1 ¶ 0003 - 0005, Pg. 3 ¶ 0021 - 0022 and 0026 - 0028, Pg. 5 ¶ 0044 - 0045, Pg. 6 ¶ 0047 and 0054 - 0056, Pg. 7 ¶ 0059) an arrangement of transmitters that match with the identified unique arrangement associated with the at least two transmitters, (Li et al., Abstract, Fig. 4, Pg. 1 ¶ 0003 - 0005, Pg. 3 ¶ 0021 - 0022, Pg. 5 ¶ 0038 - 0040, Pg. 6 ¶ 0047 and 0054 - 0056) and obtain, from the database, locations of all the transmitters in the determined arrangement of transmitters. (Li et al., Abstract, Pg. 1 ¶ 0003 - 0005, Pg. 3 ¶ 0021 - 0022 and 0026, Pg. 5 ¶ 0038 - 0041 and 0044 - 0045, Pg. 6 ¶ 0054 - 0055)
- With regards to claims 6 and 12, Li et al. in view of Barrows et al. in view of Huynh et al. in view of Zhao et al. disclose the apparatus and method according to claims 1 and 7, respectively. Li et al. fail to disclose explicitly wherein the maximum-likelihood estimate scheme comprises a least square method. Pertaining to analogous art, Barrows et al. disclose wherein the maximum-likelihood estimate scheme comprises a least square method. (Barrows et al., Pg. 13 ¶ 0146 - 0160) In addition, analogous art Huynh et al. disclose wherein the maximum-likelihood estimate scheme comprises a least square method. (Huynh et al., Pg. 5 First-Full Paragraph - Second-Full Paragraph)
Claims 2, 3, 8 and 9 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Li et al. U.S. Publication No. 2018/0348338 A1 in view of Barrows et al. U.S. Publication No. 2016/0357189 A1 in view of Phat Huynh and Myungsik Yoo, “VLC-Based Positioning System for an Indoor Environment Using an Image Sensor and an Accelerometer Sensor”, Sensors, Vol. 16, Issue 6, pages 1 - 16, 2016, herein referred to as “Huynh et al.”, in view of Zhao et al. U.S. Publication No. 2010/0017124 A1 as applied to claims 1 and 7 above, and further in view of Paolini et al. U.S. Publication No. 2017/0142809 A1.
- With regards to claims 2 and 8, Li et al. in view of Barrows et al. in view of Huynh et al. in view of Zhao et al. disclose the apparatus and method according to claims 1 and 7, respectively. Li et al. fail to disclose expressly wherein the at least two transmitters comprise a first transmitter that is larger in size than a second transmitter. Pertaining to analogous art, Paolini et al. disclose wherein the at least two transmitters comprise a first transmitter that is larger in size than a second transmitter. (Paolini et al., Pg. 5 ¶ 0041 - 0043, Pg. 7 ¶ 0052, Pg. 11 ¶ 0072 and 0077) Li et al. in view of Barrows et al. in view of Huynh et al. in view of Zhao et al. and Paolini et al. are combinable because they are all directed towards image processing systems that determine the position of an apparatus in an environment using captured image data and, similar to Li et al., Barrows et al. and Huynh et al., Paolini et al. is also directed towards determining the positions of transmitters based on captured images of the transmitters. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the combined teachings of Li et al. in view of Barrows et al. in view of Huynh et al. in view of Zhao et al. with the teachings of Paolini et al. This modification would have been prompted in order to enhance the combined base device of Li et al. in view of Barrows et al. in view of Huynh et al. in view of Zhao et al. with the well-known and applicable technique Paolini et al. applied to a similar device. Including a first transmitter that is larger in size than a second transmitter as two of the at least two transmitters, as taught by Paolini et al., would enhance the combined base device by increasing its flexibility since it would be able to be used with a wider variety of transmitters, reducing costs associated with its implementation since it would be able to rely upon and utilize any of a variety of types of pre-existing transmitters in an environment and improving its ability to uniquely identify transmitters in an environment since transmitters would be able to be identified using distinctive transmitter shapes and sizes. Furthermore, this modification would have been prompted by the teachings and suggestions of Li et al. that the one or more luminaires, transmitters, may be different physical and/or optical properties and that their system may rely on pre-existing luminaires, transmitters, in the enclosed space in combination with newly added additional luminaires, transmitters, see at least figure 3B, page 3 paragraphs 0020 and 0022 - 0023, page 4 paragraphs 0032 and 0034 - 0035 and page 5 paragraphs 0038 and 0040 of Li et al. This combination could be completed according to well-known techniques in the art and would likely yield predictable results, in that a first transmitter that is larger in size than a second transmitter would be included as two of the at least two transmitters utilized by the combined base device so as to increase its flexibility, reduce costs associated with its implementation and improve its ability to uniquely identify transmitters in an environment. Therefore, it would have been obvious to combine Li et al. in view of Barrows et al. in view of Huynh et al. in view of Zhao et al. with Paolini et al. to obtain the invention as specified in claims 2 and 8.
