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 .
Priority
Applicant’s claim for domestic priority under 35 U.S.C. 119(e) is acknowledged.
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement submitted on July 19, 2024 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:
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 1-3, 5, 7, 11-13, 15, 19, and 20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Al-kadi et al. (US Patent 10631265, hereinafter Al-kadi) in view of Ainapure et al. (US Patent Publication 2022/0299591, hereinafter Ainapure).
Regarding claim 1, Al-kadi discloses a device (col. 9, line 18 “the first anchor from the plurality of anchors”), comprising:
a communication interface (col. 6, lines 19-20 “the first anchor transmits a response message also to the other anchors”, col. 9, lines 35-36 “the node transmits the probing signal to the anchors through a further communication network”, col. 10, lines 4-6 “the further communication network is a ZigBee network, a Bluetooth low energy network, or a Wi-Fi- network” – thus the first anchor must include a communication interface); and
processing logic (col. 10, line 60 – col. 11, line 26 “The systems and methods described herein may at least partially be embodied by a computer program or a plurality of computer programs” and computer with processor to performed the predetermined operations) configured to:
receive, from a wearable device (col. 3, lines 27-33 “The node 102 whose position is determined may for example be … a device for tracking children … a device for tracking animals”; a device for tracking children or animals would necessarily have to be a wearable device), a signal, (col. 9, lines 35-36 “the node transmits the probing signal to the anchors through a further communication network”)
determine a signal strength of the received signal, (col. 9, lines 36-38 “each anchor determines a signal strength or quality parameter value of the probing signal)
receive, via the communication interface, messages from a plurality of other devices that received the signal, wherein each message includes a signal strength value corresponding to a signal strength measured by one of the plurality of other devices, (col. 9, lines 39-40 “the anchors exchange said strength or quality parameter values between each other”); and
determine whether the device received the signal with a greatest signal strength (col. 9, lines 40-42 “the anchors select the anchor that has provided the highest signal strength or quality parameter value as the first anchor”)
Al-kadi also discloses a response being sent via the communication interface by the device with the highest signal strength (Fig. 5A, col. 6, lines 34-37 “Furthermore, the method 500 comprises, at 504 , that the first anchor of said plurality transmits a response message…”).
However, Al-kadi fails to teach transmitting that response as a message to a monitoring device that also indicates an identifier (ID) of the wearable device and at least one of a location of the device or an ID associated with the device.
In the same field of endeavor, Ainapure discloses a message to a monitoring device indicating an identifier (ID) of the wearable device (p. 0041 “each asset 112-118 may be a person… the assets 112-118 may have or include an asset tag 122-128, respectively”, fig. 6, p. 0044, “the lighting device 102 may wirelessly receive beacon signals (e.g., BLE beacon signals) transmitted by one or more of the asset tags… The lighting device 102 may transmit ID information and the signal strength information to the control device 106 via the wireless signals”, where “ID information” refers to the ID of an asset tag) and at least one of a location of the device or an ID associated with the device (claim 2 “wherein the ID information and the signal strength are transmitted using a ZigBee compliant signal” – the Zigbee standard includes transmitting device IDs in its data format used in wireless communication).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective date of the claimed invention, to transmit a message to a monitoring device indicating an identifier (ID) of the wearable device and at least one of a location of the device or an ID associated with the device as suggested in Ainapure, in the device of Al-kadi, in order to communicate to an external device (the monitoring device) the current location of the tracked asset such as a person or group of people, and allowing the system to differentiate multiple users/assets reliably, using identification included in the signaling that allows multiple assets to be tracked at a time. (Ainapure p. 0068).
Consider claim 2, and as applied to claim 1 above, Al-kadi as modified by Ainapure discloses that the processing logic is further configured to:
determine that the device did not receive the signal with the greatest signal strength, and
not transmit the message to the monitoring device, in response to determining that the device did not receive the signal with the greatest signal strength (Al-kadi discloses in col. 9, lines 34-42 an embodiment where the first anchor is selected from a plurality of anchors by determining which amongst the plurality of anchors has provided the highest signal strength value, hence, an anchor does not transmit the message if it did not receive the signal with the greatest strength as it cannot be the first anchor).
