Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status
The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
Response to Arguments
Claims 1, 7, and 12 are amended.
Claims 1-3, 6-14, and 16 are presently pending
Applicant's arguments filed 20 February 2026 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
Regarding Applicant’s Remarks with respect to the rejections of the claims under 35 USC 112(a) (see Remarks, pg. 6), the Examiner disagrees. Applicant argues that the recitation of (Emphasis added) “synchronize a power of the second transmission interface and a second reception interface of the A/V receiving device using a second frequency band” is supported by [0140] of the Instant Specification, arguing that the limitation means that the second frequency band is utilized by the second reception/transmission interfaces to receive/transmit A/V data. This is a direct contradiction to the arguments made by Applicant in the Remarks filed on 07 November 2025 that specifically argued that the synchronization was being performed over the second frequency band (see Remarks filed on 07 November 2025, pg. 8, ¶4). As Applicant has specifically argued two different interpretations of the same limitation (it is noted that no amendments to the limitation in question have been submitted), there is evidence that the limitation as presently recited reflects two different and distinct interpretations, which renders the scope of the claims indefinite. As such, since the limitation was not amended and the previously argued interpretation of the limitation remains a valid interpretation under BRI, the claim limitation is still be directed to the subject matter which is unsupported by the original disclosure.
Regarding Applicant’s arguments against the rejection of the claims under 35 USC 103 (see Remarks, pgs. 6-10), the Examiner disagrees. Applicant argues “it is not believed that Examine would not disagree with the following position: Robinson, Pai, Vergoossen and Finnegan fail to explicitly disclose: ‘…the second transmission interface and the second reception interface communicate using a high-frequency band different from the low-frequency band’ (see Remarks, pg. 8). The Examiner indeed disagrees. Applicant argues with respect to Claim 7 which specifically recites the first transmission frequency communicating at 2.4 GHz, and the second transmission frequency communicating at 60 GHz. The Examiner notes that the test for obviousness is not whether the features of a secondary reference may be bodily incorporated into the structure of the primary reference; nor is it that the claimed invention must be expressly suggested in any one or all of the references. Rather, the test is what the combined teachings of the references would have suggested to those of ordinary skill in the art. Furthermore, one cannot show nonobviousness by attacking references individually where the rejections are based on combinations of references. See In re Keller, 642 F.2d 413, 208 USPQ 871 (CCPA 1981); In re Merck & Co., 800 F.2d 1091, 231 USPQ 375 (Fed. Cir. 1986).
In the Final Rejection mailed out on 07 August 2025 (hereinafter the Final), Finnegan was introduced to teach wherein two different transceiver pairs could be utilized between source and sink devices, wherein a first low power transceiver pair operates to detect some sensor or activation signal which in turn causes activation/powering on of a secondary high-power transceiver pair that is utilized for transmission of A/V data from the source device to the sink device (see Final, pg. 9). Finnegan [0008, 0040-46, 0049, 0052, 0065-66] collectively teach wherein the low-power transceiver utilizes a BLE communication channel, and where the high-power transceivers may comprise any higher power or higher capacity/bandwidth channel such as WiFi or WiMax, etc. It is implicitly understood by those of ordinary skill in the art that BLE is a specific low power wireless protocol that operates on a 2.4GHz frequency Band. It is also implicitly understood by those of ordinary skill in the art that WiFi and WiMax are both operable to operate at higher frequency bands (WiFi may operate at 5GHz, and WiMax may operate at frequency bands as high as 11GHz). It would be readily understood from the teachings of Finnegan that the use of these two transceivers could comprise the claimed first transmission/reception interfaces and second transmission/reception interfaces communicating in respective low-frequency and high-frequency bands. Such properties of these various communication protocols are supported at least by Perwej, Yusuf. “The Next Generation of Wireless Communication Using Li-Fi (Light Fidelity) Technology”, Journal of Computer Networks. (Table 1. The Comparison of Li-Fi & Wi-Fi & WiMAX and Bluetooth). 2017, 4(1), 20-29 doi:10.12591/jcn-4-1-3; and Dhawan, Sanjeev. “Analogy of Promising Wireless Technologies on Different Frequencies: Bluetooth, WiFi, and WiMAX” The 2nd International Conference on Wireless Broadband and Ultra Wideband Communications (AusWireless 2007). Downloaded on March 13,2026 from IEEE Xplore.
