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 § 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 1-5, 7, 9-14, 17, and 19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) and (a)(2) as being anticipated by Fukuda (US 20170077588 A1).
Regarding claim 1, Fukuda teaches a method of detecting movement of an item on a shelf, bin, display rack, or garment rack, the method comprising:
detecting a signal from a radio-frequency identification (RFID) tag mounted on or near the shelf, bin, display rack, or garment rack (para 127, “Sheet reader antennas 132 a to 132 d, being connected in series to an RFID reader 103 by use of cables 133 a to 133 d, are installed on the front surface of each of the shelf boards 131 a to 131 d.”; Fig. 12, RFID reader 103 mounted on shelf 131d),
performing a comparison of the signal to a previously recorded baseline signal from the RFID tag, and determining that the item has moved based on the comparison (para. 131, “The RFID reader 103 transmits a signal inquiring tag information to the reader antennas 132 a to 132 d. At this time, at a location at which a article to be managed 105 is not present, an RF tag 104 returns own tag information. On the other hand, when a article to be managed 105 is present, as described in the first exemplary embodiment, the RF tag 104 does not respond, or a strength of a reflected signal thereof becomes lower compared with a case that the article to be managed 105 is not present. The article management system 5 also determines presence or absence of a article to be managed 105 from the signal strength. At this time, by comparing a location associated with tag information with presence or absence information of an article to be managed 105, a location at which an article to be managed 105 is present and a location at which an article to be managed 105 is not present, can be detected.”).
Regarding claim 2, Fukuda teaches the method of claim 1,
wherein the item is not tagged with an operative RFID tag (para. 86, “As described above, the article management system 1 according to the first exemplary embodiment is able to detect presence or absence of an article to be managed 105, and manage presence or absence of the article to be managed 105, without affixing an RF tag 104 to the article to be managed 105.”).
Regarding claim 3, Fukuda teaches the method of claim 1,
wherein detecting the signal from the RFID tag comprises detecting, by an antenna array, radiation backscattered from the RFID tag (para. 131, “The RFID reader 103 transmits a signal inquiring tag information to the reader antennas 132 a to 132 d. At this time, at a location at which a article to be managed 105 is not present, an RF tag 104 returns own tag information. On the other hand, when a article to be managed 105 is present, as described in the first exemplary embodiment, the RF tag 104 does not respond, or a strength of a reflected signal thereof becomes lower compared with a case that the article to be managed 105 is not present. The article management system 5 also determines presence or absence of a article to be managed 105 from the signal strength. At this time, by comparing a location associated with tag information with presence or absence information of an article to be managed 105, a location at which an article to be managed 105 is present and a location at which an article to be managed 105 is not present, can be detected.”).
Regarding claim 4, Fukuda teaches the method of claim 1,
wherein performing the comparison comprises calculating an error metric between a vector representation of the signal and a vector representation of the previously recorded baseline signal (para. 61, “In the near-field region, an electromagnetic field takes on a complicated aspect, a quasi-static electromagnetic field, an induction electromagnetic field, and an radiation electromagnetic field exist, each of which having a non-negligible strength ratio, and a vector of an electromagnetic field combining the fields diversely changes spatially and temporally.”; para. 73, “Further, an antenna extending in a planar manner, transferring a signal by changing an electromagnetic field in an interspace region between a mesh conductor part and a sheet conductor part, and a leak region outside the mesh conductor part, may also be used, depending on a condition.”; para. 131, “At this time, at a location at which a article to be managed 105 is not present, an RF tag 104 returns own tag information. On the other hand, when a article to be managed 105 is present, as described in the first exemplary embodiment, the RF tag 104 does not respond, or a strength of a reflected signal thereof becomes lower compared with a case that the article to be managed 105 is not present. The article management system 5 also determines presence or absence of a article to be managed 105 from the signal strength. At this time, by comparing a location associated with tag information with presence or absence information of an article to be managed 105, a location at which an article to be managed 105 is present and a location at which an article to be managed 105 is not present, can be detected.”; Examiner is construing the difference in signal strength to be an error metric).
