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 .
Priority
Examiner acknowledges Applicant’s claim to priority benefits of DE102023128575.0 filed 10/18/2023.
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement(s) (IDS) submitted on 10/17/2024 is in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statement(s) is/are being considered if signed and initialed by the Examiner.
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 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.
For applicant’s benefit portions of the cited reference(s) have been cited to aid in the review of the rejection(s). While every attempt has been made to be thorough and consistent within the rejection it is noted that the PRIOR ART MUST BE CONSIDERED IN ITS ENTIRETY, INCLUDING DISCLOSURES THAT TEACH AWAY FROM THE CLAIMS. See MPEP 2141.02 VI.
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.
Claims 1, 3, 7, 9, 12-15, 17 and 19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Knaappila (US 2020/0193486 A1).
Regarding claim 1, Knaappila (‘486) anticipates “a method of determining an angle of incidence between a radio transmitter and one of two radio devices located at different locations and each having only a single antenna (Figure 4; paragraph 15: systems and methods may be implemented to allow a human user wearing wireless receiver device/s (e.g., wireless headphones or wireless hearing aids), to hear the spatial relative position of the wireless transmitter device and thus determine the direction, distance and/or location of the wireless transmitter device from which audio data is being conveyed to the wireless receiver device/s by a RF signal transmission; paragraph 39: optional antenna array 197 may be replaced by a single antenna element 199.sub.1 coupled to other components (e.g., receiver, transmitter and frequency synthesizer components) of module 120 without switch 195 therebetween. Such a single antenna element may be employed, for example, to measure received signal strength of a RF signal received at the single antenna element 199.sub.1 and to perform audio data information modification (e.g., to adjust the acoustic gain of the sound waves of the reproduced audio data) based on the value of received signal strength measured at the single antenna element 199.sub.1), the method comprising:
exchanging a first set of radio signals between a first radio device of the two radio devices and a second radio device of the two radio devices to determine a distance between the first radio device and the second radio device (paragraph 37: the received signal strength may be calculated from any packets in advertisement/ broadcasting state or connected state…the determined received signal strength may also be used, e.g., for approximating the distance between two BLE devices…when a packet is received from another BLE device by BLE module 100, a RSSI value may be determined from it, and used for determining the distance between BLE module 100 and the BLE device by using known distance determination algorithm);
exchanging a second set of radio signals between the first radio device and the radio transmitter and between the second radio device and the radio transmitter (Figure 7A-B); and
determining an angle of incidence (AoA) between the radio transmitter and the one of the two radio devices based on the first and second set of exchanged radio signals (paragraph 63: processing components of second module 120 of FIG. 1 may implement demodulator or receiver component of baseband processor 234 of FIG. 2, and to sample a received signal. Processing components of first module 110 may be programmed to execute an application or other suitable programmed logic to perform received audio data modification logic 275 of FIG. 2 using sampled information provided by processing components of first module 110. In this regard, received audio data modification logic 275 may be executed to measure and/or process one or more signal reception and/or transmission characteristics of network signals received by BLE module 100 of FIG. 1 from one or more other BLE devices. Such signal reception and/or transmission characteristics may include any characteristic of a signal received at a given BLE module 100 that is indicative of a direction from which the signal is received at BLE module 100 and/or that is indicative of a spatial location of a device that transmitted the received signal to BLE module 100. Specific examples of such signal reception and/or transmission characteristics but are not limited to, time difference of arrival (TDOA), Angle of Arrival (AOA), Angle of Departure (AoD), etc.).”
Regarding claim 3, which is dependent on independent claim 1, Knaappila (‘486) anticipates the method of claim 1. Knaappila (‘486) further anticipates “the determining the angle of incidence comprises determining a first angle of incidence as between the radio transmitter and the first radio device and determining a second angle of incidence as between the radio transmitter and the second radio device (paragraph 11: a wireless receiver device having multiple spaced-apart audio speakers may be configured with circuitry to measure angle of arrival (AoA) of a received RF signal transmission that contains or otherwise conveys multiple separate channels of audio data that each correspond to a different one of the multiple audio speakers; paragraph 13: a wireless receiver device may be configured to measure received signal strength of a RF signal and/or AoA received from a moving RF wireless transmitter device over time (e.g., during a predefined time period or continuously) during which the position of the moving wireless transmitter changes relative to the position of the wireless receiver device to cause the received RF signal strength and/or AoA to vary as a function of relative position to the wireless receiver device; paragraph 38: side of arrival or angle of arrival (AoA) of a signal received from another device may be so determined using only a single antenna array 197 having multiple antenna elements 199, and in another exemplary embodiment processing components of second module 120 may be programmed to determine side of arrival or AoA of a signal received from another device based on a determined angle of departure (AoD) of the received signal from another BLE device).”
Regarding claim 7, which is a corresponding device claim of independent method claim 1, Knaappila (‘486) anticipates all the claimed invention as show above for claim 1.