With respect to Applicant’s arguments against Shao (see Remarks, pg. 8), it is noted that Shao is introduced to teach that the higher-frequency band could be a frequency band of 60GHz. It was previously taught by the combination of Robinson, Pai, Vergoossen, and Finnegan that any high-powered/high-capacity wireless protocol could be used as the second communication interface/channel, including for example WiFi and WiMAX and the like. Shao teaches that a known wireless standard for high-capacity video transmission (such as that of Robinson, Pai, Vergoossen, and Finnegan) may include mmW radio which operates at a 60 GHz band. It would have been obvious to utilize mmW operating at the 60GHz band as it would be a known substitute for the operating protocols disclosed and taught by Robinson, Pai, Vergoossen, and Finnegan. As such, the combined teachings of the Prior Art disclose, teach, and suggest all of the limitations of the claimed invention.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112(a)
The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of 35 U.S.C. 112(a):
(a) IN GENERAL.—The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor or joint inventor of carrying out the invention.
The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112:
The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor of carrying out his invention.
Claims 1-3, 6-14, and 16 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(a) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), first paragraph, as failing to comply with the written description requirement. The claim(s) contains subject matter which was not described in the specification in such a way as to reasonably convey to one skilled in the relevant art that the inventor or a joint inventor, or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the inventor(s), at the time the application was filed, had possession of the claimed invention.
Claims 1 and 12 recite “synchronize a power of the second transmission interface and a second reception interface of the A/V receiving device using a second frequency band”, which Applicant has previously argued means that ‘such synchronization is performed using a second frequency band….different from a first frequency band that is used to transmit the acquired sensing data’ (see Remarks filed 07 November 2025, pg. 8), pointing to [Fig. 5] and the corresponding disclosure as the support for these amended features. Although Applicant newly argues an alternative interpretation of the limitation, the ambiguity and indefiniteness of the limitation causes this interpretation, under BRI, to still be covered by the scope of the claim language. See the rejection under 35 USC 112(b) below.
Examiner draws attention to [0119-149] which detail the process flow shown in [Fig. 5], and further draws attention to the embodiment of the system shown in [Fig. 2]. [0119-129] discloses that the A/V receiving device 200 (e.g., a Sink device) equipped with some motion sensor may transmit sensed data to the A/V transmitting device 100 (e.g., a Source device) via respective a first reception interface exemplified as wireless communication interface 210 (e.g., the Sink’s Bluetooth Low Energy – BLE – interface) and first transmission interface exemplified as wireless communication interface 120 (e.g., the Source’s BLE). Thus, it is evident that sensed motion data is transmitted from a Sink to a Source via some BLE interfaces.
[0130-136] describes the process of determining whether a user motion exists based on analyzing the received sensed data as above.
[0137-138] specify that if user motion is determined, the processor 190 of the device 100 (i.e., the Source’s CPU) transmits power-on instructions to the device 200 (i.e., the Sink) to the first reception interface (i.e., Sink’s BLE) via the first transmission interface (i.e., Source’s BLE). [0139-143] further explain that this received signal (i.e., power-on signal received through the BLE connection) is utilized by the microcomputer 290 of the device 200 (i.e., Sink CPU) to control the Sink’s display and second reception interface, exemplified by RF reception interface 240 (i.e., Sink’s RF), to be powered-on. [0144] notes that the Sink’s RF is thereafter made to wait to receive A/V data from the second transmission interface of device 100 (i.e., Source’s RF).