Regarding claim 3, and as applied to claim 1 above, Al-kadi as modified by Ainapure
discloses that the processing logic is further configured to:
transmit, to the plurality of other devices and via the communication interface, a second message including information identifying the signal strength of the received signal (Al-kadi col. 9, lines 39-40 “the anchors exchange said strength or quality parameter values between each other” - Said second message is interpreted to be the same signal-strength value containing message being received by devices as specified in claim 1 of the instant application, as suggested by the specification; see p. 0030 of application).
Regarding claim 5, and as applied to claim 1 above, Al-kadi as modified by Ainapure discloses the device further comprising: a memory configured to store a plurality of signal strength values, wherein each of the plurality of signal strength values is associated with one of the plurality of other devices (Ainapure p. 0290 “Object data 134 can be any data associated with each object 160… Such data can include, but is not limited to … RSSI values for previous RF signals… Examples of a storage repository 130 can include, but are not limited to, a database (or a number of databases), a file system, a hard drive, flash memory, some other form of solid state data storage, or any suitable combination thereof.” Ainapure p. 0291 “The storage repository 130 can be located on multiple physical machines, each storing all or a portion of … the object data 134”).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art, before the
effective date of the claimed invention, to store the signal strength values in a computer-readable medium as suggested by Ainapure in the device of Al-kadi, that can be read by a computer for purposes such as wireless data transmission, arithmetic operations, etc.
Regarding claim 7, and as applied to claim 1 above, Al-kadi as modified by Ainapure discloses that the message comprises: the ID of the wearable device and the ID associated with the device (Ainapure p. 0044, “The lighting device 102 may transmit ID information and the signal strength information to the control device 106 via the wireless signals”, claim 2 “wherein
the ID information and the signal strength are transmitted using a ZigBee compliant signal” – see claim 1 rejection above).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective date of the claimed invention, to transmit a message to a monitoring device indicating an ID of the wearable device and an ID associated with the device as suggested in Ainapure, in the device of Al-kadi, in order to communicate to an external device (the monitoring device) the current location of the tracked asset such as a person or group of people, and allowing the system to differentiate multiple users/assets reliably, using identification included in the signaling that allows multiple assets to be tracked at a time. (Ainapure p. 0068).
Regarding claim 11, Al-kadi discloses a system, comprising:
a plurality of devices, wherein each of the devices (col. 9, line 18 “the first anchor from the plurality of anchors”), comprises:
a communication interface (col. 6, lines 19-20 “the first anchor transmits a response message also to the other anchors”, col. 9, lines 35-36 “the node transmits the probing signal to the anchors through a further communication network”, col. 10, lines 4-6 “the further communication network is a ZigBee network, a Bluetooth low energy network, or a Wi-Fi- network” – thus the first anchor must include a communication interface), and
processing logic (col. 10, line 60 – col. 11, line 26 “The systems and methods described herein may at least partially be embodied by a computer program or a plurality of computer programs” and computer with processor to performed the predetermined operations) configured to:
receive, from a wearable device (col. 3, lines 27-33 “The node 102 whose position is determined may for example be … a device for tracking children … a device for tracking animals”; a device for tracking children or animals would necessarily have to be a wearable device), a signal, (col. 9, lines 35-36 “the node transmits the probing signal to the anchors through a further communication network”)
determine a signal strength of the received signal, (col. 9, lines 36-38 “each anchor determines a signal strength or quality parameter value of the probing signal)
receive, via the communication interface, messages from other ones of the plurality of devices that received the signal, wherein each message includes a signal strength value corresponding to a signal strength measured by one of the other ones of the plurality of devices, (col. 9, lines 39-40 “the anchors exchange said strength or quality parameter values between each other”); and
determine whether the device received the signal with a greatest signal strength (col. 9, lines 40-42 “the anchors select the anchor that has provided the highest signal strength or quality parameter value as the first anchor”)
Al-kadi also discloses a response being sent via the communication interface by the device with the highest signal strength (Fig. 5A, col. 6, lines 34-36 “Furthermore, the method 500 comprises, at 504 , that the first anchor of said plurality transmits a response message…”).