Regarding claim 5, Fukuda teaches the method of claim 4, but fails to teach
wherein determining that the item has moved comprises determining that the error metric exceeds a predetermined threshold (para. 131, “At this time, by comparing a location associated with tag information with presence or absence information of an article to be managed 105, a location at which an article to be managed 105 is present and a location at which an article to be managed 105 is not present, can be detected. A threshold value of a signal strength in determination of presence or absence of a article to be managed 105 may be individually set to each RF tag 104, in accordance with tag information. Thus, difference in signal strength due to difference in individual tag position can be compensated for, and a threshold value for optimum presence or absence determination of an article to be managed 105 can be set individually. Additionally, a threshold value of a signal strength in determination of presence or absence of a article to be managed 105 may be determined by measuring a signal strength of an RF tag 104 in the absence of an article to be managed 105, and setting the signal strength decreased at a predetermined rate as the threshold value. Thus, the threshold value can be easily set.”).
Regarding claim 7, Fukuda teaches the method of claim 5,
wherein the error metric is a first error metric and the previously recorded baseline signal is a first previously recorded baseline signal representing a first condition of the item, and further comprising:
calculating a second error metric between the vector representation of the signal and a vector representation of a second previously recorded baseline signal representing a second condition of the item, determining that the first error metric is smaller than the second error metric, and determining that the item has moved comprises determining that the item is more likely to be in the first condition than the second condition (para. 131, “The RFID reader 103 transmits a signal inquiring tag information to the reader antennas 132 a to 132 d. At this time, at a location at which a article to be managed 105 is not present, an RF tag 104 returns own tag information. On the other hand, when a article to be managed 105 is present, as described in the first exemplary embodiment, the RF tag 104 does not respond, or a strength of a reflected signal thereof becomes lower compared with a case that the article to be managed 105 is not present. The article management system 5 also determines presence or absence of a article to be managed 105 from the signal strength. At this time, by comparing a location associated with tag information with presence or absence information of an article to be managed 105, a location at which an article to be managed 105 is present and a location at which an article to be managed 105 is not present, can be detected.”; the differences in signal strength to each of the recorded absence and presence cases are each an error metric).
Regarding claim 9, Fukuda teaches a method of detecting an absence of an item on a shelf, bin, display rack, or garment rack, the method comprising:
detecting a multipath signature of a radio-frequency identification (RFID) tag mounted on or near the shelf, bin, display rack, or garment rack, the multipath signature representing reflection, scattering, and/or attenuation, by the item, of radiation backscattered from the RFID tag in response to an interrogation signal from a reader, detecting a change in the multipath signature of the RFID tag caused by moving the item with respect to the RFID tag, and determining that the item has been moved based on the change in the multipath signature of the RFID tag (para. 89, “However, in the configuration of the article management system 1 according to the first exemplary embodiment, radio communication between the transmitting antenna 102a and the receiving antenna 102b, and the tag antenna 112 is mainly performed by a direct wave, and radio wave interference accompanying a multipath phenomenon is not likely to occur.”; para. 131, “The RFID reader 103 transmits a signal inquiring tag information to the reader antennas 132 a to 132 d. At this time, at a location at which a article to be managed 105 is not present, an RF tag 104 returns own tag information. On the other hand, when a article to be managed 105 is present, as described in the first exemplary embodiment, the RF tag 104 does not respond, or a strength of a reflected signal thereof becomes lower compared with a case that the article to be managed 105 is not present. The article management system 5 also determines presence or absence of a article to be managed 105 from the signal strength. At this time, by comparing a location associated with tag information with presence or absence information of an article to be managed 105, a location at which an article to be managed 105 is present and a location at which an article to be managed 105 is not present, can be detected.”; multipath effects on the received signal are still possible; see Hewitt paras. 70 and 106 for further evidence of detecting that an item has moved based on a change in multipath signature).
Regarding claim 10, Fukuda teaches the method of claim 9,
wherein the item is not tagged with an RFID tag (para. 86, “As described above, the article management system 1 according to the first exemplary embodiment is able to detect presence or absence of an article to be managed 105, and manage presence or absence of the article to be managed 105, without affixing an RF tag 104 to the article to be managed 105.”).
Regarding claim 11, Fukuda teaches the method of claim 9,
wherein detecting the multipath signature of the RFID tag comprises detecting, by the reader, the radiation backscattered from the RFID tag along at least one non-line-of-sight path from the RFID tag and the reader (para. 94, “For example, it becomes feasible to house the transmitting antenna 102a and the receiving antenna 102b, the RF tag 104, and an article to be managed in a display shelf. Additionally, a narrowed interval further controls an incident of a person or a thing coming in between, to suppress erroneous detection due to blocking a line of sight.”; see Hewitt para. 4 for further evidence of multipath signature detection along NLOS paths).