[0145-146] specify that if the processor 190 (Source’s CPU) determines that user motion exists (as per Step S505), processor 190 (Source’s CPU) may activate the second transmission interface of device 100 (i.e., Source’s RF). [0147] notes that processor 190 of the A/V transmitting device 100 (Source’s CPU) therefor synchronizes the power of the respective second transmission and reception interfaces (i.e., respective Sink RF and Source RF). [0148-151] note that subsequent to powering on both Sink RF and Source RF interfaces, A/V data may be transmitted from device 100 (Source device) to device 200 (Sink device) through the second transmission band (which is described in [0140] as using a frequency band of 60GHz compared to the 2.4 GHz frequency band of the BLE interfaces as described in [0128]).
It is noted that [0160-161] as well as [0171-180] further reiterate that the power-on signal from the device 100 (Source) to device 200 (Sink) is provided via interfaces 120/210 (i.e. BLE interfaces).
It is evident from the disclosure that all of the signaling that controls the power of both Sink RF and Source RF interfaces to be synchronized is initiated by the process of the Source Device via transmission of signal using the BLE interfaces (i.e., the first frequency band). The disclosure only ever specifies that the RF interfaces (i.e., the second frequency band) is utilized to transmit A/V data between Source and Sink devices. Thus, it cannot be said that the disclosure shows “‘such synchronization is performed using a second frequency band….different from a first frequency band that is used to transmit the acquired sensing data” as the disclosure clearly shows that such synchronization is performed via the same frequency band used to transmit the acquired sensing data. Indeed, quite to the contrary, [0181-182] of the Specification specifically states “This is because power is wasted when low-capacity data, such as sensing data and power-on signals, are transmitted and received through the RF interface 160 and RF reception interface 240, which handle high-capacity data. In other words, power waste can be prevented as the BLE chip is used as a means of transmitting and receiving sensing data and power-on signal.” As such, it is evident that the subject matter to “synchronize a power of the second transmission interface and a second reception interface of the A/V receiving device using a second frequency band” is not supported by the original disclosure and the inventor, at the time of the invention, did not have possession of the claimed invention, and such subject matter comprises new matter.
Dependent Claims 2-3, 6-11, 13-14 and 16 are rejected by nature of being dependent on Claims 1 and 12 above.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112(b)
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(b):
(b) CONCLUSION.—The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph:
The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the applicant regards as his invention.
Claims 1-3, 6-14, and 16 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor (or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the applicant), regards as the invention.
Claims 1 and 12 recite (Emphasis added): “synchronize a power of the second transmission interface and a second reception interface of the A/V receiving device using a second frequency band” which Applicant newly argues means that the second transmission and second reception interfaces communicate with each other via the second frequency band (see Remarks, pg. 6). This is in direct contradiction to Applicant’s previously made arguments specifically arguing that the same limitation meant that the synchronization was performed via the second frequency band (Remarks, submitted on 07 November 2025, pg. 8). As the limitation in question has not been amended, the contradictory arguments presented by Applicant therefore provide evidence that the above limitation is indefinite as there are two different and distinct interpretations of the limitations that materially affect the scope of the claim. As such, in light of Applicant’s newly made arguments, the Claims are deemed to be indefinite as it is unclear what element of the limitation is definitively ‘using a second frequency band’.
Dependent Claims 2-3, 6-11, 13-14 and 16 are rejected by nature of being dependent on Claims 1 and 12 above.
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 of this title, 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 set forth in Graham v. John Deere Co., 383 U.S. 1, 148 USPQ 459 (1966), that are applied for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows:
1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art.
2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue.
3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art.
4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness.
Claims 1-3, 6, 10-14, and 16 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Robinson (US 2016/0127765 A1) (of record, hereinafter Robinson), in view of Pai (US 2014/0341533 A1) (of record, hereinafter Pai), further in view of Vergoossen et al. (US 2011/0062794 A1) (of record, hereinafter Vergoossen), and further in view of Finnegan (US 2018/0109999 A1) (of record, hereinafter Finnegan).
