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 .
Drawings
The drawings are objected to because Figure 6 should be designated by a legend such as --Prior Art-- because only that which is old is illustrated (please see IEEE 802.11az-2022 standard, p. 95: Figure 9-909c—TOD Error field Format). See MPEP § 608.02(g). Corrected drawings in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(d) are required in reply to the Office action to avoid abandonment of the application. The replacement sheet(s) should be labeled “Replacement Sheet” in the page header (as per 37 CFR 1.84(c)) so as not to obstruct any portion of the drawing figures. If the changes are not accepted by the examiner, the applicant will be notified and informed of any required corrective action in the next Office action. The objection to the drawings will not be held in abeyance.
Specification
Applicant is reminded of the proper content of an abstract of the disclosure. The language should be clear and concise and should avoid using phrases which can be implied, such as, “The disclosure concerns,” “The disclosure defined by this invention,” “This disclosure describes,” etc. Please see MPEP § 608.01(b). Appropriate correction is required.
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.
This application currently names joint inventors. In considering patentability of the claims the examiner presumes that the subject matter of the various claims was commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the claimed invention(s) absent any evidence to the contrary. Applicant is advised of the obligation under 37 CFR 1.56 to point out the inventor and effective filing dates of each claim that was not commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the later invention in order for the examiner to consider the applicability of 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(C) for any potential 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) prior art against the later invention.
Claims 1, 4, 10, 13, and 19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over U.S. Patent Publication No. 2019/0041509 to Jiang et al. (“Jiang”) in view of U.S. Patent Publication No. 2016/0366660 to Segev et al. (“Segev”).
As to claim 1 (and similarly applied to claims 10 and 19), Jiang discloses a device of an initiating station device (ISTA) (Jiang, Figs. 8-10, ISTA 802; ¶¶0119-0120. Please also see Figs. 5-7 and ¶0109), the device comprising processing circuitry (Jiang, Fig. 7, processing circuitry 708; ¶0110) coupled to storage (Jiang, Fig. 7, memory 710; ¶¶0111-0113), the processing circuitry configured to: initiate a ranging sequence by transmitting a null data packet announcement (NDPA) frame to a responding station device (RSTA) followed by an initiator-to-responder (I2R) null data packet (NDP) frame (Jiang, Figs. 8-10, NDPA 810 and UL NDP 814; ¶¶0121-0122); receive a corresponding responder-to-initiator (R2I) NDP frame and an R2I location measurement report (LMR) from a responding station (Jiang, Figs. 8-10, DL NDP 816 and LMR 817; ¶¶0123-0124); repeat the ranging sequence for two or more iterations to collect multiple data sets (Jiang, Figs. 8-10; NDPA 820, UL NDP 822, DL NDP 824, and LMR 826; ¶¶0127-0128); and process the R2I NDP frame and the R2I LMR to generate continuous … time of departure (ToD) measurements for each iteration (Jiang, ¶0124 and ¶0128. Please also see Figs. 17-19, ¶¶0159-0164, and ¶¶0166-0170).
Examiner notes that Jiang further discloses a non-transitory computer-readable medium storing computer-executable instructions which when executed by one or more processors of an initiating station device (ISTA) result in performing the method of operations described in claim 1 (Jiang, Figs. 7-10 and ¶0108). Thus, claims 10 and 19 are similarly rejected.
Jiang does not disclose: process the R2I NDP frame and the R2I LMR to generate continuous time of arrival (ToA) and time of departure (ToD) measurements for each iteration.
However, Segev discloses: process the R2I NDP frame and the R2I LMR to generate continuous time of arrival (ToA) and time of departure (ToD) measurements for each iteration (Segev, Fig. 6 and ¶¶0198-0207; successive FTM frames (i.e., iterations) may include continuous ToA and continuous ToD measurements for each iteration, with both TOA Not Continuous and TOD Not Continuous subfields available to indicate if the TOA and/or TOD are not continuous between successive iterations).