However, Al-kadi fails to teach transmitting that response as a message to a monitoring device that also indicates an identifier (ID) of the wearable device and at least one of a location of the device or an ID associated with the device.
In the same field of endeavor, Ainapure discloses a message to a monitoring device indicating an identifier (ID) of the wearable device (p. 0041 “each asset 112-118 may be a person… the assets 112-118 may have or include an asset tag 122-128, respectively”, fig. 6, p. 0044, “the lighting device 102 may wirelessly receive beacon signals (e.g., BLE beacon signals) transmitted by one or more of the asset tags… The lighting device 102 may transmit ID information and the signal strength information to the control device 106 via the wireless signals”, where “ID information” refers to the ID of an asset tag) and at least one of a location of the device or an ID associated with the device (claim 2 “wherein the ID information and the signal strength are transmitted using a ZigBee compliant signal” – the Zigbee standard includes transmitting device IDs in its data format used in wireless communication).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art, before the
effective date of the claimed invention, to transmit a message to a monitoring device indicating
an identifier (ID) of the wearable device and at least one of a location of the device or an ID associated with the device as suggested in Ainapure, in the device of Al-kadi, in order to communicate to an external device (the monitoring device) the current location of the tracked asset such as a person or group of people, and allowing the system to differentiate multiple users/assets reliably, using identification included in the signaling that allows multiple assets to be tracked at a time. (Ainapure p. 0068).
Consider claim 12, and as applied to claim 11 above, Al-kadi as modified by Ainapure discloses that the processing logic is further configured to:
determine that the device did not receive the signal with the greatest signal strength, and not transmit the message to the monitoring device, in response to determining that the device did not receive the signal with the greatest signal strength (Al-kadi discloses in col. 9, lines 34-42 an embodiment where the first anchor is selected from a plurality of anchors by determining which amongst the plurality of anchors has provided the highest signal strength value, hence, an anchor does not transmit the message if it did not receive the signal with the greatest strength as it cannot be the first anchor).
Regarding claim 13, and as applied to claim 11 above, Al-kadi as modified by Ainapure discloses that the processing logic is further configured to:
transmit, to the other ones of the plurality of devices and via the communication interface, a second message including information identifying the signal strength of the received signal (Al-kadi col. 9, lines 39-40 “the anchors exchange said strength or quality parameter values between each other” - Said second message is interpreted to be the same signal-strength value containing message being received by devices as specified in claim 11 of the instant application, as suggested by the specification; see p. 0030 of application).
Regarding claim 15, and as applied to claim 11 above, Al-kadi as modified by Ainapure discloses that each of the plurality of devices further comprises: a memory configured to store a plurality of signal strength values associated with the received signal (Ainapure p. 0290 “Object data 134 can be any data associated with each object 160… Such data can include, but is not limited to … RSSI values for previous RF signals… Examples of a storage repository 130 can include, but are not limited to, a database (or a number of databases), a file system, a hard drive, flash memory, some other form of solid state data storage, or any suitable combination thereof.” Ainapure p. 0291 “The storage repository 130 can be located on multiple physical machines, each storing all or a portion of … the object data 134”).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective date of the claimed invention, to store the signal strength values in a computer-readable medium as suggested by Ainapure in the device of Al-kadi, that can be read by a computer for purposes such as wireless data transmission, arithmetic operations, etc.