Regarding Claim 1, Robinson discloses a wireless display system, [Figs. 1-2] comprising:
an Audio/Video (A/V) receiving device [Fig. 1: display device 104] configured to:
acquire sensing data, [Fig. 1, 3; 0015, 0019-20: status sensor may detect presence or condition of viewers in the viewing environment, where sensor may include any sort of sensors and where sensor 108 may be incorporated in display device 104] and
transmit the acquired sensing data to an A/V transmitting device through a first reception interface using a first frequency band; [Figs. 1-3: 0019-0020, 0039: status sensor 108 (which may be incorporated in display device 104) may be in wired or wireless connection to television receiver 102 and provide sensor data to viewer status engine 110 in television receiver 102; 0024: where any variety of network interfaces may be used to communicate between devices (where it would be implicitly understood that wireless communication between devices would occur over a frequency band)] and
the A/V transmitting device [Figs. 1-2: television receiver 102] configured to:
receive the sensing data from the first reception interface through a first transmission interface, [Figs. 1-3: 0019-0020, 0039: status sensor 108 (which may be incorporated in display device 104) may be in wired or wireless connection to television receiver 102 and provide sensor data to viewer status engine 110 in television receiver 102; 0024: where any variety of network interfaces may be used to communicate between devices]
determine whether a user's presence is detected based on the sensing data, [Figs. 1-4: 0039-42: status data is analyzed to determine if a viewer is absent and/or present in the viewing environment, including if the viewer has left and subsequently if a viewer has returned to the viewing environment] and
when it is determined that the user's presence is detected, transmit a control signal to the first reception interface through the first transmission interface. [Figs. 1-4: 0039-42, 0047-50: where absence of viewer may cause receiver 102 to instruct display device 104 to initiate sleep/standby mode, and cause output/resumption of video content on the display device 104 upon return of user; 0051: where receiver may transmit signals to turn on/resume original states of various connected devices]
Robinson fails to explicitly disclose determine whether a user's motion has occurred based on the sensing data, and when it is determined that the user's motion has occurred, transmit a power-on signal to the first reception interface through the first transmission interface. (Emphasis on the particular elements of the limitations not explicitly disclosed by Robinson).
Pai, in analogous art, teaches determine whether a user's motion has occurred based on the sensing data, [Figs. 1-2, 5; 0016, 0032, 0036-0038, 0047-49: system monitors if motion was detected (step 506), and if so, may determine if display 321 is active or not, and if not, may generate a control to activate the television display] and
when it is determined that the user's motion has occurred, transmit a power-on signal to the first reception interface through the first transmission interface. [Figs. 1-2, 5; 0016, 0032, 0036-0038, 0047-49: system monitors if motion was detected (step 506), and if so, may determine if display 321 is active or not, and if not, may generate a control to activate the television display; 0022-23, 0033-35: where wireless implementations may include one or more transmitters/receivers/antenna]
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the filing date of the invention to modify the system of Robinson with the teachings of Pai to specify transmitting a power on signal to a television device upon determining a user’s motion has occurred to provide automated powering off/on of a television display in order to provide energy conservation without requiring any action on the part of the user. [Pai – 0001, 0016]
Robinson and Pai fail to explicitly disclose to activate a second transmission interface including a plurality of transmission antennas according to the power-on signal, synchronize a power of the transmission interface and a reception interface of the A/V receiving device, and transmit A/V data to the reception interface through the activated transmission interface.
Vergoossen, in analogous art, teaches disclose to activate a transmission interface according to the power-on signa, synchronize a power of the transmission interface and a reception interface of the A/V receiving device, and transmit A/V data to the reception interface through the activated transmission interface. [Vergoossen – 0040-45, 0093: upon receiving wake-up signal (such as the power on signal of Robinson and Pai), both sink and source devices are instructed to turn on the communications channel for transmission of video data (i.e., some transmission interface is activated according to a power-on signal)]
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the filing date of the invention to modify the system of Robinson and Pai with the teachings of Vergoossen to specify the A/V receiving device being configured to activate a transmission/reception interface according to a power on signal in order to synchronize power states of a sink and source to ensure reduced power consumption while ensuring both sink and source are operating in the same mode. [Vergoossen – ABST; 0019, 0047]
Robinson, Pai, and Vergoossen fail to explicitly disclose to activate a second transmission interface including a plurality of transmission antennas according to the power-on signal; the second transmission interface and a second reception interface of the A/V receiving device using a second frequency band; wherein the first transmission interface and the first reception interface communicate using a low-frequency band, and the second transmission interface and the second reception interface communicate using a high-frequency band different from the low-frequency band. (Emphasis on the particular elements of the limitations not explicitly disclosed by Robinson, Pai, and Vergoossen – namely a second, separate transmission interface comprising a plurality of antennas, and wherein the first and second interfaces respectively use a first low-frequency band and a second high-frequency band).
