Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA 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 .
2. It would be of great assistance to the office if all incoming papers pertaining to a filed application carried the following items:
i. Application number (checked for accuracy, including series code and serial no.).
ii. Group art unit number (copied from most recent Office communication).
iii. Filing date.
iv. Name of the examiner who prepared the most recent Office action.
v. Title of invention.
vi. Confirmation number (See MPEP § 503).
3. The Examiner has pointed out particular references contained in the prior art of record within the body of this action for the convenience of the Applicant. Although the specified citations are representative of the teachings in the art and are applied to the specific limitations within the individual claim, other passages, paragraph and figures may apply. Applicant, in preparing the response, should consider fully the entire reference as potentially teaching all or part of the claimed invention, as well as the context of the passage as taught by the prior art or disclosed by the Examiner.
4. Claim interpretation: When multiple limitations are connected with “OR”, one of the limitations doesn’t have any patentable weight since both of the limitations are optional.
Claim Rejection- 35 USC § 103
5. 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 of this title, 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, 2, 8 & 9 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Jiang et al (Pub No. 2023/0417890), in view of Kakuya et al (Pub No. 2025/0298140) and further in view of Chio (Pub No. 2016/0035213).
Regarding claim 1, Jiang et al discloses an electronic device comprising: a communication subsystem that communicatively connects the electronic device to an electronically paired second electronic device (Fig. 1-2: Communication system connects the first device to a second device) & (Para. 52), wherein the communication subsystem includes a Bluetooth interface (Para. 31: Bluetooth); a processor; and a memory (Fig. 1: Processor-120 & Memory-130) storing instructions executable in the processor, the instructions when executed causing the processor to: determine a current distance between the electronic device and the second electronic device based on the distance measurement results (Para. 6: Distance measuring and estimating between two devices) & (Fig. 9); and in response to determining that the current distance exceeds a predetermined distance threshold, invoke a lock screen on the electronic device (Para. 87: Alert can be generated when the distance is too large- greater than a threshold distance[Wingdings font/0xE0] The phone or watch can automatically lock itself).
Jiang is silent regarding receive a motion initiation message from the second electronic device while the electronic device is unlocked; initiate a BLE Channel Sounding (BLECS) process using a distance calculation algorithm, wherein the BLECS process comprises sending periodic channel sounding subevents, and obtaining distance measurement results corresponding to the periodic channel sounding subevents.
In a similar field of endeavor, Kakuya et al discloses initiate a BLE Channel Sounding (BLECS) process using a distance calculation algorithm (Para. 53: Channel sounding-CS distance measurement for BLE device-12), wherein the BLECS process comprises sending periodic channel sounding subevents (Para. 70: BLE- 12 periodically performs scanning) (Fig. 5: continuous wave (CW) signal having a predetermined waveform as a channel sounding (CS) distance measurement signal), and obtaining distance measurement results corresponding to the periodic channel sounding subevents (Para. 101 & 99: Channel sounding-CS distance measurement based on Channel sounding signal phase) & (Fig. 5: Measuring distance).
At the time of filling, it would have been obvious to use a channel sounding distance measurement signal in a short-range communication to determine distance preciously between multiple wireless devices.
Choi discloses receive a motion initiation message from the second electronic device while the electronic device is unlocked (Para. 16-18 & 20: Notification message send from one device to another device when device is on the motion. Note: the device is unlocked, therefore, message was displayed) & (Fig. 34: Motion of the terminal detected[Wingdings font/0xE0] display message).
At the time of filling, it would have been obvious to use device motion detection and send notification to another device to provide alert to the other neighboring devices for tracking distance between device to maintain proper connection between devices.
Regarding claim 8, Claim 8 corresponds to claim 1 and is analyzed accordingly.
Regarding claim 2 & 9, Jiang et al discloses device locked screen when devices are above threshold distance (Para. 87: When distance is too large- greater than a threshold distance[Wingdings font/0xE0] The phone or watch can automatically lock itself).
Jiang et al is silent regarding the device stop BLECS process.
Kakuya et al discloses device stop BLECS process when the device is locked (Para. 136-137) & (Fig. 9: S205- stop CS distance measurement).
At the time of filling, it would have been obvious to stop CS distance measurement to conserve energy in the device.
Claims 3 & 10 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Jiang et al (Pub No. 2023/0417890), in view of Kakuya et al (Pub No. 2025/0298140) and further in view of Chio (Pub No. 2016/0035213) and further in view of Lee et al (Pub No. 2016/0105542).
Regarding claim 3 & 10, Jiang et al is silent regarding the processor sends a lock screen activation message to the second electronic device after invoking the lock screen on the electronic.
Lee et al discloses the processor sends a lock screen activation message to the second electronic device after invoking the lock screen on the electronic (Para. 271 & 274: Lock screen of the lock state displayed).
At the time of filling, it would have been obvious to use lock state configuring system to lock the device properly to protect data on the device.
Claims 4, 5, 7, 11, 12, 14 & 18-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Jiang et al (Pub No. 2023/0417890), in view of Kakuya et al (Pub No. 2025/0298140) and further in view of Chio (Pub No. 2016/0035213) and further in view of Kwatra et al (Pub No. 2022/0092604).
Regarding claim 4 & 11 & 18, Jiang et al is silent regarding the processor, prior to invoking the lock threshold; and invokes the lock screen in response to determining that the current distance exceeds the predetermined distance threshold for a predetermined time interval.
