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 .
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.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
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.
Claims 1-20 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.
Regarding claim 1 and similarly claim 20, it is not clear of what encompasses and is meant by the term “reflected signal corresponding to the transmission signal.” As claimed the term is excessively broad in nature and the meets and bounds of the claimed limitation cannot be ascertained by one skilled in the art. Review of the specification reveals at page 7 lines 6-14 “The reflected signal (or the reverse signal) may be a sum of the reflected signal due to impedance mismatches (i.e., electrical reflection) and mutually coupled signals from other antenna elements in a free-space propagation scenario (i.e., without electromagnetic reflections) […] if there is a human body present in the transmit beam, the electromagnetic signal reflected from the human body, which is picked up by the transmission antenna simultaneously (i.e., the antenna receives while transmitting), would be superimposed on top of the ambient reverse signal mentioned above.” The Specification suggests that the reflected signal corresponds to both an ambient reverse signal independent from environmental influence and target induced reflections superimposed on the electromagnetic signal. As presently claimed it is unclear if the “reflected signal” is effected by environmental influence or if is explicitly defined by the ambient reverse signal. It suggested applicant amend the claims to be consistent with the disclosed detection step.
Regarding claim 3 and similarly claims 9, 15, and 18, it is not clear of what encompasses and is meant by the limitation “determining whether the object is detected within the proximity range of the phased antenna array comprises determining that the object is detected within the proximity range of the phased antenna array.” It is unclear how an explicit processing step may further comprise the exact same processing step. As claimed the limitation is excessively broad in nature and the meets and bounds of the claimed limitation cannot be ascertained by one skilled in the art. Review of the specification reveals at page 3 lines 12-15 “determine whether an object is detected within a proximity range of the phased antenna array, based on the comparison of at least one of the first power metric with the first threshold value or the second power metric with the second threshold value.” The Specification suggests that the above limitation is not intended to mean that the step of “determining whether the object is detected within the proximity range” comprises the step of “determining whether the object is detected within the proximity range,” but that the aforementioned determination is made bases on comparing power metrics with a threshold. It suggested applicant amend the claims to be consistent with the disclosed “reflected signal corresponding to the transmission signal.”
Regarding claim 5, it is not clear of what encompasses and is meant by the limitation “calibrating the statistics of the first power ratio values.” As the “first power ratio value” is the ratio of the first power of the first injected signal and the second power of the first reflected signal, it is unclear how the statistics of this power ratio could be calibrated. Calibration is the process of comparing a measurement to a known standard to ensure its accuracy and reliability. Increasing the sample size of a statistic such as standard deviation does not constitute “calibration.” As claimed the limitation is excessively broad in nature and the meets and bounds of the claimed limitation cannot be ascertained by one skilled in the art. Review of the specification reveals at page 12 lines 4-5 “The calibration routine in the algorithm of Table 1 determines the average and the standard deviation of the reference-levels associated for the power ratio for a given frequency of operation.” The Specification suggests that “statistics” are used in the calibration process not that the “statistics” themselves are calibrated. It suggested applicant amend the claims to be consistent with the disclosed detection step.
Regarding claim 20, it is not clear of what encompasses and is meant by the term “phased antenna array.” There is insufficient antecedent basis for the claimed term. Claim 20 discloses a “an antenna array including multiple antenna elements,” but does not provide antecedent basis for the explicit recitation of the term “phased antenna array.”
Claims 4-7, 10-12, 16 and 19 are also rejected based on their dependency of the defected parent claim(s).
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.