Finnegan, in analogous art, teaches disclose to activate a second transmission interface including a plurality of transmission antennas according to the power-on signal; [Fig. 7; 0008, 0042-43, 0046-47, 0065-68: a source device 701 may be wirelessly connected to a sink device 751 via a wireless transceivers 703/753 (i.e., first reception/transmission interfaces) that may monitor for sensor or other activation signaling, upon which time a first transceiver 707/757 (i.e., second reception/transmission interfaces) are activated and turned on as a primary communication channel for transmission of source data; 0066-67: where each transceiver may comprises one or more antennas to facilitate operation of the transceivers. See also MPEP 2144.04(VI)(B)]
the second transmission interface and a second reception interface of the A/V receiving device using a second frequency band; wherein the first transmission interface and the first reception interface communicate using a low-frequency band, and the second transmission interface and the second reception interface communicate using a high-frequency band different from the low-frequency band. [ Fig. 7; 0008, 0042-43, 0046-47, 0065-68: a source device 701 may be wirelessly connected to a sink device 751 via a wireless transceivers 703/753 (i.e., first reception/transmission interfaces) that may monitor for sensor or other activation signaling (such as the synced wake-up signal of Robinson, Pai, and Vergoossen), upon which time a first transceiver 707/757 (i.e., second reception/transmission interfaces) are activated and turned on as a primary communication channel for transmission of source data; 0008, 0040-46, 0049, 0052, 0065-66: where secondary monitoring interface may comprise a low-power wireless modality such as BLE (i.e., first transmission/reception interfaces) and higher power/capacity/bandwidth channel is used to transmit A/V data (i.e., second transmission/reception interfaces) such as WiFi or WiMax, etc. – where it would be inferably understood by one of ordinary skill in the art that Bluetooth operates at 2.4GHz, and where WiFi may operate at 5GHz and WiMax may operate up to the 11GHz band. See MPEP 2144.01]
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the filing date of the invention to modify the system of Robinson, Pai, and Vergoossen with the teachings of Finnegan to specify use of a second reception interface in order to save power by maintaining high-power/high-capacity communications interfaces (such as WiFi/WiMax which may operate in higher frequency bands) in quiescent states except when activated by data transmitted over a second low-power communication interface. [Finnegan – 0005-8, 0042, 0066]
Regarding Claim 2, Robinson, Pai, Vergoossen, and Finnegan disclose all of the limitations of Claim 1 which are analyzed as previously discussed with respect to that claim.
Furthermore, Robinson and Pai disclose wherein the A/V receiving device is further configured to turn on a screen of a display according to the power-on signal received through the first reception interface. [Robinson - Figs. 1-4: 0039-42, 0047-50: where absence of viewer may cause receiver 102 to instruct display device 104 to initiate sleep/standby mode, and cause output/resumption of video content on the display device 104 upon return of user; 0051: where receiver may transmit signals to turn on/resume original states of various connected devices; Pai - Figs. 1-2, 5; 0016, 0032, 0036-0038, 0047-49: system monitors if motion was detected (step 506), and if so, may determine if display 321 is active or not, and if not, may generate a control to activate the television display; 0022-23, 0033-35: where wireless implementations may include one or more transmitters/receivers/antenna]
Regarding Claim 3, Robinson, Pai, Vergoossen, and Finnegan disclose all of the limitations of Claim 2 which are analyzed as previously discussed with respect to that claim.
