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
Receipt is acknowledged of certified copies of papers required by 37 CFR 1.55.
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on 10/04/2024. The submission is in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statement is being considered by the examiner.
Claim Objections
Claim 1 is objected to because of the following informalities: the phrase “a sound-based sensing in a sensing area” in line 4 should be amended to read –the sound-based sensing in the sensing area--. Appropriate correction is required.
Claim 1 is objected to because of the following informalities: the phrase “the different network device” in line 14 should be amended to read –the different network devices--. Appropriate correction is required.
Claims 1, 4 and 14 are objected to because of the following informalities: the phrase “and/or” should be amended to read –and-- or –or--, because the limitation “and/or” render the claims indefinite because it is unclear what constitutes the metes and bounds of the invention. Appropriate correction is required.
Examiner respectfully notes, for purpose of examination the term “and/or” will be interpreted as “or”.
Claim 4 is objected to because of the following informalities: the phrase “at least one sound” in lines 2-3 should be amended to read –the sound generator--. Appropriate correction is required.
Claim 6 is objected to because of the following informalities: the phrase “at least one sound generator” in lines 2, 4, 6 and 8 should be amended to read –the sound generator--. Appropriate correction is required.
Claim 6 is objected to because of the following informalities: the phrase “a sound signal” in lines 2 and 4 should be amended to read –the sound signal--. Appropriate correction is required.
Claim 6 is objected to because of the following informalities: the phrase “a first audio channel” in lines 2-3 should be amended to read –the first audio channel--. Appropriate correction is required.
Claim 6 is objected to because of the following informalities: the phrase “a second audio channel” in lines 4-5 should be amended to read –the second audio channel--. Appropriate correction is required.
Claim 7 is objected to because of the following informalities: the phrase “the sound generators” in line 2 should be amended to read –the sound generator--. Appropriate correction is required.
Claim 7 is objected to because of the following informalities: the phrase “one of the sound generator” in line 4 should be amended to read –the sound generator--. Appropriate correction is required.
Claim 9 is objected to because of the following informalities: the phrase “at least one sound sensor” in line 5 should be amended to read –the sound sensor. Appropriate correction is required.
Claim 9 is objected to because of the following informalities: the phrase “an abnormality” in line 5 should be amended to read –the abnormality--. Appropriate correction is required.
Claim 11 is objected to because of the following informalities: the phrase “at least one network device” in line 3 should be amended to read –at least one of the at least two network devices--. Appropriate correction is required.
Claim 12 is objected to because of the following informalities: the phrase “at least one network device” in line 3 should be amended to read –at least one of the at least two network devices--. Appropriate correction is required.
Claim 14 is objected to because of the following informalities: the phrase “a sound-based sensing in a sensing area” in line 3 should be amended to read –the sound-based sensing in the sensing area--. Appropriate correction is required.
Claim 14 is objected to because of the following informalities: the phrase “different network devices” in line 16 should be amended to read –different network devices of the at least two network devices--. Appropriate correction is required.
Claim 14 is objected to because of the following informalities: the phrase “a subject” in line 17 should be amended to read –the subjects--. Appropriate correction is required.
Claim 14 is objected to because of the following informalities: the phrase “a sensing area” in line 19 should be amended to read –the sensing area--. Appropriate correction is required.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(b):
(b) CONCLUSION.—The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph:
The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the applicant regards as his invention.
Claims 1-15 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor (or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the applicant), regards as the invention.
Claim 1 recite the limitation “different network devices” in line 12, claim 3 recite the limitation “the network devices” in line 3, and claim 14 recite the limitation “the different network devices” in line 8, these limitations are not defined by the claims which renders the claims indefinite. One with ordinary skill in the art would not be able to know if the claimed limitation “different network devices” are the same and/or different than the claimed “at least two network devices” in claims 1 and 14. The scope of the claim remains indeterminate because of the claimed “different network devices” in claims 1, 3 and 14. Examiner respectfully notes, for purpose of examination the claimed “different network devices” will be interpreted as the same as the claimed “at least two network devices”.
Claim 1 recite the limitation “generate different for the different network devices” in line 14, this limitation is not defined by the claims which renders the claims indefinite. One with ordinary skill in the art would not be able to know if what parameter is generated for the different network devices. As broadly as claimed the scope of the claim is indeterminate with respect to the claimed “generate different for the different network devices”. Examiner respectfully notes, for purpose of examination the “generate different for the different network devices” will be interpreted as generating different frequency for the different network devices”.