- With regards to claims 3 and 9, Li et al. in view of Barrows et al. in view of Huynh et al. in view of Zhao et al. in view of Paolini et al. disclose the apparatus and method according to claims 2 and 8, respectively, whereby the first transmitter comprises a transmitter configured to emit a monochromatic light, (Li et al., Pg. 1 ¶ 0004, Pg. 3 ¶ 0020 and 0022, Pg. 4 ¶ 0030 - 0033, Pg. 5 ¶ 0038 - 0040 and 0046) and the second transmitter is configured to emit a coloured light. (Li et al., Pg. 1 ¶ 0004, Pg. 3 ¶ 0020 and 0022, Pg. 4 ¶ 0030 - 0033, Pg. 5 ¶ 0038 - 0040 and 0046) In addition, analogous art Paolini et al. disclose whereby the first transmitter comprises a transmitter configured to emit a monochromatic light, (Paolini et al., Pg. 2 ¶ 0028 - Pg. 3 ¶ 0031, Pg. 4 ¶ 0038, Pg. 5 ¶ 0041 - 0043, Pg. 10 ¶ 0069 - 0071) and the second transmitter is configured to emit a coloured light. (Paolini et al., Pg. 2 ¶ 0028 - Pg. 3 ¶ 0031, Pg. 4 ¶ 0038, Pg. 5 ¶ 0041 - 0043, Pg. 10 ¶ 0069 - 0071)
Claims 5 and 11 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Li et al. U.S. Publication No. 2018/0348338 A1 in view of Barrows et al. U.S. Publication No. 2016/0357189 A1 in view of Phat Huynh and Myungsik Yoo, “VLC-Based Positioning System for an Indoor Environment Using an Image Sensor and an Accelerometer Sensor”, Sensors, Vol. 16, Issue 6, pages 1 - 16, 2016, herein referred to as “Huynh et al.”, in view of Zhao et al. U.S. Publication No. 2010/0017124 A1 as applied to claims 1 and 7 above, and further in view of Mohammad Mirzaei et al. U.S. Publication No. 2014/0198227 A1.
