DETAILED ACTION
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 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.
This Office Action is in response to the communication filed on 12/02/2024.
Claims 18-34, 37-38 and 40 have been canceled.
Claims 1, 3-4, 7, 10, 13-14, 35-36 and 39 have been amended.
Claims 1-17, 35-36 and 39 are pending for consideration.
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 .
Specification
The lengthy specification has not been checked to the extent necessary to determine the presence of all possible minor errors. Applicant’s cooperation is requested in correcting any errors of which applicant may become aware in the specification.
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on 12/2/2024 and 04/8/2026 are in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statements are being considered by the examiner.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 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.
Claim(s) 1-17, 35-36 and 39 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Ledvina (US 20200106877) (hereinafter Ledvina).
Regarding claim 1, Ledvina discloses a ranging method, performed by a second terminal device, the method comprising: receiving a ranging request message sent by a first terminal device (Ledvina: paragraphs 0036, 0046 and 0058, “Mobile device 110 (e.g., a smartphone) can initiate a ranging measurement (operation) by transmitting a ranging request 101 to a mobile device 120”); performing privacy verification of the ranging request message based on a privacy profile stored on the second terminal device (Ledvina: paragraphs 0059-0061, “the mobile devices communicate advertisements using a first wireless protocol, e.g., BLE. A mobile device can transmit advertisements at a particular rate, and scan for advertisements from other mobile devices at a particular rate. The advertisements can include an authorization tag for each of the mobile devices to authenticate each other, e.g., to confirm that they have been registered with a third party”); and sending a ranging response message to the first terminal device (Ledvina: paragraphs 0059-0062, “For example, the receiving mobile device can detect an advertisement and obtain an authentication tag. The authentication tag can be compared to a list of authentication tags stored on the mobile device, e.g., corresponding to a contact list. When a mobile device adds a contact, the corresponding authentication tag can be obtained from an authentication server. The mobile device can then detect when an advertisement includes an authentication tag already stored on the mobile device. In some implementations, a new authentication tag can be sent to the authentication server to confirm that an identifier and an authentication tag match.”… “in response to authentication by the receiving mobile device or generally as an advertising mode, the receiving mobile device can also send an advertisement that includes an authentication tag.”), wherein the ranging response message is used to determine whether to accept a ranging request of the ranging request message (Ledvina: paragraphs 0059-0063).
Regarding claim 13, claim 13 discloses a method claim that is substantially equivalent to the method of claim 1. Therefore, the arguments set forth above with respect to claim 1 are equally applicable to claim 13 and rejected for the same reasons.
Regarding claim 2, Ledvina discloses wherein the privacy profile comprises at least one of following information: a terminal device list comprising identification of at least one terminal device allowed to be connected to the second terminal device; ranging type restriction information (Ledvina: paragraphs 0052, 0064 and 0091, “An example format for a ranging service message format can provide a code (e.g., one octet long) that indicates the type of the message. The length field (e.g., two octets long) can indicate the size in octets of the data field of the message, which may not include the code and length fields. The data field can be variable in length. Thus, the code field can determines the format of the data field and the length field can indicate the length of the data field.”); ranging geographic area restriction information (Ledvina: paragraphs 0052 and 0064); ranging time period restriction information (Ledvina: paragraphs 0052 and 0064); ranging distance accuracy restriction information (Ledvina: paragraphs 0052 and 0064); ranging direction accuracy restriction information (Ledvina: paragraphs 0052 and 0064); or restriction information on number of auxiliary terminal devices (Ledvina: paragraphs 0052 and 0064, “the mobile devices can exchange ranging capabilities (settings) using the first wireless protocol. The exchange of ranging capabilities can ensure that the signaling between mobile devices is performed in a consistent manner by both devices. Such exchange can allow the mobile device to adapt to different devices, e.g., ones with different numbers and types of antenna units. Example ranging capabilities can include specifying a format for ranging messages between the mobile devices, a frequency range to use, a number of antenna units for each device, and encryption protocols for ranging messages using the second wireless protocol”).
