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 Amendment
The Amendment filed 12/08/2025 has been entered. Claims 1-4, 6-7, and 10-14 are pending in the application, where claims 5, 8, and 9 have been withdrawn.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to the 102 rejections of independent claims 1, 13, and 14 are moot based on a new grounds of rejection.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 103 which forms the basis for all obviousness rejections set forth in this Office action:
A patent for a claimed invention may not be obtained, notwithstanding that the claimed invention is not identically disclosed as set forth in section 102, if the differences between the claimed invention and the prior art are such that the claimed invention as a whole would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which the claimed invention pertains. Patentability shall not be negated by the manner in which the invention was made.
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.
This application currently names joint inventors. In considering patentability of the claims the examiner presumes that the subject matter of the various claims was commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the claimed invention(s) absent any evidence to the contrary. Applicant is advised of the obligation under 37 CFR 1.56 to point out the inventor and effective filing dates of each claim that was not commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the later invention in order for the examiner to consider the applicability of 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(C) for any potential 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) prior art against the later invention.
Claims 1-2, 4, 6-7, and 12-14 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Takeuchi et al. (US 20230403672 A1) in view of Watanabe et al. (US 9547077 B2).
Regarding claim 1, Takeuchi discloses [Note: what Takeuchi fails to disclose is strike-through]
An information processing apparatus comprising a hardware processor (see Fig. 14; pg. 13, paragraph 0150, “an information processing device 400 may include a processor”) configured to:
acquire first reception power of a first signal radiated from an antenna when the first signal is received at a first point (see Fig. 1, base station antenna 110 sends signals to wireless terminal 220; pg. 4, paragraph 0048, device can measure received power; pg. 9, paragraph 0109, wireless terminal may report a received power value);
acquire second reception power of a second signal radiated from the antenna, the second signal being different from the first signal, when the second signal is received at a second point (see Fig. 1, multiple beams transmitted from base station antenna 110 towards second wireless terminal 210; pg. 3, paragraph 0041, the base station can select from a plurality of beams; pg. 4, paragraph 0048, device can measure received power; pg. 9, paragraph 0109, wireless terminal may report a received power value); and
determine, based on a difference between periodicity of the acquired first reception power and periodicity of the acquired second reception power, presence or absence of an object in a space facing the antenna with the second point interposed between the antenna and the space (see pg. 4, paragraph 0048, the device “determines a propagation change degree indicating an extent that propagation including received power of the wireless communication changes within a predetermined assumed delay time”; pg. 8, paragraph 0097, “a propagation change degree is calculated from a ratio (proportion) of the assumed delay time for each wireless terminal 200 to the wireless quality fluctuation time for each wireless terminal 200. Then, a value of the ratio (proportion) is output as the propagation change degree information… when being shielded by the shield 300 during the assumed delay time in a state of an antenna and a beam during communication as they are, there is a possibility that wireless communication quality may greatly decrease… Thus, the propagation change determination unit 24 (or the selection unit 25) determines selection control of an antenna and a beam in a predicted position as “necessary (effective)”.”),
wherein:
the first and second points are determined based on a distribution of a delayed wave (see Fig. 5, centralized base station 90 includes antenna/beam prediction control unit 20; Fig. 6, antenna/beam prediction control unit 20 includes propagation change determination unit 24; Fig. 7, propagation change determination unit 24 includes assumed delay time calculation unit 26 and radio wave line-of-sight space calculation unit 27; paragraph 0049, “the propagation change determination unit 24a may determine a propagation change degree from a relationship among an assumed delay time for each wireless terminal, information indicating a line-of-sight space of a radio wave used for the wireless communication, and predicted movement information about the wireless terminal”),
Watanabe discloses
the periodicity of the first reception power and the periodicity of the second reception power are represented by a spectrum of a spatial frequency, a spatial wave number, or a spatial wavelength calculated based on a spatial distribution of the first reception power and the second reception power (see col. 12, lines 44-50, “the processing unit 50 Fourier transforms the sampling data of a predetermined period of the first/second beat signals outputted from the receiver circuit 40. Through the Fourier transformation, the processing unit 50 transforms the sampling data of the predetermined period from temporospatial data to frequency-spatial data and generates the first/second frequency data”; col. 3, lines 23-28, the beat signals are made up of received signals including reflection components), and
the spectrum is calculated in a range including 1/2 of a wavelength of a radio wave (see Fig. 6, power spectrum of first and second signals include to-be-processed frequencies and frequencies that are double the signal; col. 2, lines 5-14, the device uses radar waves).