Regarding claim 9, which is dependent on independent claim 7, Knaappila (‘486) anticipates the device of claim 7. Knaappila (‘486) further anticipates “the first radio device comprises a first headphone and the second radio device comprises a second headphone (paragraph 15: to allow a human user wearing wireless receiver device/s (e.g., wireless headphones or wireless hearing aids), to hear the spatial relative position of the wireless transmitter device; paragraph 17: pair of wireless headphones or a dual-ear hearing aid speaker system may be equipped with an antenna array that defines a center plane that bisects the space between the two antenna elements of the array and that extends between the two respective left and right headphones; Figures 7A-7B).”
Regarding claim 12, which is dependent on independent claim 7, Knaappila (‘486) anticipates the device of claim 7. Knaappila (‘486) further anticipates “the distance between the two radio devices corresponds to an average distance between two ears of a user (Figures 7A-7B).”
Regarding claim 13, which is dependent on independent claim 7, Knaappila (‘486) anticipates the device of claim 7. Knaappila (‘486) further anticipates “each of the first radio device and the second radio device comprise a processor configured to determine of the angle of incidence (paragraph 35: As shown in FIG. 1, BLE module 100 includes a first module segment 110 that includes one or more central processing units (CPUs), processors or other programmable integrated circuits 150 and memory 155 (e.g., DRAM) with application data… application/s 212 may be executed by CPU 150 to provide multiple different resources (e.g., such as different Bluetooth services, security manager, parts of a Bluetooth service such as Bluetooth service characteristics, and/or any other computing or wireless operation services) to other connecting radio frequency (RF)-enabled devices across different wireless RF connections (e.g., such as different BLE wireless connections between different BLE devices)).”
Regarding claim 14, which is dependent on claim 13, Knaappila (‘486) anticipates the device of claim 7. Knaappila (‘486) further anticipates “either the first radio device or the second radio device comprises a processor configured to determine of the angle of incidence (paragraph 35: As shown in FIG. 1, BLE module 100 includes a first module segment 110 that includes one or more central processing units (CPUs), processors or other programmable integrated circuits 150 and memory 155 (e.g., DRAM) with application data…application/s 212 may be executed by CPU 150 to provide multiple different resources (e.g., such as different Bluetooth services, security manager, parts of a Bluetooth service such as Bluetooth service characteristics, and/or any other computing or wireless operation services) to other connecting radio frequency (RF)-enabled devices across different wireless RF connections (e.g., such as different BLE wireless connections between different BLE devices)).”
Regarding claim 15, which is a corresponding system claim of independent method claim 1, Knaappila (‘486) anticipates all the claimed invention as show above for claim 1.
Regarding claim 17, which is dependent on independent claim 15, and which is a corresponding system claim of independent claim 15, Knaappila (‘486) anticipates all the claimed invention as shown above for claim 3.
Regarding claim 19, which is dependent on independent claim 15, and which is a corresponding system claim of method claim 9, Knaappila (‘486) anticipates all the claimed invention as shown above for claim 9.
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.
Claims 2, 5, 8 and 16 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Knaappila (US 2020/0193486 A1), and further in view of Haartsen (US 2019/0182795 A1).
Regarding claim 2, which is dependent on independent claim 1, Knaappila (‘486) discloses the method of claim 1. Knaappila (‘486) does not explicitly disclose “determining the angle of incidence based on a first distance that is between the first radio device and the radio transmitter and based on a second distance that is between the second radio device and the radio transmitter.”
Haartsen (‘795) relates to location determination. Haartsen (‘795) teaches “determining the angle of incidence based on a first distance that is between the first radio device and the radio transmitter and based on a second distance that is between the second radio device and the radio transmitter (Figure 4; Figure 13; Figure 14).”
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill-in-the-art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the method of Knaappila (‘486) with the teaching of Haartsen (‘795) for enhanced device location (Haartsen (‘795) – paragraph 25). In addition, both of the prior art references, (Knaappila (‘486) and Haartsen (‘795)) teach features that are directed to analogous art and they are directed to the same field of endeavor, such as, performing distance and angle of arrival determination.
Regarding claim 5, which is dependent on independent claim 1, Knaappila (‘486) discloses the method of claim 1. Knaappila (‘486) does not explicitly disclose “the angle of incidence is determined in the radio transmitter.”
Haartsen (‘795) relates to location determination. Haartsen (‘795) teaches “the angle of incidence is determined in the radio transmitter (paragraph 27: the angle of arrival (AoA) can be determined; with a phased array antenna at the transmitter of a base).”
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill-in-the-art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the method of Knaappila (‘486) with the teaching of Haartsen (‘795) for enhanced device location (Haartsen (‘795) – paragraph 25). In addition, both of the prior art references, (Knaappila (‘486) and Haartsen (‘795)) teach features that are directed to analogous art and they are directed to the same field of endeavor, such as, performing distance and angle of arrival determination.