Furthermore, Vergoossen and Finnegan disclose wherein the A/V transmitting device is further configured to activate the second reception interface including a plurality of transmission antennas according to the power-on signal. [Vergoossen – 0040-45, 0093: upon receiving wake-up signal, both sink (reception interface) and source devices are instructed to turn on the communications channel for transmission of video data; Finnegan – Fig. 7; 0008, 0042-43, 0046-47, 0065-68: a source device 701 may be wirelessly connected to a sink device 751 via a wireless transceivers 703/753 (i.e., first reception/transmission interfaces) that may monitor for sensor or other activation signaling (such as the wake-up signal of Robinson, Pai, and Vergoossen), upon which time a first transceiver 707/757 (i.e., second reception/transmission interfaces) are activated and turned on as a primary communication channel for transmission of source data; 0066-67: where each transceiver may comprises one or more antennas to facilitate operation of the transceivers. See also MPEP 2144.04(VI)(B)]
Regarding Claim 6, Robinson, Pai, Vergoossen, and Finnegan disclose all of the limitations of Claim 3 which are analyzed as previously discussed with respect to that claim.
Furthermore, Finnegan discloses wherein each of the first transmission interface and the first reception interface includes a circuit using the Bluetooth Low Energy (BLE) standard. [Finnegan – Fig. 7; 0008, 0040-46, 0049, 0052, 0066: where secondary monitoring interface may comprise a low-power wireless modality such as BLE]
Regarding Claim 10, Robinson, Pai, Vergoossen, and Finnegan disclose all of the limitations of Claim 3 which are analyzed as previously discussed with respect to that claim.
Furthermore, Robinson, Pai, Vergoossen, and Finnegan wherein the A/V receiving device includes:
a display, [Robinson – Figs. 1-2, 6; 0020: display device 104 ; Pai – Figs. 1-4; 0027-28: output devices may include a display/television]
a motion sensor configured to acquire the sensing data, [Robinson – Figs. 1-2; 0019-20: status sensor 108 which may be incorporated with the display device 104; Pai – Figs. 1-4; 0026, 0032, 0036: where the output 104 may comprise an integrated motion sensor 102]
the first reception interface configured to transmit the sensing data to the first transmission interface, [Robinson – Figs. 1-2, 6; 0018-21, 0024, 0028, 0052: receiver 102 and display 104 may be operative across one or more two-way communication links for providing data wireless through any type of communication channels; Pai – Figs. 1-4; 0022-24, 0030-33: where wireless implementations may include one or more transmitters/receivers/antenna. See also MPEP 2144.04(VI)(B); Finnegan – Fig. 7; 0008, 0040-46, 0049, 0052, 0066: transceivers 703/753 (i.e., first reception/transmission interfaces) that may monitor for sensor or other activation signaling (such as the wake-up signal of Robinson, Pai, and Vergoossen),]
the second reception interface comprising a plurality of reception antennas and configured to receive the A/V data from the second transmission interface, [Robinson – Figs. 1-2, 6; 0018-21, 0024, 0028: television interface 212 for outputting a video signal to display; Pai – Figs. 1-4; 0022-24, 0030-33: where wireless implementations may include one or more transmitters/receivers/antenna. See also MPEP 2144.04(VI)(B); Finnegan – Fig. 7; 0008, 0042, 0046-47, 0065-68: transceiver 707/757 (i.e., second reception/transmission interfaces) are activated and turned on as a primary communication channel for transmission of source data] and
a microcomputer configured to turn on a screen of a display and activate the second reception interface according to the power-on signal received from the first transmission interface. [Robinson – Figs. 1-2, 6; 0019-22, 0041, 0050-51: viewer status engine 110 may send power down/up commands to respective connected devices; Pai – Figs. 1-4; 0032, 0039-40, 0043: processing component for commanding display into sleep/powered down state, and/or activated out of sleep/powered down state. See also MPEP 2144.04(VI)(B); Vergoossen – 0040-48, 0093: upon receiving wake-up signal (such as the power on signal of Robinson and Pai), both sink and source devices are instructed to turn on the communications channel for transmission of video data; Finnegan – Fig. 7; 0008, 0042, 0046-47, 0065-68: transceiver 707/757 (i.e., second reception/transmission interfaces) are activated and turned on as a primary communication channel for transmission of source data]
Regarding Claim 11, Robinson, Pai, Vergoossen, and Finnegan disclose all of the limitations of Claim 10 which are analyzed as previously discussed with respect to that claim.
