DETAILED ACTION
Status
1. The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA . Claims 1-30 are currently pending in this application.
Priority
2. No foreign priority has been claimed in this application.
Specification
3. The disclosure is objected to because of the following informalities: Applicant may choose to add PCT information in a cross reference to related applications section. Appropriate correction is required.
Information Disclosure Statement
4. The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on 4/15/2025 was received. The submission is in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97 and 37 CFR 1.98. Accordingly, the information disclosure statement has being considered by the examiner.
Drawings
5. The drawings submitted on 11/02/2023 are in compliance with 37 CFR § 1.81 and 37 CFR § 1.83 and have been accepted by the examiner.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
6. 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.
7. Claims 16-18 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. Particularly, it is unclear what the meats and bounds of the term “soft” are. While claim 16 indicates that they are “associated” with one or more points… no clear definition has been articulated in the claims or specification.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 101 Non-Statutory
8. 35 U.S.C. 101 reads as follows:
Whoever invents or discovers any new and useful process, machine, manufacture, or composition of matter, or any new and useful improvement thereof, may obtain a patent therefor, subject to the conditions and requirements of this title.
9. Claims 1-30 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 101 because the claimed invention is directed to non-statutory subject matter.
Specifically, representative Claim 1 recites:
A method of wireless sensing performed by a sensing node, comprising:
receiving, from a plurality of sensing nodes, a corresponding plurality of sets of points, wherein each point in each set of points of the plurality of sets of points represents a detection of a target object in an environment of the plurality of sensing nodes, and wherein the detection of the target object is based on one or more measurements of one or more sensing signals transmitted by at least one sensing node of the plurality of sensing nodes; and
transmitting, to a sensing entity, a sensing report indicating a point cloud determined based on the plurality of sets of points, wherein the sensing report further indicates, for each point in the point cloud, identifiers of at least one set of sensing nodes of the plurality of sensing nodes associated with the point.
The claim limitations in the abstract idea have been highlighted in bold above; the remaining limitations are “additional elements.”
Similar limitations comprise the abstract ideas of Claims 22 and 29-30.
Under Step 1 of the analysis, claim 1 does belong to a statutory category, namely it is a process claim. Likewise, claims 22 and 29 are device claims and claim 30 is a non-transitory computer readable medium claim.
Under Step 2A, prong 1, claim 1 is found to include at least one judicial exception, that being a mental process and/or mathematical concept. This can be seen in the claim limitation of “a sensing report indicating a point cloud determined based on the plurality of sets of points, wherein the sensing report further indicates, for each point in the point cloud, identifiers of at least one set of sensing nodes of the plurality of sensing nodes associated with the point.…”, which is the judicial exception of a mental process and/or a mathematical concept because it is merely a data evaluation including calculations, and/or judgements capable of being performed mentally.
Similar limitations comprise the abstract ideas of Claims 22 and 29-30.
Step 2A, prong 2 of the eligibility analysis evaluates whether the claim as a whole integrates the recited judicial exception(s) into a practical application of the exception. This evaluation is performed by (a) identifying whether there are any additional elements recited in the claim beyond the judicial exception, and (b) evaluating those additional elements individually and in combination to determine whether the claim as a whole integrates the exception into a practical application.
In addition to the abstract ideas recited in claim 1, the claimed method recites additional elements including “receiving, from a plurality of sensing nodes, a corresponding plurality of sets of points, wherein each point in each set of points of the plurality of sets of points represents a detection of a target object in an environment of the plurality of sensing nodes, and wherein the detection of the target object is based on one or more measurements of one or more sensing signals transmitted by at least one sensing node of the plurality of sensing nodes” (claims 1, 22 and 29-30) which are merely data gathering steps recited at a high level of generality and therefore merely amount to “insignificant extra-solution” activity(ies). See MPEP 2106.05(g) “Insignificant Extra-Solution Activity,”. The claim also recites “processor” (claim 22) however the “processor” is recited at a high level of generality, e.g. Spec. [0087] describing a variety of different types of “processors” that may be used, and merely amounts to the use of computer technology as a tool to apply the abstract idea (see MPEP 2106.05(f)) and/or the use of a “processor” to perform the predictions, that are otherwise abstract, is merely an attempt at limiting the abstract to a particular field of use (See MPEP 2106.05(h)).