Regarding claims 3 and 14, Ledvina discloses wherein the ranging request message comprises identification of the first terminal device, identification of the second terminal device, and a ranging type, and the ranging type comprises a first type of a ranging request directly initiated by the first terminal device, or a second type of a ranging request initiated by the first terminal device under trigger of a third terminal device (Ledvina: paragraphs 0053, 0059-0060, 0084, 0091, 0121, 0145, “The advertisements can include an authorization tag for each of the mobile devices to authenticate each other, e.g., to confirm that they have been registered with a third party,”… “an identifier that is the authentication tag or is used to generate the authentication tag can include an identity address (e.g., media access control (MAC) address). For example, a unique 48-bit address can be used for each mobile device. An authentication tag can be updated periodically. Advertisements can also include an ID associated with the authentication tag (e.g., to retrieve additional information, such as a public certificate) and one or more commands, e.g., for a receiving mobile device to wake up” … “ranging request message can specify a source address”…“The ranging request message can specify a destination address of receiving device”… “a device can store authentication tags in association with user/device identifiers (which may be included in the payload of a message), and the received authentication tag can be compared to a stored authentication tag corresponding to the received user/device identifier. Other examples of authentication are provided herein.”… “An example format for a ranging service message format can provide a code (e.g., one octet long) that indicates the type of the message. The length field (e.g., two octets long) can indicate the size in octets of the data field of the message, which may not include the code and length fields. The data field can be variable in length. Thus, the code field can determines the format of the data field and the length field can indicate the length of the data field.”).
Regarding claims 4 and 15, Ledvina discloses wherein in response to the ranging type being the second type of the ranging request initiated by the first terminal device under the trigger of the third terminal device, the ranging request message further comprises identification of the third terminal device (Ledvina: paragraph 0188, “detects incoming messages from other mobile devices 1220. In various embodiments, the incoming messages can be generated by or include received identifiers corresponding to the other mobile devices 1220, e.g., a second identifier for second mobile device 1221 and a third identifier for third mobile device 1222.”).
Regarding claims 5 and 16, Ledvina discloses wherein the ranging request message further comprises ranging information, and the ranging information comprises at least one of: ranging geographic area information, ranging time period information, ranging distance accuracy information, or ranging direction accuracy information (Ledvina: paragraphs 0030, 0054-0055, 0081 and 0091, “the distance information obtained from ranging can be used to trigger a notification (e.g., a reminder) to be output from a first mobile device. For example, a first user of the first mobile device may wish to get a reminder when the first user is close to a second user, who has a second mobile device.”… “Other examples for ranging capabilities include a number of antennas, location of those antennas (e.g., a relative distances between the antennas), how many antennas to use, encryption protocols, packet format, modes of operation, and supported frequency range. Such capabilities may reflect a software update of either device, resulting in a new or different capability. The ranging setup handshake can include a negotiation about how to carry out the ranging, such as how often to range or how to schedule the ranging (e.g., when there are multiple receiving devices—round robin, one at a time, or other options). A sending device may know it is connected to three different devices, and thus the mobile device may want a lower rate of range measurements to each device (e.g., 25 milliseconds) or schedule a particular time/frequency to perform ranging with each device. A duty cycle for when the UWB radios are on can be specified, e.g., 1 KHz or 10 KHz. For instance, when a start message is received, the devices can agree to start ranging 100 milliseconds (or 90 milliseconds for extra margin) from advertisement at 405 and then every 1 KHz after that.”).
Regarding claim 6, Ledvina discloses wherein performing the privacy verification of the ranging request message based on the privacy profile stored on the second terminal device, comprises: determining, in response to the identification of the first terminal device being in the terminal device list, that the privacy verification of the ranging request message passes (Ledvina: paragraphs 0061 and 0114, “When a mobile device adds a contact, the corresponding authentication tag can be obtained from an authentication server. The mobile device can then detect when an advertisement includes an authentication tag already stored on the mobile device. In some implementations, a new authentication tag can be sent to the authentication server to confirm that an identifier and an authentication tag match.”); and determining, in response to the identification of the first terminal device being not in the terminal device list, that the privacy verification of the ranging request message fails (Ledvina: paragraphs 0035-0036, 0061 and 0263, “The two users may know each other, and thus have each other's phone numbers or other identifiers. As described in more detail later, such an identifier can be used for authentication purposes, e.g., so ranging is not performed with unknown devices”… “the first device receives a message from the second mobile device. The message can include an authentication tag that can be used to authenticate the second mobile device. In this manner, a sharing session would not occur to a device of an unknown person.”).