Regarding claim 12, Fukuda teaches the method of claim 11,
wherein detecting the change in the multipath signature of the RFID tag comprises sensing a change in power received by the reader from the RFID tag (para. 89, “However, in the configuration of the article management system 1 according to the first exemplary embodiment, radio communication between the transmitting antenna 102a and the receiving antenna 102b, and the tag antenna 112 is mainly performed by a direct wave, and radio wave interference accompanying a multipath phenomenon is not likely to occur.”; para. 131, “The RFID reader 103 transmits a signal inquiring tag information to the reader antennas 132 a to 132 d. At this time, at a location at which a article to be managed 105 is not present, an RF tag 104 returns own tag information. On the other hand, when a article to be managed 105 is present, as described in the first exemplary embodiment, the RF tag 104 does not respond, or a strength of a reflected signal thereof becomes lower compared with a case that the article to be managed 105 is not present. The article management system 5 also determines presence or absence of a article to be managed 105 from the signal strength. At this time, by comparing a location associated with tag information with presence or absence information of an article to be managed 105, a location at which an article to be managed 105 is present and a location at which an article to be managed 105 is not present, can be detected.”).
Regarding claim 13, Fukuda teaches the method of claim 11,
wherein detecting the change in the multipath signature of the RFID tag comprises sensing a change in power propagating along the at least one non-line-of-sight path from the RFID tag and the reader (para. 94, “ For example, it becomes feasible to house the transmitting antenna 102a and the receiving antenna 102b, the RF tag 104, and an article to be managed in a display shelf. Additionally, a narrowed interval further controls an incident of a person or a thing coming in between, to suppress erroneous detection due to blocking a line of sight.”; para. 131, “The RFID reader 103 transmits a signal inquiring tag information to the reader antennas 132 a to 132 d. At this time, at a location at which a article to be managed 105 is not present, an RF tag 104 returns own tag information. On the other hand, when a article to be managed 105 is present, as described in the first exemplary embodiment, the RF tag 104 does not respond, or a strength of a reflected signal thereof becomes lower compared with a case that the article to be managed 105 is not present. The article management system 5 also determines presence or absence of a article to be managed 105 from the signal strength. At this time, by comparing a location associated with tag information with presence or absence information of an article to be managed 105, a location at which an article to be managed 105 is present and a location at which an article to be managed 105 is not present, can be detected.”).
Regarding claim 14, Fukuda teaches the method of claim 9,
wherein determining that the item has been moved comprises determining that the item has been removed from the shelf, bin, display rack, or garment rack (Fig. 12, RFID reader 103 mounted on shelf 131d; para. 86, “As described above, the article management system 1 according to the first exemplary embodiment is able to detect presence or absence of an article to be managed 105, and manage presence or absence of the article to be managed 105, without affixing an RF tag 104 to the article to be managed 105.”).
Regarding claim 17, Fukuda teaches the method of claim 9, wherein the reader is a first reader and the multipath signature is a first multipath signature, and further comprising:
detecting a second multipath signature of the RFID tag at a second reader, and determining that the RFID tag has not moved with respect to the first reader based on the first multipath signature and the second multipath signature (para. 89, “However, in the configuration of the article management system 1 according to the first exemplary embodiment, radio communication between the transmitting antenna 102a and the receiving antenna 102b, and the tag antenna 112 is mainly performed by a direct wave, and radio wave interference accompanying a multipath phenomenon is not likely to occur.”; para. 131, “An operation of the article management system 5 according to the fifth exemplary embodiment will be described. In the article management system 5, each of the RF tags 104 positioned on the reader antennas 132a to 132d in FIG. 12, has unique tag information [ID]. Further, tag information in an RF tag 104 is noted in advance. At that time, in a case that a location of an article to be managed 105 is needed, it is preferable to also note the location on a shelf, being associated with the tag information. The RFID reader 103 transmits a signal inquiring tag information to the reader antennas 132a to 132d. At this time, at a location at which a article to be managed 105 is not present, an RF tag 104 returns own tag information. On the other hand, when a article to be managed 105 is present, as described in the first exemplary embodiment, the RF tag 104 does not respond, or a strength of a reflected signal thereof becomes lower compared with a case that the article to be managed 105 is not present. The article management system 5 also determines presence or absence of a article to be managed 105 from the signal strength. At this time, by comparing a location associated with tag information with presence or absence information of an article to be managed 105, a location at which an article to be managed 105 is present and a location at which an article to be managed 105 is not present, can be detected.”).
