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 .
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
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 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) 17-20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Meissner (US 20210077858).
In claim 17, Meissner discloses
A ranging base configured to be placed along an exercise path with line of sight to the athlete (it is noted by examiner that this language is intended use, and the prior art needs to merely be capable of being placed in the location described by applicant. However paragraph 57 explicitly discloses stationary transponders at figure 1 #120, 220, and 320) wherein the ranging beacon includes:
An ultra-wideband (UWB) transceiver configured to transmit a first UWB signal and receive a second UWB signal (paragraph 57, paragraph 11 discloses that the receivers may be transceivers instead)
A processor coupled to the UWB transceiver, wherein the processor is configured to generate ranging data of the athlete based on the first UWB signal and the second UWB signal, wherein the UWB transceiver is further configured to transmit the ranging data (paragraph 10)
A computing device comprising a UWB transceiver configured to receive the ranging data form the ranging base and a user interface configured to display the ranging data (paragraph 58, 27, 72)
In claim 18, Meissner discloses the computing device is a smartphone, a tablet, a laptop, or a desktop computer (paragraph 58 discloses transmitting the information to the internet which includes any of these devices, further a processor teaches the BRI of a desktop computer, as no particular hardware is claimed for the desktop computer.)
In claim 19, Meissner discloses the computing device comprises a processor configured to determine at least one of acceleration (It is noted by examiner that these limitations are a Markush group, thus only 1 of these limitations needs to be taught. paragraph 42)
In claim 20, Meissner discloses the user interface is configured to display at lest one of acceleration (paragraphs 28, 29)
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.
Claim(s) 1-16 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Meissner (US 20210077858) in view of Franzi (US 20210141345).
In claim 1, Meissner discloses
A ranging base configured to be placed along an exercise path with line of sight to the athlete (it is noted by examiner that this language is intended use, and the prior art needs to merely be capable of being placed in the location described by applicant. However paragraph 57 explicitly discloses stationary transponders at figure 1 #120, 220, and 320) wherein the ranging beacon includes:
A ranging base ultra-wideband (UWB) transceiver configured to receive a first UWB signal and transmit a second UWB signal (paragraph 57, paragraph 11 discloses that the receivers may be transceivers instead)
A wearable device configured to be worn by the athlete, wherein the wearable device includes (again, it is noted by examiner that this language is intended use, and the prior art needs to merely be capable of being placed in the location described by applicant. However paragraph 57 explicitly discloses the device being worn by the athlete)
A wearable device UWB transceiver configured to transmit the first UWB signal and receive the second UWB signal (paragraphs 57, 64)
A processor coupled to the wearable UWB transceiver (paragraph 64)
A processor within the ranging base which is configured to generate ranging data of the athlete based on the first UWB signal and the second UWB signal (paragraph 10)
Meissner fails to disclose that the ranging data of the athlete is generated within the processor within the wearable device, instead processing this data at the ranging bases. However Franzi discloses ranging data being generated within the processor within the wearable device (paragraphs 8-17, 34, 54), it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to combine Meissner with Franzi in order to reduce the processing requirements on the ranging base.
In claim 2, Meissner discloses the wearable device is a tag a watch or an activity band (paragraph 63)
In claim 3, Meissner discloses an additional ranging base comprising an additional ranging base UWB receiver configured to receive a third UWB signal and transmit a fourth UWB signal (paragraph 67)
In claim 4, Meissner discloses an additional wearable device configured to be worn by an additional athlete comprising an additional wearable device UWB transceiver configured to transmit the third UWB signal and receive the fourth UWB signal (paragraph 80)
In claim 5, Meissner in view of Franz discloses the additional wearable device comprises an additional processor coupled to the additional wearable device UWB transceiver wherein the additional processor is configured to generate ranging data of the additional athlete based on the third UWB signal and the fourth UWB signals (as Meissner discloses the additional wearable device, and the combination teaches the processing as required, this teaches the invention as claimed)
In claim 6, Meissner in view of Franz discloses the claimed invention except a speaker configured to broadcast an audible cue to indicate a start of a race, however Official notice is taken that including a speaker within a racing system was notoriously well known in the art before the effective filing date of the invention and it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to combine Meissner in view of Franz with this well known technique in order to make sure the competitors start at the same time, as well as to keep the spectators appraised of the race situation. It is noted by examiner that the use of the speaker is intended use, and that any speaker would be capable of performing the intended function.