The generic data gathering, processing, and output steps, and other elements, are recited so generically (no details whatsoever are provided) that it represents no more than mere instructions to apply the judicial exceptions on a computer. It can also be viewed as nothing more than an attempt to generally link the use of the judicial exceptions to the technological environment of a computer. Noting MPEP 2106.04(d)(I): “It is notable that mere physicality or tangibility of an additional element or elements is not a relevant consideration in Step 2A Prong Two. As the Supreme Court explained in Alice Corp., mere physical or tangible implementation of an exception does not guarantee eligibility. Alice Corp. Pty. Ltd. v. CLS Bank Int’l, 573 U.S. 208, 224, 110 USPQ2d 1976, 1983-84 (2014) ("The fact that a computer ‘necessarily exist[s] in the physical, rather than purely conceptual, realm,’ is beside the point")”.
Thus, under Step 2A, prong 2 of the analysis, even when viewed in combination, these additional elements do not integrate the recited judicial exception into a practical application and the claim is directed to the judicial exception. No specific practical application is associated with the claimed system. For instance, nothing is done with the findings of the report after it is transmitted.
Under Step 2B, the claims do not include additional elements that are sufficient to amount to significantly more than the judicial exception because the additional elements, as described above with respect to Step 2A Prong 2, merely amount to a general purpose computer system that attempts to apply the abstract idea in a technological environment, limiting the abstract idea to a particular field of use, and/or merely insignificant extra-solution activity (claims 1, 22 and 29-30). Such insignificant extra-solution activity, e.g. data gathering and output, when re-evaluated under Step 2B is further found to be well-understood, routine, and conventional as evidenced by MPEP 2106.05(d)(II) (describing conventional activities that include transmitting and receiving data over a network, electronic recordkeeping, storing and retrieving information from memory, and electronically scanning or extracting data from a physical document).
Therefore, similarly the combination and arrangement of the above identified additional elements when analyzed under Step 2B also fails to necessitate a conclusion that claim 1, as well as claims 22 and 29-30, amount to significantly more than the abstract idea.
With regards to the dependent claims, claims 2-21, and 23-28, merely further expand upon the algorithm/abstract idea and do not set forth further additional elements therefore these claims are found ineligible for the reasons described for independent claims 1, 22 and 29-30.
See Supreme court decision in Alice Corporation Pty. Ltd. V. CLS Bank International, et al.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
10. 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 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.
11. 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.
12. Claims 1-30 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Kato et al. US Pat # 2022/0075077.
With regards to claim 1, Kato et al. US Pat # 2022/0075077 teaches a method of wireless sensing performed by a sensing node, comprising:
receiving, from a plurality of sensing nodes, a corresponding plurality of sets of points, wherein each point in each set of points of the plurality of sets of points represents a detection of a target object in an environment of the plurality of sensing nodes, and wherein the detection of the target object is based on one or more measurements of one or more sensing signals transmitted by at least one sensing node of the plurality of sensing nodes;(300; figure 2) (paragraph 0083)and
transmitting, to a sensing entity, a sensing report indicating a point cloud determined based on the plurality of sets of points, wherein the sensing report further indicates, for each point in the point cloud, identifiers of at least one set of sensing nodes of the plurality of sensing nodes associated with the point. ( transmitting to server; paragraph 0083)
With regards to claims 2 and 23, Kato et al. US Pat # 2022/0075077 teaches one or more transmitter nodes of the plurality of sensing nodes, one or more receiver nodes of the plurality of sensing nodes, or any combination thereof. (figures 2-3)
With regards to claim 3, Kato et al. US Pat # 2022/0075077 teaches a role of the one or more transmitter nodes and a role of the one or more receiver nodes are indicated explicitly in the sensing report, or the role of the one or more transmitter nodes and the role of the one or more receiver nodes are implicitly indicated based on a configuration of a sensing session that resulted in detection of the point. (measure distance, position, time; figure 3) (paragraph 0320)