Regarding claim 19, Fukuda teaches a method of detecting movement of an object from a nominal location of the object, the method comprising:
detecting a multipath signature of a radio-frequency identification (RFID) tag mounted on a fixed object near the nominal location of the object, the multipath signature representing reflection, scattering, and/or attenuation, by the object, of radiation backscattered from the RFID tag in response to an interrogation signal from a reader (Fig. 12, items placed on fixed shelf 131d; para. 46, “The RFID reader 103 transmits a transmission signal to the transmitting antenna 102a, and receives a response signal generated by a tag antenna in the RF tag 104, through the receiving antenna 102b.”),
moving the object with respect to the fixed object, detecting a change in the multipath signature of the RFID tag caused by moving the object with respect to the fixed object, and determining that the object has been moved based on the change in the multipath signature of the RFID tag (para. 59, “Then, the article management system 1 changes a signal strength between the transmitting antenna 102a and the receiving antenna 102b, and the tag antenna 112, in accordance with the coupling coefficient k2 changed by presence or absence of the article to be managed 105, and determines presence or absence of the article to be managed 105, in accordance with change in the signal strength.”; para. 89, “However, in the configuration of the article management system 1 according to the first exemplary embodiment, radio communication between the transmitting antenna 102a and the receiving antenna 102b, and the tag antenna 112 is mainly performed by a direct wave, and radio wave interference accompanying a multipath phenomenon is not likely to occur.”; see Hewitt paras. 70 and 106 for further evidence of movement detection based on change in multipath signature).
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 6, 16, and 18 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Fukuda in view of Hewitt et al. (US 20200096599 A1), hereinafter Hewitt.
Regarding claim 6, Fukuda teaches the method of claim 5, but fails to teach
wherein determining that the item has moved comprises determining that the error metric exceeds a predetermined threshold for at least a predetermined duration.
However, Hewitt teaches
wherein determining that the item has moved comprises determining that the error metric exceeds a predetermined threshold for at least a predetermined duration (para. 106, “The processor 328 may determine the relative positions of tags by comparing their multipath signatures to each other. In this example, the tag signature for the RFID tag that is closest to either reference tag 324 [e.g., RFID tags 326 a and 326 b] has the lowest error when compared with the tag signature of the corresponding reference tag 324. The error metric used for comparing multipath signatures may be mean-squared error [MSE], dynamic time warping [DTW], or any other metric that can be used to compare the similarity of the signatures.”; para. 139, “The system can further update the inventory when it determines that an item that was previously determined to be picked up by a customer is placed back and available for sale. The system may determine that an item is placed back if the item does not move for an extended period of time [e.g., longer than 5 minutes].”).
Fukuda and Hewitt are considered to be analogous to the claimed invention because they are in the same field of RFID-based presence detection. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Fukuda with the teachings of Hewitt with the motivation of incorporating additional measures toward reliable data.
Regarding claim 16, Fukuda teaches the method of claim 9, but fails to teach further comprising:
determining that the RFID tag has not moved with respect to the reader based on positions of at least two peaks in the multipath signature of the RFID tag.
However, Hewitt teaches further comprising:
determining that the RFID tag has not moved with respect to the reader based on positions of at least two peaks in the multipath signature of the RFID tag (para. 70, “FIG. 1D shows measured 3D multipath signatures for RFID tags at different locations and angles of arrival with respect to a common receiver [antenna]. Each plot shows the RFID tag signal amplitude versus azimuth and elevation angles. The peaks represent LOS and NLOS paths between the tags and the antenna, with the tallest, steepest peak in each plot representing the LOS path. These multipath signatures can be compared with each other to determine the relative AOAs and locations of the RFID tags as described in greater detail below.”; para. 153, “RFID techniques can also be used to monitor the inventory availability of a store in a real-time manner. In this case, the system can track the movement of items that are picked up by customers.”).
Fukuda and Hewitt are considered to be analogous to the claimed invention because they are in the same field of RFID-based presence detection. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Fukuda with the teachings of Hewitt with the motivation of increasing detection reliability.
Regarding claim 18, Fukuda teaches the method of claim 9, but fails to teach further comprising, before detecting the change in the multipath signature:
determining that the RFID tag is stationary based on the multipath signature, and
in response to determining that the RFID tag is stationary, designating the RFID tag as a virtual reference tag.
