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 .
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.
Claims 1-3, 9-12, 16-17 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Oh et al (US 2023/0191729 A1), in view of Barton et al (US 2022/0070613 A1).
Regarding claim 1, 11, 16, Oh teaches a method/computer readable medium/system, comprising:
identifying a plurality of clusters for ultra-wideband (UWB) time difference of arrival (TDOA) ranging, wherein each cluster of the plurality of clusters comprises an initiating anchor to transmit a plurality of UWB messages to a plurality of wireless devices for TDOA ranging ([0008], “from a first initiator anchor, a first poll message to initiate a downlink (DL)-time difference of arrival (TDoA) for a first cluster to which the first initiator anchor belongs, the first initiator anchor providing a time reference for an inter-cluster synchronization”);
forming a first supercluster comprising a first two or more of the plurality of clusters, and a second supercluster comprising a second two or more of the plurality of clusters (Fig. 9 and [0200], “For spatial reuse of time resources, a plurality of clusters may form one group (cluster group). As illustrated in FIG. 9, eight clusters corresponding to the number of active ranging rounds (the number of spatial reuse factors) may form one single group. For example, cluster #0 to cluster #7 may form a first cluster group (group #0), and cluster #8 to cluster #15 form a second cluster group (group #1)”),
conducting TDOA ranging using the plurality of clusters, based on scheduling transmission of UWB messages at least partially in parallel from initiating anchors in both the first and second superclusters ([0202]-[0203], “Through such cluster deployment and ranging round allocation, the same ranging round (time resource) may be used by a plurality of clusters belonging to different groups. For example, as shown, ranging round #0 may be used by cluster #0 of the first cluster group (group #0) and cluster #8 of the second cluster group (group #1). Thus, spatial reuse of time resources is possible”).
Lee forms its cluster groups by a planned index/adjacency arrangement and does not explicitly base group formation on a measured RF-isolation determination.
Barton discloses a measured RF-isolation determination ([0032], “The control device 580 can compute or otherwise obtain the interference mapping 500. For example, the control device 580 can instruct each primary UWB anchor in the venue 505 (including primary anchor 510 and primary anchor 565) to send a multicast frame, which can be used for purposes of creating the interference mapping 500 and potentially also for group determination purposes and/or time synchronization or other purposes. In an example embodiment, each receiving anchor (e.g., secondary anchors 515-517 and 570-572) can receive and/or demodulate any UWB transmissions within their range and forward to the control device 580 received frame signal level, emitted source, and/or other information, which the control device 580 can use to create the interference mapping 500”).
Before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art to utilize the teaching of Barton in the system disclosed by Lee. Both references are directed to scheduling UWB ranging among densely deployed anchors so as to manage mutual interference. Lee already addresses interference and collision in its spatial-reuse layout and seeks to maximize reuse of the same time resources; it leaves open how to verify that grouped/reused clusters are in fact non-interfering. Barton supplies exactly that verification — a measured interference map built from anchors’ reported received-signal levels. Substituting Barton’s measured RF-isolation determination as the basis for Lee’s group formation predictably ensures that clusters scheduled to transmit in parallel do not collide, which is the use of a known technique to improve a similar device in the same way and with a reasonable expectation of success.
Regarding claim 2, 12, 17, the aforementioned references further teaches that forming the first supercluster comprising the first two or more of the plurality of clusters and the second supercluster comprising a second two or more of the plurality of clusters comprises: iteratively selecting a plurality of anchors in each cluster, of the plurality of clusters, to act as an initiator; transmitting UWB messages from each of the selected initiator anchors; and identifying anchors that are RF isolated based on monitoring responses to the transmitted UWB messages from the selected initiator anchors (Barton, [0032], “The control device 580 can compute or otherwise obtain the interference mapping 500. For example, the control device 580 can instruct each primary UWB anchor in the venue 505 (including primary anchor 510 and primary anchor 565) to send a multicast frame, which can be used for purposes of creating the interference mapping 500 and potentially also for group determination purposes).
Regarding claim 3, the aforementioned references further teaches: forming a second plurality of clusters based on the identified anchors that are RF isolated; and forming the first and second superclusters based on selectively suppressing clusters within the second plurality of clusters (Barton, [0032], Barton teaches forming groups from the anchors determined to be isolated and selectively pacing/suppressing ranging activity in congested areas to manage interference and load. Mapping that selective suppression onto the formation of the superclusters from the second plurality of clusters is an obvious sequencing of Barton’s grouping-and-scheduling toward Lee’s spatial-reuse objective, with a reasonable expectation of success).
