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 .
Continued Examination Under 37 CFR 1.114
A request for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, including the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e), was filed in this application after final rejection. Since this application is eligible for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114. Applicant's submission filed on 07/08/2026 has been entered.
Response to Amendment
The amendment filed July 08, 2026 has been fully considered and entered into record. Claims 1-20 remain pending in the application. Claims 1 and 12 have been amended.
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 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.
Claims 1-6, 12-15, and 20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. §103 as being unpatentable over Miller et al. (US 20160248905 A1, hereinafter “Miller”) in view of Pattabiraman et al. (US 6856789 B2, hereinafter “Pattabiraman”), and further in view of Liu et al. (US 20230121034 A1, hereinafter “Liu”).
Regarding Claim 1, Miller teaches, a method of transmitting advertisements from an advertiser to a Bluetooth device in a Bluetooth network, the method comprising a sequence of: “ FIG. 1 illustrates an implementation 10 that utilizes Bluetooth Low Energy (BLE) for wireless communication. The implementation 10 includes an advertiser 12 that is arranged to transmit an advertisement signal (or signal ADV).” [0017], and “The transceivers 22 and a controller (not shown in FIG. 2), may be defined as an advertiser 12 and transmit/receive information to/from the OCD 16 in a BLE environment to ascertain the location of the various OCDs 16 in the vehicle 18.” [0020]
wirelessly transmitting, from the advertiser, an advertisement, “The implementation 10 includes an advertiser 12 that is arranged to transmit an advertisement signal (or signal ADV)” [0017], and “In operation 74, the controller 32 transmits the signal ADV” [0043], and “Each OCD 16 will periodically scan for BLE advertisements (or for the signal ADV) from the controller 32” [0024]
in response to receiving a scan request packet from the Bluetooth device in response to the advertisement: “The implementation 10 further includes a scanner 14 for transmitting a scanner request signal (or signal SCAN_REQ) in response to the signal ADV.” [0017], and further “Additionally, the advertiser 12 may be configured to receive signal SCAN_REQ from the scanner 14 such that the advertiser 12 provides additional information to the scanner 14 based on the signal SCAN_REQ.” [0018], and “In operation 80, the controller 32 determines whether the signal SCAN_REQ has been received from the OCD(s) 16. As noted above, the OCD(s) 16 may transmit the signal SCAN_REQ in response to receiving the signal ADV.” [0045]
determining at the advertiser, the RSSI of the scan request packet, “The controller 32 includes a BLE location module 38 to determine the received signal strength for each receipt of the signal SCAN_REQ.” [0025], and “The controller 32 (or the BLE location module 38) may then calculate an exponentially weighted average (“EWA”) for the signal strength for each received signal SCAN_REQ received from the OCD(s) 16 that is received at each of the selectively placed transceivers 22” [0026], and “Specifically, the controller 32 establishes the database to store information corresponding to the received signal strength (RSStotal) at the transceiver 22 a (or BLE1 _RSStotal as shown in FIG. 5), the received signal strength (RSStotal) at the transceiver 22 b (or BLE2 _RSStotal as shown in FIG. 5)” [0049]
transmitting, from the advertiser, a scan response packet to the Bluetooth device, “Once the controller 32 determines the location (or zone 20) for each OCD 16, the controller 32 notifies each OCD 16 as to its location in the vehicle 18 via a signal SCAN_RSP.” [0022], and “Once the most likely position is determined by the controller 32, the controller 32 transmits the signal SCAN_RSP to the OCD 16 to notify the same of its position (e.g., the in-vehicle-location (position) data) in the vehicle 18.” [0027]
However, Miller does not teach:
setting an adjusted transmit power based on the RSSI;
using the adjusted transmit power;
wherein the advertiser does not utilize any data contained in the scan request packet in setting the adjusted transmit power; and
wherein the Bluetooth device is unaware of the setting of the adjusted transmit power by the advertiser prior to transmission of the scan response packet;
Pattabiraman teaches, setting an adjusted transmit power based on the RSSI, “In step 407, the processor chooses a transmit power level to be used in paging the device identified in step 405. More particularly, the processor 116 applies the map 125 to the measured signal quality of the inquiry response from the particular device to be paged. This produces a prescribed transmit power level.” [Col. 9, lines 44-49], and “The map 125's Selection of transmit power is based upon the Signal quality level measured for the particular remote device” [Col. 5, lines 55-57],
using the adjusted transmit power, “Next after step 407, the processor 116 in step 408 directs the transmitter 114 to page the device that was identified in step 405, using the transmit power level chosen in step 407” [Col. 9, lines 51-53]
wherein the advertiser does not utilize any data contained in the scan request packet in setting the adjusted transmit power, Pattabiraman teaches selecting transmit power based on the signal-quality measurements stored in the link metric record while separately storing received-response contents in the inquiry response log: “The storage 118 includes a link metric record 124, page power Selector map 125, and inquiry response log 126.’ [Col. 4, lines 19-21], and “the inquiry response log 126 stores the contents of remote Bluetooth devices’ responses” [Col. 6, lines 37-38], and “The Signal quality measurement is obtained from the record 124” [Col. 9, lines 49-50].
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to modify Miller’s Bluetooth advertising method to employ Pattabiraman’s RSSI-based transmit power selection because selecting transmit power based on a measured received signal quality improves communication reliability while reducing unnecessary transmit power consumption. Such a modification would merely apply Pattabiraman’s known transmit power control technique to Miller’s Bluetooth advertising procedure to obtain the predictable result of transmitting scan response packets using a transmit power selected according to the RSSI.
The combination of Miller and Pattabiraman does not explicitly teach wherein the Bluetooth device is unaware of the setting of the adjusted transmit power by the advertiser prior to transmission of the scan response packet.
Liu teaches open-loop transmit power control in which the transmitting device independently determines its transmit power without requiring feedback from the receiving device, wherein the Bluetooth device is unaware of the setting of the adjusted transmit power by the advertiser prior to transmission of the scan response packet, “Open-loop power control refers to a method in which a receiving end does not need to feed back a receiving situation, and a transmitting end determines a transmitted power by itself.”, and “Uplink open-loop power control, also known as reverse link open-loop power control, refers to a method in which a terminal does not need an access network device to feed back a receiving situation, and the terminal determines a transmitted power by itself.” [0003].