Regarding claim 8, which is dependent on independent claim 7, and which is a corresponding device claim of method claim 2, Knaappila (‘486)/Haartsen (‘795) discloses all the claimed invention as shown above for claim 2.
Regarding claim 16, which is dependent on independent claim 15, and which is a corresponding system claim of method claim 2, Knaappila (‘486)/Haartsen (‘795) discloses all the claimed invention as shown above for claim 2.
Claim 4, 10 and 18 rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Knaappila (US 2020/0193486 A1), and further in view of Belverato (US 2022/0369188 A1).
Regarding claim 4, which is dependent on independent claim 1, Knaappila (‘486) discloses the method of claim 1. Knaappila (‘486) does not explicitly disclose “the radio signals are ultra-wide band (UWB) signals or comprise UWB signals.”
Belverato (‘188) relates to wireless devices. Belverato (‘188) teaches “the radio signals are ultra-wide band (UWB) signals or comprise UWB signals (paragraph 20: the two radios can communicate with each other over a separate channel which is not affected by the same propagation issues. Some examples of this separate channel are the use of UWB).”
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill-in-the-art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the method of Knaappila (‘486) with the teaching of Belverato (‘188) for improved wireless connection between devices (Belverato (‘188) – paragraph 7). In addition, both of the prior art references, (Knaappila (‘486) and Belverato (‘188)) teach features that are directed to analogous art and they are directed to the same field of endeavor, such as, determining location of wireless devices.
Regarding claim 10, which is dependent on independent claim 7, and which is a corresponding device claim of method claim 4, Knaappila (‘486)/Belverato (‘188) discloses all the claimed invention as shown above for claim 4.
Regarding claim 18, which is dependent on independent claim 15, and which is a corresponding system claim of method claim 4, Knaappila (‘486)/Belverato (‘188) discloses all the claimed invention as shown above for claim 4.
Claims 6, 11 and 20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Knaappila (US 2020/0193486 A1), and further in view of Joo et al. (US 2013/0271323 A1).
Regarding claim 6, which is dependent on independent claim 1, Knaappila (‘486) discloses the method of claim 1. Knaappila (‘486) does not explicitly disclose “the distance between the two radio devices is about +/-10 % of a half-wavelength of the radio signals.”
Joo et al. (‘323) relates to direction finding. Joo et al. (‘323) teaches “the distance between the two radio devices is about +/-10 % of a half-wavelength of the radio signals (paragraph 37: The first distance may be set to a distance that is equal to or shorter than a half-wavelength of the received signals; paragraph 102: the second distance D2 may be set to be longer than the half-wavelength .lamda./2).”
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill-in-the-art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the method of Knaappila (‘486) with the teaching of Joo et al. (‘323) improve the accuracy of AOA detection (Joo et al. (‘323) – paragraph 8). In addition, both of the prior art references, (Knaappila (‘486) and Joo et al. (‘323)) teach features that are directed to analogous art and they are directed to the same field of endeavor, such as, performing distance and angle of arrival determination.
Regarding claim 11, which is dependent on independent claim 7, and which is a corresponding device claim of method claim 6, Knaappila (‘486)/Joo et al. (‘323) discloses all the claimed invention as shown above for claim 6.
Regarding claim 20, which is dependent on independent claim 15, and which is a corresponding system claim of method claim 6, Knaappila (‘486)/Joo et al. (‘323) discloses all the claimed invention as shown above for claim 6.
Citation of Pertinent Prior Art
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Ciholas et al. (US 2023/0358851 A1) describes a system for determining an orientation in space of a linear array of radio receivers in a workspace…the system comprises a primary radio receiver, a secondary radio receiver located a first distance from the primary radio receiver…a plurality of radio transmitters, and a processing unit…the primary radio receiver and secondary radio receiver are capable of measuring phase of arrival of a received signal…the plurality of radio transmitters are positioned in the workspace at known, fixed locations relative to the primary radio receiver…the processing unit is in communication with the primary radio receiver and the secondary radio receiver…the processing unit is capable of calculating an angle between each of the plurality of radio transmitters and an axis comprising a line passing through the primary radio receiver and the secondary radio receiver, and capable of calculating an orientation determination algorithm (paragraph 5).
Kalantari et al. (US 2022/0352942 A1) describes a method for polarization aligned transmission towards a receiver device…the method is performed by a mobile wireless device…the mobile wireless device comprises an antenna array…obtaining, based on analysis of an image of the receiver device as captured by an image capturing unit, information of orientation of the receiver device…the orientation pertains to orientation of an antenna of the receiver device towards which a signal is to be transmitted….transmitting the signal from the antenna array towards the receiver device using a wave…the wave has its polarization aligned, based on the orientation of the receiver device, with the antenna of the receiver device (paragraph 7).
Contact Information
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to NUZHAT PERVIN whose telephone number is (571)272-9795. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 9:00AM-5:00PM.
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, Vladimir Magloire can be reached at (571) 270-5144. 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.
/NUZHAT PERVIN/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3648
Prosecution Insights