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 disclosure is objected to because of the following informalities: the specification as published has a typo in [0051] “…are….”
“…The above examples re merely provided for illustrative purposes and are not intended to limit the example embodiments in any way, the example embodiments may be use any appropriate type of one conditions to activate any type of Bluetooth feature without receiving feedback from the accessory device.” Appropriate correction is required.
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.
The factual inquiries set forth in Graham v. John Deere Co., 383 U.S. 1, 148 USPQ 459 (1966), that are applied for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows:
1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art.
2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue.
3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art.
4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness.
This application currently names joint inventors. In considering patentability of the claims the examiner presumes that the subject matter of the various claims was commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the claimed invention(s) absent any evidence to the contrary. Applicant is advised of the obligation under 37 CFR 1.56 to point out the inventor and effective filing dates of each claim that was not commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the later invention in order for the examiner to consider the applicability of 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(C) for any potential 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) prior art against the later invention.
Claims 1-5, 8, 12, 14 and 15-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Mccall US 2020/0098173 A1 in view of Liu et al. (hereinafter Liu) US 2022/0347046 A1.
Regarding Claim 1, Mccall teaches an apparatus comprising processing circuitry configured to:
determine a distance between the apparatus and an accessory device based on at least information collected by one or more cameras (¶0067; wearable system [apparatus] can also include one or more depth sensors 234. The depth sensor 234 can be configured to measure the distance between an object in an environment to a wearable device. The depth sensor 234 may include a laser scanner (e.g., a lidar), an ultrasonic depth sensor, or a depth sensing camera. In certain implementations, where the cameras 316 have depth sensing ability, the cameras 316 may also be considered as depth sensors 234. ¶0072; other components [accessory device] connects to the wearable system via Bluetooth);
select one or more signaling techniques to utilize for short-range communication with the accessory device based on the distance (¶0065 & ¶0072; beam shaping [signaling technique] or Bluetooth is used to communicate between wearable device and helmet as example);
and generate a signal for transmission to the accessory device using the one or more signaling techniques (¶0072; Bluetooth is used to communicate between wearable device and helmet components).
Mccall does not expressly teach that the distance is between the wireless device and accessory device. Liu teaches the distance is between the wireless device and accessory device (¶0069; step 630, system 300 may operate to determine whether a given user device and/or accessory of a first user (e.g., user 320 or model 325) are within a predetermined distance or distance range of another user device and/or accessory of a second user (e.g., or user devices and/or accessories of a plurality of users). Step 630 may occur in some or all modes (e.g., stranger mode) or may not occur in some modes (e.g., acquaintance mode, in which process 600 may proceed directly from step 625 to step 635). For example, system 300 may operate to determine whether determined distances (e.g., distances 335a, 335b, 335c, 340a, 340b, and/or 340c) are greater or less than a predetermined distance and/or fall within one or more predetermined ranges of distances. If system 300 determines that the determined distances do not meet or exceed a predetermined threshold or do not fall within a predetermined range of values, process 600 may return to step 625. If system 300 determines that the determined distances meet or exceed a predetermined threshold value and/or fall within a predetermined threshold range of values, process 600 may proceed to step 635).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed limitation to incorporate the teachings of Liu into the system of Mccall in order to determine a distance between the terminal device and either the accessory or a user device of the user, and control the accessory to perform a predetermined action (abstract).
Regarding Claim 2, Mccall in view of Liu teaches the apparatus of claim 1, Mccall further teaches wherein the accessory device is configured to perform functions for extended reality (XR) (¶0052-¶0053 & Fig.3; AR or virtual reality).
Regarding Claim 3, Mccall in view of Liu teaches the apparatus of claim 1, Mccall further teaches wherein the information collected by the one or more cameras comprises eye tracking data (¶0058 & ¶0071; eye data).
Regarding Claim 4, Mccall in view of Liu teaches the apparatus of claim 1, Mccall further teaches wherein determining the distance between the apparatus and the accessory device is further based on light detection and ranging (LiDAR) data collected by a LiDAR sensor (¶0067; laser scanner like lidar).
Regarding Claim 5, Mccall in view of Liu teaches the apparatus of claim 1, Mccall further teaches wherein the one or more signaling techniques include transmit beamforming (¶0065; beam shaping for transmission).
Regarding Claim 8, Mccall in view of Liu teaches the apparatus of claim 1, Liu further teaches wherein selecting the one or more signaling techniques is performed without receiving a packet from the accessory device (¶0058; For example, the exemplary disclosed distances may be calculated based on an actual position of user accessories and/or devices, a relative distance between accessories and/or devices of different users without identifying their positions, and/or any other suitable technique).
Regarding Claim 10, Mccall in view of Liu teaches the apparatus of claim 9, Liu further teaches wherein the transmission to the accessory device is limited to within the predetermined distance (¶0038-¶0039; accessory is withing a predetermined ranges).