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the invention to further modify the combined system of Miller and Pattabiraman to employ Liu’s open-loop transmit power control technique because allowing the advertiser to independently determine the transmit power without requiring prior feedback from the Bluetooth device reduces signaling overhead while maintaining effective communication. Such a modification merely applies Liu’s known transmit power control technique to Miller’s Bluetooth advertising procedure as modified by Pattabiraman to obtain the predictable result that the Bluetooth device is unaware of the advertiser’s adjusted transmit power prior to transmission of the scan response packet.
Regarding Claim 2, Miller, Pattabiraman, and Liu disclose the limitations of claim 2 as recited above in the rejection of claim 1. In addition, Pattabiraman further teaches using a lookup table to select the transmission power, wherein the setting is performed using a look up table, “The storage 118 includes a link metric record 124, page power selector map 125, and inquiry response log 126.” [Col. 4, lines 19-21], and “The map 125 contains instructions, data, logic, artificial intelligence, or other data or decision-making capability to determine which transmit level is appropriate to transmit pending pages. “ [Col. 5, lines 52-54], and “The map 125's selection of transmit power is based upon the signal quality level measured for the particular remote device to be paged.” [Col. 5, lines 55-57], and “Accordingly, the map 125 correlates different signal quality levels with the appropriate paging transmit power to be used when a device exhibits that signal quality level.” [Col. 5, lines 58-60]
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the invention to further modify the combined teaching of Miller, Pattabiraman, and Liu by implementing Pattabiraman’s page power selector map as a lookup table because Pattabiraman teaches correlating measured signal-quality levels with corresponding transmit-power levels using a predefined mapping. Employing such a lookup table would have predictably provided an efficient and straightforward mechanism for selecting an appropriate transmit power while conserving battery power and reducing unnecessary wireless inference.
Regarding Claim 3, Miller, Pattabiraman, and Liu disclose the limitations of claim 3 as recited above in the rejection of claim 1. In addition, Pattabiraman further teaches performing the setting using an algorithm, wherein the setting is performed using an algorithm, “The map 125 contains instructions, data, logic, artificial intelligence, or other data or decision-making capability to determine which transmit level is appropriate to transmit pending pages. “ [Col. 5, lines 52-54], and “The map 125's selection of transmit power is based upon the signal quality level measured for the particular remote device to be paged. Accordingly, the map 125 correlates different signal quality levels with the appropriate paging transmit power to be used when a device exhibits that signal quality level.” [Col. 5, lines 55-60], and ““In step 407, the processor chooses a transmit power level to be used in paging the device identified in step 405. More particularly, the processor 116 applies the map 125 to the measured signal quality of the inquiry response from the particular device to be paged. This produces a prescribed transmit power level.” [Col. 9, lines 44-49]
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the invention to further modify the combined teaching of Miller, Pattabiraman, and Liu to perform the RSSI-based transmit-power setting using Pattabiraman’s algorithmic mapping technique because Pattabiraman teaches determining an appropriate transmit-power level by applying stored mapping rules to measured signal quality characteristics, thereby providing an automated and predictable mechanism for selecting transmit power based on RSSI.
Regarding Claim 4, Miller, Pattabiraman, and Liu disclose the limitations of claim 4 as recited above in the rejection of claim 1. In addition, Pattabiraman further teaches selecting transmit power based on measured signal quality, such that stronger received signal quality results in lower transmit power and weaker received signal quality results in higher transmit power, wherein the adjusted transmit power varies inversely with the RSSI, “The map 125's selection of transmit power is based upon the signal quality level measured for the particular remote device to be paged.” [Col. 5, lines 55-57], and “Accordingly, the map 125 correlates different signal quality levels with the appropriate paging transmit power to be used when a device exhibits that signal quality level.” [Col. 5, lines 58-60], and “In TABLE 2, the transmitter 114's maximum transmit power is 0 dBm, and its minimum transmit power is −20 dBm.” [Col. 6, lines 31-33]
As shown in TABLE 2, a stronger received signal (e.g., RSSI = -3 dBm) corresponds to a lower transmit power (-20 dBm), while a weaker received signal (e.g., RSSI = -70 dBm) corresponds to a higher transmit power (0 dBm). Thus, the selected transmit power varies inversely with the measured RSSI.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the invention to further modify the combined teaching of Miller, Pattabiraman, and Liu by employing Pattabiraman’s inverse RSSI-based transmit-power selection because Pattabiraman teaches reducing transmit power as received signal quality increases and increasing transmit power as received signal quality decreases. Applying this known relationship to Miller’s Bluetooth Low Energy advertising and scan-response framework would have predictably maintained reliable Bluetooth communication while conserving battery power and reducing unnecessary wireless interference.
Regarding Claim 5, Miller, Pattabiraman, and Liu disclose the limitations of claim 5 as recited above in the rejection of claim 4. In addition, Pattabiraman further teaches wherein a difference between a minimum adjusted transmit power and a maximum adjusted transmit power is at least 10 dBm, “In TABLE 2, the transmitter 114's maximum transmit power is 0 dBm, and its minimum transmit power is −20 dBm.” [Col. 6, lines 31-33]
Further, TABLE 2 shows transmit-power levels ranging from 0 dBm to -20 dBm, representing a difference of 20 dBm, which is greater than the claimed minimum difference of 10 dBm.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the invention to further modify the combined teaching of Miller, Pattabiraman, and Liu to employ Pattabiraman’s transmit-power range because Pattabiraman teaches using a selectable transmit-power range sufficiently wide to accommodate varying received signal strengths while maintaining reliable Bluetooth communication. Applying Pattabiraman’s known transmit-power range to Miller’s Bluetooth advertising and scan-response framework would have predictably enabled transmit-power adjustment over a range exceeding 10 dBm, thereby conserving battery power, reducing unnecessary wireless interference and maintaining reliable communication.