Regarding claim 7, Ledvina discloses wherein performing the privacy verification of the ranging request message based on the privacy profile stored on the second terminal device, comprises: determining, in response to the identification of the first terminal device and the identification of the third terminal device being both in the terminal device list, that the privacy verification of the ranging request message passes (Ledvina: paragraphs 0114 and 0184, “Other mobile devices 1220 can include a second mobile device 1221 and a third mobile device”… “the users can control which other devices can discover them and perform ranging, or whether the device will allow sharing. For example, a user can restrict such operations to those in the contact list or a subset of those in the contact list. And, as described herein, the authentication can occur without providing private information in the clear, e.g., any such private data may be encrypted or otherwise obfuscated. For example, hashes of identifiers can be used as an first authentication tag, or public certificates and/or digital signatures can be used. For instance, an authentication server can issue the hashes, digital signatures, public certificates, etc., so that a device can match an authentication tag to a device that has been previously encountered (e.g., in a contact list) or at least know that the device has been registered and/or authenticated by the authentication server. The authentication server can provide authentication tags for each device in a contact list. As another example, such authentication tags (e.g., hashes) can be generated by a first device (e.g., at time of registration) and sent to the authentication server, which can distribute them to other devices that have the first device or related identifier in their contact list.”); and determining, in response to at least one of the identification of the first terminal device or the identification of the third terminal device being not in the terminal device list, that the privacy verification of the ranging request message fails (Ledvina: paragraphs 0114 and 0184, “the users can control which other devices can discover them and perform ranging, or whether the device will allow sharing. For example, a user can restrict such operations to those in the contact list or a subset of those in the contact list. And, as described herein, the authentication can occur without providing private information in the clear, e.g., any such private data may be encrypted or otherwise obfuscated. For example, hashes of identifiers can be used as an first authentication tag, or public certificates and/or digital signatures can be used. For instance, an authentication server can issue the hashes, digital signatures, public certificates, etc., so that a device can match an authentication tag to a device that has been previously encountered (e.g., in a contact list) or at least know that the device has been registered and/or authenticated by the authentication server. The authentication server can provide authentication tags for each device in a contact list. As another example, such authentication tags (e.g., hashes) can be generated by a first device (e.g., at time of registration) and sent to the authentication server, which can distribute them to other devices that have the first device or related identifier in their contact list.”).
Regarding claim 8, Ledvina discloses wherein performing the privacy verification of the ranging request message based on the privacy profile stored on the second terminal device, comprises: determining the number of auxiliary terminal devices triggered by the third terminal device (Ledvina: paragraphs 0153 and 0158-0160, “Ranging operations can be used for other purposes besides sharing content. For example, a first device can provide a notification (e.g., a reminder) to a first user of the first device based on a distance to a designated (second) device. Such a reminder can be useful when a reminder relates to a second user of the second device. Thus, it would be convenient to receive the reminder when the first user is nearby (e.g., talking to) the second user. As another example, a notification may be desired when the distance is greater than a threshold, e.g., when the other device block to a child of a parent who is a user of a first device.”); determining, in response to the number of auxiliary terminal devices triggered by the third terminal device being less than or equal to the restriction information on the number of auxiliary terminal devices, that the privacy verification of the ranging request message passes (Ledvina: paragraphs 0153 and 0158-0160); and determining, in response to the number of auxiliary terminal devices triggered by the third terminal device being greater than the restriction information on the number of auxiliary terminal devices, that the privacy verification of the ranging request message fails (Ledvina: paragraphs 0153 and 0158-0161, “The example of getting an alert when the two devices become separated may apply when a parent's child has a mobile device (e.g., a watch or other wearable device). The parents device can receive an alert if the child wanders too far away. Such monitoring can be performed by an AOP, which can use less power than an application processor of the device.”).
Regarding claim 9, Ledvina discloses wherein performing the privacy verification of the ranging request message based on the privacy profile stored on the second terminal device, comprises: determining, in response to the identification of the first terminal device being in the terminal device list and the ranging information being all in compliance with restriction information in the privacy profile, that the privacy verification of the ranging request message passes (Ledvina: paragraphs 0227-0229, “the ranging scores or the raw distances (e.g., for each antenna) can be used as features to a machine learning model. The training set can include a set of communications for which a recipient is known, as well as the particular context (including ranging distances). Such a machine learning model can be continually updated based on the accuracy of the predictions for the recipients of new communications for which contexts are known.”).
Regarding claim 10, Ledvina discloses wherein in response to the privacy verification of the ranging request message failing, the ranging response message is used to reject the ranging request from the first terminal device (Ledvina: paragraphs 0035-0036, 0061 and 0263, “The two users may know each other, and thus have each other's phone numbers or other identifiers. As described in more detail later, such an identifier can be used for authentication purposes, e.g., so ranging is not performed with unknown devices”… “the first device receives a message from the second mobile device. The message can include an authentication tag that can be used to authenticate the second mobile device. In this manner, a sharing session would not occur to a device of an unknown person.”).
Regarding claims 11 and 17, Ledvina discloses performing integrity verification of the ranging request message (Ledvina: paragraphs 0035-0036, 0061 and 0263, “The two users may know each other, and thus have each other's phone numbers or other identifiers. As described in more detail later, such an identifier can be used for authentication purposes, e.g., so ranging is not performed with unknown devices”… “the first device receives a message from the second mobile device. The message can include an authentication tag that can be used to authenticate the second mobile device. In this manner, a sharing session would not occur to a device of an unknown person.”); wherein in response to the integrity verification of the ranging request message failing, the ranging response message is used to reject the ranging request from the first terminal device (Ledvina: paragraphs 0035-0036, 0061 and 0263, “The two users may know each other, and thus have each other's phone numbers or other identifiers. As described in more detail later, such an identifier can be used for authentication purposes, e.g., so ranging is not performed with unknown devices”… “the first device receives a message from the second mobile device. The message can include an authentication tag that can be used to authenticate the second mobile device. In this manner, a sharing session would not occur to a device of an unknown person.”).