Regarding claim 19, Al-kadi discloses a non-transitory computer-readable medium having stored thereon sequences of instructions (col. 10, line 60 - col 11, line 1 “The systems and methods described herein may at least partially be embodied by a computer program or a plurality of computer programs… For example, they may exist as software program(s) comprised of program instructions in source code, object code, executable code or other formats for performing some of the steps. Any of the above may be embodied on a computer-readable medium”) which, when executed by at least one processor of a device, cause the at least one processor (col. 11 lines 15-21 “The term “processor” or “processing unit” refers to a data processing circuit that may be a microprocessor, a co-processor, a microcontroller, a microcomputer, a central processing unit, a field programmable gate array (FPGA), a programmable logic circuit, and/or any circuit that manipulates signals (analog or digital) based on operational instructions that are stored in a memory.”) to:
receive, from a wearable device (col. 3, lines 27-33 “The node 102 whose position is determined may for example be … a device for tracking children … a device for tracking animals”; a device for tracking children or animals would necessarily have to be a wearable device), a signal, (col. 9, lines 35-36 “the node transmits the probing signal to the anchors
through a further communication network”)
determine a signal strength of the received signal, (col. 9, lines 36-38 “each anchor determines a signal strength or quality parameter value of the probing signal)
receive, via the communication interface, messages from a plurality of other devices that received the signal, wherein each message includes a signal strength value corresponding to a signal strength measured by one of the plurality of other devices, (col. 9, lines 39-40 “the anchors exchange said strength or quality parameter values between each other”); and
determine whether the device received the signal with a greatest signal strength (col. 9, lines 40-42 “the anchors select the anchor that has provided the highest signal strength or quality parameter value as the first anchor”)
Al-kadi also discloses a response being sent via the communication interface by the device with the highest signal strength (Fig. 5A, col. 6, lines 34-36 “Furthermore, the method 500 comprises, at 504 , that the first anchor of said plurality transmits a response message…”).
However, Al-kadi fails to teach transmitting that response as a message to a monitoring
device that also indicates an identifier of the wearable device and at least one of a location of the device or an ID associated with the device.
In the same field of endeavor, Ainapure. discloses a message to a monitoring device indicating an identifier (ID) of the wearable device (p. 0041 “each asset 112-118 may be a person… the assets 112-118 may have or include an asset tag 122-128, respectively”, fig. 6, p. 0044, “the lighting device 102 may wirelessly receive beacon signals (e.g., BLE beacon signals) transmitted by one or more of the asset tags… The lighting device 102 may transmit ID information and the signal strength information to the control device 106 via the wireless signals”, where “ID information” refers to the ID of an asset tag) and at least one of a location of the device or an ID associated with the device (claim 2 “wherein the ID information and the signal strength are transmitted using a ZigBee compliant signal” – the Zigbee standard includes transmitting device IDs in its data format used in wireless communication).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective date of the claimed invention, to transmit a message to a monitoring device indicating an identifier (ID) of the wearable device and at least one of a location of the device or an ID associated with the device as suggested in Ainapure, in the device of Al-kadi, in order to communicate to an external device (the monitoring device) the current location of the tracked asset such as a person or group of people, and allowing the system to differentiate multiple users/assets reliably, using identification included in the signaling that allows multiple assets to
be tracked at a time. (Application p. 0004, Ainapure p. 0068).
Consider claim 20, and as applied to claim 19 above, Al-kadi as modified by Ainapure discloses that the instructions include instructions to further cause the at least one processor to:
determine that the device did not receive the signal with the greatest signal strength, and not transmit the message to the monitoring device, in response to determining that the device did not receive the signal with the greatest signal strength (Al-kadi discloses in col. 9, lines 34-42 an embodiment where the first anchor is selected from a plurality of anchors by determining which amongst the plurality of anchors has provided the highest signal strength value, hence, an anchor does not transmit the message if it did not receive the signal with the greatest strength as it cannot be the first anchor).
Claim(s) 4 and 14 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Al-kadi in
view of Ainapure, and further in view of the Bluetooth Core Specification, Version 4.0, Volume 6, Part B.
Regarding claim 4, and as applied to claim 3 above, Al-kadi as modified by Ainapure does not disclose that the processing logic is configured to transmit the second message at a random or pseudo-random time after receiving the signal.