Claim 1 recites the limitation "the position" in line 15. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
Claim 3 recites the limitation "the operation" in line 3. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
Claim 4 recites the limitation "the operation" in line 2. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
Claim 14 recites the limitation "the different network device" in lines 8-9. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
Claim 14 recites the limitation "the position" in line 9. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
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.
Claim(s) 1 and 3-15 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being obvious over Shouldice et al (US 2021/0150873), in view of Newman et al (US 2012/0116252).
As to claims 1, 3, 14 and 15, Shouldice teaches a system, method and a computer program product for performing a sound-based sensing of subjects in a sensing area (system and method for sensing two people, abstract and par.259, in fig.1-6), comprising
a network comprising at least two network devices configured to perform a sound-based sensing in a sensing area (devices having microphones and speakers, par.98, par.107, par.123 and par.259, fig.2-3 and 6), wherein the network devices are distributed in the sensing area and are configured to communicate with each other based on RF signals,
wherein at least one network device comprises a sound generator configured to generate a sound signal (speakers, par.123) and at least one network device comprises a sound sensor configured to detect the sound signal from the sound generator after a propagation through at least a portion of the sensing area and to generate a sensing signal indicative of the detected sound signal (microphones, par.123, par.125-126, par.129-130),
wherein the sound generator and the sound sensor are arranged in different network devices, wherein the sound generator is configured to generate the sound signal with frequencies which can vary in time or to generate different for the different network device (a processing device may produce multiple sensing signals at different sensing frequencies for sensing different users with different frequencies, par.259, and sensing signals can be generated to avoid interference with each other (i.e., keep from overlapping in time and/or frequency), devices are selective choosing a sensing signal modulation/technique that does not interfere with pre-existing sensing signals from other devices in the vicinity, par.261), and
wherein the generation of different frequencies is based on the position of the network devices in the sensing area (par.259-261), and
a sitting position detector (using SONAR, RF, or infra-red sensing and/or seat/bed load sensors, par.144, and/or single pulse Doppler RADAR modules for simple interior movement detection for security, par.142) configured to detect a sitting position of the subject in the sensing area, detecting movement of different body parts of the subject (detection of gross movement or gross body motion, such movement may include any of arm movement, head movement, torso movement, limb movement, and/or whole-body movement, par.109).
As to claims 1, 3, 14 and 15, Shouldice teaches the device substantially as claimed above, wherein acoustic technology can be used for a wide variety of purposes including pro-active health management, medical devices, and security functions (par.136) but failed to explicitly teach detect a sitting position of the subject in the sensing area based on the sensing signal from the sound sensor, wherein the sitting position is a hip position and/or a head position of the subject sitting at a table or desk in the sensing area, wherein the sitting position detector comprises a controller which is configured to control the operation of at least one of the network devices to perform the sound-based sensing in the sensing area.
However, Newman teaches an analogous body detection system (abstract, par.17-20, fig.1 and 4-5), a sitting position detector detect a sitting position of the subject in the sensing area based on the sensing signal from the sound sensor, wherein the sitting position is a hip position and/or a head position of the subject sitting at a table or desk in the sensing area (the wave sensors 135 may output sound waves and receive reflection data associated with the output waves, par.62, orientation, position, and or posture of a monitored subject may be determined. For example, differences between baseline data (or expected data) and monitored data may be identified to determine a position of a monitored subject situated within the sound wave sensor 135 grid, determination may be made as to whether the monitored subject is standing, sitting, or in a prone or laying down position. As desired, profile information associated with one or more relatively stable objects (e.g., furniture) may also be taken into consideration when determining a position, orientation, and/or posture of a monitored subject, par.63, and determination may be made that the monitored subject is standing. As another example, when the monitored subject is in a sitting position, a second measured distance "B" (e.g., a distance between the subject's head and the sensor, etc.) may be determined, par.72, fig.4-5); wherein the sitting position detector comprises a controller which is configured to control the operation of at least one of the network devices to perform the sound-based sensing in the sensing area (monitoring system control unit 115, par.28, fig.1).