Furthermore, Robinson, Pai, Vergoossen, and Finnegan disclose wherein the A/V transmitting device includes:
the first transmission interface configured to receive the sensing data from the first reception interface, [Robinson – Figs. 1-2, 6; 0018-21, 0024, 0028, 0052: receiver 102 and display 104 may be operative across one or more two-way communication links for providing data wireless through any type of communication channels; Pai – Figs. 1-4; 0022-24, 0030-33: where wireless implementations may include one or more transmitters/receivers/antenna. See also MPEP 2144.04(VI)(B)]
the second transmission interface comprising a plurality of transmission antennas and configured to transmit the A/V data, [Robinson – Figs. 1-2, 6; 0018-21, 0024, 0028: television interface 212 for outputting a video signal to display; Pai – Figs. 1-4; 0022-24, 0030-33: where wireless implementations may include one or more transmitters/receivers/antenna; Vergoossen – 0040-48, 0093: upon receiving wake-up signal, both sink and source devices are instructed to turn on the communications channel for transmission of video data; Finnegan – Fig. 7; 0008, 0042, 0046-47, 0065-68] and
a processor configured to determine whether the user’s motion has occurred based on the sensing data, [Robinson – Figs. 1-2, 6; 0019-22, 0041, 0050-51: viewer status engine 110 may send power down/up commands to respective connected devices; Pai – Figs. 1-4; 0032, 0039-40, 0043: processing component for commanding display into sleep/powered down state, and/or activated out of sleep/powered down state based on motion data; Vergoossen – 0040-48, 0093]
wherein the processor is further configured to generate the power-on signal when it is determined that the user's motion has occurred. [Robinson – Figs. 1-2, 6; 0019-22, 0041, 0050-51: viewer status engine 110 may send power down/up commands to respective connected devices; Pai – Figs. 1-4; 0032, 0039-40, 0043: processing component for commanding display into sleep/powered down state, and/or activated out of sleep/powered down state. See also MPEP 2144.04(VI)(B); Vergoossen – 0040-48, 0093]
Regarding Claim 12, Claim 12 recites a method that recites the functionality of the system of Claim 1. As such, Claim 12 is analyzed and rejected similarly as Claim 1, mutatis mutandis.
Regarding Claim 13, Robinson and Pai disclose all of the limitations of Claim 12 which are analyzed as previously discussed with respect to that claim.
Furthermore, Claim 13 recites nearly identical limitations as Claim 2 and is rejected similarly as that claim.
Regarding Claim 14, Robinson and Pai disclose all of the limitations of Claim 13 which are analyzed as previously discussed with respect to that claim.
Furthermore, Claim 14 recites nearly identical limitations as Claim 3 and is rejected similarly as that claim.
Regarding Claim 16, Robinson, Pai, Vergoossen, and Finnegan disclose all of the limitations of Claim 3 which are analyzed as previously discussed with respect to that claim.
Furthermore, Robinson, Pai, Vergoossen, and Finnegan disclose wherein the A/V transmitting device is further configured to synchronize the power of the second transmission interface and the second reception interface based on a user's motion. [Robinson – Figs. 1-4: 0039-42: status data is analyzed to determine if a viewer is absent and/or present in the viewing environment, including if the viewer has left and subsequently if a viewer has returned to the viewing environment; Pai – Figs. 1-2, 5; 0016, 0032, 0036-0038, 0047-49: system monitors if motion was detected (step 506), and if so, may determine if display 321 is active or not, and if not, may generate a control to activate the television display; Vergoossen – ABST; 0019, 0047: based on power on signal, power states between sink and source devices (reception and transmission interfaces, respectively) are synchronized; Finnegan – Fig. 7; 0008, 0042, 0046-47, 0065-68]
Claim(s) 7 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Robinson, Pai, Vergoossen, and Finnegan as applied to Claim 6 above, and further in view of Shao et al. (US 2012/0002103 A1) (of record, hereinafter Shao).