- With regards to claims 5 and 11, Li et al. in view of Barrows et al. in view of Huynh et al. in view of Zhao et al. disclose the apparatus and method according to claims 1 and 7, respectively. Li et al. fail to disclose explicitly wherein each LOS unit vector
V
^
from the receiver to the location of the transmitter on the image plane is defined as:
V
^
=
V
V
wherein V=(x, y, z), z is defined as the focal length of the at least one camera, and x and y define the location of the transmitter on the image plane of the at least one camera with regard to a centre of the image plane, wherein V is a LOS vector to the transmitter in the receiver’s coordinate system, and |V| is the norm of V. Pertaining to analogous art, Barrows et al. disclose wherein each LOS unit vector V from the receiver to the location of the transmitter on the image plane is defined as V=(x, y, z), (Barrows et al., Figs. 7, 9A & 9B, Pg. 12 ¶ 0138 - 0142, Pg. 13 ¶ 0144 - 0145) wherein x and y define the location of the transmitter on the image plane of the at least one camera with regard to a centre of the image plane, (Barrows et al., Figs. 7, 9A & 9B, Pg. 3 ¶ 0038 - 0041, Pg. 12 ¶ 0138 - 0142, Pg. 13 ¶ 0144 - 0145 [“a unit vector 931 may be generated from camera calibration parameters using a pinhole lens model”]) wherein V is a LOS vector to the transmitter in the receiver’s coordinate system. (Barrows et al., Figs. 7, 9A & 9B, Pg. 12 ¶ 0138 - 0142, Pg. 13 ¶ 0144 - 0145) Barrows et al. fail to disclose explicitly wherein each LOS unit vector
V
^
is defined as:
V
^
=
V
V
wherein V=(x, y, z), z is defined as the focal length of the at least one camera, and |V| is the norm of V. Pertaining to analogous art, Huynh et al. disclose wherein x and y define the location of the transmitter on the image plane of the at least one camera with regard to a centre of the image plane. (Huynh et al., Pg. 3 Fig. 1, Pg. 3 Second-Full Paragraph - Pg. 5 Second-Full Paragraph, Pg. 4 Fig. 2) Huynh et al. fail to disclose explicitly wherein each LOS unit vector
V
^
is defined as:
V
^
=
V
V
wherein V=(x, y, z), z is defined as the focal length of the at least one camera, and |V| is the norm of V. Pertaining to analogous art, Mohammad Mirzaei et al. disclose wherein each LOS unit vector
V
^
is defined as:
V
^
=
V
V
(Mohammad Mirzaei et al., Pg. 9 ¶ 0083 - 0090) wherein V=(x, y, z), z is defined as the focal length of the at least one camera, and x and y define a location on the image plane of the at least one camera with regard to a centre of the image plane, (Mohammad Mirzaei et al., Figs. 8A & 8B, Pg. 8 ¶ 0082 - Pg. 9 ¶ 0091, Pg. 10 ¶ 0096 - 0098) wherein V is a LOS vector in the receiver’s coordinate system, (Mohammad Mirzaei et al., Figs. 8A & 8B, Pg. 8 ¶ 0082 - Pg. 9 ¶ 0091, Pg. 10 ¶ 0096 - 0098) and |V| is the norm of V. (Mohammad Mirzaei et al., Pg. 9 ¶ 0083 - 0090) Li et al. in view of Barrows et al. in view of Huynh et al. in view of Zhao et al. and Mohammad Mirzaei et al. are combinable because they are all directed towards image processing systems that determine the position of an apparatus in an environment using captured image data. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the combined teachings of Li et al. in view of Barrows et al. in view of Huynh et al. in view of Zhao et al. with the teachings of Mohammad Mirzaei et al. This modification would have been prompted in order to substitute the unit vector equation of Barrows et al. for the unit vector formula of Mohammad-Mirzaei et al. The unit vector formula of Mohammad-Mirzaei et al. could be substituted in place of the unit vector equation of Barrows et al. using well-known techniques in the art and would likely yield predictable results, in that, in the combination, the LOS unit vectors of the combined base device would be defined and determined according to the unit vector formula of Mohammad-Mirzaei et al. This combination could be completed according to well-known techniques in the art and would likely yield predictable results, in that the unit vector formula of Mohammad-Mirzaei et al. would be utilized to define and determine the LOS unit vectors of the combined base device. Therefore, it would have been obvious to combine Li et al. in view of Barrows et al. in view of Huynh et al. in view of Zhao et al. with Mohammad Mirzaei et al. to obtain the invention as specified in claims 5 and 11.
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 ERIC RUSH whose telephone number is (571) 270-3017. The examiner can normally be reached 9am - 5pm Monday - Friday.
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, Andrew Bee can be reached at (571) 270 - 5183. 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.
/ERIC RUSH/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2677
Prosecution Insights