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, 8-11, and 13-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Black(US20170126265A1) in view of Wang(US20210318423A1)
Regarding claim 1, Black discloses
A method of proximity detection (“when a lossy body comes in close proximity to the antenna, the RL of the antenna tends to go up, which can be referred to as the body dissipation effect.” [0037] & “determine a first return loss value” [0033])[…], the method comprising: transmitting, via a first antenna element and a second antenna element among the multiple antenna elements, a transmission signal (“, the communication device 100 includes at least two antennas 118, e.g., first antenna 118a and second antenna 118b, that each transmit a portion of a transmit signal 126 “ [0035]); determining, for the first antenna element, a first power of a first injected signal(“ the controller 106 can reduce an output power level of the transceiver 112 by changing the transmit power setting 134 to reduce the power delivered to either or both of the first and second antennas 118a, 118b” [0035]) and a second power of a first reflected signal corresponding to the transmission signal (“detecting a first signal level corresponding to power delivered to a first antenna (block 1302)” [0049]); determining, for the second antenna element, a third power of a second injected signal (“ the controller 106 can reduce an output power level of the transceiver 112 by changing the transmit power setting 134 to reduce the power delivered to either or both of the first and second antennas 118a, 118b” [0035]); and a fourth power of a second reflected signal corresponding to the transmission signal (“The on-device RL measurement receiver 120 can further detect a second signal level 132 that corresponds to power delivered to the second antenna 118b “[0035]) calculating, for the first antenna element, a first power metric based on at least one of the first power of the first injected signal or the second power of the first reflected signal(“determining a first return loss value, based on a first transmit power setting and the first signal level (block 1404)” [0051]); calculating, for the second antenna element, a second power metric based on at least one of the third power of the second injected signal or the fourth power of the second reflected signal(“ The controller 106 compares a second transmit power setting 134 to the second signal level to determine a second return loss value” [0035]); comparing the first power metric with a first threshold value (“The controller determines whether the first return loss value differs from a baseline value by a threshold amount” [0020]); comparing the second power metric with a second threshold value (“The controller 106 determines whether either of the first or second return loss values differs from its respective baseline value by a respective threshold amount” [0035]).
Black discloses proximity detection, but does not explicitly disclose nor limit detecting proximity based on the comparison a power metric with a threshold value using a phased array. Wang discloses, using a phased antenna array including multiple antenna elements (“The antenna array may be a phased array” [0079])[…] and determining whether an object is detected within a proximity range of the phased antenna array, based on the comparison of at least one of the first power metric with the first threshold value or the second power metric with the second threshold value (“The UE 110 can monitor the VSWR to determine a change in VSWR that crosses the threshold, indicating the presence of an object in the near-field region.” [0039]).
Wang teaches in the same field of return loss proximity detection. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Black with the teachings of Wade to incorporate the features of a detecting proximity based on the comparison a power metric with a threshold value using a phased array so as to gain the advantage of improving proximity detection reliability. Also, since it has been held that if a technique has been used to improve one device, and a person of ordinary skill in the art would recognize that it would improve similar devices in the same way, using the technique is obvious unless its actual application is beyond his or her skill (MPEP 2143).
Regarding claim 2, Black as modified by Wang discloses wherein,
The method claim 1, wherein the first power metric includes a first power ratio based on the first power of the first injected signal and the second power of the first reflected signal (“The correct definition of RL is the ratio, in dB units, of the input power to the reflected power” [0036]).
Regarding claim 3, Black as modified by Wang discloses all the limitations of claim 2. Black does not explicitly disclose nor limit detecting proximity based on the comparison a power metric with a threshold value. Wang discloses, determining whether the object is detected within the proximity range of the phased antenna array comprises determining that the object is detected within the proximity range of the phased antenna array, in response to the first power ratio being greater or less than the first threshold value by at least a third threshold value (“The UE 110 can monitor the VSWR to determine a change in VSWR that crosses the threshold, indicating the presence of an object in the near-field region.” [0039]).
Wang teaches in the same field of return loss proximity detection. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Black with the teachings of Wade to incorporate the features of a detecting proximity based on the comparison a power metric with a threshold value so as to gain the advantage of improving proximity detection reliability. Also, since it has been held that if a technique has been used to improve one device, and a person of ordinary skill in the art would recognize that it would improve similar devices in the same way, using the technique is obvious unless its actual application is beyond his or her skill (MPEP 2143).
Regarding claim 4, Black as modified by Wang discloses all the limitations of claim 3. Black does not explicitly disclose nor limit detecting proximity based on the comparison a power metric with a threshold value. Wang discloses wherein, the first threshold value and the third threshold value are based on statistics of first power ratio values previously obtained during operations in which no object is present (“a calibrated (baseline) value can be determined when no objects are in the near-field region, thereby setting a threshold value indicative of an object in the near-field region.” [0077]).
Wang teaches in the same field of return loss proximity detection. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Black with the teachings of Wade to incorporate the features of a detecting proximity based on the comparison a power metric with a threshold value so as to gain the advantage of improving detection sensitivity. Also, since it has been held that if a technique has been used to improve one device, and a person of ordinary skill in the art would recognize that it would improve similar devices in the same way, using the technique is obvious unless its actual application is beyond his or her skill (MPEP 2143).
