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 .
DETAILED ACTION
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 103 which forms the basis for all obviousness rejections set forth in this Office action:
A patent for a claimed invention may not be obtained, notwithstanding that the claimed invention is not identically disclosed as set forth in section 102, if the differences between the claimed invention and the prior art are such that the claimed invention as a whole would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which the claimed invention pertains. Patentability shall not be negated by the manner in which the invention was made.
The factual inquiries 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.
Claim(s) 1-2 and 4-5 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over D1 US 4172255 A in view of D2 Liyuan (“A Low Complexity Asynchronous UWB TDOA Localization Method”, International Journal of Distributed Sensor Networks, Volume 2015, Article ID 675490) (and evidenced by Fuller et al.US 3714650 A).
Regarding claims 1 and 4 D1 US 4172255 A teaches
transceiver, comprising:
a transmitter;(fig. 5 P)
a receiver having a first antenna (first antenna) and a second antenna (second antenna fig. 5) separated by a first distance, d;
a non-transitory computer readable medium configured to store computer executable instructions; and(col 7 line 45-63)
one or more processors, wherein, in response to executing the computer executable instructions, the one or more processors are configured to perform a method comprising the steps of: (col 7 line 45-63)
using the first antenna to receive a transmitted signal;(fig. 5) (col 4 line 56-col 5 line 25)
using the second antenna to receive the transmitted signal; and(col 4 line 56-col 5 line 25)
using the receiver to:
develop a range, r, between the transmitter and a selected one of the first antenna and the second antenna; (col 4 line 56-col 5 line 25)(distance is calculated using two way propagation time)
develop a first time of flight value as a function of a complex baseband impulse response of the transmitted signal received by the first antenna; (col 4 line 56-col 5 line 25)
develop a second time of flight value as a function of a complex baseband impulse response of the transmitted signal received by the second antenna; (col 4 line 56-col 5 line 25)
develop a path difference value, p, as a function of the first time of flight value and the second time of flight value (col 4 line 56-col 5 line 25 phase difference is proportional to tof difference{evidenced by Fuller et al.US 3714650 A}) and
develop an (x, y) location of the transmitter relative to the receiver as a function of d, r, and p.(col 4 lines 47-55)
difference also is that P itself is not a transmitter but rather reflector and two way propagation time is calculated(col 4 line 56-col 5 line 25)
but does not explicitly teach
ultra-wide (UWB)
X and y coordinate
D2 teaches ultra-wide (UWB) (abstract) and transformation from r theta to X and y coordinate (page 6)
Instead of using reflector using two antennas for reception and one transmitter(passive listening type)
It would be obvious to one of ordinary skills in the art at the time of the filing to modify invention by D1 with invention by D2 in order make positioning in Ultra wide band domain and represent the position of the reflector in cartesian coordinates.
2, 5 (Original) The UWB transceiver of claim 1, wherein d is less than or equal to one half of a wavelength, of the transmitted signal.(D1 col 5 lines 12-14)
Claim(s) 3, 6 are is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over D1 US 4172255 A in view of D2 Liyuan (“A Low Complexity Asynchronous UWB TDOA Localization Method”, International Journal of Distributed Sensor Networks, Volume 2015, Article ID 675490) (and evidenced by Fuller et al.US 3714650 A) also further in view of/evidenced by Royal US 3886555 A .
Regarding claims 3, 6 D1 teaches
3, 6 (Original) The UWB transceiver of claim 1, wherein a processor is configured to develop the path difference value, p, as the function of a first phase value and a second phase value by developing the path difference value, p, as the function of the first time of flight value, the second time of flight value, (implicit / obvious col 5 lines 3-24 .PHI.(.DELTA.)=k.sub.o *d *sin .alpha.(.DELTA.) as .PHI.(.DELTA.) depends on path difference which is the same as TOF difference and system should be calibrated although not explicit to obtain correct TOF hence calibration should be present in phase difference calculation but in any case Royal US 3886555 A explicitly teaches performing calibration to remove phase errors )
But does not explicitly say
of a selected calibration function
Royal US 3886555 A explicitly teaches performing calibration to remove phase errors (which inherently means using calibration function)(col 1 lines 10-24)
It would be obvious to one of ordinary skills in the art at the time of the filing to modify invention by D1 with invention by Royal in order to remove phase errors.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to HELENA SERAYDARYAN whose telephone number is (571)270-0706. The examiner can normally be reached on M-T, 7:30-5pm.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Resha Desai can be reached on (571)270-7792. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300.
Information regarding the status of an application may be obtained from the Patent Application Information Retrieval (PAIR) system. Status information for published applications may be obtained from either Private PAIR or Public PAIR. Status information for unpublished applications is available through Private PAIR only. For more information about the PAIR system, see http://pair-direct.uspto.gov. Should you have questions on access to the Private PAIR system, contact Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative or access to the automated information system, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
/HELENA H SERAYDARYAN/ Examiner, Art Unit 3648
/VLADIMIR MAGLOIRE/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3648
Prosecution Insights