DETAILED ACTION
for
METHOD AND SYSTEM FOR PRESSURE-BASED MOTION TRACKING
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 .
Information Disclosure Statement
No information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted.
Oath/Declaration
The Oath/Declaration submitted on 10/02/2024 is noted by the Examiner.
Specification
The abstract of the disclosure is objected to because: It uses the phrase “Embodiments herein generally”.
A corrected abstract of the disclosure is required and must be presented on a separate sheet, apart from any other text. See MPEP § 608.01(b).
Applicant is reminded of the proper language and format for an abstract of the disclosure.
The abstract should be in narrative form and generally limited to a single paragraph on a separate sheet within the range of 50 to 150 words in length. The abstract should describe the disclosure sufficiently to assist readers in deciding whether there is a need for consulting the full patent text for details.
The language should be clear and concise and should not repeat information given in the title. It should avoid using phrases which can be implied, such as, “The disclosure concerns,” “The disclosure defined by this invention,” “The disclosure describes,” etc. In addition, the form and legal phraseology often used in patent claims, such as “means” and “said,” should be avoided.
The title of the invention is not descriptive. A new title is required that is clearly indicative of the invention to which the claims are directed.
The following title is suggested: Method for Performing Pressure-based Motion Tracking on Ground Positioning System for Detecting Sudden Pressure Change from Air Moving Around Asset.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
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 the appropriate paragraphs of 35 U.S.C. 102 that form the basis for the rejections under this section made in this Office action:
A person shall be entitled to a patent unless –
(a)(2) the claimed invention was described in a patent issued under section 151, or in an application for patent published or deemed published under section 122(b), in which the patent or application, as the case may be, names another inventor and was effectively filed before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claims 1 and 3-11 and 13-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) as being anticipated by Barfield Jr. (US 9,967,701).
Regarding claims 1 and 11, Barfield discloses a pressure-based motion tracking system (see abstract), comprising: at least one pressure sensor (360); and at least one processor (315)coupled to the at least one pressure sensor (360; Fig. 3), and configured for: monitoring pressure data generated by the at least one pressure sensor, wherein the pressure data is generated at sampling instances (Col. 11, lines 55-65); determining differential pressure (DP) values from the pressure data, wherein the DP values correspond to a difference in the pressure data between at least two sampling instances (Col. 17, lines 9-13); determining if the DP values exceed a predetermined threshold; and if the DP values exceed the predetermined threshold (Col. 22, lines 64-67), generating an output indicating that an asset, associated with the motion tracking system, has moved (Col. 4, lines 47-55)
PNG
media_image1.png
330
559
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Regarding claims 3 and 13, Barfield further discloses a location sensing unit (356) coupled to the at least one processor (315), and if the DP values exceed the predetermined threshold (Col. 22, lines 64-67), the at least one processor (315) being further configured for activating the location sensing unit, of the motion tracking system (Col. 2, lines 55-63), to output location data (Fig. 6).
Regarding claims 4 and 14, Barfield further discloses the location sensing unit (365) a global navigation satellite system (Col. 3, lines 7-10).
Regarding claims 5 and 15, Barfield further discloses the predetermined threshold is a first predetermined threshold (Col. 2, lines 47-54), and after activating the location sensing unit (365), the at least one processor (315) configured for continuing monitoring the pressure data generated by the at least one pressure sensor (360); determining the DP values from the pressure data; determining if the DP values fall below a second predetermined threshold (Col. 4, lines 61-65); and if the DP values fall below the second predetermined threshold, deactivating the location sensing unit (Col. 17, lines 55-61).
Regarding claims 6 and 16, Barfield further discloses determining if the DP values fall below the second predetermined threshold for a period of time (Col. 20, lines 50-57).
Regarding claims 7 and 17, Barfield further discloses the first predetermined threshold is the same or different from the second predetermined threshold (Col. 6, lines 23-29).
Regarding claims 8 and 18, Barfield further discloses at least one accelerometer coupled to the at least one processor (315), and the at least one processor is further configured for: monitoring acceleration data generated by the at least one accelerometer (Col. 12, lines 51-53).; determining differential acceleration (DA) values from the acceleration data (Col. 12, lines 51-53); and activating the location sensing unit (365) if one or more of the DP and DA values exceed a respective predetermined threshold (Col. 13, lines 32-41).
Regarding claims and 9 and 19, Barfield further discloses at least one accelerometer coupled to the at least one processor (315), wherein the at least one processor (315) is further configured for: identifying one or more of motion properties of the asset (Col. 14, lines 4-12), and target movement conditions; based on the identifying (Fig. 3), determining to monitor accelerometer data (Col. 11, lines 26-33), in addition to the pressure data; monitoring acceleration data generated by the at least one accelerometer (Col. 12, lines 40-47); determining differential acceleration (DA) values from the acceleration data (Fig. 6A); and activating the location sensing unit (365) if one or more of the DP (Fig. 3-7) and DA values exceed a respective predetermined threshold (Col. 13, lines 20-26).
Regarding claims 10 and 20, Barfield further the at least one processor (315) is further configured to monitor one or more threshold adjusting conditions (Col. 17, lines 51-54), and adjusting the predetermined threshold if a threshold adjusting condition is detected (Col. 17, lines 55-61).
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.
Claims 2 and 12 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Barfield Jr. (US 9,967,701).
Regarding claims 2 and 12, Barfield further discloses the predetermined threshold.
Barfield further discloses the predetermined threshold is 0.2 millibars.
The particular predetermine threshold, absent any criticality, is only considered to be the “optimum” range/size of the pressure values used by Prior Art for differential pressure that a person having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was made would have been able to determine using routine experimentation based, among other things, on the type of measurements and or/ intended use, etc. See In re Boesch, 205 USPQ 215 (CCPA 1980).
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to BRANDI N HOPKINS whose telephone number is (571)270-7042. The examiner can normally be reached M & F 9-5 and T-TH, 6-4.
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, Kristina Deherrera can be reached at (303) 297-4237. 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.
/BRANDI N HOPKINS/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2855
Prosecution Insights