DETAILED ACTION
This is in response to applicant's communication filed on 09/11/2023, wherein:
Claim 1-33 are pending.
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.
Claim 1-7, 9-10, 12, 23-24, 27-28, and 32-33 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Behzadi et al. (US 20220035510 A1) in view of Mccrary et al. (US 20240046770 A1).
Regarding claim 1, Behzadi discloses a method comprising: at a first electronic device in communication with a second electronic device, and wireless communication circuitry (Fig. 6K-6M disclose remote locator object 600 and personal electronic device 500 in wireless communication with each other; Fig. 12C-12Z disclose remote locator object 1200 and device 500):
while the first electronic device and the second electronic device are operating as part of a finding process (Fig. 6K-6M, and Fig. 12C-12Z):
detecting that a distance between a findable electronic device that is being located as part of the finding process and a finding electronic device that is being used to locate the findable electronic device as part of the finding process has changed (Fig. 12C-12Z and ¶0382-0408 disclose updating user interface based on distance between a remote locator object 1200 which indicated the detection of change in distance); and
in response to detecting that the distance between the findable electronic device and the finding electronic device has changed (Fig. 12C-12Z and ¶0382-0408 disclose updating user interface based on distance between a remote locator object 1200 which indicated the detection of change in distance).
Behzadi further discloses the ability to manually cause the findable device to generate an alert based on user input (Fig. 12D-12Z and ¶0388 – “In some embodiments, selectable option 1238-2 is selectable to cause the remote locator object 1200 to emit an audible tone”). However, the reference is silent on details about (1) in accordance with a determination that one or more first criteria are satisfied, including a criterion that is satisfied when the findable electronic device and the finding electronic device are within a threshold distance of each other in response to the change in distance, causing the findable electronic device that is being located as part of the finding process to generate an alert indicating that the finding electronic device is within the threshold distance of the findable electronic device; and in accordance with a determination that the one or more first criteria are not satisfied, forgoing causing the findable electronic device that is being located as part of the finding process to generate the alert indicating that the finding electronic device is within the threshold distance of the findable electronic device.
Mccrary discloses in accordance with a determination that one or more first criteria are satisfied, including a criterion that is satisfied when the findable electronic device and the finding electronic device are within a threshold distance of each other in response to the change in distance, generating an alert indicating that the finding electronic device is within the threshold distance of the findable electronic device (Fig. 14A step 1404-1405-1406-1407 and ¶0147 – “If idle, a determination is made if the alert (alarm) requested is associated with an in-range (in physical proximity) or out-of-range (not in physical proximity—separated) event 1404 such as would be appropriate for an alarm due to a physical separation between the PRD 100 and protected phone 104. If an out-of-range event occurs, the alert mitigation timer #1 is started 1413 and the method 1400 exited by returning 1409 to the alert requestor. In the above, instead the alert requested was an in-range 1404, and the last alert an out-of-range type 1405, and no conflicting alerts are in the queue, the range would be adjusted to perform hysteresis 1406, the in-range alert would be performed 1407”; claim 1 – “J) trigger an auditory proximity alert apparatus alarm output in response to the protected device being less than a selected distance from the proximity alert apparatus”); and in accordance with a determination that the one or more first criteria are not satisfied, forgoing generating the alert indicating that the finding electronic device is within the threshold distance of the findable electronic device (Fig. 14A step 1404-1413 and ¶0147, claim 1 – “J) trigger an auditory proximity alert apparatus alarm output in response to the protected device being less than a selected distance from the proximity alert apparatus”).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art, before effective filing date of the claimed the invention, to modify the invention of Behzadi to incorporate alert triggering by distance from Mccrary because doing so would apply a known technique to a known device (method, or product) ready for improvement to yield predictable results (MPEP §2141 -III) to improve user experience in finding device by providing distance triggering alert.
Regarding claim 2, the combined teaching of Behzadi and Mccrary discloses the method of claim 1, wherein the first electronic device is the findable electronic device, and the second electronic device is the finding electronic device (Behzadi - Fig. 6K-6M disclose remote locator object 600 and personal electronic device 500 in wireless communication with each other; Fig. 12C-12Z discloses remote locator object 1200 and device 500).
Regarding claim 3, the combined teaching of Behzadi and Mccrary discloses the method of claim 1, wherein the first electronic device is the finding electronic device, and the second electronic device is the findable electronic device (Behzadi - Fig. 6K-6M disclose remote locator object 600 and personal electronic device 500 in wireless communication with each other; Fig. 12C-12Z disclose remote locator object 1200 and device 500).
Regarding claim 4, the combined teaching of Behzadi and Mccrary discloses the method of claim 1, wherein the findable electronic device is a companion device of the finding electronic device (Behzadi – Fig. 6A, Fig. 6F, Fig. 12C-Z disclose remote locator device; ¶0202 – “FIG. 6A also illustrates an exemplary remote locator object 600 that is in an uninitialized state. In some embodiments, the remote locator object is a device with a battery, one or more wireless antenna and a low power processor that enables the device to function as a special-purpose remote locator object when associated with another physical object (e.g., wallet, purse, backpack, suitcase, car, set of keys, or the like). In some embodiments, the remote locator object is a multi-purpose device with location tracking capabilities such as a smartphone, tablet, computer, or watch. In some embodiments, remote locator object 600 is capable of transmitting location data to an electronic device”).
