DETAILED ACTION
This action is in response to the initial filing filed on May 13, 2024 Claims 1-11 havebeen examined in this application.
Information Disclosure Statement
The Information Disclosure Statement (IDS) filed on 5/13/2024 has been acknowledged.
Priority
Receipt is acknowledged of certified copies of papers required by 37 CFR 1.55.
Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status
The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 103 which forms the basis for all obviousness rejections set forth in this Office action:
A patent for a claimed invention may not be obtained, notwithstanding that the claimed invention is not identically disclosed as set forth in section 102, if the differences between the claimed invention and the prior art are such that the claimed invention as a whole would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which the claimed invention pertains. Patentability shall not be negated by the manner in which the invention was made.
Claims 1-6, 8, and 10-11 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Romme (US 2020/0395978 A1) in view of Kluge et al (US 2010/0167662 A1).
Regarding Claim 1, Romme teaches a method of phase-based ranging between a first device and a second device, comprising [0007, 0010 for phase-based ranging with a first measuring device]:
receiving a plurality two-way phase-measurements between the first device and the second device performed at a plurality of frequencies [0007 for a first and second frequency];
identifying a first measurement and a second measurement of said plurality of two-way phase measurements [0010-0011 and 0057];
calculating a relative speed between said first device and said second device based at least on said first measurement and said second measurement [0008, 0019-0020];
doppler compensating a plurality of measurements of said plurality of two-way phase measurements based on the calculated relative speed [0019-0020, and 0060];
and calculating a distance between said first device and said second device based on the doppler compensated measurements [0008, and 0060].
Romme fails to explicitly teach identifying a first measurement and a second measurement of said plurality of two-way phase measurements having been performed at a same frequency.
Kluge has a method for distance measurement between two nodes of a radio network (abstract) and teaches identifying a first measurement and a second measurement of said plurality of two-way phase measurements having been performed at a same frequency [0084-0085].
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the applicant’s invention for modifying the phase ranging techniques, as disclosed by Romme, further including the frequency calculations as taught by Kluge for the purpose to allow the two-phase errors can be subtracted from one another (Kluge, 0084).
Regarding Claim 2, Romme teaches each two-way phase measurement of said plurality of two-way phase measurements is a pair of in-phase, I, and quadrature, Q, measurements, a phase-magnitude-pair, or any other pair of numbers representable as a complex number [0015, 0071].
Regarding Claim 3, Romme teaches the frequencies of said plurality of two-way phase measurements are pseudo-randomly ordered in time [0024].
Regarding Claim 4, Romme fails to explicitly teach the pseudo-random order in time of the frequencies of said plurality of two-way phase measurements is according to US FCC regulation 47 CFR §15.247 [0023 for using standards].
Regarding Claim 5, Romme teaches said calculating of said distance is performed using a fast Fourier transform, FFT, ranging algorithm or a super-resolution ranging algorithm [0057 for using super-resolution].
Regarding Claim 6, Romme fails to explicitly teach said relative speed is calculated based on a phase difference between said second measurement and said first measurement, said same frequency, and a time difference between said second measurement and said first measurement.
Kluge has a method for distance measurement between two nodes of a radio network (abstract) and teaches said relative speed is calculated based on a phase difference between said second measurement and said first measurement, said same frequency, and a time difference between said second measurement and said first measurement [0008, and 0091-0094].
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the applicant’s invention for modifying the phase ranging techniques, as disclosed by Romme, further including the frequency calculations as taught by Kluge for the purpose to synchronize the crystal oscillator to the frequency (Kluge, 0008).
Regarding Claim 8, Romme fails to explicitly teach a doppler compensation of said doppler compensating is calculated based on the frequency of the measurement, the estimated relative speed, the time of measurement at the first device and the time of measurement at the second device [0057-0059 and 0086-0089].
Regarding Claim 10, Romme teaches device configured to perform the method 0007, 0010].
Regarding Claim 11, Romme teaches non-transitory computer-readable medium comprising instructions which, when executed by a computer or processor, causes the computer or processor to carry out the method [0007, 0010].
Claims 7 and 9 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Romme (US 2020/0395978 A1) in view of Kluge et al (US 2010/0167662 A1), as applied to Claim 1 above, and further in view of Richards et al (SciTech, 2010).
Regarding Claim 7, Romme fails to explicitly teach said relative speed is calculable as: n =c∆ϕ/-4πf n ∆T wherein n is the estimated relative speed, c is the speed of light, f n is said same frequency, ∆T is a time difference between said second measurement and said first measurement, and ∆ϕ is a phase difference between said second measurement and said first measurement.
Richards has a method for to target detection and target range determination (page 3, Section 1.1 first paragraph) and teaches said relative speed is calculable as: n =c∆ϕ/-4πf n ∆T wherein n is the estimated relative speed, c is the speed of light, f n is said same frequency, ∆T is a time difference between said second measurement and said first measurement, and ∆ϕ is a phase difference between said second measurement and said first measurement [page 696, Section 18.7].
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the applicant’s invention for modifying the phase ranging techniques, as disclosed by Romme, further including the velocity calculations as taught by Richards for the purpose to determine range estimations (Richards, page 696, Section 18.7 first paragraph).
Regarding Claim 9, Romme fails to explicitly teach a doppler compensation of said doppler compensating is calculable as: ϕdoppler=-2πf n /c(tA+tB) wherein f is the frequency of the measurement, n is the estimated relative speed, c is the speed of light, tA is a time of measurement at the first device and tB is a time of measurement at the second device.
Richards has a method for to target detection and target range determination (page 3, Section 1.1 first paragraph) and teaches a doppler compensation of said doppler compensating is calculable as: ϕdoppler=-2πf n /c(tA+tB) wherein f is the frequency of the measurement, n is the estimated relative speed, c is the speed of light, tA is a time of measurement at the first device and tB is a time of measurement at the second device [page 695, first two paragraphs].
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the applicant’s invention for modifying the phase ranging techniques, as disclosed by Romme, further including the velocity calculations as taught by Richards for the purpose to determine range estimations (Richards, page 696, Section 18.7 first paragraph).
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Zhou et al (US 2014/0184447 A1) has RF tag reader may use spatial averaging to compensate for the limitations of performing multi-frequency continuous-wave ranging.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to SAMARINA MAKHDOOM whose telephone number is (703)756-1044. The examiner can normally be reached Monday – Thursdays from 8:30 to 5:30 pm eastern time.
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 on 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.
/SAMARINA MAKHDOOM/
Examiner, Art Unit 3648