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 .
Prosecution Reopened
In view of the Pre-appeal Brief Request for Review filed on 29 June 2026 (hereinafter, “Request for Review”) PROSECUTION HAS BEEN REOPENED. New grounds of rejection are set forth below.
To avoid abandonment of the application, Appellant must exercise one of the following two options:
(1) file a reply under 37 CFR 1.111 (if this Office action is non-final) or a reply under 37 CFR 1.113 (if this Office action is final); or,
(2) initiate a new appeal by filing a notice of appeal under 37 CFR 41.31 followed by an appeal brief under 37 CFR 41.37. The previously paid notice of appeal fee and appeal brief fee can be applied to the new appeal. If, however, the appeal fees set forth in 37 CFR 41.20 have been increased since they were previously paid, then Appellant must pay the difference between the increased fees and the amount previously paid.
A Supervisory Patent Examiner (SPE) has approved of reopening prosecution by way of the Notice of Panel Decision from Pre-appeal Brief Review, dated 14 July 2026.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments, see pp. 1-4 of the Request for Review, with respect to the rejection(s) of claim(s) 1, 11, and 17 under 35 U.S.C. § 103, have been fully considered and are persuasive. Therefore, the previous rejection has been withdrawn. However, upon further consideration, a new ground(s) of rejection is made in view of a different interpretation of the previously applied reference, which interpretation is set forth in detail below.
For example, Applicant argues that the previous ground of rejection was deficient with respect to the claim limitation “generating combined sensor data by combining the first sensor data and the rotated second sensor data.” As explained below, the prior art’s procedure step of transforming each gravity vector in both sensor frames, using the corrected orientation Q1Cor of the first portion and the orientation Q2 of the second portion discloses the claim limitation.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
The following is a quotation of the appropriate paragraphs of 35 U.S.C. § 102 that form the basis for the rejections under this section made in this Office action:
A person shall be entitled to a patent unless –
(a)(1) the claimed invention was patented, described in a printed publication, or in public use, on sale, or otherwise available to the public before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
(a)(2) the claimed invention was described in a patent issued under section 151, or in an application for patent published or deemed published under section 122(b), in which the patent or application, as the case may be, names another inventor and was effectively filed before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claims 1-9 and 11-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 102(a)(1)/102(a)(2) as being anticipated by US 2023/0027806 (hereinafter, “YOUSSEF”).
Regarding claim 1, YOUSSEF discloses:
A method (Fig. 4: [R]outine for determining hinge angle constraining an axis of one portion of a device with an axis of another portion of the device), comprising:
generating first sensor data with a first inertial measurement unit (SPU 106) in a first lid (portion 124) of a foldable electronic device (device 100; ¶ 0003: [A] phone with a folding screen); ¶ 0007: Each portion includes an integrated sensor assembly configured to output motion sensor data; ¶ 0006: [O]btaining motion sensor data from a sensor assembly integrated with the first portion of the device; ¶ 0028: [E]ach sensor assembly is implemented in the form of integrated sensor processing units (SPUs) 106 and 108, which may also be termed inertial measurement units (IMUs); ¶ 0051: Q1 and Q2 represent the orientations (quaternions) determined using the information from the sensor assemblies for the first and second portions respectively)
generating second sensor data with a second inertial measurement unit (SPU 108) in a second lid (portion 126) of the foldable electronic device; (¶ 0007: Each portion includes an integrated sensor assembly configured to output motion sensor data; ¶ 0006: [O]btaining motion sensor data from a sensor assembly integrated with the second portion of the device; ¶ 0028: [E]ach sensor assembly is implemented in the form of integrated sensor processing units (SPUs) 106 and 108, which may also be termed inertial measurement units (IMUs); ¶ 0051: Q1 and Q2 represent the orientations (quaternions) determined using the information from the sensor assemblies for the first and second portions respectively)
detecting a rotation angle between the first lid and the second lid based on the first and second sensor data; (¶ 0051: [T]he constraint of the mechanical hinge means that the hinge axis of the coupled device portions must be the same for the sensors of each portion. When using orientation quaternions, it is convenient to express changes in terms of rotation around a vector. For example, FIG. 3 schematically depicts the change in a body's axes from (x, y, z) to (d1, d2, d3) due to rotation ∠ about vector b)