It would have been obvious to someone with ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention to incorporate the features as disclosed by Watanabe into the invention of Takeuchi. Both Takeuchi and Watanabe are considered analogous arts to the claimed invention as they both disclose radar communication systems that can detect an object. Takeuchi discloses an apparatus, a hardware processor, acquiring a first and second reception power from first and second points, determining the presence of an object, and determining points based on a delayed wave; however, Takeuchi fails to disclose the received power being represented as a spatial frequency, wavenumber, or wavelength, and a spectrum in a range including ½ of a wavelength of a radio wave. This feature is disclosed by Watanabe where the device performs a Fourier transformation to translate signal data into frequency-spatial data and the spatial frequency representation of the received power can include double the frequency of the radio wave signal. The combination of Takeuchi and Watanabe would be obvious with a reasonable expectation of success in order to present the signal data in an alternative way that can make signal processing and analysis easier by making the data comparable to the initial emitted radio wave.
Regarding claim 2, Takeuchi further discloses
The information processing apparatus according to claim 1, wherein:
the first and second signals are radiated from the antenna by the radio wave (see pg. 4, paragraph 0049, radio wave is used for wireless communication; pg. 5, paragraph 0058, base station antenna includes RF transmission/reception unit); and
the object includes a radio wave shielding object that shields the radio wave (see Fig. 1, shield 300; pg. 8, paragraph 0095, “a radio wave is blocked by the shield 300 such as an obstacle”).
Regarding claim 4, Takeuchi further discloses
The information processing apparatus according to claim 2, wherein the radio wave shielding object is not disposed between the antenna and the first and second points (see Fig. 1, wireless terminals 220 and 210 can move while shield 300 remains stationary).
Regarding claim 6, Takeuchi further discloses
The information processing apparatus according to claim 2, wherein the hardware processor is configured to acquire the first reception power of the first signal and the second reception power of the second signal transmitted and received in a band in which there is no power fluctuation due to a frequency, or in which the power fluctuation due to the frequency is equal to or less than a predetermined value (see Fig. 7, wireless quality fluctuation time-calculation unit 28; pg. 7, paragraph 0086,“The wireless quality fluctuation time is a time required until wireless quality including received power decreases to equal to or less than a predetermined threshold value”).
Regarding claim 7, Takeuchi further discloses
The information processing apparatus according to claim 2, further comprising a storage configured to store the first point and the first reception power in association with each other (see Fig. 6, propagation information database 23; pg. 6, paragraph 0076, “The propagation information database 23 receives and records received power information, beam information, and antenna information about a wireless signal from the base station antenna 110 and the like being measured in the wireless terminal 200”),
wherein the hardware processor is configured to read, when the second reception power is acquired, the first reception power stored in the storage in association with the first point from the storage, and to compare the periodicity of the read first reception power with the periodicity of the acquired second reception power (see pg. 6, paragraph 0076, “for a measurement result of received power in the wireless terminal 200, the wireless terminal 200 reports a measurement result of a synchronization signal and a reference signal to the base station antenna 110 and the like”) to determine the presence or absence of the radio wave shielding object (see pg. 4, paragraph 0048, the device “determines a propagation change degree indicating an extent that propagation including received power of the wireless communication changes within a predetermined assumed delay time”; pg. 8, paragraph 0097, “a propagation change degree is calculated from a ratio (proportion) of the assumed delay time for each wireless terminal 200 to the wireless quality fluctuation time for each wireless terminal 200. Then, a value of the ratio (proportion) is output as the propagation change degree information… when being shielded by the shield 300 during the assumed delay time in a state of an antenna and a beam during communication as they are, there is a possibility that wireless communication quality may greatly decrease… Thus, the propagation change determination unit 24 (or the selection unit 25) determines selection control of an antenna and a beam in a predicted position as “necessary (effective)”.”).
