DETAILED CORRESPONDENCE
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 .
Status of Claims
Claims 1-20 are pending.
Claim Interpretation
The claim elements do not invoke 35 U.S.C. § 112(f).
References
D1: CN112098936 LIU December 18, 2020
Claim Rejections - 35 U.S.C. § 102
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)(1) the claimed invention was patented, described in a printed publication, or in public use, on sale, or otherwise available to the public before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claims 1, 2, 4, 7-13, 15, and 18-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by D1.
With regards to claim 1, the D1 reference discloses the utilization of a distance measurement method, comprising: detecting, by a first electronic (intelligent) device, a distance measurement instruction; detecting, by the first electronic device at a first moment (T2), a first group of sound wave signals sent by a second electronic (intelligent) device, and determining, based on the first group of sound wave signals and first information (T1) corresponding to the first group of sound wave signals, a first distance (L=(T2-T1) × c) that is between the first electronic device and the second electronic device and that corresponds to the first moment, wherein the first information comprises first sending time (T1) information of sending the first group of sound wave signals by the second electronic device; displaying, by the first electronic device, the first distance; detecting, by the first electronic device at a second moment (T4) after the first moment, a second group of sound wave signals sent by the second electronic device, and determining, based on the second group of sound wave signals and second information (T3) corresponding to the second group of sound wave signals, a second distance (L=(T4-T3) × c) that is between the first electronic device and the second electronic device and that corresponds to the second moment, wherein the second information comprises second sending time (T3) information of sending the second group of sound wave signals by the second electronic device; and displaying, by the first electronic device, the second distance (pages 4-5).
With regards to claim 12, the D1 reference discloses the utilization of a processor (page 6).
With regards to claims 2 and 13, the D1 reference discloses the first electronic device receives the first information (T1) and the second information (T3) from the second electronic device (pages 4-5).
With regards to claims 4, 9, 15, and 20, the D1 reference discloses repeated operation (pages 4-5).
With regards to claims 7 and 18, the D1 reference discloses the utilization of Bluetooth (page 25).
With regards to claims 8 and 19, the D1 reference discloses time synchronization (page 4).
With regards to claim 10, the D1 reference discloses the first electronic device detects a search operation performed by the user on the second electronic device (page 4).
With regards to claim 11, the D1 reference discloses the utilization of bands of sound waves (Abstract).
Examiner Note
Examiner has pointed out particular references contained in the prior art of record in the body of this action for the convenience of the Applicant. However, any citation to specific, pages, columns, lines, or figures in the prior art references and any interpretation of the references should not be considered to be limiting in any way. A reference is relevant for all it contains and may be relied upon for all that it would have reasonably suggested to one having ordinary skill in the art. In re Heck, 699 F.2d 1331, 1332-33, 216 USPQ 1038, 1039 (Fed. Cir. 1983) (quoting In re Lemelson, 397 F.2d 1006, 1009, 158 USPQ 275, 277 (CCPA 1968)). Applicant, in preparing the response, should consider fully the entire reference as potentially teaching all or part of the claimed invention, as well as the context of the passage as taught by the prior art or disclosed by the Examiner.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 3, 5, 6, 14, 16, and 17 are objected to 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
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Dan Pihulic whose telephone number is 571-272-6977. If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner's supervisor, Isam Alsomiri, can be reached on 571-272-6970.
/Daniel Pihulic/
Primary Examiner
Art Unit 3645