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 .
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 3 April 2026 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive. Applicant’s arguments are believed to be addressed in the rejection as outlined below.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
The text of those sections of Title 35, U.S. Code not included in this action can be found in a prior Office action.
Claims 1, 5-11, and 15-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Flick (US Patent Publication 2019/0143935) in view of Lars (German Patent App 10-2023-106748) as evidenced by Hlapisi, “Understanding Bluetooth LE Pairing—Step by Step.”
Regarding claims 1, and 11, Flick discloses a computer-implemented method for location sensing of a vehicle AND a vehicle, comprising: (abstract)
a GPS receiver configured to receive signals from a plurality of satellites; (¶43)
a transceiver configured to communicate with a portable electronic device paired with the vehicle; and (¶33-34)
a vehicle controller in signal communication with the GPS receiver and the transceiver, the vehicle controller including one or more processors and a non-transitory computer-readable storage medium having a plurality of instructions stored thereon, which, when executed by the one or more processors, cause the one or more processors to perform operations comprising: (¶32)
authenticate, by the transceiver, that the portable electronic device is authorized to communicate with the vehicle; (¶31; although not explicit authentication is required for at least the disclosed Bluetooth transceiver)
determine, by the GPS receiver, a GPS location of the vehicle; (¶43)
Flick discloses using a smartphone as a security device for a vehicle but appears to be silent as to using the smartphone location data for differential GPS and thus appears to be silent as to determine, by the transceiver, a location of the portable electronic device; receive, by the transceiver, a GPS location of the portable electronic device; determine a GPS error based on the determined vehicle GPS location, the determined location of the portable electronic device, and the received portable electronic device GPS location; and adjust the determined vehicle GPS location based on the GPS error to improve location sensing for location-based services operating on the vehicle.
Lars however teaches determine, by a signal-based ranging session between the transceiver and the portable electronic device, a location of the portable electronic device; (P6, bottom of page; “The sensor device of the vehicle 202 is designed to detect the… user and to determine a relative position …, a radar sensor and/or a lidar sensor for this purpose.”)
receive, by the transceiver, a GPS location of the portable electronic device; (page 6, last paragraph – page 7, first two lines)
determine a GPS error based on the determined vehicle GPS location, the determined location of the portable electronic device, and the received portable electronic device GPS location; and (page 7, first full paragraph)
adjust the determined vehicle GPS location based on the GPS error to improve location sensing for location-based services operating on the vehicle. (page 4, 3rd full paragraph)
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of filing to provide the invention of Flick with determine, by a signal-based ranging session between the transceiver and the portable electronic device, a location of the portable electronic device; receive, by the transceiver, a GPS location of the portable electronic device; determine a GPS error based on the determined vehicle GPS location, the determined location of the portable electronic device, and the received portable electronic device GPS location; and adjust the determined vehicle GPS location based on the GPS error to improve location sensing for location-based services operating on the vehicle.as taught by Lars with a reasonable expectation of success so as to ensure high accuracy positioning for increased safety (Lars: Page 2, 2nd full paragraph) and further because the technique for improving a particular class of devices was part of the ordinary capabilities of a person of ordinary skill in the art, in view of the teaching of the technique for improvement in other situations, would have yielded predictable results to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the invention.