Regarding Claim 6, Miller, Pattabiraman, and Liu disclose the limitations of claim 6 as recited above in the rejection of claim 1. In addition, Pattabiraman further teaches selecting a transmit power for a subsequent Bluetooth transmission after measuring received signal quality, wherein the scan response packet is transmitted using a different transmit power than is used for the advertisement, “In step 407, the processor chooses a transmit power level to be used in paging the device identified in step 405” [Col. 9, lines 44-45], and “More particularly, the processor 116 applies the map 125 to the measured signal quality of the inquiry response from the particular device to be paged. This produces a prescribed transmit power level.” [Col. 9, lines 45-49], and “Next after step 407, the processor 116 in step 408 directs the transmitter 114 to page the device that was identified in step 405, using the transmit power level chosen in step 407” [Col. 9, lines 51-53]
One of ordinary skill in the art would have understood that, when Pattabiraman’s RSSI-based transmit-power selection is incorporated into Miller’s BLE advertising sequence, the advertisement is transmitted before the scan-request RSSI is available, whereas the subsequent scan-response packet is transmitted after the RSSI-based transmit-power selection has been performed. Accordingly, the scan-response packet would have been transmitted using the newly selected transmit power, which differs from the transmit power previously used for the advertisement.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the invention to further modify the combined teaching of Miller, Pattabiraman, and Liu to apply Pattabiraman’s RSSI-based transmit-power selection to the subsequent scan-response transmission because Pattabiraman teaches selecting transmit power after evaluating received signal quality to conserve battery power while reducing unnecessary wireless interference. Applying this known technique to Miller would have predictably resulted in transmitting the scan-response packet at an RSSI-adjusted transmit power that differs from the transmit power used for the earlier advertisement.
Regarding Claim 12, Miller teaches, a Bluetooth network device, comprising: “The transceivers 22 and a controller (not shown in FIG. 2), may be defined as an advertiser 12 and transmit/receive information to/from the OCD 16 in a BLE environment to ascertain the location of the various OCDs 16 in the vehicle 18.” [0020], and “ The controller 32 and the transceivers 22 a-22 c are configured to engage in bi-directional communication, via BLE, with the OCDs 16 a-16 n” [0021]
a network interface including, “The apparatus 30 generally includes the transceivers 22, a controller 32, and a powertrain control module (PCM) 34.” [0021], and “ The controller 32 and the transceivers 22 a-22 c are configured to engage in bi-directional communication, via BLE, with the OCDs 16 a-16 n” [0021]
a processing unit, “The apparatus 30 generally includes the transceivers 22, a controller 32, and a powertrain control module (PCM) 34.” [0021], and “It is recognized that any circuit or other electrical device disclosed herein may include any number of microprocessors, integrated circuits, memory devices (e.g., FLASH, random access memory (RAM), read only memory (ROM), electrically programmable read only memory (EPROM), electrically erasable programmable read only memory (EEPROM), or other suitable variants thereof) and software which co-act with one another to perform operation(s) disclosed herein” [0016]
a memory device, in communication with the processing unit, containing instructions, which when executed by the processing unit, enable the Bluetooth network device to: “It is recognized that any circuit or other electrical device disclosed herein may include any number of microprocessors, integrated circuits, memory devices (e.g., FLASH, random access memory (RAM), read only memory (ROM), electrically programmable read only memory (EPROM), electrically erasable programmable read only memory (EEPROM), or other suitable variants thereof) and software which co-act with one another to perform operation(s) disclosed herein” [0016], and further “In addition, any one or more of the electric devices may be configured to execute a computer-program that is embodied in a non-transitory computer readable medium that is programmed to perform any number of the functions as disclosed.” [0016]
wirelessly transmit an advertisement to a second Bluetooth network device, “The implementation 10 includes an advertiser 12 that is arranged to transmit an advertisement signal (or signal ADV)” [0017], and “The controller 32 includes a BLE advertiser management module 36 that manages the transmission of the signal ADV to the OCDs 16.” [0023], and “Each OCD 16 will periodically scan for BLE advertisements (or for the signal ADV) from the controller 32” [0024]
in response to receiving a scan request packet from the second Bluetooth network device in response to the advertisement: “The implementation 10 further includes a scanner 14 for transmitting a scanner request signal (or signal SCAN_REQ) in response to the signal ADV.” [0017], and further “Additionally, the advertiser 12 may be configured to receive signal SCAN_REQ from the scanner 14 such that the advertiser 12 provides additional information to the scanner 14 based on the signal SCAN_REQ.” [0018], and “In operation 80, the controller 32 determines whether the signal SCAN_REQ has been received from the OCD(s) 16. As noted above, the OCD(s) 16 may transmit the signal SCAN_REQ in response to receiving the signal ADV.” [0045]
determine the RSSI of the scan request packet, “The controller 32 includes a BLE location module 38 to determine the received signal strength for each receipt of the signal SCAN_REQ.” [0025], and “The controller 32 (or the BLE location module 38) may then calculate an exponentially weighted average (“EWA”) for the signal strength for each received signal SCAN_REQ received from the OCD(s) 16 that is received at each of the selectively placed transceivers 22” [0026], and “Specifically, the controller 32 establishes the database to store information corresponding to the received signal strength (RSStotal) at the transceiver 22 a (or BLE1 _RSStotal as shown in FIG. 5), the received signal strength (RSStotal) at the transceiver 22 b (or BLE2 _RSStotal as shown in FIG. 5)” [0049]
transmit a scan response packet, “Once the controller 32 determines the location (or zone 20) for each OCD 16, the controller 32 notifies each OCD 16 as to its location in the vehicle 18 via a signal SCAN_RSP.” [0022], and further “Once the most likely position is determined by the controller 32, the controller 32 transmits the signal SCAN_RSP to the OCD 16 to notify the same of its position (e.g., the in-vehicle-location (position) data) in the vehicle 18.” [0027]. Figure 1 on page 2 also visually shows the ordered sequence:
Advertisement -> Scan Request -> Scan Response.