Regarding claim 5, Black as modified by Wang discloses all the limitations of claim 4. Black does not explicitly disclose nor limit calibrating the statistics of the first power ratio values. Wang discloses, calibrating the statistics of the first power ratio values previously obtained during operations in which no object is present based on environmental conditions (“ calibrated (baseline) value can be determined when no objects are in the near-field region” [0077])
Wang teaches in the same field of return loss proximity detection. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Black with the teachings of Wade to incorporate the features of calibrating the statistics of the first power ratio values so as to gain the advantage of improving detection sensitivity. Also, since it has been held that if a technique has been used to improve one device, and a person of ordinary skill in the art would recognize that it would improve similar devices in the same way, using the technique is obvious unless its actual application is beyond his or her skill (MPEP 2143).
Regarding claim 6, Black as modified by Wang discloses all the limitations of claim 4. Black does not explicitly disclose nor limit a mean power ratio among the first power ratios. Wang discloses, calculating the first threshold value as a mean power ratio among the first power ratios previously obtained during the operations in which no object is present (“Comparing a first voltage standing wave ratio of the plurality of voltage standing wave ratios to a second voltage standing wave ratio of the plurality of voltage standing wave ratios;” [0100]).
Wang teaches in the same field of return loss proximity detection. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Black with the teachings of Wade to incorporate the features of a mean power ratio among the first power ratios so as to gain the advantage of improving detection accuracy. Also, since it has been held that if a technique has been used to improve one device, and a person of ordinary skill in the art would recognize that it would improve similar devices in the same way, using the technique is obvious unless its actual application is beyond his or her skill (MPEP 2143).
Regarding claim 8, Black as modified by Wang discloses wherein
The method claim 1, wherein the second power metric includes a second power ratio based on the third power of the second injected signal and the fourth power of the second reflected signal (“The correct definition of RL is the ratio, in dB units, of the input power to the reflected power” [0036] & “The controller 106 compares a second transmit power setting 134 to the second signal level to determine a second return loss value” [0035]).
Regarding claim 9, Black as modified by Wang discloses wherein
The method of claim 8, wherein determining whether the object is detected within the proximity range of the phased antenna array comprises determining that the object is detected within the proximity range of the phased antenna array (“when a lossy body comes in close proximity to the antenna, the RL of the antenna tends to go up, which can be referred to as the body dissipation effect.” [0037] & “determine a first return loss value” [0033]),
Black discloses proximity detection, but does not explicitly disclose nor limit detecting proximity based on the comparison a power metric with a threshold value. Wang discloses, response to the second power ratio being greater or less than the second threshold value by at least a fourth threshold value (“and the second voltage ratio is associated with a second antenna element of the plurality of antenna elements.” [0100] & “The UE 110 can monitor the VSWR to determine a change in VSWR that crosses the threshold, indicating the presence of an object in the near-field region.” [0039]).
Wang teaches in the same field of return loss proximity detection. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Black with the teachings of Wade to incorporate the features of second power ratio being greater or less than the second threshold value by at least a fourth threshold value so as to gain the advantage of improving detection reliability. Also, since it has been held that if a technique has been used to improve one device, and a person of ordinary skill in the art would recognize that it would improve similar devices in the same way, using the technique is obvious unless its actual application is beyond his or her skill (MPEP 2143).
Regarding claim 10, Black as modified by Wang discloses all the limitations of claim 9. Black does not explicitly disclose nor limit detecting proximity based on the comparison a power metric with a threshold value. Wang discloses wherein, the second threshold value and the fourth threshold value are based on statistics of second power ratio values previously obtained during operations in which no object is present (“a calibrated (baseline) value can be determined when no objects are in the near-field region, thereby setting a threshold value indicative of an object in the near-field region.” [0077]).
Wang teaches in the same field of return loss proximity detection. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Black with the teachings of Wade to incorporate the features of a detecting proximity based on the comparison a power metric with a threshold value so as to gain the advantage of improving detection sensitivity. Also, since it has been held that if a technique has been used to improve one device, and a person of ordinary skill in the art would recognize that it would improve similar devices in the same way, using the technique is obvious unless its actual application is beyond his or her skill (MPEP 2143).
Regarding claim 11, Black as modified by Wang discloses all the limitations of claim 10. Black does not explicitly disclose nor limit a mean power ratio among the first power ratios. Wang discloses, calculating the second threshold value as a mean power ratio among the second power ratios previously obtained during the operations in which no object is present (“Comparing a first voltage standing wave ratio of the plurality of voltage standing wave ratios to a second voltage standing wave ratio of the plurality of voltage standing wave ratios;” [0100]).
