DETAILED ACTION
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 § 112
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(b):
(b) CONCLUSION.—The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph:
The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the applicant regards as his invention.
Claims 1-4, 11, 14, and 19-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor (or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the applicant), regards as the invention.
Claim 1 recites the limitation "the wireless communication device" in lines 4-6 and lines 10-11. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. The Examiner suggests amending the limitation to read “the second wireless communication device” if it is intended to refer to that antecedent basis.
Similarly, in Claim 2, lines 3-4, it is suggested to amend the limitation “the wireless communication device” to read “the second wireless communication device” as described above.
Similarly, in Claim 3, lines 3-4, it is suggested to amend the limitation “the wireless communication device” to read “the second wireless communication device” as described above.
Similarly, in Claim 4, lines 3-4 and lines 6-7, it is suggested to amend the limitation “the wireless communication device” to read “the second wireless communication device” as described above.
Claim 11, recites the limitation "the first wireless communication device" in lines 2-3. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
Similarly, in Claim 14, lines 3-4, it is suggested to amend the limitation “the wireless communication device” to read “the second wireless communication device”.
Claim 19, recites the limitation "the wireless communication device" in lines 4-6, 8, and 11-12. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. The Examiner suggests amending the limitation to read “the second wireless communication device” if it is intended to refer to that antecedent basis.
Similarly, in Claim 20, lines 3-6, it is suggested to amend the limitation “the wireless communication device” to read “the second wireless communication device”.
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 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 1-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Aldana et al. (US 11,899,090 B2 herein Aldana), and further in view of Belt et al. (US 2018/0202813 A1 herein Belt).
Regarding claim 1, Aldana teaches an apparatus (read as first device 405) (Aldana – Figure 4, column 9 lines 65-67, column 10 lines 1-15) comprising processing circuitry configured to:
generate, for transmission to a second wireless communication device (read as second device 410) (Aldana – Figure 4, column 9 lines 65-67, column 10 lines 1-15), a request to initiate a ranging operation (read as first device transmits the report; first device transmit the report to a second device; first device may transmit the report responsive to generating the report; the first device may transmit the report responsive to receiving a request for a report from the second device) (Aldana – column 18 lines 4-24);
process, based on one or more signals received from the wireless communication device, a response indicating that the apparatus is to locate the wireless communication device (read as sensors may include devices configured to detect motion and/or location; second device receives a report; the report may include a plurality of values including an elevation component of an AoA from the second device and an azimuth component of the AoA from the second device; at least some of the plurality of values may be obtained according to measurements between the plurality of UWB devices of the first device and the at least one UWB device of the second device) (Aldana – Figure 2, column 9 lines 7-37, column 18 lines 34-60);
collect inertial measurement unit (IMU) data, from at least one of the apparatus or the wireless communication device (read as sensors configured to detect a position or orientation of the HWD 150 relative to a direction or fixed location; the sensors may include an inertial measurement unit (IMU), and so forth) (Aldana – Figure 2, column 9 lines 7-21).
However, Aldana fails to teach generate an arrow to be displayed based on at least the IMU data, the arrow indicating a direction of the wireless communication device relative to the apparatus.
In the related art, Belt teaches generate an arrow to be displayed based on at least the IMU data, the arrow indicating a direction of the wireless communication device relative to the apparatus (read as portable computing device may cause the display 168 to display one or more shapes, such as directional arrows; a direction arrow may indicate the user location on a map; direction indicated by the directional arrow may adjust its orientation relative to the user using data from an IMU 180) (Belt – [0090], [0098]).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to incorporate the teachings of Belt into the teachings of Aldana for the purpose of a portable computing device to display one or more shapes, such as directional arrows to indicate directions using data from an inertial measurement unit IMU.
Regarding claim 2 as applied to claim 1, Aldana as modified by Belt further teach wherein IMU data comprises a first set of IMU data collected by a component of the apparatus and a second set of IMU data collected by the wireless communication device, the processing circuitry further configured to: process, based on signaling received from the wireless communication device, the second set of IMU data (read as device 100 may include additional components; device 100 may include an inertial measurement unit (IMU) 180; IMU 180 may be an electrical component that detects the motion of the wireless receiver 104 and may include a plurality of accelerometers disposed to detect acceleration in a plurality of directions; IMU 180 may enable the wireless receiver 104 to determine substantially accurately any change in orientation or position of the receiver) (Belt – [0071]).
Regarding claim 3 as applied to claim 1, Aldana as modified by Belt further teach wherein IMU data comprises a first set of IMU data collected by a component of the apparatus and a second set of IMU data collected by the wireless communication device, the processing circuitry further configured to: process, based on signaling received from the wireless communication device over a cellular network connection (read as the connection may be over a cellular data network) (Belt – [0085]), the second set of IMU data (read as device 100 may include additional components; device 100 may include an inertial measurement unit (IMU) 180; IMU 180 may be an electrical component that detects the motion of the wireless receiver 104 and may include a plurality of accelerometers disposed to detect acceleration in a plurality of directions; IMU 180 may enable the wireless receiver 104 to determine substantially accurately any change in orientation or position of the receiver) (Belt – [0071]).