Regarding claim 12, Takeuchi further discloses
A system comprising:
the information processing apparatus according to claim 1; and
a moving body communicably connected to the information processing apparatus (see Fig. 4, wireless terminals 210 and 220; pg. 4, paragraph 0055, “FIG. 4 illustrates the two wireless terminals 210 and 220, but the number of the wireless terminals 210 and 220 may be at least one, or may be three or more. The wireless terminals 210 and 220 are collectively referred to as a wireless terminal 200. The wireless terminal 200 is, for example, a portable terminal device”; pg. 5, paragraph 0056, “the wireless terminal 200 may be… an automobile, an automated guided vehicle (AGV), and industrial equipment such as a robot”),
wherein the moving body is configured to receive the first signal at the first point (see Fig. 1, base station antenna 110 sends signals to wireless terminal 220), measure the first reception power of the received first signal (see pg. 4, paragraph 0048, device can measure received power; pg. 9, paragraph 0109, wireless terminal may report a received power value), receive the second signal at the second point (see Fig. 1, multiple beams transmitted from base station antenna 110 towards second wireless terminal 210), and measure the second reception power of the received second signal (see pg. 4, paragraph 0048, device can measure received power; pg. 9, paragraph 0109, wireless terminal may report a received power value).
Regarding claim 13, the same cited sections and rationale from claim 1 are applied. Takeuchi further discloses
A method (see Fig. 3; pg. 4, paragraph 0050, “FIG. 3 is a flowchart diagram illustrating a wireless control method according to the overview of the example embodiment”) comprising:
Regarding claim 14, the same cited sections and rationale from claim 1 are applied. Takeuchi further discloses
A non-transitory computer-readable storage medium having stored thereon a program which is executed by a computer (see pg. 13, paragraph 0153, “The program may be stored in a non-transitory computer-readable medium”), the program comprising instructions capable of causing the computer to execute functions of (see pg. 13, paragraph 0153, “When the program is read by the wireless control device 20a and the like including a computer, the program includes a command group (or software codes) for causing the computer to perform one or more of the functions described in the example embodiments”):
Claims 3, 10, and 11 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Takeuchi et al. (US 20230403672 A1) in view of Watanabe et al. (US 9547077 B2) and further in view of Oishi et al. (US 12287420 B2).
Regarding claim 3, Oishi discloses
The information processing apparatus according to claim 2, wherein each of the first and second points includes a plurality of points arranged at intervals shorter than 1/2 of the wavelength of the radio wave (see col. 13, lines 61-63, “a distance between the antennas is a short distance of about ½ of a wavelength of a signal for estimating an arrival angle”; col. 4, lines 43-51, the device uses radio waves to communicate).
It would have been obvious to someone with ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention to incorporate the features as disclosed by Oishi into the inventions of Takeuchi and Watanabe. Watanabe, Takeuchi, and Oishi are considered analogous arts to the claimed invention as they all disclose wireless communication systems for a moving device. Takeuchi and Watanabe discloses the limitations of claim 2; however, Takeuchi and Watanabe fail to disclose the reception points having a plurality of points arranged at intervals shorter than ½ of a wavelength of the radio wave. This feature is disclosed by Oishi where reception antennas on the moving device are spaced by about ½ of a wavelength of a received signal. The combination of Takeuchi, Watanabe, and Oishi would be obvious with a reasonable expectation of success in order to improve accurate detection of an object between the transmission point and reception points because having a small distance between antennas shows that “a large difference in a signal reception time and a power value between the antenna 221A, the antenna 221B, the antenna 221C, and the antenna 221D means that the validity that the signal is based on a direct wave becomes lower” (see Oishi col. 13, lines 63-67).