Wang teaches in the same field of return loss proximity detection. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Black with the teachings of Wade to incorporate the features of a mean power ratio among the first power ratios so as to gain the advantage of improving detection accuracy. Also, since it has been held that if a technique has been used to improve one device, and a person of ordinary skill in the art would recognize that it would improve similar devices in the same way, using the technique is obvious unless its actual application is beyond his or her skill (MPEP 2143).
Regarding claim 13, Black as modified by Wang discloses all the limitations of claim 1. Black does not explicitly disclose using 5G frequency range 2 (FR2) millimeter-wave transmit signal. Wang discloses wherein, the transmission signal includes a 5G frequency range 2 (FR2) millimeter-wave transmit signal (“each of the transmitting antenna arrays 204 and transceiver modules 206 may be tuned to frequency bands defined by 5G NR communication standards” [0033]).
Wang teaches in the same field of return loss proximity detection. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Black with the teachings of Wade to incorporate the features of 5G frequency range 2 (FR2) millimeter-wave transmit signal so as to gain the advantage of reducing latency. Also, since it has been held that if a technique has been used to improve one device, and a person of ordinary skill in the art would recognize that it would improve similar devices in the same way, using the technique is obvious unless its actual application is beyond his or her skill (MPEP 2143).
Regarding claim 14, Black as modified by Wang discloses all the limitations of claim 1. Black does not explicitly disclose a power metric incudes a first power ratio based on the first power of the first injected signal and the fourth power of the second reflected signal. Wang discloses wherein, the first power metric includes a first power ratio based on the first power of the first injected signal and the fourth power of the second reflected signal (“Comparing a first voltage standing wave ratio of the plurality of voltage standing wave ratios to a second voltage standing wave ratio of the plurality of voltage standing wave ratios;” [0100]).
Wang teaches in the same field of return loss proximity detection. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Black with the teachings of Wade to incorporate the features of a power metric including a first power ratio based on the first power of the first injected signal and the fourth power of the second reflected signal so as to gain the advantage of improving detection accuracy. Also, since it has been held that if a technique has been used to improve one device, and a person of ordinary skill in the art would recognize that it would improve similar devices in the same way, using the technique is obvious unless its actual application is beyond his or her skill (MPEP 2143).
Regarding claim 15, Black as modified by Wang discloses,
The method of claim 14 wherein determining whether the object is detected within the proximity range of the phased antenna array comprises determining that the object is detected within the proximity range of the phased antenna array, (“when a lossy body comes in close proximity to the antenna, the RL of the antenna tends to go up, which can be referred to as the body dissipation effect.” [0037] & “determine a first return loss value” [0033]),
Black discloses proximity detection, but does not explicitly disclose nor limit detecting proximity based on the comparison a power metric with a threshold value. Wang discloses in response to the first power ratio being greater or less than the first threshold value by at least a third threshold value (“and the second voltage ratio is associated with a second antenna element of the plurality of antenna elements.” [0100] & “The UE 110 can monitor the VSWR to determine a change in VSWR that crosses the threshold, indicating the presence of an object in the near-field region.” [0039]).
Wang teaches in the same field of return loss proximity detection. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Black with the teachings of Wade to incorporate the features of first power ratio being greater or less than the first threshold value by at least a third threshold value so as to gain the advantage of improving detection reliability. Also, since it has been held that if a technique has been used to improve one device, and a person of ordinary skill in the art would recognize that it would improve similar devices in the same way, using the technique is obvious unless its actual application is beyond his or her skill (MPEP 2143).
Regarding claim 16, Black as modified by Wang discloses all the limitations of claim 15. Black does not explicitly disclose nor limit detecting proximity based on the comparison a power metric with a threshold value. Wang discloses wherein, the first threshold value and the third threshold value are based on statistics of first power ratio values previously obtained during operations in which no object is present (“a calibrated (baseline) value can be determined when no objects are in the near-field region, thereby setting a threshold value indicative of an object in the near-field region.” [0077]).