generating rotated second sensor data by adjusting the second sensor data based on the rotation angle; and (¶ 0051: [D]etermining a hinge correction rotation (DQ) that rotates the quaternion for a first device portion (Q1) so that the y-axis of DQ*Q1 matches the y-axis of the quaternion for a second device portion (Q2). In this example, the hinge axis is aligned with the respective y-axes, but as noted above, any sensor orientation may be used so long as the orientation with respect to the hinge axis is known. The hinge correction is a rotation along the Gravity vector, as Q1 and Q2 only drift along the Gravity axis; ¶ 0052: Beginning with 400, the [hinge]correction rotation DQ is initialized at a unit value representing an identity operation without rotation. A loop then starts in 402 by applying the DQ rotation to Q1 to obtain a corrected orientation for the first portion, Q1Cor)
generating combined sensor data by combining the first sensor data and the rotated second sensor data. (¶ 0052: The cross product of the y-axis and each of the gravity vectors G1 and G2 is taken to determine the vectors perpendicular to gravity and each y-axis in both sensor frames, Y1Perp and Y2Perp in 406, each of which is then transformed to the world frame using the corrected orientation Q1Cor of the first portion and the orientation Q2 of the second portion in 408)
Regarding claim 2, YOUSSEF, as applied above, anticipates the method of claim 1. YOUSSEF further discloses:
wherein adjusting the second sensor data includes applying to the second sensor data a rotation matrix based on the rotation angle. (¶ 0050: [U]sing Euler angles or rotation matrices to represent orientation; ¶ 0054:
PNG
media_image1.png
121
418
media_image1.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image2.png
110
427
media_image2.png
Greyscale
)
Regarding claim 3, YOUSSEF, as applied above, anticipates the method of claim 1. YOUSSEF further discloses:
generating a first accuracy value based on the first and second sensor data; and (¶¶ 0050-0052, e.g.: [A] hinge correction rotation (DQ) that rotates the quaternion for a first device portion (Q1) so that the y-axis of DQ*Q1 matches the y-axis of the quaternion for a second device portion (Q2). In this example, the hinge axis is aligned with the respective y-axes, but as noted above, any sensor orientation may be used so long as the orientation with respect to the hinge axis is known. The hinge correction is a rotation along the Gravity vector, as Q1 and Q2 only drift along the Gravity axis as discussed above. For the purposes of this description, S1 refers to the sensor frame for the first device portion, S2 to the sensor frame for the second device portion and WF to the world frame. As previously discussed, Q1 and Q2 represent the orientations (quaternions) determined using the information from the sensor assemblies for the first and second portions respectively)
generating the combined sensor data based on the first accuracy value. (¶ 0033: [A]ccelerometer data tends to be relatively noisy, while gyroscope data typically experiences significant drift in bias over time. Employing sensor fusion allows these different sources of motion information to help compensate for each other's deficiencies. Specifically, sensor fusion for SPU 106 gives the orientation of portion 124 and sensor fusion for SPU 108 gives the orientation of portion 126. By taking the difference in these orientations, an accurate estimation may be made for the absolute hinge angle)
Regarding claim 4, YOUSSEF, as applied above, anticipates the method of claim 3. YOUSSEF further discloses:
comprising generating an angle change value indicating how fast the rotation angle is changing. (¶ 0034: [A]ccelerometers are known to lack the native capability sense yaw (also termed azimuth or heading) as this involves an angular rotation with respect to vertical, i.e., the gravity axis. Gyroscopes provide only relative motion information, namely the rate of angular rotation)
Regarding claim 5, YOUSSEF, as applied above, anticipates the method of claim 4. YOUSSEF further discloses:
comprising:
generating the combined sensor data if the angle change value is less than a threshold value; and stopping generation of the combined sensor data if the angle change value is greater than or equal to the threshold value. (¶ 0003: [A] hinge angle greater than a suitable threshold but less than approximately 180° may indicate a normal mode of operation; ¶ 0034: [I]ntegration of the sensor readings may be used to determine a current orientation (including yaw) with respect to a previously known orientation but lack a fixed reference; ¶ 0054: Equation (3) relates the y-axis gyroscope data (which is the hinge angle in this embodiment) to determine variations in hinge angle over time when the difference exceeds a suitable threshold that account for offset:
PNG
media_image3.png
30
151
