CTNF 18/883,976 CTNF 84983 DETAILED ACTION Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status 07-03-aia AIA 15-10-aia The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA. 07-30-03-h AIA Claim Interpretation Claim 3 includes language that does not limit the scope of the claim. Claim 3 recites that a variety of steps are performed in order “to maintain resolvability in Doppler and time domains.” This language does not “require steps to be performed” – rather, this shows the “intended result of a process step” and thus is non-limiting. See MPEP 2111.04 I. Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102 07-07-aia AIA 07-07 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 – 07-08-aia AIA (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. 07-12-aia AIA (a)(2) the claimed invention was described in a patent issued under section 151, or in an application for patent published or deemed published under section 122(b), in which the patent or application, as the case may be, names another inventor and was effectively filed before the effective filing date of the claimed invention. 07-15 AIA Claim s 1, 11, and 16 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102( a)(1) and 102(a)(2 ) as being anticipated by Li, US 20220007139 . Claim 1: Li discloses a method comprising: sending one or more frames to one or more transceivers to initiate a process of frame exchanges ( Transmitters in the system initiate transmission of signal, i.e., initiate a process of frame exchanges. ¶29. ); receiving, based on the frame exchanges, channel state information (CSI) having one or more CSI impairments; processing the CSI to adjust the one or more CSI impairments of the CSI to generate a plurality of cleaned CSI metrics ( CSI parameters are received based on the transmission of the signals. ¶31. Localization parameters are extracted based on the CSI signals. ¶71. The CSI has impairments such as noise and synchronization errors, which are processed to produce cleaned CSI metrics, such as amplitude and phase information. ¶¶ 31-32 and 72-73. ); and estimating a velocity of a user using the plurality of cleaned CSI metrics ( Location and velocity of the target is estimated based on the cleaned CSI metrics. ¶¶ 11-18 and 80. The description of receiving and “cleaning” the CSI information in ¶¶ 69-73 relates to training the neural network. However, the POSITA would understand that when determining a target’s location and velocity, this same process is followed. For example, ¶31 describes that “localization parameters” that enable the velocity to be estimated include “one or more parameters of channel state information (CSI) (such as the amplitude and/or phase of one or more specific subcarriers).” See also ¶80. To obtain the amplitude and phase information, the POSITA would understand that the raw CSI information must be filtered and “cleaned” as described in ¶¶ 32 and 71-73. ). Claim 11 : see rejection of claim 1. Li discloses a velocity tracking system, comprising: one or more transceivers; and an inference engine comprising a processor, the processor configured to cause the inference engine to perform the method of claim 1. See Li Fig. 1 and its description. Here, the inference engine is the device that operates the run-time model. See e.g. ¶¶25-26 and 80. Claim 16: see rejection of claims 1 and 11 . Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103 07-20-aia AIA 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. 07-21-aia AIA Claim 3 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Li in view of Malkin, US 20240187833 . Claim 3: Li fails to disclose that estimating the velocity of the user using the plurality of cleaned CSI metrics comprises combining the cleaned CSI metrics to obtain the velocity estimate based on direct current (DC) offset removal, wavelet denoising, and wavelet transform to maintain resolvability in Doppler and time domains. Malkin discloses, in an RF sensing system, estimating movement information based on DC offset removal, noise reduction, and other pre-processing steps. Malkin ¶¶ 7 and 154. It would have been obvious to a skilled artisan before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Li with teachings in Malkin, the rationale being to produce more accurate velocity estimate. Li-Malkin does not disclose that the velocity estimate is further based on wavelet denoising and transform. However, official notice is taken that these were well known processing steps, and using these steps in the Li-Malkin system would have been obvious in order to produce a velocity estimate of higher accuracy . 