Wang teaches in the same field of return loss proximity detection. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Black with the teachings of Wade to incorporate the feature’s wherein detecting proximity is based on the comparison a power metric with a threshold value so as to gain the advantage of improving detection sensitivity. Also, since it has been held that if a technique has been used to improve one device, and a person of ordinary skill in the art would recognize that it would improve similar devices in the same way, using the technique is obvious unless its actual application is beyond his or her skill (MPEP 2143).
Regarding claim 17, Black as modified by Wang discloses all the limitations of claim 11. Black does not explicitly disclose nor limit a second power metric including a second power ratio based on the third power of the second injected signal and the second power of the first reflected signal. Wang discloses wherein, the second power metric includes a second power ratio based on the third power of the second injected signal and the second power of the first reflected signal (“the determined VSWRs for different antenna elements 205 are compared to determine whether the VSWR change is from a simultaneous event or from different events” [0084])
Wang teaches in the same field of return loss proximity detection. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Black with the teachings of Wade to incorporate the features of a second power ratio based on the third power of the second injected signal and the second power of the first reflected signal so as to gain the advantage of improving detection reliability. Also, since it has been held that if a technique has been used to improve one device, and a person of ordinary skill in the art would recognize that it would improve similar devices in the same way, using the technique is obvious unless its actual application is beyond his or her skill (MPEP 2143).
Regarding claim 18, Black as modified by Wang discloses,
The method of claim 17, wherein determining whether the object is detected within the proximity range of the phased antenna array comprises determining that the object is detected within the proximity range of the phased antenna array(“when a lossy body comes in close proximity to the antenna, the RL of the antenna tends to go up, which can be referred to as the body dissipation effect.” [0037] & “determine a first return loss value” [0033]),
Black discloses proximity detection, but does not explicitly disclose nor limit detecting proximity based on the comparison a power metric with a threshold value. Wang discloses in response to the second power ratio being greater or less than the second threshold value by at least a fourth threshold value (“and the second voltage ratio is associated with a second antenna element of the plurality of antenna elements.” [0100] & “The UE 110 can monitor the VSWR to determine a change in VSWR that crosses the threshold, indicating the presence of an object in the near-field region.” [0039]).
Wang teaches in the same field of return loss proximity detection. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Black with the teachings of Wade to incorporate the features of first power ratio being greater or less than the first threshold value by at least a third threshold value so as to gain the advantage of improving detection reliability. Also, since it has been held that if a technique has been used to improve one device, and a person of ordinary skill in the art would recognize that it would improve similar devices in the same way, using the technique is obvious unless its actual application is beyond his or her skill (MPEP 2143).
Regarding claim 19, Black as modified by Wang discloses all the limitations of claim 18. Black does not explicitly disclose wherein the second threshold value and the fourth threshold value are based on statistics of second power ratio values. Wang discloses wherein, the second threshold value and the fourth threshold value are based on statistics of second power ratio values previously obtained during operations in which no object is present (“a calibrated (baseline) value can be determined when no objects are in the near-field region, thereby setting a threshold value indicative of an object in the near-field region.” [0077]).
Wang teaches in the same field of return loss proximity detection. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Black with the teachings of Wade to incorporate the features wherein the second threshold value and the fourth threshold value are based on statistics of second power ratio values so as to gain the advantage of improving detection sensitivity. Also, since it has been held that if a technique has been used to improve one device, and a person of ordinary skill in the art would recognize that it would improve similar devices in the same way, using the technique is obvious unless its actual application is beyond his or her skill (MPEP 2143).
Regarding claim 20, Black discloses
A system, comprising: an antenna array including multiple antenna elements (FIG.1, parts.118a&118b); and a processor (“processing devices” [0027])configured to: transmit, via a first antenna element and a second antenna element among the multiple antenna elements, a transmission signal(“, the communication device 100 includes at least two antennas 118, e.g., first antenna 118a and second antenna 118b, that each transmit a portion of a transmit signal 126 “ [0035]), determine, for the first antenna element, a first power of a first injected signal (“ the controller 106 can reduce an output power level of the transceiver 112 by changing the transmit power setting 134 to reduce the power delivered to either or both of the first and second antennas 118a, 118b” [0035]) and a second power of a first reflected signal corresponding to the transmission signal (“detecting a first signal level corresponding to power delivered to a first antenna (block 1302)” [0049]), determine, for the second antenna element, a third power of a second injected signal (“ the controller 106 can reduce an output power level of the transceiver 112 by changing the transmit power setting 134 to reduce the power delivered to either or both of the first and second antennas 118a, 118b” [0035]) and a fourth power of a second reflected signal corresponding to the transmission signal (“The on-device RL measurement receiver 120 can further detect a second signal level 132 that corresponds to power delivered to the second antenna 118b “[0035]), calculate, for the first antenna element, a first power metric based on at least one of the first power of the first injected signal or the second power of the first reflected signal (“determining a first return loss value, based on a first transmit power setting and the first signal level (block 1404)” [0051]), calculate, for the second antenna element, a second power metric based on at least one of the third power of the second injected signal or the fourth power of the second reflected signal (“ The controller 106 compares a second transmit power setting 134 to the second signal level to determine a second return loss value” [0035]), compare the first power metric with a first threshold value (“The controller determines whether the first return loss value differs from a baseline value by a threshold amount” [0020]), compare the second power metric with a second threshold value
(“The controller 106 determines whether either of the first or second return loss values differs from its respective baseline value by a respective threshold amount” [0035]).