Regarding claim 9, the aforementioned references further teach that determining that a respective initiating anchor associated with each of the two or more clusters in the first supercluster is RF isolated from respective recipient anchors associated with each of the two or more clusters in the second supercluster comprises: determining that a received signal strength indication (RSSI )for messages from the respective initiating anchors to the respective recipient anchors is at or below a threshold value (Barton, [0032], “The control device 580 can compute or otherwise obtain the interference mapping 500. For example, the control device 580 can instruct each primary UWB anchor in the venue 505 (including primary anchor 510 and primary anchor 565) to send a multicast frame, which can be used for purposes of creating the interference mapping 500 and potentially also for group determination purposes; it’s noted that determining isolation from the received signal level of a message sent form one anchor to another teaches determining RF isolation based on an RSSI for messages from an initialing anchor to a recipient anchor. Comparing that received signal level against a threshold – such that a value at or below the threshold indicates the anchor are isolated – is a routine implementation of Barton’s signal level comparison and is the conventional manner of converting a measured RSSI into an isolation decision).
Regarding claim 10, the aforementioned references further teach that each of the anchors comprises a wireless access point (AP) (Barton, Fig. 1, [0034], “AP”).
Claims 4-6, 8, 13-15, 18-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Oh et al (US 2023/0191729 A1), in view of Barton et al (US 2022/0070613 A1), further in view of Hajiakhondi-Meybodi et al (“Jump-Start Reinforcement Learning-based Node Selectin for UWB Indoor Localization”), hereinafter as “Haji.
Regarding claim 4, the aforementioned references teach all of the limitations except that using a linear regressor to selectively suppress a respective anchor associated with each cluster within the second plurality of clusters.
Haji teaches applying trained machine-learning models to select among UWB nodes/anchors based on the radio environment (see abstract, “we target development of a Reinforcement Learning (RL) anchor selection framework that can efficiently cope with the dynamic nature of indoor environments”, it’s noted that Linear regression is a foundational supervised machine learning algorithm used to predict continuous numerical values).
Before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, it would have been obvious to incorporated Haji’s teaching into Oh in view of Barton’s supercluster composition during operation, predictably adapting the grouping to changing interference and thereby improving spatial reuse in the dense-deployment problem common to all references.
Regarding claim 5, the aforementioned references teach all of the limitations except that modifying a composition of the first supercluster, during operation of the plurality of clusters, based on using machine learning (ML). Haji teaches modifying a composition of the cluster, during operation of the plurality of clusters, based on using machine learning (ML) (see abstract, “we target development of a Reinforcement Learning (RL) anchor selection framework that can efficiently cope with the dynamic nature of indoor environments”).
Before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, it would have been obvious to apply such reinforcement learning to update Oh in view of Barton’s supercluster composition during operation, predictably adapting the grouping to changing interference and thereby improving spatial reuse in the dense-deployment problem common to all references.
Regarding claim 6, 14, 19, the aforementioned references further teach that modifying a composition of the first supercluster, during operation of the plurality of clusters, based on using ML comprises: using reinforcement learning to identify the composition of the first supercluster (Haji, see abstract, “we target development of a Reinforcement Learning (RL) anchor selection framework that can efficiently cope with the dynamic nature of indoor environments”), based on detected interference between clusters (Barton, [0032], detecting interference).
Regarding claim 8, 15, 20, the aforementioned references further teach: forming the first and second superclusters )(Oh, Fig. 9 and [0200]) using a linear regressor; and modifying a composition of the first supercluster, during operation of the plurality of clusters, based on using ML (Haji, see abstract, “we target development of a Reinforcement Learning (RL) anchor selection framework that can efficiently cope with the dynamic nature of indoor environments”).
Regarding claims 13, 18, the aforementioned references further teach that: forming a second plurality of clusters based on the identified anchors that are RF isolated (Barton, [0032]); forming the first and second superclusters based on selectively suppressing clusters within the second plurality of clusters, comprising: using a linear regressor to selectively suppress a respective anchor associated with each cluster within the second plurality of clusters ((see abstract, “we target development of a Reinforcement Learning (RL) anchor selection framework that can efficiently cope with the dynamic nature of indoor environments”, it’s noted that Linear regression is a foundational supervised machine learning algorithm used to predict continuous numerical values).
Allowable Subject Matter
Claim 7 is objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to SIMING LIU whose telephone number is (571)270-3859. The examiner can normally be reached M-F, 8:30am-5:00pm.
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, Derrick Ferris can be reached at 571-272-3123. 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.
/SIMING LIU/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2411
Prosecution Insights