Regarding claims 5, and 15, Flick further discloses wherein the transceiver and the portable electronic device are configured to communicate signals therebetween, the communicated signals including authentication information to confirm the portable electronic device is authorized to control a function of the vehicle. (¶35; Bluetooth pairing requires an authentication that verifies two devices are who they claim to be using a challenge-response system)
Regarding claims 6, and 16, Flick further discloses wherein the transceiver is a Bluetooth transceiver, and the communicated signals are Bluetooth signals. (¶35)
Regarding claims 7, and 17, Flick further discloses further comprising a telematics device configured for communication with the portable electronic device via a network, wherein the vehicle controller utilizes the telematics device to determine the vehicle GPS location, the distance to the portable electronic device, and the portable electronic device GPS location. (¶16)
Regarding claims 8, and 18, Flick further discloses wherein the portable electronic device is paired with the vehicle and authorized to enable access to a vehicle function. (¶35)
Regarding claims 9, and 19, Flick further discloses wherein enabling access to a vehicle function comprises unlocking one or more doors of the vehicle to grant vehicle access to a user of the portable electronic device. (¶6)
Regarding claims 10, and 20, Flick further discloses wherein enabling access to a vehicle function further comprises enabling an ignition start of the vehicle. (¶14)
Claims 2-3, and 12-13 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Flick in view of Larsas evidenced by Hlapisi as applied to claims 1, and 11 above, and further in view of Xia et. al (US Patent Publication 2018/0231668).
Regarding claims 2, and 12, Flick discloses various short range communication technologies, and time-of-flight ranging technologies but appears to be silent as to specifically ultrawide band.
Xia however teaches wherein the transceiver is an ultra-wideband (UWB) transceiver configured to determine the location of the portable electronic device via one or more UWB signals. (¶37)
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of filing to provide the invention of Flick with wherein the transceiver is an ultra-wideband (UWB) transceiver configured to determine the location of the portable electronic device via one or more UWB signals as taught by Xia with a reasonable expectation of success so as to ensure high accuracy positioning for increased safety (Xia: ¶37) and further because the technique for improving a particular class of devices was part of the ordinary capabilities of a person of ordinary skill in the art, in view of the teaching of the technique for improvement in other situations, would have yielded predictable results to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the invention.
Regarding claims 3, and 13, Flick further discloses wherein the signal-based ranging session is a
Flick discloses various short range communication technologies, and time-of-flight ranging technologies but appears to be silent as to specifically ultrawide band.
Xia however teaches a UWB ranging session between the transceiver and the portable electronic device, and wherein the vehicle controller subsequently determines the location of the portable electronic device based on time-of-flight information in the one or more UWB signals. (¶37; the Examiner notes that time-of-flight ranging determination is inherent to the UWB ranging taught in Xia)
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of filing to provide the invention of Flick with a UWB ranging session between the transceiver and the portable electronic device, and wherein the vehicle controller subsequently determines the location of the portable electronic device based on time-of-flight information in the one or more UWB signals as taught by Xia with a reasonable expectation of success so as to ensure high accuracy positioning for increased safety (Xia: ¶37) and further because the technique for improving a particular class of devices was part of the ordinary capabilities of a person of ordinary skill in the art, in view of the teaching of the technique for improvement in other situations, would have yielded predictable results to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the invention.
Claims 4, and 14 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Flick in view of Lars as applied to claims 1, and 11 above, and further in view of Ha et. al. (US Patent Publication 2022/0060852)
Regarding claims 4, and 14, Ha teaches wherein the determined GPS error is a current GPS error sample, and wherein the vehicle controller is configured to adjust the determined vehicle GPS location based on the current GPS error sample and one or more previously stored GPS error samples. (¶5, 50)
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of filing to provide the invention of Flick with wherein the determined GPS error is a current GPS error sample, and wherein the vehicle controller is configured to adjust the determined vehicle GPS location based on the current GPS error sample and one or more previously stored GPS error samples as taught by Xia with a reasonable expectation of success so as to ensure high accuracy positioning for increased safety (Ha: abstract) and further because the technique for improving a particular class of devices was part of the ordinary capabilities of a person of ordinary skill in the art, in view of the teaching of the technique for improvement in other situations, would have yielded predictable results to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the invention.
Conclusion
Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a). Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a).
A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of the advisory action. In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the mailing date of this final action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ALAN D HUTCHINSON whose telephone number is (571)272-8413. The examiner can normally be reached 7-5 Mon-Thur.
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, Navid Mehdizadeh can be reached at (571) 272-7691. 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.
/ALAN D HUTCHINSON/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3669
Prosecution Insights