Regarding claim 12, Ledvina discloses wherein in response to the integrity verification of the ranging request message and the privacy verification of the ranging request message passing, the ranging response message is used to accept the ranging request from the first terminal device (Ledvina: paragraphs 0061 and 0227-0229, “The authentication tag can be compared to a list of authentication tags stored on the mobile device, e.g., corresponding to a contact list. When a mobile device adds a contact, the corresponding authentication tag can be obtained from an authentication server. The mobile device can then detect when an advertisement includes an authentication tag already stored on the mobile device. In some implementations, a new authentication tag can be sent to the authentication server to confirm that an identifier and an authentication tag match.”…“the ranging scores or the raw distances (e.g., for each antenna) can be used as features to a machine learning model. The training set can include a set of communications for which a recipient is known, as well as the particular context (including ranging distances). Such a machine learning model can be continually updated based on the accuracy of the predictions for the recipients of new communications for which contexts are known.”).
Regarding claim 35, Ledvina discloses a communication device comprising a processor and a memory, wherein the memory stores a computer program, and the processor is configured to execute the computer program stored in the memory, to cause the method according to claim 1 to be performed by the device (Ledvina: paragraphs 0027-0031 and 0033, “mobile device can include ranging circuitry that can determine the relative distance between the mobile device and another mobile device. For example, time of flight measurements can be performed using ultra-wideband (UWB) pulses transmitted between the mobile devices. The ranging can provide distance information, which can be used to determine a relative position of one mobile device to another. As examples, the relative position can include a distance value, angular (orientation) information between the two devices, or both.”… “a mobile device can include circuitry for performing ranging measurements. Such circuitry can include one or more dedicated antennas (e.g., 3) and circuitry for processing measured signals. The ranging measurements can be performed using the time-of-flight of pulses between the two mobile devices. In some implementations, a round-trip time (RTT) is used to determine distance information, e.g., for each of the antennas. In other implementations, a single-trip time in one direction can be used. The pulses may be formed using ultra-wideband (UWB) radio technology.”).
Regarding claim 36, Ledvina discloses a communication device comprising a processor and a memory, wherein the memory stores a computer program, and the processor is configured to execute the computer program stored in the memory, to cause the method according to claim 13 to be performed by the device (Ledvina: paragraphs 0027-0031 and 0033, “mobile device can include ranging circuitry that can determine the relative distance between the mobile device and another mobile device. For example, time of flight measurements can be performed using ultra-wideband (UWB) pulses transmitted between the mobile devices. The ranging can provide distance information, which can be used to determine a relative position of one mobile device to another. As examples, the relative position can include a distance value, angular (orientation) information between the two devices, or both.”… “a mobile device can include circuitry for performing ranging measurements. Such circuitry can include one or more dedicated antennas (e.g., 3) and circuitry for processing measured signals. The ranging measurements can be performed using the time-of-flight of pulses between the two mobile devices. In some implementations, a round-trip time (RTT) is used to determine distance information, e.g., for each of the antennas. In other implementations, a single-trip time in one direction can be used. The pulses may be formed using ultra-wideband (UWB) radio technology.”).
Regarding claim 39, Ledvina discloses a non-transitory computer-readable storage medium having instructions stored thereon, which when executed, cause the method according to claim 1 to be implemented (Ledvina: paragraphs 0027-0031 and 0033, “mobile device can include ranging circuitry that can determine the relative distance between the mobile device and another mobile device. For example, time of flight measurements can be performed using ultra-wideband (UWB) pulses transmitted between the mobile devices. The ranging can provide distance information, which can be used to determine a relative position of one mobile device to another. As examples, the relative position can include a distance value, angular (orientation) information between the two devices, or both.”… “a mobile device can include circuitry for performing ranging measurements. Such circuitry can include one or more dedicated antennas (e.g., 3) and circuitry for processing measured signals. The ranging measurements can be performed using the time-of-flight of pulses between the two mobile devices. In some implementations, a round-trip time (RTT) is used to determine distance information, e.g., for each of the antennas. In other implementations, a single-trip time in one direction can be used. The pulses may be formed using ultra-wideband (UWB) radio technology.”).
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to TRANG T DOAN whose telephone number is (571)272-0740. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 7-4 ET.
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, Lynn D Feild can be reached on (571)272-2092. 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.
/TRANG T DOAN/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2431
Prosecution Insights