DETAILED ACTION
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 .
Art Unit- Location
The Art Unit location of your application in the USPTO has changed. To aid in correlating any papers for this application, all further correspondence regarding this application should be directed to Art Unit 2642.
Preliminary Amendment
The present Office Action is based upon the original patent application filed on 06/21/2024 as modified by the preliminary amendment filed on 06/21/2024. Claims 1-6, 8-9, 11-14, 16-18, 20-22 and 24-25 are now pending in the present application.
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on 03/10/2025 is in compliance with the provision of 37 CFR 1.97, has been considered by the Examiner, and made of record in the application file.
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:
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.
Claims 1-6, 8, 20-22 and 24-25 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being un-patentable over Thiagarajan US Patent No.:( US 9,086,281 B1) hereinafter referred as Thiagarajan, in view of Fujiwara US Patent Application No.:( US 2011/0208472) hereinafter referred as Fujiwara.
For claim 1, Thiagarajan discloses the method for determining user movement direction, the method comprising:
obtaining, using a control system, user acceleration data associated with a user (Column 1, lines 37-41 discloses the acceleration data and the movement of the user);
determining, using the control system, a movement period associated with a movement activity of the user using the user acceleration data (Column 1, lines 59-67, discloses source device that is moved or rotated. The output of the IMU are processed into rotation and acceleration), wherein the movement period indicates a duration between two sequential movements by the user (Column 2, lines 14-18 discloses that according to the accelerometer detects a duration on the movements); and
determining, using the control system, a movement direction corresponding to the movement activity using the user acceleration data based on a direction of acceleration orthogonal to the movement direction in which at least a portion of the user acceleration data (Column 3, lines 22-36) and (Column 6, lines 24-39). However, Thiagarajan disclose all the subject matter of the claimed invention with the exemption of the acceleration data is anti-periodic over a period of time corresponding to the movement period as recited in claim 1.
Fujiwara from the same or analogous art teaches the acceleration data is anti-periodic over a period of time corresponding to the movement period (Paragraph [0054], lines 1-3). Therefore, it would have been obvious for the person of ordinary skill in the art at the time of filling to use the acceleration data is anti-periodic over a period of time corresponding to the movement period as taught by Fujiwara into the using accelerometer data to determine movement direction device of Thiagarajan.
The acceleration data is anti-periodic over a period of time corresponding to the movement period can be modify/implemented by combining the acceleration data is anti-periodic over a period of time corresponding to the movement period with the device. This process is implemented as a hardware solution or as firmware solutions of Fujiwara into the using accelerometer data to determine movement direction device of Thiagarajan. As disclosed in Fujiwara, the motivation for the combination would be to use the anti-periodic acceleration over a motion period that will help to the efficient energy use, becoming more efficient and reliable management use.
For claim 2, Thiagarajan discloses all the subject matter of the claimed invention with the exemption of the portion of the user acceleration data is anti-periodic over the period of time corresponding to the movement period such that a cross-correlation of the at least the portion of the user acceleration data with a version of the at least the portion of the user acceleration data delayed by the movement period is negative as recited in claim 2.
Fujiwara from the same or analogous art teaches the portion of the user acceleration data is anti-periodic over the period of time corresponding to the movement period such that a cross-correlation of the at least the portion of the user acceleration data with a version of the at least the portion of the user acceleration data delayed by the movement period is negative (Paragraph [0049], lines 13-18). Therefore, it would have been obvious for the person of ordinary skill in the art at the time of filling to use the portion of the user acceleration data is anti-periodic over the period of time corresponding to the movement period such that a cross-correlation of the at least the portion of the user acceleration data with a version of the at least the portion of the user acceleration data delayed by the movement period is negative as taught by Fujiwara into the using accelerometer data to determine movement direction device of Thiagarajan.
The portion of the user acceleration data is anti-periodic over the period of time corresponding to the movement period such that a cross-correlation of the at least the portion of the user acceleration data with a version of the at least the portion of the user acceleration data delayed by the movement period is negative can be modify/implemented by combining the portion of the user acceleration data is anti-periodic over the period of time corresponding to the movement period such that a cross-correlation of the at least the portion of the user acceleration data with a version of the at least the portion of the user acceleration data delayed by the movement period is negative with the device. This process is implemented as a hardware solution or as firmware solutions of Fujiwara into the using accelerometer data to determine movement direction device of Thiagarajan. As disclosed in Fujiwara, the motivation for the combination would be to use the anti-periodic acceleration over a motion period that will help to the efficient energy use, becoming more efficient and reliable management use.
For claim 3, Thiagarajan discloses all the subject matter of the claimed invention with the exemption of the at least the portion of the user acceleration data that is anti-periodic includes a local maximum and a local minimum occurring after a subsequent time interval corresponding with the movement activity as recited in claim 3.
Fujiwara from the same or analogous art teaches the at least the portion of the user acceleration data that is anti-periodic includes a local maximum and a local minimum occurring after a subsequent time interval corresponding with the movement activity (Paragraph [0062]-[0063], lines 1-17). Therefore, it would have been obvious for the person of ordinary skill in the art at the time of filling to use the at least the portion of the user acceleration data that is anti-periodic includes a local maximum and a local minimum occurring after a subsequent time interval corresponding with the movement activity as taught by Fujiwara into the using accelerometer data to determine movement direction device of Thiagarajan.