Since determining position/orientation of a subject using sound signal is well-known in the art so it would have been obvious to one having an ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to use sound signals to determine position of a subject in Shouldice’s invention, as taught by Newman’s invention, for the same purpose of detecting position/orientation of a subject.
As to claim 4, Shouldice/ Newman combination teaches the system, wherein the controller is configured to control the operation of at least one sound generator to determine a sound waveform and/or a frequency of the generated sound signal in at least a first and/or a second audio channel (Shouldice teaches dual tone ramp, par.62, par.71-72 and par.124, fig.4B and 9A).
As to claim 5, Shouldice/ Newman combination teaches the system, wherein the first audio channel is in an audible frequency range and the second audio channel is in an inaudible frequency range (Shouldice teaches detecting both audible and inaudible frequencies, par.58, par.62, par.68 and par.124).
As to claim 6, Shouldice/ Newman combination teaches the system, wherein at least one sound generator is configured to generate a sound signal in a first audio channel (Shouldice teaches the first channel of the dual tones, par.62, par.71-72 and par.124, fig.4B and 9A), at least one sound generator is configured to generate a sound signal in a second audio channel (the second channel of the dual tones, par.62 and par.71-72, fig.4B and 9A), at least one sound sensor is configured to detect the sound signal in the first audio channel and to generate a sensing signal indicative of the detected sound signal, at least one sound sensor is configured to detect the sound signal in the second audio channel and to generate a sensing signal indicative of the detected sound signal (par.62, par.71-72 and par.124, fig.4B and 9A).
As to claim 7, Shouldice/ Newman combination teaches the system, wherein the controller is configured to control one of the sound generators generating an audible sound signal or an inaudible sound signal in the first audio channel and to control one of the sound generator generating the inaudible sound signal or the audible sound signal in the second audio channel, wherein the controller is configured to initiate the generation of the inaudible sound signal or the audible sound signal only when the sitting position detector has detected a correct head position of the subject range (Shouldice teaches detecting both audible and inaudible frequencies, par.58, par.62, par.68 and par.124).
As to claims 8 and 9, Shouldice/ Newman combination teaches the system, wherein the sitting position detector comprises a fall detector configured to determine that the subject has fallen off a chair based on the sensing signal from the sound sensor, wherein the sitting position detector is configured to determine an abnormality regarding a sitting posture compared to a previously determined sitting posture based on the sensing signal from the at least one sound sensor and to issue a warning if an abnormality is determined (Newman teaches determination may be made that the monitored subject is in a seated position. In the event that the subject falls down, the measured distances may be processed in order to determine that the subject is in a prone or laying down position, and a suitable alarm event may be generated, par.72)
It would have been obvious to one having an ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the invention to determine fall event and/or abnormal position that may lead to the subject falling in Shouldice’s invention, as taught by Newman’s invention to warn the user to adjust position and/or to prevent fall, as taught by Newman’s invention (par.72).
As to claim 10, Shouldice/ Newman combination teaches the system, wherein at least one of the network devices comprises a lighting functionality (Shouldice teaches home/network devices can be smart lighting, par.123, fig.6).
As to claim 11, Shouldice/ Newman combination teaches the system, wherein at least one network device is implemented as a light unit, in particular a celling lamp, a lighting wall switch or a desk lamp (Shouldice teaches home/network devices can be smart automated appliance, smart lighting, smart thermostats, or smart power switches for powering appliances, par.123, fig.6).
As to claim 12, Shouldice/ Newman combination teaches the system, wherein at least one network device is implemented as a smart device, smart speaker, or a laptop (Shouldice teaches home/network devices can be smart automated appliance (phone or laptop, as best seen in fig.6), smart lighting, smart thermostats, or smart power switches for powering appliances, par.123, fig.6).
As to claim 13, Shouldice/ Newman combination teaches the system, wherein one of the network devices is configured to output or display instructions to a user (Shouldice teaches display 306, par.53 and/or display of any of the smart devices is more than capable of displaying instructions to the user, any measured data and/or warnings, par.215 and par.246, fig.3 and 6) or how to best position the sound generator and/or the sound sensor.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to MAY A ABOUELELA whose telephone number is (571)270-7917. The examiner can normally be reached 8-5.
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, JACQUELINE CHENG can be reached at 5712725596. 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.
/MAY A ABOUELELA/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3791
Prosecution Insights