Jiang and Segev are considered to be similar to the claimed invention because they are in one or more of the same fields of: precision ranging and locating users, terminals, and/or network equipment in Wi-Fi networks; Fine Timing Measurement (FTM) sequences; and/or wireless local area networks (WLANs) and Wi-Fi networks including networks operating in accordance with IEEE 802.11 standards. As such, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Jiang to incorporate the teachings of Segev to include: process the R2I NDP frame and the R2I LMR to generate continuous time of arrival (ToA) and time of departure (ToD) measurements for each iteration. Doing so would allow the TOA and/or TOD values to be compared with previous values (Segev, ¶0205) and allow for more efficient time synchronization in terms of power consumption and/or medium consumption (Segev, ¶0006 and ¶¶0135-0139). Additionally, it would be obvious to combine the teachings of Segev and Jiang because doing so merely combines prior art elements according to known methods to yield predictable results with a reasonable expectation of success.
As to claim 4 (and similarly applied to claim 13), Jiang in view of Segev discloses the device of claim 1, wherein the processing circuitry is further configured to perform optional I2R LMR transmission as part of the ranging sequence based on predetermined criteria or configuration settings (Jiang, Fig. 11 and ¶¶0138-0140. The ISTA 1102, which "may be the same or similar as ISTA 802" (Jiang, ¶0129) transmits an I2R LMR to RSTA 1104, which "may be the same or similar as RSTA 804" (Jiang, ¶0129). Please also note that "whether the ISTA-to-RSTA LMR 1120 should be transmitted may be established at the time of service establishment" (Jiang, ¶0140), i.e., the I2R LMR is optional and whether it is transmitted as part of the ranging sequence is based on predetermined criteria or configuration settings).
Claims 3, 5, 8-9, 12, 14, and 17-18 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Jiang in view of Segev and further in view of IEEE 802.11az-2022 (“IEEE”).
As to claim 3 (and similarly applied to claim 12), Jiang in view of Segev discloses the device of claim 1, wherein the processing circuitry is further configured to: identify a "TOD not continuous" subfield in a "TOD Error field" of the LMR (Jiang, Fig. 17 and ¶0160).
Jiang in view of Segev does not disclose: set the "TOD not continuous" subfield to 0 to indicate the continuity of the ToD measurements.
However, IEEE discloses: set the "TOD not continuous" subfield to 0 to indicate the continuity of the ToD measurements (IEEE 802.11az-2022, Fig. 9-909c--TOD Error field format; p. 95: "The TOD Not Continuous subfield indicates that the TOD value is with respect to a different underlying time base than the last transmitted TOD value. It is set to 1 when a discontinuity is present. Otherwise, it is set to 0.").
Jiang, Segev, and IEEE are considered to be similar to the claimed invention because they are in one or more of the same fields of: precision ranging and locating users, terminals, and/or network equipment in Wi-Fi networks; Fine Timing Measurement (FTM) sequences; and/or wireless local area networks (WLANs) and Wi-Fi networks including networks operating in accordance with IEEE 802.11 standards. As such, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Jiang in view of Segev to incorporate the teachings of IEEE to include: set the "TOD not continuous" subfield to 0 to indicate the continuity of the ToD measurements. Doing so would allow Jiang's device to operate in accordance with existing standards, as noted by Jiang, ¶0120, "ISTA and RSTA may be configured to operate in accordance with IEEE 802.11az", and it would allow the device(s) to indicate to each other that the TOD values are or are not continuous (Jiang, ¶0160). It would have been obvious to combine the teachings of Jiang, Segev, and the IEEE 802.11az-2022 standard because doing so merely combines prior art elements according to known methods to yield predictable results with a reasonable expectation of success.
As to claim 5 (and similarly applied to claim 14), Jiang in view of Segev discloses the device of claim 1.
Jiang in view of Segev does not disclose: wherein the processing circuitry is further configured to execute algorithms to estimate a kb/ka ratio based on additional measurements and constraints, wherein the kb/ka is the ratio of clock frequencies or timing offsets of the ISTA and the RSTA.
However, IEEE discloses: wherein the processing circuitry is further configured to execute algorithms to estimate a kb/ka ratio based on additional measurements and constraints, wherein the kb/ka is the ratio of clock frequencies or timing offsets of the ISTA and the RSTA (IEEE 802.11az-2022, Equation (11-6); p.132: "The SME at the ISTA may estimate the offset of the local clock relative to that at the RSTA using clock offset as defined by Equation (11-6). clock offset = [(t2 - t1') - (t4' - t3)]/2").