However, Miller does not teach:
a read circuit to receive, demodulate and decode an incoming packet and to determine a received signal strength indicator (RSSI) for the incoming packet; and
a power amplifier configured to transmit packets at a selectable transmit power;
set an adjusted transmit power based on the RSSI; and
using adjusted transmit power to transmit the scan response packet;
wherein the Bluetooth network device does not utilize any data contained in the scan request packet in setting the adjusted transmit power and
wherein the second Bluetooth network device is unaware of the setting of the adjusted transmit power by the Bluetooth network device prior to transmission of the scan response packet.
Pattabiraman teaches a receiver including a Bluetooth-compatible demodulator and associated evaluation circuitry configured to receive Bluetooth packages and determine received signal quality, including RSSI, a read circuit to receive, demodulate and decode an incoming packet and to determine a received signal strength indicator (RSSI) for the incoming packet, “The receiver 110 comprises, as an example, a Bluetooth-compatible demodulator” [Col. 4, lines 22-23], and “Receiver 110 is configured to receive Bluetooth voice and/or data packets from remote device 104 over Bluetooth wireless link 106 via antenna 108.” [Col. 4, lines 26-28], and “The link quality evaluator 112 comprises circuitry to evaluate the quality of signals received by 110.” [Col. 4, lines 48-49], and “Depending upon the implementation, the evaluator 112 may evaluate any suitable aspect of such Bluetooth inquiry response signals, such as measured signal energy (total strength of received signals), packet header failure, packet header correction value, or another signal characteristic by which the quality of an inquiry response signal from a remote Bluetooth device may be evaluated. One particular gauge of measured energy is the received signal strength indicator (RSSI).” [Col. 4, lines 58-67]
a power amplifier configured to transmit packets at a selectable transmit power, “The transmitter 114 is configured to transmit Bluetooth messages, inquiry signals called “inquiry IDs,” pages, and other signals to devices such as the remote device 104, using the antenna 108 and wireless link 106.” [Col. 4, lines 32-35], and “The map 125 contains instructions, data, logic, artificial intelligence, or other data or decision-making capability to determine which transmit level is appropriate to transmit pending pages.” [Col. 5, lines 52-54], and “ In TABLE 2, the transmitter 114's maximum transmit power is 0 dBm, and its minimum transmit power is −20 dBm” [Col. 6, lines 31-33]
set an adjusted transmit power based on the RSSI, “The map 125's selection of transmit power is based upon the signal quality level measured for the particular remote device to be paged.” [Col.5, lines 55-57], and “Accordingly, the map 125 correlates different signal quality levels with the appropriate paging transmit power to be used when a device exhibits that signal quality level.” [Col. 5, lines 58-60], and “In step 407, the processor chooses a transmit power level to be used in paging the device identified in step 405. More particularly, the processor 116 applies the map 125 to the measured signal quality of the inquiry response from the particular device to be paged. This produces a prescribed transmit power level. The signal quality measurement is obtained from the record 124, as prepared earlier in step 404.” [Col. 9, lines 44-50]
using the adjusted transmit power, “Next after step 407, the processor 116 in step 408 directs the transmitter 114 to page the device that was identified in step 405, using the transmit power level chosen in step 407” [Col. 9, lines 51-53]
wherein the Bluetooth network device does not utilize any data contained in the scan request packet in setting the adjusted transmit power, Pattabiraman teaches selecting transmit power based on the signal-quality measurement stored in link metric record 124, while the contents the received response are separately stored in inquiry-response log 126: “In contrast to the link metric record 124, which stores measurements of signal quality, the inquiry response log 126 stores the contents of remote Bluetooth devices' responses to inquiry IDs sent by the transmitter 112 during the inquiry process.” [Col. 6, lines 35-39], and “For each inquiry response, the log 126 may include (for example) the identity of the responding Bluetooth device, the frequency bin where the response occurred, features that the remote device supports, and some or all other information contained in the inquiry response message” [Col. 6, lines 39-44], and “The map 125's selection of transmit power is based upon the signal quality level measured for the particular remote device to be paged.” [Col.5, lines 55-57], and “The signal quality measurement is obtained from the record 124, as prepared earlier in step 404.” [Col. 9, lines 49-50]
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to modify Miller’s Bluetooth advertising method to employ Pattabiraman’s RSSI-based transmit power selection because selecting transmit power based on a measured received signal quality improves communication reliability while reducing unnecessary transmit power consumption. Such a modification would merely apply Pattabiraman’s known transmit power control technique to Miller’s Bluetooth advertising procedure to obtain the predictable result of transmitting scan response packets using a transmit power selected according to the RSSI.
The combination of Miller and Pattabiraman does not explicitly teach wherein the Bluetooth device is unaware of the setting of the adjusted transmit power by the advertiser prior to transmission of the scan response packet.
Liu teaches open-loop transmit power control in which the transmitting device independently determines its transmit power without requiring feedback from the receiving device, wherein the Bluetooth device is unaware of the setting of the adjusted transmit power by the advertiser prior to transmission of the scan response packet, “Open-loop power control refers to a method in which a receiving end does not need to feed back a receiving situation, and a transmitting end determines a transmitted power by itself.”, and “Uplink open-loop power control, also known as reverse link open-loop power control, refers to a method in which a terminal does not need an access network device to feed back a receiving situation, and the terminal determines a transmitted power by itself.” [0003].
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the invention to further modify the combined system of Miller and Pattabiraman to employ Liu’s open-loop transmit power control technique because allowing the advertiser to independently determine the transmit power without requiring prior feedback from the Bluetooth device reduces signaling overhead while maintaining effective communication. Such a modification merely applies Liu’s known transmit power control technique to Miller’s Bluetooth advertising procedure as modified by Pattabiraman to obtain the predictable result that the Bluetooth device is unaware of the advertiser’s adjusted transmit power prior to transmission of the scan response packet.