In claim 7, Meissner in view of Franz discloses the claimed invention except one or more LEDs configured to emit light to indicate a start of a race, however Official notices that inclusion of LEDs within a racing system was notoriously well known in the art before the effective filing date of the invention, and it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to combine Meissner in view of Franz with this well known technique in order to make sure the competitors start at the same time. It is noted by examiner that the use of the LEDs is intended use, and that any LED would be capable of performing the intended function.
In claim 8, Meissner discloses the processor is configured to communicate with a second ranging base via the wearable UWB transceiver (paragraph 67)
In claim 9, Meissner discloses the ranging base is configured to be placed before or on a start line and the second ranging base is positioned on or after a finish line (figure 1 #20, 120, 220, 320, although the start/finish line is not explicitly shown, any starting location would teach this invention as claimed, as the track is circular and thus all of the ranging bases are both before and after the start/finish line.)
In claim 10, Meissner discloses
A ranging base configured to be placed along an exercise path with line of sight to the athlete (it is noted by examiner that this language is intended use, and the prior art needs to merely be capable of being placed in the location described by applicant. However paragraph 57 explicitly discloses stationary transponders at figure 1 #120, 220, and 320) wherein the ranging beacon includes:
A ranging base ultra-wideband (UWB) transceiver configured to transmit a first UWB signal and receive a second UWB signal (paragraph 57, paragraph 11 discloses that the receivers may be transceivers instead)
A ranging base processor coupled to the ranging base UWB transceiver, wherein the ranging base processor is configured to generate ranging data of the athlete based on the first UWB signal and the second UWB signal (paragraph 10)
A wearable device configured to be worn by the athlete, wherein the wearable device comprising (again, it is noted by examiner that this language is intended use, and the prior art needs to merely be capable of being placed in the location described by applicant. However paragraph 57 explicitly discloses the device being worn by the athlete)
A processor coupled to the wearable UWB transceiver
Determining at least one of acceleration (It is noted by examiner that these limitations are a Markush group, thus only 1 of these limitations needs to be taught. paragraph 42)
Meissner fails to disclose bluetooth, as well as that calculations occur within the wearable device however Franzi discloses use of bluetooth (paragraph 11) as well as calculating within the wearable device. As one of ordinary skill in the art would be able to understand that the processing may occur within any processor of appropriate capability, this combination would teach the invention of Messier being modified by including whatever portions of the software on whichever processor the operator sees fit, and even if this were not the case, Official notice is taken that processing software on any of various processors working in conjunction within a system was notoriously well known in the art before the effective filing date of the invention, and it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to combine Meissner in view of Franzi to use known hardware for improved communication, as well as to reduce the processing requirements upon some of the processors in favor of processing on other processors.
In claim 11, Meissner discloses attaching the wearable device to the athlete (paragraph 8), Meissner fails to explicitly disclose a clip, magnet, or hook and loop fastener, however Official notice is taken that these were notoriously well known attachment devices, and it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to combine Meissner in view of Franz with this well known technique in order to allow for fastening via whichever fastening method is preferred by the operator of the device.
In claim 12, Meissner discloses a UWB transceiver configured to receive the first UWB signal from the ranging base and transmit the second UWB signal back to the ranging base (paragraph 57, 11)
In claim 13, Meissner discloses the wearable device is configured to transmit personal data of the athlete (paragraph 57, the location of the athlete is personal data)
In claims 14 and 15, Meissner discloses the ranging base is configured to transmit a third UWB signal via the ranging base UWB transceiver, wherein a second wearable device receives the third UWB signal and transmits a fourth UWB signal to the ranging base (paragraph 80)
In claim 16, Meissner in view of Franz discloses the claimed invention except the ranging base further comprises a button configured to pair the ranging base to the wearable device, however providing a button for pairing of devices was notoriously well known in the art before the effective filing date of the invention. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to combine Meissner in view of Franz with this well known technique in order to allow for wearables and beacons to be universally interchangeable.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to THOMAS HAYNES HENRY whose telephone number is (571)270-3905. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 10-6.
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, Peter Vasat can be reached at 571-270-7625. 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.
/THOMAS H HENRY/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3715
Prosecution Insights