07-21-aia AIA Claim s 4-6, 10, 14, and 17 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Li . Claim 4 : Li does not disclose identifying desired CSI metrics to be included in the CSI received; and sending information indicating the desired CSI metrics to the one or more transceivers. But official notice is taken that this was well known in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention. Therefore it would have been obvious to the POSITA to modify Li to include this, the rationale being to ensure that CSI metrics are received that are most useful when estimating a user velocity. The POSITA would understand that this would increase accuracy of the estimate. Claims 5 and 17: Li does not disclose that initiating the process of frame exchanges further comprises: indicating one or more of inter-packet transmission times, total duration of a frame exchange sequence, number of frame exchanges to be performed, a bandwidth of frames to be used for transmission, or a combination thereof. But official notice is taken that this was well known in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention. Therefore it would have been obvious to the POSITA to modify Li to include this, the rationale being to provide increase flexibility in how the measurements are made by enabling these parameters to be specified. Claim 6: Li does not disclose sending a frame of the one or more frames to solicit the desired CSI metrics from the one or more transceivers. But official notice is taken that this was well known in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention. Therefore it would have been obvious to the POSITA to modify Li to include this, the rationale being to ensure that CSI metrics are received that are most useful when estimating a user velocity. The POSITA would understand that this would increase accuracy of the estimate. Claims 10 and 14: Li does not disclose: before sending one or more frames to one or more transceivers to initiate a process of frame exchanges, determining whether to initiate the process of frame exchanges based on a user input, a sensor measurement, or a predetermined environmental condition. But official notice is taken that this was well known in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention. Therefore it would have been obvious to the POSITA to modify Li to include this, the rationale being to enable more control over how and when the measurements are made, thereby conserving resources . 07-21-aia AIA Claim s 7-9, 12, 13, 15, and 18-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Li in view of Qian, CN 106792505 . Claim 7: Li does not disclose, but Qian discloses: estimating the velocity of the user using the plurality of cleaned CSI metrics further comprises: performing a signal transform process; and performing a path length change rate (PLCR) estimation process using an output from the signal transform process ( Qian Fig. 1 and its description. See e.g. the description of step S1 in ¶¶ 22-28 (see pg. 3-4 of the included English translation) ). It would have been obvious to a skilled artisan before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Li with teachings in Qian, the rationale being to produce more accurate velocity estimate. Claim 8: Li-Qian discloses that estimating the velocity of the user using the plurality of cleaned CSI metrics further comprises: selecting a subcarrier of the plurality of subcarriers as a basis for estimating a PLCR estimation value for one or more transmitter-receiver pair of the one or more transceivers ( Qian ¶¶30-32 ). Qian does not disclose extracting a peak-to-average ratio (PAR) for each of a plurality of subcarriers used for the process of frame exchanges. But Qian teaches selecting a “most energetic” subcarrier having the most relevant information for the measurement. See Qian claim 3, for example. It was well known to use PAR to make this determination. Therefore, to the extent that Qian does not explicitly teach this, it would have been obvious to the POSITA to use this method to determine the most energetic subcarriers, the rationale being to provide a simple method of making this determination. Claim 9: Li-Qian discloses that estimating the velocity of the user using the plurality of cleaned CSI metrics further comprises: converting the PLCR estimation value for each of one or more transmitter-receiver pairs to a PLCR vector for each of the one or more transmitter-receiver pairs indicating a location of the user; and determining a velocity vector using the PLCR vector for each of the one or more transmitter-receiver pairs ( See Fig. 2-8 and their description ). Claims 12 and 19: see rejection of claims 8. Claims 13 and 20: see rejection of claim 9. Claims 15 and 18: see rejection of claim 7 . Allowable Subject Matter 12-151-08 AIA 07-43 12-51-08 Claim s 2 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. Conclusion Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ROBERT J HANCE whose telephone number is (571)270-5319. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 11:00am-7:00pm 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, Michael Fuelling can be reached at (571) 270-1367. 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. /ROBERT J HANCE/Reexamination Specialist, Art Unit 3992 Application/Control Number: 18/883,976 Page 2 Art Unit: 3992 Application/Control Number: 18/883,976 Page 3 Art Unit: 3992 Application/Control Number: 18/883,976 Page 4 Art Unit: 3992 Application/Control Number: 18/883,976 Page 5 Art Unit: 3992 Application/Control Number: 18/883,976 Page 6 Art Unit: 3992 Application/Control Number: 18/883,976 Page 7 Art Unit: 3992 Application/Control Number: 18/883,976 Page 8 Art Unit: 3992
Prosecution Insights