In the same field of endeavor, the Bluetooth Core Specification Version 4.0, Volume 6, Part B discloses that the processing logic is configured to transmit the second message at a random or pseudo-random time after receiving the signal (4.4.2.2 [page 59],“For all undirected advertising events, the time between the start of two consecutive advertising events (T_advEvent) is computed as follows for each advertising event: T_advEvent = advInterval + advDelay … The advDelay is a pseudo-random value with a range of 0 ms to 10 ms generated by the Link Layer for each advertising event”).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective date of the claimed invention, to combine the teachings of the Bluetooth Core Specification Version 4.0, Volume 6, Part B with the teachings of Al-kadi and Ainapure to significantly decrease the probability of collisions between wirelessly transmitted messages from transmitting devices.
Regarding claim 14, and as applied to claim 13 above, Al-kadi as modified by Ainapure does not disclose that the processing logic is configured to transmit the second message at a random or pseudo-random time after receiving the signal.
In the same field of endeavor, the Bluetooth Core Specification Version 4.0, Volume 6, Part B discloses that the processing logic is configured to transmit the second message at a random or pseudo-random time after receiving the signal (4.4.2.2 [page 59], “For all undirected advertising events, the time between the start of two consecutive advertising events (T_advEvent) is computed as follows for each advertising event: T_advEvent = advInterval + advDelay … The advDelay is a pseudo-random value with a range of 0 ms to 10 ms generated by the Link Layer for each advertising event”).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective date of the claimed invention, to combine the teachings of the Bluetooth Core Specification Version 4.0, Volume 6, Part B with the teachings of Al-kadi and Ainapure to significantly decrease the probability of collisions between wirelessly transmitted messages from transmitting devices.
Claim(s) 6, 8, and 16 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Al-kadi and Ainapure as applied to claims 5 and 15 above, and further in view of Eizips et al. (US Patent Publication 2024/0427300 A1, hereinafter Eizips).
Regarding claim 6, and as applied to claim 5 above, Al-kadi as modified by Ainapure does not expressly disclose that the processing logic is further configured to: access the memory, and compare the determined signal strength of the received signal to the plurality of stored signal strength values to determine whether the device received the signal with the greatest signal strength.
In the same field of endeavor, Eizips discloses that the processing logic is further configured to: access the memory, and compare the determined signal strength of the received signal to the plurality of stored signal strength values to determine whether the device received the signal with the greatest signal strength (p. 0039, “the method 300 includes storing the ordered signal strength list in a memory... In some embodiments, the highest signal strength value within the ordered signal strength list is representative of the corresponding local management unit that is relatively closest to the receiver”, p. 0047 “In some embodiments, the controller is configured to order the first signal strength and the second signal strength from highest signal strength to lowest signal strength to generate an ordered signal strength list.”; creating a sorted list of signal strength values inherently accesses the memory and isolates the greatest signal strength value, in this case, at the start of the list).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art, before the
effective date of the claimed invention, to combine the teachings of Eizips with the teachings of Al-kadi and Ainapure to achieve a non-transitory embodiment of the signal strength comparison operation that can be persistent and useful in a computer system.
Regarding claim 8, and as applied to claim 1, above, Al-kadi as modified by Ainapure discloses a memory configured to store signal strength values associated with signals associated with a plurality of wearable devices (Ainapure p. 0290; see claim 5 rejection above)
Al-kadi as modified by Ainapure does not expressly disclose that the processing logic is configured to: access the memory to determine whether the device is located closer to one of the plurality of wearable devices than any of the other devices, and transmit a second message identifying the location of the device in response to determining that the device is located closer to the one of the plurality of wearable devices than any of the other devices.
In the same field of endeavor, Eizips discloses that the processing logic is configured to: access the memory to determine whether the device is located closer to one of the plurality of wearable devices than any of the other devices (Eizips p. 0039, p. 0047; see claim 6 rejection above), and transmit a second message identifying the location of the device (Eizips p. 0010 “In some embodiments, the relative locations within the string of photovoltaic panels can be used in conjunction with, for example, a blueprint of the system to determine an exact geographical location of the photovoltaic panel within the photovoltaic system”) in response to determining that the device is located closer to the one of the plurality of wearable devices than any of the other devices (Al-kadi col. 9, lines 40-42 “the anchors select the anchor that has provided the highest signal strength or quality parameter value as the first anchor” – Transmission of a message, such as location information, upon a condition, such as the detection of being closest to a node as taught in Al-kadi, is a known technique with predictable results).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art, before the
effective date of the claimed invention, to combine the teachings of Eizips with the teachings of Al-kadi and Ainapure to provide the location of the device closest to the wearable device in order to quickly and accurately determine the location of the wearable device (Al-kadi, column 1 lines 18-26).