Regarding claim 4 as applied to claim 1, Aldana as modified by Belt further teach wherein IMU data comprises a first set of IMU data collected by a component of the apparatus and a second set of IMU data collected by the wireless communication device, the processing circuitry further configured to: process, based on signaling received from the wireless communication device over a wireless local area network (WLAN) connection (Belt – [0142]), the second set of IMU data (read as device 100 may include additional components; device 100 may include an inertial measurement unit (IMU) 180; IMU 180 may be an electrical component that detects the motion of the wireless receiver 104 and may include a plurality of accelerometers disposed to detect acceleration in a plurality of directions; IMU 180 may enable the wireless receiver 104 to determine substantially accurately any change in orientation or position of the receiver) (Belt – [0071]).
Regarding claim 5 as applied to claim 1, Aldana as modified by Belt further teach wherein generating the arrow to be displayed based on at least the IMU data (read as portable computing device may cause the display 168 to display one or more shapes, such as directional arrows; a direction arrow may indicate the user location on a map; direction indicated by the directional arrow may adjust its orientation relative to the user using data from an IMU 180) (Belt – [0090], [0098]) includes using a motion model to determine an angle of the arrow (read as configured to transmit, send, or otherwise provide UWB signals to the HWD 150; HWD 150 may be configured to determine an AoA of the device 300 relative to the HWD 150) (Aldana – Figure 3, column 9 lines 38-64).
Regarding claim 6 as applied to claim 5, Aldana as modified by Belt further teach wherein the motion model includes multiple particles, each particle with multiple states comprising at least i) a coordinate location state, ii) a velocity state and iii) a direction of travel state (read as IMU 180 may include a plurality of accelerometers, a plurality of gyroscopes to detect acceleration in any direction, detecting linear or rotational motion, determining substantially precisely the direction and magnitude of motion of the wireless receiver relative to an initial reference frame and location) (Belt – [0071]).
Regarding claim 7 as applied to claim 6, Aldana as modified by Belt further teach wherein a first portion of the particles are stationary and a second portion of the particles are moving (read as IMU 180 can determine substantially precisely the direction and magnitude of motion of the wireless receiver 104 relative to an initial reference frame and location; where the wireless receiver 104 is initially stationary, IMU 180 may enable the wireless receiver 104 to determine substantially accurately any change in orientation or position of the receiver) (Belt – [0071]).
Regarding claim 8 as applied to claim 7, Aldana as modified by Belt further teach wherein a subset of the second portion of the particles is redirected to change direction by 90 degrees or 180 degrees every measurement (read as passive transmitter has a plurality of antennas to enable the transmitter to capture the signal optimally from a plurality of angles) (Belt – Figure 1, [0026], [0088]).
Regarding claim 9 as applied to claim 8, Aldana as modified by Belt further teach wherein the angle of the arrow is derived from the coordinate location state variance of the particles of the motion model (read as passive transmitter has a plurality of antennas to enable the transmitter to capture the signal optimally from a plurality of angles; ) (Belt – Figure 1, [0026], [0088]).
Regarding claim 10 as applied to claim 6, Aldana as modified by Belt further teach wherein generating the arrow to be displayed is further based on visual inertial odometry (VIO) trajectories (read as determining a trajectory of the second device according to the first report and the second report) (Aldana – column 3 lines 1-23, column 15 lines 43-67, column 16 lines 1-13).
Regarding claim 11 as applied to claim 10, Aldana as modified by Belt further teach wherein the coordinate location state comprises a trajectory rotation of the first wireless communication device relative to the second wireless communication device (read as determining a trajectory of the second device according to the first report and the second report) (Aldana – column 3 lines 1-23, column 15 lines 43-67, column 16 lines 1-13).
Regarding claim 12 as applied to claim 1, Aldana as modified by Belt further teach wherein generating an arrow to be displayed is further based on camera data (read as camera of the mobile device; a video capture device) (Belt – [0024], [0141]).
Regarding claim 13 as applied to claim 1, Aldana as modified by Belt further teach wherein generating an arrow to be displayed is further based on global positioning data (read as navigation facilities may include a receiver configured to communicate with the Global Positioning System or with similar satellite networks as well as any other system that mobile phones or other devices use to ascertain their location) (Belt – [0072]).