Regarding Claim 7, Robinson, Pai, Vergoossen, and Finnegan disclose all of the limitations of Claim 6 which are analyzed as previously discussed with respect to that claim.
Furthermore, Robinson, Pai, and Finnegan disclose wherein the first transmission interface and the first reception interface communicate using the low-frequency band of 2.4 GHz, [Finnegan – Fig. 7; 0008, 0040-46, 0049, 0052, 0066: where secondary monitoring interface may comprise a low-power wireless modality such as BLE (where BLE functions on 2.4GHz frequency band)] and
the second transmission interface and the second reception interface communicate using the high-frequency bandwidth. [Robinson – 0020, 0024, 0029, 0062: where any variety of network interfaces may be used to communicate between devices; Pai – 0019, 0023, 033, 0072; Finnegan – 0008, 0040-46, 0049, 0052, 0065-66: higher power/capacity/bandwidth channel may be WiFi or WiMax, etc. – where WiFi may operate at 5GHz and WiMax may operate up to the 11GHz band. See MPEP 2144.01]
Robinson, Pai, Vergoossen, and Finnegan fail to explicitly disclose the second transmission interface and the second reception interface communicate using a frequency band of 60 GHz. (Emphasis on the particular elements of the limitations not explicitly disclosed by Robinson, Pai, Vergoossen, and Finnegan).
Shao, in analogous art, teaches the second transmission interface and the second reception interface communicate using a frequency band of 60 GHz.
[0020: wherein wireless communications between devices for video transmission may utilize any various standards including WiFi radio (e.g., 2.4Ghz band) and/or mmW radio (e.g., 60 GHz band)]
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the filing date of the invention to modify the system of Robinson, Pai, Vergoossen, and Finnegan with the teachings of Shao to specify use of a 60GHz frequency band as it is understood that mmW radio bands are a known wireless standard/protocol that may be used to wirelessly communicate video transmissions. [Shao – 0020]
Claim(s) 8-9 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Robinson, Pai, Vergoossen, and Finnegan as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Kyung et al. (US 2013/0235364 A1) (of record, hereinafter Kyung)
Regarding Claim 8, Robinson, Pai, Vergoossen, and Finnegan disclose all of the limitations of Claim 1 which are analyzed as previously discussed with respect to that claim.
Robinson, Pai, Vergoossen, and Finnegan fail to explicitly disclose wherein the A/V receiving device further includes a Time of Flight (ToF) sensor configured to: measure distance data between the user and the A/V receiving device, and obtain the measured distance data as the sensing data.
Kyung, in analogous art, teaches wherein the A/V receiving device further includes a Time of Flight (ToF) sensor configured to: measure distance data between the user and the A/V receiving device, and obtain the measured distance data as the sensing data. [0004-5, 0039-42: Time of Flight sensors may measure distances to objected detected and if a change in distance is detected over time, determines that an object has moved in that scene]
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the filing date of the invention to modify the system of Robinson, Pai, Vergoossen, and Finnegan with the teachings of Kyung to specify use of a ToF sensor configured to measure distance data as ToF sensors are known type of sensor for detecting motion within a sensing field. [Kyung – ABST; 0002-5]
Regarding Claim 9 , Robinson, Pai, Vergoossen, Finnegan, and Kyung disclose all of the limitations of Claim 8 which are analyzed as previously discussed with respect to that claim.
Furthermore, Kyung discloses wherein the A/V transmitting device is further configured to: compare a first distance included in first distance data received at a first time point with a second distance included in second distance data received at a second time point following the first time point, and when a difference between the first distance and the second distance is more than a preset difference, determine that the user's motion has occurred. [Kyung – 0004-5, 0039-42: Time of Flight sensors may measure distances to objected detected and if a change in distance is detected over time, determines that an object has moved in that scene]
Conclusion
Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a). Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a).
A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of the advisory action. In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the mailing date of this final action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to WILLIAM J KIM whose telephone number is (571)272-2767. The examiner can normally be reached 9:30am - 5:30pm.
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, Hadi Armouche can be reached at (571) 270-3618. 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.
/WILLIAM J KIM/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2409