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 § 101
35 U.S.C. 101 reads as follows:
Whoever invents or discovers any new and useful process, machine, manufacture, or composition of matter, or any new and useful improvement thereof, may obtain a patent therefor, subject to the conditions and requirements of this title.
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 1-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 101 because the claimed invention is directed to non-statutory subject matter.
Claim 1, recites, “determine the apparatus is in a predetermined environment; determine there is no active communication connection to a wireless communication device; and alter a parameter associated with establishing an active communication connection”,
Step 1: it’s an apparatus claim.
Step 2A, prong 1: the limitations, determining an environment, determining a connection status, and altering a parameter—are mental process of evaluating a condition and making a decision are Mental Processes (observation, evaluation, judgment, and/or opinion).
Step 2A, prong 2: there are additional limitations like processor, wireless communication device and apparatus however, these are generic processor to perform the abstract ideas. Merely reciting "a processor to determine..." or "an apparatus configured to..." adds no meaningful limits to practicing the abstract idea. These additional limitations do not improve the computer itself or improve the technology. It invokes a generic computer (merely as a tool to perform the judicial exception or an existing process by using of a computer or other machinery in its ordinary capacity.
When considered a whole, the claimed invention fails to recite any improvement in any technology or technical field (MPEP 2106.05(a)) or recite any meaningful limitations (MPEP 2106.05(e)). The limitations are no more than mere automation of a mental process to determine determining configuration of sideline positioning reference signal and a radio beam identifier.
Step 2B: the claim does not recite additional elements that are sufficient to amount to significantly more than the abstract idea when considered both individually and as a whole.
When considered a whole, the claimed invention still fails amount to significantly more than applying a judicial exception in a field of use, using a generic computer.
Claim 2, discloses what the advertisement rate is and not significant than the abstract idea itself. Claim3, again discloses advertisement rate, which is data gathering. Claim 4, determining step which is mental step and generate indication is again providing output and insignificant extra solution activity.
Claim 5, indication is transmitted... is again insignificant extra solution activity which is well-understood, routine activity.
Claim 6, determining parameters are mental step and generate for transmission , a message is outputting information which is insignificant extra solution activity which is well-understood, routine activity.
Claim 7, discloses predetermined environment is again additional limitation which is not significant and claim 8 define what the apparatus is and determining and collecting is merely mental step and data gathering which is pre/post insignificant extra solution activity.
Claim 9 discloses, determine context information for the apparatus; in response to the context information, determine there is no active communication connection to a wirelessly locatable tag; and alter a parameter associated with establishing an active communication connection, are mental process of evaluating a condition and making a decision are Mental Processes (observation, evaluation, judgment, and/or opinion).
Claims 10-12 discloses what parameter comprises which is data gathering. Claim 13, determining and indicating is mental process and generate output which is insignificant extra solution activity. Claim 14 is indication which is outputting and its insignificant extra solution activity. Claim 16 perform initiating UWB communication merely using general purpose processor is insignificant. Claim 17 generating alert which is outputting information and insignificant extra solution activity, insignificant extra solution activity which is well-understood, routine activity. claim 18 displaying also outputting information, insignificant extra solution activity which is well-understood, routine activity. Claim 19 generating a message on display is outputting information, insignificant extra solution activity which is well-understood, routine activity. Claim 20 discloses what the predetermined environment is and parameters which are merely data gathering and are pre/post insignificant extra solution activity.
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) 1- 6, 9, 11, 13- 15, 17-19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102 (a)(1) as being anticipated by Ramappa et al (US 2017/0374629)(hereafter Ramappa).