The at least the portion of the user acceleration data that is anti-periodic includes a local maximum and a local minimum occurring after a subsequent time interval corresponding with the movement activity can be modify/implemented by combining the at least the portion of the user acceleration data that is anti-periodic includes a local maximum and a local minimum occurring after a subsequent time interval corresponding with the movement activity with the device. This process is implemented as a hardware solution or as firmware solutions of Fujiwara into the using accelerometer data to determine movement direction device of Thiagarajan. As disclosed in Fujiwara, the motivation for the combination would be to use the anti-periodic uses a threshold for a local maximum and a local minimum occurring after a subsequent time interval corresponding with the movement activity, becoming more efficient and reliable for a better management use of the device.
For claim 4, Thiagarajan discloses the method, wherein the movement activity comprises walking or running, and wherein the movement direction comprises a direction the user is walking or running (Column 2, lines 14-22) and (Column 4, lines 25-31).
For claim 5, Thiagarajan discloses the method, further comprising transforming the user acceleration data from a user-centered coordinate frame to a fixed coordinate frame, to produce transformed user acceleration data, wherein the movement period is determined using the transformed user acceleration data (Column 2, lines 11-31).
For claim 6, Thiagarajan discloses the method, wherein transforming the user acceleration data comprises using user head orientation data obtained from one or more gyroscopes (Column 1, lines 67-Column 2, lines 1-3).
For claim 8, Thiagarajan discloses the method, wherein determining the movement period comprises using data associated with a vertical component of the user acceleration data (Column 8, lines 8-10).
For claim 20, Thiagarajan discloses the method, wherein the user acceleration data is obtained from one or more accelerometers disposed in or on a user device configured to be carried by or worn by the user (Column 2, lines 57-62).
For claim 21, Thiagarajan discloses the method, wherein the user device comprises headphones (Column 3, line 20).
For claim 22, Thiagarajan discloses the method, further comprising rendering audio content to be presented by the headphones based on the identified movement direction (Column 3, lines 13-26).
For claim 24, Thiagarajan discloses an apparatus comprising one or more processors and a memory including instructions, which when executed by the one or more processors, cause the apparatus to perform configured for implementing the method of (Claims 24 has been analyzed and rejected with the same rationale as claim 1 applied above).
For claim 25, Thiagarajan discloses one or more non-transitory computer-readable storage media having software stored thereon, the software including instructions for controlling one or more devices to performing the method (Claims 25 has been analyzed and rejected with the same rationale as claim 1 applied above).
Claim 11 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being un-patentable over Thiagarajan US Patent No.:( US 9,086,281 B1) hereinafter referred as Thiagarajan, in view of Fujiwara US Patent Application No.:( US 2011/0208472) hereinafter referred as Fujiwara, in further view of Tu US Patent Application No.:( US 2011/0208472) hereinafter referred as Tu.
For claim 11, Thiagarajan discloses all the subject matter of the claimed invention with the exemption of the at least a portion of the user acceleration data that is anti-periodic over the period of time corresponding to the movement period comprises one or more horizontal components of the user acceleration data as recited in claim 11.
Tu from the same or analogous art teaches the at least a portion of the user acceleration data that is anti-periodic over the period of time corresponding to the movement period comprises one or more horizontal components of the user acceleration data (Column 8, lines 47-55). Therefore, it would have been obvious for the person of ordinary skill in the art at the time of filling to use the at least a portion of the user acceleration data that is anti-periodic over the period of time corresponding to the movement period comprises one or more horizontal components of the user acceleration data as taught by Tu into the using accelerometer data to determine movement direction device of Thiagarajan.
The at least a portion of the user acceleration data that is anti-periodic over the period of time corresponding to the movement period comprises one or more horizontal components of the user acceleration data can be modify/implemented by combining the at least a portion of the user acceleration data that is anti-periodic over the period of time corresponding to the movement period comprises one or more horizontal components of the user acceleration data with the device. This process is implemented as a hardware solution or as firmware solutions of Tu into the using accelerometer data to determine movement direction device of Thiagarajan. As disclosed in Tu, the motivation for the combination would be to use the acceleration data that is anti-periodic over the period of time corresponding to the movement period comprises one or more horizontal components of the user acceleration data, repeatable signal property that can be harnessed for more accurate activity recognition, cleaner motion extraction, and efficient on-device processing, provided it is detected after proper sensor calibration and filtering, becoming more efficient and reliable for a better location track.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 9, 12-14, 16-17 and 18 are objected as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure is shown in the following table:
2025/0250954
TAN
The mobile device, motion data indicating motion measured by a motion sensor over a time period. The motion sensor is worn or carried by a user.
2021/0400418
TAM
tablet computer, laptop computer, wearable computer, game console television etc. In an embodiment, source device includes the inertial measurement unit (IMU) that includes various motion sensors, 3-axis and accelerometers 3-axis MEMS accelerometer. When source devices moved or rotated, the motion sensors detect the
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JOSEPH AREVALO whose telephone number is (571)270-3121. The examiner can normally be reached on M-F 8:30-5:00 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, Rafael Perez-Gutierrez can be reached on (571)272-7915. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300.
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 http://pair-direct.uspto.gov. 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.
/JOSEPH AREVALO/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2642