Regarding claim 5, the combined teaching of Behzadi and Mccrary discloses the method of claim 1, wherein the findable electronic device is a remote locator device associated with the finding electronic device (Fig. 6C-6L, and Fig. 12C-Z disclose remote locator 600/1200 are associated with device 500).
Regarding claim 6, the combined teaching of Behzadi and Mccrary discloses the method of claim 1, wherein the finding process includes in accordance with a determination that one or more second criteria are satisfied, causing the finding electronic device to generate a second alert (Behzadi – ¶0394 – “In some embodiments, while remote locator object 1200 is 25 feet away from device 500, device 500 emits a periodic tactile output. In some embodiments, the periodic tactile output is a “tap” with a low intensity (e.g., MicroTap), as illustrated by graph 1201. In some embodiments, the tactile output is a discrete “tap” at a respective frequency (e.g., every 1 second, every 0.5 seconds). As will be described in further detail below, in some embodiments, the frequency and/or intensity of the tactile output increases as the remote locator object 1200 moves closer to device 500 (e.g., and optionally decreases as the remote locator object 1200 moves farther from device 500). In some embodiments, when device 500 detects a change in orientation, device 500 emits a discrete tactile output (e.g., different from and optionally in addition to the discrete tap at a respective frequency, described above, that indicates distance) indicating that the device 500 detects that the orientation (e.g., distance and/or relative direction) has changed”).
Regarding claim 7, the combined teaching of Behzadi and Mccrary discloses the method of claim 6, wherein generating the second alert includes generating tactile feedback at the finding electronic device (Behzadi – ¶0394 – “In some embodiments, while remote locator object 1200 is 25 feet away from device 500, device 500 emits a periodic tactile output. In some embodiments, the periodic tactile output is a “tap” with a low intensity (e.g., MicroTap), as illustrated by graph 1201. In some embodiments, the tactile output is a discrete “tap” at a respective frequency (e.g., every 1 second, every 0.5 seconds). As will be described in further detail below, in some embodiments, the frequency and/or intensity of the tactile output increases as the remote locator object 1200 moves closer to device 500 (e.g., and optionally decreases as the remote locator object 1200 moves farther from device 500). In some embodiments, when device 500 detects a change in orientation, device 500 emits a discrete tactile output (e.g., different from and optionally in addition to the discrete tap at a respective frequency, described above, that indicates distance) indicating that the device 500 detects that the orientation (e.g., distance and/or relative direction) has changed”).
Regarding claim 9, the combined teaching of Behzadi and Mccrary discloses the method of claim 7, wherein: the one or more second criteria include a criterion that is satisfied when the finding electronic device is within the threshold distance of the findable electronic device; and generating the second alert includes generating a continuous tactile feedback (Behzadi – ¶0394 – “In some embodiments, while remote locator object 1200 is 25 feet away from device 500, device 500 emits a periodic tactile output. In some embodiments, the periodic tactile output is a “tap” with a low intensity (e.g., MicroTap), as illustrated by graph 1201. In some embodiments, the tactile output is a discrete “tap” at a respective frequency (e.g., every 1 second, every 0.5 seconds). As will be described in further detail below, in some embodiments, the frequency and/or intensity of the tactile output increases as the remote locator object 1200 moves closer to device 500 (e.g., and optionally decreases as the remote locator object 1200 moves farther from device 500). In some embodiments, when device 500 detects a change in orientation, device 500 emits a discrete tactile output (e.g., different from and optionally in addition to the discrete tap at a respective frequency, described above, that indicates distance) indicating that the device 500 detects that the orientation (e.g., distance and/or relative direction) has changed”).
Regarding claim 10, the combined teaching of Behzadi and Mccrary discloses the method of claim 9, wherein the continuous tactile feedback is variable based on a distance from the finding electronic device to the findable electronic device (Behzadi – ¶0394 – “In some embodiments, while remote locator object 1200 is 25 feet away from device 500, device 500 emits a periodic tactile output. In some embodiments, the periodic tactile output is a “tap” with a low intensity (e.g., MicroTap), as illustrated by graph 1201. In some embodiments, the tactile output is a discrete “tap” at a respective frequency (e.g., every 1 second, every 0.5 seconds). As will be described in further detail below, in some embodiments, the frequency and/or intensity of the tactile output increases as the remote locator object 1200 moves closer to device 500 (e.g., and optionally decreases as the remote locator object 1200 moves farther from device 500). In some embodiments, when device 500 detects a change in orientation, device 500 emits a discrete tactile output (e.g., different from and optionally in addition to the discrete tap at a respective frequency, described above, that indicates distance) indicating that the device 500 detects that the orientation (e.g., distance and/or relative direction) has changed”).