media_image3.png
Greyscale
)
Regarding claim 6, YOUSSEF, as applied above, anticipates the method of claim 3. YOUSSEF further discloses:
comprising generating a second accuracy value for the combined sensor based on the angle change value. (¶¶ 0050-0052, e.g.: [A] hinge correction rotation (DQ) that rotates the quaternion for a first device portion (Q1) so that the y-axis of DQ*Q1 matches the y-axis of the quaternion for a second device portion (Q2). In this example, the hinge axis is aligned with the respective y-axes, but as noted above, any sensor orientation may be used so long as the orientation with respect to the hinge axis is known. The hinge correction is a rotation along the Gravity vector, as Q1 and Q2 only drift along the Gravity axis as discussed above. For the purposes of this description, S1 refers to the sensor frame for the first device portion, S2 to the sensor frame for the second device portion and WF to the world frame. As previously discussed, Q1 and Q2 represent the orientations (quaternions) determined using the information from the sensor assemblies for the first and second portions respectively)
Regarding claim 7, YOUSSEF, as applied above, anticipates the method of claim 1. YOUSSEF further discloses:
wherein the first sensor data includes first accelerometer data and first gyroscope data, while the second sensor data includes second accelerometer data and second gyroscope data. (¶ 0033: [A]ccelerometer data tends to be relatively noisy, while gyroscope data typically experiences significant drift in bias over time. Employing sensor fusion allows these different sources of motion information to help compensate for each other's deficiencies. Specifically, sensor fusion for SPU 106 gives the orientation of portion 124 and sensor fusion for SPU 108 gives the orientation of portion 126. By taking the difference in these orientations, an accurate estimation may be made for the absolute hinge angle)
Regarding claim 8, YOUSSEF, as applied above, anticipates the method of claim 7. YOUSSEF further discloses:
wherein the combined sensor data includes combined accelerometer data and combined gyroscope data. (¶ 0033: [A]ccelerometer data tends to be relatively noisy, while gyroscope data typically experiences significant drift in bias over time. Employing sensor fusion allows these different sources of motion information to help compensate for each other's deficiencies. Specifically, sensor fusion for SPU 106 gives the orientation of portion 124 and sensor fusion for SPU 108 gives the orientation of portion 126. By taking the difference in these orientations, an accurate estimation may be made for the absolute hinge angle)
Regarding claim 9, YOUSSEF, as applied above, anticipates the method of claim 1. YOUSSEF further discloses:
wherein generating combined sensor data includes averaging the first sensor data and the rotated second sensor data. (¶ 0036: [D]ifferent rotations could be applied to both sensor frame so that their respective hinge axis align with a common vector, such as an average)
Regarding claim 11, YOUSSEF discloses:
An electronic device (device 100; ¶ 0003: [A] phone with a folding screen), comprising:
a first lid (portion 124) including a first inertial measurement unit (SPU 106) configured to generate first inertial sensor data; (¶ 0007: Each portion includes an integrated sensor assembly configured to output motion sensor data; ¶ 0006: [O]btaining motion sensor data from a sensor assembly integrated with the first portion of the device; ¶ 0028: [E]ach sensor assembly is implemented in the form of integrated sensor processing units (SPUs) 106 and 108, which may also be termed inertial measurement units (IMUs); ¶ 0051: Q1 and Q2 represent the orientations (quaternions) determined using the information from the sensor assemblies for the first and second portions respectively)
a second lid (portion 126) including a second inertial measurement unit (SPU 108) configured to generate second inertial sensor data; (¶ 0007: Each portion includes an integrated sensor assembly configured to output motion sensor data; ¶ 0006: [O]btaining motion sensor data from a sensor assembly integrated with the second portion of the device; ¶ 0028: [E]ach sensor assembly is implemented in the form of integrated sensor processing units (SPUs) 106 and 108, which may also be termed inertial measurement units (IMUs); ¶ 0051: Q1 and Q2 represent the orientations (quaternions) determined using the information from the sensor assemblies for the first and second portions respectively)
a sensor processing unit (SPU 106 / 108) configured to:
detect a rotation angle between the first lid and the second lid based on the first sensor data and the second sensor data; (¶ 0051: [T]he constraint of the mechanical hinge means that the hinge axis of the coupled device portions must be the same for the sensors of each portion. When using orientation quaternions, it is convenient to express changes in terms of rotation around a vector. For example, FIG. 3 schematically depicts the change in a body's axes from (x, y, z) to (d1, d2, d3) due to rotation ∠ about vector b)