Regarding claim 1, Ramappa discloses an apparatus comprising processing circuitry configured to:
determine the apparatus is in a predetermined environment; determine there is no active communication connection to a wireless communication device (see, para [0025], When the admin scanner 202 determines that no additional SCNs are present within communication range of the ADV 202, interpreted as whether in predetermined environment, the admin scanner 202 can transmit the configuration message to the ADV 200 to reduce the advertisement rate or stop advertising, interpreted as determining no active communication connection to device); and
alter a parameter associated with establishing an active communication connection (see, para [0025], the admin scanner 202 can send a connect request (CONN_REQ) message to the ADV 200 to indicate that the ADV 200 can reduce the advertisement rate or stop advertising because no SCNs are within communication range of the ADV 200, para [0027], where the ADV 200 is part of a pet tag or wearable device, then the admin scanner 202 can transmit the configuration message to reduce or stop the advertisement rate when a distance between the ADV 200 and the admin scanner 202 is less than a predetermined distance, which may indicate that a pet wearing the pet tag or the wearable device is within viewing range of the owner, see, also para [0030]).
Regarding claim 2, Ramappa further discloses the apparatus, wherein the parameter comprises an advertisement rate that is increased (see, para [0025], [0027] and [0030]).
Regarding claim 3, Ramappa further discloses the apparatus of claim 1, wherein the parameter comprises a transmit power for advertisements that is increased (see, para [0025], [0027] and [0030]).
Regarding claims 4 and 13, Ramappa further discloses the apparatus of claim 1, wherein the processing circuitry is further configured to: determine the active communication connection to the wireless communication device has been established; and generate, for transmission to the wireless communication device, an indication that the apparatus is in the predetermined environment (see, para [0025], the admin scanner 202 can send a connect request (CONN_REQ) message to the ADV 200 to indicate that the ADV 200 can reduce the advertisement rate or stop advertising because no SCNs are within communication range of the ADV 200, para [0027], where the ADV 200 is part of a pet tag or wearable device, then the admin scanner 202 can transmit the configuration message to reduce or stop the advertisement rate when a distance between the ADV 200 and the admin scanner 202 is less than a predetermined distance, which may indicate that a pet wearing the pet tag or the wearable device is within viewing range of the owner, see, also para [0030]).
Regarding claims 5 and 14, Ramappa further discloses the apparatus of claim 4, wherein the indication is transmitted via a special frame identification of the active communication connection (see, para [0028], the ADV 200 can output the CONN_RES or SCN_RSP message to acknowledge the advertisement rate modification. The ADV 200 outputs the advertisement data in a predetermined message format, which can correspond to a BLE protocol messaging format, such as a connectable undirected advertising event (ADV_IND) message).
Regarding claim 6, Ramappa further discloses the apparatus wherein the processing circuitry is further configured to: determine one or more parameters associated with the predetermined environment; and generate, for transmission to the wireless communication device, a message comprising the one or more parameters (see, para [0028], the ADV 200 can output the CONN_RES or SCN_RSP message to acknowledge the advertisement rate modification. The ADV 200 outputs the advertisement data in a predetermined message format, which can correspond to a BLE protocol messaging format, such as a connectable undirected advertising event (ADV_IND) message).
Regarding claim 9, Ramappa discloses an apparatus comprising processing circuitry configured to:
determine context information for the apparatus; in response to the context information, determine there is no active communication connection to a wirelessly locatable tag (see, para [0025], When the admin scanner 202 determines that no additional SCNs are present within communication range of the ADV 202, the admin scanner 202 can transmit the configuration message to the ADV 200 to reduce the advertisement rate or stop advertising, here, communication range is interpreted as context information); and
alter a parameter associated with establishing an active communication connection (see, para [0025], the admin scanner 202 can send a connect request (CONN_REQ) message to the ADV 200 to indicate that the ADV 200 can reduce the advertisement rate or stop advertising because no SCNs are within communication range of the ADV 200, para [0027], where the ADV 200 is part of a pet tag or wearable device, then the admin scanner 202 can transmit the configuration message to reduce or stop the advertisement rate when a distance between the ADV 200 and the admin scanner 202 is less than a predetermined distance, which may indicate that a pet wearing the pet tag or the wearable device is within viewing range of the owner, see, also para [0030]).
Regarding claim 11, Ramappa further discloses the apparatus, wherein the parameter comprises a transmit power that is increased (see, para [0025], [0027] and [0030]).