With regards to claims 4 and 24, Kato et al. US Pat # 2022/0075077 teaches based on a point in the point cloud being associated with two or more non-overlapping sets of sensing nodes, the sensing report includes: identifiers of the two or more non-overlapping sets of sensing nodes, or identifiers of only one set of sensing nodes of the two or more non-overlapping sets of sensing nodes. (measure distance, position, time; figure 3)
With regards to claims 5 and 25, Kato et al. US Pat # 2022/0075077 teaches multiple points in the point cloud are associated with a same set of sensing nodes. (paragraph 0083)
With regards to claims 6 and 26, Kato et al. US Pat # 2022/0075077 the point cloud is determined based on clustering the plurality of sets of points based on one or more parameters for clustering points. (paragraph 0363)
With regards to claim 7, Kato et al. US Pat # 2022/0075077 receiving the one or more parameters for clustering points from the sensing entity. (paragraph 0387)
With regards to claim 8, Kato et al. US Pat # 2022/0075077 the one or more parameters for clustering points comprise: a lower bound associated with points in the point cloud, an upper bound associated with the points in the point cloud, a coverage area within which the points of the point cloud are to be reported, one or more parameters for outlier rejection, or any combination thereof. (paragraph 0366)
With regards to claim 9, Kato et al. US Pat # 2022/0075077 the one or more parameters for outlier rejection comprise one or more dimensions of a target object associated with a point. (Noise; paragraph 0386)
With regards to claims 10 and 27, Kato et al. US Pat # 2022/0075077 the point cloud is determined based on applying outlier rejection to the plurality of sets of points. (Noise; paragraph 0386)
With regards to claims 11 and 28, Kato et al. US Pat # 2022/0075077 the sensing report indicating, for each point in the point cloud, the identifiers of the at least one set of sensing nodes of the plurality of sensing nodes associated with the point comprises: the sensing report including, for each point in the point cloud, the identifiers of the at least one set of sensing nodes of the plurality of sensing nodes associated with the point; or the sensing report including, for each point in the point cloud, an index value representing the identifiers of the at least one set of sensing nodes of the plurality of sensing nodes associated with the point. (paragraph 0154)
With regards to claim 12, Kato et al. US Pat # 2022/0075077 receiving a mapping of index values representing identifiers of different sets of sensing nodes of the plurality of sensing nodes. (paragraph 0154)
With regards to claim 13, Kato et al. US Pat # 2022/0075077 based on the mapping not including an index value for a set of sensing nodes of the plurality of sensing nodes associated with a point of the point cloud: the sensing report includes identifiers of the set of sensing nodes, or the sensing report does not include an indication of the set of sensing nodes. (paragraph 0324)
With regards to claim 14, Kato et al. US Pat # 2022/0075077 based on the mapping including an index value for a subset of sensing nodes of a set of sensing nodes of the plurality of sensing nodes associated with a point of the point cloud: the sensing report includes identifiers of the set of sensing nodes, or the sensing report includes the index value for the subset of sensing nodes. (paragraph 0324)
With regards to claim 15, Kato et al. US Pat # 2022/0075077 the mapping is received via: Long-Term Evolution (LTE) positioning protocol (LPP) signaling, sidelink positioning protocol (SLPP) signaling, New Radio positioning protocol type A (NRPPa) signaling, radio resource control (RRC) signaling, medium access control control element (MAC-CE) signaling, downlink control information (DCI), or sidelink control information (SCI). (any method may be used; paragraph 0138 & 0327)
With regards to claim 16, Kato et al. US Pat # 2022/0075077 the sensing report further includes soft information associated with one or more points of the point cloud indicating a likelihood of the presence of the one or more points. (paragraph 0131)
With regards to claim 17, Kato et al. US Pat # 2022/0075077 receiving, from the sensing entity, a request for the soft information. (paragraph 0152)
With regards to claim 18, Kato et al. US Pat # 2022/0075077 transmitting, to the sensing entity, a capability message indicating that the sensing node is able to provide the soft information in the sensing report.