Regarding claim 14 as applied to claim 1, Aldana as modified by Belt further teach wherein generating an arrow to be displayed is further based on access point names (APNs) identified by at least one of the apparatus or the wireless communication device (read as identifying, by the portable computing device, in a first data structure linking the unique identifier to the first location, the first location; wireless receiver 104 receives identifying information from the third-party transmitter, and uses the identifying information to retrieve product data or content data; the identifying information may identify the transmitter, a product, a container, or another item) (Belt – [0005], [0113]).
Regarding claim 15 as applied to claim 1, Aldana as modified by Belt further teach wherein generating an arrow to be displayed is further based on global positioning data (read as navigation facilities may include a receiver configured to communicate with the Global Positioning System or with similar satellite networks as well as any other system that mobile phones or other devices use to ascertain their location) (Belt – [0072]).
Regarding claim 16, as applied to claim 1, Aldana as modified by Belt further teach wherein the processing circuitry is further configured to: trigger, prior to collecting the IMU data, a switch from a first mode of operation to a second mode of operation, wherein in the second mode of operation the apparatus is configured to generate the arrow to be displayed using IMU data (read as direction indicated by the directional arrow may adjust its orientation relative to the user using data from an IMU 180) (Belt – [0071], [0090]) and in the first mode of operation the apparatus is configured to generate the arrow to be displayed without using the IMU data (Belt – [0072], [0097], [0137]).
Regarding claim 17 as applied to claim 16, Aldana as modified by Belt further teach wherein triggering the switch from the first mode of operation to the second mode of operation is based on at least one of, an indication of crowded environment, a distance between the apparatus and the second wireless communication device, a type of location and an indication that one or more cameras are occluded (Belt – [0097], [0137]).
Regarding claim 18 as applied to claim 1, Aldana as modified by Belt further teach wherein the request is transmitted via a short-range connection, a Wi-Fi connection, an Internet connection or a cellular connection (read as cellular data network; a wireless connection to a network; wide area network; local area network; telephone network; data network) (Belt – [0085], [0142]).
Regarding claim 19, Aldana teaches a method, comprising:
generating, for transmission to a second wireless communication device (read as second device 410) (Aldana – Figure 4, column 9 lines 65-67, column 10 lines 1-15), a request to initiate a ranging operation (read as first device transmits the report; first device transmit the report to a second device; first device may transmit the report responsive to generating the report; the first device may transmit the report responsive to receiving a request for a report from the second device) (Aldana – column 18 lines 4-24);
processing, based on one or more signals received from the wireless communication device, a response indicating that the apparatus is to locate the wireless communication device (read as sensors may include devices configured to detect motion and/or location; second device receives a report; the report may include a plurality of values including an elevation component of an AoA from the second device and an azimuth component of the AoA from the second device; at least some of the plurality of values may be obtained according to measurements between the plurality of UWB devices of the first device and the at least one UWB device of the second device) (Aldana – Figure 2, column 9 lines 7-37, column 18 lines 34-60);
collecting inertial measurement unit (IMU) data, from at least one of the apparatus or the wireless communication device (read as sensors configured to detect a position or orientation of the HWD 150 relative to a direction or fixed location; the sensors may include an inertial measurement unit (IMU), and so forth) (Aldana – Figure 2, column 9 lines 7-21).
However, Aldana fails to teach generating an arrow to be displayed based on at least the IMU data, the arrow indicating a direction of the wireless communication device relative to an apparatus performing a method.
In the related art, Belt teaches generating an arrow to be displayed based on at least the IMU data, the arrow indicating a direction of the wireless communication device relative to an apparatus performing a method (read as portable computing device may cause the display 168 to display one or more shapes, such as directional arrows; a direction arrow may indicate the user location on a map; direction indicated by the directional arrow may adjust its orientation relative to the user using data from an IMU 180) (Belt – [0090], [0098]).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to incorporate the teachings of Belt into the teachings of Aldana for the purpose of a portable computing device to display one or more shapes, such as directional arrows to indicate directions using data from an inertial measurement unit IMU.
Regarding claim 20 as applied to claim 19, Aldana as modified by Belt further teach wherein IMU data comprises a first set of IMU data collected by an apparatus performing the method and a second set of IMU data collected by the wireless communication device, the method further comprising processing, based on signaling received from the wireless communication device, the second set of IMU data (read as device 100 may include additional components; device 100 may include an inertial measurement unit (IMU) 180; IMU 180 may be an electrical component that detects the motion of the wireless receiver 104 and may include a plurality of accelerometers disposed to detect acceleration in a plurality of directions; IMU 180 may enable the wireless receiver 104 to determine substantially accurately any change in orientation or position of the receiver) (Belt – [0071]).
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to APRIL GUZMAN GONZALES whose telephone number is (571)270-1101. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday 8:00 am to 4:00 pm EST.
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, Wesley L. Kim can be reached at (571) 272-7867. 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.
/APRIL G GONZALES/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2648
Prosecution Insights