Regarding claim 15, Ramappa further discloses wherein the processing circuitry is further configured to: in response to processing the indication, perform an operation related to locating the wirelessly locatable tag (see, para [0025], the admin scanner 202 can send a connect request (CONN_REQ) message to the ADV 200 to indicate that the ADV 200 can reduce the advertisement rate or stop advertising because no SCNs are within communication range of the ADV 200, para [0027], where the ADV 200 is part of a pet tag or wearable device, then the admin scanner 202 can transmit the configuration message to reduce or stop the advertisement rate when a distance between the ADV 200 and the admin scanner 202 is less than a predetermined distance, which may indicate that a pet wearing the pet tag or the wearable device is within viewing range of the owner, see, also para [0030]).
Regarding claim 17, Ramapap further discloses the apparatus, wherein the operation comprises generating an alert indicating the wirelessly locatable tag is in the predetermined environment (see, para [0028], the ADV 200 can output the CONN_RES or SCN_RSP message to acknowledge the advertisement rate modification. The ADV 200 outputs the advertisement data in a predetermined message format, which can correspond to a BLE protocol messaging format, such as a connectable undirected advertising event (ADV_IND) message).
Regarding claim 18, Ramappa further discloses the apparatus, wherein the operation comprises generating a display providing a user with a directional indication for locating the wirelessly locatable tag (see, para [0053]).
Regarding claim 19, Ramappa further discloses the apparatus, wherein the processing circuitry is further configured to: process, based on signaling from the wirelessly locatable tag, a message comprising one or more parameters associated with the predetermined environment, wherein generating the display is further based on the one or more parameters ((see, para [0025], the admin scanner 202 can send a connect request (CONN_REQ) message to the ADV 200 to indicate that the ADV 200 can reduce the advertisement rate or stop advertising because no SCNs are within communication range of the ADV 200, para [0027], where the ADV 200 is part of a pet tag or wearable device, then the admin scanner 202 can transmit the configuration message to reduce or stop the advertisement rate when a distance between the ADV 200 and the admin scanner 202 is less than a predetermined distance, which may indicate that a pet wearing the pet tag or the wearable device is within viewing range of the owner, see, also para [0030]).
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.
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 text of those sections of Title 35, U.S. Code not included in this action can be found in a prior Office action.
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 non-obviousness.
11. Claim(s) 7 and 20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Ramappa in view of Motley, III et al. (US 2015/0186697)(hereafter Motley).
Regarding claims 7 and 20, Ramappa does not explicitly disclose the apparatus, wherein the predetermined environment comprises a luggage carousel and wherein the one or more parameters comprise one of luggage carousel speed, luggage carousel acceleration or luggage carousel vibration. However, in same field of endeavor, Motley teaches para [0007], The tag also has various sensors, such as sensors for detecting different types of vibrations, electro-magnetic sensor, compass, light sensor, GPS chipset and antenna, and others. As the baggage to which the tag is attached goes on its journey, the sensors detect stimuli and ascertain where in the journey the baggage is and use itinerary and other data to determine where the baggage should be. The tag service provider server communicates with the tag at various stages in the journey, one of its primary functions being providing up-to-date itinerary data to the tag. Para [0030], These include sensors for detecting a range of vibrations and vibration types, sensors for detecting movement (e.g., continuous, abrupt, rolling, stillness, etc.), a 3D compass, a light sensor, a GPS sensor, altimeter, thermometer, accelerometer, magnetometer, and others. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skilled in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the teaching of Motley with the Ramappa, so as to determine the location of tag using the parameters as claimed, the motivation is to further track the apparatus.
12. Claim(s) 8 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Ramappa in view of Snyder (US2019/0313020) (hereafter Snyder).