Black discloses proximity detection, but does not explicitly disclose nor limit detecting proximity based on the comparison a power metric with a threshold value using a phased array. Wang discloses, determine whether an object is detected within a proximity range of the phased antenna array (“The antenna array may be a phased array” [0079]), based on the comparison of at least one of the first power metric with the first threshold value or the second power metric with the second threshold value (“The UE 110 can monitor the VSWR to determine a change in VSWR that crosses the threshold, indicating the presence of an object in the near-field region.” [0039]).
Wang teaches in the same field of return loss proximity detection. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Black with the teachings of Wade to incorporate the features of a detecting proximity based on the comparison a power metric with a threshold value using a phased array so as to gain the advantage of improving proximity detection reliability. Also, since it has been held that if a technique has been used to improve one device, and a person of ordinary skill in the art would recognize that it would improve similar devices in the same way, using the technique is obvious unless its actual application is beyond his or her skill (MPEP 2143).
Claims 7 and 12 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Black(US20170126265A1) as modified by Wang(US20210318423A1) as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of SINGH(US20210399778A1).
Regarding claim 7, Black as modified by Wang discloses all the limitations of claim 3. Black as modified by Wang does not explicitly disclose calculating the third threshold value as a standard deviation. SINGH discloses, calculating the third threshold value as a standard deviation (“calculate standard deviations for the return loss values of the plurality of sets of return loss values” [0040]) of the first power ratios previously obtained during the operations in which no object is present (“ a standard deviation that satisfies a threshold […] the threshold may be a standard deviation value of one “ [0043]).
SINGH teaches in the same field of return loss detection. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Black as modified by Wade with the teachings of SINGH to incorporate the features calculating the third threshold value as a standard deviation so as to gain the advantage of improving detection reliability. Also, since it has been held that if a technique has been used to improve one device, and a person of ordinary skill in the art would recognize that it would improve similar devices in the same way, using the technique is obvious unless its actual application is beyond his or her skill (MPEP 2143).
Regarding claim 12, Black as modified by Wang discloses all the limitations of claim 9. Black as modified by Wang does not explicitly disclose calculating the fourth threshold value as a standard deviation. SINGH discloses, calculating the fourth threshold value as a standard deviation (“calculate standard deviations for the return loss values of the plurality of sets of return loss values” [0040]) of the second power ratios previously obtained during the operations in which no object is present (“ a standard deviation that satisfies a threshold […] the threshold may be a standard deviation value of one “ [0043]).
SINGH teaches in the same field of return loss detection. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Black as modified by Wade with the teachings of SINGH to incorporate the features calculating the fourth threshold value as a standard deviation so as to gain the advantage of improving detection reliability. Also, since it has been held that if a technique has been used to improve one device, and a person of ordinary skill in the art would recognize that it would improve similar devices in the same way, using the technique is obvious unless its actual application is beyond his or her skill (MPEP 2143).
Documents Considered but not Relied Upon
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to the applicant’s Disclosure.
Eggers(US20070111677A1) is considered analogous art to the instant application as it discloses in [0061] “The absorption for sub-elements M has a simple model of the lognormal distributed loss with the mean value of 5 dB and the standard deviation of 5 dB.”
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to CLAYTON PAUL RIDDER whose telephone number is (571)272-2771. The examiner can normally be reached Monday thru Friday ET.
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, Jack Keith can be reached on (571) 272-6878. 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.
/C.P.R./Examiner, Art Unit 3646
/JACK W KEITH/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3646
Prosecution Insights