generate rotated second sensor data by adjusting the second sensor data based on the rotation angle; and (¶ 0051: [D]etermining a hinge correction rotation (DQ) that rotates the quaternion for a first device portion (Q1) so that the y-axis of DQ*Q1 matches the y-axis of the quaternion for a second device portion (Q2). In this example, the hinge axis is aligned with the respective y-axes, but as noted above, any sensor orientation may be used so long as the orientation with respect to the hinge axis is known. The hinge correction is a rotation along the Gravity vector, as Q1 and Q2 only drift along the Gravity axis; ¶ 0052: Beginning with 400, the [hinge]correction rotation DQ is initialized at a unit value representing an identity operation without rotation. A loop then starts in 402 by applying the DQ rotation to Q1 to obtain a corrected orientation for the first portion, Q1Cor)
generate combined sensor data by combining the first sensor data and the rotated second sensor data. (¶ 0052: The cross product of the y-axis and each of the gravity vectors G1 and G2 is taken to determine the vectors perpendicular to gravity and each y-axis in both sensor frames, Y1Perp and Y2Perp in 406, each of which is then transformed to the world frame using the corrected orientation Q1Cor of the first portion and the orientation Q2 of the second portion in 408)
Regarding claim 12, YOUSSEF, as applied above, anticipates the electronic device of claim 11. YOUSSEF further discloses:
comprising a hinge rotatably coupling the first lid to the second lid. (¶ 0036: [M]echanical coupling provided by hinge 128, which allows a single degree of freedom in the orientation of portion 124 with respect to portion 126 along this shared hinge axis, but otherwise maintains the other two orthogonal axes in a fixed relationship)
Regarding claim 13, YOUSSEF, as applied above, anticipates the electronic device of claim 12. YOUSSEF further discloses:
wherein the sensor processing unit is configured to generate a first accuracy value based on the first and second sensor data and generate the combined sensor data based on the first accuracy value. (¶¶ 0050-0052, e.g.: [A] hinge correction rotation (DQ) that rotates the quaternion for a first device portion (Q1) so that the y-axis of DQ*Q1 matches the y-axis of the quaternion for a second device portion (Q2). In this example, the hinge axis is aligned with the respective y-axes, but as noted above, any sensor orientation may be used so long as the orientation with respect to the hinge axis is known. The hinge correction is a rotation along the Gravity vector, as Q1 and Q2 only drift along the Gravity axis as discussed above. For the purposes of this description, S1 refers to the sensor frame for the first device portion, S2 to the sensor frame for the second device portion and WF to the world frame. As previously discussed, Q1 and Q2 represent the orientations (quaternions) determined using the information from the sensor assemblies for the first and second portions respectively; ¶ 0033: [A]ccelerometer data tends to be relatively noisy, while gyroscope data typically experiences significant drift in bias over time. Employing sensor fusion allows these different sources of motion information to help compensate for each other's deficiencies. Specifically, sensor fusion for SPU 106 gives the orientation of portion 124 and sensor fusion for SPU 108 gives the orientation of portion 126. By taking the difference in these orientations, an accurate estimation may be made for the absolute hinge angle)
Regarding claim 14, YOUSSEF, as applied above, anticipates the electronic device of claim 13. YOUSSEF further discloses:
wherein the sensor processing unit is configured to generate an angle change value indicating how fast the rotation angle is changing. (¶ 0034: [A]ccelerometers are known to lack the native capability sense yaw (also termed azimuth or heading) as this involves an angular rotation with respect to vertical, i.e., the gravity axis. Gyroscopes provide only relative motion information, namely the rate of angular rotation)
Regarding claim 15, YOUSSEF, as applied above, anticipates the electronic device of claim 14. YOUSSEF further discloses:
wherein the sensor processing unit is configured to:
generate the combined sensor data if the angle change value is less than a threshold value; and stop generation of the combined sensor data if the angle change value is greater than or equal to the threshold value. (¶ 0003: [A] hinge angle greater than a suitable threshold but less than approximately 180° may indicate a normal mode of operation; ¶ 0034: [I]ntegration of the sensor readings may be used to determine a current orientation (including yaw) with respect to a previously known orientation but lack a fixed reference; ¶ 0054: Equation (3) relates the y-axis gyroscope data (which is the hinge angle in this embodiment) to determine variations in hinge angle over time when the difference exceeds a suitable threshold that account for offset:
PNG
media_image3.png
30
151
media_image3.png
Greyscale
)
Regarding claim 16, YOUSSEF, as applied above, anticipates the electronic device of claim 11. YOUSSEF further discloses:
wherein adjusting the second sensor data includes applying to the second sensor data a rotation matrix based on the rotation angle. (¶ 0050: [U]sing Euler angles or rotation matrices to represent orientation)
Regarding claim 17, YOUSSEF discloses:
A foldable smartphone (device 100; ¶ 0003: [A] phone with a folding screen), comprising:
a first lid (portion 124) including a first inertial measurement unit (SPU 106) configured to generate first inertial sensor data; (¶ 0007: Each portion includes an integrated sensor assembly configured to output motion sensor data; ¶ 0006: [O]btaining motion sensor data from a sensor assembly integrated with the first portion of the device; ¶ 0028: [E]ach sensor assembly is implemented in the form of integrated sensor processing units (SPUs) 106 and 108, which may also be termed inertial measurement units (IMUs); ¶ 0051: Q1 and Q2 represent the orientations (quaternions) determined using the information from the sensor assemblies for the first and second portions respectively)
a hinge coupled to the first lid; (hinge 128)
a second lid (portion 126) rotatably coupled to the first lid by the hinge and including a second inertial measurement unit (SPU 108) configured to generate second inertial sensor data; (¶ 0007: Each portion includes an integrated sensor assembly configured to output motion sensor data; ¶ 0006: [O]btaining motion sensor data from a sensor assembly integrated with the second portion of the device; ¶ 0028: [E]ach sensor assembly is implemented in the form of integrated sensor processing units (SPUs) 106 and 108, which may also be termed inertial measurement units (IMUs); ¶ 0051: Q1 and Q2 represent the orientations (quaternions) determined using the information from the sensor assemblies for the first and second portions respectively)
a sensor processing unit (SPU 106 / 108) including:
a lid angle module configured to detect an angle of rotation between the first and second lids based on the first and second sensor data; (¶ 0036: [H]inge module 122 may therefore be used to determine hinge angle for portion 124 and portion 126 by applying sensor fusion to the accelerometer and gyroscope data from SPU 106 and SPU 108 respectively to obtain their orientations relative to the world frame and then determine a constraint rotation along the vertical axis so that the hinge axis in each sensor frame is aligned. This can be a rotation applied to the orientation of SPU 106, such as represented by a quaternion, to bring its hinge axis into alignment with the hinge axis in the sensor from of SPU 108 or vice versa. Alternatively, different rotations could be applied to both sensor frame so that their respective hinge axis align with a common vector, such as an average. These techniques exploit the mechanical coupling provided by hinge 128, which allows a single degree of freedom in the orientation of portion 124 with respect to portion 126 along this shared hinge axis, but otherwise maintains the other two orthogonal axes in a fixed relationship)
a rotation module configured to generate rotated second sensor data by adjusting the second sensor data based on the angle of rotation; and (¶ 0023: [F]unctionality described herein may be provided within dedicated software modules or hardware modules; ¶ 0051: [D]etermining a hinge correction rotation (DQ) that rotates the quaternion for a first device portion (Q1) so that the y-axis of DQ*Q1 matches the y-axis of the quaternion for a second device portion (Q2). In this example, the hinge axis is aligned with the respective y-axes, but as noted above, any sensor orientation may be used so long as the orientation with respect to the hinge axis is known. The hinge correction is a rotation along the Gravity vector, as Q1 and Q2 only drift along the Gravity axis; ¶ 0052: Beginning with 400, the [hinge]correction rotation DQ is initialized at a unit value representing an identity operation without rotation. A loop then starts in 402 by applying the DQ rotation to Q1 to obtain a corrected orientation for the first portion, Q1Cor)
a combiner module configured to generate combined sensor data from the first sensor data and the rotated second sensor data. (¶ 0023: [F]unctionality described herein may be provided within dedicated software modules or hardware modules; ¶ 0052: The cross product of the y-axis and each of the gravity vectors G1 and G2 is taken to determine the vectors perpendicular to gravity and each y-axis in both sensor frames, Y1Perp and Y2Perp in 406, each of which is then transformed to the world frame using the corrected orientation Q1Cor of the first portion and the orientation Q2 of the second portion in 408)
Regarding claim 18, YOUSSEF, as applied above, anticipates the foldable smartphone of claim 17. YOUSSEF further discloses:
wherein the sensor processing unit includes angle variation detector configured to generate an angle change value indicating a rate of change of the angle of rotation. (¶ 0034: [A]ccelerometers are known to lack the native capability sense yaw (also termed azimuth or heading) as this involves an angular rotation with respect to vertical, i.e., the gravity axis. Gyroscopes provide only relative motion information, namely the rate of angular rotation)
Regarding claim 19, YOUSSEF, as applied above, anticipates the foldable smartphone of claim 18. YOUSSEF further discloses:
wherein the combiner module is configured to receive the angle change value and to generate the combined sensor data based on the angle change value. (¶ 0028: A sensor fusion operation performed by sensor processor 108, or other processing resources of device 100, combines data from internal sensor 114 to provide a six-axis determination of motion or six degrees of freedom (6DOF))
Regarding claim 20, YOUSSEF, as applied above, anticipates the foldable smartphone of claim 19. YOUSSEF further discloses:
wherein the combiner circuit is configured to generate an accuracy value of the combined sensor data. (¶¶ 0050-0052, e.g.: [A] hinge correction rotation (DQ) that rotates the quaternion for a first device portion (Q1) so that the y-axis of DQ*Q1 matches the y-axis of the quaternion for a second device portion (Q2). In this example, the hinge axis is aligned with the respective y-axes, but as noted above, any sensor orientation may be used so long as the orientation with respect to the hinge axis is known. The hinge correction is a rotation along the Gravity vector, as Q1 and Q2 only drift along the Gravity axis as discussed above. For the purposes of this description, S1 refers to the sensor frame for the first device portion, S2 to the sensor frame for the second device portion and WF to the world frame. As previously discussed, Q1 and Q2 represent the orientations (quaternions) determined using the information from the sensor assemblies for the first and second portions respectively)
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 10 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103 as being unpatentable over YOUSSEF in view of US 2022/0350373 (hereinafter, “CUI”).
Regarding claim 10, YOUSSEF, as applied above, anticipates the method of claim 1. YOUSSEF does not explicitly disclose:
wherein generating combined sensor data includes:
applying a first weight to the first sensor data based on a noise level of the rotated second sensor data; applying a second weight to the rotated second sensor data based on a noise level of the first sensor data; and
generating a weighted average of the first sensor data and second sensor data based on the first weight and the second weight.
In the same field of endeavor, however, CUI teaches:
applying a first weight to the first sensor data based on a noise level of the rotated second sensor data; applying a second weight to the rotated second sensor data based on a noise level of the first sensor data; and generating a weighted average of the first sensor data and second sensor data based on the first weight and the second weight. (¶ 0047: In the prediction step, the Kalman filter produces estimates of the current state variables, along with their uncertainties. Once the outcome of the next measurement (necessarily corrupted with some amount of error, including random noise) is observed, these estimates are updated using a weighted average, with more weight being given to estimates with higher certainty)
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify YOUSSEF’s hinge tilt estimation procedure to provide estimates that are updated using a weighted average as taught by CUI, and because with the weighted values better (i.e., smaller) values’ estimated uncertainty are “trusted” more, the weights for the values are calculated from the covariance, a measure of the estimated uncertainty of the prediction of the system's state, such that the result of the weighted average is a new state estimate that lies between the predicted and measured state. See CUI, at ¶ 0048.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the Examiner should be directed to Garth D Richmond whose telephone number is (703)756-4559. The Examiner can normally be reached M-F 8 a.m. - 5 p.m. ET.
Examiner interviews are available via telephone, in-person, and video conferencing using a USPTO supplied web-based collaboration tool. To schedule an interview, Applicant is encouraged to use the USPTO Automated Interview Request (AIR) at http://www.uspto.gov/interviewpractice.
If attempts to reach the Examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the Examiner’s supervisor, Kathy Wang-Hurst can be reached at 571-720-5371. 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.
/GARTH D RICHMOND/Examiner, Art Unit 2644
/KATHY W WANG-HURST/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2644
Prosecution Insights