Regarding claim 8, Ramappa does not disclose the apparatus, wherein the apparatus further comprises an inertial measurement unit (IMU) sensor, wherein determining the apparatus is in the predetermined environment is based on data collected by the IMU sensor. However, in same field of endeavor, Snyder teaches [0038], Thus, the tag may facilitate tracking of the target as it moves through the environment. In some implementations, the tag may include therein various sensors such as, for example, inertial measurement units or heart rate sensors, among other possibilities. The sensors may be integrated with the tag, or may be provided as separate units that are communicatively connected to the tag. [0066] Camera device 200 may additionally include inertial measurement units (IMUs) (not shown), including gyroscopes, accelerometers, and magnetometers, to assist with determining the position and orientation of camera device 200 or the components thereof. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skilled in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the teaching of Snyder with the Ramapa, so as to configure the apparatus to have inertial measurement unit integrated into; to further track the apparatus, the motivation is to provide the measurement of the object.
13. Claim(s) 10 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Ramappa in view of Smith et al. (US 12614185)(hereafter Smith).
Regarding claim 10, Ramappa does not discloses the apparatus wherein the parameter comprises a scan rate that is increased, however, in same field of endeavor, Smith teaches col. 5 lines 10-23, the central management system 12 may receive an indication of a location of the user (e.g., from a global positioning sensor or other position sensor) in the user device 16, correlate the location to a retail store (e.g., home improvement store) to determine that the user is in the store, and then initiate a scan of the electronic mail inbox at some time (e.g., 5, 15, or 30 minutes) after determining that the user is in the retail store or has left the retail store, and/or increase a rate of scan of the electronic mail inbox for some time (e.g., from a first lower rate, such as daily, to a second higher rate, such as every minute until the receipt for purchase is identified or until sometime passes, such as 30 minutes) after determining that the user is in the retail store or has left the retail store. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skilled in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the teaching of Smith with the Ramappa, so as to detect the apparatus based on scan rate; the motivation is to communicate with the object.
14. Claim(s) 12 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Ramappa in view of Matsumoto et al. (US 2023/0388833)(hereafter Mastsumoto).
Regarding claim 12, Ramappa does not discloses the apparatus, wherein the parameter comprises a channel on which scanning occurs , however, in same field of endeavor, Matsumoto teaches in para [0062] In step S255, the slave communication device 30 opens a scan window according to connection parameters notified from the master communication device 20, and performs a scanning operation. For example, in the case of BLE, connection parameters include a transmit window size that indicates a transmission period of data packets, a connection interval that indicates a frequency channel hop cycle, a channel mapping that indicates which data channel is to be used in a connection event, a hop increment that specifies an order of channel switching, and the like. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skilled in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the teaching of Matsumoto with the Ramappa, so as to track the apparatus based on frequency hopping channel; the motivation is to provide the measurement of the object.
15. Claim(s) 16 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Ramappa in view of Seo et al. (US 2023/0128414)(hereafter Seo).
Regarding claim 16, Ramappa does not disclose the apparatus, wherein the operation comprises initiating an ultra-wideband (UWB) ranging operation with the wirelessly locatable tag. However, in same field of endeavor, Seo teaches in para [0130], The uplink TdoA method is a method in which TdoA anchors receive the ranging message transmitted from the UWB device (tag), calculate the time difference (e.g., TdoA) and, based thereupon, determine the location of the UWB device and corresponds to one of OWR schemes. The downlink TdoA method is a method in which the UWB device (UWB tag) receives the ranging messages transmitted from the UWB anchors, calculates the time difference (e.g., TdoA) and, based thereupon, determines the location of the UWB device and corresponds to one of the OWR schemes. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skilled in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the teaching of Seo with the Ramappa, so as to use UWB as short range communication between tag and device, the motivation is to determine position of the apparatus.
Conclusion
16. The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Brice et al. (US 2017/0180934) discloses locating remote objects.
Harada (US 2012/0025988) discloses wireless tag collective reading device and network article management system.
Dotan (US 2011/0092161) discloses wireless communication apparatus for monitoring proximity of a subject.
Foster et al. (US 2020/0260514) discloses displaying information based on wireless ranging.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to DHAVAL V PATEL whose telephone number is (571)270-1818. The examiner can normally be reached Monday to Friday (8:00am-4:30pm).
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, Hannah Wang can be reached at 571-272-9018. 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.
/DHAVAL V PATEL/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2631
Prosecution Insights