Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status
The present application is being examined under the pre-AIA first to invent provisions.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to the rejection(s) of claim(s) 1, 6-9, and 14-15 under 35 U.S.C. § 103 have been fully considered and are persuasive. However, upon further consideration, Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Applicants’ arguments are rendered moot in view of the present Office Action.
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.
Claim 8 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Csonka (US 10868615) and further in view of Penning De Vries (US 11158187).
Consider Claim 8, Csonka discloses a communication device (Figure 2, element 200b) comprising: a sensor (Figure 2, element 240b) configured to receive a signal from a detection range represented by a range of a detection direction (Figure 1, where element 200b is in the range of element 200a to receive signal); an actuator configured to change the detection range in such a way that a search direction included in a search range is included in the detection range (Column 7, Lines 19-21, where processor is associated with pointing hardware for adjustment of system) for at least a predetermined time (Column 12 Lines 31-34, where device stays in a certain pattern/frame position before moving onto next one), the search range being wider than the detection range (Figure 7, where secondary/reception device initiates search pattern of various intervals larger than the detection range); at least one memory storing a set of instructions (Column 6, Lines 49-51, where memory stores instructions); at least one processor (Figure 2, element 220); a transmitter (Figure 2, element 230a) configured to transmit a second signal toward a transmission range of a predetermined size, the transmission range represented by a range of transmission direction (Figure 1, where transmitter 230 is transmitting in direction of receiver module 250b); and a second actuator (Column 7, Lines 19-21, where processor is associated with pointing hardware for adjustment of system) configured to change the transmission range in such a way that any scan direction included in a scan range is included in the transmission range (Figure 8, and Column 14, Lines 29-32 where beacon beam element 24 of device element 200a searches all directions/entire circumference of each possible beacon position elements 1-22) for at least a second predetermined (Column 14, Lines 45-47 primary device beacon position is held for a certain amount of time) the scan range being wider than the transmission range (Figure 8, where primary/transmission device initiates search pattern of various intervals larger than the detection range) but does not disclose a processor configured to execute the set of instructions to specify a reception direction in which the signal is received.
However, Penning De Vries disclose a processor configured to execute the set of instructions to specify a reception direction in which the signal is received (Column 7, Lines 55-60 where processor can obtain signal patterns and select signals based on incoming direction).Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of applicant’s claimed invention to have incorporated the teachings of Penning De Vries into Csonka to better identify signals.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 1, 3-7, 9, and 11-15 allowed.
The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter:
Csonka discloses a reception device (Figure 2, element 200b) comprising: a sensor configured to receive a signal (Figure 2, element 240b) from a detection range represented by a range of a reception direction (Figure 1, where element 200b is in the range of element 200a to receive signal); an actuator (Column 7, Lines 19-21, where processor is associated with pointing hardware for adjustment of system) configured to change the detection range in such a way that a search direction included in a search range wider than the detection range is included in the detection range (Figure 7, where secondary/reception device initiates search pattern of various intervals larger than the detection range) for at least a predetermined time (Column 12 Lines 31-34, where device stays in a certain pattern/frame position before moving onto next one) ; at least one memory (Figure 2, element 220) storing a set of instructions (Column 6, Lines 49-51, where memory stores instructions); and at least one processor (Figure 2, element 210) configured to execute the set of instructions to: detect reception of the signal (Column 7, Lines 2-7 where processor can receive signal). Penning De Vries discloses a processor to specify a reception direction in which the signal is received (Column 7, Lines 55-60 where processor can obtain signal patterns and select signals based on incoming direction).
However, Csonka, Penning, De Vries, and a thorough search in the art fail to disclose the following:
Claim 1: wherein the actuator changes the detection range in such a way that the detection range matches each of a plurality of target ranges for at least the predetermined time, the plurality of target ranges being determined in such a way that a search direction included in the search range is included in at least one of the plurality of target ranges, the each of the plurality of target ranges having a same size same as a size of the detection range.
Claim 9: changing the detection range in such a way that the detection range becomes each of a plurality of target ranges, the plurality of target ranges being determined in such a way that a search direction included in the search range is included in at least one of the plurality of target ranges, the each of the plurality of target ranges having a same size same as a size of the detection range.
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 ASIF SHAMEEM whose telephone number is (571)272-6576. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday 8:00 AM EST-5:00 PM EST.
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, KENNETH VANDERPUYE can be reached at (571) 272-3078. 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.
/ASIF SHAMEEM/Examiner, Art Unit 2634
/KENNETH N VANDERPUYE/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2634
Prosecution Insights