Regarding Claim 13, Miller, Pattabiraman, and Liu disclose the limitations of claim 13 as recited above in the rejection of claim 12. In addition, Pattabiraman further teaches wherein the processing unit uses a look up to set the adjusted transmit power, “The storage 118 includes a link metric record 124, page power selector map 125, and inquiry response log 126.” [Col. 4, lines 19-21], and “The map 125 contains instructions, data, logic, artificial intelligence, or other data or decision-making capability to determine which transmit level is appropriate to transmit pending pages. “ [Col. 5, lines 52-54], and “The map 125's selection of transmit power is based upon the signal quality level measured for the particular remote device to be paged.” [Col. 5, lines 55-57], and “Accordingly, the map 125 correlates different signal quality levels with the appropriate paging transmit power to be used when a device exhibits that signal quality level.” [Col. 5, lines 58-60]
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the invention to further modify the combined teaching of Miller, Pattabiraman, and Liu by implementing Pattabiraman’s page power selector map 125 as a lookup table because Pattabiraman teaches correlating measured signal-quality levels with corresponding transmit-power levels using a predefined mapping. Employing such a lookup table would have predictably provided an efficient and straightforward mechanism for selecting an appropriate transmit power while conserving battery power and reducing unnecessary wireless inference.
Regarding Claim 14, Miller, Pattabiraman, and Liu disclose the limitations of claim 14 as recited above in the rejection of claim 12. In addition, Pattabiraman further teaches wherein the processing unit uses an algorithm to set the adjusted transmit power., “The map 125 contains instructions, data, logic, artificial intelligence, or other data or decision-making capability to determine which transmit level is appropriate to transmit pending pages. “ [Col. 5, lines 52-54], and “The map 125's selection of transmit power is based upon the signal quality level measured for the particular remote device to be paged. Accordingly, the map 125 correlates different signal quality levels with the appropriate paging transmit power to be used when a device exhibits that signal quality level.” [Col. 5, lines 55-60], and ““In step 407, the processor chooses a transmit power level to be used in paging the device identified in step 405. More particularly, the processor 116 applies the map 125 to the measured signal quality of the inquiry response from the particular device to be paged. This produces a prescribed transmit power level.” [Col. 9, lines 44-49]
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the invention to further modify the combined teaching of Miller, Pattabiraman, and Liu to perform the RSSI-based transmit-power setting using Pattabiraman’s algorithmic mapping technique because Pattabiraman teaches determining an appropriate transmit-power level by applying stored mapping rules to measured signal quality characteristics, thereby providing an automated and predictable mechanism for selecting transmit power based on RSSI.
Regarding Claim 15, Miller, Pattabiraman, and Liu disclose the limitations of claim 15 as recited above in the rejection of claim 12. In addition, Pattabiraman further teaches selecting transmit power based on measured signal quality, such that stronger received signal quality results in lower transmit power and weaker received signal quality results in higher transmit power, wherein the adjusted transmit power varies inversely with the RSSI, “The map 125's selection of transmit power is based upon the signal quality level measured for the particular remote device to be paged.” [Col. 5, lines 55-57], and “Accordingly, the map 125 correlates different signal quality levels with the appropriate paging transmit power to be used when a device exhibits that signal quality level.” [Col. 5, lines 58-60], and “In TABLE 2, the transmitter 114's maximum transmit power is 0 dBm, and its minimum transmit power is −20 dBm.” [Col. 6, lines 31-33]
As shown in TABLE 2, a stronger received signal (e.g., RSSI = -3 dBm) corresponds to a lower transmit power (-20 dBm), while a weaker received signal (e.g., RSSI = -70 dBm) corresponds to a higher transmit power (0 dBm). Thus, the selected transmit power varies inversely with the measured RSSI.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the invention to further modify the combined teaching of Miller, Pattabiraman, and Liu by employing Pattabiraman’s inverse RSSI-based transmit-power selection because Pattabiraman teaches reducing transmit power as received signal quality increases and increasing transmit power as received signal quality decreases. Applying this known relationship to Miller’s Bluetooth Low Energy advertising and scan-response framework would have predictably maintained reliable Bluetooth communication while conserving battery power and reducing unnecessary wireless interference.
Regarding Claim 20, Miller, Pattabiraman, and Liu disclose the limitations of claim 20 as recited above in the rejection of claim 12. In addition, Pattabiraman further teaches wherein the scan response packet is transmitted using a different transmit power than is used for the advertisement, “In step 407, the processor chooses a transmit power level to be used in paging the device identified in step 405” [Col. 9, lines 44-45], and “More particularly, the processor 116 applies the map 125 to the measured signal quality of the inquiry response from the particular device to be paged. This produces a prescribed transmit power level.” [Col. 9, lines 45-49], and “Next after step 407, the processor 116 in step 408 directs the transmitter 114 to page the device that was identified in step 405, using the transmit power level chosen in step 407” [Col. 9, lines 51-53]
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the invention to further modify the combined teaching of Miller, Pattabiraman, and Liu to apply Pattabiraman’s RSSI-based transmit-power selection to the subsequent scan-response transmission because Pattabiraman teaches selecting transmit power after evaluating received signal quality to conserve battery power while reducing unnecessary wireless interference. Applying this known technique to Miller would have predictably resulted in transmitting the scan-response packet at an RSSI-adjusted transmit power that differs from the transmit power used for the earlier advertisement.
Claims 7-8, and 16 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. §103 as being unpatentable over Miller et al. (US 20160248905 A1, hereinafter “Miller”) in view of Pattabiraman et al. (US 6856789 B2, hereinafter “Pattabiraman”), in view of Liu et al. (US 20230121034 A1, hereinafter “Liu”), and further in view of Reunamaki et al. (US 9307347 B2, hereinafter “Reunamaki”)
Regarding Claim 7, Miller, Pattabiraman, and Liu disclose the limitations of claim 7 as recited above in the rejection of claim 1. However, Miller, Pattabiraman, and Liu do not explicitly teach wherein after transmitting the scan response packet, the advertiser switches to a different channel and repeats the sequence.