Kwatra et al discloses the processor, prior to invoking the lock threshold; and invokes the lock screen in response to determining that the current distance exceeds the predetermined distance threshold for a predetermined time interval (Para. 39: screen lock when distance exceeds the predetermined distance threshold for a predetermined time interval) & (Para. 254).
At the time of filling, it would have been obvious to use device lock configuring system to lock the device properly to protect data on the device when no data communication is required.
Regarding claim 5 & 12 & 19, Jiang et al is silent regarding the predetermined time interval is a value ranging from 10 seconds to 15 seconds.
Kwatra et al discloses the system using predetermine time interval (Para. 24: time interval X). Examiner taking official notice that predetermined time interval can be 10 to 15 seconds based on design choice. In this case, the functionality of the device has not changed, absent unexpected result.
At the time of filling, it would have been obvious to use device lock configuring system to lock the device properly to protect data on the device when no data communication is required.
Regarding claim 7 & 14 & 20, Jiang et al is silent regarding the predetermined distance threshold is a value ranging from 50 centimeters to 60 centimeters.
Kwatra et al discloses system using predetermined distance threshold (Para. 24 & 39). Examiner taking official notice that predetermined distance threshold can range from 50 to 60 centimeters based on design choice. In this case, the functionality of the device has not changed, absent unexpected result.
At the time of filling, it would have been obvious to use device lock configuring system to lock the device properly to protect data on the device when no data communication is required.
Claims 6 & 13 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Jiang et al (Pub No. 2023/0417890), in view of Kakuya et al (Pub No. 2025/0298140) and further in view of Chio (Pub No. 2016/0035213) and further in view of Chen et al (Pat No. 11500476).
Regarding claim 6 & 13, Jiang et al is silent regarding the distance calculation algorithm includes at least one of Time of Flight (ToF), Channel Impulse Response (CIR), Angle of Arrival (AoA), and Time Difference of Arrival (TDoA).
Chen et al discloses the distance calculation algorithm includes at least one of Time of Flight (ToF), Channel Impulse Response (CIR), Angle of Arrival (AoA), and Time Difference of Arrival (TDoA) (Col. 4 Line 36-52: measuring time-of- flight, angle of arrival).
At the time of filling, it would have been obvious to use different algorithm to determine the device location/ position to calculate device distance.
Claims 15-16 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Jiang et al (Pub No. 2023/0417890), and further in view of Kakuya et al (Pub No. 2025/0298140).
Regarding claim 15, Jiang et al discloses computer program product comprising a non-transitory computer readable medium having program instructions that when executed by a processor of an electronic device that includes a Bluetooth interface (Fig. 1-2: Communication system connects the first device to a second device via Bluetooth) & (Para. 52), configure the electronic device to perform functions comprising: determine a current distance between the electronic device and the second electronic device based on the distance measurement results (Para. 6: Distance measuring and estimating between two devices) & (Fig. 9); and in response to determining that the current distance exceeds a predetermined distance threshold, invoke a lock screen on the electronic device (Para. 87: Alert can be generated when the distance is too large- greater than a threshold distance[Wingdings font/0xE0] The phone or watch can automatically lock itself).
Jiang is silent regarding receive a motion initiation message from the second electronic device while the electronic device is unlocked; initiate a BLE Channel Sounding (BLECS) process using a distance calculation algorithm, wherein the BLECS process comprises sending periodic channel sounding subevents, and obtaining distance measurement results corresponding to the periodic channel sounding subevents.
In a similar field of endeavor, Kakuya et al discloses initiate a BLE Channel Sounding (BLECS) process using a distance calculation algorithm (Para. 53: Channel sounding-CS distance measurement for BLE device-12), wherein the BLECS process comprises sending periodic channel sounding subevents (Para. 70: BLE- 12 periodically performs scanning) (Fig. 5: continuous wave (CW) signal having a predetermined waveform as a channel sounding (CS) distance measurement signal), and obtaining distance measurement results corresponding to the periodic channel sounding subevents (Para. 101 & 99: Channel sounding-CS distance measurement based on Channel sounding signal phase) & (Fig. 5: Measuring distance).
At the time of filling, it would have been obvious to use a channel sounding distance measurement signal in a short-range communication to determine distance preciously between multiple wireless devices.
Regarding claim 16, Jiang et al discloses device locked screen when devices are above threshold distance (Para. 87: When distance is too large- greater than a threshold distance[Wingdings font/0xE0] The phone or watch can automatically lock itself).
Jiang et al is silent regarding the device stop BLECS process.
Kakuya et al discloses device stop BLECS process when the device is locked (Para. 136-137) & (Fig. 9: S205- stop CS distance measurement).
At the time of filling, it would have been obvious to stop CS distance measurement to conserve energy in the device.
Claim 17 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Jiang et al (Pub No. 2023/0417890), in view of Kakuya et al (Pub No. 2025/0298140) and further in view of Lee et al (Pub No. 2016/0105542).
Regarding claim 17, Jiang et al is silent regarding the processor sends a lock screen activation message to the second electronic device after invoking the lock screen on the electronic.
Lee et al discloses the processor sends a lock screen activation message to the second electronic device after invoking the lock screen on the electronic (Para. 271 & 274: Lock screen of the lock state displayed).
At the time of filling, it would have been obvious to use lock state configuring system to lock the device properly to protect data on the device.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to MD K TALUKDER whose telephone number is (571)270-3222. The examiner can normally be reached Mon-Thur from 10 am to 6 pm.
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, Wesley Kim can be reached on 571-272-7867. 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.
/MD K TALUKDER/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2648