With regards to claim 19, Kato et al. US Pat # 2022/0075077 receiving, from the sensing entity, a request for the capability message.
With regards to claim 20, Kato et al. US Pat # 2022/0075077 the sensing node comprises: a user equipment (UE), a base station, a transmission-reception point (TRP), a positioning reference unit (PRU), or a sensing reference unit (SRU). (figure 1-2)
With regards to claim 21, Kato et al. US Pat # 2022/0075077 the sensing entity comprises: a core network entity, a location server, a base station, an anchor UE, or a roadside unit (RSU). (figure 1-2)
With regards to claim 22, Kato et al. US Pat # 2022/0075077sensing node, comprising:
one or more memories; (540; figure 1)
one or more transceivers; (400, 420; figure 2) and
one or more processors communicatively coupled to the one or more memories and the one or more transceivers, the one or more processors, either alone or in combination, (520; figure 1)configured to:
receive, via the one or more transceivers, from a plurality of sensing nodes, a corresponding plurality of sets of points, wherein each point in each set of points of the plurality of sets of points represents a detection of a target object in an environment of the plurality of sensing nodes, and wherein the detection of the target object is based on one or more measurements of one or more sensing signals transmitted by at least one sensing node of the plurality of sensing nodes; (300; figure 2) (paragraph 0083) and
transmit, via the one or more transceivers, to a sensing entity, a sensing report indicating a point cloud determined based on the plurality of sets of points, wherein the sensing report further indicates, for each point in the point cloud, identifiers of at least one set of sensing nodes of the plurality of sensing nodes associated with the point. ( transmitting to server; paragraph 0083)
With regards to claim 29, Kato et al. US Pat # 2022/0075077 sensing node, comprising: means for receiving, from a plurality of sensing nodes, a corresponding plurality of sets of points, wherein each point in each set of points of the plurality of sets of points represents a detection of a target object in an environment of the plurality of sensing nodes, and wherein the detection of the target object is based on one or more measurements of one or more sensing signals transmitted by at least one sensing node of the plurality of sensing nodes; (300; figure 2) (paragraph 0083) and
means for transmitting, to a sensing entity, a sensing report indicating a point cloud determined based on the plurality of sets of points, wherein the sensing report further indicates, for each point in the point cloud, identifiers of at least one set of sensing nodes of the plurality of sensing nodes associated with the point. ( transmitting to server; paragraph 0083)
With regards to claim 30, Kato et al. US Pat # 2022/0075077non-transitory computer-readable medium storing computer-executable instructions that, when executed by a sensing node, cause the sensing node to:
receive, from a plurality of sensing nodes, a corresponding plurality of sets of points, wherein each point in each set of points of the plurality of sets of points represents a detection of a target object in an environment of the plurality of sensing nodes, and wherein the detection of the target object is based on one or more measurements of one or more sensing signals transmitted by at least one sensing node of the plurality of sensing nodes; (300; figure 2) (paragraph 0083) and
transmit, to a sensing entity, a sensing report indicating a point cloud determined based on the plurality of sets of points, wherein the sensing report further indicates, for each point in the point cloud, identifiers of at least one set of sensing nodes of the plurality of sensing nodes associated with the point. ( transmitting to server; paragraph 0083)
Conclusion
13. The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. Liang et al. US 11,500,099 teaches three dimensional object detection. Schroeter US 2023/0121226 teaches determining weight of points of point cloud based on geometric features.
14. Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ADITYA S BHAT whose telephone number is (571)272-2270. The examiner can normally be reached on Monday-Friday 8 am-6pm.
15. 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.
16. If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Shelby Turner can be reached on 571-272-6334. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300.
17. 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 https://ppair-my.uspto.gov/pair/PrivatePair. Should you have questions on access to the Private PAIR system, contact the 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.
/ADITYA S BHAT/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2857 May 14, 2026
Prosecution Insights