Reunamaki teaches wherein after transmitting the scan response packet, the advertiser switches to a different channel and repeats the sequence, “If the advertiser receives a SCAN_REQ PDU that contains its device address from a scanner allowed by the advertising filter policy, it replies with SCAN_RSP PDU on the same advertising channel index. After the SCAN_RSP PDU is sent, or if the advertising filter policy prohibits processing the SCAN_REQ PDU, the advertiser move to the next used advertising channel index to send another ADV_IND PDU, or close the advertising event.” [Col. 14, lines 1-8], and “Next, the first BT LE compliant device applies its advertising filter policy which in this case allows a scan response SCAN RSP 1340A to be sent on the same Adv idx 38. The first BT LE compliant device moves to the next unused Adv idx 39 and sends a third connectable undirected event (ADV IND) 1350A.” [Col. 14, lines 44-49]
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the invention to further modify the combined teaching of Miller, Pattabiraman, and Liu to switch the advertiser to another advertising channels and repeat the advertising sequence after transmitting a scan response packet as taught by Reunamaki because Reunamaki teaches continuing a BLE advertising event by moving to the next advertising channel after transmitting a SCAN_RSP. Incorporating this known BLE advertising procedure would improve device discovery opportunities and increase the likelihood that scanning devices receive the advertiser’s transmissions while remaining compatible with established Bluetooth Low Energy advertising operations.
Regarding Claim 8, Miller, Pattabiraman, and Liu disclose the limitations of claim 8 as recited above in the rejection of claim 1. However, Miller, Pattabiraman, and Liu do not explicitly teach wherein the advertisement, the scan request packet and the scan response packet are transmitted on an advertising channel.
Reunamaki teaches wherein the advertisement, the scan request packet and the scan response packet are transmitted on an advertising channel, “A Bluetooth low energy device acting as an advertiser broadcasts advertising packets during advertising events on advertising channels.” [Col. 11, lines 12-14], and “If the advertiser receives a SCAN REQPDU that contains its device address from a scanner allowed by the advertising filter policy, it replies with SCAN RSP PDU on the same advertising channel index.” [Col. 14, lines 1-4], and also “As can be seen in FIG. 13A, an advertising event is started 1301A by a first BT LE compliant device as a connectable undirected event (ADV IND) 1301A on an unused advertising channel assigned advertising channel index (Adv idx) 37. A second connectable undirected event (ADV IND) 1320A is sent on Adv idx 38 by that same device. At this point, a second BTLE compliant device responds on the same Adv idx 38 with a scan request SCAN REQ 1330A. The time inter frame space (T IFS) which is the time interval between consecutive packets on same channel index is not specified here since it is not limited because the advertising interval of an connectable undirected event can be 20 ms or greater as mentioned above. Next, the first BT LE compliant device applies its advertising filter policy which in this case allows a scan response SCAN RSP 1340A to be sent on the same Adv idx 38.” [Col. 14, lines 31-46]. Figure 13A therefore expressly illustrates:
ADV_IND (advertisement) on an advertising channel,
SCAN_REQ on the same advertising channel, and
SCAN_RSP on the same advertising channel.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the invention to further modify the combined teaching of Miller, Pattabiraman, and Liu to transmit the advertisement, scan request packet, and scan response packet on Bluetooth Low Energy advertising channels as taught by Reunamaki because Reunamaki teaches this as the standard BLE advertising procedure. Incorporating this known advertising-channel communication would predictably provide compatibility with established BLE discovery and scanning operations while enabling interoperable advertiser and scanner communications.
Regarding Claim 16, Miller, Pattabiraman, and Liu disclose the limitations of claim 16 as recited above in the rejection of claim 12. However, Miller, Pattabiraman, and Liu do not explicitly teach wherein the advertisement and the scan response packet are transmitted on an advertising channel.
Reunamaki teaches wherein the advertisement and the scan response packet are transmitted on an advertising channel, “A Bluetooth low energy device acting as an advertiser broadcasts advertising packets during advertising events on advertising channels.” [Col. 11, lines 12-14], and “If the advertiser receives a SCAN REQPDU that contains its device address from a scanner allowed by the advertising filter policy, it replies with SCAN RSP PDU on the same advertising channel index.” [Col. 14, lines 1-4], and also “As can be seen in FIG. 13A, an advertising event is started 1301A by a first BT LE compliant device as a connectable undirected event (ADV IND) 1301A on an unused advertising channel assigned advertising channel index (Adv idx) 37. A second connectable undirected event (ADV IND) 1320A is sent on Adv idx 38 by that same device. At this point, a second BTLE compliant device responds on the same Adv idx 38 with a scan request SCAN REQ 1330A. The time inter frame space (T IFS) which is the time interval between consecutive packets on same channel index is not specified here since it is not limited because the advertising interval of an connectable undirected event can be 20 ms or greater as mentioned above. Next, the first BT LE compliant device applies its advertising filter policy which in this case allows a scan response SCAN RSP 1340A to be sent on the same Adv idx 38.” [Col. 14, lines 31-46]. Figure 13A therefore expressly illustrates:
ADV_IND (advertisement) on an advertising channel,
SCAN_REQ on the same advertising channel, and
SCAN_RSP on the same advertising channel.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the invention to further modify the combined teaching of Miller, Pattabiraman, and Liu to transmit the advertisement, scan request packet, and scan response packet on Bluetooth Low Energy advertising channels as taught by Reunamaki because Reunamaki teaches this as the standard BLE advertising procedure. Incorporating this known advertising-channel communication would predictably provide compatibility with established BLE discovery and scanning operations while enabling interoperable advertiser and scanner communications.
Claims 9 and 17 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. §103 as being unpatentable over Miller et al. (US 20160248905 A1, hereinafter “Miller”) in view of Pattabiraman et al. (US 6856789 B2, hereinafter “Pattabiraman”), in view of Liu et al. (US 20230121034 A1, hereinafter “Liu”), and further in view of Ericksen et al. (US 12466508 B2, hereinafter “Ericksen”)
Regarding Claim 9, Miller, Pattabiraman, and Liu disclose the limitations of claim 9 as recited above in the rejection of claim 1. However, Miller, Pattabiraman, and Liu do not explicitly teach wherein the advertisement, the scan request packet and the scan response packet are transmitted on a data channel.