Regarding claim 10, Takeuchi further discloses [Note: what Takeuchi fails to disclose is strike-through]
The information processing apparatus according to claim 2, wherein:
the first signal is radiated from the antenna in a first time zone (see pg. 5, paragraph 0063, signals can be emitted at different times, “The wireless resource control unit 30 specifically decides a wireless resource (such as an antenna, a beam, a frequency, and a time) used for each wireless terminal 200, based on the information decided by the antenna/beam prediction control unit 20”);
the second signal is radiated from the antenna in a second time zone different from the first time zone (see pg. 5, paragraph 0063, signals can be emitted at different times, “The wireless resource control unit 30 specifically decides a wireless resource (such as an antenna, a beam, a frequency, and a time) used for each wireless terminal 200, based on the information decided by the antenna/beam prediction control unit 20”); and
Oishi discloses
a distance between the first point at which the first signal is received and the second point at which the second signal is received is less than a predetermined value (see col. 13, lines 61-63, “a distance between the antennas is a short distance of about ½ of a wavelength of a signal for estimating an arrival angle”)
It would have been obvious to someone with ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention to incorporate the features as disclosed by Oishi into the inventions of Takeuchi and Watanabe. Takeuchi discloses a first signal radiating at a time and a second signal radiating at a different time; however, Takeuchi and Watanabe fail to disclose the distance between two reception points being less than a predetermined value. This feature is disclosed by Oishi where the reception antennas can have a distance from each other that is about ½ of a wavelength of a signal. The combination of Takeuchi, Watanabe, and Oishi would be obvious with a reasonable expectation of success in order to improve accurate detection of an object between the transmission point and reception points because having a small distance between antennas in addition to a time difference between signals shows that “a large difference in a signal reception time and a power value between the antenna 221A, the antenna 221B, the antenna 221C, and the antenna 221D means that the validity that the signal is based on a direct wave becomes lower” (see Oishi col. 13, lines 63-67)
Regarding claim 11, Takeuchi further discloses
The information processing apparatus according to claim 10, wherein:
the first reception power is reception power of the first signal received in a state in which the radio wave shielding object does not exist (see Fig. 4, system configuration where shield doesn’t exist); and
the hardware processor is configured to determine that the radio wave shielding object does not exist when the difference between the periodicity of the first reception power and the periodicity of the second reception power is within a predetermined range (see pg. 8, paragraph 0098, “when a value of the ratio (proportion) is less than 1, it means that the wireless quality fluctuation time is longer. In this case, even when being shielded by the shield 300 in a state of an antenna and a beam during communication as they are, updating of an antenna and a beam based on next received power information can be achieved before wireless communication quality greatly decreases” meaning that the signal will not be blocked by an object when the value is less than 1, suggesting that the obstacle does not exist), and determine that the radio wave shielding object exists when the difference between the periodicity of the first reception power and the periodicity of the second reception power is out of the predetermined range (see pg. 8, paragraph 0097, “when a value of the ratio (proportion) is equal to or more than 1, it means that the assumed delay time is longer. In this case, when being shielded by the shield 300 during the assumed delay time in a state of an antenna and a beam during communication as they are, there is a possibility that wireless communication quality may greatly decrease” caused by the presence of a shielding object).
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 ISABELLA A EDRADA whose telephone number is (571)272-4859. The examiner can normally be reached Mon - Fri 9am-5pm EST.
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, William Kelleher can be reached at (571) 272-7753. 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.
/ISABELLA AMEYALI EDRADA/Examiner, Art Unit 3648
/William Kelleher/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3648