However, Hewitt teaches further comprising, before detecting the change in the multipath signature:
determining that the RFID tag is stationary based on the multipath signature, and in response to determining that the RFID tag is stationary, designating the RFID tag as a virtual reference tag (paras. 106-107, “Using the example of MSE, the lower the metric, the more similar the multipath signatures are. In a scenario where the multipath signature for RFID tag 322 is compared to the multipath signatures for reference tags 324 a and 324 b, if the error between the multipath signatures for RFID tag 322 and reference tag 324 a is smaller than the error between the multipath signatures for RFID tag 322 and reference tag 324 b, the processor 328 determines that RFID tag 322 is closer to reference tag 324 a than it is to reference tag 324 b. If the error between the multipath signatures for RFID tag 322 and reference tag 324 b is twice the error between the multipath signatures for RFID tag 322 and reference tag 324 a, then RFID tag 322 may be twice as far from reference tag 324 b as it is from reference tag 324 a. Other non-linear weightings may also work. If repeated RFID signal measurements show that the RFID tags 326 a and 326 b aren't moving, they can be added as ‘virtual reference tags’ even if their absolute locations are unknown [at least to the same level of precision of the locations of the reference tags 324]. This process can be continued for other stationary RFID tags.”).
Fukuda and Hewitt are considered to be analogous to the claimed invention because they are in the same field of RFID-based presence detection. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Fukuda with the teachings of Hewitt with the motivation of increasing detection accuracy.
Claims 8 and 15 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Fukuda in view of Livingston et al. (US 20120166241 A1), hereinafter Livingston.
Regarding claim 8, Fukuda teaches the method of claim 1, but fails to teach further comprising:
in response to determining that the item has moved, triggering re-stocking of the item.
However, Livingston teaches further comprising:
in response to determining that the item has moved, triggering re-stocking of the item (para. 48, “RFID readers 380 may be configured to detect when one of items 350 or 360 are removed from the aisle. The supply chain management system may then be configured to provide information regarding what is needed for restocking purposes. According to various embodiments, the supply chain management system may be aware of what is in stock, such as in a backroom, and what needs to be ordered. Accordingly, the supply chain management system may alert users as to what is needed for restocking, order the necessary items, and/or provide accurate inventory counts.”; para. 61, “The supply chain management system may provide an alert as to which items need restocking and on which shelves at a specific time during the day, continually, at regular intervals, in response to specific triggering events, when new items are received and/or when the correct employees are present. A display of an RFID reader, such as portable RFID reader 499 or different RFID reader [not illustrated], may display the expected items on the left side of a split screen to facilitate restocking. An employee may then utilize portable RFID reader 499 or an RFID reader in a shipping vehicle or stockroom to collect the necessary items 475 for restocking. The employee may then place the items for restocking on a restocking cart 490.”).
Fukuda and Livingston are considered to be analogous to the claimed invention because they are in the same field of RFID-based presence detection. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Fukuda with the teachings of Livingston with the motivation of being able to manage item storage with sensor assistance.
Regarding claim 15, Fukuda teaches the method of claim 14, but fails to teach further comprising:
in response to determining that the item has been removed from the shelf, bin, display rack, or garment rack, replacing the item on the shelf, bin, display rack, or garment rack.
However, Livingston teaches further comprising:
in response to determining that the item has been removed from the shelf, bin, display rack, or garment rack, replacing the item on the shelf, bin, display rack, or garment rack (para. 61, “The supply chain management system may provide an alert as to which items need restocking and on which shelves at a specific time during the day, continually, at regular intervals, in response to specific triggering events, when new items are received and/or when the correct employees are present. A display of an RFID reader, such as portable RFID reader 499 or different RFID reader [not illustrated], may display the expected items on the left side of a split screen to facilitate restocking. An employee may then utilize portable RFID reader 499 or an RFID reader in a shipping vehicle or stockroom to collect the necessary items 475 for restocking. The employee may then place the items for restocking on a restocking cart 490.”).
Fukuda and Livingston are considered to be analogous to the claimed invention because they are in the same field of RFID-based presence detection. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Fukuda with the teachings of Livingston with the motivation of being able to manage item storage with sensor assistance.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ERIC K HODAC whose telephone number is (571) 270-0123. The examiner can normally be reached M-Th 8-6.
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, VLADIMIR MAGLOIRE can be reached at (571) 270-5144. 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.
/ERIC K HODAC/Examiner, Art Unit 3648
/VLADIMIR MAGLOIRE/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3648