Ericksen teaches wherein the advertisement, the scan request packet and the scan response packet are transmitted on a data channel, “In contrast, secondary advertisement channels (e.g., same as the data channels used during a connection- channels 0-36) are not part of the advertisement event, but rather part of the extended advertisement event.” [0131], and “Bluetooth 5 utilizes extended advertisements, e.g., a way to advertise more(offloaded)data than what’s allowed with legacy advertisements. In general, offloading is accomplished by first advertising on the primary channel that points to an auxiliary packet on the secondary channel.” [0132], and “When advertising on the LE Coded PHY, scan requests, scan responses, connection requests, and connection responses are always offloaded to the secondary channel.” [0134]
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the invention to further modify the combined teaching of Miller, Pattabiraman, and Liu to transmit the advertisement, scan request packet, and scan response packet on a secondary advertising data channel as taught by Ericksen because doing so would have predictably enabled the use of Bluetooth 5 extended advertising to offload advertising and scanning communications from the primary advertising channels, thereby permitting additional information to be transmitted and reducing interference on the primary advertising channels.
Regarding Claim 17, Miller, Pattabiraman, and Liu disclose the limitations of claim 17 as recited above in the rejection of claim 12. However, Miller, Pattabiraman, and Liu do not explicitly teach wherein the advertisement and the scan response packet are transmitted on a data channel.
Ericksen teaches Ericksen teaches wherein the advertisement, the scan request packet and the scan response packet are transmitted on a data channel, “In contrast, secondary advertisement channels (e.g., same as the data channels used during a connection- channels 0-36) are not part of the advertisement event, but rather part of the extended advertisement event.” [0131], and “Bluetooth 5 utilizes extended advertisements, e.g., a way to advertise more(offloaded)data than what’s allowed with legacy advertisements. In general, offloading is accomplished by first advertising on the primary channel that points to an auxiliary packet on the secondary channel.” [0132], and “When advertising on the LE Coded PHY, scan requests, scan responses, connection requests, and connection responses are always offloaded to the secondary channel.” [0134]
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the invention to further modify the combined teaching of Miller, Pattabiraman, and Liu to transmit the advertisement, scan request packet, and scan response packet on a secondary advertising data channel as taught by Ericksen because doing so would have predictably enabled the use of Bluetooth 5 extended advertising to offload advertising and scanning communications from the primary advertising channels, thereby permitting additional information to be transmitted and reducing interference on the primary advertising channels.
Claims 10 and 18 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. §103 as being unpatentable over Miller et al. (US 20160248905 A1, hereinafter “Miller”) in view of Pattabiraman et al. (US 6856789 B2, hereinafter “Pattabiraman”), in view of Liu et al. (US 20230121034 A1, hereinafter “Liu”), further in view of Ericksen et al. (US 12466508 B2, hereinafter “Ericksen”), and further in view of Sato (US 11057951 B2, hereinafter “Sato”)
Regarding Claim 10, Miller, Pattabiraman, Liu, and Ericksen disclose the limitations of claim 10 as recited above in the rejection of claim 9. However, Miller, Pattabiraman, Liu, and Ericksen do not explicitly teach teaches wherein information to be sent from the advertiser to the Bluetooth device in response to the scan request packet cannot all be contained within the scan response packet and wherein the advertiser transmits additional response packets using the adjusted transmit power.
Sato teaches wherein information to be sent from the advertiser to the Bluetooth device in response to the scan request packet cannot all be contained within the scan response packet, “When a central device 1610 receives (step S1601) an AUX_ADV_IND packet that a peripheral device 1600 transmits, the central device 1610 transmits (step S1602) to the peripheral device 1600 an AUX_SCAN_REQ packet. At that time, the central device 1610 transmits an AUX_SCAN_REQ packet in the same channel as the channel in which the AUX_ADV_IND packet is received. The peripheral device 1600, after receiving the AUX_SCAN_REQ packet, transmits (step S1603) to the central device 1610 an AUX_SCAN_RSP packet having set response message data. In addition, in the case where the response message data does not all fit into the AUX_SCAN_RSP packet, the peripheral device 1600 transmits the remaining data in a subsequent AUX_CHAIN_IND packet (step S1604).” [Col. 12, lines 6-19]
and wherein the advertiser transmits additional response packets, “the peripheral device 1600 transmits the remaining data in a subsequent AUX_CHAIN_IND packet ( step S1604 ).” [Col. 12, lines 17-19]. Sato’s Figure 16 illustrates the exact sequence:
ADV_EXT_IND / AUX_ADV_IND
AUX_SCAN_REQ
AUX_SCAN_RSP
AUX_CHAIN_IND
However Sato does not explicitly teach using the adjusted transmit power. Pattabiraman, however, is already relied upon for determining and using the adjusted transmit power in transmitting responsive Bluetooth communications.
Accordingly, it would have been obvious to transmit Sato’s additional response packet (AUX_CHAIN_IND) using Pattabiraman’s adjusted transmit power technique to maintain reliable Bluetooth communication and improve communication robustness while transmitting multiple response packets.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to further modify the combine teachings of Miller, Pattabiraman, Liu, and Ericksen with Sato by employing Sato’s additional response packet (AUX_CHAIN_IND) technique when the response information exceeds the capacity of a single scan response packet. Doing so would have predictably enabled transmission of the remaining response information while continuing to use the adjusted transmit power provided by the combined teachings of Miller, Pattabiraman, Liu, and Ericksen, thereby maintaining reliable Bluetooth communication during extended advertising.
Regarding Claim 18, Miller, Pattabiraman, Liu, and Ericksen disclose the limitations of claim 18 as recited above in the rejection of claim 17. However, Miller, Pattabiraman, Liu, and Ericksen do not explicitly teach teaches wherein information to be sent from the Bluetooth network device in response to the scan request packet cannot all be contained within the scan response packet and further comprising instructions, which when executed by the processing unit, enable the Bluetooth network device to transmit additional response packets using the adjusted transmit power.