Regarding claim 12, Behzadi and Mccrary discloses the method of claim 6, wherein generating the second alert includes displaying, via a display generation component of the finding electronic device, visual feedback (Behzadi – Fig. 12D-12Z disclose displaying visual feedback).
Regarding claim 23, the combined teaching of Behzadi and Mccrary discloses the method of claim 1, wherein, while the first electronic device and the second electronic device are operating as part of the finding process: detecting a request to locate the findable electronic device from the finding electronic device; and in response to detecting the request, causing the findable electronic device to generate a second alert, different than the alert (Behzadi - Fig. 14A step 1404-1413 and ¶0147, claim 1 – “J) trigger an auditory proximity alert apparatus alarm output in response to the protected device being less than a selected distance from the proximity alert apparatus” – i.e. second alert which is activated manually by user input).
Regarding claim 24, the combined teaching of Behzadi and Mccrary discloses the method of claim 23, wherein: while the first electronic device and the second electronic device are operating as part of the finding process, the finding electronic device is displaying, in a finding user interface, an affordance for generating the second alert at the findable electronic device; and detecting the request to locate the findable electronic device includes detecting, via one or more input devices of the findable electronic device, selection of the affordance in the finding user interface (Behzadi - Fig. 14A step 1404-1413 and ¶0147, claim 1 – “J) trigger an auditory proximity alert apparatus alarm output in response to the protected device being less than a selected distance from the proximity alert apparatus” – i.e. second alert which is activated manually by user input).
Regarding claim 27, the combined teaching of Behzadi and Mccrary discloses the method of claim 1, wherein operating as part of the finding process includes: in accordance with a determination that one or more second criteria are satisfied, initiating the finding process between the first electronic device and the second electronic device in a second finding mode; and in accordance with the determination that the one or more second criteria are not satisfied, initiating the finding process in a first finding mode, different from the second finding mode (Fig. 12A-12Z disclose second finding mode when the remote locator object is in a far distance as shown in Fig. 12B and first finding mode when the remote locator object is within proximity as shown in Fig. 12C-12Z).
Regarding claim 28, the combined teaching of Behzadi and Mccrary discloses the method of claim 27, wherein the one or more second criteria include a criterion that is satisfied when the first electronic device and/or the second electronic device are in a respective region in which operating as part of the finding process in the first finding mode is unsupported (Fig. 12A-12Z disclose second finding mode when the remote locator object is in a far distance as shown in Fig. 12B and first finding mode when the remote locator object is within proximity – in respective region- as shown in Fig. 12C-12Z; ¶0387 discloses using short range communication for locating device within proximity which is not available if remote locator object and device 500 are not in the same region area).
Regarding claim 32, the scope and content of the claim recites a first electronic device that is in communication with a display generation component and one or more input devices, the electronic device comprising: one or more processors; memory; and one or more programs (Behzadi – Fig. 5A device 500; Fig. 3 discloses block diagram of device with display, input, and processor), wherein the one or more programs are stored in the memory and configured to be executed by the one or more processors, the one or more programs including instructions for performing the method of claim 1, therefore, being addresses as in claim 1.
Regarding claim 33, the scope and content of the claim recites a non-transitory computer readable storage medium storing one or more programs, the one or more programs comprising instructions, which when executed by one or more processors of a first electronic device, cause the first electronic device to perform a method of claim 1, therefore, being addressed as in claim 1.
Claim 11 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Behzadi et al. (US 20220035510 A1) in view of Mccrary et al. (US 20240046770 A1) and Blass (US 20160292775 A1).
Regarding claim 11, the combined teaching of Behzadi and Mccrary discloses the method of claim 6, however, silent on further details of claim 11.
Blass discloses wherein generating alert includes outputting audio feedback at the finding electronic device (¶0036 – “The list generator 44 can organize listed items according to distance from the mobile device 15. In doing so, the list generator 44 associates color, audio, acoustic, or tactile feedback data such as device vibration with the shopping items according to the location of the items relative to the location of the user's mobile device 15, for example, indicative of a distance and/or direction of the mobile device 15 from the items of interest”).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art, before effective filing date of the claimed the invention, to modify the invention of Behzadi and Mccrary to incorporate audio feedback from Blass because doing so would apply a known technique to a known device (method, or product) ready for improvement to yield predictable results (MPEP §2141 -III) to improve user experience by providing various type of feedbacks.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claim 8, 13-22, 25-26, and 29-31 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.
Contact Information
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to DUNG HONG whose telephone number is (571)270-7928. The examiner can normally be reached on Monday-Friday from 8:00 am to 5:00 pm.
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, JINSONG HU, can be reached on (571) 272-3965. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300.
Information regarding the status of an application may be obtained from the Patent Application Information Retrieval (PAIR) system. Status information for published applications may be obtained from either Private PAIR or Public PAIR. Status information for unpublished applications is available through Private PAIR only. For more information about the PAIR system, see http://pair-direct.uspto.gov. Should you have questions on access to the Private PAIR system, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free).
/DUNG HONG/
Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2643
Prosecution Insights