Regarding claim 16, and as applied to claim 15 above, Al-kadi as modified by Ainapure does not expressly disclose that the processing logic is further configured to: access the memory, and compare the determined signal strength of the received signal to the plurality of stored signal strength values to determine whether the device received the signal with the greatest signal strength.
In the same field of endeavor (Eizips p. 0010, relative location tracking using signal strength measurement), Eizips discloses that the processing logic is further configured to: access the memory, and compare the determined signal strength of the received signal to the plurality of stored signal strength values to determine whether the device received the signal with the greatest signal strength (p. 0039, “the method 300 includes storing the ordered signal strength list in a memory... In some embodiments, the highest signal strength value within the ordered signal strength list is representative of the corresponding local management unit that is relatively closest to the receiver”, p. 0047 “In some embodiments, the controller is configured to order the first signal strength and the second signal strength from highest signal strength to lowest signal strength to generate an ordered signal strength list.”; creating a sorted list of signal strength values inherently accesses the memory and isolates the greatest signal strength value, in this case, at the start of the list).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective date of the claimed invention, to combine the teachings of Eizips with the teachings of Al-kadi and Ainapure to achieve a non-transitory embodiment of the signal strength comparison operation that can be persistent and useful in a computer system.
Claim(s) 9 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Al-kadi, Ainapure, and Eizips as applied to claim 8 above, and further in view of Kulkarni et al. (US Patent Publication 2018/0332434 A1, hereinafter Kulkarni).
Regarding claim 9, and as applied to claim 8 above, Al-kadi as modified by Ainapure and Eizips discloses the processing logic being further configured to: receive a second signal from the wearable device, and determine a signal strength of the received second signal (Al-kadi, col. 2, lines 19-20 “In an embodiment, selecting the first anchor is repeated at regular intervals”; the process of selecting the first anchor involves determining a signal strength or quality parameter value of a signal received from the node. Hence, in repeating the selection of a first anchor, an anchor receives a second signal from the node and determines its signal strength; see claim 1 rejection above). However, Al-kadi as modified by Ainapure and Eizips fails to disclose the processing logic being further configured to determine, based on the signal strengths of the first and second signals, whether the wearable device has moved, and not transmit the message to the monitoring device in response to determining that the wearable device has not moved or moved less than a predetermined distance.
In the same field of endeavor, Kulkarni discloses the processing logic being further configured to determine, based on the signal strengths of the first and second signals, whether the wearable device (p. 0034 “The present disclosure describes a method for real time location of at least one leaf node device”, p. 0596 “Examples of wearable devices include wristbands, watches, clips, clothing, glasses and more … Such wearable devices may be considered leaf nodes”) has moved (p. 0364 “In different embodiments and with different programming a receiver node may look for various distinct patterns in the RSSI time series … First, there is a benign case, where the leaf node moves towards the receiver and then moves away over the finite window of observation. Here, the received RSSI at the leaf node increases and then decreases”. It is apparent that the receiver node can use at least a first and second signal strength measurement to determine movement), and not transmit the message to the monitoring device in response to determining that the wearable device has not moved or moved less than a predetermined distance (p. 411 “Such infrequent advertisement can conserve device battery life, such as leaf node battery life, as well as avoid clogging the advertising channels with traffic … In such situations, automatically setting to infrequent advertisements after the condition has expired, such as movement stopping, conserves battery power” The sensed non-movement of the leaf node triggers a reduction in advertising).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective date of the claimed invention, to combine the teachings Kulkarni with the teachings of Al-kadi, Ainapure, and Eizips to use successive measurements in signal strength to determine if continued transmission of signals is necessary, and if not, then not transmit in order to reduce network traffic.
Claim(s) 10 and 17 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Al-kadi in view of Ainapure, and further in view of Maghanoy (US Patent 9117357).