Regarding Claim 12, Mccall in view of Liu teaches the apparatus of claim 11, Mccall further teaches wherein the visual indication is a visual or physical state change of the accessory device (Fig. 9 & ¶0065-¶0072; physical state)
Regarding Claim 14, Mccall in view of Liu teaches the apparatus of claim 1, Mccall further teaches wherein the apparatus comprises a wireless communication device (Fig. 2 or 3).
Claims 15-20 are substantially similar to the above claims, thus the same rationale applies.
Claims 6-7 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Mccall in view of Liu and further in view of Arfaei et al. (hereinafter Arfaei) US 2018/0069324 A1.
Regarding Claim 6, Mccall in view of Liu teaches the apparatus of claim 1, but they do not expressly teach wherein the one or more signaling techniques include power amplification using an external power amplifier (EPA).
Arfaei teaches wherein the one or more signaling techniques include power amplification using an external power amplifier (EPA) (obvious from ¶0046 & ¶0069 & ¶0098; power amplifier).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed limitation to incorporate the teachings of Arfaei into the system of Mccall- Liu in order to improve connection strength and/or access range of the wireless device 30 to a wireless access point for a given amount of power consumption (¶0051 & ¶0098).
Regarding Claim 7, Mccall in view of Liu teaches the apparatus of claim 1, but they do not expressly teach herein the one or more signaling techniques include power amplification.
Arfaei wherein the one or more signaling techniques include power amplification (¶0046 & ¶0069; power amplifier).
Claim 9 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Mccall in view of Liu and further in view of Brier US 2022/0200298 A1.
Regarding Claim 9, Mccall in view of Liu teaches the apparatus of claim 1, but they do not expressly teach wherein the processing circuitry is further configured to: generate a notification instructing a user to move within a predetermined distance of the accessory device.
Brier teaches wherein the processing circuitry is further configured to: generate a notification instructing a user to move within a predetermined distance of the accessory device (obvious from ¶0049; When paired with a remote device, a user may also configure additional tracking features such as a geofence that triggers the device alarm if the user's remote device (e.g., a smartphone, smartwatch) moves a certain radial distance away from the device (crosses the geofence) and vice versa (as determined using the GNSS receiver or WiFi/Bluetooth location technology), or initiates certain processes or functions after connecting to the remote device or moving a certain distance to/from the remote device, such as sending a text message, notification, email or phone call to the remote device).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed limitation to incorporate the teachings of Brier into the system of Mccall- Liu in order to make paring different accessory easier (common knowledge).
Claims 11 and 13 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Mccall in view of Liu and further in view of Ostanin et al. (hereinafter Ostanin) US 2021/0147040 A1.
Regarding Claim 11, Mccall in view of Liu teaches the apparatus of claim 1, but they do not expressly teach wherein the processing circuitry is further configured to: identify a visual indication provided by the accessory device that is configured to acknowledge successful reception of the signal.
Ostanin teaches wherein the processing circuitry is further configured to: identify a visual indication provided by the accessory device that is configured to acknowledge successful reception of the signal (¶0055; In a preferred embodiment, a combined Bluetooth and microcontroller unit (MCU) 326 receives input from buttons 327 and 328, coupled with stored instructions from NVRAM 329, and sends radio signals via low-frequency radio (LFR) 324 to the motorized fin, and gives visual indications to the rider via LED 323. A global navigation satellite system (GNSS) receiver 325 may generate geolocation data, which is stored in NVRAM and transmissible via Bluetooth or LFR for location purposes or for integration with sports tracking software. In a preferred embodiment, the GNSS receiver may be GPS or GLONASS receivers).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed limitation to incorporate the teachings of Ostanin into the system of Mccall- Liu in order to confirm a successful Bluetooth connection instantly (common knowledge). It removes guesswork, saves time, and gives you clear proof that your devices are paired and ready to use without checking a phone screen (common knowledge).
Regarding Claim 13, Mccall in view of Liu and Ostanin teaches the apparatus of claim 11, Ostanin teaches wherein the visual indication is based on a light emitting diode (LED) of the accessory device (¶0055; In a preferred embodiment, a combined Bluetooth and microcontroller unit (MCU) 326 receives input from buttons 327 and 328, coupled with stored instructions from NVRAM 329, and sends radio signals via low-frequency radio (LFR) 324 to the motorized fin, and gives visual indications to the rider via LED 323. A global navigation satellite system (GNSS) receiver 325 may generate geolocation data, which is stored in NVRAM and transmissible via Bluetooth or LFR for location purposes or for integration with sports tracking software. In a preferred embodiment, the GNSS receiver may be GPS or GLONASS receivers).
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to MAHRAN ABU ROUMI whose telephone number is (469)295-9170. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Thursday 6AM-5PM.
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, Emmanuel Moise can be reached at 571-272-3865. 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.
MAHRAN ABU ROUMI
Primary Examiner
Art Unit 2455
/MAHRAN Y ABU ROUMI/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2455
Prosecution Insights