Jiang, Segev, and IEEE are considered to be similar to the claimed invention because they are in one or more of the same fields of: precision ranging and locating users, terminals, and/or network equipment in Wi-Fi networks; Fine Timing Measurement (FTM) sequences; and/or wireless local area networks (WLANs) and Wi-Fi networks including networks operating in accordance with IEEE 802.11 standards. As such, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Jiang in view of Segev to incorporate the teachings of IEEE to include: wherein the processing circuitry is further configured to execute algorithms to estimate a kb/ka ratio based on additional measurements and constraints, wherein the kb/ka is the ratio of clock frequencies or timing offsets of the ISTA and the RSTA. Doing so would allow Jiang's device to operate in accordance with existing standards, as noted by Jiang, ¶0120, "ISTA and RSTA may be configured to operate in accordance with IEEE 802.11az", and it would allow the "ISTA [to] track this clock offset over time to derive an estimate of the difference between the ISTA's time base and the RSTA's time base, and thereby improve the accuracy of its derivation of t1' and t4' from the TOD and TOA fields" (IEEE, p. 132, NOTE 3). It would have been obvious to combine the teachings of Jiang, Segev, and the IEEE 802.11az-2022 standard because doing so merely combines prior art elements according to known methods to yield predictable results with a reasonable expectation of success.
As to claim 8 (and similarly applied to claim 17), Jiang in view of Segev and further in view of IEEE discloses the device of claim 5, wherein the processing circuitry is further configured to solve equations formed by observations and constraints to obtain both ToF and the kb/ka ratio (IEEE 802.11az-2022, Equations (11-5) and (11-6); p.132).
As to claim 9 (and similarly applied to claim 18), Jiang in view of Segev and further in view of IEEE discloses the device of claim 5, wherein the processing circuitry is further configured to conduct a double-sided ranging process by exchanging a series of frames between the ISTA and the RSTA to calculate distance based on a ToF (Jiang, Fig. 8 and ¶0124, "The RTT may be used to determine a distance between RSTA 804 and ISTA 802") with incorporated synchronization adjustments using the kb/ka ratio (IEEE 802.11az-2022, Equation (11-6); p.132: NOTE 3: "The ISTA might track this clock offset over time to derive an estimate of the difference between the ISTA's time base and the RSTA's time base, and thereby improve the accuracy of its derivation of t1' and t4' from the TOD and TOA fields").
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 2, 6-7, 11, 15-16, and 20 are objected to as being dependent upon one or more rejected base claim(s), but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
References Cited
IEEE 802.11az-2022 (Amendment to IEEE Std 802.11-2020 as amended by IEEE Std 802.11ax-2021, IEEE Std 802.11ay-2021, IEEE Std 802.11ba-2021, and IEEE Std 802.11-2020/Cor 1-2022) , vol., no., pp.1-248, 3 March 2023, doi: 10.1109/IEEESTD.2023.10058117.
Jiang et al. (2019). Location measurement reporting (US 2019/0041509 A1). Filed 2018-09-11.
Segev, Jonathan et al. (2016). Apparatus, system and method of determining a time synchronization function (tsf) based on fine time measurement (ftm) messages (US 2016/0366660 A1). Filed 2015-12-26.
Other Pertinent References
The following prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant’s disclosure:
Banin, Leor et al. (2018). System and method for channel information exchange for time of flight range determination (US 10064154 B2). Filed 2016-02-04.
Das, Dibakar et al. (2020). Report identification and power control for ranging (US 20200169841 A1). Filed 2020-01-17.
Feng, Wei et al. (2022). Device detection and locationing within a wireless network (US 11510172 B1). Filed 2021-03-03.
Li, Qinghua et al. (2020). Phase shift time of arrival (US 20200355785 A1). Filed 2020-07-31.
Lindskog, Erik David et al. (2018). Access point (ap) to access point (ap) ranging for passive locationing (US 20180249437 A1). Filed 2018-02-22.
Raj, Rishabh et al. (2022). Methods and apparatus for wi-fi ranging protocol enhancement with reduced throughput impact (US 20220039058 A1). Filed 2021-07-02.
Ramasamy et al. (2018). Wireless network positioning (US 20180310133 A1). Filed 2017-09-22.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to SAMUEL H LEONARD whose telephone number is (571)272-5720. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday, 7am-4pm (PT).
Examiner interviews are available via telephone, in-person, and video conferencing using a USPTO supplied web-based collaboration tool. To schedule an interview, please 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, Yuwen (Kevin) Pan can be reached at (571)272-7855. 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.
/SAMUEL H. LEONARD/Examiner, Art Unit 2649 /YUWEN PAN/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2649
Prosecution Insights