Consider claim 10, and as applied to claim 1 above, Al-kadi as modified by Ainapure does not expressly disclose the wearable devices comprising a pendant configured to be worn around the neck or wrist of a user.
In the same field of endeavor, Maghanoy discloses wearable devices comprising a pendant configured to be worn around the neck or wrist of a user (Abstract, “A tracking system for enabling a first user to monitor the proximity of a second user features a parent pendant mounted on a parent pendant necklace… The system features a child pendant mounted on a child pendant necklace“ col. 3, lines 56-58 “In some embodiments, the child pendant (210) comprises a child pendant global positioning satellite (GPS) component (240) for transmitting and receiving located therein” Fig. 1 shows the necklace design)
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective date of the claimed invention, to combine the teachings of Maghanoy with the teachings of Al-kadi and Ainapure to give the wearable device the ease-of-use inherent to a necklace design with a pendant attached, where the tracked object is a person.
Regarding claim 17, and as applied to claim 11 above, Al-kadi as modified by Ainapure does not expressly disclose the wearable device comprising a pendant configured to be worn by a user, and the system further comprising: a plurality of pendants.
In the same field of endeavor, Maghanoy discloses the wearable device comprising a pendant configured to be worn by a user, and wherein the system further comprises: a plurality of pendants (Abstract, “A tracking system for enabling a first user to monitor the proximity of a second user features a parent pendant mounted on a parent pendant necklace… The system features a child pendant mounted on a child pendant necklace“, col. 3, lines 4-6 “In some embodiments, the parent pendant (110) comprises a parent pendant global positioning satellite (GPS) component (140) for transmitting and receiving located therein.” col. 3, lines 56-58 “In some embodiments, the child pendant (210) comprises a child pendant global positioning satellite (GPS) component (240) for transmitting and receiving located therein”; the location of both pendants are tracked, Fig. 3 shows the necklace design).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective date of the claimed invention, to combine the teachings of Maghanoy with the teachings of Al-kadi and Ainapure to give the wearable devices the ease-of-use inherent to a
necklace design with a pendant attached, where the tracked objects are people.
Claim 18 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Al-kadi in view of Ainapure and Maghanoy as applied to claim 17 above, and further in view of Swart (US Patent 10231078).
Regarding claim 18, and as applied to claim 17 above, Al-kadi as modified by Ainapure and further modified by Maghanoy does not expressly disclose a location monitoring system, wherein the location monitoring system is configured to: receive messages from the plurality of pendants, and track locations of the pendants based on the received messages.
In the same field of endeavor , Swart discloses claim 1, “A real-time location system (RTLS) having tags, beacons, bridges, and a central location server for providing people and asset tag locating”; tags implied to be wearable, a location monitoring system (“central location server 105”), wherein the location monitoring system is configured to: receive messages from the plurality of pendants (col 4, lines 14-22 “One or more tags 103 transmit a radio signal containing the tag's motion status to one or more bridges … The bridge retransmits the received signal strength of the tag's message, and the tag's motion status, via Wi-Fi to a central location server 105”; as established previously, the wearable taking form of pendant is obvious in view of Maghanoy), and track locations of the pendants based on the received messages (col. 4, lines 29-35 “All of this information, including signal strengths of tag transmissions heard at the bridges, and coincident motion reports from the tags and fixed beacons, is factored into the location algorithm at the central location server. The central location server produces a “location estimate” for the tag, which is defined as an estimate of which room in the building the tag is located in).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective date of the claimed invention, to combine the teachings of Swart with the teachings of Al-kadi, Ainapure, and Maghanoy to achieve more informed and precise tracking of pendants by using information provided by sensors on pendants in addition to measured signal strength between pendants and locators.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JUSTIN WINN whose telephone number is (571)270-5541. The examiner can normally be reached M-F, 9am to 5pm 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, Rafael Perez-Gutierrez can be reached at (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 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.
/JUSTIN HUYNH WINN/Examiner, Art Unit 2642
/Rafael Pérez-Gutiérrez/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2642
Prosecution Insights