Sato teaches wherein information to be sent from the Bluetooth network device in response to the scan request packet cannot all be contained within the scan response packet, “When a central device 1610 receives (step S1601) an AUX_ADV_IND packet that a peripheral device 1600 transmits, the central device 1610 transmits (step S1602) to the peripheral device 1600 an AUX_SCAN_REQ packet. At that time, the central device 1610 transmits an AUX_SCAN_REQ packet in the same channel as the channel in which the AUX_ADV_IND packet is received. The peripheral device 1600, after receiving the AUX_SCAN_REQ packet, transmits (step S1603) to the central device 1610 an AUX_SCAN_RSP packet having set response message data. In addition, in the case where the response message data does not all fit into the AUX_SCAN_RSP packet, the peripheral device 1600 transmits the remaining data in a subsequent AUX_CHAIN_IND packet (step S1604).” [Col. 12, lines 6-19]
when executed by the processing unit, enable the Bluetooth network device to transmit additional response packets, “the peripheral device 1600 transmits the remaining data in a subsequent AUX_CHAIN_IND packet ( step S1604 ).” [Col. 12, lines 17-19]. Sato’s Figure 16 illustrates the exact sequence:
ADV_EXT_IND / AUX_ADV_IND
AUX_SCAN_REQ
AUX_SCAN_RSP
AUX_CHAIN_IND
However Sato does not explicitly teach using the adjusted transmit power. Pattabiraman, however, is already relied upon for determining and using the adjusted transmit power in transmitting responsive Bluetooth communications.
Accordingly, it would have been obvious to transmit Sato’s additional response packet (AUX_CHAIN_IND) using Pattabiraman’s adjusted transmit power technique to maintain reliable Bluetooth communication and improve communication robustness while transmitting multiple response packets.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to further modify the combine teachings of Miller, Pattabiraman, Liu, and Ericksen with Sato by employing Sato’s additional response packet (AUX_CHAIN_IND) technique when the response information exceeds the capacity of a single scan response packet. Doing so would have predictably enabled transmission of the remaining response information while continuing to use the adjusted transmit power provided by the combined teachings of Miller, Pattabiraman, Liu, and Ericksen, thereby maintaining reliable Bluetooth communication during extended advertising.
Claims 11 and 19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. §103 as being unpatentable over Miller et al. (US 20160248905 A1, hereinafter “Miller”) in view of Pattabiraman et al. (US 6856789 B2, hereinafter “Pattabiraman”), in view of Liu et al. (US 20230121034 A1, hereinafter “Liu”), further in view of Ericksen et al. (US 12466508 B2, hereinafter “Ericksen”), and further in view of Skillermark et al. (US 11490400 B2, hereinafter “Skillermark”)
Regarding Claim 11, Miller, Pattabiraman, Liu, and Ericksen disclose the limitations of claim 11 as recited above in the rejection of claim 9. However, Miller, Pattabiraman, Liu, and Ericksen do not explicitly teach transmitting an initial advertisement on an advertising channel prior to transmitting the advertisement on the data channel.
Skillermark teaches transmitting an initial advertisement on an advertising channel prior to transmitting the advertisement on the data channel, “An LE Extended Advertising transmitter may send ADV_EXT_IND PDUs 20 over the primary advertising channels 37, 38, and 39. The ADV_EXT_IND PDUs 20 may point to an AUX_ADV_IND PDU 21, also referred to as an auxiliary packet, in which the message may be transmitted. The AUX_ADV_IND PDUs 21 may be transmitted over the BLE data channels, which in this context may also be referred to as secondary advertising channels.” [Col. 3, line 60 to line 1, Col. 4]
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to further modify the combined teachings of Miller, Pattabiraman, Liu, and Ericksen with Skillermark by transmitting an initial advertisement on a primary advertising channel prior to transmitting the associated advertisement on a data channel, as taught by Skillermark, because doing so enables a scanning Bluetooth device to discover the advertisement on a primary advertising channel and obtain the channel information needed to receive the associated advertising on the data channel, thereby predictably extending the combined Bluetooth advertising method to support extended advertising while preserving the transmit power adjustment and communication reliability provided by the combined teachings.
Regarding Claim 19, Miller, Pattabiraman, Liu, and Ericksen disclose the limitations of claim 19 as recited above in the rejection of claim 17. However, Miller, Pattabiraman, Liu, and Ericksen do not explicitly teach transmit an initial advertisement on an advertising channel prior to transmitting the advertisement on the data channel.
Skillermark teaches transmit an initial advertisement on an advertising channel prior to transmitting the advertisement on the data channel, “An LE Extended Advertising transmitter may send ADV_EXT_IND PDUs 20 over the primary advertising channels 37, 38, and 39. The ADV_EXT_IND PDUs 20 may point to an AUX_ADV_IND PDU 21, also referred to as an auxiliary packet, in which the message may be transmitted. The AUX_ADV_IND PDUs 21 may be transmitted over the BLE data channels, which in this context may also be referred to as secondary advertising channels.” [Col. 3, line 60 to line 1, Col. 4]
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to further modify the combined teachings of Miller, Pattabiraman, Liu, and Ericksen with Skillermark by transmitting an initial advertisement on a primary advertising channel prior to transmitting the associated advertisement on a data channel, as taught by Skillermark, because doing so enables a scanning Bluetooth device to discover the advertisement on a primary advertising channel and obtain the channel information needed to receive the associated advertising on the data channel, thereby predictably extending the combined Bluetooth advertising method to support extended advertising while preserving the transmit power adjustment and communication reliability provided by the combined teachings.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record not relied upon and considered pertinent to Applicant’s disclosure:
Viswanadham et al. (US 20160100276 A1) - Bluetooth Scanning Enhancements, discloses Methods and systems for storing data regarding received advertising packets are disclosed. An example method involves determining parameters of at least one batch-scan mode for a Bluetooth device. The parameters of the at least one batch-scan mode specify a format for storing data regarding particular advertising packets that are received by the Bluetooth device when operating in the at least one batch-scan mode. The method also involves receiving, by the Bluetooth device, one or more advertising packets on an interval basis. Further, the method involves storing data regarding the one or more advertising packets into a memory of the Bluetooth device in accordance with the at least one batch-scan mode. And the method involves providing the stored data regarding the one or more advertising packets to the host Bluetooth stack.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to SANG PHUOC LE whose telephone number is (571)272-3659. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Thursday 7:00 am - 5:30 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, Charles Appiah can be reached at 571-272-7904. 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.
SANG PHUOC. LE
Examiner
Art Unit 2641
/SANG PHUOC LE/Examiner, Art Unit 2641
/CHARLES N APPIAH/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2641
Prosecution Insights